Just asking because S&S was geared toward men and Friends was geared toward Women. Just trying to see if there are still some men who likes Friends and women who isn't grossed out by sanford and son. I will say as man, i could never get into friends.

I'm a guy and I can't stand Friends - maybe it's just that I don't like shows that were made after 1980 except for a few select shows.

My grandmother is 74 and she loves Sanford and Son. Watches it every night:talk:

I'm a guy and I can't stand Friends - maybe it's just that I don't like shows that were made after 1980 except for a few select shows.

My grandmother is 74 and she loves Sanford and Son. Watches it every night:talk:



Most women find the Fred Sanford character very rude

I thought Freinds was a very funny show, and I liked it very much.

I really like friends a lot.
:woohoo:

my mom thought Redd Foxx was very funny

My Mom was a big fan of Sanford And Son.

Just asking because S&S was geared toward men and Friends was geared toward Women. Just trying to see if there are still some men who likes Friends and women who isn't grossed out by sanford and son. I will say as man, i could never get into friends.

My two older sisters love Sanford and Son. By coincidence, I gave one of my sisters all my Sanford and Son tapes from Columbia House so I could concentrate on the DVDs.

How did you get the idea that Friends was geared towards women? I mean, there were *plenty* of jokes appealing to men. Three of the six main characters were guys. There was a lot of 'guy'-humour going on, especially with Joey and Chandler. I'd say it was 50-50.

Anyway, I like Friends and have never seen Sanford and son.

I'm a man; and I like "Friends".

How did you get the idea that Friends was geared towards women? I mean, there were *plenty* of jokes appealing to men. Three of the six main characters were guys. There was a lot of 'guy'-humour going on, especially with Joey and Chandler. I'd say it was 50-50.


I agree. Friends was a very "co-ed" show. I know many men as well as women who watched it in its original NBC run.

I guess Solomon is referring to all the "soap opera" type storylines involved on the show. Despite that, I think Friends is funny.

I guess Solomon is referring to all the "soap opera" type storylines involved on the show. Despite that, I think Friends is funny.

I think the soap opera aspect is what has hurt Friends in the long run compared to something like Seinfeld or The Simpsons in reruns. Dramas with "soap opera" qualities are one thing, part of what made Buffy and Desperate Housewives so good is that you couldn't miss an episode, and each episode had something to contribute to the series. Too many of Friends' episodes had nothing happening in them (and not in the "nothing" sense they use about Seinfeld) that looking back on it in retrospect, it was really a good 4-season sitcom that lasted 10 years. Sex And The City also played the soap card as well, but it had less than half as many episodes as Friends, and once again, each episode contributed something new to the storyline.

Too many of Friends' episodes had nothing happening in them (and not in the "nothing" sense they use about Seinfeld)

What do you mean by this?

I love "Sanford and Son", it's one of my favorites.

What do you mean by this?

a lot of the episodes were basically hot air filling time that you forgot about 10 minutes after it ended.

The first season of Friends was classic, the second and third seasons were disapointing but still worth watching, and seasons four to six were the show at it's peak, but seasons seven through ten were practically unbearable and watching the six of them together as thirtysomethings wasn't the same as when they were in their mid-twenties

Sanford and Son is a great show. I don't enjoy it when Redd Foxx is absent though.

Sanford and Son is a great show. I don't enjoy it when Redd Foxx is absent though.


Yes Janice the Sanford eps with GRADY and no FRED are very very unwatchable

a lot of the episodes were basically hot air filling time that you forgot about 10 minutes after it ended.

The first season of Friends was classic, the second and third seasons were disapointing but still worth watching,

I disagree. Sure not all episodes were part of a (longer) running storyline, but which sitcom has *only* episodes that are about a running storyline? There are a lot of sitcoms that don't even have storylines that last longer than one episode, like Married with Children or Happy Days and those are excellent sitcoms, despite what you call 'hot air'. Besides, seasons 2 and 3 were very important for the development of the Ross-and-Rachel and Joey-and-Chandler relationships and further establishing Chandler's personality.

and seasons four to six were the show at it's peak,

I'd say the show was at its peak from seasons 1-5.

but seasons seven through ten were practically unbearable and watching the six of them together as thirtysomethings wasn't the same as when they were in their mid-twenties

They were decent but definately less fun to watch.

