I watched a few episodes of season 1. I found all the kids to be completely generic and boring, I couldn't tell any of them apart. Whether that was due to the actors, the writing, or just me getting old I couldn't tell you.
this post was submitted on 04 Oct 2024
44 points (94.0% liked)
Television
4551 readers
55 users here now
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I felt the same way initially, they do eventually get better developed towards the end of season 1 imo
Wonder if the bad publicity around the original shows cast contributed to this. First season, everyone was talking about Danny Masterson. This season people just aren't down with Kutcher and Kunis. And this past month Kutcher's name has come up in relation to Diddy. None of them were in season 2 I believe. What's the point?
Season 1 wasn't terrible. Season 2 absolutely was.
I didn't know this show even existed until around a month ago lol
Gonna need another two decades for a show set in the 90s to be novel, it can only be novel once today's clothing wouldn't fit in there.
The pitch of "it's like today, only the phones and computers are larger, and the Internet is smaller" just isn't meaningful enough of a difference.
There was 22 years between the first air date of that 70s show (98) and the year it was set in (76).
There was a 28 year difference for that 90s show. I never watched that 90s show, but I'm guessing the reason for its limited success has more to do with the quality and the nature of the current streaming environment than the setting.
This makes me wonder how many shows we consider classics only got popular because the came on after something else we liked and we didn't change the channel. When given the choice to watch them we just... don't.
You've found the reason for the success of Full House.
That along with the constrained amount of content. Yes.
That 80's Show aired in 2002, and was set in 1984, 18 years earlier.
"Happy Days" initially aired about 15 years after the time in which it was set.