Tag must die

Anyone else agree? Tonight was horrible worst show in years.

In article , Bluescore wrote:

It's up there for the worst.

Except for the utter idiocy of the folks lining up for candy, I thought this was actually the only ep I've liked this season. Even the Tag sequence wasn't as bad as the rest of them had been. It was good to see the return of Ross as a sweet guy, and nice to see some (tiny) sparks between him and Phoebe.

brad laidman wrote in article ...

worst one, the worst being the one where Joey has meaningless sex with that basket girl.

2 things we noticed:

1. It's getting surreal. Unlike Seinfeld, Friends was always based in reality. That scene with the neighbors was not.

2. Rachel is acting cold and out of character. Also, she was never promiscuous. A few years ago, she was a romantic with only a few lovers. Now, Monica can rattle off all her one-night stands? Where is that coming from?

that

Rachel never promiscious. Huh??? Have you watched the same Friends over the last 6 years as I have. Monica's charather has mentioned numerous times in the past about Rachel being slutty (ie, her high school antics) etc. etc.

I thought Rachel's behavior was exactly in line to how her character has behaved over the years. She's petty & jealous and doesn't like it when other are happier than she is.

[Then again, we're talking about a TV show. Nothing on that show is real, so ultimately, it's moot. FWIW, I thought last night's episode was hilarious].

Spoiler space

S P O I L E R

S P A C E

S P O I L E R

S P A C E

He Smoked???

On 08 Dec 2000 16:05:58 GMT, [email] (Toni Perry If only) wrote:

Yeah, but not more than the time he visited Rachel's work. And he said "Merry Christmas" to himself afterwards, so it was probably just a reward. :) Unfortunately (for him), Monica realised what he had been doing when he kissed her shortly afterwards.

On Fri, 08 Dec 2000 05:14:45 GMT, Laurie wrote:

The whole guy is plain boring. I think there hasn't been one good storyline involving him and Rachel. In fact, it was a big relief when he wasn't on the show. Hopefully, he'll disappear soon.

S

P

O

I

L

E

R

S

Tag actually didn't bother me that much. He showed more personality than in his previous appearances. The only person that annoyed me was Rachel. In the real world, she would have been fired instantly.

The Rachel/Tag relationship is doing to Rachel what the Ross/Elizabeth relationship did to Ross. It's turning her into a reckless idiot.

--Doc

DocDoc2222 wrote:

At least it's equal opportunity character destruction.

Greetings

S

P

O

I

L

E

R

S

P

A

C

E

I do NOT agree. True, I don't like those Tag plots either, but I thought everything else was very sweet. Ross buying Phoebe a bike and trying to teach her how to ride it was just like something he would have done in the first couple of seasons. Monica making candy for the neighbours is just the warm, sympathetic character like in the first couple of seasons who would do that. Most people were complaining about those two. And I think, they couldn't have been more like in earlier episodes. And, to comment on DocDoc's comment, that Rachel would have been fired in real-life. That's not true. At least not in Europe. Imagine this: You have a person, who does a GREAT job, that you even offer him a job for Polo Retail. You think, you would just fire that person, and try to find a suitable successor? I doubt it. Plus, is that against the law to date someone who works for you? I understand that can cause problems, but I did not know, that it can get you fired. I know, TV is not reality, but let's take Ally McBeal for a sec: The senior partners are both dating co-workers, and it doesn't seem to be too weird for everyone.

*shrug*

I liked that last episode, rant all you want :-)

Didi

Technically, it's not against the rules, but they do frown on it.

Actually, I thought it was rather pathetic. Didn't Chandler call her out on this by saying she was just doing it so that everyone would like her? It was a neurotic thing to do, and completly in keeping with the Monica that has existed over the last couple of seasons.

True, but was it really a very funny subplot? It had a few funny moments, but overall it was nowhere near as funny as it would have been had the writers of the first 4 seasons written it.

Hey!

Fair enough. Just wanted to point that out, it's not necessarily something you can get fired for.

on

was a

existed

Ahh. Being nice to neighbours is pathetic? Of course, there is no selfless good deed. I disagree. This is something a first-season-Monica could have done, too.

the

but

of

Hmkay... Ross and Rachel breaking up and crying all night, that's funny? What I'm saying is, not every plot HAS to make people crack up. As far as I'm concerned, it made me feel good, to see that Ross cared about his friend Phoebe, plus this plot did have some humoreous lines. That's all I'm asking for.

The Rachel & Tag plot did make me sick though. It wasn't that funny, and it reminded me of the whole Rachel & Joshua plot, which I didn't like at all either.

If I had to rate this plot, I'd be going like this: - An episode usually has 3 plots. - Each plot would get 3 points, 3 = very good, 2 = good, 1 = average, 0 = bad - If the whole episode worked very well, I'd give one bonus point, making it a 10.

1 point: Rachel / Tag 3 points: Ross / Phoebe 2 points: Candy-plot

Total: 6 points.

Hmm... I'll figure out a better rating system, but this actually comes pretty close.

Regards, Didi

Didi wrote:

Not usually, unless you're in the military, in which case they do a lot more than "fire" you. In all reality, Rachel should be concerned about how her coworkers would perceive her, and her star employee. It would do Tag no good in the eyes of his coworkers if they found out he was dating the boss. In all reality, one, or both, or the manager would change the situation before the scenario arose where anyone would get fired.

