Gloria was one of the most boring and annoying characters on the show. She never was funny just immature and always crying like a little girl. Gloria scenes with Mike were not entertaining and her scenes with Archie wasn't funny either. On the other had Mike and Edith brought the best out of Archie. Also George, Henry, Irene Lionel, and Frank played off Archie very well. There was always a funny moment with those characters interacting with Archie. But Louise and Gloria just didn't do it for me. I feel if a certain character didn't have any chemistry with the main character then they ADDED NOTHING TO THE SHOW Like Louise Jefferson and Gloria Stivic.



PS-Gloria and Louise would be the Punter on a Championship Football Team. Meaning they would be a apart of a successful team but really did not contribute to the success

I loudly disagreed with that. Gloria added a lot to the show especially in the later years as she matured. If you watched Episode #111, The Very Moving Day, when Gloria announced she is pregnant. The scene between her and Archie was very powerful and moving that it brings a person to tears. Her tender moments with Archie was real and it came across genuine.

Another great Gloria moment was when Edith did not want to go identify the man who attempted to rape her. Gloria displayed tough love to get her mother to go to the police. That scene was very powerful.

Louise added a lot to the show as well. It gave Edith a close friend to hang out with and to be somewhat of a sounding board with the craziness in her household. Frankly Louise was a lot funnier in All In the Family than she was on The Jeffersons. I found Louise Jefferson on The Jeffersons very boring and uninteresting.

The four principals of the show: Carroll O'Connor, Jean Stapleton, Rob Reiner and Sally Struthers each brought a lot to the show and it was not the same after Reiner and Struthers left. Too bad they did not pull the plug then. If the plug was pulled that season it would had been ranked up there as one of the best series finales.

Originally posted by mstewart
I loudly disagreed with that. Gloria added a lot to the show especially in the later years as she matured. If you watched Episode #111, The Very Moving Day, when Gloria announced she is pregnant. The scene between her and Archie was very powerful and moving that it brings a person to tears. Her tender moments with Archie was real and it came across genuine.

Another great Gloria moment was when Edith did not want to go identify the man who attempted to rape her. Gloria displayed tough love to get her mother to go to the police. That scene was very powerful.

Louise added a lot to the show as well. It gave Edith a close friend to hang out with and to be somewhat of a sounding board with the craziness in her household. Frankly Louise was a lot funnier in All In the Family than she was on The Jeffersons. I found Louise Jefferson on The Jeffersons very boring and uninteresting.

The four principals of the show: Carroll O'Connor, Jean Stapleton, Rob Reiner and Sally Struthers each brought a lot to the show and it was not the same after Reiner and Struthers left. Too bad they did not pull the plug then. If the plug was pulled that season it would had been ranked up there as one of the best series finales.



Well since 'm a fan of comedy, neither Louise or Gloria added any humor. They may have added something else but not humor. Maybe my post should have said DID Gloria or Louise add any HUMOR to the Show

Characters don't all have to add humor to the shows. There are what are called "straight guys" that are used to be the object of the joke or bounce off the other characters. Without Gloria, there would be no Mike! The only alternative would be to have Archie and Edith have Mike as their son, and have Mike and Archie have a very difficult parent/child relationship--with Mike having all his political and other strong opinions--and the two of them arguing for the half hour continually. That would bore me. The female characters, in my opinion, were there to point our their husband's flaws, be the voices of reason a good bit of the time, and to "soften" the show a little. It is called "All In The FAMILY" after all. The show without EDITH? Oh my...no way. She had some of the best lines! The Gloria character was another that had to struggle to find itself. The early episodes actually had Gloria as rather bright. Then, they dumbed her down.

Originally posted by Viola_Fuss
Characters don't all have to add humor to the shows. There are what are called "straight guys" that are used to be the object of the joke or bounce off the other characters. Without Gloria, there would be no Mike! The only alternative would be to have Archie and Edith have Mike as their son, and have Mike and Archie have a very difficult parent/child relationship--with Mike having all his political and other strong opinions--and the two of them arguing for the half hour continually. That would bore me. The female characters, in my opinion, were there to point our their husband's flaws, be the voices of reason a good bit of the time, and to "soften" the show a little. It is called "All In The FAMILY" after all. The show without EDITH? Oh my...no way. She had some of the best lines! The Gloria character was another that had to struggle to find itself. The early episodes actually had Gloria as rather bright. Then, they dumbed her down.


Edith had her funny lines but Gloria had NONE. very dull charcter

In a way, you are right.

Gloria was a vehicle for bringing Mike into the picture. Because the relationship with the father and the son in law is naturally going to be the most volatile.

Louise was a natural part of George Jefferson's family, so in a way she would need to be featured as much as George was. But she was also a kind of counterpart to Edith. Although having similarities to Edith meant that she was sometimes riding on Edith's coattails, which was not necessarily a bad thing.

I noticed that the original George was played by a different actor. His character was originally just a way for Archie to react to something. But eventually they found a much funnier actor to play George and go to his own spinoff show.

