Review of Roseanne

Roseanne (1988–2018)
7/10
Original series, 8 stars, great, revival, 5 stars, mildly amusing in places
1 April 2018
I wrote a review of the Roseanne revival and then realized it's all clumped together on IMDB, so I'm adding a note that I loved the original series except towards the end (that last season was horrific).

My review of the revival:

The reboot of Roseanne put some liberals in a quandary, because they thought the series was funny but didn't want to watch a show helmed by a rabid conspiracy theorist who believes lizard men rule the world.

So as a liberal I was relieved when I watched the first episode of the reboot and though, meh.

As with the original series, Roseanne, who can't act and isn't all that funny, is supported by a talented cast to make up for her deficiencies. Unfortunately, only Goodman manages to capture what made the original series so good; everything he says is funny or thought-provoking, but even other hugely talented people like Laurie Metcalf and Sara Gilbert don't seem to be able to recapture their characters. Perhaps they're just out of practice.

The writing is weak. The back and forth between Jackie and Roseanne is shrill and uncomfortable but not actually funny.

Roseanne has a very old-school, which tends to put me off a series nowadays. The only really retro old-school series I watch is One Day at a Time, which is much funnier, and even then I don't care for it as much as modern sitcoms like Kimmie Schmidt and Corporate.

The new Roseanne isn't as bad as the final years of the old Roseanne, but it's not nearly good enough for me to bother with.
6 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed