One thing I didn't like about the show was Bonnie Franklin's attitude sometimes. She seemed to always be acting like a "guru" for womanhood, humanity, morality, etc.

When in reality it seems like she was promoting a lot of the outdated morales of the time in which the show aired. Particularly values of the 60's and 70's. The "me" generation. Turning their nose upon their parents' "old fashioned" generation...you know, the older people who did a small thing like make this world a better place for their children and grandchildren.

I'm not exactly sure what I am trying to say. But I did read that Franklin tried to have more control over the things that her character said and did, even to the disappointment of the writers and producers. Thinking back, that seems to be the thing about the show that I least enjoyed.

I don't think she necessarily hurt ODAAT, but she was too angry a lot of times. I read an old article where she credits the late Carroll O'Conner for telling her to speak up if she didn't like something about the scripts.

Reading (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0072554/board/thread/237744033) the "Did You Know?" Section...

1. Almost quit season 1 because she "didn't like the direction the show was going" and only stayed after her demands for creative license were met!

2. Jealous that the character of Ginny was "Upstaging" her so *POOF!* The Ginny character was gone!

3. Jealous of Glenn Scarpelli's character getting "more laughs" so *POOF!" HE was gone!

4. Apparent tension with Mackenzie Phillips upstaging her but "luckily" for Bonnie, Mackenzie got HERSELF fired.

5. Creators wanted to do 2 more seasons but BONNIE DECIDED 9 years was "enough." Screw the other actors opinions!

She didn't do a good job playing a strong lead character. She was too emotional and to me not a good enough actress to play lead. Maybe she would of done better if she was a supporting character. I think that is why we haven't seen her as a regular in another show.

I thought she did just fine as the lead. She did well. Now, if she didn't want to do season nine, then it was what it was. It was her show and she did not want to keep going. Bea Arthur wanted "Maude" to end after the sixth season. If she did not want to keep going as the star, then it was pretty much her choice. It be dat way, sometimes.

Reading (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0072554/board/thread/237744033) the "Did You Know?" Section...

1. Almost quit season 1 because she "didn't like the direction the show was going" and only stayed after her demands for creative license were met!

2. Jealous that the character of Ginny was "Upstaging" her so *POOF!* The Ginny character was gone!

3. Jealous of Glenn Scarpelli's character getting "more laughs" so *POOF!" HE was gone!

4. Apparent tension with Mackenzie Phillips upstaging her but "luckily" for Bonnie, Mackenzie got HERSELF fired.

5. Creators wanted to do 2 more seasons but BONNIE DECIDED 9 years was "enough." Screw the other actors opinions!
Glenn left to do Jennifer Slept here.

I thought she did just fine as the lead. She did well. Now, if she didn't want to do season nine, then it was what it was. It was her show and she did not want to keep going. Bea Arthur wanted "Maude" to end after the sixth season. If she did not want to keep going as the star, then it was pretty much her choice. It be dat way, sometimes.
Both her and Valerie wanted to leave. They couldn't have the show without them so they ended it. It was better then dragging it along long after it JTS.

I think another actress could have done a better job. I do not know who though
If you think the same,who do you think might have done a better job ?

Nine years was flogging the horse. The girls were married and in their twenties, with Julie running off soap opera style. What's left for Ann Romano to do, av sex with Schneider in the trailer, get pregnant, marry Schneider and stress him to an early grave?

Maybe that would not have been a bad show!

http://i.imgur.com/cDlIADy.jpg (http://lunapic.com)

http://i.imgur.com/8ObJZir.jpg (http://lunapic.com)

http://i.imgur.com/cDlIADy.jpg (http://lunapic.com)

http://i.imgur.com/8ObJZir.jpg (http://lunapic.com)
Although I don't think she made the entire show, I can't picture anybody else in the role of Ann Romano. She was a big reason for the show's success.

I think the unofficial star of the show was Schneider,Pat Harrington,who won an Emmy in 1984 for best supporting Actor. I do not think Bonnie Franklin won any awards for One Day at a time, before the show ended.I just found out that:
Norman Lear Plots Latino ''One Day at a time''
Remake.

Reading (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0072554/board/thread/237744033) the "Did You Know?" Section...

1. Almost quit season 1 because she "didn't like the direction the show was going" and only stayed after her demands for creative license were met!

2. Jealous that the character of Ginny was "Upstaging" her so *POOF!* The Ginny character was gone!

3. Jealous of Glenn Scarpelli's character getting "more laughs" so *POOF!" HE was gone!

I don't know much of Bonnie's prior acting career but what kind of clout did she have on the show that she could start making such demands? I mean in those days I thought male producers resented the fact that a woman was giving them orders.

I thought she did just fine as the lead. She did well. Now, if she didn't want to do season nine, then it was what it was. It was her show and she did not want to keep going.

While the press in 1984 was saying that Bonnie Franklin and Valerie Bertinelli wanted to leave the show, it's very unlikely CBS would have renewed the show as it had dropped to 47th place in the ratings. The show had clearly run its course.

Bea Arthur wanted "Maude" to end after the sixth season. If she did not want to keep going as the star, then it was pretty much her choice. It be dat way, sometimes.

The official story, to protect Bea Arthur, was that she wanted to quit Maude, but the reality was the show was canceled. Maude had taken a nosedive in the ratings and wound up in 78th place in its sixth season. It was practically the bottom-rated show, and was being referred to as a "ratings disaster." There's no way CBS would have brought it back for another season.
https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=zJAjAAAAIBAJ&sjid=U6EFAAAAIBAJ&pg=1151,3245502&dq=maude+ratings&hl=en

I think the unofficial star of the show was Schneider,Pat Harrington,who won an Emmy in 1984 for best supporting Actor. I do not think Bonnie Franklin won any awards for One Day at a time, before the show ended.I just found out that:
Norman Lear Plots Latino ''One Day at a time''
Remake.

