TMZ: Darlene Spin-off in the Works at ABC

Roseanne will collect all the royalties from said spin-off as she owns the character. ABC is gonna fuck itself.

They'll rename Darlene as Darla.

[quote]Roseanne will collect all the royalties from said spin-off as she owns the character. ABC is gonna fuck itself.

I really wish people would stop spouting this nonsense. Roseanne does not “own the character” of anyone other than Roseanne Barr.

The sole credited creator of this show is Matt Williams. He “owns” the characters likenesses and can receive residuals.

Please stop saying this bullshit. It’s on every damn thread (all 700 of ‘em!).

If they actually did a Darlene series, cancellation in 6 weeks. But a Becky show might work.

Gilbert & Goodman must really be a pair of greedy, grasping assholes. Wouldn't if be best for their careers to severe ties to Barr & move on?

What a bad idea. Perhaps they're making a deal with Gilbert & Goodman so they would not sue for lost earnings?

I hope this happens. They can still discuss the same issues as planned, and the storylines might become more daring with the imposing figure of Roseanne out of the way.

Will they "forget" this season ever happened? They can say Roseane is dead or in a mental institution...

Sara Gilbert should have done this in the first place. A spin-off would have been safe from the hazard of working with unstable Roseanne.

There's no "Rosanne" without Roseanne. Call it whatever you want, it's not going to last long. ABC thinks they can cut her out and have the successful show based on her, without her. Not going to happen. When Sheen left Two And A Half Men the show tanked, but they tried to save face. Didn't work. FAIL.

I'll watch, just to spite R10. I know a few others who will too!

R3 Except anyone can take a few seconds and look up either the original or newer show on IMDB and see that both Roseanne Barr and Matt Williams are listed as creditors of both.

As such, any spin-off involving any character that appeared on either the original or newer show would result in both Roseanne and Matt rightly being paid and receiving at the very least a "based on characters created by" credit.

Roseanne therefore, like it or not, will make bank with any spin-off.

From now on, please stick to the facts instead of spewing your bullshit as usual. Thanks in advance.

It's cute that you like to pass yourself off as a Hollywood insider on here though but be advised that that requires a bit more than simply a subscription to Entertainment Weekly.

I don't know about Gilbert's finances, but Goodman doesn't need the cash, believe me.

Oh well, it's a guaranteed success then, R11.

ABC has a contract with Gilbert and Goodman and they're getting paid whether they work or not. This is probably for the other people who would lose their jobs like the grips, cameramen, etc. At least ABC should try to get their money's worth. It may or may not work.

I would actually watch this. It was always the supporting characters that made the show watchable in the first place. Roseanne on her own is unpleasant, shrill and overly self-satisfied and the series would have been nothing without the rest of the cast actually giving it heart.

So call it "Harlene!"

If they do it, it needs to be right now, with all this attention and interest going on.

[Quote]Sara Gilbert should have done this in the first place. A spin-off would have been safe from the hazard of working with unstable Roseanne.

It wouldn't have worked then, but it just might work now, since we've now seen who they've have become as 21st century characters.

R14, you seem triggered!

Will Roseanne try to sue? Some of her stupid Twitter followers are encouraging her to fight back. She was distraught but tweeted that she wants to fight back now. What is the possibility that she can sue ABC or Disney and win?

I don't want her to make a profit out of this.

R18 It could have if they announced it as a spin off from the very beginning (maybe with Roseanne visiting on the pilot). But ABC saw W&G's revival success and tried to do the same with the old show Roseanne (to the point of reviving a dead Dan).

I've never watched the Roseanne rebooted series. Is Darlene a lesbian?

As much of a trainwreck as Roseanne is, the show was built around her and her low-rent humor. She was always a bad actress and always will be. Sara Gilbert is not enough to carry a network show. Unless they move this to HBO and can swear with impunity. As long as they are paying them, I don't think they'll mind. John Goodman could give a shit. He'll get another movie and Laurie Metcalf will work for years.

[quote]Except anyone can take a few seconds and look up either the original or newer show on IMDB and see that both Roseanne Barr and Matt Williams are listed as creditors of both.

Yeah, cause let’s trust IMDb instead of the credits that are plastered on every episode!

[quote]From now on, please stick to the facts instead of spewing your bullshit as usual. Thanks in advance.

As usual? You’ve got the wrong poster. I’ve never posted anything entertainment related. Someone said there’s a way on here to check other’s posts. I’ll wait while you do that and see.

[quote]It's cute that you like to pass yourself off as a Hollywood insider on here though but be advised that that requires a bit more than simply a subscription to Entertainment Weekly.

