If The Facts of Life kept one more girl from the first season, who would it be?

[nancyrulz]

I picked Cindy...I just thought her character was pretty cool.

[Classic FOL Fanatic]

Sue Ann

[DustBunny]

I voted for Molly Parker.

[PhoenixMcKeonism]

Molly Ringwald....... at least until 16 candles and all that happened....... I dig her, she has style

[satindoll]

Sue Ann would have been a good choice.

[candycandy]

Originally Posted by threeone2002

Sue Ann, her and Blair loved to get into it and can you imagine Sue Ann and Jo together tag teaming Blair, we can only imagine how funny that would have been.

That s a pretty tough one but i d pick SUE ANN too: she was kind but loved to tease too (although i d see her becoming closer to TOOTIE & NAT, not so much JO & BLAIR); CINDY would be my next choice & she d definitely be on JO s side!(in fact, she d probably love to torment BLAIR + make her jealous by developing a crush on JO); NANCY would be more likely to have a "rivalry" relationship with BLAIR (they d probably steal each other s boyfriends lol); Lastly, MOLLY is the only 1 i don t see in the show at all (she s be out of place since she s too much of a goody too shoes).......

[SneakerBoom]

Originally Posted by hawaii five-o

I voted for Sue Ann. She always kind of reminded me of Mary Ann on "Gilligan's Island", a wholesome farm girl. And she always enjoyed putting Blair in her place.

She was like Mary Ann, but not as good looking.

[SneakerBoom]

Originally Posted by Impressions

I like Sue Ann a lot but if I were forced to pick which one I would keep for the second season it would be Nancy Olson, because it seemed like some of the characters were very similar to each other for example Sue Ann was a lot like Blair, Cindy was a lot like Jo and Molly was a lot like Tootie so I think Nancy balanced it out, IMO and I like characters that have there own distinct characteristics. The reason why I chose Nancy is because she is a very talented actress and yet she was very attractive and beautiful, I would've liked her to have more screen time during the first season because you would usually only see her in scenes while she was on the phone with her boyfriend, Roger or with very few speaking parts, so I think if she stayed for the remainder of the series, she wouldn't have been so underated like when she was as a regular in season 1, however it was nice to see her again when she appeared as an extra in the second season.

Is it possible that Felice Schachter was fired because her character had the same first name as Nancy McKeon????

[RetroGuy2000]

Resurrecting this old thread to vote for Cindy. They were all really good, and any one of them could have done a great job, but Cindy seemed to offer more possibilities.

She had the gymnastics thing going on. Imagine an episode where she's pushed past her limit by a gym coach, or her own expectations. Imagine all the possibilities they could have had with Jo and Cindy playing sports. And Julie Anne Haddock was a good foil for the snobby Blair character, which they softened in the second season.

[Impressions]

10 years later....I would say Molly! She would have made a great wildcard to the cast. There was really nothing very interesting about Nancy, she was too one-dimensional. All I knew about her was her obsession with Roger, beauty and doing well at school.

[RetroGuy2000]

Originally Posted by Impressions

10 years later....I would say Molly! She would have made a great wildcard to the cast. There was really nothing very interesting about Nancy, she was too one-dimensional. All I knew about her was her obsession with Roger, beauty and doing well at school.

But how was Molly three-dimensional?

We know Nancy did well at school, was obsessed with Roger, and liked Mikhail Baryshnikov... in fact, she was in general completely boy-crazy. She would do anything to attract a boy's eye. We know she was a scholarship student, she starred in the school play, and had the highest IQ of all the girls at Eastland Academy.

Molly... was a (IMO not very good) musician and activist. And... well...

[Impressions]

Molly Ringwald had some acting chops, it's just too bad she had to leave to pursue a film career I think if the writers developed and added some more dimension to her character, I think she would have the most potential.

Lisa Whelchel was better at being narcissistic, snobby, and boy-crazy than Felice Schacter. Nancy McKeon is still better than Julie Ann Haddock and Julie Piekarski combined.

I think the writers made the right choice though. If they still added another character from season one to the show, it just wouldn't have been good.

[wiseguy182]

You know, given how awful the first season was, I'm surprised so many people are talking about it, especially to this day, more than 30 years later. It's important to keep in mind that the show was retooled for a reason. The first season was, quite simply, atrocious, and the retool saw a better set, a better theme song and many other improvements. I also found Mrs. Garrett to be completely annoying in the first season as most of her time was spent squabbling with Mr. Bradley. Getting into constant arguments with your boss is a good way to get shown the door. The show went from #74 in the ratings in its first season, to #26 in the second season, after they got rid of the dead weight.

That being said, the one thing I didn't like about the retool was the addition of Nancy McKeon. A little too tough for my liking, I found her constant threats of physical abuse and getting in people's faces (literally) to be too off-putting. She also got into too much trouble and was too immature for her age. I'll cast a vote for Cindy Webster (Julie Anne Haddock) to be put in Jo's place and stick around. I thought she was likeable, athletic, and tough while still being feminine, and if they would have wrote her as a lesbian (which seemed to be the direction they were going) it would have made for groundbreaking t.v. for the time.

My thoughts on other characters:

Sue Ann ~ why is she winning this poll? SHE SUCKS! I've talked about her at length in the thread "Did FOL drop the ball with the Sue Ann character" so I won't repeat it here. It's just a few threads down from this one. I found her "holier than thou" attitude to be really grating.

