Q&A's with former Friends writer Michael Curtis
Larissa
Hall, used to have a section in 1999 where the ATH readers would send their
questions to me, then I'd filter out the best ones and give them to former
Friends writer/executive producer Michael Curtis (who worked there during
seasons 2-5), then he'd answer the questions, send them back to me, and they'd
appear in the next issue of ATH. If you've been on the newsgroup for a while,
you'll remember him posting here as MNL. These are categorized as best I
could. Enjoy!
***Behind The Scenes***
ATH: What is the best practical joke ever played during a filming or rehearsal?
MC: Well, my particular favorite was when Marta, David, and Kevin were going to
miss the beginning of a show (because they'd been away on a business trip), and
we were left "in charge" for the first couple hours. We planned to have a
couple Warner Bros. fire trucks parked outside the stage, with their lights
flashing... sort of like, "the kids have burned down the house while we were
gone." But because the trucks were blocking the street, their limo had to park
a ways away, and they had to walk to the stage. They didn't think it was funny.
ATH: Is the hall and the two apartments one set or divided up sets?
MC: One continuous set.
ATH: How many hours of filming was there in the opening credits? How long did
the cast know each other before filming it? Was special water used? Who came up
with the fountain idea? What exactly were the cast listening to when they were
dancing near it--was it actually the Rembrandts song?
MC: It took a few hours, it was filmed after the pilot was shot, so the cast
knew each other a little, regular water was used and heated, but it was cold
quickly. They were listening to some kind of funky soul thing -- not the
Friends song, which hadn't been written yet.
ATH: Would you guys ever consider doing a program of just Friends bloopers,
outtakes, practical jokes, etc. that occurred during rehearsals or filmings
that were caught on tape, during summer reruns, or as a "holiday special" or
the like?
MC: We're trying to convince the powers that be to do a show that is solely
"The Friends Read Letters From The Fans." That way, we'd only have to write the
answers.
ATH: What was the one scene (or multiple scenes) that you recall as having the
highest number of retakes? Is there anything humorous you can share about the
retakes (i.e.- bloopers, cause for retakes, cast outbursts, etc.)?
MC: I don't remember exactly the number of takes for any particular scene. They
usually do each take two or three times, unless there's a mistake in it or
something. Usually, if the cast starts cracking up or something, and can't say
their lines, then it might require several takes.
ATH: Who draws the Magna-Doodle pictures on the back of Chandler and Joey's
door?
MC: I think whoever happens to be standing next to it one second before the
show starts.
ATH: When the pilot episode was done, did everyone expect it to be such a big
hit?
MC: I think you can only cross your fingers.
ATH: How were each of the character's names decided on?
MC: I don't know. I didn't work on the pilot, but I know Marta Kauffman had a
friend named Chandler.
ATH: I heard that originally, Monica and Joey were supposed to be together. Can
you share some other preliminary storylines that didn't work out?
MC: Rachel eats alone, Joey tries to get on Saturday Night Live, The Line
Dancer... and many many more.
***Chandler and Monica***
ATH: Michael Borkow is quoted as saying "did we want Monica and Chandler to
sleep together? There were strong - really strong - feelings both for and
against." Were you personally pro-C&M or anti-C&M?
MC: I was pro. In fact, I seem to recall suggesting that one of the things that
could happen at Barry and Mindy's wedding was that Monica and Chandler wake up
together in the hotel room. That's the first time I remember that idea coming
up, but I'm sure it was around before that.
ATH: Why did you choose to put Chandler and Monica together?
MC: Great dynamic. We thought it would make for a few good ebizomes at the
beginning of the season, but it's worked out really well so far.
***Continuity***
ATH: You mentioned that your favorites episodes were the ones with the
flashbacks, but what do you think of those details that do not fit with the
timeline? For instance, in the first episode Rachel and Chandler do not know
each other, though in tow the flashback, Rachel and Chandler meet. And in that
episode, they do not seem to know each other...but in TOW the Thanksgiving
Flashbacks we know that they had already met... ;-)
MC: Well, the only flashback where Chandler and Rachel ACTUALLY meet, is the
Thanksgiving One. And he comes across as such a geek that she probably quickly
dismisses him as Monica's brother's friend. (And she barely acknowledges Ross,
don't forget.) In the other flashback, years later, he's just some doofus in a
bar.
I think this allows some license in their first REAL meeting, in the pilot.
ATH: Or, in college Rachel and Monica seem to be the best friends ever...how
come Monica wasn't invited to the wedding (especially when it seems that the
Gellers and Greens are friends too)...
MC: Just like in Real Life, best friends quickly fall by the wayside.
Especially with someone, at THAT time anyway, who was as shallow as Rachel
seemed. (She may also not been too excited about Monica's sexy new look,
either. Just a thought)
***Friends on the Net/Fanfic***
ATH: Do any of the Friends cast or crew that are involved with the show surf
the web often? And if they do, do they search for Friends sites or try and
avoid them?
MC: I know a few do. I don't know what they think of the sites.
ATH: Have you ever read any internet fanfic (especially Dan Silverstein's "The
Last One" or "Chandler and Monica")?
MC: No.
ATH: Would you ever think of using a fanfic script on the show?
MC: No.
***Guest Appearances***
ATH: If Ross and Rachel were broken up because they weren't funny as a couple,
was Emily really a better alternative considering the distinct lack of humour
in all her scenes? (No offence to anyone here by the way - I think Helen
Baxendale's a great actress; she was brilliant in "Cardiac Arrest" for
example.)
MC: Emily was a catalyst for a dynamic between Ross and Rachel. She didn't have
to be THAT funny, just charming and pretty, which, she is.
ATH: In episode 210, there is a character played by 'Snaro' - is this David
Schwimmer, and why would he be called that?
MC: Everyone thinks Snaro is David Schwimmer, but he's actually some big star
Croatian actor who played the part of Russ. His story has been told many times
in the ATF NG.
ATH: In an ideal world, who would you like to play Chandler's dad?
MC: I would like someone like Barry Humphries ("Dame Edna Everage") but not in
drag. Others would prefer someone like Chuck Norris (playing it straight).
ATH: Why has there never been someone with dark skin on FRIENDS?
MC: You mean, like, sunburned or something? Because there have been lots of
black characters.
(Note from ATH: We remember Monica's co-worker in the pilot, Rhonda at Ross's
cafeteria in season 4, that dance teacher at Joey's audition, the lady at the
store when Ross returned his couch, and the lady interviewing Phoebe for a job
but thought she was a whore.)
ATH: Will Eddie ever return with his stupid small fruit?
MC: Adam Goldberg (Eddie) is bigger than all of us, now. He helped save Private
Ryan, fer cryin' out loud!
ATH: We know from Seinfeld that Maggie Wheeler does not have an annoying
squeaky voice/laugh; who decided for her to have one and why?
MC: I think that's just Maggie's take on the character of Janice. Actually,
she's got a deep, sexy voice.
ATH: Speaking of Janice, will she be coming back any time soon?
MC: I'm sure, in a story crunch, you will be seeing Deus ex Janica.
ATH: Would you say that Richard Branson is the worst guest star you've ever
had?
MC: LOL!! He was certainly one of the nicest. Anyway, he turned out to be
pretty good!
***Miscellaneous***
ATH: Is executive producer on "Friends" a nine to five, Monday to Friday job or
do you work odd hours?
MC: Extremely odd hours. 10AM to midnight or worse. 3PM to 7AM, etc.
ATH: You appear in TOW Heckles Dies, various writers appear in the teaser for
TOW the Princess Leia Fantasy, Adam Chase was apparently the noisy upstairs
neighbor in TOW Chandler Can't Remember which Sister - are there any other
guest writer appearances which you found funny?
MC: Ira Ungerleider was "Upstairs Kenny" in that story, not Adam Chase. Wil
Calhoun was "Freak" in the coffeehouse whose order was too complicated for
Rachel, Greg Malins was a priest in the museum when Rachel and Ross wake up in
the diorama, I was also the guy on "Wheel of Fortune" who didn't know "Mount
Rushmore." There might be more, but I can't recall.
ATH: How much of an input do Marta Kauffman and David Crane have into the
everyday scripts and jokes (eg. TOW the Yeti as opposed to TO Hundredth)?
MC: All the stories have to be "approved" by them unless there's a tremendous
time crunch. They are part of the process (in a large way, or less) every day.
ATH: How many more seasons do you think Friends will have and do you have any
idea on how to end it?
MC: I guess "Friends" will be on as long as there are interesting stories to
tell.
ATH: Where did Michael Borkow and Ira Ungerleider go?
MC: Michael Borkow finished up his run at "Friends" and moved over to
Dreamworks, where he is currently putting together a new show for them. Ira
Ungerleider created and executive produced "Jesse."
ATH: What happened to Alexa Junge during Season 4?
MC: She went to work on "Veronica's Closet" as a consultant. Fortunately, she
[was] back at "Friends" [during season five].
ATH: Will there ever be a Friends movie?
MC: Who knows. There's no plan for one. I can imagine that the Friends, who are
trying their hardest to shed their Friends identities and break into movies
would balk at a "Friends Movie."
ATH: Is Rachel's last name Green or Greene?
MC: It's "Greeb."
(Note from ATH: Yes, he's kidding.)
ATH: Do the characters wear their own clothes?
MC: No, they wear the clothes of the cast of "Everybody Loves Raymond." A lot
of shows filmed in Hollywood exchange clothing. The writers of "Friends" tried
exchanging clothes with the writers of "Frasier," but we couldn't fit into
their silk pantaloons and embroidered waistcoats. We liked the powdered wigs,
though!
ATH: I noticed that at the end of TOW The Cat, it says "In memory of Dorothy
Kauffman." Was she Marta's mother who passed away?
MC: Actually, it was her cat. Which later came back to life in the form of Adam
Chase's mother.
***Personal Questions***
ATH: Have you ever thought of writing for a movie? (not the rumored Friends
movie)
MC: With Greg Malins I wrote "...And God Spoke," a Spinal Tap-style documentary
about the making and unmaking of a Biblical Epic Movie. We have also done work
on "Lethal Weapon 4" and the new Joel Silver movie "House on Haunted Hill."
ATH: Who's your favourite director - Kevin S. Bright / James Burrows etc.?
MC: Well, Kevin Bright is one of my bosses, but James Burrows gets me home by
10:30 on show night. (Instead of 12 midnight or later, which is typical.)
ATH: What are your favorite episodes?
MC: TOW the Flashback and TOW the Thanksgiving Flashbacks.
ATH: What is your absolutely favourite scene?
MC: When Ross can't get his leather pants back on and has to call Joey for
help.
ATH: If you could be any of the Friends, which and why?
MC: I would be Rachel, because then I could get free polo shirts at Ralph
Lauren.
ATH: It is assumed that writers create plots that are either significant to
them in some way, have happened in real life to them or someone they know, or
for other reasons. On a more personal query, what inspires you to write?
MC: All of our "real life" stories were used up in season 1 and 2. They're pure
fiction, now. "What inspires me to write?" A little something called "bills."
***Phoebe's Songs***
ATH: Is it true Lisa Kudrow makes up her own tunes? Who makes up the lyrics?
MC: Lisa comes up with the music to the words, which are written by the writers
and in the scripts.
ATH: Which have you specifically made up?
MC: Anything that's in a script I wrote. "Parading Goats," "Paper Mache Man,"
"Sticky Shoes" etc.
ATH: Were there any Phoebe songs that weren't approved?
MC: I can't think of any. Some may have been cut for time, but nothing has "not
been approved." The one where she sings about her "bitch whore" ex-partner got
on, and there haven't been any worse than that.
***Plots in the Show***
ATH: Will you ever give Chandler a job that he likes?
MC: I think Chandler likes his job.
ATH: Was there any reason for not giving Monica anyone to date during the
entire fourth season (with the exception of Richard's son)?
MC: After dating Tom Selleck?! How could she want anyone else?!
ATH: Are the writers of the show planning to put Joey and Phoebe together?
MC: LOL! Enough with the pairing off!!
ATH: What happened to Phoebe's triplets? Will we ever see them again?
MC: The best thing about the triplets is that they aren't Phoebe's, and so the
show isn't saddled with annoying babies. I mean, come on, we barely see BEN!
Maybe the babies will turn up in a story or something, and they'll certainly be
mentioned, but I can't imagine them becoming regulars.
ATH: In the episode where Chandler and Janice meet online, was this based on a
real life event of any of the writers or staff, or did they just use the
internet deal because it was popular?
MC: A little bit of both. The fact that it turns out to be Janice, and not a
300 Star Trek fan, was what we thought was the original spin on a idea that was
even then a bit worn out in sitcoms.
***Ross and Rachel***
ATH: How do you and the other writers feel about Ross and Rachel? Is there a
possibility of them ever getting back together?
MC: I think if an interesting take could be found on "Ross and Rachel
together," there might not be a problem getting them back together somehow.
ATH: In TOW the Invitation (fourth season), why did all the flashbacks consist
of events leading up to Ross and Rachel's one year relationship or events after
it, but none during it?
MC: Really? I thought it was all the good times vs. the bad times. I don't
remember enough of it, I guess, but I thought there were tons of break up stuff
(and stuff leading up to the break up), which, technically, was during their
relationship.
ATH: Are you the main objector to Ross and Rachel or does most of the writing
staff feel the same way?
MC: A lot of people feel that Ross and Rachel shouldn't get together unless an
interesting storyline can be thought up for it. No one is fundamentally opposed
to Ross/Rachel, if their relationship can be made interesting. When they were
courting each other, it was funny and interesting, when they started breaking
apart, it was funny and interesting (and dramatic) but when they were
dating...? Eh.
ATH: In the first few episodes of season 5, it seemed like a lot of the R&R
references got cut out, like Ross saying "I love you too" in TOW All the
Kissing and Rachel saying "I would have married me" in TOW The Kips. Did you
have something planned for them, but then changed your mind?
MC: I know the "I would have married me" was a last minute addition from
Jennifer and David S. when a scene wasn't working, but it was totally wrong for
their arc for the rest of the season, so something else was said instead. (I
think it was "I would've said the right name" or something like that.)
***Scripts and Writing***
ATH: In the 'Friends' books with the scripts with the writing by the side, is
the writing typical for most script pages or are they sort of put there for
show to show the readers what you are thinking?
MC: It's all pretend. The real doodles and notes are horribly offensive.
ATH: If people have an interest in writing for television, what courses do you
recommend they take? How long did you have to go to school for?
MC: Take some writing courses if you want. Nothing I learned in college helped
me get where I am today, except the "growing up" part, between high school and
Real Life.
ATH: What, in your opinion, is the funniest joke that has ever been cut from a
table draft?
MC: Where Joey says he'll get the duck to make some more pate, and Chandler
realizes Joey thinks duck shit is pate.
ATH: In TOW Dr Ramoray Dies, Joey's character is killed off because he annoyed
the soap writers by commenting that he wrote some of his own lines. Were there
any in-jokes here?
MC: Yes.
Randy Hinds
Larissa wrote:
>
> ***Behind The Scenes***
>
>
> ATH: How many hours of filming was there in the opening credits? How long did
> the cast know each other before filming it? Was special water used? Who came up
> with the fountain idea? What exactly were the cast listening to when they were
> dancing near it--was it actually the Rembrandts song?
>
> MC: It took a few hours, it was filmed after the pilot was shot, so the cast
> knew each other a little, regular water was used and heated, but it was cold
> quickly. They were listening to some kind of funky soul thing -- not the
> Friends song, which hadn't been written yet.
Just a comment on this. . . . .
During the opening credits for one (or more?) of the earlier seasons, you can see
Jennifer Aniston mouthing "there forrrr youuu", synced perfectly to the opening
audio (Rembrandts song).
Perhaps they spliced multiple takes of the fountain scene, each take with a
different background song. . . ????
--
I speak only for myself
--Randy
Adeline
Larissa wrote...
>As promised, here are all the questions and answers. My newsletter, Across The
>Hall, used to have a section in 1999 where the ATH readers would send their
>questions to me, then I'd filter out the best ones and give them to former
>Friends writer/executive producer Michael Curtis (who worked there during
>seasons 2-5), then he'd answer the questions, send them back to me, and they'd
>appear in the next issue of ATH. If you've been on the newsgroup for a while,
>you'll remember him posting here as MNL. These are categorized as best I
>could. Enjoy!
Thankyou very much, Larissa.
Adeline.
======
"The more I drink, the less there is for the kids to drink!" - Phoebe Buffay, 'Friends'
SHNOCODY
>ATH: How many hours of filming was there in the opening credits? What exactly
were the cast listening to when they
>were>dancing near it--was it actually the Rembrandts song?
>They were listening to some kind of funky soul thing -- not the
>Friends song, which hadn't been written yet.
I could swear that when jennifer is dancing and they show her doing a dance
consisting of her moving her hands in and out (i can't explain it any better),
she says the words,"i'll be there for you."
>ATH: Would you say that Richard Branson is the worst guest star you've ever
>had?
who's Richard Branson? Who did he play?
Be aware, this next bit is terribly pro-Ross and Rachel and many chandler and
monica fans may be upset:
>MC: A lot of people feel that Ross and Rachel shouldn't get together unless
>an
>interesting storyline can be thought up for it. No one is fundamentally
>opposed
>to Ross/Rachel, if their relationship can be made interesting. When they were
>courting each other, it was funny and interesting, when they started breaking
>apart, it was funny and interesting (and dramatic) but when they were
>dating...? Eh.
>
>Were you personally pro-C&M or anti-C&M?
>
>MC: I was pro. In fact, I seem to recall suggesting that one of the things
>that
>could happen at Barry and Mindy's wedding was that Monica and Chandler wake
>up
>together in the hotel room. That's the first time I remember that idea coming
>up, but I'm sure it was around before that.
>
>
>ATH: Why did you choose to put Chandler and Monica together?
>
>MC: Great dynamic. We thought it would make for a few good ebizomes at the
>beginning of the season, but it's worked out really well so far.
Can you guys honestly tell me that Chandler and monica's relationship
storylines have actually been funny or at all entertaining?? I really believer
that r and r relationship storylines are much better than c and m, although i'm
not saying that theirs are horrible.
Just one last note.... It doesn't surprise me that the writers are against r
and r. I didn't realize there were so many who are opposed to them. I'm
beginning to think that a reunion is not in store for them, because the writers
are/were supposed. GREAT, with my luck they'll be kept apart forever.
