The cast is very good. The scripts are patchy. Maybe they can bring in the Mad About You writers now that the show has ended. Brooke gets better and better. She was a little stiff at first, but now she is relaxed and nuanced. I'm glad Kathy Griffin's character is single again. What will happen next season without Stricland and Ne
Add a Review
-
Red6615 June 1999
-
shelbythuylinh14 December 2021When David Strickland killed himself in 1999, the show went down as he had a promising future there. And how that we will never see his potential.
Brooke Shields prove she could be a comedic actress there. Really have to turn off with Kathy Griffith being a you know what there.
As despite being a huge Eric Idle fan, really he was very miscast there when Judd Nelson left. -
safenoe20 April 2024I think Suddenly Susan was sadly underrated as a 1990s sitcom, trying to stand out amongst Seinfeld and Friends, although Suddenly Susan is more memorable in the public consciousness than Union Square, which was part of NBC's Must See TV lineup. Anyway, I enjoyed watching this series, where Brooke "Blue Lagoon" Shields and Judd "The Breakfast Club" Nelson, were the headline performers. The chemistry was fun, and there was a true ensemble, and the characters were relatable and likeable. Sadly, David Strickland passed away towards the end of season three, and the season three finale was an emotional tribute. Sure, Eric "Monty Python" Idle is big in England and in Saturday Night Live, but bringing him on was like a square peg in a circle, like when Head of the Class brought in the Scottish comedian Billy Connolly to replace Howard Hesseman. It went all downhill from there. Also Judd Nelson and Andrea Bendewald leaving after season three didn't help.
-
I thought the tribute to David Strickland last night was extremely touching and surprisingly enough very funny. I know in my heart they did David Strickland very well with the tribute and the season finale. There was real emotion and sadness. I did not see anything phony about their sadness, it was truly genuine. On a more personal note, I really thought David Strickland was very funny and very talented. What it really all boils down to is listening to our youth and trying to understand the problems, because no matter what, there are always warning signs.
-
prine012478-121 May 2020Not entertaining and almost uncomfortable to watch. These folks are willing to get up in front of a camera and do anything for cash. Must have needed to fill some empty time slots with something. At least an infomercial would have been interesting.
-
mltmn29 December 2006This show and its ensemble of characters was one of the funniest and creative shows on television. The comedy's center was the workplace with each character finding his/her own niche, completely separate and different from the others. Brooke Shields was excellent as the foil to many pranks/quips relating to her relationship with her cohorts, especially after the addition of Maddie. Unfortunately the shows strengths diminished after the death of David Stickland and the departure of Jack and Maddie. The whole show's premise and hilarity was lost with the addition of Eric Idol and the change to the magazine as well. Bring back the origin of this sitcom. David Strickland must have never known how he affected so many in his life. It is a shame, God rest and bless his soul.
-
Sylviastel23 September 2002One of the reasons that Suddenly Susan works for me is the ensemble cast of characters including Brooke Shields. Even though she is the star of the show, she manages to evolve her supporting cast of characters like the unbelievable Vicki and Judd Nelson as her boss Jack Richmond. The show is well-grouped with this cast of zany characters working at a fictional San Francisco newspaper. When tragedy struck the cast, the loss of David Strickland who played Todd was so catastrophic for the cast and crew for it to ever recover from his loss. David Strickland committed suicide in a Las Vegas hotel room. The cast was never the same again without him. The pairing of Vicki and Susan living together brought great laughs. These two should get together and spin off the characters into their own series. The show was never an Emmy winner or critically acclaimed. But from all reports, this show actually had a pleasant environment to grow and mature. Brooke Shields as a producer was not afraid to let her supporting cast branch out which is why I like this show.
-
ProofUndeniable24 July 2003The one and only reason I ever tuned into this show was to see Judd Nelson on a regular basis. And on that point I was not disappointed. I found him to be charming and engaging and quite funny. And a pleasant surprise was the comedic abilities of the late David Strickland. He had an endearing quality combined with a knack for delivery. The glowing review ends there. Brooke Shields was hit and miss, with a strong emphasis on miss. She could be humorous at times, but it was usually due more to circumstance than her delivery or timing. Kathy Griffin's Vicky had an obnoxious nastiness that could wrangle a snicker out of me every now and again. But, Aundrea Benewald and Nestor Carbonell were forgettable window dressing for the most part. The last season was not pleasant and I think I only suffered through the season opener. I don't try and sit through any of the fourth season re-runs, even if nothing is on but infomercials.
-
scottallenkennedy@hotmail.com15 March 2006Brooke Shields was long overdue for recognition when she was finally given her chance to shine in this funny, quiet, unassuming little gem. What people seem to forget was, that it finished its first year in the top 4 in the Nielson ratings. It more than held viewers from the lead in show. Then NBC foolishly moved it. Always the kiss of death...or at least the beginning of the proverbial handwriting on the wall. However, this show defied the odds and improved in years 2 and 3! Thanks mainly to Brooke's self-deprecating humor and delivery which was reminiscent of Mary Tyler Moore. And supporting her was the cast's individual and unique contributions which were also reminiscent of that glorious cast of MTM. Now, in all fairness the shows writing didn't rival the show I have just used in comparison, but it more than surpassed shows that were on TV for triple the number of years than SS. It is more than worth your time for viewing! One day, if she returns to Movies and TV, Mrs. Henchy will receive her long overdue awards of merit to go with her long overdue "awards of motherhood"!
-
This was never a wonderfully written program. In comparison to shows like Frasier, Friends, Seinfeld, even Mad About You, the plots, the jokes, were just thin. One good reason why is that the subplots never meshed with the plots.
For example, I just watched a rerun of one: the subplot is about the photographer taking pictures of Nana in order for Shields to present a portrait to her grandfather. Predictably, the photographs are far more racy than Shields expects. The main plot is about Griffin's jealousy over Shields' "sudden" success as a star player on Griffin's basketball team - the jealousy spills over into jealousy of Shields' beauty (and she responds that no one has life easy, being so tall, etc.). The plot has NOTHING to do with the subplot. They could have been put in different episodes - that's not very good writing.
For me, the reason for watching the program is to watch Brooke Shields -whose graciousness, modesty and essential sweetness come through in all she's done as an adult. (I was too old to be a fan in her "Endless Summer", "Blue Lagoon" days). More than any other actress, she has that Mary Tyler Moore character's humility, that eagerness to please. I would expect that she is always one of the most diligent actresses in any project.
When someone so beautiful is also so obviously this lovely seeming a person, one's in danger of losing one's heart. That's why I watched this fairly weak program. Shields deserves better writers - and she's really born to be a movie star, not one on television. -
Brian-27231 May 2001"Suddenly Susan" isn't the best series it likes much in terms of the stories and plot work to make the many episodes interesting. I can say that if you like Brooke Shields at all then watch this series! Now don't you like the fact of having Brooke working in a magazine company! I always just liked everything about Brooke Shields she is so beautiful and very sexy. You can watch the "Suddenly Susan" reruns late at night on WGN. This is a must see if you like and enjoy watching Brooke Shields.
-
mlinci8 August 2003After watching reruns of Suddenly Susan over the last couple of months I got strangely addicted to it. I find myself really looking forward to the "new" old episodes every day. I don't usually fall for American sitcoms, I prefer British sense of humour, but I really got to like this show. I love the characters (especially those in the first three seasons), and unlike some other viewers who have commented on it, I think there is real chemistry between Susan and Jack. I also think that Luis is an excellent character.
-
ghost-911 June 2002Suddenly Susan is one of my wive's and my favorite series. It always makes us laugh out loud which is unusual of today's sitcoms. We are sorry we didn't discover it until it was on reruns. Of course, some humor is funnier than other and all is subject to the mood and personality of the viewer. In my opinion, Suddenly Susan stands head and shoulders over contemporary sitcoms and also has a little bit more heart than other shows which makes all the difference in the world.
-
patygirl_df25 February 2000I've always loved Brooke Shields, she had a wonderful and quick career as a movie star. I don't understand what happened, because she is even more talented and beautiful than she used to be when she made her best movies. Maybe she enjoy doing television or maybe they stop sending her good scripts. The show is great, very funny, interesting but it so below Brooke's competence, she could be so much more. I really miss her in the big screen, but I watch the show every week and I have a really great time...
-
tex-4224 May 2000Even Brooke Shields should have backed away from this one. After making a comic appearance on Friends, Shields was given her own sitcom that turned into this mess. The show is boring, poorly written, and might as well be called "Sitcom Set at News Organization #202" just to show how predictable and already been done it is.
-
bookwormcassie27 August 2005Suddenly Susan is funny and creative. I watch it every single day. In New York, S.S. is on at 4pm on LRW. (lifetime real women) My favorite character is probably Todd. It's way too bad he killed himself. After the tribute episode to him, the show seemed to go down the hill. They moved to another office building and there were suddenly (excuse the pun) a bunch of new people we'd never seen before. I kind of don't care for the 1999 and 2000 episodes. That's not to say all of the 1999 episodes were that bad. Before Todd's character disappeared, it was a great laugh-out-loud comedy. Then it just got really inappropriate and I didn't race to the TV when it was time for S.S. anymore. In the beginning though, it was good.
-
lucrezia-29 December 1998A has-been star, a workplace full of zany characters (including a wisecracking redhead), and a Ross-and-Rachel type love story -- there you have half of NBC's lineup. But this show's writing is worse than usual -- it proves that if you put a thousand chimps in front of a thousand typewriters, they'll eventually turn out a sitcom.
-
patbuddha7 May 2002This is one the examples I use whenever I rant about the fact that NBC cancelled Freaks and Geeks after only 14 episodes, but yet gave this show three seasons. I saw only bits and pieces of the show during it's original network run. Tonight I caught the first ten minutes of an episode in syndication. I wondered if maybe there might have been something I had missed. Maybe the show had a charm that I had overlooked. I saw nothing that changed my opinion.
