Among the girls who were cut out to make room for Jo after the first season, who (had Jo not been added) deserved to stay? I guess it would seem the most logical (at least in hindsight) to keep Molly considering Molly Ringwald's subsequent movie success. Although apparently, Molly in real life wound up actually quitting in order to try a movie career. Cindy in a way, seemed like a prototype of Jo (sans the tough Bronx exterior) considering that both were the resident tomboys among the crew.

i voted for sun ann i always liked her

I voted Sue Ann to. I thought she brought life to the show.
Nancy (Felice) was pretty but I don't know if she could added much more to the show. Molly was okay but I actually remember them saying on E True Hollywood She was leaving anyways to start a movie career. Or something to that extent. Cindy was kind of a pre Jo.

Sue Ann is my favorite of those four. She would be my 2nd favorite overall after Blair.

I agree with everyone. Sue Ann would have been my choice over Tootie but I see why they kept Tootie since Sue Ann and Blair are really similar. Cindy was my second favorite, Nancy was my third and Molly was my fourth.

Sue Ann...all the way.
They should have dumped Mindy Cohn in favor of Julie P. but since Charlotte Rae discovered Cohn they probably didn't want to make her mad.

I liked all of those girls except for Molly Parker - the character was beyond annoying. But Molly Ringwald ended up becoming John Hughes' leading lady of choice, so obviously everything worked out OK for everyone.

It sure did. Especially since the addition of Jo helped bring the show from the bottom of the barrel.

Cindy. I felt she was a perfect foil to Blair, but then again, they wouldn't have Jo. Nancy was useless plotwise, Molly was annoying at times, and Sue Ann was snarky.

Did Nancy even have a life outside of talking to Roger on the phone non-stop???

The show had no idea what it wanted to be during Season 1. The cast was overloaded (Imagine if they kept Jenny O'Hara for the entire season!) and they tried too hard to hit every demographic as far as casting the girls.

They obviously realized this and decided to go in a different direction with Season 2 and while it's hard to criticize what they did, I'm not sure if I'd have gone in the same direction.

Perhaps because I tend to enjoy shows that skew to a somewhat older cast I would have kept Schachter, Piekarski and obviously Whelchel. I would've kept Mindy Cohn on as well and dispersed with the younger actors.

It's obvious that what the producers tried to do was both trim down and diversify the cast. They kept one of the three "Charlie's Angels", one of the younger set and Cohn. It's only with this logic that the decision not to retain Piekarski and to a lesser degree Schachter makes any sense.

It's also interesting to think where television has gone as far as casting has gone as far as shows aimed at a teenage audience. Does anyone think that if a show was facing a similar dilemma today that Julie Piekarski and Felice Schachter would even get near the chopping block?

I liked Sue Ann the most out of the girls that didn't get to stay.

I'm kind of surprised at the large positive response Sue Ann is getting. It seems like, either on this board or the YouTube comments, Sue Ann and the actress who plays her get a lot of criticism. I noticed because Sue Ann happens to be my favorite of the girls who were cut. (Although I think Jo makes a much better pairing with Blair.)

I'm kind of surprised at the large positive response Sue Ann is getting. It seems like, either on this board or the YouTube comments, Sue Ann and the actress who plays her get a lot of criticism. I noticed because Sue Ann happens to be my favorite of the girls who were cut. (Although I think Jo makes a much better pairing with Blair.)



Yeah,I liked Sue ann a great deal.Don't get me wrong she's no Jo.But she was a talented actress.You're right though Jo and Blaire combination couldn't be beat.Wish Blaire would of stayed a little tougher though.Like in the first season.

I'm kind of surprised at the large positive response Sue Ann is getting. It seems like, either on this board or the YouTube comments, Sue Ann and the actress who plays her get a lot of criticism. I noticed because Sue Ann happens to be my favorite of the girls who were cut. (Although I think Jo makes a much better pairing with Blair.)

What is so frustrating about the Sue Ann/Blair relationship is how poorly defined it was. It was almost as if the writers saw potential in the pairing but they had no idea whether the two should be friends, antagonists or somewhere in between.

One episode, they are at each other's throats, the next they are referring to each other as "best friends". I think if they just allowed Julie to play a straight protagonist while having Blair as an antagonist the pairing would've been as effective as the Blair/Jo pairing. But instead they made Sue Ann far too dippy and Blair far too strong an antagonist as nobody ever really got the better of her until Jo came along. I really think they wasted an opportunity as did they with Felice obviously.

What is so frustrating about the Sue Ann/Blair relationship is how poorly defined it was. It was almost as if the writers saw potential in the pairing but they had no idea whether the two should be friends, antagonists or somewhere in between.

One episode, they are at each other's throats, the next they are referring to each other as "best friends". I think if they just allowed Julie to play a straight protagonist while having Blair as an antagonist the pairing would've been as effective as the Blair/Jo pairing. But instead they made Sue Ann far too dippy and Blair far too strong an antagonist as nobody ever really got the better of her until Jo came along. I really think they wasted an opportunity as did they with Felice obviously.



My thoughts exactly pretty much.

What is so frustrating about the Sue Ann/Blair relationship is how poorly defined it was. It was almost as if the writers saw potential in the pairing but they had no idea whether the two should be friends, antagonists or somewhere in between.

One episode, they are at each other's throats, the next they are referring to each other as "best friends". I think if they just allowed Julie to play a straight protagonist while having Blair as an antagonist the pairing would've been as effective as the Blair/Jo pairing. But instead they made Sue Ann far too dippy and Blair far too strong an antagonist as nobody ever really got the better of her until Jo came along. I really think they wasted an opportunity as did they with Felice obviously.

The thought just struck me though that at my high school back in the 70s, the Sue Ann/Blair type of relationship between girls like that was more likely than the Blair/Jo relationship. A real life Blair and Jo probably would have ignored each other and stayed within their own circle of friends.

A sitcom or any other type of entertainment doesn't have to been like real life though to be entertaining. If the girls were real life teenagers in my neighborhood, the only one I would even remotely like would be Natalie and yet Natalie isn't my favorite character.

I really think they wasted an opportunity as did they with Felice obviously.[/QUOTE]


DarkDante, please clarify this sentence.

I truly hope that the next time a 'Facts' reunion occurs, these four girls, Mackenzie Astin, Sherrie Austin, and George Clooney are involved as well.

None of them.

Although apparently, Molly in real life wound up actually quitting in order to try a movie career.

That is not true. Molly was devastated at being cut from the show, and she was very bitter about it for years (check out interviews with her back then). She was very hurt at the time, and the movie career only happened after she was cut from the series.


They should have dumped Mindy Cohn in favor of Julie P.

Yeah,I liked Sue ann a great deal she was a talented actress.

No way. Mindy was naturally talented. Julie P. was obviously NOT.


The cast was overloaded (Imagine if they kept Jenny O'Hara for the entire season!)

Not it was not. The cast was just right. The writers just did not know how to write scripts which balanced out the characters. Series have been successful with many characters: Head of the Class and Cheers, for example (albeit the latter added characters gradually). I've always thought it was a poor excuse to say the cast was too large or "there were too many girls". And they really should have kept Jenny O'Hara as Miss Mahoney. It was so refreshing for Mrs. Garrett to have a fellow female adult confidant to bond with, and for Charlotte to have a fellow adult actress to play off of.

And while Cindy is my favorite of the lost girls, if Jo had not come along I would say the series should have held on to either Cindy or Molly. A tomboy and a feminist are wonderful contrasting complements to the clown, the innocent, and the princess. lol I would only consider Sue Ann if she were played by a different actress who could act naturally. And Nancy wasn't defined enough to make any lasting impression to be retained for the series.