Just so you guys know, I've had a pretty bad day, (i.e. Rain, erands, allergy
testing, etc...) so if you could not kill me for saying this anti- C and M
stuff, I'd appreciate that. :)
Tennant Stuart
(SHNOCODY) wrote:
> Can you guys honestly tell me that Chandler and monica's relationship
> storylines have actually been funny or at all entertaining??
Yes.
There have been many very funny & entertaining C&M relationship
stories - and also a few truly dreadful ones.
> I really believer that r and r relationship storylines are much better
> than c although i'm not saying that theirs are horrible.
R&R were equally very entertaining while they were getting together, and
they have been again since they broke up, but while the pair were happily
together they were somewhat bland, I'm afraid.
Now, if someone would like to list every R&R story in 216-310, and every
C&M story from 502-625, we can argue the chapter & verse...
Tennant Stuart
--
____ ____ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ ____
(_ _)( ___)( \( )( \( ) /__\ ( \( )(_ _) Greetings to family
)( )__) ) ( ) ( /(__)\ ) ( )( friends & neighbours
(__) (____)(_)\_)(_)\_)(__)(__)(_)\_) (__) @argonet.co.uk & JMH
Hilfig8484
>they have been again since they broke up, but while the pair were happily
>together they were somewhat bland, I'm afraid.
I don't understand this! How can you say that R&R were "bland" when C&M have
become so incredibly boring? I'll admit that I loved them during S5...but now?
It's stale. The writers had trouble keeping R&R interesting, so they broke
them up. Haven't they realized that something might be up with C&M, especially
because of the ratings decline?
This is my opinion, and it's shared by many a person. I realize that R&R's
timing in the show led to their break-up as well, but I never found them so
horrifyingly dull as C&M have become.
Their magic died during the beginning of the sixth season. Up until then, it
was great. Too much of a good thing'll do that to anybody.
Bobby Coakley
Larissa <peach...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20000822214823...@ng-bk1.aol.com...
> ***Chandler and Monica***
>
>
> ATH: Why did you choose to put Chandler and Monica together?
>
> MC: Great dynamic. We thought it would make for a few good ebizomes at the
> beginning of the season, but it's worked out really well so far.
True, and truer. The C&M romance really got things swinging for the start
of Season 5, and TOW Thanksgiving Flashbacks and TOW Everybody Finds Out
continued the high. They just got into something of a rut in season 6, that
hopefully
the wedding will pull them out of.
> ATH: What happened to Phoebe's triplets? Will we ever see them again?
>
> MC: The best thing about the triplets is that they aren't Phoebe's, and so
the
> show isn't saddled with annoying babies. I mean, come on, we barely see
BEN!
> Maybe the babies will turn up in a story or something, and they'll
certainly be
> mentioned, but I can't imagine them becoming regulars.
I'm still half-convinced they wrote in Ben only so Ross will have a reason
to leave
a scene: "I gotta go pick up Ben." They even parodied it on TOW the Last
Night.
> ***Ross and Rachel***
>
> ATH: How do you and the other writers feel about Ross and Rachel? Is there
a
> possibility of them ever getting back together?
>
> MC: I think if an interesting take could be found on "Ross and Rachel
> together," there might not be a problem getting them back together
somehow.
>
> ATH: Are you the main objector to Ross and Rachel or does most of the
writing
> staff feel the same way?
>
> MC: A lot of people feel that Ross and Rachel shouldn't get together
unless an
> interesting storyline can be thought up for it. No one is fundamentally
opposed
> to Ross/Rachel, if their relationship can be made interesting. When they
were
> courting each other, it was funny and interesting, when they started
breaking
> apart, it was funny and interesting (and dramatic) but when they were
> dating...? Eh.
>
This lends a lot of support to the "R&R don't get back together until the
final episode"
theory. The writers can then get them back together in whatever funny,
interesting
and dramatic way they choose, and not have to worry about supporting it in
following
episodes. Curtis has a certain point: After TOW R&R... You Know, many of
the episodes didn't even have plots based on R&R being together. Even if
they did, it is only the *results* of them being together that was the plot
(i.e. Monica not liking that Ross is around the apartment more often since
he's dating Rachel). Maybe the two of them together aren't that interesting
from a writer's POV (not that continually giving Rachel control over Ross'
love life season after season is any better for us as an audience).
Bobby C.
Jacqui
>>ATH: Would you say that Richard Branson is the worst guest star you've
ever
>>had?
>
Um, he played Richard Branson. Being a "salesman" because (ho ho, this
is so funny...) he owns or has owned a) the airline Rachel flew to
London on, b) a record company c) a chain of record stores d) a failed
chain of bridal stores e)you name it. He's the beardy with no acting
skills when Chandler falls over and sends everything flying, in London.
He may or may not (details pending) have the contract to run the UK's
lottery, since the present holders lost it yesterday. His bid wasn't
accepted as is, but will probably be accepted once fine tuned.
And no, I don't think he was the *worst* guest star ever. Number 2 or
3, maybe.
Jac
Claire Abraham
Hilfig8484 wrote:
> >R&R were equally very entertaining while they were getting together, and
> >they have been again since they broke up, but while the pair were happily
> >together they were somewhat bland, I'm afraid.
>
> I don't understand this! How can you say that R&R were "bland" when C&M have
> become so incredibly boring? I'll admit that I loved them during S5...but now?
> It's stale. The writers had trouble keeping R&R interesting, so they broke
> them up. Haven't they realized that something might be up with C&M, especially
> because of the ratings decline?
This is the one thing about the couples that I have never understood. Both couples
were considered bland by a lot of folks when the big hook was gone (the chase or
the secret.) R&R got booted. C&M drone on. Why the double standard?
Claire Abraham
Tennant Stuart wrote:
> In article <20000823175149...@ng-cm1.aol.com>, shno...@aol.com
> (SHNOCODY) wrote:
>
> > Can you guys honestly tell me that Chandler and monica's relationship
> > storylines have actually been funny or at all entertaining??
>
> Yes.
Once or twice, yes. It's the incessant overkill that is bringing this down,
not the simple fact of their relationship.
> Now, if someone would like to list every R&R story in 216-310, and every
> C&M story from 502-625, we can argue the chapter & verse...
Tennant, hon. Dear friend. This will give somebody a stroke. :-)
Tennant Stuart
Thankyou so much, Larissa.
> MC: We're trying to convince the powers that be to do a show that is
> solely "The Friends Read Letters From The Fans." That way, we'd only
> have to write the answers.
That would have been such fun! Better than a clip show. But I suspect
that the questions would all be stuff like their favourite colours, any
embarrassing moments, and will Ross & Rachel ever get together...
> ATH: Can you share some preliminary storylines that didn't work out?
> MC: Rachel eats alone, Joey tries to get on Saturday Night Live, The Line
> Dancer... and many many more.
It would be nice to be able to read all of these...
> MC: The only flashback where Chandler and Rachel ACTUALLY meet, is the
> Thanksgiving One. And he comes across as such a geek that she probably
> quickly dismisses him as Monica's brother's friend. (And she barely
> acknowledges Ross, don't forget.) In the other flashback, years later,
> he's just some doofus in a bar. I think this allows some license in
> their first REAL meeting, in the pilot.
I guess that pretty well settles the argument.
> MC: Just like in Real Life, best friends quickly fall by the wayside.
> Especially with someone, at THAT time anyway, who was as shallow as Rachel
> seemed. (She may also not been too excited about Monica's sexy new look,
> either. Just a thought)
He makes a very interesting & valid point there. Was the young Rachel only
friends with the young Monica but she wasn't competition? And by 1994 she
had matured sufficiently to befriend a beautiful Monica?
> ATH: If Ross and Rachel were broken up because they weren't funny as a
> couple, was Emily really a better alternative considering the distinct
> lack of humour in all her scenes?
> MC: Emily was a catalyst for a dynamic between Ross and Rachel. She
> didn't have to be THAT funny, just charming and pretty, which, she is.
Yes, it's easily forgotten that the whole Emily plot, and Paul & Liz
in Season Six, were actually Ross & Rachel stories. Also Helen Baxendale
being given no funny lines seems to have happened with Elle Macpherson
later on, (after MC's tenure of course).
> MC: Everyone thinks Snaro is David Schwimmer, but he's actually some big
> star Croatian actor who played the part of Russ. His story has been told
> many times in the ATF NG.
Perhaps someone ought to be very boring, and point out that he's kidding.
> ATH: In an ideal world, who would you like to play Chandler's dad?
> MC: I would like someone like Barry Humphries ("Dame Edna Everage") but
> not in drag.
An excellent suggestion to go with Nathan Lane & William Shatner.
> ATH: Why has there never been someone with dark skin on FRIENDS?
> MC: You mean, like, sunburned or something? Because there have been lots
> of black characters.
> (Note from ATH: We remember Monica's co-worker in the pilot, Rhonda at
> Ross's cafeteria in season 4, that dance teacher at Joey's audition, the
> lady at the store when Ross returned his couch, and the lady interviewing
> Phoebe for a job but thought she was a whore.)
And Chandler's boss Mr.Douglas, and an escapee from one of Rachel's parties,
but there has never been anyone lasting several episodes.
> ATH: We know from Seinfeld that Maggie Wheeler does not have an annoying
> squeaky voice/laugh; who decided for her to have one and why?
> MC: I think that's just Maggie's take on the character of Janice.
> Actually, she's got a deep, sexy voice.
I so want to see Joey's reaction should Janice take elocution lessons!
> ATH: Speaking of Janice, will she be coming back any time soon?