She was nominated once for an Emmy for One Day at a Time -- in 1982 -- but lost to Carol Kane on Taxi. Pat Harrington did win an Emmy in 1984, and also a Golden Globe, in 1981.

Actually, Little Ricky, CBS did want to renew the show for another two years but it was Bonnie that decided that she did not want to do the show. Pat Harrington was hoping she would say yes as he would still be working to take care of a financial matter but he said he understood.

Actually, Little Ricky, CBS did want to renew the show for another two years but it was Bonnie that decided that she did not want to do the show. Pat Harrington was hoping she would say yes as he would still be working to take care of a financial matter but he said he understood.

Are you sure that was not just an official story for the press? The networks back in those days -- especially CBS -- were often putting out phony stories to protect stars of long-running shows from being embarrassed by the cancellation of their series. They would make it look like it was the star's decision to end the show. It seems really odd the CBS would commit itself to two more years of a show that was quickly sinking in the ratings. When a show falls to 47th place, it's no longer a hit. And besides that, there was a big dip in the ratings between the two shows it was sandwiched in between -- its lead-in, Alice, at #25, and The Jeffersons, #19, which immediately followed it. So there were a lot of viewers watching those two shows who apparently tuned out while One Day at a Time was on. Networks expect a show to build onto the audience from the lead-in, not lose viewers.

Are you sure that was not just an official story for the press? The networks back in those days -- especially CBS -- were often putting out phony stories to protect stars of long-running shows from being embarrassed by the cancellation of their series. They would make it look like it was the star's decision to end the show. It seems really odd the CBS would commit itself to two more years of a show that was quickly sinking in the ratings. When a show falls to 47th place, it's no longer a hit. And besides that, there was a big dip in the ratings between the two shows it was sandwiched in between -- it's lead-in, Alice, at #25, and The Jeffersons, #19, which immediately followed it. So there were a lot of viewers watching those two shows who apparently tuned out while One Day at a Time was on. Networks expect a show to build onto the audience from the lead-in, not lose viewers.
The show did move to Wednesdays in March so it no longer had Alice as a lead in. I forgot what show it was paired with. I pretty much stopped watching it after it moved from Sunday except for the episode where Ann left.

She deserved more credit.

Are you sure that was not just an official story for the press? The networks back in those days -- especially CBS -- were often putting out phony stories to protect stars of long-running shows from being embarrassed by the cancellation of their series. They would make it look like it was the star's decision to end the show. It seems really odd the CBS would commit itself to two more years of a show that was quickly sinking in the ratings. When a show falls to 47th place, it's no longer a hit. And besides that, there was a big dip in the ratings between the two shows it was sandwiched in between -- its lead-in, Alice, at #25, and The Jeffersons, #19, which immediately followed it. So there were a lot of viewers watching those two shows who apparently tuned out while One Day at a Time was on. Networks expect a show to build onto the audience from the lead-in, not lose viewers.


Mr. Harrington stated this in an interview a few years back. So, it had nothing to do with press as the show was already defunct when this interview was given. I think it is still up on you tube (where I found the info)

Mr. Harrington stated this in an interview a few years back. So, it had nothing to do with press as the show was already defunct when this interview was given. I think it is still up on you tube (where I found the info)

I hear actors from old shows all the time boast about the shows they were on, making them seem bigger and more popular than they ever were in reality. One that immediately comes to mind is Clint Howard claiming that Gentle Ben and The Andy Griffith Show (his brother's show) were tied for number one in the ratings. Gentle Ben was never anywhere near number one. Pat Harrington is probably imagining things as he'd like to remember them. It simply makes no sense that CBS would have any interest in making a two-year commitment to a show that was losing big numbers from its lead in (Alice), and had dropped from 16th place to 47th in a single year. They just don't do things like that. They might on rare occasions make that kind of commitment to a solid number one megahit, but not a #47 show. I think Bonnie Franklin and Valerie Bertinelli saw the writing on the wall and decided to jump ship before they were pushed overboard. They may very well have decided to leave the show before any decision had been made to cancel it, but I would bet that if they had changed their minds, they wouldn't have had a show to come back to.

I hear actors from old shows all the time boast about the shows they were on, making them seem bigger and more popular than they ever were in reality. One that immediately comes to mind is Clint Howard claiming that Gentle Ben and The Andy Griffith Show (his brother's show) were tied for number one in the ratings. Gentle Ben was never anywhere near number one. Pat Harrington is probably imagining things as he'd like to remember them. It simply makes no sense that CBS would have any interest in making a two-year commitment to a show that was losing big numbers from its lead in (Alice), and had dropped from 16th place to 47th in a single year. They just don't do things like that. They might on rare occasions make that kind of commitment to a solid number one megahit, but not a #47 show. I think Bonnie Franklin and Valerie Bertinelli saw the writing on the wall and decided to jump ship before they were pushed overboard. They may very well have decided to leave the show before any decision had been made to cancel it, but I would bet that if they had changed their minds, they wouldn't have had a show to come back to.

Some CBS shows were not doing that well in the ratings but it is likely that they wanted to hold on to the old faithfuls. The Jeffersons started one season before ODAAT and ran one season longer before being canceled. So, there is a good probability that ODAAT would have been picked up by CBS for those two seasons. If ratings were not satisfactory by the next season, then maybe CBS would have had the right to pull the plug. However, I doubt Pat Harrington would embellish over something like this. Plus, the show still had enough ratings and longevity for another season. (albeit barely. LOL.)

