Along the lines of this thread about music

https://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/showthread.php?p=6275050#post6275050

does anyone have any bad reviews of shows that went on to have long successful runs? I think TVFactFan and his endless access to old newspapers could be quite useful here.

Tracked down a Seinfeld one from 1990

>>>Seinfeld, which had a trial one-shot last year as The Seinfeld Chronicles, is slated to run for three more weeks on NBC. That should be enough. — Richard Hack<<<

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/general-news/seinfeld-first-episodes-tv-review-804735/

Tracked down a Seinfeld one from 1990

>>>Seinfeld, which had a trial one-shot last year as The Seinfeld Chronicles, is slated to run for three more weeks on NBC. That should be enough. — Richard Hack<<<

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/general-news/seinfeld-first-episodes-tv-review-804735/He did have a point about Kevin Dunn. Seinfeld got numerous guest/recurring actors who were better than him.

seems there was review/s of comedy (long running tv series/show /gimme a

break) on the g a break..wiki internet pg (bottom of pg).the show did have


some very funny episodes...good cast (famous singer had been in a music


group),good writers.....good


producers.....directors...show had singing......characters grew up.....many


interesting types of stories.new characters were added..as time went on...


one of the main actors died...started watching reruns ...show was a hit !! 1st



episode was very interesting.storylines -diff stories about social topics in

society.

Here’s some I Love Lucy negativity from 1951, but it’s not a complete hatchet job

>>> I’m a little depressed about the whole thing because it continues a radio formula — and especially a state of mind about husbands — which had outgrown its usefulness long before television was very important.

The show, I’m forced to concede, is very competently put together, is written almost too professionally (which is to say, cynically, and, as long as Miss Ball is in there, it’ll always have quite a few laughs in it. But I think it’s a terrible waste of her talents and her husband’s. The endless cliches into which these people are thrust, and what I’m afraid is the spirit of contempt or, at very least. indifference toward television which seems to imbue the actors, robs them of a great deal of their personality and of their appeal.<<<


To read the whole article go here
https://clickamericana.com/media/television-shows/i-love-lucy-debuts-and-a-leading-critic-hates-it-1951

and scroll down till you see the sub headline

When I Love Lucy debuted, a leading TV critic hated it (1951)

I posted a Negative Review for Jeffersons in Chicago Tribune but realized it was a article from season 2 when the Jeffersons started to struggle. I will post another

I have no links to provide, but The Beverly Hillbillies seemed to generate a loooong string of negative reviews from TV critics of the day. I am sure that one, or two, or five hundred of them can be found online!

cd

I have no links to provide, but The Beverly Hillbillies seemed to generate a loooong string of negative reviews from TV critics of the day. I am sure that one, or two, or five hundred of them can be found online!

cd

I was thinking that about Threes Company, that all the “high brow” critics must have hated it. All I can find though is The Hollywood Reporter review of the first episode, not a rave but not really a rip.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/tv/tv-news/threes-company-review-1977-tv-show-1094425/

I was thinking that about Threes Company, that all the “high brow” critics must have hated it. All I can find though is The Hollywood Reporter review of the first episode, not a rave but not really a rip.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/tv/tv-news/threes-company-review-1977-tv-show-1094425/

I am not coming across many reviews for Three's Company since it was a short mid-season run with only 4 eps.

I posted a Negative Review for Jeffersons in Chicago Tribune but realized it was a article from season 2 when the Jeffersons started to struggle. I will post another

From The Hollywood Reporter in 1975 on the first episode (the only source I can easily find online). They didn’t like it but saw the potential of it.

>>>The Jeffersons, a contrived show full of forced humor where everybody yells at everyone else in a totally unrealistic way — yet I have the feeling the show will work in spite of itself.

If you look through all of the mistakes that were made in this episode such as exaggerated direction and writing people like cartoon characters, you see that somewhere there are believable people and a real situation. Hopefully someone will fix it.<<<

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/general-news/jeffersons-first-episode-1975-review-736454/

Found a negative review from Pittsburgh Press, Jan 28 1975

The NY Times did not like the first episode of One Day At A Time, although it did call the cast appealing.

>>>The format is hardly fresh. Take one unattached adult (divorced or widowed, cf., “Fay,” “Phyllis,” “Joe and Sons,” “Three for the Road,” the upcoming “Popi,” and so forth), and add an assortment of children for plot machinations. But a lack of fresh formats has never bothered commercial television. The problem with “One Day at a Time” goes somewhat deeper, at least as far as the thin veneer beneath its thin veneer.<<<

Hopefully the link works as sometimes the Times gets stuck behind a paywall

https://www.nytimes.com/1975/12/16/archives/tv-one-day-at-a-time-norman-lears-latest-situation-comedy-begins.html

Found a negative review from Pittsburgh Press, Jan 28 1975

What a horrible picture of Sherman Hemsley. And they mis-spelled his last name in the picture caption.

What a horrible picture of Sherman Hemsley. And they mis-spelled his last name in the picture caption.


I didnt even catch the misspelled:lol: