The Graduate Part 1 and George Clooney

[geremi]

The Last Episode from Season 7 with George Clooney was The Lady Who Came To Dinner and he was in there for less than 5 minutes, such a huge difference from The Reunion Episode where his character was the main focus. I always wondered why the writers did not put his character in The Graduate Episode since it was Tootie's Graduation where she invited all her friends.

A photo from Gettyimages showed that he was on set to support the cast but was not invited to be on the actual episode. I am glad that he was there in person because not inviting his character was a huge mistake for that particular episode.

https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/n...hoto/138429098

[RetroGuy2000]

Originally Posted by geremi

The Last Episode from Season 7 with George Clooney was The Lady Who Came To Dinner and he was in there for less than 5 minutes, such a huge difference from The Reunion Episode where his character was the main focus. I always wondered why the writers did not put his character in The Graduate Episode since it was Tootie's Graduation where she invited all her friends.

Great observations, Geremi.

I just watched "The Graduate", and you're right: it's odd that George isn't there, since they specifically said all Tootie's friends would be there. Were George and Tootie not friends?

A photo from Gettyimages showed that he was on set to support the cast but was not invited to be on the actual episode. I am glad that he was there in person because not inviting his character was a huge mistake for that particular episode.

https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/n...hoto/138429098

Cool find! And even weirder that he wasn't on the episode itself.

One thing I do like about "The Graduate" episode, and the one after that, with Natalie and Tootie in NYC, is that Mrs. Garrett feels like her old self, giving Tootie good advice about Tootie not getting the role, and (later) recommending bug spray for the apartment.

[80s Dude]

Another photo of George at Tootie's graduation.

[RetroGuy2000]

Another cool photo! The guy behind Kim in the second photo is NBC president Brandon Tartikoff.

[FOL-FAN-ITA]

I guess they didn't care anymore about the character. After his brief appearences in the following season, George is gone for good

[RetroGuy2000]

Originally Posted by FOL-FAN-ITA

I guess they didn't care anymore about the character. After his brief appearences in the following season, George is gone for good

It kind of felt as if they were throwing characters against the wall to see what would stick. George was not fully cooked pasta.

[FOL-FAN-ITA]

Originally Posted by RetroGuy2000

It kind of felt as if they were throwing characters against the wall to see what would stick. George was not fully cooked pasta.

I always found it odd that Andy remained until the end. Nothing against him but his character was a mini-me version of Kevin/George

[RetroGuy2000]

Originally Posted by FOL-FAN-ITA

I always found it odd that Andy remained until the end. Nothing against him but his character was a mini-me version of Kevin/George

I actually feel like he had a stronger reason to hang around at the end than he did at the beginning: at the end, he's been adopted by Beverly Ann: he's legally tied to her home. At the beginning, he's just some weirdo kid hanging around Mrs. Garrett and four much-older girls, with the flimsiest of reasons.

Perhaps they should have made Andy the son of Alex, Mrs. Garrett's irresponsible son. Then he could have been Mrs. Garrett's grandson, and would have had a reason to hang around the shop. Of course, then Mrs. Garrett would have been Andy's lying grandmother in "Write or Wrong", so that episode would have had to have been rewritten, but it needed rewriting anyway.

[valentina warner]

I think they should have kept GEORGE and got rid of URCHIN ANDY: that kid was always in the way, making silly remarks and irritating me!

GEORGE on the other hand was a far better actor, and he could have become a suitor to one of the girls....

[RetroGuy2000]

Originally Posted by valentina warner

I think they should have kept GEORGE and got rid of URCHIN ANDY: that kid was always in the way, making silly remarks and irritating me!

GEORGE on the other hand was a far better actor, and he could have become a suitor to one of the girls....

It's like they halfway executed the 'Suitor George' storyline. They'd hint at the possibility, but then pull it back. I don't know why the writers decided to do this. And there's no payoff, as George leaves after four appearances the following season.

[FOL-FAN-ITA]

Originally Posted by RetroGuy2000

Perhaps they should have made Andy the son of Alex, Mrs. Garrett's irresponsible son. Then he could have been Mrs. Garrett's grandson, and would have had a reason to hang around the shop.

I would have liked it, Granny Garrett

[RetroGuy2000]

Originally Posted by FOL-FAN-ITA

I would have liked it, Granny Garrett

I'm not sure Charlotte would have approved of a "Granny Garrett" moniker. But that would have been a much better way of keeping Andy around, at least at the beginning of Andy's episodes.

[valentina warner]

Originally Posted by FOL-FAN-ITA

I would have liked it, Granny Garrett

That would have made MRS G quite a young granny to ANDY, considering that she was in her fifties when he was like 11 or 12! (my granny was exactly 50 years old when i was born, and nowadays people give birth when they are in their late 30 s or even in their 40 s lol!).

[RetroGuy2000]

Originally Posted by valentina warner

That would have made MRS G quite a young granny to ANDY, considering that she was in her fifties when he was like 11 or 12! (my granny was exactly 50 years old when i was born, and nowadays people give birth when they are in their late 30 s or even in their 40 s lol!).

If Mrs. Garrett was born in 1926, much like Charlotte, then by 1985 (when Andy was first introduced), she was 59. Raymond and Alex would have been between 41 and 30, plenty old enough to have a 12-year-old.

In real life, Joel Brooks (Raymond Garrett) was born in 1949, so he is 23 years younger than Charlotte, and was 36 in 1985. Tom Fitzsimmons (Alex Garrett) was born in 1947, so he was 38 in 1985.

[valentina warner]

Originally Posted by RetroGuy2000

If Mrs. Garrett was born in 1926, much like Charlotte, then by 1985 (when Andy was first introduced), she was 59. Raymond and Alex would have been between 41 and 30, plenty old enough to have a 12-year-old.

In real life, Joel Brooks (Raymond Garrett) was born in 1949, so he is 23 years younger than Charlotte, and was 36 in 1985. Tom Fitzsimmons (Alex Garrett) was born in 1947, so he was 38 in 1985.

Wow! ALEX (Tom Fitzsimmons) is older than RAYMOND???? (Joel Brook): i always thought he was much younger, considering the fact that he was so hot too lol!

Ok, well: if MACKENZIE was born in 1973 and CHARLOTTE in 1926, then she would have been 47 years older than him (therefore old enough to be his granny) but still a young one in my eyes!