Originally posted by richheart
In a way, you are right.

Gloria was a vehicle for bringing Mike into the picture. Because the relationship with the father and the son in law is naturally going to be the most volatile.

Louise was a natural part of George Jefferson's family, so in a way she would need to be featured as much as George was. But she was also a kind of counterpart to Edith. Although having similarities to Edith meant that she was sometimes riding on Edith's coattails, which was not necessarily a bad thing.

I noticed that the original George was played by a different actor. His character was originally just a way for Archie to react to something. But eventually they found a much funnier actor to play George and go to his own spinoff show.


The other actor didn't play George Jefferson, he played Henry Jefferson. And why do you think Sherman Hemsley was funnier than the guy who played Henry Jefferson?

First of all, not to jump off topic, but a good punter adds alot to a successful football team.

Originally posted by Brian Damage
First of all, not to jump off topic, but a good punter adds alot to a successful football team.


Yeah the Punter has a important role but not a Large Role. Just like Louise and Gloria were on All in the Family. Both had important roles but they were not really Largre Roles. Meaning that people didn't tune in every week to see Gloria and Louise. It was Archie, And when I look at the football game today it will be to see the QB, RB and Defense, NOT THE PUNTER

At least you corrected yourself.

I guess I haven't seen enough of the show to understand why there were two Jeffersons. I know that one was the brother or brother in law.

Sherman Helmsley was great. He was good enough to warrant his own show. He was a kind of black counterpart to Archie. His financial financial fortune was funny also, because Archie was probably bothered by it.

Dean Martin probably did not add much to the team of Martin and Lewis. But Jerry Lewis obviously thought he was important enough to be a part of his team.

Sometimes a straight man is needed for the main performer to be effective.

Originally posted by richheart
I guess I haven't seen enough of the show to understand why there were two Jeffersons. I know that one was the brother or brother in law.

Sherman Helmsley was great. He was good enough to warrant his own show. He was a kind of black counterpart to Archie. His financial financial fortune was funny also, because Archie was probably bothered by it.


Well there were Two different Jeffersons because


From 1971 to 1973, There was no George Jefferson, it was said on the show that George refuses to step foot inside a white man's house. So from 71-73, George was only mentioned not seen. So instead of Louise visting the Bunkers with her husband, it was her brother in law Henry Jefferson who hated Achie too. Then in the Fall of 1973, THe guy who plays Henry leaves the show and now Sherman Hemsley joins the cast. So George Jefferson was finally seen inside the Bunkers House in the episode-Henry's Fsrewell. I still don't know what made George such a instant hit.

He may not have been an instant hit, depending on how you look at it. It could be that they spent a lot of time creating his character and/or finding an actor to fill the role. It was like they were adding another major player to the show.

Originally posted by Sitcom Analyzer
Then in the Fall of 1973, THe guy who plays Henry leaves the show and now Sherman Hemsley joins the cast. So George Jefferson was finally seen inside the Bunkers House in the episode-Henry's Fsrewell. I still don't know what made George such a instant hit.

Maybe because we'd heard about him, but never actually seen him. Then he's there in our faces in all his glory. Henry bored me. George was a spitfire. His reluctance to associate with Archie was as strong as Archie's reluctance to socialize with him! It's this tension and blatent stupidity of both men that makes that chemistry between Archie and George so unique. Slightly OT, I had no idea that Isabel Sanford was so much older than Sherman! They look age-compatible on AITF, and I don't recall any references to Weezie being older than George, either on AITF or The Jeffersons.

Originally posted by Viola_Fuss
Maybe because we'd heard about him, but never actually seen him. Then he's there in our faces in all his glory. Henry bored me. George was a spitfire. His reluctance to associate with Archie was as strong as Archie's reluctance to socialize with him! It's this tension and blatent stupidity of both men that makes that chemistry between Archie and George so unique. Slightly OT, I had no idea that Isabel Sanford was so much older than Sherman! They look age-compatible on AITF, and I don't recall any references to Weezie being older than George, either on AITF or The Jeffersons.



Why did Henry bore you? And yes it was hard to believe that Sherman Hemsley was only 35 years old when he first appeared on All in the Family. When I first saw the Jeffersons at the age of 13, always thought Sherman was in his early 50's.

If he was really that young, they must have made him up to look older. It's been done before...

- Estelle Getty on Golden Girls

- Irene (Grannie) whatever on Beverly Hillbillies.

- Father Merrick in the Exorcist

Originally posted by richheart
If he was really that young, they must have made him up to look older. It's been done before...

- Estelle Getty on Golden Girls

- Irene (Grannie) whatever on Beverly Hillbillies.

- Father Merrick in the Exorcist


The strange thing abot George Jefferson was he became younger as the Years went on. In 1973 he looked 53 and in 1985 he looked 41. In 85 he was less gray. He was more gray when he first appeared on All in the Family. And then the gray decreased bit by bit from 73-85