> MC: I'm sure, in a story crunch, you will be seeing Deus ex Janica.
Lol!
> ATH: Would you say that Richard Branson is the worst guest star you've
> ever had?
> MC: LOL!! He was certainly one of the nicest. Anyway, he turned out to be
> pretty good!
And everybody flew to London on Branson's airline?
> ATH: You appear in TOW Heckles Dies,
Which one was MC?
> various writers appear in the teaser for TOW the Princess Leia Fantasy
Who did?
> MC: Ira Ungerleider was "Upstairs Kenny" in <TOW Chandler Can't Remember
> which Sister>, Wil Calhoun was "Freak" in the coffeehouse whose order was
> too complicated for Rachel, Greg Malins was a priest in the museum when
> Rachel and Ross wake up in the diorama, I was also the guy on "Wheel of
> Fortune" who didn't know "Mount Rushmore."
Gosh! I've always wondered who the noisy upstairs neighbor was.
> ATH: How many more seasons do you think Friends will have and do you have
> any idea on how to end it?
> MC: I guess "Friends" will be on as long as there are interesting stories
> to tell.
Yay!!
> ATH: Is Rachel's last name Green or Greene?
> MC: It's "Greeb."
> (Note from ATH: Yes, he's kidding.)
And you yourself have reported that the scripts say "Green".
> MC: No, they wear the clothes of the cast of "Everybody Loves Raymond."
> A lot of shows filmed in Hollywood exchange clothing. The writers of
> "Friends" tried exchanging clothes with the writers of "Frasier," but
> we couldn't fit into their silk pantaloons and embroidered waistcoats.
> We liked the powdered wigs, though!
Lol!
> MC: All of our "real life" stories were used up in season 1 and 2.
> They're pure fiction, now. "What inspires me to write?" A little
> something called "bills."
Hmmm.....
> ATH: Which <song> have you specifically made up?
> MC: Anything that's in a script I wrote. "Parading Goats," "Paper
> Mache Man," "Sticky Shoes" etc.
Oh - "Sticky Shoes" is one of my favourites! All three of the songs are in
405 "TOW Joey's New Girlfriend", but strangely there is another version of
"Sticky Shoes" in 314 "TOW Phoebe's Ex-Partner" by Wil Calhoun.
These are the episodes credited to Michael Curtis...
203 "TOW Heckles Dies"
215 "TOW Ross and Rachel... You Know"
219 "TOW Eddie Won't Go"
220 "TOW Old Yeller Dies"
301 "TOW the Princess Leia Fantasy"
310 "TOW Rachel Quits"
405 "TOW Joey's New Girlfriend"
420 "TOW All the Wedding Dresses"
422 "TOW the Worst Best Man Ever"
504 "TOW Phoebe Hates PBS"
513 "TOW Joey's Bag"
518 "TOW Rachel Smokes"
So I guess Michael wrote "Sleepy Girl" in 513, are there any others?
> ATH: Will you ever give Chandler a job that he likes?
> MC: I think Chandler likes his job.
Ahah! :)
> ATH: Was there any reason for not giving Monica anyone to date during
> the entire fourth season (with the exception of Richard's son)?
> MC: After dating Tom Selleck?! How could she want anyone else?!
Lol! How indeed!!! Activia, Adeline & Sebrina know why I say this...
> ATH: Are the writers of the show planning to put Joey and Phoebe together?
> MC: LOL! Enough with the pairing off!!
Looks like C&M will be the only couple...
> MC: A little bit of both. The fact that it turns out to be Janice, and not
> a 300 Star Trek fan, was what we thought was the original spin on a idea
> that was even then a bit worn out in sitcoms.
A 300 *pound* Star Trek fan?
> ATH: How do you and the other writers feel about Ross and Rachel? Is there
> a possibility of them ever getting back together?
> MC: I think if an interesting take could be found on "Ross and Rachel
> together," there might not be a problem getting them back together
> somehow.
Hmmm....
> ATH: Are you the main objector to Ross and Rachel or does most of the
> writing staff feel the same way?
> MC: A lot of people feel that Ross and Rachel shouldn't get together
> unless an interesting storyline can be thought up for it. No one is
> fundamentally opposed to Ross/Rachel, if their relationship can be
> made interesting. When they were courting each other, it was funny
> and interesting, when they started breaking apart, it was funny and
> interesting (and dramatic) but when they were dating...? Eh.
This is of course very significant, and rather as I suspected.
> ATH: What, in your opinion, is the funniest joke that has ever been cut
> from a table draft?
> MC: Where Joey says he'll get the duck to make some more pate, and
> Chandler realizes Joey thinks duck shit is pate.
Lol! I can see why it got cut, though. :)
> ATH: In TOW Dr Ramoray Dies, Joey's character is killed off because he
> annoyed the soap writers by commenting that he wrote some of his own
> lines. Were there any in-jokes here?
> MC: Yes.
Ahah! :)
Thankyou very much indeed for that, Larissa. Do you still keep in contact
with Mr.Curtis? Is there a chance that he could answer some new questions
from us, just about Seasons 2-5 of course?
Tennant
William Pora
>
> SHNOCODY wrote
> >>ATH: Would you say that Richard Branson is the worst guest star you've
> ever
> >>had?
> >
>
> Um, he played Richard Branson. Being a "salesman" because (ho ho, this
> is so funny...) he owns or has owned a) the airline Rachel flew to
> London on, b) a record company c) a chain of record stores d) a failed
> chain of bridal stores e)you name it. He's the beardy with no acting
> skills when Chandler falls over and sends everything flying, in London.
>
> He may or may not (details pending) have the contract to run the UK's
> lottery, since the present holders lost it yesterday. His bid wasn't
> accepted as is, but will probably be accepted once fine tuned.
And dont forget his ballooning escapades, trying to constantly go
round the world. Demonstrating that yes you CAN have too much
money
>
> And no, I don't think he was the *worst* guest star ever. Number 2 or
> 3, maybe.
>
> Jac
Id say either Jean claude van damne or julia roberts were
--
To reply to my email type: wporaATixDOTnetcomDOTcom
changing the AT's and DOT's to the appropriate
symbols of course.
Tennant Stuart
> Um, he played Richard Branson. Being a "salesman" because (ho ho, this
> is so funny...) he owns or has owned a) the airline Rachel flew to
> London on, b) a record company c) a chain of record stores d) a failed
> chain of bridal stores e)you name it. He's the beardy with no acting
> skills when Chandler falls over and sends everything flying, in London.
You omitted his circumglobal ballooning exploits. ;)
> He may or may not (details pending) have the contract to run the UK's
> lottery, since the present holders lost it yesterday. His bid wasn't
> accepted as is, but will probably be accepted once fine tuned.
Betcha he gets it now he's escaped that hurricane.
> And no, I don't think he was the *worst* guest star ever. Number 2 or
> 3, maybe.
Oh, who? Bear in mind that MC is only talking about Seasons 2-5...
Tennant :):)
Tennant Stuart
<abra...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> Tennant Stuart wrote:
> Once or twice, yes. It's the incessant overkill that is bringing this
> down, not the simple fact of their relationship.
Indeed, as we have discussed before. Even we ardent C&M fans complained
about some of their stories last season.
> > Now, if someone would like to list every R&R story in 216-310, and every
> > C&M story from 502-625, we can argue the chapter & verse...
> Tennant, hon. Dear friend. This will give somebody a stroke. :-)
Oh yes, indeedio Claire. You'll notice that I wasn't volunteering... :)
Tennant
Mislead
Bobby Coakley wrote:
>
> Larissa <peach...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:20000822214823...@ng-bk1.aol.com...
>
> > ***Chandler and Monica***
> >
> >
> > ATH: Why did you choose to put Chandler and Monica together?
> >
> > MC: Great dynamic. We thought it would make for a few good ebizomes at the
> > beginning of the season, but it's worked out really well so far.
>
> True, and truer. The C&M romance really got things swinging for the start
> of Season 5, and TOW Thanksgiving Flashbacks and TOW Everybody Finds Out
> continued the high. They just got into something of a rut in season 6, that
> hopefully the wedding will pull them out of.
Where the hell do you get this from? What possible indication is there
that "Mondler" will just go away once Monica ropes poor Chandler in for
good?
I really don't understand.
Jacqui
>Jacqui wrote:
>
>> Um, he played Richard Branson. Being a "salesman" because (ho ho,
this
>> is so funny...) he owns or has owned a) the airline Rachel flew to
>> London on, b) a record company c) a chain of record stores d) a
failed
>> chain of bridal stores e)you name it. He's the beardy with no acting
>> skills when Chandler falls over and sends everything flying, in
London.
>
>You omitted his circumglobal ballooning exploits. ;)
And the Blue Riband Atlantic crossing, and, yes, yes, lots of other
things.
>> He may or may not (details pending) have the contract to run the UK's
>> lottery, since the present holders lost it yesterday. His bid wasn't
>> accepted as is, but will probably be accepted once fine tuned.
>
>Betcha he gets it now he's escaped that hurricane.
Since Camelot won't be getting it and there's no other contender, I
think his revised bid will be accepted, don't you?
>> And no, I don't think he was the *worst* guest star ever. Number 2
or
>> 3, maybe.
>
>Oh, who? Bear in mind that MC is only talking about Seasons 2-5...
Jean-Claude Van Damme for starters, and much as I like Robin Williams
and Billy Crystal, THAT was completely stupid!
