I remember back when this show was the number one show on television, a friend asked "How on earth did this stupid show become the number one show on television?" I was embarrassed to answer because I actually watched the show and liked it. Now as I see it in reruns, I'm asking myself how could I have liked that show. I can't bear to watch any of it. The jokes are completely juvenile. It's got some of the worst acting in the history of television: almost all of the characters are unrealistic and overplayed -- Laverne, Shirley, Lenny, Squiggy. The actors all SCREAM their lines; it's nothing but a constant yell fest. It is a demonstration of some of the worst sitcom writing I've ever seen; the plots are all absurd. Even the physical comedy routines are overdone and exaggerated. Garry Marshall (who wrote for The Lucy Show for several years) was basically trying to reinvent Lucille Ball and Vivian Vance with Penny Marshall and Cindy Williams. But those two were NOT Lucille Ball and Vivian Vance. Ball and Vance, when they worked together, would perform their comedy with mastery, doing subtle little things that were hysterical. But there was never anything subtle about what Penny Marshall and Cindy Williams did. It was completely out there. The comedy was as broad as it could be. And MAN was it loud!

Then there was that ridiculous move of having every character in the cast suddenly decide to relocate to Southern California and wind up in the same neigborhood. How absurd! That was even more stupid than when Lucy Carmichael and Mr. Mooney both moved to Los Angeles on The Lucy Show (a move that ruined that show, and which perhaps not coincidentally happened during the time Garry Marshall was part of the writing staff; it's obvious where he got his bad idea from). Then joining the loud and obnoxious Laverne and Shirley, the humanly impossible Lenny and Squiggy, the utterly boring Frank, Edna (was that her name?), and Carmine was an even worse sitcom character creation (if that's possible): Rhonda. The show went from very bad to even worse.

So what was the deal with this show rising to number one? With such intelligent comedy on the air at the time, such as the Norman Lear sitcoms, how could this idiocy rise about it? It sure lends credence to the "dumbing down of America" theory. And then there's Happy Days, which started life as a charming and realistic sitcom that accurately recreated life in Middle America in the late '50s, but then, thanks to Fred Silverman, turned into another loud show with juvenile jokes with Fonzie being brought to the forefront as an incredibly unrealistic, unbelievable character, and the show no longer looking anything like the '50s really were. Both of these shows, which started out resembling the '50s, turned into something that had nothing to do with that era. Laverne and Shirley, for example, had those bouffant hairdos in the beginning and dressed as people did in the late '50s/early '60s, but later wound up in blue jeans (very 1970s), a very 1970s shag haircut (Laverne) and a very 1970s Dorothy Hamill haircut (Shirley). What was up with that? Meanwhile, over on Happy Days, they were listening to Leather Tuscadero perform 1970s style music at Arnolds.

I can't think of any redeeming qualities that Laverne & Shirley had. So why did (and do) people watch it? Maybe I should be asking myself why I was watching 20 some years ago. Perhaps it's a kid thing one grows out of, like cartoons? I'm sorry to be so blunt, but this show is awful. Penny Marshall was right to stick with directing, where she excels, instead of acting (where she doesn't).

Originally posted by JaneTVFan
So what was the deal with this show rising to number one? With such intelligent comedy on the air at the time, such as the Norman Lear sitcoms, how could this idiocy rise about it?

Please pardon my typo, that should be "rise ABOVE it" not "rise about it."

Laverne and Shirley would have been a total flop if it hadn't been a spin-off of Happy Days. Plus, it aired before Three's Company, and after Happy Days, which made people tune into watching it. I agree with you about that the acting was pretty unrealistic, but I think that part of that was a gimmick...because of their character's personalities...they basically grew better and funnier throughout the show. I respect your ideas...but I never said that I really agreed with them, because Laverne and Shirley is quite a funny show.

Originally posted by JaneTVFan
So what was the deal with this show rising to number one? With such intelligent comedy on the air at the time, such as the Norman Lear sitcoms, how could this idiocy rise about it?

I hope you know that "All in the Family" and "The Jeffersons" (two norman lear shows) were just as LOUD as "Laverne & Shirley" was except even worse. Whenever I tune into "All In the Family", all I hear is Archie Bunker and that Stivics boy yelling and literally screaming on top of their lungs. Edith and her high-pitched annoying voice, ect. And still I don't get why THAT show was the number #1 show for so many years.

And to answer your question about "Laverne & Shirley". Well, I think the reason why that show rised up to #1 was because it was heartwarming and about two friends sticking together no matter what (which everyone could relate to). Then there was the physical comedy. I think this is one of the greatest shows of the 70's outranking those boring Norman Lear shows because of those elements that mentioned of "Laverne & Shirley".

I am sorry if I sound mean but I am SO tired of everyone criticizing Garry Marshall shows and then cheering on Norman Lear shows. To be quite frank, I find those Norman Lear shows (except the Jeffersons, and Sanford & Son) pointless and very unheathly. No wonder why Lucille Ball disliked "All In the Family" aka 'the King of the Norman Lear shows'. I don't blame her one bit. We need more shows like hers such as "Laverne & Shirley", "Perfect Strangers", ect.

oh. things like this get me mad.

"It's got some of the worst acting in the history of television: almost all of the characters are unrealistic and overplayed -- Laverne, Shirley, Lenny, Squiggy."
-Um.. hello? It's television. Hollywood. Is it supposed to reflect reality? Noo....

"The actors all SCREAM their lines; it's nothing but a constant yell fest."
-Yes. I've notcied that. Eddie/Carmine, especially. But they didn't have the highest qulity sound equipment in the 70's, now did they?

"It is a demonstration of some of the worst sitcom writing I've ever seen; the plots are all absurd."
-Again, back to reality. Isn't there enough reality in this world?

"Even the physical comedy routines are overdone and exaggerated."
-Says you. I think it's great. Would you be ble to do it? No....

"Garry Marshall (who wrote for The Lucy Show for several years) was basically trying to reinvent Lucille Ball and Vivian Vance with Penny Marshall and Cindy Williams."
-Not exactly. Lucy had the crazy ideas and got into perdicaments at will. These girl got into trouble by accident.

"Then there was that ridiculous move of having every character in the cast suddenly decide to relocate to Southern California and wind up in the same neigborhood. How absurd!"
-I completely agree with you.

"Then joining the loud and obnoxious Laverne and Shirley, the humanly impossible Lenny and Squiggy, the utterly boring Frank, Edna (was that her name?), and Carmine was an even worse sitcom character creation (if that's possible): Rhonda. The show went from very bad to even worse."
-Are you part of the Nielson rating crew? Nooo...


I honestly don't know what you're trying to achieve by coming on to a Laverne and Shirley fan discussion board and saying this. Do you plan to achieve any self confidence? Trying to make yourself feel better and piss us off? Is that what you want?

You're ********. Stupid wench.

Originally posted by SpinalTap101747
"It's got some of the worst acting in the history of television: almost all of the characters are unrealistic and overplayed -- Laverne, Shirley, Lenny, Squiggy."
-Um.. hello? It's television. Hollywood. Is it supposed to reflect reality? Noo....

Lucy, Ricky, Fred and Ethel were realistic and not overplayed. Archie and Edith were realistic and not overplayed. Mary and Lou and Rhoda and Ted and Sue Ann and Murray were realistic and not overplayed. These characters all seemed real. That's why they were so funny. People could identify with them. Laverne and Shirley and Lenny and Squiggy never seemed like real people.

"The actors all SCREAM their lines; it's nothing but a constant yell fest."
-Yes. I've notcied that. Eddie/Carmine, especially. But they didn't have the highest qulity sound equipment in the 70's, now did they?[/QUOTE]

??? The '70s weren't exactly the dark ages. The Mary Tyler Moore Show was on in the '70s also. They must have been using similar sound equipment. But nobody on that show found it necessary to yell all the lines.

"It is a demonstration of some of the worst sitcom writing I've ever seen; the plots are all absurd."
-Again, back to reality. Isn't there enough reality in this world?[/QUOTE]

I'm not asking for the comedy to reflect reality, just to be believable.

"Even the physical comedy routines are overdone and exaggerated."
-Says you. I think it's great. Would you be ble to do it? No....[/QUOTE]

The way they do it? Yes.