When it comes to sitcoms I'm pretty easy to please. I don't necessarily have to find something funny every episode. Sometimes the characters and the chemistry of the cast is enough. Suddenly Susan has none of that. Even the absense of that might not be enough to make me change channels. What I cannot forgive is whenever a sitcom lays in an uproarious laugh track almost literally every 5 seconds for lines and facial expressions that don't even seem intentionally funny. If a show truly has the goods I'll figure it out for myself. I don't need the help of a sound editor. -
iLoveLamp629 July 2001Suddenly Susan is a great show! one of the best! It is by far the second best because NOTHING can beat "FRIENDS" One of the reasons I love Suddenly Susan so much is all because of one guy! the soooooo hot and irreplaceable Judd Nelson! he makes the show better!the other characters give alot too, like Kathy Griffin she is so funny, Brook Sheilds is great too and of course Nestor Carbonel.David Strickland's character got on my nerves...ALOT! but David himself was a great actor and it's sad to say that the show could of taken his departure but then Judd Nelson left and BOOM!!! everything fell appart!! they changed the place of the office and Matty left, they got a new boss who I ABSOLUTLY HATE AND CANNOT STAND!!! and Oliver is a pain in the ***. I still watch the reruns everyday but stop as soon as they air the episodes without Judd and David. One of the best episodes they made was the tribute to David Strickland that was sooooo sad I actually almost cried! and the other best episodes were the one's where Jack told Susan he loved her when she was on her way to Italy (I think) then later she breaks his heart by telling him she doesn't feel the same!! I just wanted to kill her!! I just love Judd Nelson, he doesn't get enough credit for his work! he is a GREAT actor and not to mention very HOT!! and this is all coming from a 15 year old girl! so over all I say that Suddenly Susan beats every sitcom, exept for the one and only FRIENDS!, I give Suddenly Susan 9.9 out of 10
-
faceless_unknown14 April 2003I just saw an episode of this show and I am appalled. I don't even want to mention the plot of the episode because it was so terrible. How could anyone watch such garbage? I sincerely hope this show wasn't popular though it was on for four years. Could this have actually had an effect on people?!
-
luvuwildbill6 December 2002Hastily pasted together sitcom, and a rather dull one at that. Brooke Sheilds is a charming girl, but not really a comedienne. Kathy Griffin is funny, but the rest of the cast, including the late David Strickland, didn't get much to do. In fact, when Andrea Bendenwald joined the cast, I literally kept forgetting who she was each week. Not offensively bad, just bland. I stopped watching when Judd Nelson left-I just couldn't bear to see a comic giant like Eric Idle act down to the level of the writing. One bright spot: The Shawn Colvin song,"Nothin' On Me", heard to better advantage on her cd "A Few Small Repairs".
-
HailMary10 May 2000If you look at Suddenly Susan and NewsRadio, do you notice the similarities? NewsRadio came a few years before, and had better and different writers. A small magazine and radio station with similar sets, desks with a boss office, a romance between the boss and the star worker, a wisecracking red head, present in both sitcoms, they even look alike! Plus, of course, they have to add the ethnicity, despite the fact that the show takes place in San Francisco and there is not ONE asian person in it. Instead, to compete with NewsRadio's Italian guy, they add a latino. Racism, plagirism. Is there anyone this show does not offend?
-
Hotoil13 March 2001I can't believe Eric Idle went from the innovative 'Monty Python' to the laughably recycled and unfunny "Suddenly Susan". This was part of the 'clumsy single-women in the city with formula supporting cast and starring actress from exhausted film/tv career' TV shows NBC was spitting out for a while (see "Caroline in the City", "Veronica's Closet", "Jesse" for more). This was after they had already exhausted the 'idiotic, naurotic single man in the city' premise based after Seinfeld (see 'Single Guy', among others).
This show was dumb, as you probably now, sometimes acting only as a promotion for other shows (an entire episode revolving around how you can't miss NBC's must-see TV line-up). Yet it lasted for four seasons!! Is the world that far gone?? -
Bob-78520 April 2001Although this is not one of the best television shows ever created, I have to say that the writers are very good. The way that they handled the tragic death of actor David Strickland was excellent. And I have to praise the stars for their performances in that episode. During the story it cuts to all of the main characters in a blackened room all relaying their favourite memories of Todd (David's character) and they were blatantly speaking, not just about the loss of the their fictional friend but also their real life friend. The characters are extremely run of the mill, present in every sitcom set in a work place but their is something endearing about all of them. Sometimes the redhead's 'spunkiness' is sometimes a little over played she is an interesting character for the majority. And the show would be nothing without the presence of the irreplacable, majorly talented Judd Nelson. His characters wit and charm are inexpendable, not to mention the fact that he provides a nice little spot of eye candy! Overall, I have to say that this is a watchable, though not excessively brilliant show.
-
The Horseman31 May 2002Enter scene. Two or more characters talk for a while. They say things which aren't funny. Background laughter. All present pause while the background laughter is on. Resume talking. Somebody will use a joke that was once funny in 1953. Background laughter again. Resume talking. Some physical bit of comedy will be used. Nobody will laugh at home. The audience will split their sides. Like before, everyone will pause for a nanosecond while the background laughter plays
Enter scene......