I do agree that maybe the actors thought it was time to move on. For themselves and the show did run its course. TV was dead (according to reports) back around this time before Cosby came into the helm and networks like CBS were trying to hold on the dependable, reliable stuff. I know say it doesn't make sense but think about it when I say that these networks have done a LOT of things and made decisions that have made no sense, whatsoever. I would not be surprised. ;)

Some CBS shows were not doing that well in the ratings

Including One Day at a Time. But many CBS shows were doing quite well, like The Jeffersons, Cagney & Lacey, Magnum P.I., Simon & Simon, Knots Landing, Dallas, Falcon Crest, 60 Minutes. Seven of the top ten shows were CBS shows. Fifteen of the top 25 shows were CBS shows. CBS was in the driver's seat that season; it was the top-rated network and ODAAT was one of its poorest performing shows. They didn't need it at all.

but it is likely that they wanted to hold on to the old faithfuls. The Jeffersons started one season before ODAAT and ran one season longer before being canceled. So, there is a good probability that ODAAT would have been picked up by CBS for those two seasons.

The Jeffersons was doing really well in the ratings, One Day at a Time was doing poorly.

If ratings were not satisfactory by the next season, then maybe CBS would have had the right to pull the plug.

They were already bad. Not only was the show down to 47th place -- one of CBS's lowest-rated shows -- but as I pointed out, it was a big drop from the lead-in show. That's something networks take very seriously. They don't want a show on their schedule that's eroding gains from earlier in the night. The Jeffersons, which followed ODAAT, was doing well in spite of ODAAT being its lead-in, but probably would have done even better had ODAAT not lost so many of the Alice viewers, which were already considerably fewer than the show before that: number two-rated 60 Minutes. And note that Alice got the ax the very next year.

However, I doubt Pat Harrington would embellish over something like this.

I don't doubt it at all. This show was the highlight of his career and he was proud of it. Of course he would have an incentive to embellish its legacy.

Plus, the show still had enough ratings and longevity for another season. (albeit barely. LOL.)

Not at 47th place.

I know say it doesn't make sense but think about it when I say that these networks have done a LOT of things and made decisions that have made no sense, whatsoever. I would not be surprised. ;)

I can't get past the two-year commitment thing. They canceled Archie Bunker's Place the year before, and it was #22, and Gloria, which was #18! But they're going to commit to two years for a show that has dropped to #47 and is losing millions of viewers from its lead-in, when they're the number one network and have so many stronger shows? That's bad business.

The only thing I know is that Bonnie and Valerie announced they were leaving before CBS canceled it. But CBS did move it from their regular Sunday night slot to a night that had always been bad for CBS at that time. And even though ODAAT made a spinoff attempt for Pat Harrington, Jr. It was not picked up. I knew it had not been picked up by the time it aired and that was one of the reasons I didn't watch it.

Including One Day at a Time. But many CBS shows were doing quite well, like The Jeffersons, Cagney & Lacey, Magnum P.I., Simon & Simon, Knots Landing, Dallas, Falcon Crest, 60 Minutes. Seven of the top ten shows were CBS shows. Fifteen of the top 25 shows were CBS shows. CBS was in the driver's seat that season; it was the top-rated network and ODAAT was one of its poorest performing shows. They didn't need it at all.



The Jeffersons was doing really well in the ratings, One Day at a Time was doing poorly.



They were already bad. Not only was the show down to 47th place -- one of CBS's lowest-rated shows -- but as I pointed out, it was a big drop from the lead-in show. That's something networks take very seriously. They don't want a show on their schedule that's eroding gains from earlier in the night. The Jeffersons, which followed ODAAT, was doing well in spite of ODAAT being its lead-in, but probably would have done even better had ODAAT not lost so many of the Alice viewers, which were already considerably fewer than the show before that: number two-rated 60 Minutes. And note that Alice got the ax the very next year.



I don't doubt it at all. This show was the highlight of his career and he was proud of it. Of course he would have an incentive to embellish its legacy.



Not at 47th place.



I can't get past the two-year commitment thing. They canceled Archie Bunker's Place the year before, and it was #22, and Gloria, which was #18! But they're going to commit to two years for a show that has dropped to #47 and is losing millions of viewers from its lead-in, when they're the number one network and have so many stronger shows? That's bad business.


But it still business. It doesn't always make sense. Heck, Gilligan's Island was on the table for a fourth season but was pulled because the CBS network exec's wife liked either "Gunsmoke" or "Bonanza". (one of the two). I always heard that rumor but it was Lloyd Schwartz (Sherwood's son) who confirmed it for me during my conversation with him last summer. If the show was doing poorly then they would have been in their right to cancel it but they had a given a bone by CBS but Bonnie opted not to chew it. ;) Things don't always make sense. Heck, I work in this crazy industry and there are a lot of stupid politics that make me SMH.

You are good debater, Little RickyII. I will say that. Your points are valid and well thought out.

This show had a great ending though....

1.) Julie went to rehab.

2.) Barbara married Eddie Van Halen.

3.) Anne married Dr. Johnny Fever.

And I got promoted to the second grade. LOL.

And I got promoted to the second grade. LOL.
And I graduated HS. lol

Back to the original topic: I thought Bonnie did a great job as the lead character. "One Day" was a Norman Lear show and all his shows had strong leads with high strung attitudes (Archie Bunker, Maude Findlay, etc.). The whole point of those shows was how the leads interacted (or failed to interact) with people who didn't see the world the same way.

But it still business. It doesn't always make sense. Heck, Gilligan's Island was on the table for a fourth season but was pulled because the CBS network exec's wife liked either "Gunsmoke" or "Bonanza". (one of the two). I always heard that rumor but it was Lloyd Schwartz (Sherwood's son) who confirmed it for me during my conversation with him last summer. If the show was doing poorly then they would have been in their right to cancel it but they had a given a bone by CBS but Bonnie opted not to chew it. ;) Things don't always make sense. Heck, I work in this crazy industry and there are a lot of stupid politics that make me SMH.

You are good debater, Little RickyII. I will say that. Your points are valid and well thought out.

