Review Friends (1994)
- Thread starter Hux
- Start date
I really enjoyed this when it was airing, but when I see an episode now, I don't find it funny at all.
Anyway, I liked Chandler the most.
And yes, they were on a break :)
Anyway, I liked Chandler the most.
And yes, they were on a break :)
Carol
Member: Rank 5
Yes, I agree, but can no longer for the life of me remember why...
chainsaw_metal1
Member: Rank 8
When it was running, Joey was my favorite. Recently, I read an article where someone talked about how Ross was the hero of the show, and how it was the story of an intelligent man being made dumber by his group of friends. I like that theory, but Ross is still just too whiny for me to completely like.
I don't know that I necessarily have a favorite episode, but moments. Like Joey trying to learn French, or Ross and Rachel finally having sex, only to wake up in front of a group of school children. Things like that.
Yes, Cracked had an article recently about how Rachel is evil, and only got delight out of making Ross' life hell. It really makes sense. Yeah, she was too hot for him, but she was also being a snot about the whole deal (snot being the nicest and most appropriate word I could use in this instance).
Hux
Member: Rank 6
Well, technically she said... "take a break from us."
There's a non-permanent quality to that phrase.
That's what was so good about the writing. They covered all bases so the audience wouldn't be able to hate just one character for the break-up.
Anyway, I never much cared for them as couple. Preferred Mondler.
There's a non-permanent quality to that phrase.
That's what was so good about the writing. They covered all bases so the audience wouldn't be able to hate just one character for the break-up.
Anyway, I never much cared for them as couple. Preferred Mondler.
Carol
Member: Rank 5
Yes - but I think there was a one-off dud American remake of Coupling as well.
Again, there was verging on too much How I Met Your Mother for my taste; I surfeited then took to dippin in and out the first time round and now still sometimes see episodes on E4 that are new to me - and we'd need another thread for "series endings that really cheesed you off".
starfang7456
Member: Rank 1
Also from Seinfeld in regard of jokes and plotlines, but executed ranging from good to abysmal.
Regarding Friends, is a cool sit-com I recently rediscovered four years ago and it was really pleasant with some unfunny bits, but were easly to gloss over.
I wish nowadays sitcoms to have, at least, a bit of consistency between episodes and seasons without divebombing to crassness and bad writing.
I'm re-watching the series at the moment. Some of the humour has dated poorly (there's a lot of homophobia jokes, for example). It's interesting watching the Ross/Rachel relationship in hindsight. Both characters didn't come out of things well to be honest, but I think Rachel is overall worse. Ross was the initial problem - his jealousy caused the big fight and, while I'd agree that they were "on a break" that's a very different thing from "breaking up". I would take "on a break" to mean a temporary separation to get some space with the goal of working things out. Not the sort of thing that sleeping with someone else is likely to help.But, in Ross's defence, I think (as Phoebe pointed out later in the series) Susan really messed him up. After a 5? year marriage, his wife cheats on him and comes out as gay, which clearly had a significant effect on his trust. That's not an excuse for his behaviour and the first breakdown in their relationship is fully on him.
After that Rachel becomes more of the problem, getting jealous whenever he dates another woman (although there is some of that on both sides too). She goes out of her way to wreck his relationship with Emily (and although I'm not convinced that would have lasted, Ross had clearly moved on from Rachel by that point). She sabotages his relationship with the bald girl and then, after Ross breaks up with her, she decides she's only going to get back together with him if he accepts all of the responsibility for the first break up.
I think that, had Rachel not continued semi-pursuing Ross, he'd have moved on and not continued to fall for her. It's only her continued pursuit of Ross (only when he's not available) that ensures Ross continues to be interested.
And of course after his marriage breakdown with Emily, Ross is clearly suffering some serious mental health issues, which all of his friends either just ignore or tease him about. He loses his wife, his home, his job all in a short space of time and is made fun of constantly for it. And after he marries Rachel in Vegas, his refusal to divorce her is symptomatic of a serious disconnect with reality.
Of course, it's just possible I'm overthinking things (just slightly) and the show was written in pursuit of the jokes rather than as an exploration into the mental health decline of a divorced man.