I disagree. Sure not all episodes were part of a (longer) running storyline, but which sitcom has *only* episodes that are about a running storyline? There are a lot of sitcoms that don't even have storylines that last longer than one episode, like Married with Children or Happy Days and those are excellent sitcoms, despite what you call 'hot air'. Besides, seasons 2 and 3 were very important for the development of the Ross-and-Rachel and Joey-and-Chandler relationships and further establishing Chandler's personality.

no, you're not understanding what I meant. It seemed like in latter seasons, there were a lot of episodes that seemed like the writers wrote in their sleep and were meant to kill time for an "important" episode. Like the one where Monica thought that Chandler had a shark fetish. You could tell the writers were out of ideas but trying to keep it afloat. You can have good standalone episodes, the episode from season 1 where Monica was experiencing credit fraud and befriended the woman who stole her credit card, was a good example. Some of the latter standalones were wretched.

I said seasons 2 and 3 were decent, but compared to the classic season 1, they were lacking. The entire first season is classic, there are a lot of season 2 and 3 episodes that haven't held up as well. Compare that to season 4, when everything worked perfectly and seasons 5 and 6 were also great. By season 7, the show had really exhausted its course and really stayed on just because there was still money to be made and that by then, Friends had really become an institution that people kept watching as comfort food even though the show was a shadow of its former self. That's all IMO though.


I'd say the show was at its peak from seasons 1-5.

some of my favorite moments of the entire series happened in season 6, like the season 6 Thanksgiving episode. Even though I agree with you that Chandler and Monica getting together was really the beginning of the end.

no, you're not understanding what I meant. It seemed like in latter seasons, there were a lot of episodes that seemed like the writers wrote in their sleep and were meant to kill time for an "important" episode. Like the one where Monica thought that Chandler had a shark fetish. You could tell the writers were out of ideas but trying to keep it afloat.

Ok, I guess I really didn't understand what you meant. :o I totally agree with you about this.

You can have good standalone episodes, the episode from season 1 where Monica was experiencing credit fraud and befriended the woman who stole her credit card, was a good example.

Classic episode, indeed.

Some of the latter standalones were wretched.

Again, I agree.

I said seasons 2 and 3 were decent, but compared to the classic season 1, they were lacking. The entire first season is classic, there are a lot of season 2 and 3 episodes that haven't held up as well.

I guess season 2 is my favorite. Season 1 was really about establishing all characters and settings etc. and were for a large part about Ross not being able to get Rachel. Season 2 mainly focussed on Joey and Chandler and their relationship. Because Chandler is my favorite character, it's not hard to see why I liked that so much. The other important storyline through season 2 was Monica's relationship with Richard. I just loved Tom Selleck's performance! He should have ended up with Monica instead of Chandler! Season 3 was weaker indeed, but it had 'The one without a ski trip', which was very important for further establishing Chandler's character. And it had 'The one with the flashback', which showed us a lot of what had happened before the start of the series as we know it.

Compare that to season 4, when everything worked perfectly and seasons 5 and 6 were also great.

Seasons 4 and 5 were fine too. I guess I just get an allergic reaction as soon as I see Chandler moving in with Monica. :p

By season 7, the show had really exhausted its course and really stayed on just because there was still money to be made and that by then, Friends had really become an institution that people kept watching as comfort food even though the show was a shadow of its former self. That's all IMO though.

Oh, I totally agree, although there were some good moments/episodes too. But they blew it by having Chandler's father as a woman at the wedding, having Joey and Rachel falling in love with each other, bringing Chandler's role to a minimum in seasons 8 and 9, letting Ross evolve into a neurotic freak, cramping too much changes into too little episodes in season 10 etc.

I love Sanford & Son, I didn't find Fred rude at all he was like Archie Bunker in a way.

Also I didn't mind it when Fred was gone, it wasn't the same funny show, but in one episode where Grady grows weed in the garden and he thinks it Parsley and put it in a salad and feed it to Smitty and Hoppy...Hilarious.