Does anyone else have a problem with how horribly they're portraying the effort that parenting takes? Or is it just me (could be!)?
You almost *never* see Rachel or Ross with Emma! She's always off at Ross' or Rachel's parents. I don't know of many parents that can take off on an impromptu weekend (like Ross) at the drop of a hat. And what about Rachel spending all that time at a soap opera studio? Yeah parents need time to themselves, but geez! You hear them mention Emma every once in a while, but rarely see her. But, most TV shows do the same thing (Mad About You was awful at that, too!).
U�ytkownik "Stellar Mama" napisa� w wiadomo�ci news:TRSna.109565$[email]...
effort that parenting
Ross' or Rachel's parents. I
Ross) at the drop of a
Yeah parents need time
while, but rarely see her.
too!).
It's just a tv show:) There are many problems with baby so... It's much easier to say "Baby is with parent" than to show the baby all the time. A real life is 'completely' different...
Greetings
Marcin.
"In philosophy, or religion, or ethics, or politics, two and two might make five, but when one was designing a gun or an aeroplane they had to make four." - George Orwell
"Stellar Mama" wrote in message news:TRSna.109565$[email]...
effort that parenting
Ross' or Rachel's parents. I
Ross) at the drop of a
Yeah parents need time
while, but rarely see her.
too!).
Dawn, I was thinking the same thing. I have a baby who is going on six weeks old, and he requires constant attention! Last night, we saw Ross take off for the weekend, and Rachel spend most of her time either watching Joey tape DOOL or running lines with him. I would have appreciated even a tiny mention of Emma as to who was watching her while all this was going on. And maybe we could have had a brief glimpse of her in the scene where Rachel wakes from her dream. . . .
"Belphoebe" wrote in message news:NrUna.2624$[email]...
|
I have 2 (3.5 and 2) and even though they're older, I'm still with them pretty much all the time. And they *definitely* spend more time with me than with babysitters (grandparents or otherwise)!!
They have a hot lesbian nanny! I think that covers it.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+ Tim D. Sherer +
+ [email] - remove the letter U +
+ Will you trace the damn coyote, Mister Purple?+
+ The Floating Spirit +
+ www.salmonriver.com/FS +
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Wait a minute. We haven't seen that hot nanny, or that hot lesbian, since she kissed her girlfriend, and went out somewhere.
And now that you mention it, do we know she is a lesbian? She might be bisexual, and simply dating a woman at the moment, or even that her primary relationship is with a woman.
The problem they're running into is a baby of the age Emma is now can CRAWL. From now until the time Emma is old enough to talk, they're going to have a very hard time because children of that age are simply not controllable enough to appear on screen. That's why so many sitcoms jump from small baby straight to five or six years old.
I do think, though, that they could make them more realistic parents without showing the baby, though. Joey could be exhausted...
This reminds me of another difference between MAY and F - the fact that Monica's door was always unlocked. A lot of people bitched about that. I'm serious. We had lunch time discussions about how unrealistic Friends was and the unlocked door always came up.
On MAY, Paul or Jamie had to buzz people in and go open the door for people. It changed the whole pace of the show. P and J would have little conversations on the way to the door - for instance, when J's sister leaned on the buzzer.
On Friends, a person could walk right in in the middle of a conversation, like when Pheobe was telling everyone she was going to get it on her shoulder - the tatoo, I mean.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+ Tim D. Sherer +
+ [email] - remove the letter U +
+ Will you trace the damn coyote, Mister Purple?+
+ The Floating Spirit +
+ www.salmonriver.com/FS +
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
She's probably off somewhere with Phoebe's surrogate triplets and Ben who we also never see anymore.
Funny how on some shows kids just disappear because they can't really write them out of the show like adults or older children. (i.e Can't send them off to college or to a new job in another city or marry them off.)
And there would have been an excuse to write him out is they wanted to. (BTW who's Chuck? I don't recall a Friends reference to him.)
The only good way to write out a child would be that they left with at least one their parents. So in the case of Friends they could say that Carol and Susan and Ben or Frank and Alice and the triplets moved to Seattle or somewhere. Other than that what's left? Kill em? Say they ran away or were kidnapped? Send them to boarding school? I guess you could do the last one. It's just easier to ignore them.
"Michael Black" wrote in message news:b7s39h$nfn$[email]...
Chuck didn't just go off to college though. He ceased existing, and Richie became the oldest child of the family. No one remembers the old house on "Happy Days" either.
That was my point. The college bit was merely to reference his age. If I hadn't seen those early episodes of the show, I would not know that there was or had been an older brother. I was deliberately cryptic because of this.
He was an example, likely classic, of a character disappearing without any word. Not only are there no references, but it is as if they hadn't been there in the first place.
The poster I was responding to said that older people have legitimate reasons for being absent. I was just suggesting a character who could have legitimate reason for not being shown, but they didn't give a reason. They decided the character was wrong, and he disappeared, and the show was different.
"Michael Black" wrote in message news:b7ud8r$lqp$[email]...
at
them
Richie
on
I find it interesting that your name is Michael, as another example is the oldest brother, Mike, who left my three sons. He left in the episode in which Ernie was adopted--thus keeping the number of sons at three. We never heard of Mike again.
He and Chuck are now living in a run-down tenement building near downtown LA. They read the trades and dream the recurrent nightmare of being a couple of years too old too soon.
After watching the ep a second time, nobody ever mentioned Emma's name once. Nothing...not a "where is she?" "how is she?" ..... nothing. If it hadn't of been for the sparsely scattered baby accoutrements in the apartment, one would think a baby didn't even live there!!! ~~~ Kathy
"Stellar Mama" wrote in message news:TRSna.109565$[email]...
Gee, it's almost as if the writers seem to regret writing a baby into the plot in the first place.
I have six locks on my door all in a row. When I go out, I lock every other one. I figure no matter how long somebody stands there picking the locks, they are always locking three. - Elayne Boosler
Well, they thought -- not unreasonably -- that this season would be the last. So: baby born. Baby in a few episodes while still largely immobile. R&R get together. Big build-up. Wedding. Out.
Now they've got another year to fill -- and a baby that can crawl.
No, I don't hate Ross. In fact, I liked him alot during the first few seasons. But, unfortunately in recent seasons/episodes, he's become a wimpy, jealous, whiney jellyfish. Rachel deserves much, much better. Namely JOEY. ~~~ Kathy
"NjnTx" wrote in message news:hpiqa.331$[email]...
This is not true. I like Ross and I am a J&R fan. It's Ross and Rachel together that I don't like. They bring out the worst in each other. Seriously, would such a couple ever get together in real life? Joey and Rachel are more compatible.
On Sat, 26 Apr 2003 09:58:32 -0500, "David Buehrle" wrote:
Meaning Ross in in a relationship where he never has sex with Rachel anymore, and Joey is supposed to be in love with rachel, but it will never become physical, as Rachel is in a sort of sexless realtionship with Ross?
Oh I see. Well, I think Rachel was ready for a relationship if Ross would have just stepped up and been honest and open with her about how he felt about her. Of course, he's too busy deluding himself most of the time anyway.
It's that old, tired plot tool of creating conflict out of misunderstand--but it is so thinly veiled that, at any moment, the conflict will fall away as soon as the characters involved start being honest with each other.
Yes, Joey would get Rachel in real life. That's why I like this show because an underdog like Ross can get Rachel. In real life, the great-looking stud usually gets the girl. Real life sucks sometimes. I don't want to always see this on my TV screen.
Whatever you say, R&R did get together. She (at one time) recognized that he was deserving and sweet even if he wasn't Joey-stud. And they were very happy for that one year until the *decision was made* to break them up.
"NjnTx" wrote in message news:bPBqa.267$[email]...
I think Ross's insecurity is at the root of the problems, and it has always been that way. His insecurity put thoughts distrust about Mark in his head, which directly lead to their break, and break up. Recently, his insecurity has kept him from opening up and telling Rachel how he feels about her. She was ready for a relationship with him, but only if he was ready to be upfront with her about it.
What Ross needs to do is stand up for himself for a change, figure out that he really is a good, decent, attractive man, and get over the whiney crap. Someone who is that insecure never gets the girl.
Joey might not be one of the world's great thinkers, but you always know where you stand with him. As an R&R fan, I can't quite say that I'd like to see Joey and Rachel get together, and I certainly wouldn't want to see Rachel toy with Joey's emotions, but . . . Well, enough about that from me for now.
"David Buehrle" wrote in message news:ydUqa.18408$[email]...
always
head,
insecurity
She
that
to
from
Yes, yes, yes, BUT...
the mess really started when the DECISION was made to break up R&R. Before that, Ross and Rachel had a happy relationship. Things have been screwed up because the writers have wanted to keep them *apart*, not because they have wanted them together! If by some miracle, the writers do decide to hook them up again, all this insecurity and whiney crap would magically disappear or be *finally* dealt with. I'm totally convinced of that. Until that happens, there will only be more of the same. I believe that is the only way we will see any of the "old sweet Ross" again.
While I agree with all that, there is another factor that you are missing here. These character flaws that Ross develops are heightened when they want to bring J&R to the center stage but these developments to his character cannot entirely be attributed to that alone. They began the show with each of them having a character trait to bounce jokes off of. Like Joey being dumb, neurotic Monica, spoiled ditzy Rachel, flaky Phoebe and sarcastic Chandler. Ross was a regular sensitive guy. DS loved Mental Geller as it gave him an opportunity to play something different with his character. I believe they have given a hump to the character with this constant serving of idiocy. So, it's entirely possible that even if R&R were together, we might see Ross do some pretty idiotic stuff. Sad thing is that it's almost always totally unfunny. Perhaps because we cannot accept it because the old Ross wouldn't behave that way.
