This is why I prefer the Bundys over the Connors - Sitcoms Online Message Boards

TVFactFan · 02-01-2006, 11:13 AM

The Bundys didn't have that Dirty LOOK like the Connors. I mean the Connots could have been a little more CLEAN looking and NEAT. The Bundys didn;t have the DIRTY look at all they were just ignorant and didn't care about anything. Kelly Bundy and Peg cared about how they look and even bud, maybe Al was not as nice looking as the other three but he was NEAT. Dan Connor just walked around with that oversized GUT and those SAGGING jeans and that SMALL coat. Roseanne was no better and the same with the children. So I will take the Bundys over the Connors anyday of the week.

BTW: The connors were extra DIRTY LOOKING in season 1.

Dean Winchester · 02-01-2006, 11:17 AM

what's with this sudden Roseanne hatred?

who else is willing to bet there's gonna be a thread soon about why the Tanner's are better than the Conner's?

MWC was a funny show, but if you get down to it, they were bigger white trash than the Conner's any day. While the Conner's rifted, deep down you knew they really loved and cared about each other, nothing of that sort was ever shown on MWC.

TVFactFan · 02-01-2006, 11:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HUNG UP!

what's with this sudden Roseanne hatred?

who else is willing to bet there's gonna be a thread soon about why the Tanner's are better than the Conner's?

MWC was a funny show, but if you get down to it, they were bigger white trash than the Conner's any day. While the Conner's rifted, deep down you knew they really loved and cared about each other, nothing of that sort was ever shown on MWC.

I disagree, The Bundys cared about how they looked. Can't say that about the Connors. And since Roseanne and Dan were OVERWEIGHT they could have atleast been NEAT looking instead of just walking around SLOPPY

GARFIELDKOOL · 02-01-2006, 11:25 AM

Al was kind of sloppy looking himself.

Brian Damage · 02-01-2006, 11:27 AM

As far as comedy goes, MWC was so over the top it was funny. Roseanne was more realistic comedy.

TVFactFan · 02-01-2006, 11:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GARFIELDKOOL

Al was kind of sloppy looking himself.

How was AL sloppy looking? His shirt was always TUCKED IN

Dean Winchester · 02-01-2006, 11:29 AM

oh, so one show is better than the other because one has skinny people in it?

This will come as a surprise, but John Goodman actually became a "big guy sex symbol" while on Roseanne because a lot of people thought he was like a cuddly teddy bear. And Roseanne was barely fat in the latter seasons after she started the plastic surgery, she was considerably slimmer in seasons 7-9 than she was in the early years.

I don't watch my TV shows based on how many sexy thin people are in it or not.

Plus, the Bundy's couldn't stand each other!!! Even though Darlene was sarcastic and made fun of Becky and DJ, there were moments where you saw that deep down, she did love and care for both of them. Al and Peg, in 11 seasons, never showed a sign that they could even stand the sight of each other.

It's too bad that you have to be shallow and think that the number of supermodels in the cast is proportioned to how good the show is... I'm sure Baywatch is the greatest creation television ever saw then, right?

TVFactFan · 02-01-2006, 11:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HUNG UP!

oh, so one show is better than the other because one has skinny people in it?

This will come as a surprise, but John Goodman actually became a "big guy sex symbol" while on Roseanne because a lot of people thought he was like a cuddly teddy bear. And Roseanne was barely fat in the latter seasons after she started the plastic surgery, she was considerably slimmer in seasons 7-9 than she was in the early years.

I don't watch my TV shows based on how many sexy thin people are in it or not.

Plus, the Bundy's couldn't stand each other!!! Even though Darlene was sarcastic and made fun of Becky and DJ, there were moments where you saw that deep down, she did love and care for both of them. Al and Peg, in 11 seasons, never showed a sign that they could even stand the sight of each other.

It's too bad that you have to be shallow and think that the number of supermodels in the cast is proportioned to how good the show is... I'm sure Baywatch is the greatest creation television ever saw then, right?

I'm talking more about them being SLOPPY not Fat. The Kids were not NEAT either and they were not FAT. I'm saying the family just looked like they didn;t wash-lol Has nothing to do with them being FAT

GARFIELDKOOL · 02-01-2006, 11:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TVResearcher

How was AL sloppy looking? His shirt was always TUCKED IN

It's the way he wore his pants. They drooped down,. You don't have to have your shirt tucked out to look sloppy.

TVFactFan · 02-01-2006, 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GARFIELDKOOL

It's the way he wore his pants. They drooped down,. You don't have to have your shirt tucked out to look sloppy.

Al carried himself a lot better than DAN.

Dean Winchester · 02-01-2006, 11:37 AM

actually, when Roseanne started, critics lauded the kids on the show for actually being more realistic than the picture-perfect Huxtables. You gotta admit the Huxtable kids were too good to be true, lol.

Dean Winchester · 02-01-2006, 11:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TVResearcher

Al carried himself a lot better than DAN.

actually, Dan wasn't that unlike a drywall/construction worker. Why should
Dan walk around in three-piece suits when he obviously was not that type of person? it'd be like my best friend who works in a factory to wear a suit instead of jeans and boots, which goes along with his job?

GARFIELDKOOL · 02-01-2006, 11:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TVResearcher

Al carried himself a lot better than DAN.

I liked Married With Children a lot better than Roseanne. But Al wasn't neat either. Peg was sloppy too. They had that didn't give a f*uck attitude, which made them sloppy.