After that Rachel becomes more of the problem, getting jealous whenever he dates another woman (although there is some of that on both sides too). She goes out of her way to wreck his relationship with Emily (and although I'm not convinced that would have lasted, Ross had clearly moved on from Rachel by that point). She sabotages his relationship with the bald girl and then, after Ross breaks up with her, she decides she's only going to get back together with him if he accepts all of the responsibility for the first break up.
I think that, had Rachel not continued semi-pursuing Ross, he'd have moved on and not continued to fall for her. It's only her continued pursuit of Ross (only when he's not available) that ensures Ross continues to be interested.
And of course after his marriage breakdown with Emily, Ross is clearly suffering some serious mental health issues, which all of his friends either just ignore or tease him about. He loses his wife, his home, his job all in a short space of time and is made fun of constantly for it. And after he marries Rachel in Vegas, his refusal to divorce her is symptomatic of a serious disconnect with reality.
Of course, it's just possible I'm overthinking things (just slightly) and the show was written in pursuit of the jokes rather than as an exploration into the mental health decline of a divorced man.
chainsaw_metal1
Member: Rank 8
I came across an article a while ago in which the author argued that Friends was a show about how Ross was the hero, and was gradually made dumber by his social group over 10 years.They brought up examples of how, when Ross would talk about work or discuss a topic where he was proven to be intelligent, the others did nothing but mock him and make him feel lousy for being smart. And, like you, they pointed out how Rachel basically just turned an already damaged Ross into an emotional child, who would run back to her because she is an evil bitch.
It funny how we can, indeed, point to Susan (and her partner, who hated Ross for no other reason than he was a man, referring to him as nothing more than a "sperm donor") as being a major catalyst in breaking Ross. Yes, we see in many flashbacks that he always carried a torch for Rachel, but he was living a good life, married, child on the way, and a great job. While our attitude toward Susan is painted by archaic writing (making her and the partner - what the fuck was her name, Carol?!? - little more than man-haters, which was common for the time the series started), it still stands that she as a character is terrible.
I'm not a fan of the last couple of seasons, mostly because most sitcoms seem to have a shelf life, and then they decide they have to shake things up to stay "fresh". Like many sitcoms, characters started hooking up with each other, then kids are added, jokes become stale, and suddenly, everyone's trying to figure out why fans aren't watching like they used to. I still think there's something to the British attitude toward television, where you do limited series, instead of endless seasons of 22-plus episodes, where writing can suffer for the sake of advertising sales and talent salaries. Of course, if a producer would like to pay me a pantload of money to do such a job, I would sell out like Gene Simmons and take the money.
Of course, without the misogynistic and conservative diatribes.
It funny how we can, indeed, point to Susan (and her partner, who hated Ross for no other reason than he was a man, referring to him as nothing more than a "sperm donor") as being a major catalyst in breaking Ross. Yes, we see in many flashbacks that he always carried a torch for Rachel, but he was living a good life, married, child on the way, and a great job. While our attitude toward Susan is painted by archaic writing (making her and the partner - what the fuck was her name, Carol?!? - little more than man-haters, which was common for the time the series started), it still stands that she as a character is terrible.
I'm not a fan of the last couple of seasons, mostly because most sitcoms seem to have a shelf life, and then they decide they have to shake things up to stay "fresh". Like many sitcoms, characters started hooking up with each other, then kids are added, jokes become stale, and suddenly, everyone's trying to figure out why fans aren't watching like they used to. I still think there's something to the British attitude toward television, where you do limited series, instead of endless seasons of 22-plus episodes, where writing can suffer for the sake of advertising sales and talent salaries. Of course, if a producer would like to pay me a pantload of money to do such a job, I would sell out like Gene Simmons and take the money.
Of course, without the misogynistic and conservative diatribes.
I did like the fact that the Chandler and Monica relationship was able to be as stable as it was. Given their family backgrounds it was a good relationship for them both. Ross and Rachel, on the other hand, seem to have grown up as the "spoilt" children and it shows in their relationships.