What was the point of Richie? - Sitcoms Online Message Boards

senor boogie woogi · 09-04-2008, 06:51 AM

Hola!

What was the point of the son, Richie? Did you like him? I thought the kid was super annoying and frankly rather ********. Laura always seemed to be mad at him anyway, basically because of his ******** behavior.

Richie would disappear for long stretches of time. He's either asleep, in his room, outside playing or flying in the sky in a UFO with Chuck Cunningham. It seemed that his character was more in the way of what this modern, adult show was about. It would be like having a child as a regular cast member of "Seinfeld". It just did not mix in with what the show was about.

Richie was an only child too, which is a lonely experience.

Senor

Sophia's Wrinkles · 09-04-2008, 08:22 AM

I think he was one of the worst child actors ever. Thankfully he wasn't there enough to ruin my enjoyment of the show.

kooky12 · 09-04-2008, 10:06 AM

Like some other sitcoms, the child only appeared when he was relevant to the plot, like the woodpecker episode, or the where-do-babies-come-from episode. If he wasn't needed, he would meet daddy when he came home, maybe do a quick one-liner, and off to bed. I agree that Laura was usually mad at him - maybe she should not have kept him. But I don't think that he was any more ******** than any other sitcom kid. I think that he was pretty good in the episodes where he played an important role.

Indy788 · 09-04-2008, 12:37 PM

I think Richie was a good edition to the cast in the early episodes. He wasn't necessarily the best actor but he did add a 'cute factor'. There was a point to Richie though, he did enable the writing staff to do many family related plots. Without Richie we wouldn't have Where Did I Come From?, Odd But True, Gesundheit, Darling and other great episodes. The first episode would also be completely different.

Oddly enough, Danny Thomas told Larry Matthews that he was the best child actor at the time outside of Rusty Hamer and Ron Howard.

LauraNamesake · 09-04-2008, 04:37 PM

I think he was needed as one of those "exsists" characters. Like Sally's Aunt Anges. Although Richie was more important. I mean I think it was beter that Laura and Rob had a kid, because it made their house more of a "home" which I think was important.

MickeyMac · 09-04-2008, 05:37 PM

Yeah I thought Richie was a totally brat. Its still a great show though.

goodolddays · 09-04-2008, 08:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LauraNamesake

I think he was needed as one of those "exists" characters. Like Sally's Aunt Anges. Although Richie was more important. I mean I think it was beter that Laura and Rob had a kid, because it made their house more of a "home" which I think was important.

My sentiments exactly. He made the Petrie couple the Petrie family.

Schmoopie · 09-04-2008, 10:23 PM

I thought he was cute and I liked the interaction between him and Dick Van Dyke!

Andrea

70s show watcher · 09-04-2008, 10:35 PM

he was around to annoy rob by constantly asking him did you bring me anything before rob even had a chance to catch his breath or trip over the ottoman

Rue_McClanahan · 09-05-2008, 01:21 AM

I think it's nice that they had a kid, because as others have said, it made their house more of a home. It made them seem like a family. Kind of just one of those charactors that it adds something to the show knowing He exists, but not someone you want to see as a regular on the show. Nice knowing they had a kid, but he did seem a bit annoying.

Marvo301 · 09-12-2008, 01:03 AM

Carl Reiner who created this show and wrote many of the episodes, based the series on his own personal experiences as a comedy writer. One aspect of Carl Reiner's real life experience is that he was a father. Therefore his fictional counterpart, Rob Petrie, was also a father. So to answer your original question, the point of Richie is that he is the TV counterpart to Carl Reiner's real life children(and more specifically his son Rob Reiner).

PGood97041 · 02-12-2009, 10:04 PM

I think Senor Boogie Woogi may have just been goofing on the board with this question (before he got banned).
Ritchie was a very important part of the show and I thought, while no child actor is perfect, he was perfect in that role.
I mean, I just bought the boxed set, and as I'm currently thoroughly enjoying the first season, Ritchie is already an important part of five or six of the episodes.
He's central to the first show when he isn't feeling well. When he thinks Buddy's dog is a wolf, and when Sol and the sponsor are arguing and a sleepy Ritchie comes out and thinks Rob and Laura have the TV on too loud, those are things that kids do!!!!
As is the did-you-bring-me-something bit, or when he's emptying out his pockets and tells Laura he wants to keep his "rock that doesn't sink", which ends up being a cork. It's all cute stuff, and the only time Rob and Laura even get slightly exasperated with him is when he does some of those more mischievous things that kids do...like the using of the dirty words.

The writing on this show is as great as I remember it, and that includes the part of Ritchie, who I agree provides that necessary "family" feeling. And I think the little guy did a great job!

tdr · 02-13-2009, 05:25 PM

I prefer to look at it this way: If Rob and Laura did not have at least one kid, considering the times, much of the discussion-- especially when any of their relatives are there-- would have been about that ["When are you going to give us some granchildren?"]. On the other hand, if they had had 2 or more kids, the show would have been more of a 'domestic' comedy than was envisioned, as the show he wrote for, and their ties to show business in general, were to provide the situations. So having one kid was probably the best option for keeping their childlessness from being an issue, and still keeping the show from resembling Father Knows Best or Leave it to Beaver.

As to Larry Matthews' acting-- it could have been better, and possibly he would have been coached better if his part was more prominent. His main flaw IMO was that he couldn't speak up well without almost shouting. But the episodes in which he was featured more are generally still good ones and soemtimes parallel the adult situations; especially where he is giving things away to keep his friends liking him, and Rob lectures him on that, to finally realize t hat he (Rob) himself has been doing the same thing.

Indy788 · 02-13-2009, 06:07 PM

I agree with you on both accounts tdr, but although that Larry Matthews did shout, to me that made him seem more like a real child. Children aren't always composed and often seem to shout when they're excited, and in other sitcoms the children seemed so mature and 'written for' rather than like real kids. Richie seemed more real to me, especially int he early episodes than say the children on The Donna Reed Show or Leave it to Beaver.

Tweety · 02-15-2009, 02:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Indy788

I agree with you on both accounts tdr, but although that Larry Matthews did shout, to me that made him seem more like a real child. Children aren't always composed and often seem to shout when they're excited, and in other sitcoms the children seemed so mature and 'written for' rather than like real kids. Richie seemed more real to me, especially int he early episodes than say the children on The Donna Reed Show or Leave it to Beaver.

I think you're right. I've always been critical of Matthews as an actor, but when you think about it, the way he shouts when he's excited is actually very real (the kids on LITB would shout in the house sometimes, but usually to yell to their folks that they've come home). Wally's character was older than Richie's so that could be part of it as well. Beaver was maybe around the same age, just starting school. But parents are always having to tell their young kids to be a little more quiet in the house.

And I'll point one other thing out as well... how many shows have we seen that "jumped the shark" when the starring couple had a baby? Too many to name. At least in the case of the DVD show, they had a kid when the show started, and indeed, only really used him when it was necessary for the plot, or else gave him a brief encounter with Rob when he came home from the office. They didn't go though an entire season of Laura being pregnant, but did have some enjoyable flashback episodes to talk about her pregnancy. "I Love Lucy" handled pregnancy beautifully, with truly funny episodes, but it's not easy to pull that off.

I think DVD was the perfect show... a perfect cast, and just the right combination of "domstic" episodes and "office" episodes. And it definitely helped that they had a child. And yet, for some reason, it's very hard to imagine the Petries with a daughter who was an only child. It could have been done, I'm sure, but it worked out perfectly with Ritchie.

Besides, how good would a child actor have to be to hold his/her own with THAT cast?

