Is anyone here sick of "Friends".

I am so sick of Friends and all the publicity they get. Number one, they aren't funny, period. Number two, they have no character. Number three, they don't diserve to be on the same night as Seinfeld. Number four, they all sleep around in Hollywood, I hope they all get AIDS.

In article , [email] wrote:

Then why are they the most popular show???

[email] (Steve Lapommeray) wrote:

IT isn't the most popular show. Not if you're talking ratings. Seinfeld beat Friends consistently, if not every week, in the ratings.

Monty

It's not the most popular? Then why the Friends bonanza?? Why are the entire cast mega-mega-mega stars??

[email] (Steve Lapommeray) wrote:

Because it's new and because it's ONE of the most popular shows on TV and because NBC and Pepsi are targeting Gen-X with the biggest media blitz this side of a Super Bowl.

Monty

Is the entire cast mega-stars?

Lets see. Matt Leblanc's first movie, "Ed" was a monster bomb at the box office. David Schwimmer's movie "The Pallbearer" also was a bomb, and it got horrible reviews.

Now I would be surprised if Jennifer Aniston's movie was bad, since its being made by Ed Burns.

But I think that David Schwimmer had the most intelligent comment regarding the popularity of Friends. He basically was of the opinion that the reason why people like the show is that they generally can look down on the characters as underachievers, goofballs, etc. As the cast stars in more and more movies, and make more and more money, people who watch the show aren't going to see the characters anymore, they are going to see a bunch of young actors making huge amounts of money, playing a bunch of goofballs. And thats when they are going to stop watching the show.

Regardless of whether I agree or disagree with numbers 1-3, I find your number 4 to be completely disgusting and not the least bit funny.

you are an IDIOT. i hope your fingers rot off so that you can't type your dribble anymore

you are an IDIOT. i hope your fingers rot off so that you can't type your dribble anymore

Eye candy for dullards, is what it is...

[email] (Justin Tribble) wrote:

Sometimes, Justin, you can be the biggest idiot in this group. Too bad JCS isn't around to give you a run for your money. It sounds like you have a personal problem with Friends that has very little to do with the quality of the show. The fact is, Friends is very funny at times. The premise of the show is a little lame and it doesn't challenge you to think very hard, but it's a good show, just not a great show.

Monty

[email] (Monty D. Martin) wrote:

Is this a fact too?

Oh, well, thank you for enlightening us with the FACTS.

The fact is: it's not even a good show.

Kirk Knutson wrote:

No, it's an opinion based on a childish rant about Friends that was way below Justin's usual standards. He can argue his point much more intelligently and has so on many occasions.

Hey, don't mention it. It seems that you in particular are in desperate need of enlightenment, but perhaps I should rephrase that. "The fact is, MANY people find the show to be funny." How's that, Mr. Take Everything Everybody Says Literally.

You are entitled to your facts and I'm entitled to mine.

Monty

[email] (Monty D. Martin) wrote:

Monty I think you are right about me. I sometimes rant too much, but I do have a point in there somewhere. My main problem with Friends is the fact that they really do project themselves as being the most "hip" type of people around. Seinfeld is really not quite the same, but I don't agree with Seinfeld's moral corruption. Seinfeld usually doesn't praise their immorallity, they more or less make fun of it (i.e. "Susan's death") Friends on the other hand seems to praise their ways of doing things. I find the way they act, as if sleeping with every cute guy/girl they come in contact with as being completly normal, very repulsive. Is it not true that sleeping with every person you practically go out with, as do the cast of Friends, alittle immoral. Friends is a very corrupt show, but very few people realize it because just about everyone left in this country has been degraded of their morals in some way or another. Deep down most Americans these days don't see anything wrong with a lot of "sleeping around", it's normal, everybody does it, who cares? People don't consciously think these thoughts in their minds, if they did they just might acctually see how awful what they believe acctually is. They just have this programing in their subconscience that they don't care about fixing. Justin Tribble [email]

I have been watching this whole "Friends" vs. "Seinfeld" debate with much amusement, so I'll finally contribute an opinion.

When "Friends" first began, it was obviously a "Seinfeld for 20-somethings" and even had "Seinfeld" as a lead-in. However, as the cast and writing matured and developed, they have had some very funny bits and even touching continuing story lines. IMHO, they even passed "Seinfeld" as my personal favorite when "Seinfeld" went into a brief slump in '94 (though "Seinfeld" has re-established its lead).

As far as the "sleeping around" thing goes, I have to disagree. One of the continuing themes of the show is that these beautiful young people have very UNsatisfying sex lives (as in the theme song line which says, "Your love life's DOA"). I myself find it barely credible that three such gorgeous women should have such difficulty finding eligible men, but that's just the way life is sometimes in the big city.

I would also like to call attention to the themes of love and attachment in the show. In my opinion, Ross is the most well-developed 3-dimensional character and David Schwimmer is the best actor on the show, a latter-day Ben Braddock (Dustin Hoffman's character in "The Graduate"). He will go far, well after "Friends" is long gone. HIs feelings about his pet monkey Marcel were well-played and genuine, not overdone to the point of campiness. And his long-term devotion to Rachel, even when it seemed hopeless, was extremely affecting.

