I always thought that the Molly's Holiday's episode was originally was suppose to be the season ender for season 1. All the students going home made it seem that they were ready for their summer break. The last aired episode of Dope just seemed like it was out of sequence.

I used to think that years ago, but then I noticed it was their spring break.

MH was actually episode #7 of season 1 in taping order (see "The Facts of Life" Production Guide brilliantly compiled by fellow user hch here (https://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/showthread.php?t=287307)).

But yeah, that would have been neat though having a season finale where the girls are going off their separate ways for the summer break.

It is indeed, as '80s Sitcoms says, their Spring Break. NBC was too cheap to give the series a full 24-episode run, so they only got 13 episodes: not truly long enough to stretch from Fall to Summer.

But I've also read, somewhere, that "Dope" was held back due to its controversial nature. So even though "Molly's Holiday" wasn't originally meant to be the final episode of the season (because we know it was produced much earlier), I think it's possible that some NBC executive saw it and said, 'Let's use this as the season finale, with all the girls departing for the break".

I think both "Molly's Holiday" and "Dope" work equally well for the season finale: in both episodes, we already start to get a bit of a transition to Season Two, with Nancy and Cindy's roles already being pared down in MH, and Molly, Nancy, and Cindy's roles pared down in "Dope" (the only big casting change remaining is Sue Ann being replaced by Jo). Had there been more episodes in Season One, we might have even seen a more gradual reduction in their roles, with a better transition. Instead, we get, "Well, at least 'our group' is back together," with just Mrs. Garrett and four girls hugging. I'll never believe that was a complete coincidence. The producers must have known, by then, that they were culling some students from Eastland. Why else script it that way?

It is indeed, as '80s Sitcoms says, their Spring Break. NBC was too cheap to give the series a full 24-episode run, so they only got 13 episodes: not truly long enough to stretch from Fall to Summer.

But I've also read, somewhere, that "Dope" was held back due to its controversial nature. So even though "Molly's Holiday" wasn't originally meant to be the final episode of the season (because we know it was produced much earlier), I think it's possible that some NBC executive saw it and said, 'Let's use this as the season finale, with all the girls departing for the break".

I think both "Molly's Holiday" and "Dope" work equally well for the season finale: in both episodes, we already start to get a bit of a transition to Season Two, with Nancy and Cindy's roles already being pared down in MH, and Molly, Nancy, and Cindy's roles pared down in "Dope" (the only big casting change remaining is Sue Ann being replaced by Jo). Had there been more episodes in Season One, we might have even seen a more gradual reduction in their roles, with a better transition. Instead, we get, "Well, at least 'our group' is back together," with just Mrs. Garrett and four girls hugging. I'll never believe that was a complete coincidence. The producers must have known, by then, that they were culling some students from Eastland. Why else script it that way?

But why did they end it that way if Molly was the last girl fired and was originally going to be the 4th girl?

Now, if MOLLY was supposed to be the girl number 4: would she have being paired up with BLAIR? (instead of JO)?

But why did they end it that way if Molly was the last girl fired and was originally going to be the 4th girl?

I don't believe she was. I believe a producer told her she was going to still be on the show. Molly interpreted this as "you're still going to be in the opening credits." Then she showed up to the set, and realized it was not something she'd been led to believe. Something similar happened to the original Mark Foster on Step By Step: he's written here on SO that he showed up to the Christmas party, only to find out that he'd been replaced. His agent wasn't honest with him, and it was The Most Awkward Christmas Party Ever.

Now, if MOLLY was supposed to be the girl number 4: would she have being paired up with BLAIR? (instead of JO)?

I don't see Molly as a good foil for Blair: she's the same age (roughly) as Natalie and Tootie*, which makes it odd that they would pair up three younger girls with one older one. It would have been weird to have older, sophisticated Blair being snobby to three younger girls. It would have played very differently.

Also, while Molly did have a Social Justice Warrior thing going on, Molly and Blair rarely if ever clashed during their scenes together. Blair and Sue Ann, Blair and Cindy, and even Blair and Nancy were more likely to clash.


*Tootie, not Kim. We know Kim in real life was a few years younger than even Molly or Mindy.

I don't see Molly as a good foil for Blair: she's the same age (roughly) as Natalie and Tootie*, which makes it odd that they would pair up three younger girls with one older one. It would have been weird to have older, sophisticated Blair being snobby to three younger girls. It would have played very differently.

Also, while Molly did have a Social Justice Warrior thing going on, Molly and Blair rarely if ever clashed during their scenes together. Blair and Sue Ann, Blair and Cindy, and even Blair and Nancy were more likely to clash.


*Tootie, not Kim. We know Kim in real life was a few years younger than even Molly or Mindy.

So it wouldn't have made any sense to have MOLLY on season 2, unless another one of the girls, nearer BLAIR's age would be paired up with her?
CINDY would have been a great foil for BLAIR (they already clashed on the episode 'rough housing') though.....:lol:

I don't see Molly as a good foil for Blair: she's the same age (roughly) as Natalie and Tootie*, which makes it odd that they would pair up three younger girls with one older one. It would have been weird to have older, sophisticated Blair being snobby to three younger girls. It would have played very differently.

Also, while Molly did have a Social Justice Warrior thing going on, Molly and Blair rarely if ever clashed during their scenes together. Blair and Sue Ann, Blair and Cindy, and even Blair and Nancy were more likely to clash.


*Tootie, not Kim. We know Kim in real life was a few years younger than even Molly or Mindy.

There was only a year (15 months) age difference between Molly and Kim. 3 years between Kim and Mindy.

I don't believe she was. I believe a producer told her she was going to still be on the show. Molly interpreted this as "you're still going to be in the opening credits." Then she showed up to the set, and realized it was not something she'd been led to believe. Something similar happened to the original Mark Foster on Step By Step: he's written here on SO that he showed up to the Christmas party, only to find out that he'd been replaced. His agent wasn't honest with him, and it was The Most Awkward Christmas Party Ever.

What was the name of the original Mark Foster?

What was the name of the original Mark Foster?

Jarrett Lennon Kaufman, and he discusses what happened to him on SBS in this thread (https://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/showthread.php?t=318506). Lorimar and I got all the juicy details at that time. (Of course, we hadn't yet learned of the Angela Watson drama, yet).

So it wouldn't have made any sense to have MOLLY on season 2, unless another one of the girls, nearer BLAIR's age would be paired up with her?
CINDY would have been a great foil for BLAIR (they already clashed on the episode 'rough housing') though.....:lol:

I feel as though Cindy would have been a better foil for Blair than Molly. Still, Cindy, too, was a couple of years younger than Blair.

In real life, Nancy McKeon was two years younger than Lisa, yet she looked considerably older. Maybe it was her height, or something else, but she could easily pass for 15 or 16, while I don't think Julie Anne could have.

Jarrett Lennon Kaufman, and he discusses what happened to him on SBS in this thread (https://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/showthread.php?t=318506). Lorimar and I got all the juicy details at that time. (Of course, we hadn't yet learned of the Angela Watson drama, yet).

Haha very juicy indeed ;)

This is another source that said that Molly was the last to be fired. This is the transcript from a documentary called TV Guide's Behind the Sitcoms. A producer of the show said that Felice and the Julies were fired first and then the next decision was to decide which preteen to keep, Kim or Molly. http://www.televisionhits.com/factsoflife/transcripts/tvguide.html?fbclid=IwAR1oE0w0U3iNk97vOSNFZe9yuspk_orRBtnyvHHaD4WSjKkcn7MPBeP5lCA

This is another source that said that Molly was the last to be fired. This is the transcript from a documentary called TV Guide's Behind the Sitcoms. A producer of the show said that Felice and the Julies were fired first and then the next decision was to decide which preteen to keep, Kim or Molly. http://www.televisionhits.com/factsoflife/transcripts/tvguide.html?fbclid=IwAR1oE0w0U3iNk97vOSNFZe9yuspk_orRBtnyvHHaD4WSjKkcn7MPBeP5lCA

Thanks for the link! Actually, Felice is never even mentioned in that transcript: only Molly, Julie, and Julie Anne. (There's also no mention of Jenny O'Hara or John Lawlor).

That transcript also uses the "f"-word: "fired", while Molly insists she was simply "let go".

The Truth Behind the Sitcoms again relies on the old chestnut that there were "too many girls" at a girls' school, even though many successful shows with large school casts (6+ kids) have been successful, even hugely so.