Nancy Olson ~ boooooorrrrrriiiiiinnnnnnggg. Roger this, Roger that. Had the personality of a dried up prune. Good riddance, she sucked. There was also another character with the same name on another NBC series around this time (Little House on the Prairie), so perhaps it was too confusing for some.

Molly ~ She was supposed to stick around and deserved to. Her character might have changed as she got older, and perhaps that was for the better, but this was Molly friggin Ringwald, so they should have done something with her. I personally think having a liberal character was good for the show as its run was roughly parallel to that of Reagan's presidency, timewise. And man, did that joker spare no opportunity to tell us how evil his former party supposedly was. She was also a redhead, so it would have been a nice balance for the show.

Mr. Bradley ~ I actually found him to be pretty likeable, even though he was cast out to be the quasi-villain of the show. The guy sacrificed his vacation in one episode to solve a problem for the girls, and in another he risked his life to help out Blair, Tootie and their pets. I don't know why Mrs. G. constantly thought of him as a backwards empty suit.

Miss Emily Mahoney ~ sucked. I started a thread on her, it's still on the first page.

I also agree it would have been nice to see more of Kimberly Drummond.

[RetroGuy2000]

Originally Posted by wiseguy182

The show went from #74 in the ratings in its first season, to #26 in the second season, after they got rid of the dead weight.

The ratings improving has been attributed to better scripts/acting over the years, but to be honest, during the first season, FOL was scheduled against the hits "Fantasy Island" and "The Incredible Hulk". There was no way it was going to be a ratings success going up against two hit shows.

In season two, FOL was moved to Wednesdays directly after Diff'rent Strokes, its parent show, where you'd expect a spin-off to be. It was scheduled against a CBS made-for-TV movie and "Soap" in its final season. It was an easy night for a ratings victory, and having the lead-in from a well-established related show helped, too.

Add to that fact that NBC only ordered 13 episodes of season one, spread out over a full year (while season two was 16 episodes during 5 months) meant there were fewer repeats, and thus, higher ratings, and these were major reasons why S2 was much higher rated than S1.

No doubt getting rid of the first season's cheesy theme helped, too, but I don't believe getting rid of Julie Anne Haddock (who already had several big movies under her belt), Molly Ringwald (who would go on to prove herself in countless films), and Felice Schachter (who would also later find success in film) had anything to do with the show's success.

That being said, the one thing I didn't like about the retool was the addition of Nancy McKeon. A little too tough for my liking, I found her constant threats of physical abuse and getting in people's faces (literally) to be too off-putting.

I agree. It's like they were trying to re-create Fonzie.

I'll cast a vote for Cindy Webster (Julie Anne Haddock) to be put in Jo's place and stick around. I thought she was likeable, athletic, and tough while still being feminine, and if they would have wrote her as a lesbian (which seemed to be the direction they were going) it would have made for groundbreaking t.v. for the time.

It really was groundbreaking on TV in that era to even hint that a 14-year-old girl might be a lesbian, and it was courageous of Julie Anne to tackle the role. This was way before being gay was accepted on television. Maybe about a decade before.

Molly ~ She was supposed to stick around and deserved to. Her character might have changed as she got older, and perhaps that was for the better, but this was Molly friggin Ringwald, so they should have done something with her. I personally think having a liberal character was good for the show as its run was roughly parallel to that of Reagan's presidency, timewise. And man, did that joker spare no opportunity to tell us how evil his former party supposedly was. She was also a redhead, so it would have been a nice balance for the show.

I think they didn't know what to do with her. Of all the girls, she had the least developed character. So they had her sing and play the guitar, and I don't think that's where her talents were. Under a skilled director, she found success elsewhere, which was good, but it's a shame the producers of FOL, and the execs at the network, were so short-sighted.

Mr. Bradley ~ I actually found him to be pretty likeable, even though he was cast out to be the quasi-villain of the show. The guy sacrificed his vacation in one episode to solve a problem for the girls, and in another he risked his life to help out Blair, Tootie and their pets. I don't know why Mrs. G. constantly thought of him as a backwards empty suit.

Well, he was pretty backwards in "IQ" and a few other episodes. I think he was meant to be Mrs. G's foil.

Miss Emily Mahoney ~ sucked. I started a thread on her, it's still on the first page.

She seemed way older (and stuffier) than 32, and there really was nothing to her character, other than being a bit of a stuffed shirt.

I also agree it would have been nice to see more of Kimberly Drummond.

Yeah, it was weird that she was almost never seen at a school she attended for about two years.

['80sSitcoms]

Originally Posted by RetroGuy2000

No doubt getting rid of the first season's cheesy theme helped, too, but I don't believe getting rid of Julie Anne Haddock (who already had several big movies under her belt), Molly Ringwald (who would go on to prove herself in countless films), and Felice Schachter (who would also later find success in film) had anything to do with the show's success.

As much as I love Cindy and Molly, I do have to agree with those who say the paring down of the cast and adding Nancy, to make a smaller more centralized cast (a la "The Golden Girls" and "Designing Women") did make a big difference for the chemistry and focus of the show.

Originally Posted by RetroGuy2000

Molly ~ I think they didn't know what to do with her. Of all the girls, she had the least developed character.

No one was lesser-developed than Nancy. Poor bland, flavorless, filler Nancy...(apologies to any Nancy fans)