I do have problems with the portrayal of Ross' ex-wife's lesbian relationship, which I consider to be total "alternative lifestyle" propaganda, culminating in the abominable and insulting "wedding" episode which is being re-run tonight (on July 4th, no less! Think that might have been planned that way?).The great thing about "Seinfeld" is that there's no propagandizing, just comedy. In fact, they go out of their way to skewer the "politically correct." Compare and contrast how "Seinfeld" dealt with the theme of homosexuality in a totally non-offensive and funny way in "The Outing" with this ham-handed episode of "Friends," which just bludgeons you over the head with its holier-than-thou attitude.

On Wed, 3 Jul 1996, Justin Tribble wrote:

I agrre- think about how often the _Seinfeld_ gang has things blow up in their face... Almost ONCE an episode something happens to one of them that could be described as a disaster. And this is because they are willimng to lie, cheat, and steal. The message is that being a jerk blows in your face more often than it helps you.

Friends is basically a bad soap dressed up as a sitcom ... and enough about the stupid hair !!! as Newman would say, "I loath the show !!!"

Jason

Kirk Knutson wrote:

Wrong.

Whether it's a good show or not -- is an opinion, it will never be a fact.

Whether it gets high ratings or low ratings -- that is a fact.

Friends has just started down here (it's been on for about 3 months already), so we're way behind you guys, but personally, I don't really like it. I mean, it's a decent show, and it is funny at times, but I think it's unbelievable over rated. It's like the buzz word on everyone's lips around here. You know, they hear that it's America's favourite show, so of course automaitcally it must be good. I know so many people who watch it because everyone else is. It's alright as a show, but really, the storylines are pretty weak, and it's unoriginal in the extreme. Seinfeld is very original. That's why I love it. But I must say that I am already sick of Friends.

Well, here's my 2 cents from America: It's Dull. My fiance likes to watch it sometimes so I have seen maybe two episodes. It's just a plain vanilla sitcom to me. I can see the jokes coming a mile away. Courtney Cox is gorgeous imo, but an AWFUL actress. Her greatest moment was being in Bruce Springsteen's video, "Dancing in the Dark" about 13 years ago.

Sometimes certain things become all the rage for no particular reason and then quickly exhaust themselves, witness, The Macarena.

g

Lee Kirshon wrote:

I thought it was pretty good in its first season, but by the middle of season 2 I had stopped watching. It got to be so trendy, and tried too hard to be "cool" or "sexy" or any of the other things the magazines had proclaimed it to be. One night I actually decided to watch it again, you know, to see if it had gotten better, and I saw Tom Selleck sitting on their couch. I was ROTFL for days, convinced "Friends" was onee of the dumbest shows on TV. It's a good show to laugh at.

Lee Kirshon wrote:

I know what you mean. It was okay for a while, but the babefest aint what it used to be. I still like Courtney and Jennifer's tushes, but the jokes.. well.. you know...they certainly don't get great lines like they do in Seinfeld. ------- How did I find out what it was all about? A little birdie told me so. (Hart) --Lars Dreklind

[email] (Lars Dreklind) wrote:

Well, Lars, I am sure the gals can feel a sense of professional accomplishment knowing that you like their tushes -- exactly their reason for going into acting, I'm sure.

[email] (debbie) wrote:

Not to get TOO snotty, Debbie, but where do you think they'd be without those tushes? Courtney is an excuse for an actress, imo. I have no opinion about the other females on the show.

As far as looks go, the same is true for most of the guys on the show, too. Gregg

I am NOT a Sexist Pig! ....(I'm a misogynist....) :-)

Friends has now become a show to be laughed at...Not with.

In article , [email] (Lars Dreklind) wrote:

I think it is vastly over-rated and over-hyped. The Chandler Bing character has some great lines, but the show is weak overall. Lisa Kudrow is/was terrific as a bit character playing dumb waitress Ursula on "Mad About You', but as Phoebe her stupid character is just annoying. Friends is pretty lame. bob storch

Yes, exactly! I loved the Ursula character, but Phoebe (basically the same character) is annoying. People have to be careful with characters like that, that are only good in small doses. Imagine if Newman had several lines every single week!

-Jen

"Jennifer M. Blaske" wrote:

That's one place where Seinfeld shows it's genius: I doesn't overplay the jokes. Most sitcome ffind a gag that works, and then proceed to make the audience sick of it. Seinfeld continually risks new ideas so they don't become redundant.

Just yesterday I remarked to a friend that I haven't seen George's parents this season. All George's parents have to do is shout amd overreact ONCE, and I'm in stiches. But perhaps they are restraining themselves so that the Costanza's stay in our memories as "funny."

And they err the other way too: They tried to make a gag out of revealing Kramers first name. (actually, I always thought that Kramer WAS his first name!) "Cosmo" wasn't funny. But they took a chance. Hat's off.