09-04-2008, 06:51 AM	#1
senor boogie woogi Banned Banned!! Frequent Poster Join Date: Feb 23, 2004 Posts: 107	What was the point of Richie? Hola! What was the point of the son, Richie? Did you like him? I thought the kid was super annoying and frankly rather ******. Laura always seemed to be mad at him anyway, basically because of his ****** behavior. Richie would disappear for long stretches of time. He's either asleep, in his room, outside playing or flying in the sky in a UFO with Chuck Cunningham. It seemed that his character was more in the way of what this modern, adult show was about. It would be like having a child as a regular cast member of "Seinfeld". It just did not mix in with what the show was about. Richie was an only child too, which is a lonely experience. Senor

09-04-2008, 12:37 PM	#4
Indy788 Member Frequent Poster Join Date: Feb 02, 2008 Location: Illinois Posts: 109	I think Richie was a good edition to the cast in the early episodes. He wasn't necessarily the best actor but he did add a 'cute factor'. There was a point to Richie though, he did enable the writing staff to do many family related plots. Without Richie we wouldn't have Where Did I Come From?, Odd But True, Gesundheit, Darling and other great episodes. The first episode would also be completely different. Oddly enough, Danny Thomas told Larry Matthews that he was the best child actor at the time outside of Rusty Hamer and Ron Howard.
	__________________ http://youtube.com/user/Indy7888

09-04-2008, 04:37 PM	#5
LauraNamesake Oh Rob!!! Frequent Poster Join Date: Jun 13, 2008 Location: MD Posts: 277	I think he was needed as one of those "exsists" characters. Like Sally's Aunt Anges. Although Richie was more important. I mean I think it was beter that Laura and Rob had a kid, because it made their house more of a "home" which I think was important.
	__________________ ~LauraNamesake Not Just A Namesake, a replic of Laura Petrie. MR. GRANT: (sarcasticly) Hey Mary, do you think a single raw carrot will put any more ugly fat on my body? MARY: Not if you STICK IT UP YOUR NOSE. MR. GRANT: What did you say? MARY: Nothing, I said nothing. ~The Mary Tyler Moore Show ROB: He said you were lovely! LAURA: How did he know?!?!?!?! --The Dick Van Dyke Show I X3 Dick Van Dyke!!!

09-04-2008, 10:23 PM	#8
Schmoopie Keep Calm and Love Snoopy Forum Star Join Date: Jul 13, 2008 Location: Lynnwood, Washington Posts: 15,697	I thought he was cute and I liked the interaction between him and Dick Van Dyke! Andrea
	__________________ In memory of my wonderful husband. I love and miss you more than words can say, but I will always and forever keep you in my heart. September 23, 1961-January 14, 2019

09-05-2008, 01:21 AM	#10
Rue_McClanahan I love 'Reba' & G Gs Occasional Poster Join Date: Nov 03, 2005 Location: Indiana Posts: 78	I think it's nice that they had a kid, because as others have said, it made their house more of a home. It made them seem like a family. Kind of just one of those charactors that it adds something to the show knowing He exists, but not someone you want to see as a regular on the show. Nice knowing they had a kid, but he did seem a bit annoying.
	__________________ Corky: [sobbing] I haven't experienced life! Murphy: I've experienced life, and I'm here to tell you it's overrated.

09-04-2008, 08:22 AM	#2
Sophia's Wrinkles Member Frequent Poster Join Date: Aug 16, 2002 Posts: 460	I think he was one of the worst child actors ever. Thankfully he wasn't there enough to ruin my enjoyment of the show.

09-04-2008, 10:06 AM	#3
kooky12 Member Senior Member Join Date: Sep 06, 2005 Posts: 2,022	Like some other sitcoms, the child only appeared when he was relevant to the plot, like the woodpecker episode, or the where-do-babies-come-from episode. If he wasn't needed, he would meet daddy when he came home, maybe do a quick one-liner, and off to bed. I agree that Laura was usually mad at him - maybe she should not have kept him. But I don't think that he was any more ******** than any other sitcom kid. I think that he was pretty good in the episodes where he played an important role.

