Was the show better or worse without James?(was this topic already asked?) - Sitcoms Online Message Boards

Chain Gang Member · 10-13-2005, 03:50 PM

Did you like it better before or after he was killed off?

TVFactFan · 10-13-2005, 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chain Gang Member

Did you like it better before or after he was killed off?

Yes and the answer is obvious. I don;t know anyone who would say they liked the show better without James. That's like asking me-"Was cable better before Digital or After digital was installed"-LOL-LOL

JeffRuss1972 · 10-13-2005, 04:16 PM

The show was DEFINITELY better WITH James(John Amos). I may be biased however, as he was and is one of my favorite television characters of all time. The show had a nice mixture of drama and comedy, as well as meaningful episodes during the Amos years.

nndman1 · 10-13-2005, 05:56 PM

I won't necessarily say the show was worse without James, but it certainly was not the same. it was basically a different show. The interplay between James and JJ was what made the show. If you watch the early eps it appears they were trying to make Michael the featured child (probably because RC was the most established actor among the "kids") but it didn't take off. The JJ character took off and the rest is history. When James was killed off, the show lost that interaction between those two characters and the show was never the same.

mstewart · 10-13-2005, 10:47 PM

The show went downhill after John Amos was dismissed from the show. It got worse when Esther Rolle left the following season. The show without Rolle and Amos was not good at all. When Esther returned for the final season the damage was done that started with killing James Evans off. On the E True Hollywood Story the writers had even said the show was never the same without John Amos.

Brian Damage · 10-13-2005, 11:28 PM

It was worse without him.

Mr. Television · 10-13-2005, 11:59 PM

The show was worst without James

nerrad · 10-14-2005, 07:01 AM

Worse.

jamesanthony · 10-14-2005, 04:35 PM

It was better with James, although I have to say that the show still had something going for it that it could keep going on without him. There are actually more episodes after James left than they were with him in it.

Brieannas21 · 10-15-2005, 04:49 PM

I'm going to go with the masses and say that it was better with James. He was the backbone of that family, I missed the strong presence that he portrayed.

catlover79 · 05-15-2007, 11:29 PM

Worse. The Norman Lear brain trust should have listened to Esther Rolle and John Amos. They were two fine actors who cared more about artistic quality and realism than goofy catchphrases. It's a shame. I would've loved to see what the show would've been had James been there the entire run.

AB · 05-16-2007, 02:10 PM

I think it was better with James too.

Scoobiedoo30 · 05-17-2007, 12:14 AM

worse

USATVFAN · 05-17-2007, 06:34 PM

The Show Was At It Best When James was there.
and plus The Ratings was it Best Before John Amso left.

SitcomGyrl1955 · 05-23-2007, 10:19 AM

The show was so much better when James was there. I hated it after he left....especially the addition of Ben Powers.

10-13-2005, 03:50 PM	#1
Chain Gang Member 1st Female Triple Crown Champ Forum Fanatic Join Date: Sep 28, 2003 Location: Watching Three's Company & Wrestling Posts: 8,928	Was the show better or worse without James?(was this topic already asked?) Did you like it better before or after he was killed off?
	__________________ Mickie is the best woman to step inside the ring http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EOTh3hVT0HU

10-13-2005, 04:16 PM	#3
JeffRuss1972 70s Sitcoms Rule!!! Eternal Member Senior Member Join Date: Jul 11, 2005 Location: Villa Rica, GA Posts: 1,257	The show was DEFINITELY better WITH James(John Amos). I may be biased however, as he was and is one of my favorite television characters of all time. The show had a nice mixture of drama and comedy, as well as meaningful episodes during the Amos years.
	__________________ Previously JalanRuss for a SHORT time, but got my OLD Username Back! Hello Again

10-13-2005, 11:28 PM	#6
Brian Damage I'm Rich Bitch Forum Icon Join Date: Feb 03, 2002 Location: What Ain't No Country I Ever Heard Of...They Speak English in What? Posts: 63,107	It was worse without him.
	__________________ The Key to the Kingdom of Heaven: John 3:3 *Money Doesn't Buy Happiness...But I'd Rather Cry in My Private Jet*

10-13-2005, 11:59 PM	#7
Mr. Television 23 Years at Sitcoms Online Forum Icon Join Date: Jun 06, 2003 Location: Somewhere you're Not Posts: 62,132	The show was worst without James
	__________________ Sonny

05-15-2007, 11:29 PM	#11
catlover79 God Bless Val Forum Addict Join Date: May 29, 2006 Location: Bewitched in Ohio Posts: 70,392	Worse. The Norman Lear brain trust should have listened to Esther Rolle and John Amos. They were two fine actors who cared more about artistic quality and realism than goofy catchphrases. It's a shame. I would've loved to see what the show would've been had James been there the entire run.
	__________________ "Jesus loves you and He approves this message." "I'm alive. I'm feeling good. I'm trying to live every moment as much as I can." - Valerie Harper, March 2013

10-13-2005, 05:56 PM	#4
nndman1 Member Occasional Poster Join Date: Aug 26, 2004 Posts: 40	I won't necessarily say the show was worse without James, but it certainly was not the same. it was basically a different show. The interplay between James and JJ was what made the show. If you watch the early eps it appears they were trying to make Michael the featured child (probably because RC was the most established actor among the "kids") but it didn't take off. The JJ character took off and the rest is history. When James was killed off, the show lost that interaction between those two characters and the show was never the same.

10-13-2005, 10:47 PM	#5
mstewart mstewart Senior Member Join Date: Jan 25, 2002 Location: California Posts: 1,780	The show went downhill after John Amos was dismissed from the show. It got worse when Esther Rolle left the following season. The show without Rolle and Amos was not good at all. When Esther returned for the final season the damage was done that started with killing James Evans off. On the E True Hollywood Story the writers had even said the show was never the same without John Amos.

10-14-2005, 07:01 AM	#8
nerrad Member Senior Member Join Date: Oct 06, 2003 Location: pfunkytown Posts: 1,253	Worse.

10-14-2005, 04:35 PM	#9
jamesanthony Member Senior Member Join Date: Mar 30, 2004 Posts: 2,180	It was better with James, although I have to say that the show still had something going for it that it could keep going on without him. There are actually more episodes after James left than they were with him in it.

10-15-2005, 04:49 PM	#10
Brieannas21 Member Forum Fanatic Join Date: Apr 05, 2004 Location: Texas Posts: 9,792	I'm going to go with the masses and say that it was better with James. He was the backbone of that family, I missed the strong presence that he portrayed.

05-16-2007, 02:10 PM	#12
AB Member Eternal Member Forum Icon Join Date: Dec 26, 2006 Location: The South Posts: 59,428	I think it was better with James too.

05-17-2007, 12:14 AM	#13
Scoobiedoo30 Member Forum Superstar Join Date: Jun 27, 2002 Location: KENNER, LOUISIANA Posts: 27,654	worse
	__________________ Who Dat

05-17-2007, 06:34 PM	#14
USATVFAN Member Senior Member Join Date: Jan 31, 2007 Location: Kalispell, USA Posts: 1,742	The Show Was At It Best When James was there. and plus The Ratings was it Best Before John Amso left.

05-23-2007, 10:19 AM	#15
SitcomGyrl1955 #1 Good Times Fan Frequent Poster Join Date: Apr 19, 2006 Location: The Good Old USA Posts: 319	The show was so much better when James was there. I hated it after he left....especially the addition of Ben Powers.