The first few episodes of this season were kind of a downer and only sorta funny but after that it slowly got some of the biting humor back that the original series had.
Once they got away from Roseann's death and back to daily life things, the show started getting better. I'm glad I stuck with it and gave it a chance.
Add a Review
-
bigcat240013 December 2018
-
tzk1213 November 2018The show is still good. Yes, it's obvious Roseanne's voice is missing, but the show is good on it's own merit, not just because of one personality. I actually like it better cuz I find Roseanne's voice jarring and annoying, but she can be funny. lol! I will continue to watch the show since I like the storylines and it's still funny to me.
-
kellysculaw11 May 2024It's painful to watch the character Darlene as the seasons go on. It seems like the writers wanted to make the character the most selfish, rude, mean and unhappy woman in the world, and it's not funny. No one would hopefully put up with anyone that awful in their life, so how did she get a handsome, caring, intelligent husband, a successful career, non-suicidal children... The beauty of Roseanne was that it showed us the real world, recognizing the truth about living from paycheck to paycheck, but still finding humor and joy in it. But that formula seems to be missing the main ingredients on this show. How disappointing in too many ways. The 5 is for everyone, mainly wonderful Ms. Metcalf! If only the show centered around wonderful Metcalf perhaps we could see hope and joy in the doldroms of reality.
-
ShartyMcFly26 November 2018I have watched all the episodes so far because I want to like this show. I loved the original and still enjoy the reruns so much. However, the new show is simply not good. I love Laurie Metcalf but she is horribly overplaying her character much like she did in the original runs last season. I don't know who told her this was the way to go, but it's awful. Goodman looks bored and seems like he's forcing his lines. Sara Gilbert seems to be trying to fill the void left by Roseanne and she's just not up to it. Darlene was an interesting teenage character but her flat, monotone one-liners just don't deliver. As for the rest of the cast, there's too many extra characters and very little character development. If I'm supposed to care about any of the grandkids, they need to be featured more than a couple minutes each week. What made the original so good was the relationships - Roseanne was at the center of that with Dan, Jackie, Becky and Darlene. I gave it a chance, I think I'll stick with the reruns and take a pass on this.
-
thoopous1118 October 2018Maybe some if these bad reviews are not based on the show itself but on people's anger that Rosanne was fired. I thought the writing and the acting were as good as anything in the original. Rosanne picked the cast and set the tone so I guess that's a tribute to her. I thought her tweets were offensive but she's a comedienne, not the president, so holding her to a higher standard seems kind of unfair. . I think the show will go on without her. Darlene was always my favorite character anyway.
-
wienke-386203 August 2019I thought Goodman could still carry this show without Roseanne. I was wrong. I guess this is what you get when you show zero loyalty to the woman who built your careers. Pretty disappointing ending to a really funny show.
-
lthunting22 November 2018Its not as bad as everyone says. Its not as good without roseanne but pretty good. My biggest problem with it is that its not as funny as it should be. Its kind of depressing.
-
This show started out at a solid 5. Despite the sudden loss of the driving force of the show, the first season of The Conners seemed to do a decent job. They highlighted how an average family can weather poverty and loss while also dealing with the generational conflicts that will naturally happen when you have three generations trying to inhabit the same space without killing each other. In the second season it started slipping, and has continued to do so ever since. Now in season 4 we have reached a generous 2/10 and absolutely NONE of the original magic is left. It is almost entirely filled with this or that political/social agenda and the acting and writing have both become painful to witness. No matter what your opinion of Rosanne's politics is, anyone who is being honest has to admit that the original series was awesome (until we got to season 9 and things started to go seriously off the rails) where this show started off average at best and is now a complete dumpster fire.
-
Yes, it sucks that Roseanne is absent, but I've always enjoyed the supporting cast. I think that they're holding their own pretty well in this series. It's funny to me and it doesn't feel much different than the original series, other than the obvious being that Rosie isn't there. Great acting here and I can appreciate it.
-
joellyn-mumcian17 October 2018I hope this gets some other "better" reviews. The 1 and the 3 ratings I thought were unnecessarily harsh. I thought "The Conner's" was a pretty fair re-boot. It was funny, sad in the right places, and I really didn't miss Roseanne. Maybe those other reviews were from die hard Rosanna Barr fans.
-
amexspam10 March 2022The writing of the early years of the Roseanne show was based on memories, and recent realities, of actual "working class" people. "The Connors" writers are - based on their bios - all millionaire Hollywood sexagenarians, living in Mailibu, that grew up in upper middle class homes, attended Ivy league schools, and went up from there...Top 1% clueless cultural misappropriation. This still might work if the show was at all funny, but it simply isn't.
-
peggy-zelaya18 November 2018As a devout Roseanne viewer who has seen every Roseanne episode at least 10 times it was hard for me to hear of her firing and the show getting cancelled. I was reluctant about "The Conners" but I found that it is just as funny. It really is. Aunt Jackie is great and Dan carries the show well. I will say that I HATE the opening of the show without Roseanne's laugh. They should have totally changed it. That's the only reason I'm giving it an 8.
-
ragana17 October 2018I didn't think it would work without Roseanne but I also didn't think a new Star Trek series would work after the original. The humor is intact, the relationships are strong, Roseanne's death is dealt with in a dark, sad, and culturally appropriate manner. It's an excellent jumping off point for the show, future story lines, and character growth. It has the makings of being just as wonderful as the original if people can just get past their "It's Kirk or nothing!" I mean "It's Roseanne or nothing!" attitude.
-
thekingerguy23 September 2021I agree I'm just not feeling this show at all I don't find it funny....it's just not working.
-
mija28817 October 2018It's amazing how many chose to go low with their review without ever watching the show or, DID watch it but went into it with plans to be negative no matter what. In my opinion, the premiere episode was VERY good and I wasn't expecting it to be but I chose to give it an honest shot with my only real disappointment coming with the fact Roseanne Barr made the choices she did. I WILL be a regular viewer and I'm proud of the cast AND crew for trusting in their belief that there was still a story to tell and they were up to the challenge.
-
davelynch1621 November 2018I see a lot of bad reviews giving 1/10 I will leave my rating until I watch it some more. I found the first episode both funny and a little touching. The jokes were similar. The same sarcastic tone. It's sort of strange that an actress can get fired from a popular show for making a comment that very few people Barr (excuse the pun) the media were following anyway, while the President of the United States can get away with just about anything. To sum up, episode one is a fitting tribute to the show's former title character. I'll give episode one 9/10 and save my rating based on the first series, of which I will be following.
-
Tron_Swanson17 October 2018So the first episode of Roseanneless Roseanne actually isn't really that bad.
The main stand outs for me are definitely Dan and Jackie. The way the Jackie goes full neurotic around the house because she doesn't want to leave for fear she would be leaving Roseanne is great. Another high point is Dan in all his John Goodman goodness. He's still got jokes and is still one of the funniest characters on the show. His emotional moments were on point too. And the way they handled Mark coming out to Dan was sweet.
The only bad I really saw was the scene where the family finds out it was an OD that killed Roseanne felt kinda forced.
Overall I think this could be a decent show despite the absence of Rosanne. -
michael-0330324 November 2018I've watched all five eps to date. I just can't watch any more. It's not funnny. Poorly written and lackluster. It's such a shame. Roseanne was a staple of my youth. Without her this show is terrible.
-
waynetripp-6855217 October 2018Yes, it's a different show without Roseanne but it was still funny.
-
jrdjrdmcdglgmlcm18 May 2023You know--without Roseanne, The Connors just does not pass muster. The original "Rosanne" was a groundbreaking and much more controversial series than this: the writers had more freedom to express their humor, the jokes weren't stale and cookiecutter in the original. Clearly the writers have tried to make the humor in this series as PC as possible, but everything just falls flat.
Admittedly, Roseanne's comment that got her canned from the "Roseanne" reboot wasn't a good thing to say, but it's hypocritical how Hollywood will not let her return to the series. To me, the action of not forgiving a gaffe--even a terribly offensive gaffe--says more about Hollywood's character (or lack thereof) than it does Roseanne's.
Anyway, Roseanne was the nexus that glued the characters harmonically together, without Rosie the show just doesn't work. -
michellepugh-964-46145529 November 2018Get over it people, Rosanne is not on the show. It's funny, even without Rosanne. Sheesh.
-
sarah_sle11 April 2021Is this show a joke? It seems so! The acting and parody to today's life is! Get real! The Rosanne show use to be great because real people could relate to it and it made us laugh! This crap just makes me cringe!! Stop Already!! You're all embarrassing yourselves!!
-
neoemm5 February 2023The original roseanne show was so relatable and true to real people. I can't say the same about the connors.
I watched the fist three episodes but I had to draw the line at the Halloween episode, the original Roseanne Halloween episodes were always a fantastic farce but now in the connors it is full of pc nonsense.
Also some characters have not been explained or introduced to the audience, what's that about.
The connors feels like it's trying too hard to fit into the current climate, so much so story surfers.
Some actors are well below par especially becky, she took me out of the narrative.
I was hoping for something special but unfortunately it has become pc fest, far from the originals tone.