"Garry Marshall (who wrote for The Lucy Show for several years) was basically trying to reinvent Lucille Ball and Vivian Vance with Penny Marshall and Cindy Williams."
-Not exactly. Lucy had the crazy ideas and got into perdicaments at will. These girl got into trouble by accident.[/QUOTE]

Lucy had the crazy ideas and got into predicaments at will BEFORE the Garry Marshall/Milt Josefsberg days. When that team of writers came along, Lucy (whose personality abruptly changed) started getting into trouble by accident and because of stupidity.

"Then there was that ridiculous move of having every character in the cast suddenly decide to relocate to Southern California and wind up in the same neigborhood. How absurd!"
-I completely agree with you.[/QUOTE]

Even back in the days when I watched L&S, I couldn't take it anymore after the move to Hollywood.


I honestly don't know what you're trying to achieve by coming on to a Laverne and Shirley fan discussion board and saying this. Do you plan to achieve any self confidence? Trying to make yourself feel better and piss us off? Is that what you want?[/QUOTE]

I'm looking for enlightenment, but you're not giving me any.

You're ********. Stupid wench. [/QUOTE]

That's very intelligent. How kind of you.

Originally posted by LucyFan


I hope you know that "All in the Family" and "The Jeffersons" (two norman lear shows) were just as LOUD as "Laverne & Shirley" was except even worse. Whenever I tune into "All In the Family", all I hear is Archie Bunker and that Stivics boy yelling and literally screaming on top of their lungs. Edith and her high-pitched annoying voice, ect. And still I don't get why THAT show was the number #1 show for so many years.

On the Norman Lear shows, they yelled when they were arguing (which was a lot); on L&S, they yelled even when they weren't arguing.

Originally posted by JaneTVFan


On the Norman Lear shows, they yelled when they were arguing (which was a lot); on L&S, they yelled even when they weren't arguing.

THAT IS SO NOT TRUE!!!! It is the other way round geez.

Originally posted by LucyFan


THAT IS SO NOT TRUE!!!! It is the other way round geez.

You're telling me they delivered their lines at a normal pitch? I hardly think so. These loud voices still ring in my ears after all these years.

Originally posted by JaneTVFan
You're telling me they delivered their lines at a normal pitch? I hardly think so. These loud voices still ring in my ears after all these years.

If there voices were so loud,maybe you should have turned the volume down.:rolleyes:
And if you thought the show was so ridiculous and "loud" than why did you watch it??

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Wild Child


If there voices were so loud,maybe you should have turned the volume down.:rolleyes: [B]

I have an easier solution: I turn the channel.

[B]
And if you thought the show was so ridiculous and "loud" than why did you watch it??

That's exactly the question I keep asking myself. Like I suggested earlier, I suppose it must have been a childhood thing, like cartoons.

OK. I honestly still do not know why you're here. :angryfire

Please go away so we can have our peaceful board back.:confused:

Originally posted by SpinalTap101747
OK. I honestly still do not know why you're here. :angryfire

Please go away so we can have our peaceful board back.:confused:

I'm here just to engage folks in some thought-provoking discussion about L&S. That's all. :)

The early seasons of "Laverne & Shirley" are pretty underrated. Very rarely did you get to see two women doing a "buddy" sitcom, and very rarely were the working poor portrayed on television, so the show deserves credit for this alone. And while the scripts may not always have been the best, the characterizations were top-notch. Laverne, Shirley, Lenny, and Squiggy are really well-drawn. Michael McKeon and David Lander, in particular, are very gifted performers to be able to pull off characters like Lenny and Squiggy. And there was some wonderful physical comedy, which, unfortunately, is a dying art these days. I have to agree about the California years, though -- the show had really declined by this point.

As far as yelling lines goes, this is very common in all pre-1980s shows flimed in front of a studio audience, "Mary Tyler Moore" included (I just saw a few episodes of that show the other day, and the lines were spoken very loudly, especially in the early days). In the "All in the Family" book "Those Were the Days", the actors specifically comment on how at that point in time, it was necessary to deliver all their lines in full voice, so that they could be heard by the studio audience, and over the studio audience in the sound track. Even their non-argument scenes were delivered loudly. Fortunately, the technology for filming in front of an audience has come a long way in the last 25 years, and all the yelling has become unnecessary.