First of all, see above. Second, I’m on the opposite coast of Hollyweird and never posted on any entertainment threads. And I’m glad you think YOU’RE a Hollywood insider, too.

Actually, Matt Williams is the only creator on Roseanne. And the union would back that up, as I'm sure they did with off of the fights that happened with Roseanne. Roseanne only gets the credit of 'based on a character by'. Matt gets credit for everything else, including the show as a whole.

What about Laurie Metcalf?

The Roseanne reboot was so good. It was like wrapping up in a warm blanket. Sadly the spell is broken now. I won't be watching any spinoffs.

NO ONE is going to want to look at Sara Gilbert (and listen to her slurred voice) week after week. And indeed if there are spin off starring Roseanne characters Roseanne Barr will benefit financially from it.

R23 That's the whole point. Sara is not a star, and can be a team player with the rest of the cast. Sara and Darlene can have their eternal sibling rivalry like trashy Jan and Marcia.

R29 I meant Darlene and Becky.

Good, I never thought that homophobic, crazy fat bitch was funny anyway. I remember when she put her own parents though hell years ago by saying they molested her. They took a polygraph test and passed it, and then Rosanne said she was having false memories or some shit. Her fucking crazy lies almost ruined her parents' lives.

Maybe DJ can finally show off his acting chops. I sense Emmy nomination from him!

Sara Gilbert's low energy and joyless delivery and persona are not a draw for me. Sorry.

I guess you should know, R19.

You post at R11 is the definition of 'triggered'. Did you stomp your feet when you wrote it?

lol, no, R34. It's all TV silliness to me. My mouth, however, is much less filled with the taste and juice of Roseanne's pussy than yours though!

Whoops, "sever ties", not "severe".

I see you have a case of "about Roseanne" going on, R35. Good luck with that one.

Oh, and Gilbert will never fuck you, dear lesbian at R35.

Good, R38! I'd rather fuck Johnny Galecki anyhow!

R3, the characters are named after her family members. Roseanne owns the rights to the show. You’re an idiot.

[quote] Actually, Matt Williams is the only creator on Roseanne. And the union would back that up, as I'm sure they did with off of the fights that happened with Roseanne. Roseanne only gets the credit of 'based on a character by'. Matt gets credit for everything else, including the show as a whole.

Roseanne owns the show, hon. She owns the characters.

ARE YOU KIDDING? THE REBOOT WAS THE DARLENE SHOW! IT WAS MOSTLY ABOUT HER.

The looky loos will tune in for the first episode of the spinoff and then the ratings will plummet. Face it, people tuned in to see what Roseanne would do.

[quote] The looky loos will tune in for the first episode of the spinoff and then the ratings will plummet.

So you mean just like Roseanne's 10th season?

So what if Roseanne gets paid behind the scenes? It's not like this has forced her into poverty. If they can make a good. show with a talented cast, let 'em.

Laurie needs her own show.

R45 is a retard.

I would totally watch this. She was my favorite character.

[quote] It's not like this has forced her into poverty.

But Roseanne is working class!! She understands everything about middle class flyover America!

If Darlene gets her own spin-off, so should I!

[quote][R45] is a retard.

Well, compared to the evident extent of your genius...

I think this is great and would love to see it happen. Particularly since the final episode of the reboot season ended with Roseanne going in for surgery. I would be very easy to say that she died at the hospital. It's almost as if the writers anticipated that Barr would screw up and they could easily get rid of her character. Whoever set up this premise and got Roseanne to agree to it was a fucking genius.

[quote] I would be very easy to say that she died at the hospital.

I want Roseanne to go all Aunt Diane, go on an opioid and booze bender, drive her Uber on the wrong side of the highway, and die in a fiery crash, engulfed by flames!

Roseanne does not own the characters and she is not credited with creating the series -- and it doesn't matter how many of you claim otherwise (and it doesn't matter what it says on IMDB); it's just not so. This legal battle was fought 30 years ago -- Matt Williams has the sole "created by" credit. He is credited with creating the characters, the setup, everything. Roseanne has never stopped being furious about that, and she probably has a pretty good point, but it doesn't matter. Matt Williams is the sole credited creator and Carsey-Werner owns the show. Full stop.

I'm stunned the reboot was doing as well as it had. Rosanne and Dan were both disabled losers, Becky and Darlene are losers who had BOTH move back home. Even Jackie ended up a fuck up.

No.

Is Darlene a country singer?

[quote][R3], the characters are named after her family members. Roseanne owns the rights to the show. You’re an idiot.