Jac
Mislead
Breaking up is hard to do.
The writers hate Ross.
Chandler and Monica are more neurotic than Ross and Rachel. Thus, more
stories can be written for them that are based on incredibly stupid
things, none of which are any good.
Mistaken belief that any story involving Chandler is incapable of
failing.
Never make the same mistake twice.
Mistaken belief that Monica is funny.
Incompetence.
Mislead
>
> >R&R were equally very entertaining while they were getting together, and
> >they have been again since they broke up, but while the pair were happily
> >together they were somewhat bland, I'm afraid.
>
> I don't understand this! How can you say that R&R were "bland" when C&M have
> become so incredibly boring? I'll admit that I loved them during S5...but now?
> It's stale. The writers had trouble keeping R&R interesting, so they broke
> them up. Haven't they realized that something might be up with C&M, especially
> because of the ratings decline?
Want to hear something annoying? The most noticeable difference between
seasons 5&6 was that S6 had a lot more R&R plots. The writers will
probably blame the ratings decline on them (like season 2) and continue
to overuse their prized super couple.
> This is my opinion, and it's shared by many a person. I realize that R&R's
> timing in the show led to their break-up as well, but I never found them so
> horrifyingly dull as C&M have become.
R&R were too cute at times in late S2, but they were great in pre-Chloe
S3. Their plot in TOW Old Yeller Dies for example, was pretty bland,
but there was enough heart to carry it through. It established that
they were in love and would be for a very long time.
> Their magic died during the beginning of the sixth season. Up until then, it
> was great. Too much of a good thing'll do that to anybody.
I liked C&M in 601~606, 622, 623 and 617. The mixed tape mishap was the
best C&M story this season. 614 and 607 are about 50%, losing out
because of poor characterization and the comedic vacuum known as Monica.
Hilfig8484
>couples
>were considered bland by a lot of folks when the big hook was gone (the chase
>or
>the secret.) R&R got booted. C&M drone on. Why the double standard?
Timing was everything, Claire. R&R came too soon. C&M cleaned up a mess--I
mean, they saved the show. I think the writers feel they owe C&M (and
Courteney and Matthew) their jobs. What happens when it gets so bad next
season that they don't wanna bring it back for an 8th? Will they be forced to?
Tennant Stuart
> Tennant Stuart wrote
> >You omitted his circumglobal ballooning exploits. ;)
> And the Blue Riband Atlantic crossing, and, yes, yes, lots of other
> things.
God, yes - I'd forgotten about that... thanks.
> >Betcha he gets it now he's escaped that hurricane.
> Since Camelot won't be getting it and there's no other contender, I
> think his revised bid will be accepted, don't you?
Oh yeah, the commission is just playing hard-ball.
> >> And no, I don't think he was the *worst* guest star ever. Number 2
> >> or 3, maybe.
> >Oh, who? Bear in mind that MC is only talking about Seasons 2-5...
> Jean-Claude Van Damme for starters, and much as I like Robin Williams
> and Billy Crystal, THAT was completely stupid!
God, yes - I'd forgotten about them... thanks.
Tennant :):)
DocDoc2222
>Hilfig8484 wrote:
>
>> >R&R were equally very entertaining while they were getting together, and
>> >they have been again since they broke up, but while the pair were happily
>> >together they were somewhat bland, I'm afraid.
>>
>> I don't understand this! How can you say that R&R were "bland" when C&M
>have
>> become so incredibly boring? I'll admit that I loved them during S5...but
>now?
>> It's stale. The writers had trouble keeping R&R interesting, so they
>broke
>> them up. Haven't they realized that something might be up with C&M,
>especially
>> because of the ratings decline?
>
>couples
>were considered bland by a lot of folks when the big hook was gone (the chase
>or
>the secret.) R&R got booted. C&M drone on. Why the double standard?
>
>
>
The writers decided at the start of the C&M relationship that the couple would
be the exact opposite of R&R. R&R's relationship was a roller coaster----C&M's
relationship has to be smooth. R&R broke up----C&M can't break up. Obviously,
the writers had no long-term plans when they created the C&M relationship.
The biggest disappointment about the upcoming C&M wedding is that there has
been no rough ride filled with anticipation. A long, tumultuous relationship
is what brings a sense of hard-earned satisfaction to the altar. Two years of
perfect bliss don't. That is television.
--Doc (who is only against the writers, not C&M)
DocDoc2222
>>
>> >R&R were equally very entertaining while they were getting together, and
>> >they have been again since they broke up, but while the pair were happily
>> >together they were somewhat bland, I'm afraid.
>>
>> I don't understand this! How can you say that R&R were "bland" when C&M
>have
>> become so incredibly boring? I'll admit that I loved them during S5...but
>now?
>> It's stale. The writers had trouble keeping R&R interesting, so they
>broke
>> them up. Haven't they realized that something might be up with C&M,
>especially
>> because of the ratings decline?
>
>seasons 5&6 was that S6 had a lot more R&R plots. The writers will
>probably blame the ratings decline on them (like season 2) and continue
>to overuse their prized super couple.
>
If anybody is blamed, it will certainly not be C&M. They'll blame R&R and
Elle.
>> This is my opinion, and it's shared by many a person. I realize that R&R's
>> timing in the show led to their break-up as well, but I never found them so
>> horrifyingly dull as C&M have become.
>
>R&R were too cute at times in late S2, but they were great in pre-Chloe
>S3. Their plot in TOW Old Yeller Dies for example, was pretty bland,
>but there was enough heart to carry it through. It established that
>they were in love and would be for a very long time.
>
What irks me is R&R were never really given a chance as a couple. The second
half of Season 2 predominantly focused on Chandler/Joey and Monica/Richard.
However, the writers had already decided at the end of Season 2 that R&R should
break up. So, basically, the show went through a slump when R&R weren't even
the main storyline anymore. Yet, R&R get the blame. What gives?
>> Their magic died during the beginning of the sixth season. Up until then,
>it
>> was great. Too much of a good thing'll do that to anybody.
>
>I liked C&M in 601~606, 622, 623 and 617. The mixed tape mishap was the
>best C&M story this season. 614 and 607 are about 50%, losing out
>because of poor characterization and the comedic vacuum known as Monica.
>
>
>
I am in no way against C&M. They've had their good moments. I just don't see
how anyone can say they (in their current state) are MORE interesting than R&R.
The secret relationship was C&M's only driving force. And that ended over a
year ago.
--Doc
SHNOCODY
>
>> MC: It's "Greeb."
>> (Note from ATH: Yes, he's kidding.)
>
>And you yourself have reported that the scripts say "Green".
>
in TOW the invitation (i think that's the title), when rachel reads her invite
to ross and emily's wedding, the card clearly states GREENE.
Larissa
Tennant Stuart <ten...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
>
> In article <20000822214823...@ng-bk1.aol.com>,
> peach...@aol.com (Larissa) wrote:
>
>
> > ATH: Would you say that Richard Branson is the worst guest star
you've
> > ever had?
>
> > MC: LOL!! He was certainly one of the nicest. Anyway, he turned out
to be
> > pretty good!
>
> And everybody flew to London on Branson's airline?
Yep.
> > ATH: You appear in TOW Heckles Dies,
>
> Which one was MC?
He played the police officer who walks by, but has no lines.
> > various writers appear in the teaser for TOW the Princess Leia
Fantasy
>
> Who did?
Someday when I get up the energy to look through my tapes and find that
episode, I'll watch the beginning and let you know, okay? :)
> Thankyou very much indeed for that, Larissa.
You're very welcome. :)
>Do you still keep in contact
> with Mr.Curtis?
Of course.
>Is there a chance that he could answer some new questions
> from us, just about Seasons 2-5 of course?
Sorry, but he says he's finished with that. He's pretty busy and
involved with his new show right now.
Larissa
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Larissa
Nobody ever said prop people couldn't make mistakes once in a while.
Larissa
SHNOCODY
>half of Season 2 predominantly focused on Chandler/Joey and Monica/Richard.
>However, the writers had already decided at the end of Season 2 that R&R
>should
>break up. So, basically, the show went through a slump when R&R weren't even
>the main storyline anymore. Yet, R&R get the blame. What gives?
>
i agree. And i think it's non-debatable that David and Jennifer did a SUPERB
job, given what the were. You're right, they didn't have any realy storylines.
They had only SUB-storylines. Nonetheless, i think they made season 2. And i'm
not saying that because i'm an R and R fan. I would also like to say that i am
NOT against C and M. I enjoyed the storyline between them starting at ross'
wedding. But i think that their storlyine really needs to be improved, as do
many other people.
Bobby Coakley
Mislead <thisi...@mail.com> wrote in message
news:39A57033...@mail.com...
> Pardon my french, but...
>
> Bobby Coakley wrote:
> >
> > news:20000822214823...@ng-bk1.aol.com...
> >
> > > ***Chandler and Monica***
> > >
> > >
> > > ATH: Why did you choose to put Chandler and Monica together?
> > >
> > > MC: Great dynamic. We thought it would make for a few good ebizomes at
the
> > > beginning of the season, but it's worked out really well so far.
> >
> > True, and truer. The C&M romance really got things swinging for the
start
> > of Season 5, and TOW Thanksgiving Flashbacks and TOW Everybody Finds Out
> > continued the high. They just got into something of a rut in season 6,
that
> > hopefully the wedding will pull them out of.
>
> that "Mondler" will just go away once Monica ropes poor Chandler in for
> good?
> I really don't understand.
It's just a hunch or a theory, like one of those Lone
Gunman/Communism/Geometry theories. I may very well be proven wrong by the
episodes after the big wedding,
and the show will be become even more "Mad About Mondler" than before. Time
will tell.
Bobby C.
Claire Abraham
SHNOCODY wrote:
All the writing needs to be improved. R&R interacted plenty, but their actions
didn't make any sense. He as much as confessed that he still loved her in the
fifth episode, but after that it was never mentioned again. Their story in the
finale bewilders me no end. Rachel's duplicituous attitude towards Ross dating
Jill versus herself dating Paul was extremely poorly handled; Ross had Rachel cold
and defended himself so poorly she got away with murder. It's bad writing, the
same bad writing that makes Monica try to seduce Chandler with a headcold.
Bleck. This is not the couples fault. There's a cancer at the heart.
Tennant Stuart
wrote:
> > > ATH: You appear in TOW Heckles Dies,
> > Which one was MC?
> He played the police officer who walks by, but has no lines.
Ah - must give this a look. :)
> > > various writers appear in the teaser for TOW the Princess Leia
> > > Fantasy
> > Who did?
> Someday when I get up the energy to look through my tapes and find that
> episode, I'll watch the beginning and let you know, okay? :)
Cheers.
> >Is there a chance that he could answer some new questions
> > from us, just about Seasons 2-5 of course?
> Sorry, but he says he's finished with that. He's pretty busy and
> involved with his new show right now.
Ah. Okay.
Mislead
That's what I thought. I really don't see it happening though. :(
Mislead
>
> >Hilfig8484 wrote:
> >>
> >> >R&R were equally very entertaining while they were getting together, and
> >> >they have been again since they broke up, but while the pair were happily
> >> >together they were somewhat bland, I'm afraid.
> >>
> >> I don't understand this! How can you say that R&R were "bland" when C&M
> >have
> >> become so incredibly boring? I'll admit that I loved them during S5...but
> >now?
> >> It's stale. The writers had trouble keeping R&R interesting, so they
> >broke
> >> them up. Haven't they realized that something might be up with C&M,
> >especially
> >> because of the ratings decline?
> >
> >Want to hear something annoying? The most noticeable difference between
> >seasons 5&6 was that S6 had a lot more R&R plots. The writers will
> >probably blame the ratings decline on them (like season 2) and continue
> >to overuse their prized super couple.
> >
>
> If anybody is blamed, it will certainly not be C&M. They'll blame R&R and
> Elle.
Elle/Janine (was there a difference?) was awful, but it was kind of nice
when she was on the show. People could blame her for the bad episodes,
and pretend nothing was wrong with the show.
> >> This is my opinion, and it's shared by many a person. I realize that R&R's
> >> timing in the show led to their break-up as well, but I never found them so
> >> horrifyingly dull as C&M have become.
> >
> >R&R were too cute at times in late S2, but they were great in pre-Chloe
> >S3. Their plot in TOW Old Yeller Dies for example, was pretty bland,
> >but there was enough heart to carry it through. It established that
> >they were in love and would be for a very long time.
> >
>
> What irks me is R&R were never really given a chance as a couple. The second
> half of Season 2 predominantly focused on Chandler/Joey and Monica/Richard.
> However, the writers had already decided at the end of Season 2 that R&R should
> break up. So, basically, the show went through a slump when R&R weren't even
> the main storyline anymore. Yet, R&R get the blame. What gives?
R&R were in the background *because* the writers couldn't come up with
stories for them. It's a shame C&M can't do the same.
There was no slump, it was backlash against "The Rachel", Coca-Cola ads,
being the hot show, salary demands, and too many guest stars (TOA The
Superbowl) especially Tom Selleck. (critics hate him for some reason)
> >> Their magic died during the beginning of the sixth season. Up until then,
> >it
> >> was great. Too much of a good thing'll do that to anybody.
> >
> >I liked C&M in 601~606, 622, 623 and 617. The mixed tape mishap was the
> >best C&M story this season. 614 and 607 are about 50%, losing out
> >because of poor characterization and the comedic vacuum known as Monica.
> >
> >
> >
>
> I am in no way against C&M. They've had their good moments. I just don't see
> how anyone can say they (in their current state) are MORE interesting than R&R.
> The secret relationship was C&M's only driving force. And that ended over a
> year ago.
>
> --Doc
C&M seemed like a bad idea from the start to me. Same problem that
there was with R&R, but instead of being smart and breaking them up,
they did the dumb thing and kept them together.
Now they pay the price.
Claire Abraham
Mislead wrote:
> DocDoc2222 wrote:
> >
> > >Hilfig8484 wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >R&R were equally very entertaining while they were getting together, and
> > >> >they have been again since they broke up, but while the pair were happily
> > >> >together they were somewhat bland, I'm afraid.
> > >>
> > >> I don't understand this! How can you say that R&R were "bland" when C&M
> > >have
> > >> become so incredibly boring? I'll admit that I loved them during S5...but
> > >now?
> > >> It's stale. The writers had trouble keeping R&R interesting, so they
> > >broke
> > >> them up. Haven't they realized that something might be up with C&M,
> > >especially
> > >> because of the ratings decline?
> > >
> > >Want to hear something annoying? The most noticeable difference between
> > >seasons 5&6 was that S6 had a lot more R&R plots. The writers will
> > >probably blame the ratings decline on them (like season 2) and continue
> > >to overuse their prized super couple.
> > >
> >
> > If anybody is blamed, it will certainly not be C&M. They'll blame R&R and
> > Elle.
>
> Elle/Janine (was there a difference?) was awful, but it was kind of nice
> when she was on the show. People could blame her for the bad episodes,
> and pretend nothing was wrong with the show.
>
> > >> This is my opinion, and it's shared by many a person. I realize that R&R's
> > >> timing in the show led to their break-up as well, but I never found them so
> > >> horrifyingly dull as C&M have become.
> > >
> > >R&R were too cute at times in late S2, but they were great in pre-Chloe
> > >S3. Their plot in TOW Old Yeller Dies for example, was pretty bland,
> > >but there was enough heart to carry it through. It established that
> > >they were in love and would be for a very long time.
> > >
> >
> > What irks me is R&R were never really given a chance as a couple. The second
> > half of Season 2 predominantly focused on Chandler/Joey and Monica/Richard.
> > However, the writers had already decided at the end of Season 2 that R&R should
> > break up. So, basically, the show went through a slump when R&R weren't even
> > the main storyline anymore. Yet, R&R get the blame. What gives?
>
> R&R were in the background *because* the writers couldn't come up with
> stories for them. It's a shame C&M can't do the same.
> There was no slump, it was backlash against "The Rachel", Coca-Cola ads,
> being the hot show, salary demands, and too many guest stars (TOA The
> Superbowl) especially Tom Selleck. (critics hate him for some reason)
>
> > >> Their magic died during the beginning of the sixth season. Up until then,
> > >it
> > >> was great. Too much of a good thing'll do that to anybody.
> > >
> > >I liked C&M in 601~606, 622, 623 and 617. The mixed tape mishap was the
> > >best C&M story this season. 614 and 607 are about 50%, losing out
> > >because of poor characterization and the comedic vacuum known as Monica.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > I am in no way against C&M. They've had their good moments. I just don't see
> > how anyone can say they (in their current state) are MORE interesting than R&R.
> > The secret relationship was C&M's only driving force. And that ended over a
> > year ago.
> >
> > --Doc
>
> C&M seemed like a bad idea from the start to me. Same problem that
> there was with R&R, but instead of being smart and breaking them up,
> they did the dumb thing and kept them together.
> Now they pay the price.
The ratings for first - run episodes are still fairly good (though the summer reruns
numbers are terrible and show how weak their rewatch value is.) They got an Emmy nod
for best comedy. Maybe they think everything is hunky dory?
Hilfig8484
I'm with you. I don't care who is coupled with who as long as the writing is
good. And it has not been. And judging from the spoilers we've received, it
doesn't appear to be going away. We're about ready for another one tomorrow.
Let's pray.
Mislead
>
> Mislead wrote:
> > C&M seemed like a bad idea from the start to me. Same problem that
> > there was with R&R, but instead of being smart and breaking them up,
> > they did the dumb thing and kept them together.
> > Now they pay the price.
>
> The ratings for first - run episodes are still fairly good (though the
> summer reruns numbers are terrible and show how weak their rewatch
> value is.) They got an Emmy nod for best comedy. Maybe they think
> everything is hunky dory?
The same is true about the second half of season 2. Except I *liked*
those episodes.
I haven't been watching the prime time reruns either, and I'll tune out
once they get filtered into syndacation. Well, maybe the first six
episodes...
Tennant Stuart
<ten...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <8o4i0j$2m5$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Larissa <Peach...@aol.com>
> wrote:
> > In article <na.91126649f3...@argonet.co.uk>,
> > Tennant Stuart <ten...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> > > > ATH: You appear in TOW Heckles Dies,
> > > Which one was MC?
> > He played the police officer who walks by, but has no lines.
> Ah - must give this a look. :)
The cop who checks his watch, makes a note of the time, then
exits behind the guys carrying Heckles's corpse?
Paul Hyett
this considered view. Waking from my doze, I hastily scrawled -
>
>And dont forget his ballooning escapades, trying to constantly go
>round the world. Demonstrating that yes you CAN have too much
>money
In some terms they succeeded, because of the publicity they generated.