Dean Winchester · 02-01-2006, 11:48 AM

I agree, the Bundy's were hardly the Huxtables in the sense.

I honestly don't understand why it's so bad if Dan walks around in jeans instead of dressed up at home? Believe it or not, television will never show this, but I have friends who are lawyers who are always dressed down when they're not working... sometimes TV oversensationalizes things when they have characters who are dressed up in suits when they're off and home for the day. Dan would dress up if the occasion called for it, but when he was relaxed and comfortable, he went in his jeans. Same with Roseanne and her clothes, she would get herself made up when she wants to, she just didn't want to walk around the house (and seriously, why should she?) in high heels.

And the kids... like it or not, put three kids together, and you're more likely going to get Becky/Darlene/DJ than Denise/Vanessa/Theo. It's the way it goes, people complained about how unrealistically behaved and Stepfordized the Huxtable kids were.

TVFactFan · 02-01-2006, 11:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HUNG UP!

actually, Dan wasn't that unlike a drywall/construction worker. Why should
Dan walk around in three-piece suits when he obviously was not that type of person? it'd be like my best friend who works in a factory to wear a suit instead of jeans and boots, which goes along with his job?

I'm not saying he had to wear a suit but the clothes he had on was too small which made him look sloppy. My mom even noticed that the other night. That coat he would wear was too small.

02-01-2006, 11:13 AM	#1
TVFactFan Member Forum Junkie Join Date: Aug 17, 2002 Posts: 99,111	This is why I prefer the Bundys over the Connors The Bundys didn't have that Dirty LOOK like the Connors. I mean the Connots could have been a little more CLEAN looking and NEAT. The Bundys didn;t have the DIRTY look at all they were just ignorant and didn't care about anything. Kelly Bundy and Peg cared about how they look and even bud, maybe Al was not as nice looking as the other three but he was NEAT. Dan Connor just walked around with that oversized GUT and those SAGGING jeans and that SMALL coat. Roseanne was no better and the same with the children. So I will take the Bundys over the Connors anyday of the week. BTW: The connors were extra DIRTY LOOKING in season 1.

02-01-2006, 11:27 AM	#5
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	As far as comedy goes, MWC was so over the top it was funny. Roseanne was more realistic comedy.
	__________________ The Key to the Kingdom of Heaven: John 3:3 *Money Doesn't Buy Happiness...But I'd Rather Cry in My Private Jet*

02-01-2006, 11:17 AM	#2
Dean Winchester Member Forum Fanatic Join Date: Sep 28, 2003 Location: Louisville KY Posts: 14,803	what's with this sudden Roseanne hatred? who else is willing to bet there's gonna be a thread soon about why the Tanner's are better than the Conner's? MWC was a funny show, but if you get down to it, they were bigger white trash than the Conner's any day. While the Conner's rifted, deep down you knew they really loved and cared about each other, nothing of that sort was ever shown on MWC.

02-01-2006, 11:25 AM	#4
GARFIELDKOOL Member Forum Veteran Join Date: Sep 02, 2004 Location: Rochester, NY Posts: 7,204	Al was kind of sloppy looking himself.

02-01-2006, 11:29 AM	#7
Dean Winchester Member Forum Fanatic Join Date: Sep 28, 2003 Location: Louisville KY Posts: 14,803	oh, so one show is better than the other because one has skinny people in it? This will come as a surprise, but John Goodman actually became a "big guy sex symbol" while on Roseanne because a lot of people thought he was like a cuddly teddy bear. And Roseanne was barely fat in the latter seasons after she started the plastic surgery, she was considerably slimmer in seasons 7-9 than she was in the early years. I don't watch my TV shows based on how many sexy thin people are in it or not. Plus, the Bundy's couldn't stand each other!!! Even though Darlene was sarcastic and made fun of Becky and DJ, there were moments where you saw that deep down, she did love and care for both of them. Al and Peg, in 11 seasons, never showed a sign that they could even stand the sight of each other. It's too bad that you have to be shallow and think that the number of supermodels in the cast is proportioned to how good the show is... I'm sure Baywatch is the greatest creation television ever saw then, right?

02-01-2006, 11:37 AM	#11
Dean Winchester Member Forum Fanatic Join Date: Sep 28, 2003 Location: Louisville KY Posts: 14,803	actually, when Roseanne started, critics lauded the kids on the show for actually being more realistic than the picture-perfect Huxtables. You gotta admit the Huxtable kids were too good to be true, lol.

02-01-2006, 11:48 AM	#14
Dean Winchester Member Forum Fanatic Join Date: Sep 28, 2003 Location: Louisville KY Posts: 14,803	I agree, the Bundy's were hardly the Huxtables in the sense. I honestly don't understand why it's so bad if Dan walks around in jeans instead of dressed up at home? Believe it or not, television will never show this, but I have friends who are lawyers who are always dressed down when they're not working... sometimes TV oversensationalizes things when they have characters who are dressed up in suits when they're off and home for the day. Dan would dress up if the occasion called for it, but when he was relaxed and comfortable, he went in his jeans. Same with Roseanne and her clothes, she would get herself made up when she wants to, she just didn't want to walk around the house (and seriously, why should she?) in high heels. And the kids... like it or not, put three kids together, and you're more likely going to get Becky/Darlene/DJ than Denise/Vanessa/Theo. It's the way it goes, people complained about how unrealistically behaved and Stepfordized the Huxtable kids were.