09-04-2008, 05:37 PM	#6
MickeyMac Member Forum Star Join Date: Jun 18, 2008 Location: Kalamazoo, Michigan Posts: 19,006	Yeah I thought Richie was a totally brat. Its still a great show though.

09-04-2008, 10:35 PM	#9
70s show watcher Member Forum 4000 Club Member Join Date: May 20, 2008 Location: between point place and studio 8 h Posts: 4,549	he was around to annoy rob by constantly asking him did you bring me anything before rob even had a chance to catch his breath or trip over the ottoman

09-12-2008, 01:03 AM	#11
Marvo301 I'm NOT a Blockhead! Forum Celebrity Join Date: May 17, 2002 Location: The Great White North Posts: 21,456	Carl Reiner who created this show and wrote many of the episodes, based the series on his own personal experiences as a comedy writer. One aspect of Carl Reiner's real life experience is that he was a father. Therefore his fictional counterpart, Rob Petrie, was also a father. So to answer your original question, the point of Richie is that he is the TV counterpart to Carl Reiner's real life children(and more specifically his son Rob Reiner).
	__________________ Only a life lived for others is worth living. Albert Einstein A life isn't worth living unless it has impact on other lives. Jackie Robinson Be always at war with your vices, at peace with your neighbors, and let each new year find you a better man. Benjamin Franklin

02-12-2009, 10:04 PM	#12
PGood97041 Member Forum Regular Join Date: Jan 03, 2008 Location: Boston Posts: 747	I think Senor Boogie Woogi may have just been goofing on the board with this question (before he got banned). Ritchie was a very important part of the show and I thought, while no child actor is perfect, he was perfect in that role. I mean, I just bought the boxed set, and as I'm currently thoroughly enjoying the first season, Ritchie is already an important part of five or six of the episodes. He's central to the first show when he isn't feeling well. When he thinks Buddy's dog is a wolf, and when Sol and the sponsor are arguing and a sleepy Ritchie comes out and thinks Rob and Laura have the TV on too loud, those are things that kids do!!!! As is the did-you-bring-me-something bit, or when he's emptying out his pockets and tells Laura he wants to keep his "rock that doesn't sink", which ends up being a cork. It's all cute stuff, and the only time Rob and Laura even get slightly exasperated with him is when he does some of those more mischievous things that kids do...like the using of the dirty words. The writing on this show is as great as I remember it, and that includes the part of Ritchie, who I agree provides that necessary "family" feeling. And I think the little guy did a great job!

02-13-2009, 05:25 PM	#13
tdr Member Senior Member Join Date: Mar 23, 2001 Posts: 1,454	I prefer to look at it this way: If Rob and Laura did not have at least one kid, considering the times, much of the discussion-- especially when any of their relatives are there-- would have been about that ["When are you going to give us some granchildren?"]. On the other hand, if they had had 2 or more kids, the show would have been more of a 'domestic' comedy than was envisioned, as the show he wrote for, and their ties to show business in general, were to provide the situations. So having one kid was probably the best option for keeping their childlessness from being an issue, and still keeping the show from resembling Father Knows Best or Leave it to Beaver. As to Larry Matthews' acting-- it could have been better, and possibly he would have been coached better if his part was more prominent. His main flaw IMO was that he couldn't speak up well without almost shouting. But the episodes in which he was featured more are generally still good ones and soemtimes parallel the adult situations; especially where he is giving things away to keep his friends liking him, and Rob lectures him on that, to finally realize t hat he (Rob) himself has been doing the same thing.

02-13-2009, 06:07 PM	#14
Indy788 Member Frequent Poster Join Date: Feb 02, 2008 Location: Illinois Posts: 109	I agree with you on both accounts tdr, but although that Larry Matthews did shout, to me that made him seem more like a real child. Children aren't always composed and often seem to shout when they're excited, and in other sitcoms the children seemed so mature and 'written for' rather than like real kids. Richie seemed more real to me, especially int he early episodes than say the children on The Donna Reed Show or Leave it to Beaver.