I just now read this comment. Thanks. :) I worked for years in the legal profession writing briefs and arguments, so . . . :)

I'm still not convinced that the stuff about Bonnie being offered by CBS to continue the show is anything more than a face-saving story for the press, given the ratings. But neither of us worked for CBS (I assume), so we can't prove it either way.

The Gunsmoke story I'm familiar with, but I actually heard that it was a politician in Washington, DC, who pressured CBS not to cancel the show (as if Washington politics should have anything to with entertainment industry decision-making). And the interesting this is Gunsmoke had been falling in the ratings up to that point, and was down to 34th place, which is borderline, but still on a downward trajectory. Network execs usually interpret this as a sign that a show's good years are behind it. But they made the last-minute decision to continue the show, moved it from Saturday night to Monday night, and that very next season it bounced all the way up to 4th place and became yet again one of CBS's strongest hits and remained on the schedule for another seven seasons (20 seasons total). When it finally was canceled in 1975, it was still ranked #28. But it had been #15 the year before, and #7 the year before that. So it was back on that dreaded downward trajectory. Still, the cast was shocked by the cancellation as they were not expecting it and were preparing to return for season 21.

Wonder what made the last season so different from all the seasons when the show was in the top 30?

This was a good thread.

Bump.

Wonder what made the last season so different from all the seasons when the show was in the top 30?

The Ann character became less the focus of the show which really ticked Miss Franklin off according to Pat Harrington. (paraphrasing here)

The Ann character became less the focus of the show which really ticked Miss Franklin off according to Pat Harrington. (paraphrasing here)

In all fairness, Bonnie was ready to walk at the end of Season 8 according to an old interview with Glenn S. (which is why he did the "Jennifer Slept Here" pilot) Why she committed to a 9th Season (and according to Val both were offered TWO Seasons, a Ninth and 10th Season)must have been the deal she got - she's not in a couple of episodes (They shot the last few out of order so she'd wrap up earlier) and she did get to co-direct two so that must have been enough to change her mind (Plus the marriage to Sam ,which according to TV GUIDE she wanted, might have also changed her mind - fresh story-lines and progression she wanted for the character...but in the end she knew she only wanted to do the one final season,9) (Val mentioned in her book if Bonnie took the two years, she would have taken Season 9 off and returned in the 10th - perhaps Barbara would have been a tour guide for a year long around-the-world tour, which could explain where she was? :) )

Val also said in her first book there was "Talk" of a spin-off with her and Mac when she returned, but that didn't happen and it puttered out (Either due to Network cold feet because of Mac's possible and eventual relapse or because Bonnie committed to the 9th season)- but the episode "Sisters" clearly sets up what became season 9's direction - more on the girls, (well, that was the plan before Mac screwed that up!) and less on Ann - and Bonnie knew she was losing the show in the end.

Would the show have continued into Season 9 without Bonnie but not as a spin-off...Val as the star...who knows. Was CBS ready to give Val the show?

As for the Move to Wednesday mid-season- CBS had already realized they couldn't get Bonnie and Val to reconsider (At this point they had already finished filming the season) and needed counter-programming for that night against "Fall Guy" (Big Hit) and an aging "Real People" - throws off the ratings for the season - it went from an average of 17-18 million on Sundays to 11 Million on Wednesdays matched with "Mama Malone".

Mind you at the same time ODAAT was a BIG hit in syndication - not that people were not watching the show, and CBS did play reruns on various nights through that Summer - some episodes did better during the summer than during the first run! (and mind you, there were summer preemptions as well)

I believe if Bonnie and/or Val had committed to a 10th year, the two season contract, CBS would have protected the show and not moved it into a weaker Wednesday slot (Where it might have gone is anyone's guess - perhaps put into "After M*A*S*H" slot, and they could have moved it to Wednesdays - it might have done better,or at least as well as on Mondays - ODAAT could have easily fit well with "Newhart") - it was "dead show walking" by that point they had nothing to lose. They were committed to the 22 episodes by contract and out of respect to Norman Lear. The final season ratings are lopsided due to move into the Wednesday slot.

I also believe there never would have been a "Kate and Allie", either if the show continued - clearly it was CBS's "replacement" for "One Day at a Time" - two independent mothers with kids sharing a household... Let's not forget the last two ODAAT and the Schnider spin-off pilot aired on Mondays in K&A's slot following it's short 6 episode first season,which itself was the slot for "After M*A*S*H " who's season ended, which they moved to Tuesday the following season against A-Team and killed that show,but that's another story.

By Season 8 it should have been all about the younger people !;) The Newlyweds , Barbara and Mark and Julie and Max:) Ann wasn't really needed anymore. She should have just popped on here and there and the main focus should have been totally off her by that time!;)

By Season 8 it should have been all about the younger people !;) The Newlyweds , Barbara and Mark and Julie and Max:) Ann wasn't really needed anymore. She should have just popped on here and there and the main focus should have been totally off her by that time!;)

The problem was two fold - it was still Bonnie's show and the unpredictability of Mac which turned out to be correct. Do you really think CBS and Embassy was ready to give Mac co-star status again - technically season 9 she's supporting and she only made it through 3 1/2 episodes.

Bonnie did not want to be a supporting player in her own show - the concessions they gave her for season 9 - a couple-three fewer episodes (most likely she was paid for those as a "consideration"), co-directing two shows,and the marriage to Sam - is what got her to sign for one more year.

But the big question again is if Bonnie walked after 8, would they have given the show to Val?

Steve R.

I knew when I bumped up this old thread you would offer up some terrific insights. :wave:

I think they should have given the show to Val but most likely out of loyalty to Bonnie Franklin and her own desire to move on it wasn't in the cards.

But WHY couldn't they just have breathed new life into the Ann Romano character and keep it afloat for another year?

Some suggestions.

Have them put some better focus on Ann's working life. Give her and Francine some actual employees and crazy/funny clients. Have Sam who liked to dicker around in different work settings as established in season 8 a role in the company somehow. He could have been part of their creative team. Him being an architect limited him on that show. We never got to see his professional life, it was just referred to. They should have integrated his character better.

The character of Ann got "stale" because they let it get stale. She still had some potential stories that never got told.

I hated the way they wrapped up the show in a half an hour with Ann leaving Francine in the lurch like that. The whole thing was planned so poorly. :(

The character of Ann got "stale" because they let it get stale. She still had some potential stories that never got told(

This was the whole point of her Marrying Sam - to bring some freshness, but the problem was it was "dead show walking" season 9 - Bonnie and Val had already agreed to one season more only.

Then as I've written, the show had become two series - the sisters & husbands and Ann & Sam with Schneider & Grandma the bridge between the two and Francine bumped down to reoccurring. (She only did 5 episodes but got an "Also Starring" credit for her episodes)

So Season 9 turned out to be a hybrid of two separate ideas - the potential spin-off that never happened with Val & Mac (which for various reasons didn't happen - I say it was both CBS/Embassy nervous about Mac's health and Bonnie signing for season 9) and the progression of Ann's life.

There are good episodes in Season 9, but those can be split into two categories - Ann episodes and Barbara,etc episodes. The strongest episodes went to Val and Mike - The Adoption 2-parter and "Dear Max".

If Bonnie and Val had signed for 2 seasons, I think the show would have progressed slightly differently (even with Mac's 2nd firing) and CBS would have "protected it's investment" and not moved it into the Wednesday Slot which hurt the back-end. (Mind you, they reran the show in various slots through the Summer - Mondays and Sundays, getting higher rating for some episodes than the first run!)

Truth is, I think Bonnie just gave up fighting for her show. She was the one who wanted Ann to Marry Sam, she got concessions of less episodes (As mentioned, the season was shot out of order(The finale was shot 20th!) and she's not in at least two episodes) and co-directing episodes in Season 9 (which also accounts for a couple of her minimal appearances so she could prepare for her two directing assignments) But she knew she couldn't get, or even give more. She lost control,she lost being the focus 100% of the time, She was tired, but had over 200 episodes under her belt and a decent cut of the syndication. The would have been the other motivation for Season 9 - to bring the episode count over 200 (209) so you know they must have "sweetened" things for Bonnie and Val in the last contract - but not sweet enough for 10 seasons. :)

But hey, we got 21 more episodes and the Schneider pilot.

This was the whole point of her Marrying Sam - to bring some freshness, but the problem was it was "dead show walking" season 9 - Bonnie and Val had already agreed to one season more only.

Then as I've written, the show had become two series - the sisters & husbands and Ann & Sam with Schneider & Grandma the bridge between the two and Francine bumped down to reoccurring. (She only did 5 episodes but got an "Also Starring" credit for her episodes)

So Season 9 turned out to be a hybrid of two separate ideas - the potential spin-off that never happened with Val & Mac (which for various reasons didn't happen - I say it was both CBS/Embassy nervous about Mac's health and Bonnie signing for season 9) and the progression of Ann's life.

There are good episodes in Season 9, but those can be split into two categories - Ann episodes and Barbara,etc episodes.

If Bonnie and Val had signed for 2 seasons, I think the show would have progressed slightly differently (even with Mac's 2nd firing) and CBS would have "protected it's investment" and not moved it into the Wednesday Slot which hurt the back-end. (Mind you, they reran the show in various slots through the Summer, getting higher rating for some episodes than the first run!)

Truth is, I think Bonnie just gave up fighting for her show. She was the one who wanted Ann to Marry Sam, she got concessions of less episodes (As mentioned, the season was shot out of order(The finale was shot 20th!) and she's not in at least two episodes) and co-directing episodes in Season 9 (which also accounts for a couple of her minimal appearances so she could prepare for her two directing assignments) But she knew she couldn't get, or even give more. She lost control,she lost being the focus 100% of the time, She was tired, but had over 200 episodes under her belt and a decent cut of the syndication.

Wow! Good for her. Did anybody else get a cut?

Wow! Good for her. Did anybody else get a cut?

Depends on their contracts and standard SAG/AFTRA rules for royalties. Everyone got something, even if it was standard. You have to expect that as time went on Val got sweet deals as well. Listed as "also starring" but technically the 2nd Star...

Also, actors could take a lump sum "Buy out" based on projected revenue. (The "All in The Family" cast did that thinking the show would have a short life in Syndication due to the dated/topical material - something Sally and Rob still say was the biggest mistake of their careers.)

There's still the unknown about the DVDs however.

Depends on their contracts and standard SAG/AFTRA rules for royalties. Everyone got something, even if it was standard.

Also, actors could take a lump sum "Buy out" based on projected revenue. (The "All in The Family" cast did that thinking the show would have a short life in Syndication due to the dated/topical material - something Sally and Rob still say was the biggest mistake of their careers.)

There's still the unknown about the DVDs however.

Speaking of Rob and Sally. Would it have killed him to give her some kind of role in one of his movies? I digress...:lol:

Do you think there might be bad blood with Val and Lear in the sense that she is not seemingly very supportive of the reboot as Mack and Lem are. :confused: Did she even wish them well on social media?

I actually like all the other characters more than Ann. I always saw her as trying too hard to be heard.

I actually like all the other characters more than Ann. I always saw her as trying too hard to be heard.

She would have benefited from some therapy.

I think she had a "Napoleon complex"...:wave:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napoleon_complex

Do you think there might be bad blood with Val and Lear in the sense that she is not seemingly very supportive of the reboot as Mack and Lem are. :confused: Did she even wish them well on social media?

She has made a handful positive and supportive comment on the new show on Twitter. Keep in mind she's been busy with her book and her additional "seasons" the last year+,so she's been rather busy in the kitchen. There's been no evidence of "Bad Blood" whatsoever.

