I really used to love watching Diff'rent Strokes, but for some reason the show seems to have become a lot less funny and enjoyable. The Facts Of Life I think is way better now. Diff'rent Strokes is really childish I think, although it's kind of cool to see Gary grow up, but since Dana died, it doesn't seem funny anymore when you see episodes like when Kimberly and Willis tell Muhammid Ali that Arnold is dead. It's sometime hard to watch the show after her death too. And the cast isn't so nice in real life either....I spoke to Shavar Ross a month ago, and he never sent me his autograph. I'm just saying that Facts Of Life is a lot better, and that I don't know if I want to tape the episodes. No offense to fans of the series, it was cool when I was younger.

------------------
Andrew Carden

well, I grew up watching both shows all the time. I see where you're coming from in a way, but the two shows are really different. DS is one of the flat-out funniest sitcoms ever, FOL was never as funny, but, except for Arnold on DS (let's face it, Conrad Bain had top billing, but Gary IS Diff'rent Strokes) I liked the characters and interaction better on Facts. You watch the characters age 9 years before your eyes, and they grow too. Whereas Arnold remained the cute, cuddly "whatchootalkinboutWillis" all 8 years. But still, Gary was so funny that it doesn't matter.

when I mean "and they grow too", I just noticed that. I didn't mean to mention about Gary's height and kidney problem (as some might take it). I meant that you see characters like Blair age from a 16 year old immature snob to a 25 year old lady with a different outlook on life than she would've if not for Jo, Nat and Tootie.

Yeah, I would agree that "Diff'rent Strokes" hasn't aged well. The scripts are really pretty silly, and the constant moralizing is kind of tough to swallow now that we're older.

Granted, "Facts of Life" had its share of silly scripts and moralizing. But out of all the kid-coms from the 1980s, "Facts" is the one with the best-developed characters and the most talented cast (compare any of the "Facts" characters to Samantha from "Who's the Boss?" or the girls from "Charles in Charge," and you'll see what I mean). And the chemistry between the cast was really wonderful, and helped the show overcome the sometimes-subpar scripts. (I think this is why "The Brady Bunch" remains watchable, too, despite the dumb scripts.)

Put it this way -- who would you rather have hung out with when you were younger: Arnold, Willis, and Kimberly; or Blair, Jo, Tootie, and Natalie?

That's an easy one. I would definately want to hang out with Blair, Jo, Natalie and Tootie!!!

I would have rather hung out with Arnold, Willis, and Kimberly. I don't think I would have liked to have 4 girls as my 'best friends'.

I've gotta disagree with you there, Mr. Moderator TJ.

I mean, if given a chance, I would take the four FoL girls over Arnold, Willis, and Kimberly anyday.

The girls just seemed... nicer. And Cuter!

But I guess I'm just a sucker for a pretty face... or four.

Originally posted by TJ:
I would have rather hung out with Arnold, Willis, and Kimberly. I don't think I would have liked to have 4 girls as my 'best friends'.

I'm with you TJ.

Originally posted by The Obsolete Man:
I've gotta disagree with you there, Mr. Moderator TJ.

I mean, if given a chance, I would take the four FoL girls over Arnold, Willis, and Kimberly anyday.

The girls just seemed... nicer. And Cuter!

But I guess I'm just a sucker for a pretty face... or four.

Me too. The only char. I liked from DS was arnold while with FOL I liked everyoen but Tootie.



------------------
Andy: C'Mon Ms. Garrett, throw us a song.

Ms. G.: Born in the U.S.S.R.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by TJ:
[B]I would have rather hung out with Arnold, Willis, and Kimberly. I don't think I would have liked to have 4 girls as my 'best friends'.

I agree!!!!!!!!!!