You think the characters are named after her family members? Darlene, Becky and Dan, Jr. (DJ)?

And R3 is the idiot?!

I think more than 100 people lost their jobs because of that stupid Ambien tweet. Maybe its an attempt to save a sinking ship from the ice berg Captain Conner purposely hit in the middle of the night.

R57, yes, Darlene is a country singer. And Roseanne loves her!

No one is going to watch this.

I'm sure they'll describe her death as hilariously as possible in the polite episode. "I'm afraid she was devoured by hyenas at the Lanford Zoo."

*"pilot" episode, not "polite" episode

It's a good idea. I don't know how successful it will be, but it's worth a try. Especially when all actors and crew, who were happy with the reboot and a 2nd season in the works, lost work because of a reckless big mouth. Why should they be punished? I hope it works out for them. I like the other characters outside of Rosanne, that are just as interesting. I would watch.

I don't think they'll kill Roseanne off. They'll send her off to look after her Mom for a spell or something similar. I think it's even possible that if she seeks serious therapy that they might let her back on the show. But I think she's probably too mentally ill to return.

Is everyone forgetting how Fucking Awful that show is?

[quote]They'll send her off to look after her Mom for a spell or something similar.

That's what they should have done instead of cancelling the show. It was a ridiculous knee-jerk reaction to completely cancel the show the same day without any thought put behind it, just to show how pure ABC is.

I thought Roseanne and Dan were the weakest link on the show. I also found it hard to believe that Dan had the most issues with his grandson. I remember the character as being more accepting. I would think Roseanne would have more problems with it.

Darlene and Becky had a good dynamic.. trading sarcastic barbs as sisters, and still being supportive of each other. DJ could use more character development. He's basically a blank slate, as he was never really featured too much in the series. The writers could be creative with him.

They can't flush that show down the cultural toilet fast enough!

r42 said what I was about to say. The reboot was centered on Darlene (too much so), and Roseanne was a supporting character. I didn't like it as much as I had hoped. I wanted to see more Roseanne and Dan. Maybe the network didn't think viewers would tune into a show about two 60-somethings. But the most electrifying part of the past season was Dan dealing with the flood while being forced to screw over his best friend.

The big problem: how do you explain Roseanne's absence. It would be pretty damn mean to kill off the character when the actress didn't leave willingly (unlike with Valerie and the recent Kevin James fiasco). Then, without Roseanne in the picture, there'd be no reason for Jackie to be hanging around. (It worked for an episode before when Roseanne had threatened to quit the show, but the scenario is less plausible now that the kids are grown.)

If it does go on, what could they do? The show opens with Dan on a psychologist's couch, talking about his problems. His wife died suddenly. He buried himself in work, and his business did well for the first time ever. He felt guilty. He took a young illegal worker under his wing and mentored him. His granddaughter Harris fell for the guy. Darlene was against it and has to ask herself if she's classist/xenophobic. Then the kid gets deported, and it breaks Dan and Harris' hearts. Becky falls further into alcoholism. DJ is getting more depressed, suffering PTSD and worrying about his enlisted wife. Dan is overcome with worry about his kids, but he doesn't know what to do. At the season finale, Dan says "Doc, it feels really good to talk about all buy problems. I don't know why I never considered trying that before." The camera pulls away to reveal that the psychologist is ......: __________.

I don't want Roseanne to make any money off this at all. She's a despicable human being who deserves to be out in the streets. Did you see her house in Hawaii? Nothing to rave about. It was always a mess. I hope her house is on the Big Island where the volcano can destroy it.

Should be “Becky & Darlene”. Like, a “Laverne & Shirley”

The George Soros tweet was as bad as the Jarret one. I'm guessing this is current Tin-hat-speak? Since Roseanne admits to a steady diet of right wing hate radio!

Alright, well anyways. Blocked. Done with the Roseanne stuff.

ABC would be employing Roseanne again with royalties for this. Not gonna happen.

[quote] Even Jackie ended up a fuck up.

She and about twenty thousand others.

Jesus, enough with the reboots! Now they're reimagining a failed reboot. Fuck off, TV networks!

ABC is already paying the stars for next season anyway, So they're trying to work something out. Even if ratings dropped 50% from it's season finale, it would sit where Modern Family currently rates. I think it would get huge initial interest then taper off, settling into a solid core audience depending on how good it actually is. That's what happened to 2.5 men in the post Charlie seasons.

You could tell from Gilbert's tweet that she was already trying to say this was just one actor on the show. You could see the wheels spinning in her brain about the rest of the cast going on.

It would be hilarious - maybe meta? - if they make a new series with a live Dan and a dead Roseanne, given in the end of the original series it was dead Dan and live Roseanne...

I don't think Sara or the others actors would be comfortable having the Roseanne character killed off due to the fragile mental state of the real-life Roseanne. This is someone that Sara has known since she was around 10.

I'm sure they might also want to give Roseanne some hope that she might be welcomed back into the fold in the future whether or not it's a realistic possibility.

Gilbert has the charisma of a soggy towel and no one wants to watch Darlene's depressive, mopey, zero-energy presence week after week. Gilbert just doesn't have the acting chops to headline her own show.

ROSEANNE with a dead Roseanne would be even more bleak than it was before.

Everyone attached (save Goranson and Fishman) can easily cut their losses and move onto other projects, and they should. This show, its creator and its stink are radioactive and ABC and all concerned would be wise to leave it in the rear-view mirror.

The show was a piece of shit anyway so let them try it without Barr.

Also I don't think Barr is mentally ill, I think that she's just a rich asshole who thinks she can say whatever she wants.

Roseanne is the main character. She's the comic. All of the humor is based on her character. If you remove her, it's a completely different show. They may as well put them in a hospital with scrubs on, or make them detectives, and make a drama. That's how different it will be.

They could recast Roseanne wirh.... Rosie O'Donnell ...

Is it all deplorables who are hoping a Darlene show will fail?

To me, this is the best possible outcome. I actually like Sara Gilbert in the new show. And without that asshole Roseanne it will be easy and entertaining to watch the re-reboot.

I'm done with Barr forever. I was willing to give the show a pass in spite of her. Now I don't have to.

FWIW, this solution is all talk at this point right?

R87 How is the taste of borscht and vodka, my little Russian piggy?

I hope this happens and that Roseanne rejoins once the internet warriors stop feigning disgust like she said she joined the MMM or something.

*KKK

Damn this autocorrect!

They should call the reboot- spinoff "SHAME", for all the cast members who tried to cash in off that racist whale in the first place!

She doesn't have the acting chops to be a lead.

Here's some info from Indie WIre:

"A source close to production told Variety that Werner, Gilbert, and Helford are preparing to sit down with ABC executives this week to discuss a potential future for the series. The source made it clear that everyone involved knows it’s a long shot to get the series back on air. One idea mentioned in a report by Entertainment Weekly is to create a similar but new show centered around modified versions of the characters played by Gilbert, John Goodman, Laurie Metcalf, and more.

Both Variety and Entertainment Weekly note the biggest roadblock standing in the way of a variation of “Roseanne” is the fact Barr has a major financial stake in the series. Depending on how the revival’s cast and creators decide to continue the show, it could end up financially benefitting Barr. “Roseanne” was a ratings blockbuster for ABC this season, which makes it a no-brainer as to why the network would be open to at least considering a continuation of some kind."

"Modified versions" of Dan, Jackie and Darlene? Hoo boy. Sounds like a recipe for disaster to me. And it sure does look like Roseanne Barr would get something out of it if another tv series was slapped together featured characters from a a show that SHE created.

You can't go back. Despite Roseanne being mentally ill, the show was best back in the day- prior to the bad lotto season. Too bad we didn't get a Halloween show though.

[quote]This season was really about Darlene and her family. She was actually good too. She, John, and Laurie could be the main characters in a new show based around Sarah Gilbert.

I wrote that in the "Roseanne Cast May Be Saved" thread. Someone give me a job in network television!

Here's the thing about the ownership of the show "Roseanne," Matt Williams was solely credited with the creation of the original show, which always upset Roseanne and was a throne in her side. She did however gain ownership in the show. But here is where it gets interesting, one of the things they had to do to get her to agree to come back for the latest season is that she was granted the created by credit. So there is no way to cut her out financially, unless she agrees. And, if they were to create a "new" show with thinly disguised characters, it would be a lawsuit waiting to happen that she would more than likely win.

As I see it, the only plausible spin-off that I can imagine is to have Becky and Darlene move in together, and have that be the focus of the show.

Lecy and Sara have good chemistry together, their characters are natural foils for each other (just like Roseanne and Jackie were) and they have decent storylines between them that can be explored which don't revolve around Roseanne (i.e. Darlene raising her kids as a working class single mom, Becky going back to school and trying to move on from her husband's death, etc.).

You can sprinkle in some cameo appearances with Dan and Aunt Jackie to fill out the show, maybe some episodes with DJ and his daughter, and Roseanne need only be mentioned/acknowledged off screen.

I can't see it working any other way. Roseanne's character was/is the nucleus of the show in its original concept. The only way to plausibly cut her out would be to re-focus the premise entirely.

Tonally, it would be a different show though. More like Laverne & Shirley than about a blue-collar family struggling together to make ends meet.

ABC should just let sleeping dog lie. Roseanne will get in the way of the spin-off one way or another and do anything she can to ruin its success. She's a vindictive bitch decades ago. Now she's a crazy vindictive bitch. Good luck with that.

Laurie Metcalf deserves her own series.

It all comes down to money. Is it cheaper to pay the leads their $9 million, and whatever else is owed and call it a day or try to recoup?

r31 Dl can't even let one case of child abuse of a celeb stand, it makes it appear like no celebs and celeb children were abused as children, except three people, people like you shouldn't be allowed to li.. .

How about no? Enough of this trash family.

Why not just replace Rosannes character? Sort of like what they did with Becky those couple years.

Rosie ODonelle would be PERFECT.

Joe Maganello is free from his True Blood commitments.

R103 Rosie O is not going to do that. Rosie even said she called Roseanne after this thing blew up. She's sympathetic to Roseanne's mental illness.

They need to forget about a spin-off. The bitch will file a lawsuit. She's already in a fighting mood. It will be a Disney and ABC's biggest headache.

They should kiss their millions goodbye and walk away. It's over. Done.

How does Gilbert have any sway? She helped produce The Talk and helped bring out Roseanne reboot. To me, she has the charisma of a dishrag. It must be her powerful lez connections.

R105, I know. Rosie and Rosanne are friends.

But Rosie would be perfect...

I wouldn’t watch a show focused on Darlene. Shes great as part of the ensemble cast but certainly he character of Darlene can’t be a lead role.

Rosanne Conner is the nucleus that holds the cast together..

Just recast Rosanne

As long as they're going to have anything to do with the Connor family, Roseanne will profit. I don't want that bitch to make a single dime.

R109 There is no way that you can recast the character of Roseanne, anymore than you could have recast Lucy. Sometime the difference between the character and actor is so blurred that they can't be separated.

Too bad Lecy Goranson (Becky) completely forgot how to act and developed the voice of a chain-smoking stevedore, or they could have done an odd couple show with Becky and Darlene sharing an apartment.

Roseanne is the CO-CREATOR of the show. Everyone who keeps saying Matt Williams is sole creator is wrong. So she benefits if the characters are used for a different show. That is ABC’s current dilemma over the situation. Friends of mine working for Disney/ABC have talked about nothing else the last few days. Since salaries have to be paid out. ABC wants a show revamped in a different scenario. But they also know that if Roseanne profits from it that they could receive backlash. So these are the options being weighed.

Everyone seems to be forgetting that the only people who were watching the show were fans of Roseanne's. If CBS is spiteful and sneaky and finds a way to cut her out and somehow spin a new show, none of her fans are watching. So what's the point? CBS lost this one, they fucked up.

[quote]Everyone seems to be forgetting that the only people who were watching the show were fans of Roseanne's.

Not everyone. I watched the first episode this year out of curiosity, not because I'm a fan of Barr. I watched a few more episodes, including the finale, on demand despite Roseanne Barr, not because of her. I thought the writing, some of the themes and a few members of the cast were really good. Including Gilbert, who has a great droll delivery.

So if there's a way to keep the cast working and the writing is good, I'll probably at least give it a look for a few weeks.

The alternative, a very different project using a lot of the same cast, writers, and crew...that could only work if the concept is really good. Think about something like Laurie Metcalf as a powerful right-wing bitch and John Goodman as her effete ultra-progressive foil, with Sara Gilbert as the woman caught in the middle (or whatever, that's just off the top of my head)

Oh, fine, I'll do it.

Why not just re-cast the Roseanne character with Sarah Chalke? She has proven she can take on an existing character and still make the show work.

Just dye her hair and put her in a fat suit and she can mope around making sarcastic one-liners.

Even throw in some meta jokes like they used to when she replaced Goranson.

[quote]Think about something like Laurie Metcalf as a powerful right-wing bitch and John Goodman as her effete ultra-progressive foil, with Sara Gilbert as the woman caught in the middle (or whatever, that's just off the top of my head)

I know it's just an idea but I think they'd be better off staying away from anything political. While it may have helped them gain viewers, they still lost quite a few that could make up the different this time round. Also if there's an issue with one of the actors (unlikely) or the writing (likely) it will be magnified tenfold in these politically charged times.

The show should have focused on Darlene in the first place with occasional appearances from Roseanne.

r114 Leave us out of this.

[quote]Here's the thing about the ownership of the show "Roseanne," Matt Williams was solely credited with the creation of the original show, which always upset Roseanne and was a throne in her side.

Ouch!

R23 I enjoyed watching a young Sara as "Half Pint". It seems to me that she has grown out of whatever was her "It" factor. John Good man isn't half the man he used to be either.

The best solution....bring the show back with Roseanne and have a "special" episode dedicated to racism. It would be great to have Valerie Jarrett guest on the show and really try and change things instead of everyone just taking sides of who's right and who's wrong. The comments Roseanne made were racist, but I don't believe she is racist. We all say stupid, insensitive comments....it's being human. I think we take this situation, and grow from it....not just say "yes, got you fired.." and then everyone forgets about it. It's important to have conversations and I think keeping the show on the air would be great. Plus, Roseanne and ABC could donate profits/paycheque to black organizations and to promote anti-racism

Roseanne is unhinged, r122. ABC was nuts to hand her this series in the first place. Doing it a second time would test the bounds of common sense.

Her earlier tweets were not that far removed from the Valerie Jarrett/George Soros ones. Who knows what depths she might sink to next. Calling for lynchings? I am not kidding.

However, I am curious as to how much of the reboot audience is made up of hardcore Deplorables and what that absence would mean for a ratings slide if the show somehow continued in a new iteration.

R121 Melissa Gilbert played half-pint, not Sara.

[quote]John Good man isn't half the man he used to be either.

You’re right, he’s twice the man!!

Eh, eh, see what I did there? See? Oh, that’s hilari...I’ll show myself out.

Melissa Gilbert as post-surgery Roseanne

Melissa McCarthy would be a better Roseanne.

If they would like to replace Roseanne with another crass, chubby-cheeked, beady-eyed vulgarian, perhaps they should consider Jennifer Lawrence.

Because the Brady Brides worked so well! lol

R122 Alec Baldwin said something similar. That would've been a groundbreaking episode. I also like the idea of VJ guest starring. ABC missed their chance.

[quote] If CBS is spiteful and sneaky and finds a way to cut her out and somehow spin a new show, none of her fans are watching. So what's the point? CBS lost this one, they fucked up.

It was ABC, not CBS, and they fucked up when they gave Roseanne a new/rebooted show in the first place. They had to know all along, given her long history of batshittery, that an incident like this was a possible. They took a chance that she could hold her shit relatively together for the duration of the show and they lost. As far as the racist tweet goes, they did they only thing reasonable they could do when they cancelled the show.

R130 ABC is not going to bank on an abusive and unstable troublemaker like Roseanne. She's like a ticking time bomb, and the execs ain't got time for that.

Everyone seems to forget that the show absolutely blows!

Remember the good old days?

[quote]And now the comedian may be cruising for another if she makes good on her threats. She is ticked off at Bette Midler, who was quoted in last month's Redbook magazine as calling today's women comics "low-life sluts."

[quote]Said Barr, heatedly: "If I ever see her ugly face, I'm gonna slap her till her goddam eyeballs spin -- that bitch. And I will see her, so y'all can be watching for it. I'll slap her till she can't see straight, and I'll pull off her little wig too. Why wouldn't I? She called me a slut! And my husband might beat up her husband!"

Doesn't Sara Gilbert make enough money from that awful tv show "The Talk?" I guess for some people no amount of money is enough.

R135 Isn't she Jewish?

Yes, and she like the (gefilte) fish too.

I hope it bombs

I'd watch that

ABC probably would give Rosanne back her show if she promised the Connors would suddenly decide Trump should be impeached.

Oh I get it. She meant the Helena Bonham Carter version. (at least she could claim that as a good excuse, there is a certain similarity)

I’ve a feeling this whole “let’s revamp the show”will gradually turn into “Roseanne will be absent for a couple episodes” then be brought back into the mix. The show is nothing without her. If they want to use the rest of the cast - unless Jackie is the lead (sorry Sara you don’t cut it as a lead character) it just won’t work. Darlene’s character isn’t meant to be the main focus. The characters all work best as an ensemble around Roseanne.

I think Rosanne will be brought back after “therapy/anger management/donations to civil rights orgs - . With the condition she is not allowed to post on any form of social media.

she will be back...

Mark my words.

The Darlene Connor Show - Episode 1 “Watching Paint Dry”

I can’t wait!

R142 Yep. The summer hiatus will help because most people have short attention spans. By the time the new season starts (with Roseanne back and first billed as usual), the Outrage Bus will have well and truly moved on and most will have forgotten these tweets because there will have been about 100 other outrages between now and then. Just like nobody's talking about Stormy or Camera Hogg anymore.