PS you all probably know this by now, but Kramer was "Kaufman" in the pilot. Another good call!

They just appeared a couple of weeks ago on a new episode..... the one with the Jewish singles night???

Wasn't it "Hoffman?"

On Sun, 24 Nov 1996, Jennifer M. Blaske wrote:

Agree! Other than Chandler, I don't think I like the rest of the cast very much. Some of them hardly have a character to play in the sitcom at all. I mean if you take out Courtney, probably nobody would even notice that shes gone. Whereas in Seinfeld, every person in the show has its own unique character. Can't imagine if anyone of them leaves. Also, they don't seem to have as strong a bond as the cast in Seinfeld. They have a rather superficial clique.

BTW, do any of you guys notice that crosstalk between Chandler and Joey is rather similar to those in Seinfeld?

I couldn't agree any more with your critique on the show. Friends is completely overrated due to a few very pretty girls and "cool" guys. The humour level at best is extremely shallow and certainly doesn't carry the uniqueness of Seinfeld. All in all, people love it because they enjoy viewing pretty people, but at the very least, one cannot say Seinfeld and Friends in the same breath. They're honestly not even comparable! Bernie

Lee Kirshon wrote:

yes... it started here in New Zealand last year... my girlfriend likes it (for some reason) and also my flatmates... Wednesday night 7:30.. im out of there.. try and find others around who don't watch it... very rare indeed... is there no one out there (in Hamilton, New Zealand) who hates the show as well??????

Perfer to beat my toungue with a meat tenderiser than watch it... the show really grates my nerve ends....

Friends = Seinfeld - the wit

Yeah, I officially stopped watching Friends about a month ago, and it used to be one of my favorite shows for a while. Mostly I got sick of all the sex. On Seinfeld it's a little more bearable because it has an unrealistic feel, sort of. It also started dawning on me that the actors are not as wondrously attractive as I used to think they were.

-Jen

No, If you don't like the show, don't watch it.

the show hasn't been on long enough to get boring, so iagree. if you don't like it don't watch it

Well Monty, I have to agree that Chandler is pretty funny sometimes, but don't agree with the morals on the show. They sleep around like crazy. There morals OFF the show aren't to great either, I always hear about reports of them sleeping around, cheating on boyfriends/girlfriends, getting in fights at bars. I think the actors on the show are very corrupt. Seinfeld is the same way, but there is a difference. Seinfeld isn't normal, Friends projects themselves as being the coolest of the coolest, thus influencing an entire nation of people without morals to continue their degridation. Thanks, Justin Tribble

[email] (Justin Tribble) wrote:

Sorry about the rude comments, Justin. You certainly make your point much better in this post than you did in the first one. I still disagree with some of what you say, but I'm more inclined to listen to what you have to say when you aren't ranting.

For sleeping around, Seinfeld's cast definitely takes top honors. Not that there's anything wrong with that. I think Friends is far more responsible in the way they treat casual sex. Joey is the only one who has a reputation for sleeping around. Chandler probably would if he wasn't so pathetic.

As far as the casts' personal lives, I don't pay much attention to the gossip. I certainly wouldn't believe everything I read, if I did.

As far as influence goes, both shows have huge audiences (mostly the same people) and they both influence large numbers of people. It really doesn't matter if one show "isn't normal" and the other "projects itself as being the cooloest of the coolest".

If you find Friends to be morally degrading and Seinfeld not, then you are judging the shows by two different standards. I, personally, don't see anything morally wrong with either show, so I don't see the degradation.

Monty

Ummmm, No. This whole moral issue is a degridation of critical thinking itself. There is, never has been and never will be a consitent moral code for any culture or civilization on this planet as long as human beings are around. TV is about one thing and one thing only. Money. If you want to bring in cash you have to appeal to the human race on it most primal level. Sex, vanity, erotic fiction. Oh yeah and people love to hear about corruption and deceit as well. Oh yeah, and people love when shit blows up killing everything in sight. Yeah, murder, sex, suffering, pain....all that immoral stuff. People love it! :)

Those are your morals. Why do you assume everyone else on the planet has the same ones? Are you, perhaps, one of those people who equates morality with sexual behaviour?

IMHO, the characters are good - and I especially like the theme song - but the writers let them down quite often. I heard recently that the major studios in L.A. are so short-handed that they are developing a class at UCLA(?) specifically for screenwriters. Of course, they can always borrow talent from the Seinfeld crew!!!

KP

I hafta agree with you. It's so unrealistic. SEinfeld kicks major ***..... Friends should be on Sunday late-night so everyone's in bed.

-Tierney

Yeah, Friends is starting to suck major time. I stopped watching it. I think they got popular too fast, it went to their heads, and now they suck.

Gwen

In article , [email] (KP) writes:

Oh, sure, there are hardly any screenwriters in L.A. -- certainly none that can meet their high standards.

Who pays for the class? Sounds like the same sort of bait-and-switch that Intel was accused of.