She has made a handful positive and supportive comment on the new show on Twitter. Keep in mind she's been busy with her book and her additional "seasons" the last year+,so she's been rather busy in the kitchen. There's been no evidence of "Bad Blood" whatsoever.

I knew you would have the "scoop", Steve R.

Thanks. :wave:

I knew you would have the "scoop", Steve R.

Thanks. :wave:

...and let's not forget Val is getting into the wine business as well - she's very busy :)

But she's even said she'd like to do another sitcom. Where the heck would she find the time? :)

Hey, if Linda Lavin can come back to CBS after 32 years (9JKL) there's got to be something out there for Val as a mother or grandmother (!)

...and let's not forget Val is getting into the wine business as well - she's very busy :)

But she's even said she'd like to do another sitcom. Where the heck would she find the time? :)

Hey, if Linda Lavin can come back to CBS after 32 years (9JKL) there's got to be something out there for Val as a mother or grandmother (!)

Absolutely! :wave:

:)

The show would never have been as popular without Bonnie. I know she grates on some people, but maybe she was supposed to (or at least her character was).

Ann was not a perfect person, and I think that was part of the appeal of the show. She wasn't June Cleaver or Aunt Bee; she was a loud, willful, outspoken, quick tempered woman who often didn't do or say the right thing.

She was also a deeply caring and intelligent woman, with a fierce will and a drive to survive against all odds. She loved her family and friends completely and would have done anything for them.

I think TV could use more balanced characters like this but I suspect we are WAY past the point of no return in that regard.

The show would never have been as popular without Bonnie. I know she grates on some people, but maybe she was supposed to (or at least her character was).

Ann was not a perfect person, and I think that was part of the appeal of the show. She wasn't June Cleaver or Aunt Bee; she was a loud, willful, outspoken, quick tempered woman who often didn't do or say the right thing.

She was also a deeply caring and intelligent woman, with a fierce will and a drive to survive against all odds. She loved her family and friends completely and would have done anything for them.

I think TV could use more balanced characters like this but I suspect we are WAY past the point of no return in that regard.


Even though Ann was a pain in the arse much of the time and I love to make fun of her annoying traits as much as the next person, everything you said is spot on! She was not an easy character to love and Bonnie Franklin made her come alive in a way I don't think any actress could have. :wave:

I wonder why her television career pretty much faded out after that. Did she make a lot of enemies in the business or was it just that she tired of the grind and had enough money to be choosy? :confused:

IMO she hurt the show. Ann was an obnoxious and annoying character. The constant yelling was ridiculous. What did this woman have to be so angry about? She is the one who walked on on a nice life and disrupted her family.

IMO she hurt the show. Ann was an obnoxious and annoying character. The constant yelling was ridiculous. What did this woman have to be so angry about? She is the one who walked on on a nice life and disrupted her family.

She must not have been too big a burden on the show; it was a Top Ten show for years and made it nine full seasons.

Even though Ann was a pain in the arse much of the time and I love to make fun of her annoying traits as much as the next person, everything you said is spot on! She was not an easy character to love and Bonnie Franklin made her come alive in a way I don't think any actress could have. :wave:

I wonder why her television career pretty much faded out after that. Did she make a lot of enemies in the business or was it just that she tired of the grind and had enough money to be choosy? :confused:

Good question; I don't have a ready answer, unfortunately. My guess might be that being on a weekly TV series for nine years is pretty grueling. Also, wasn't Franklin's first love actually the stage, Broadway, etc.? Maybe she figured she'd done the "TV thing" was it was time to move on?

Maybe a factor as well was that she no longer was a really young woman, with ageism and sexism hindering females who would like to extend their careers with quality TV roles.

It's an interesting question: Franklin was awful in the extreme in the role, stiff and unnatural. Her exaggerated muggings maybe would have been less distracting on the stage (or better yet, radio). There have been worse actresses on sitcoms, but they've generally been chosen for their looks and are more models than actresses.

That said, did she hurt the show? I would say yes, but given the crappiness of the scripts and the awfulness of the rest of the cast it's hard to be sure.

"Other that that, how did you like the play, Mrs. Lincoln?" ;)

It's an interesting question: Franklin was awful in the extreme in the role, stiff and unnatural. Her exaggerated muggings maybe would have been less distracting on the stage (or better yet, radio). There have been worse actresses on sitcoms, but they've generally been chosen for their looks and are more models than actresses.

That said, did she hurt the show? I would say yes, but given the crappiness of the scripts and the awfulness of the rest of the cast it's hard to be sure.

Question: If you obviously hate everything about the show, why are you wasting your time reading posts in a forum devoted to the show?

I watched back in the day and still watch because of Valerie. The episodes that focused too much on Ann are not nearly as good.

The show would have been much better with a different actress in the role of Ann.

Ann Romano was perhaps one of the most unintentionally unlikable, unsympathetic, and downright selfish main characters in sitcom history when you really get down to it. She divorces her husband, Ed no apparent reason (other than she's "bored") and then proceeds to complain about how hard life was as a single mother. I mean, her husband as far as we know, didn't beat her or cheat on her, so what exactly made Ann want to divorce Ed in the first place? Also, even though at the start of the series, Ann is about 34 years old, numerous stories early on were written as if her life was virtually over and she was "over-the-hill". Bonnie Franklin's often shrill, overwrought, ham-handed acting style just compounded the issue.

The way I see it, Ann probably married Ed because it felt like the right thing to do at the time. But maybe she was never really in love with the guy. So as time went along she became increasingly unhappy with the marriage and sought divorce so she could become independent again and "find herself". But she now had the two daughters to raise which didn't make the transition to single any easier.

There is nothing wrong with Bonnie Franklin's performances in the episodes. She acted accordingly as the scripts called for. If she was supposed to be kind and loving, that's what she did. If she was supposed to let off some steam and have an emotional outburst, she did that too. I wouldn't go so far as to say her performances were award winning worthy but she was more than adequate playing the Ann Romano role.

