Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mel O&#039;Drama" data-source="post: 408526" data-attributes="member: 23">This was pretty much it. Rhoda was visiting her family for two weeks. On day one, Brenda was babysitting Joe's son and there were immediate sparks between Rhoda and Joe.At the end of the pilot episode much was made of Rhoda agreeing to stay in New York, but it wasn't explicitly said to be a permanent situation. She'd initially  prolonged her visit by calling in sick to work, was about to give up on this and return to Minneapolis (because Joe was busy with work), but Joe came by and persuaded her to stay. Even though it had a sense of importance, I still read it that she was agreeing to stay for the extra week she'd arranged.Because of this, she could easily have returned to MTM after the Rhoda pilot without any continuity issues. It was only at the beginning of the second episode that Rhoda actually moved her belongings back to NYC.This makes perfect sense, and it wasn't unheard of with British series as well. By virtue of their much shorter seasons (or "series" as they were generally called here) British sitcoms probably had fewer examples of the same actor recurring in the same series in different roles, but it still happened.I think Richard Schaal is probably more noticeable because of his screen presence. He looks distinctive, has a certain acting style and a good degree of charisma, so most of his episodes tend to be quite memorable (for me, at least). Plus I always have a fraction of a second where he appears where I think he's Don Murray and then realise it's the guy that looks like him.In an episode I watched last night, Barbara Sharma returned for the second of what I understand will be a series of appearances as Myrna. Because of her distinctive style (the look and the voice) she's still clear in my mind from her solitary MTM appearance. But of course that was three years earlier by air date.Oh, interesting. That could have taken things in a different direction.Yes, I feel if Joe was Jewish it certainly would have been mentioned or alluded to more strongly around the time of the wedding.Despite the full white dress and Wagner's Bridal Chorus on the accordion, the wedding ceremony was actually fairly non-denominational and neutral. It took place in a non-religious setting (the Morganstern apartment) with Rhoda and Joe writing the vows. While this kind of setting is fairly standard for such occasions in television for budgetary reasons, given your comments about interfaith couples on TV perhaps this choice was as much to mitigate any potential controversy as anything else.With the bonus being they could pour the money saved on the wedding venue into the brilliant and iconic location scenes of Rhoda legging it through New York in her wedding dress.I must confess I find myself surprised by this. In large part, I suppose this is because MTM directly addressed Rhoda's faith several times (Some Of My Best Friends Are Rhoda springs to mind). It's a shame, because I'd have trusted a series from this stable would be able to at least acknowledge the relationship being interfaith in a sensitive, matter-of-fact way without it blowing up but, given your context, perhaps America just wasn't ready.With Rhoda being the best friend of one of the (if not the) best-loved American sitcom characters of all time and leading her own sitcom, it seems a funny line in the sand. But then, as you said... sex.And at least Rhoda herself was allowed to be Jewish, unlike <a href="https://www.sitcomsonline.com/photopost/showphoto.php/photo/286275/size/big/si/slaps">The Lucie Arnaz Show a decade later</a> where the interference of CBS execs sanitised the premise it was remaking to such a degree it was pointless.And this possibly explains why Rhoda and Joe's bed is offscreen most of the time - unlike her previous residences where it's been part of the living room!Funnily enough, there was a line in one of the post-wedding episodes that I thought was a little edgy for the time. Rhoda and Joe were in bed and one of them said they were just thinking back. When asked to what, they replied "half an hour ago", and both of them gave a knowing little smile.I was prepared for it go downhill, and it still might.I'm in the latter part of Season One now, and still loving the series, but overall I enjoy Rhoda the wife less than I do Rhoda the wisecracking friend.I find her tendency to want Joe to talk about his feelings and show his emotions all the time quite suffocating. In one of the episodes I watched she was so unhappy that he internalised his feelings that she chipped away at him, only easing off once she thought she'd seen a tear (which she victoriously showed him in the mirror).It's probably quite a realistic study of an insecure newlywed who has grown up being conditioned to share all her feelings, marrying a man she's had barely any time to know and discovering he's her polar opposite emotionally. But her lack of acceptance of who he is as a person is still pretty ugly, and (most unforgivable of all) too awkward to be truly funny.Well, I wasn't planning to watch Rhoda and was sold after some encouragement, so I might be open to persuasion on Phyllis.</blockquote>

Verification: 6 + 4 =