--
Paul 'US Sitcom Fan' Hyett - The Wild Frame Grabber of the Net!
Website at http://www.activist.demon.co.uk/USsitcoms/
Marita
<abra...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>The ratings for first - run episodes are still fairly good (though the summer reruns
>numbers are terrible and show how weak their rewatch value is.) They got an Emmy nod
>for best comedy. Maybe they think everything is hunky dory?
This shows how different America is from some other countries in the
world.
The reruns of Friends (every night on prime time TV) this summer have
got enormous ratings in my country. In fact as much as 680.000++++
people have tuned in to watch the show every night, making it one of
the most watched shows on TV. And that's pretty much considering there
are just 4,2 million people living here...
And now as the season 6 episodes have started up again, the newspapers
are writing articles every week on how great the show is these days.
Insiders are expecting huge ratings for the new episodes, and I think
we will see that happening.
What about the rest of the world? Do you get the feeling that the show
has lost its appeal, or is it still going strong?
~Marita
-------------------------------
"Betre bør du ber kje i bakken enn mannevit mykje"
- Håvamål
EsotericGrrrl
>got enormous ratings in my country. In fact as much as 680.000++++
Well they are mostly episodes airing for the 3rd time, and with Big Brother
being on it does take away some viewers because it's a new show. The summer
ratings are still pretty strong because of an overall decline in viewership.
======
<A HREF="http://rainforest.care2.com/front.html/player58016">Join Care2.com's
Race for the Rain Forest!</A>
Tennant Stuart
wrote:
> What about the rest of the world? Do you get the feeling that the show
> has lost its appeal, or is it still going strong?
It's still the number one foreign show here.
Bobby Coakley
DocDoc2222 <docdo...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20000824205342...@ng-cg1.aol.com...
It's been said that the C&M relationship was originally planned to be a
short-term thing,
ending in Episode 100. However, it should be noted that for the four years
before
C&M got together, their romantic lives were on the roller-coaster side.
Yes, they were
able to find some measure of peace with Janice and Richard (respectivly) but
this didn't
last long and wound up only causing more angst.
I think the (relative) ease which C&M solve their problems is the writers
cutting them
some slack after 4 years. Yes, C&M can cause each other angst, but the
problems are
usually solved by the end of the (hour long) episode. This is better than
them moping
around for season after season. Plus, I really liked how Chandler was able
to move
through that Metaphorical Tunnel.
As far as any "rough ride" C&M will have, I think the writers will save
that for
after the Wedding when it comes to Monica getting pregnant. A page or two
will
be borrowed from other comedies and dramas, as Chandler discovers knocking
somebody up isn't as easy as it sounds. The way I see it, Monica
confronting
the possibility she won't be able to have children sounds pretty tumultuous.
Bobby C.
Bobby Coakley
Claire Abraham <abra...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:39A5E6BB...@earthlink.net...
Hopefully with Jesse and Veronica's Closet no longer bogging down Bright,
Kaufman and Crane, this fatal flaw in the writing will be removed. Another
possible cure would be getting James Burrows back to direct an episode or
two,
but he seems dead-set on directing every episode of Will & Grace himself.
Most of the examples Claire listed show that the writers seem to be
letting Logic
and Prior Characterization wait outside for the sake of Plot and Jokes.
It is not the best writing they could have done, but I don't know what they
rejected. But everyone always does a great job with what they are given,
even if it sometimes doesn't seem to lead anywhere plotwise.
So, hopefully without Jesse and Veronica, BK&C will bring back
sense and sensibility to the jokes and characterization of Friends.
Otherwise,
in its last two years, Friends will denegrate into just another Thursday
show we watch while waiting for ER to start.
Bobby C.
alr...@my-deja.com
Yes, this is very true. Too many times S6 storylines were started and
then dropped, abruptly--particularly the bizarre bipolar arc that was
R&R's marriage. Phoebe had so little to do, I would not have blamed
Lisa Kudrow for wiping the dust from her sandals. Joey had a great
start, then was saddled with Janine and CHEESE. It would have been
nice to see the finale not couple-based at all (instead of "Couples
in Spades!"), but about some group conflict as, say, Joey considering
moving to LA--or Canada, actually, where they shoot so much
television, now--for his job. That would have been original (for
this show)--with the added benefit of mirroring what was going on at
the time with the cast--and every one else whose jobs depended on the
contract decision.
And C&M were accelerated too quickly, as were R&R (they got together too
early in the life of the show, IMO. Cheers and Frasier had it
right--just to name a couple of examples). There NEEDS to be tension in
a fictional romance, comedy or not. Although a C&M fan, I really wanted
to see them break up after Vegas (of course to get back together in the
distant future). Yes, it's great that Chandler made it through The
Tunnel, but he doesn't make it look as fun as it actually is (maybe
these writers have a secret dread that it is not?). If there was not to
be a break-up, the characters should have been given real, adult,
non-relationship conflicts to deal with. The whole idea of fiction, and
this is most definitely true with romantic fiction, is that
plot=conflict. SO many television shows have tripped over this concept.
Friends, twice now.
alr...@my-deja.com
m.ba...@c2i.net wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Aug 2000 13:31:15 GMT, Claire Abraham
> <abra...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >The ratings for first - run episodes are still fairly good (though
the summer reruns
> >numbers are terrible and show how weak their rewatch value is.) They
got an Emmy nod
> >for best comedy. Maybe they think everything is hunky dory?
>
> This shows how different America is from some other countries in the
> world.
>
> got enormous ratings in my country. In fact as much as 680.000++++
> the most watched shows on TV. And that's pretty much considering there
> are just 4,2 million people living here...
>
> And now as the season 6 episodes have started up again, the newspapers
> are writing articles every week on how great the show is these days.
> Insiders are expecting huge ratings for the new episodes, and I think
> we will see that happening.
>
> has lost its appeal, or is it still going strong?
>
> -------------------------------
Well, wait, there are extenuating circumstances on American TV this
summer. Friends has always done well in reruns, and is still doing
quite well this summer, compared to most sitcoms--though down from last
summer, admittedly--and deservedly. But there are unprecedented numbers
for original programming this summer (The four Millionaires and,
especially, Survivor), which filter numbers into rerun programs on the
corresponding networks--Everybody Loves Raymond, Drew Carey, etc. which
are making summer appearances in the Top 20 on a regular basis. So,
reruns of Friends, which usually spend the summer in the top ten, have
been pushed down. I'm not saying that NBC and the Friends crew
shouldn't be concerned about the ratings; but you have to factor in the
unusual circumstances. God knows, I hope it's a wake-up call to all
concerned.
DocDoc2222
>that for
>after the Wedding when it comes to Monica getting pregnant. A page or two
>will
>be borrowed from other comedies and dramas, as Chandler discovers knocking
>somebody up isn't as easy as it sounds. The way I see it, Monica
>confronting
>the possibility she won't be able to have children sounds pretty tumultuous.
>
> Bobby C.
>
>
I actually like this idea. It could add some much needed drama into the
relationship and give the two characters more depth. What if Monica (who has
always wanted children) finds out she can't have children? Or what if Chandler
can't? How would the relationship survive that?
Or would that just be really cruel of the writers? :-)
--Doc
Tina
whiskers on his/her face and miaowed this little lot at a statue...
>: Or would that just be really cruel of the writers? :-)
They'd save it for Ross and Rachel.
--
Le grá, go deo!
Tina: The upholder of Angelicism - or something like that...
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Hilfig8484
True. That would be their "angle." Happy together, but they can't have a
baby. While, next door, as soon as one comes out, another is going back into
Monica. :)
Claire Abraham
Tina wrote:
> Hellooooo!!! After getting drunk in Vegas, DocDoc2222 doodled cat
> whiskers on his/her face and miaowed this little lot at a statue...
>
> >: Or would that just be really cruel of the writers? :-)
>
> They'd save it for Ross and Rachel.
It would be a pity if they did; Ross is already a daddy and Rachel isn't
really selfless enough to go through pregnancy with hope and joy. Being
infertile would be a much bigger deal for a character who really vocally
prizes the idea of motherhood, and would make for much more interesting
stories. This is a bigger deal to C&M than to R&R. Rachel gets to be
a noncustodial stepmom, at least - motherhood lite. Ideal situation for
her.
Tina
whiskers on his/her face and miaowed this little lot at a statue...
>: It would be a pity if they did; Ross is already a daddy and Rachel isn't
>: really selfless enough to go through pregnancy with hope and joy. Being
>: infertile would be a much bigger deal for a character who really vocally
>: prizes the idea of motherhood, and would make for much more interesting
>: stories. This is a bigger deal to C&M than to R&R. Rachel gets to be
>: a noncustodial stepmom, at least - motherhood lite. Ideal situation for
>: her.
Yes, but it's cruel of the writers no matter who they inflict it on -
therefore, it will go to R&R by default. :)
Tennant Stuart
docdo...@aol.com (DocDoc2222) wrote:
> I actually like this idea. It could add some much needed drama
> into the relationship and give the two characters more depth. What
> if Monica (who has always wanted children) finds out she can't have
> children? Or what if Chandler can't? How would the relationship
> survive that?
> Or would that just be really cruel of the writers? :-)
Nope, we could do with a harder edge to the comedy, it seems to me. I
like this idea too, very much. But the real world is going to get in
the way though, with CA and/or JA likely to be pregnant soon.