As my avatar picture shows, I think she was far more attractive in the early seasons of the show when she had the longer hairstyle. :eyes: With the short hairstyle she lost much of her sex appeal but still turned in good performances in the episodes. In the 9th and final season, the series detours/shifts a little to focus more on Mark/Barbara and Max/Julie and their situations, less is seen of Sam and Ann.

The way I see it, Ann probably married Ed because it felt like the right thing to do at the time. But maybe she was never really in love with the guy. So as time went along she became increasingly unhappy with the marriage and sought divorce so she could become independent again and "find herself". But she now had the two daughters to raise which didn't make the transition to single any easier.

There is nothing wrong with Bonnie Franklin's performances in the episodes. She acted accordingly as the scripts called for. If she was supposed to be kind and loving, that's what she did. If she was supposed to let off some steam and have an emotional outburst, she did that too. I wouldn't go so far as to say her performances were award winning worthy but she was more than adequate playing the Ann Romano role.

As my avatar picture shows, I think she was far more attractive in the early seasons of the show when she had the longer hairstyle. :eyes: With the short hairstyle she lost much of her sex appeal but still turned in good performances in the episodes. In the 9th and final season, the series detours/shifts a little to focus more on Mark/Barbara and Max/Julie and their situations, less is seen of Sam and Ann.


I totally agree!:) Good post Retro Lee!! ;):wave:

I totally agree!:) Good post Retro Lee!! ;):wave:

Thank you, I guess my continuing love for Bonnie Franklin with longer hair motivated me to make that post. ;) :lol:

We're just talking about a TV show here, not real life, but I think the Ann/Ed marriage was one of those things where she was young at the time and had some romantic feelings so she got married, but she wasn't really in love with the guy.

I would have liked to see Ann eventually hook up with David, I think she matched much more with David compared to Sam. The season 6 closer "Indianapolis Story" episode they did where David comes back and tries to woo Ann again but she turns him down, I would have liked to see her accept his proposal and they could have had a wedding episode in season 7 instead of Sam coming along later and getting in the picture.

IMO she hurt the show. Ann was an obnoxious and annoying character. The constant yelling was ridiculous. What did this woman have to be so angry about? She is the one who walked on on a nice life and disrupted her family.

If anything, the show needed a strong, forceful director. He or she could have reined in Bonnie Franklin’s over the top acting. The show also needed a producer who was willing to knock her down a few pegs. She had too much control over the production and as a result, the show suffered (https://web.archive.org/web/20061031125340/http://www.jumptheshark.com/o/one_day_at_a_time.htm).

Damn it, TMC!

Are you currently reading the same thread on another site that I am about Miss Franklin? LOL.

:wave:

It is mean but hilarious. :lol:

I think that she hurt the show because her character of Ann was unable to evolve as the show went on.

Also, had the show continued for two more seasons; wouldn't Bonnie demand a raise as the star of her show? With falling ratings, I think the right decision was to cancel the show because it had run its course.

Not Exactly. I think she did help the show as the lead character

I think that she hurt the show because her character of Ann was unable to evolve as the show went on.

Also, had the show continued for two more seasons; wouldn't Bonnie demand a raise as the star of her show? With falling ratings, I think the right decision was to cancel the show because it had run its course.

Did Bonnie Franklin/Ann Romano show any sense of maternal instinct and chemistry? I mean the character was often so shrill that it was almost as if her daughters were her sisters, her competition (in effect). She just often seemed bossy, aggressive and unpleasant instead of say, more dejected and understanding.

IMO she hurt the show. Ann was an obnoxious and annoying character. The constant yelling was ridiculous. What did this woman have to be so angry about? She is the one who walked on on a nice life and disrupted her family.

Bonnie Franklin's style of acting was simply put, not suited for a sitcom at all. She acted as thought she was still on a Broadway stage, "projecting" with her voice and mannerisms for all she was worth.

I still don’t get this question. The show was a major hit, had big ratings mostly throughout, and ran 9 seasons. Would it have been even bigger with someone else? :confused:

5. Creators wanted to do 2 more seasons but BONNIE DECIDED 9 years was "enough." Screw the other actors opinions!Screw the facts! Valerie wanted it to end as well.

I still don’t get this question. The show was a major hit, had big ratings mostly throughout, and ran 9 seasons. Would it have been even bigger with someone else? :confused:

I guess a better question would have been......did she play a role in the show lasting longer?

I never thought she was really wanted again on a primetime show. She was pretty dreadful when she was on daytime’s Young and Restless.

Was Ann Romano from ‘One Day at a Time’ one of the most irritating characters in TV history? (https://www.quora.com/Was-Ann-Romano-from-One-Day-at-a-Time-one-of-the-most-irritating-characters-in-TV-history/answer/Jon-Mixon-1)

Question: Was Ann Romano (https://historifans.org/2022/08/29/ann-romano-what-took-you-so-long-understanding-one-day-at-a-time-as-the-first-american-sitcom-about-divorce/) from ‘One Day at a Time’ (https://ew.com/article/2013/03/02/the-one-day-at-a-time-legacy-one-mom-to-another/?srsltid=AfmBOopswxrVjQvP3aXpnsdPFzuBlkfA4hLvvGzLJKovl2fS4ODmQyfo) one of the most irritating characters in TV history?

Oh yes.

In fact, despite having NINE seasons and 209 individual episodes, the writing staff was never able to explain why a man wanted to be romantic with her…and things never seemed to get to that point anyway.