Monica wasn't being "nice to neighbors". I see it more as she was coerced because they wouldn't go away. She was more like threatened. It was pretty rediculous to think anyone would respond that way.

Ross buying something for Phoebe, then teaching her how to use it is fine. It's sweet, the type of Ross we all know and love. A microscope, or a keyboard/synthesizer. The fact that it was a *little girls bike*, complete with pink handlebar tassles and training wheels was rediculous. This was only topped by the way Phoebe reacted. I don't care HOW many toys one missed out on as a child, no 30 year old woman is going to react to a little kids bike that way. It was rediculous and shallow. Think of your friends (or, if you're significantly under the age of 30 - 35, you're mom's friends), would ANY of them respond this way?? No. It would be more like. "Hmmm. That's nice. Interesting. Now where am I going to put it?"

No. But you are stating the exception, not the rule. That ONE show was not funny. But that's ok. It was the ONLY one that was not funny. It was painfully real, thanks to DS and JA (except the dialogue about the anchovies). I don't mind the occasional sitcom episode that is not funny. It's nice to see "another side" to the characters. We got to see Rachel mad. We got to see Ross heartbroken and desperate. We got to see a bunch of stuff that makes the characters more "real". This is good. It makes us feel like we know these people, and therefore can relate to what they experience.

What's not good is corny, cheesy, plastic, or telegraphed jokes that one can see coming a mile away.

Where I work, you would most likely not get fired, but you would be asked to remove yourself from a position of authority. This sort of action can be perceived as sexual harassment - not just by the person receiving it, but by those around - which can still get you in trouble. My jaw hit the floor when I watched these scenes. I was shocked that such behavior would be portrayed as acceptable (if you will) by the fact that Rachel got out of it without any reprimands. I didn't like this part.

This part of the show was just dumb. No one would ever do this. Ok, maybe at first. But, you wouldn't continue to the point of stressing yourself over it. This went overboard for even Monica.

I liked this part of the episode. Ross's manipulation of Phoebe, implying the bike had feelings, was hilarious. And Phoebe talking to the bike was right in character for her. The training wheels weren't added until the last part when Ross had tried everything else. Phoebe is a little girl at heart. I think this story line fit her well.

J wrote:

My reaction was very similar to yours. With all the "sexual harassment" training I've endured in corporate and government life (and I *do* find the training *very* offensive, but THAT doesn't seem to count as harassment), I was uncomfortable with the portrayals also.

Broadcast media has always tried to be so "politically correct" in every way, shape, and form. Then, to assume that something that eggregious would be "funny" is pathetic. If the roles were reversed, and Rachels boss was treating Rachel that way, would the audience respond the same? I think not.

Well, it did. Phoebe is the only one who could have been in that position and pulled it off with even a little bit of believability. I personally thought it was a little rediculous, though.

something

more

good in

all

the

Speaking from personal experience, in the military it doesn't just have to be someone who works for you. You can get fired for dating someone in a totally different chain of command, as long as one of the two is an officer and the other is enlisted. It is a totally ridiculous rule in my opinion. However, I agree completely that it would be inappropriate if one person was in a position of authority over the other. BTW, I was an officer. My husband was enlisted. Neither of us is in the military now.

Tana

"Randy Hinds" wrote:

(Snip)

It's

complete with

topped

as a

way.

of them

Hm, hello? This is a TV-show. I don't have any friends like any of those six. I almost tend to say, that these characters are totally exaggerated. Now come on, which 30 y.o. guy would be thrilled about someone who seems to be an identical hand twin (I hated that plot, though).

(Snip)

not

anchovies).

to see

see Ross

these

can see

I did not see that coming, that Ross was going to buy a kid's bike for Phoebe, which looked exactly like the one of Phoebe's kid-neighbour. I thought is was funny. True, I gave a bad example with that seen of Ross and Rachel. In fact, I think this is the only scene in the whole series, that actually really could have happened with that dialogue. Everything else is really just too sitcom-like. Our opinions concerning what's funny obviously differ. Although, since I find both the old episodes and the new episodes equally funny, maybe I'm just a person who gets amused real easily, hehehe.

Regards, Didi

On Tue, 12 Dec 2000, Didi stated this considered view. Waking from my doze, I hastily scrawled -

Not here.

It could be written into an employment contract, but even then it could be challenged under sex discrimination laws if you were fired just after breaking up.

Maybe because the whole staff are weird already? :)

In article , "brad laidman" wrote:

At least the twins who got to play Ben Geller also appeared in Adam Sandler's mega-hit, Big Daddy. That's the highlight of that night's show.

SPOILER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

They will appear on this week's show since it's the Christmas show whereas Ross wants to introduce Chanakah to Ben whereas Ben's more interested in Christmas.

That proves my point, Ross should have perminant custody of Ben instead of Carol and Susan.

Oh yeah, before I forget, DEATH TO TAG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

He won't, unless it's some off screen and somewhat funny way (Joanna getting hit by a cab after work and Rachel not getting her raise). Or we could watch Rachel cry for the whole episode, or until she finds a new crush, which every comes firstl.

====== es*o*ter*ic b : of or relating to knowledge that is restricted to a small group

2 a : limited to a small circle