John Bowab also mentions he feels like Molly had a conspiracy theory about her being "let go": You know I liked Molly, I think that there was a feeling that all of us conspired in to let her go."

I feel as though Cindy would have been a better foil for Blair than Molly. Still, Cindy, too, was a couple of years younger than Blair.

In real life, Nancy McKeon was two years younger than Lisa, yet she looked considerably older. Maybe it was her height, or something else, but she could easily pass for 15 or 16, while I don't think Julie Anne could have.

Actually, CINDY was only a year younger than BLAIR: 14 and the other 15.:talk:

Actually, CINDY was only a year younger than BLAIR: 14 and the other 15.:talk:

In real life Lisa is 2 years younger than Julie Ann. I remember when the show was on, Lisa was listed as being born in 1965. Now it's listed as she was born in 1963.

I don't believe she was. I believe a producer told her she was going to still be on the show. Molly interpreted this as "you're still going to be in the opening credits." Then she showed up to the set, and realized it was not something she'd been led to believe. Something similar happened to the original Mark Foster on Step By Step: he's written here on SO that he showed up to the Christmas party, only to find out that he'd been replaced. His agent wasn't honest with him, and it was The Most Awkward Christmas Party Ever.

Step by Step had what? 6 kids, 3 adults, and Cody. That is 10 characters and yet they managed to fit everything in a half hour format. Did all the child actors get equal air time and lines count? No. Some were going to be the stars and others had supporting roles. All the actors seemed OK with that. Most of them appeared to have gotten along with one another. No one complained about them having too many characters.

In real life Lisa is 2 years younger than Julie Ann. I remember when the show was on, Lisa was listed as being born in 1965. Now it's listed as she was born in 1963.

No, there is no Julie who is two years older than Lisa. Here are the real actresses' ages, in descending order:

Julie Piekarski - January 3, 1963
Lisa Whelchel - May 29, 1963
Felice Schachter - November 17, 1963
Julie Anne Haddock - April 3, 1965
Nancy McKeon - April 4, 1966
Mindy Cohn - May 20, 1966
Molly Ringwald - February 18, 1968
Kim Fields - May 12, 1969

(Regardless of their real ages, Nancy McKeon and Kim Fields were playing older than their real-life ages.)

Step by Step had what? 6 kids, 3 adults, and Cody. That is 10 characters and yet they managed to fit everything in a half hour format. Did all the child actors get equal air time and lines count? No. Some were going to be the stars and others had supporting roles. All the actors seemed OK with that. Most of them appeared to have gotten along with one another. No one complained about them having too many characters.

I totally agree with you that it should have been pretty easy to fit ten people on a half-hour sitcom. Many other shows have done it successfully. Not just '90s sitcoms, either. Think of The Brady Bunch, which had nine main characters.

Toward the end of Step by Step, the character of Brendan Lambert disappeared, but that was only during the last season or two. Step By Step remains a much better model for how shows with large casts can be handled. "Too many girls" is a lame excuse.

No, there is no Julie who is two years older than Lisa. Here are the real actresses' ages, in descending order:

Julie Piekarski - January 3, 1963
Lisa Whelchel - May 29, 1963
Felice Schachter - November 17, 1963
Julie Anne Haddock - April 3, 1965
Nancy McKeon - April 4, 1966
Mindy Cohn - May 20, 1966
Molly Ringwald - February 18, 1968
Kim Fields - May 12, 1969

(Regardless of their real ages, Nancy McKeon and Kim Fields were playing older than their real-life ages.)

I met the other way around in that Julie Ann Haddock was 2 years younger than Lisa. As I mentioned above, she played her real age on the show.

Speaking of Birthdays, our Molly's birthday is tomorrow.

Looking back at the production dates, Molly's Holiday was done before Christmas so it may have been the Christmas break that they were headed out for. As discussed in another thread, Molly does appear shorter in this episode than she was in earlier aired episodes, but the episodes were taped about 3 months after Molly's Holiday was taped.

Looking back at the production dates, Molly's Holiday was done before Christmas so it may have been the Christmas break that they were headed out for.

No, it was spring break. Taping schedule doesn't match up with what the time of year is in an episode. Christmas episodes of sitcoms are often taped in the fall because they have to be ahead of schedule for editing, mastering, music/sound, etc.