Let’s review:


If you were a certain type of man, you weren’t closing the deal with Ms. Romano - David, her divorce attorney and the first man she dated following her divorce (Irony?) got all the way to getting engaged with her and he never spent the night or even got a quick tugger in the car. Basically she was chaste woman with two daughters and the producers tried to sell that one for 10 years. And they partially succeeded.
Ann Romano wouldn’t let **** go - If she got a bur underneath her saddle, she’d not only complain till it was removed, she complain that it ever go there in the first place. If you watch the series now nearly 40 years after it’s left the air, you realize that when she wasn’t complaining she really wasn’t saying too much.
Ann was a busybody - “Mind Your Own Business” was not a concept that she could relate to and it certainly didn’t represent to she acted and reacted during the series. Ann was up in everybody’s business, whether she was helpful or not.
Ann sucked at concealing her body language - Basically, what she was thinking (which seemed to consist mostly of a complaint or a sarcastic/snide comment) was what you could discern was coming your way simply looking at her stance and her crossed arms. For some who was a parent, Ann didn’t seem to have the whole thing down pat and even before she said anything, her disappointment wafted off of her like a sour fragrance.
Ann Romano was the LEAST funny character in what supposed to be a sitcom - When she stopped whining long enough to have a mature or substantive conversation, it was rarely a joke and always a scripted. The character was so unfunny that you almost felt sorry for her. Until…well…almost. Basically the least interesting person in a sitcom is usually the dullest or the most irritating.


Were there more irritating characters in the history of North American television?

Certainly.

Mrs. Kravitz, Dr. Bellows, Sheldon Cooper, Cousin Oliver, etc.

However Ann Romano was an unlikable character who managed to become even less likeable as the show wore on. In what has to be a unique achievement, her character hasn’t improved over time and in many ways is worse when viewed NOW (2025) than she was fifty years ago.

Ann with her trademark suspicious look….

https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-21a9bb792ef9f3c51d8f044733662e4e

One Day at a Time season 7 (https://thatsallsiknow.blogspot.com/2022/12/one-day-at-time-season-7.html)

Although there were additional principals in the early years (Pat Harrington Jr. as building super Dwayne Schneider, who stuck around for the entire run; Richard Masur as Ann’s divorce attorney and boyfriend, David Kane, written off after 22 episodes; and Mary Louise Wilson as Ginny Wroblicki, the wisecracking neighbor, who lasted a mere 17), the primary focus was on Bonnie Franklin as Ann, Mackenzie Phillips as Julie and Valerie Bertinelli as Barbara. They were all three of them pretty awful, at least to start. Bertinelli was so green that the producers had her take acting lessons after the first season. Phillips had a raw, nervy vitality, but her performing style — if you can even call it that — was undisciplined and unfocused. And then there was Franklin. She had pluck and sincerity and occasional warmth — and not much else. As an actress, she was a mass of contradictions, few of them flattering. Her face was both round and rubbery, her body language at once obvious and curious. She could go from 0 to 100 in the bat of an eye, but struggled with all the digits in between. She didn’t so much process emotions as arrive at them, often clumsily — and ostentatiously, as if announcing, “Here I am being concerned.” “Here I am being furious.” It’s probably tacky to note that Franklin, prior to being cast as Ann Romano, had enjoyed her greatest acclaim informing a Broadway audience, “What is it that we’re living for? Applause, applause” — but it’s also sort of inescapable. On the One Day (https://web.archive.org/web/20061031125340/http://www.jumptheshark.com/o/one_day_at_a_time.htm) at a Time soundstage, at least in those early years, that still seems to be her MO. Everything seems designed for maximum effect. If one were to be charitable, one could call her acting choices bold, but that does a disservice to all the genuinely intrepid performances to come out of the ’70s — especially from the Lear shows. Offhand, I can’t think of a Lear-show performance so brash yet so unsubtle. Or so inconsistent. For every moment Franklin manages well, you can point to two other bits she doesn’t pull off at all. (She’s especially bad at things that are straight out of Acting 101 – e.g., Ann has a cold, Ann dissolves into laughter.)

IMO she hurt the show. Ann was an obnoxious and annoying character. The constant yelling was ridiculous. What did this woman have to be so angry about? She is the one who walked on on a nice life and disrupted her family.

I never realized what exactly was it that people had an issue (if you want to call it that) with Bonnie Franklin's acting style or on-screen performance as Ann Romano until I read something (https://x.com/i/grok/share/vWUWvg9UyOgQRQqEUbNMjoKY3) that summarized or described her whole vibe. That "vibe" being that nagging, edge-of-your-seat tension where the character's (or actor or actress's) energy just grates, even if it's not outright villainous.

I don't think she necessarily hurt ODAAT, but she was too angry a lot of times. I read an old article where she credits the late Carroll O'Conner for telling her to speak up if she didn't like something about the scripts.

And look where that got O'Conner - Years of butting heads with Norman Lear, (Who thretened to kill off Archie, and eventually did kill off James on "Good Times" because John Amos was another actor who dared to speak up!) and then After 11 1/2 seasons, CBS was sick of dealing with O'Conner as well,and cancled "Archie Bunker's Place" after it's 4th season with decent rattings! (#22 with an 18 share!)

Look at the last season of ODAAT - Bonnie is basicly phoning it in most of the time (and she's only in 20 of the 22 episodes), not to mention CBS moving the show around, not even aring reruns some weeks...and then running it against a top 20 show ("Fall Guy") paried with a left-over show ("Mama Malone") that they needed to burn off. CBS just gave up... (and Mac falling "off the wagon", causing CBS to slot in a "Jefferson's" rerun at the last minute very early in the season didn't help things either!) Truth is, the final season was a mess... (and CBS's fears came true with Mac's issues screwing things up!)

Is it any wonder they didn't pick up "Another Man's Shoes" for the spin-off!

Frankly, There were BETTER actress who could have played Ann...and the one top of my list is Patty Duke-Astin...ok, she's two years younger than Bonnie, but then Ann was slightly older than Bonnie (who was 31 when the show started, and Ann was clearly a little bit older based on the girl's ages!) anyway...and I think Patty could have also passed for slightly older as well.