I just want to see Roseanne fucked for being the callous asshole she is. I hope "Roseanne" dies from a Fentanyl overdose for her knee pain.

Exactly r144. I think abc was way to quick to cancel. I think they are gonna have to slowly step back from the "cancellation" if they want to keep the rest of the cast. They need rosanne to be on the show for the rest of the cast to work.

The outrage will die down in a week or so... then we will slowly hear stories of rosanne being spotted leaving rehab etc...

did she take off from twitter? I don't think she's posted in a couple days? Maybe it's already started. Maybe she was told to lay off twitter and maybe just maybe you have a chance to come back...

Wow it's been like 48 hours since her last tweet.

Mark my words... she will be back on Rosanne. Business as usual. Her last tweet:

[quote] I think abc was way to quick to cancel. I think they are gonna have to slowly step back from the "cancellation" if they want to keep the rest of the cast.

They won't back away from it. It's just too risky and they have already been called out multiple times about how they ignored her past history. Dungey also got a lot of good press thanks to the cancellation as did ABC Disney.

It doesn't matter what the public's attention span is, the media would see a story there and trounce on it just to remind people if they allowed her show to return.

She also publicly attacked her costars. They're probably used to it being done in private but in public is a whole other story.

Roseanne is just too much of a loose cannon for anyone to manage.

Roseanne was ABC's biggest hit in years. People on Twitter might be applauding Dungey but what do the shareholders have to say? Most people in Hollywood are deranged cunts. Roseanne is no different.

Roseanne is not going to be back on the air. Are you kidding? She barely made it through one 9-episode season before her career-ending outburst. She can't be trusted not to do the same thing again. Who the hell would enforce the "no social media" thing? No matter what she might promise, she's about as likely to stop tweeting as Trump is.

R150 And her fans love her twitter rants. It's only those who don't even watch the show that go upset.

They did not cancel her show because they feared her trumpflake fans would stop watching , r151, so what's your point?

Anyone who thinks Roseanne herself will be back is nuts or stupid.

The show was based on Roseanne Barr stand up act. The only way they can do a spin off is if Roseanne Barr signs off on it. Of course, she will want MONEY, and perhaps still CREATIVE CONTROL. Also, Roseanne may be able to go to another network with this show, but this depends on the contract that she has will ABC. She can always go to another network based on new material. Looks like Fox is very interested.

If she was capable of giving up Twitter "for the good of her career," she would have done that already. She gets too much positive reinforcement from connecting with her fellow QAnon crazies.

As for the show...they were so quick to cut her loose that I suspect she'd already built up a lot of bad blood with co-workers and people at the network. This was probably just the last straw.

No other network is going to hire Roseanne. Do boobs like r154 understand that shows rely on advertisers to make money and companies won't advertise their products during a show starring a loose cannon whose unscripted remarks are likely to lead to boycotts of the advertisers' products?

As for a spinoff, they'll never do one that involves giving Roseanne any creative control. They might not be able to avoid having to pay her money, however, which makes me think the spinoff will never happen. Or they'll come up with some entirely new concept and characters that have nothing to do with the Connor family, and avoid paying Roseanne, but the show will probably last two seconds.

r156, not hire, buy out.

[quote] Anyone who thinks Roseanne herself will be back is nuts or stupid.

Agree. Roseanne is just too crazy, unstable and UNTRUSTWORTHY.

She blames her craziness on Ambien or one of her multiple personalities. No one in the Entertainment business should touch her with a 10 foot pole. She's like an addict, she'll get remorseful and sober and then have another Twitter relapse.

[quote]the Outrage Bus will have well and truly moved on and most will have forgotten

How long does this usually take?

Asking for a friend...

[quote]NO ONE is going to want to look at Sara Gilbert (and listen to her slurred voice) week after week.

Absolute truth. She was abysmal on Big Bang Theory and has never been a good actor. She and Roseanne both have the same problems: stilted delivery, lack of control of their facial expressions, grinning at funny lines when the character isn't supposed to be making a joke, etc. It's awful to watch, and I have never understood, even when I was a kid, why anyone thought the show or half the actors on it were any good.

Nine episodes in the reboot, and the dozens of characters are still as undeveloped and vacuous as... as if it never aired.

Listen to Sara Gilberts’ monotone voice? Fuck no. If she thinks she can carry a show, she’s delusional.

Is Roseanne on board?