DocDoc2222
>> I actually like this idea. It could add some much needed drama
>> into the relationship and give the two characters more depth. What
>> if Monica (who has always wanted children) finds out she can't have
>> children? Or what if Chandler can't? How would the relationship
>> survive that?
>
>> Or would that just be really cruel of the writers? :-)
>
>Nope, we could do with a harder edge to the comedy, it seems to me. I
>like this idea too, very much. But the real world is going to get in
>the way though, with CA and/or JA likely to be pregnant soon.
>
>
I completely agree. Unfortunately for C&M fans, I don't believe Monica will
get pregnant unless CCA does (or until the final episode).
Why? Let's say Monica gets pregnant this season. But then CCA gets pregnant 6
or so months later. That could really mess up storylines. I mean, how would
they explain Monica being pregnant for 15+ months (with her belly size changing
back and forth!)? Following a real world pregnacy is the only safe way to do
that kind of storyline.
--Doc
Tennant Stuart
docdo...@aol.com (DocDoc2222) wrote:
>Let's say Monica gets pregnant this season. But then CCA gets pregnant
> 6 or so months later. That could really mess up storylines. I mean, how
> would they explain Monica being pregnant for 15+ months (with her belly
> size changing back and forth!)? Following a real world pregnacy is the
> only safe way to do that kind of storyline.
This happened in "Roseanne". Roseanne (the character) became pregnant, and
tests showed she was carrying a girl. Then Roseanne (the actress) became
pregnant later on, and tests showed she was carrying a boy...
They fudged around it, but it was a bit of a mess. Every time the episodes
come up on Paramount, they get emails from puzzled viewers.
Paul Hyett
considered view. Waking from my doze, I hastily scrawled -
>docdo...@aol.com (DocDoc2222) wrote:
>
>>Let's say Monica gets pregnant this season. But then CCA gets pregnant
>> 6 or so months later. That could really mess up storylines. I mean, how
>> would they explain Monica being pregnant for 15+ months (with her belly
>> size changing back and forth!)? Following a real world pregnacy is the
>> only safe way to do that kind of storyline.
>
>This happened in "Roseanne". Roseanne (the character) became pregnant, and
>tests showed she was carrying a girl. Then Roseanne (the actress) became
>pregnant later on, and tests showed she was carrying a boy...
Yeah, but Roseanne looks 'pregnant' all the time! :)
Randy Hinds
Tennant Stuart wrote:
> In article <20000827114649...@ng-cg1.aol.com>,
> docdo...@aol.com (DocDoc2222) wrote:
>
> > I actually like this idea. It could add some much needed drama
> > into the relationship and give the two characters more depth. What
> > if Monica (who has always wanted children) finds out she can't have
> > children? Or what if Chandler can't? How would the relationship
> > survive that?
>
> > Or would that just be really cruel of the writers? :-)
>
> Nope, we could do with a harder edge to the comedy, it seems to me. I
> like this idea too, very much. But the real world is going to get in
> the way though, with CA and/or JA likely to be pregnant soon.
Errrr, that's assuming the real world doesn't get in the way AGAIN, and
we find out JA or CCA cannot get pregnant, for some reason.
(Oooh. Now there's a thought. . . What a way to put a crimp in Brad
Pitt's stud image if he couldn't father a child). . .
--
I speak only for myself
--Randy
Tina
whiskers on his/her face and miaowed this little lot at a statue...
>: (Oooh. Now there's a thought. . . What a way to put a crimp in Brad
>: Pitt's stud image if he couldn't father a child). . .
Bitter, Randy? :)
Randy Hinds
Tina wrote:
> Hellooooo!!! After getting drunk in Vegas, Randy Hinds doodled cat
> whiskers on his/her face and miaowed this little lot at a statue...
>
> >: (Oooh. Now there's a thought. . . What a way to put a crimp in Brad
> >: Pitt's stud image if he couldn't father a child). . .
>
> Bitter, Randy? :)
Hey, I can dream, can't I? =)
Tina
whiskers on his/her face and miaowed this little lot at a statue...
>: Hey, I can dream, can't I? =)
:-)
Tennant Stuart
<rhi...@Qrsinc.comQ> wrote:
> Tennant Stuart wrote:
> > The real world is going to get in the way, with JA
> > and/or CA likely to be pregnant soon.
> Errrr, that's assuming the real world doesn't get in the way AGAIN,
> and we find out JA or CCA cannot get pregnant, for some reason.
If that should happen, there's no practical reason why Rachel
and/or Monica cannot still become pregnant. There could however
be valid emotional reasons why the actresses might object.
> (Oooh. Now there's a thought. . . What a way to put a crimp in Brad
> Pitt's stud image if he couldn't father a child). . .
A more likely possibility involves the women being too skinny,
though the wedding pictures show CA seems to have put on weight.
Toni Perry If only
>> Pitt's stud image if he couldn't father a child). . .
>
>A more likely possibility involves the women being too skinny,
>though the wedding pictures show CA seems to have put on weight.
And about bloody time too. I was losing sight of her side ways on!
--
Toni
**Rachel: It's not that common, it doesn't happen to every guy and it IS a big
deal!!!
Chandler: I knew it!**
Randy Hinds
Tennant Stuart wrote:
> In article <39AA9C3A...@Qrsinc.comQ>, Randy Hinds
> <rhi...@Qrsinc.comQ> wrote:
>
> > Tennant Stuart wrote:
>
> > > The real world is going to get in the way, with JA
> > > and/or CA likely to be pregnant soon.
>
> > Errrr, that's assuming the real world doesn't get in the way AGAIN,
> > and we find out JA or CCA cannot get pregnant, for some reason.
>
> If that should happen, there's no practical reason why Rachel
> and/or Monica cannot still become pregnant. There could however
> be valid emotional reasons why the actresses might object.
Well, yes, and I like I said earlier, there could be valid physical
reasons also. CCA and/or JA may not discover any "problems" (be it with
themselves or with their husbands) UNTIL they actually TRY to get
pregnant, which is when most people who can't have kids find out they
can't have kids.
> > (Oooh. Now there's a thought. . . What a way to put a crimp in Brad
> > Pitt's stud image if he couldn't father a child). . .
>
> A more likely possibility involves the women being too skinny,
> though the wedding pictures show CA seems to have put on weight.
>
Yes, weight does have something to do with it, but that affects the health
of the baby moreso than the likelyhood of conceiving (altlhough it can
affect that also).
Tennant Stuart
<rhi...@Qrsinc.comQ> wrote:
> Tennant Stuart wrote:
I'm going by what Jacqui said on the subject many weeks ago, that
being underweight adversely affects fertility.
CandiGrrl
Tennant Stuart wrote in message ...
|In article <39ABE618...@Qrsinc.comQ>, Randy Hinds
|<rhi...@Qrsinc.comQ> wrote:
|
|> Tennant Stuart wrote:
|
|> > A more likely possibility involves the women being too skinny,
|> > though the wedding pictures show CA seems to have put on weight.
|
|> Yes, weight does have something to do with it, but that affects the
health
|> of the baby moreso than the likelyhood of conceiving (altlhough it can
|> affect that also).
|
|I'm going by what Jacqui said on the subject many weeks ago, that
|being underweight adversely affects fertility.
Yep yep, if you're too thin, the body stops making the little egg thingies
because it has to conserve bits of it, so that you don't die off. Trust me.
I know.
Jacqui
> Yep yep, if you're too thin, the body stops making the little egg
thingies
> because it has to conserve bits of it, so that you don't die off.
Trust me.
> I know.
>
problem. Maybe it's possible that being too thin causes infertility,
but I doubt it.
Yeah, it's not that you don't have the egg thingies :) it's that the
ovaries/fallopian tubes won't release them. It's self-preservation - if
the body is not getting enough nutrients to maintain itself, no way in
hell can it maintain a baby too. So it stops being able to conceive,
until the state of health returns to one where pregnancy might be
viable. There *are* anorectics that conceive, but it's very rare. 9
times out of 10 if your weight drops below a certain point (to do with
fat rather than actual weight, mind you) menstruation stops.
Jac
CandiGrrl
Shierly wrote in message <39ADC6F4...@mediaone.net>...
| Yep yep, if you're too thin, the body stops making the little egg
thingies
| because it has to conserve bits of it, so that you don't die off. Trust
me.
| I know.
|
|Women are born with those "egg thingies," so I doubt that's the problem.
Maybe it's possible that being too thin causes infertility, but I doubt it.
Okay, so I'm not very sciencey.... hehe
Ellie Marie Licon
to carry it full term. But undernourishment does. That is why that one of
the first tell tell signs of anorexia and bulimia in woman is that they stop
menstruating. And no I'm not saying that either JA or CCA have either
anorexia or bulimia.
--
Ross: "Do you have a point?"
Chandler: "You'd think I would."
"CandiGrrl" <NOSPAMC...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:8omjmj$cf5$1...@uranium.btinternet.com...
mayno...@ca.rr.com
>
> > MC: Everyone thinks Snaro is David Schwimmer, but he's actually some big
> > star Croatian actor who played the part of Russ. His story has been told
> > many times in the ATF NG.
>
> Perhaps someone ought to be very boring, and point out that he's kidding.
>
>
How DARE you, sir!
http://stopyellingatme-maynotlast.blogspot.com/2010/06/snaro-and-story-of-him.html