If R&R get together, the Mental Geller stuff may not completely disappear but I believe that it would lessen a lot, much like it started to decrease last season when they were hinting at R&R leading up to the finale. Wasn't the mental stuff at its height last season when R&J had the "Joey loves Rachel" thing going on? If R&J do get together, I would mind it a whole lot less if they could also write Ross a lot less stupid at the same time. It seems to me that when they make Joey Mr. Romantic and Sensitive, that means that Ross must take over as Mr. Imbecile. DS does romantic and sensitive better than MLB. MLB does funny and dumb better than DS. When these rolls switch, it doesn't work for me. There's no comedy left at all, especially with Chandler not as funny any more, either.
Yeah, he was horrible in 811. But he was behaving like an idiot in 803 which was right after the episode where he was revealed as the father of the baby. In 903, he behaves like a dope and that's only an episode after Joey/Rachel story had been closed. Like it or not, Ross will be stupid regardless.
Well, don't worry. Chances are, Ross is going to get her by the end of the show anyway. Unless the producers show some guts and take a different route.
And a very good decision at that. This show wouldn't have managed ten season if they stayed together.
You know, I will agree that if they had stayed together all this time, it would have been bad for the show. But the route the writers took which was trying to invent new and weird ways to keep them apart has been wearing on the show also.
Well, then apparently you can only see as far as the end of your nose.
Ross and Chandler are friends. Chandler and Monica fall in love. Ross is happy about that.
So, why is it so horrible for Joey and Rachel to have happiness together, too? It is CRYSTAL CLEAR that Ross and Rachel cannot and will not EVER find a medium ground as far as a romantic relationship goes. They do better as co-parents and NOT living together. We've already seen evidence of it this season. That's why she's back at Joey's. Ross is a big, insecure mess. He smothered the heck outta Rachel and tried to run her life. Joey won't do that. He's never been insecure and he gives Rachel her space. Remember how long it took him just to tell her how he felt about her??? His feelings are genuine. I've known men like that in real life and even though they love to "play the field", whenever they fall for a woman, they TOTALLY fall and it doesn't matter who else comes along, their heart will always belong to the woman that made them fall.
Ross and Rachel are H-I-S-T-O-R-Y as far as being a couple. Yay!!!!! ~~~ Kathy
It is CRYSTAL CLEAR that Ross and Rachel cannot and will not EVER find
this
He
Ross needs better writing. It always seems that J&R action = Ross acting like an imbecile. I get upset at the writers but it doesn't mean that I would root for Ross's best friend to hook up with the mother of his child.
Here's my explanation (rant) on why I feel this way:
I'm not going to address the argument that R&R don't get along well enough because the writers can rectify that very easily. This is fiction, after all.
Joey always seems to get the girls (and now maybe Rachel). Joey has never really been "in love" except for Rachel. Only lately in this show has he wanted anything close to a real relationship with a woman (except for perhaps one other time).
Now Ross was tossed aside by a wife that he loved very much, had to see her replace him with another woman who tried to push him aside when they had their son. Ross has always been looking for a committed relationship. He has been very much the anti-Joey as far as looking for something real with a woman. That's always been understood throughout the run of the show. And his life story has been fairly "tragic" as far has all the things that have gone wrong for him, many of them caused in some way by Rachel.
The writers have been keeping R&R teasing alive for years, especially during sweeps. They seem to be aware that there's a strong R&R fan base that have been keeping this show alive on some level. If there are so many R&R fans, it's because the writers have encouraged their hopes over the years in many ways, lately by their baby and the 8th season finale. It's not like the fans were grasping at straws, the writers have actively encouraged them to hope!
Now if they figuratively give this fan base the finger with J&R at the near-end of this show's run... can you see what I'm getting at???
This storyline would be a major screw job to Ross as a character. I know you all say he deserves it anyway but I don't see the writers "killing" (figuratively) Ross off because I do think they want to see him be happy by the time this show ends. And don't you remember Phoebe's remark to Ross that if Ross & Rachel hook up, he would get everything he has wanted since he was 15? In some way, he still wants Rachel and the writers have made us aware of that for a reason.
All of you who are soooo excited about J&R can be sure that it won't be smooth sailing for them either. Just be prepared to be jerked around like the R&R fans have been. Luckily, the show's almost over so you won't have years of this.
granted: joey and rachel are so much more compatible. blah blah boring.. It is just so obvious. It was just so much more romantic and better storyline with ross and rachel because they ARE so different. Even if r/j come together, what do we get? Pizza and dirty socks jokes?
Ross is a insecure mess, jalousy and all. AND he is plain stupid, letting R. go.. but it was good old friends-fun when I watched e.g. the red sweater and the videotape episodes..
I don't know about Ross, though. He's never been the "play the field" type. Remember the pathetic attempt at flirting with the pizza delivery girl?? He's not a smooth talker when it comes to the ladies. He defines "putting your foot in your mouth"!!! ~~~ Kathy