Watching the second season episodes recently, I could clearly see why the writers felt the Rhoda needed to move in a different direction. The second season started off well, but by the end it was losing its sizzle. The writers felt that CBS's scheduling of this show during the family hour hampered their ability to delve into the adult relationship issues they wanted to explore with Rhoda and Joe, so since they couldn't do that, their answer was for them to divorce. So on with season three and carrying out this plan. With this dramatic turn in the series, the early episodes of season three, with sparks flying between Rhoda and Joe, were a welcome change; it brought interesting new subject matter to explore. But my gosh, by the end of the season, with Joe completely out of the picture, the show was dreadful! Couldn't the writers see at that point that writing Joe off the show completely was not the answer for saving this show, and in fact was killing it? If they couldn't tell just by watching those awful Joe-less episodes, couldn't they have figured it out just by the fact that the ratings were plummeting? In the second season, it was still a top ten show, but in the third season it suddenly dropped out of the top thirty.

Even at low points in season two, there was still that chemistry between Rhoda and Joe that sustained the show. So the show's one saving grace gets completely taken away in the third season. They replace that with a bunch of incidental characters who somehow become central to Rhoda's life. What a mistake!

One of the main reasons viewers fell in love with Rhoda on MTM was the conflict between her being "perfect" Mary's best friend while at the same time feeling so inadequate next to her. Maybe what they should have done on Rhoda was create a married version of Mary: some close "perfect" friend for Rhoda, who seems to have it all -- an always-blissful marriage, a successful career, even tempered husband -- to create a contrast with Rhoda's marriage and life and provide that same sort of dynamic Rhoda had with Mary, but without requiring Rhoda to be single again in order to achieve it. That kind of dynamic was totally missing between Rhoda and Brenda. As much as I love Julie Kavner, they sort of turned Brenda into Rhoda, which made the Rhoda character seem pointless. Anyway, none of the changes they made in this show worked. And if my memory serves, even when they brought Nancy Walker back in the 4th season, her presence wasn't enough to save this show from the mess it became. I was always longing for Joe to come back.

Yes I agree very sad that Joe disappeared all togethor from Rhoda after season3.

It would have been good if Joe had come back and I will they won't they get back togethor storyline.

As I've posted before,viewers like to see couples pull through hard times but pull through and breaking up Rhoda and Joe was a brave move but viewers hated it and the ratings dived.

There was the big point of making Rhoda independant but then in season 4 she works for a Lou Grant clone in an unfunny custome hire shop,thankfully though Nancy Walker and Harould Gould returned for seasons 4 and 5.

Yes I agree very sad that Joe disappeared all togethor from Rhoda after season3.

It would have been good if Joe had come back and I will they won't they get back togethor storyline.

As I've posted before,viewers like to see couples pull through hard times but pull through and breaking up Rhoda and Joe was a brave move but viewers hated it and the ratings dived.

There was the big point of making Rhoda independant but then in season 4 she works for a Lou Grant clone in an unfunny custome hire shop,thankfully though Nancy Walker and Harould Gould returned for seasons 4 and 5.

Well, the season opener when Ida returns was pretty decent, but the follow-up episode that aired today, where Rhoda gets her job at the costume shop stunk. I remember being happy about Nancy Walker returning to the show, but then didn't understand why she wasn't as funny as in earlier seasons. Maybe the episode today explains why: terrible scripts. That scene near the end when Ida comes in the costume shop and immediately starts insulting Rhoda's new boss was ridiculous. That was so totally unmotivated, it made no sense. There was just no logic to it. And in the earlier scene when Rhoda was trying to get hired, then pitched that big fit, I almost expected Mr. Doyle to say "you've got spunk!" I guess they tried to clone Mr. Grant, but the big difference is Lou Grant, beneath all the bluster, had a heart. He was a teddy bear, so he endeared audiences to him. This Mr. Doyle character is so one dimensional, perpetually sour, it's impossible to like him at all.

Yes I didn't like the custome hire store at all.

Jack could be funny but yes he was a poor Lou Grant clone,there's one episode when he's worried about Rhoda,he turns up in pyjamas with a jacket over them,again that's very Lou Grant.

The character I didn't like was Benny,the way he spoke to Brenda,I really didn't like,yes sadly the scripts did go dowhill,will still buy them because of Valerie Harper,Julie Kavner and Nancy Walker.

One of the better latter episodes,is a Blind Date one,when Rhoda mets a bald nasty man,who she goes on a second date with and he is awful to her,then Rhoda finally loses it.

I saw the second ep last night, and I did think it was a bit sloppy as well. However, "That scene near the end when Ida comes in the costume shop and immediately starts insulting Rhoda's new boss was ridiculous. That was so totally unmotivated, it made no sense." is incorrect.

The reason Ida insults him is because he insulted her by accident. She enters and tells him she came to see Rhoda (without identifying herself). He answers, "Oh you must be one of the munchkins", since Rhoda had just told him she had talked a customer into renting 25 "munchkins" costumes for his play 'The Wizard of Oz'. Ida has always been sensitive to her height, and she is insulted by his mistake. That's why she goes back at him - and this sets off their relationship for the next two seasons (insulting each other).

I found the whole "I need a job" scenario at the end a bit over the top as well (why did she end her career in the first place, with no back-up?), however, I think the writers were trying to be in step with the times - and in 1977, the US was going through one of the worst eras of recession and unemployment (though not nearly as bad as today) in history. I think they felt they needed to introduce Rhoda to this as well.

I saw the second ep last night, and I did think it was a bit sloppy as well. However, "That scene near the end when Ida comes in the costume shop and immediately starts insulting Rhoda's new boss was ridiculous. That was so totally unmotivated, it made no sense." is incorrect.

The reason Ida insults him is because he insulted her by accident. She enters and tells him she came to see Rhoda (without identifying herself). He answers, "Oh you must be one of the munchkins", since Rhoda had just told him she had talked a customer into renting 25 "munchkins" costumes for his play 'The Wizard of Oz'. Ida has always been sensitive to her height, and she is insulted by his mistake. That's why she goes back at him - and this sets off their relationship for the next two seasons (insulting each other).

Thanks for correcting me on that. Yes, it's true he made that munchkin remark, but I guess the way she kept firing back at him seemed excessive, especially given that he's her daughter's boss at a brand new job. No mother in her right mind would behave that badly towards their child's boss, when she's just starting out on a new job. It felt over the top to me.

Rhoda's character on TMTMS was downright hysterical, because it was a DYNAMIC. I've only seen the first season of Rhoda, and I thought it was decent, but just... an okay spinoff. To be honest, I think Rhoda should've stayed in Minneapolis. On her own show (even the creators admitted it on the DVD retrospective), she was married off within the first third of the season--- completely losing the "independence" she came back home to gain. On another board discussing a bad spin-off one poster said supporting characters are supporting characters for a reason--- and that is to be the second banana, a foil to the main star. Valerie just wasn't a star like Mary, and she was very funny, and made many moments in her own show funny, but the show as a whole felt too forced. And by the way, does anyone else notice that the words "terrific" and "rotten" are uttered about 50 times an episode in season one? LOL

Well I'm very glad the Rhoda spin off happened,we got Julie Kavner and more

of Nancy Walker and Valerie Harper.

Following a classic like MTM was gonna be hard,but to gain three spinoffs Rhoda Phyllis and Lou Grant,two of them running to five years was quite a big
deal and I enjoyed all three spinoffs.