Did the great Betty White save TMTMS after Valerie Harper's departure or was she just another cog in a well oiled machine?

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_utkNgv-Y2Iw/TTX5zRQYvgI/AAAAAAAAHPU/w0IEVWUU3yM/s1600/BETTY-WHITE-sueann-thumb-autox379-136080.jpg

Don't think she really saved it, as she was a very different character and didn't see as much screen time as Rhoda did. She WAS expertly played by White, of course, and did add some real malice to the show. Ted was boorish but Sue Ann was downright mean at times, and always self centered and arrogant.

Also, I don't think the show was in any real jeopardy after Harper left. It felt her loss, for sure, but the others were more than capable of carrying on without her.

It's a credit to Betty White that such a nice person was able to so effectively play such a rotten character! :lol:

MTM didn't need saving. That would be saying that viewers only watched because of Rhoda.
However, there definitely was a void after Rhoda left because that left MTM without a close friend. Sue Ann didn't fill that void of a close friend/confidant.
A major reason why I enjoy the early years is because of Mary's and Rhoda's friendship, even though on the negative side there were too many episodes centered around the guest stars and not the cast.

IMO, Betty didn't "save" the show but she surely added a lot to it. Now Lou going, that would have been a blow (on top of Rhoda anyways.)

Mary was wonderful and quite frankly, could hold her own all by herself if she had too.

I always thought of Sue Ann more as a replacement for Phyllis than for Rhoda. But anyway, Betty White was a great addition to the show in the later years.

I wouldn't say that she saved it, but she did add a lot to the show after Rhoda had left. Although Rhoda was one of my favorite characters, everyone on that show was good. One of the few shows where the absence of characters didn't ruin it. The show never needed any saving.

I always thought of Sue Ann more as a replacement for Phyllis than for Rhoda. But anyway, Betty White was a great addition to the show in the later years.
You make a very valid point. Sue Ann was an antagonist for Mary like Phyllis was. Not a friend like Rhoda. And Sue Ann was very good at being an antagonist!!

Yes I agree I saw Sue-Ann as filling the void for Phyllis rather than Rhoda.


Sue was a co-worker rather than a friend to Mary,unlike Rhoda and

Phyllis,who were friends even if Phyllis was self centred.

While Phyllis and Sue Ann were both self centered and easily annoyed Mary, there were a couple big differences between them. For one, Phyllis actually liked Mary and wanted to be around her; she was very jealous of Rhoda because Rhoda's closer friendship with Mary. Sue Ann, on the other hand, was very insecure and, consequently, did not like Mary, only pretended to. She was "friends" with Mary only because everyone else was, not because she desired her friendship.

Also, unlike Sue Ann, I don't think of Phyllis as insecure, just daffy and maybe too lost in space to recognize her own shortcomings. Sue Ann, however, was well aware of her own shortcomings and tried to compensate for them by putting down "better" people, like Mary, or desperately trying to win the affection of others (especially men), even if it meant behaving badly (which Phyllis would never do intentionally).

SueAnn was overused on the show. The show really changed (not for the better) when Rhoda, and later Phyllis left. SueAnn and Georgette had way too much screen time.