If they do a spin off, then they will have to deal with Roseanne Barr in some fashion; get her permission, pay her, let her make decisions. That will certainly get out and that will certainly make everyone involved look like shit. They cancel her show, get rid of her for appalling behavior and THEN get her back on a tv series in some shape or form? I can't believe this is even being considered or talked about. I guess the network just wants to keep making money from Roseanne somehow. But in order to do it they would have to get Roseanne back in the game. How can they possibly do that without looking like idiots?

R160 fancies himself or herself the head of The Actor's Studio.

R163 I read ABC has to pay the top bill actors for season 2 whether there is a show or not, so I don't blame them for looking for work around to get some return from its money.

delighted the cast and crew will have a paycheck.

I never watched any of the shows, old or new, that schmaltzy cornball family shit bugs me

ROT IN HELL ROSEANNE

I would watch a Jackie and Darlene show. Even with the annoying kids, though the daughter is a druggie, right?

Maybe ABC pretend fired her and Roseanne does not want to be on the show anyway. She still wants money as creator and exec producer.

The whole thing is so crazy. ABC is Racist and Republican, they vote for Trump too. ABC is worse than Barr.

r168 Please explain to us how ABC votes.

[quote][R160] fancies himself or herself the head of The Actor's Studio.

Ahem.

Let me ask you something, R164, if Heaven exists...

Sara Gilbert is ok as a supporting actress, but as a lead actress carrying a series? No, not at all. That would get stale fast.

she looks like Mortimer Snerd, the puppet dummy

Sarah Gilbert could have been spun off as Leslie Winkle from BBT.

Sarah has her characters down pat.

A brilliant female STEM PhD comedy is something Chuck needs to look into.

ABC is Republican and RACIST. This looks like ABC is trying to steal the work of Barr, who is know to be mentally ill.

GET A LAWYER, ROSEANNE.

ABC/DISNEY banned African Americans from their parks and resorts. They banned African-Americans from ABC, from work, which is true Racism, and blatantly ILLEGAL. Much worse than anything you have did. Though, that tweet was Fucked Up.

[quote] ABC/DISNEY banned African Americans from their parks and resorts.

Plainly not true.

R174 = batshit Roseanne

R174 can eat my ass after Taco Bell.

My favorite thing about Sara Gilbert's Darlene character is her $500 haircut/hairstyle.

Say WHAT, R174?!

Brief and non complete racist history of Disney.

Brief and non complete racist history of Trump.

Roseanne might forego profits to keep the show going.

Please let this show just die. Darlene has the charisma of a wet dish rag, the other cast members couldn't act. Leave it alone and let's forget the reboot ever happened.

good

Sara Gilbert is not a lead actress who can have a whole show revolve around her. Period.

[QUOTE]Please let this show just die. Darlene has the charisma of a wet dish rag,

So 10 million people were tuning in for Roseanne’s charisma?

No, R186, for nostalgia.

Darlene wasn't the lead before, no apparently she's going to be. Gilbert is good in small doses, but not as the lead.

I predict that the leads will be John Goodman, Laurie Metcalfe and Sara Gilbert.

r185 then luckily ABC also has contracts for a season of shows with Metcalf and Goodman.

Since they have to pay them anyway, might as well shoot a season of shows with these actors as brand new characters. They could have Metcalf and Goodman as a married couple with Gilbert as the cranky neighbor.

They have to air shows anyway, this would stand just as good of a chance as another pilot.

I wonder if Metcalf and Goodman would accept if this goes through. It’s been a major embarrassment and they have steady careers outside of this show. Plus, they might feel a misguided loyalty to Roseanne.

For $300,000 per episode, they’ll be there.

R191 They are still under contract... if ABC doesn't do anything, they are home free. Otherwise, they would have to get lawyers to wiggle their way out of it if ABC does decide to do some spin-off and they don't want to be involved.

That's what I was going to say. For $3 million, all of them will show up. How much of a career does John Goodman have left? Laurie can still do Broadway, buy it pays shit.

What happened to the huge mop of cascading curls that Sara Gilbert used to sport on the old Roseanne tv series? Her hair now looks limp as a noodle now. It seems to have sagged along with her face.

It appears to be getting closer to happening.

Now they just have to negotiate a one time fee to pay Roseanne so she'll go away.

They should really let this project die. None of the other characters could carry a show.

I hope it goes through. Even if it fails, it would be an interesting footnote in TV history.

Never a fan of Roseann. Not a fan oh Sara Gilbert. Sheadds nothing to The Talk.

Da fuq, R199?

I guess the network figures if it's going to have to pay these people anyway why not have them working. But "Roseanne" without Roseanne is not going to be watched by many people. This shouldn't be happening. Hell, the original reboot of "Roseanne" shouldn't have happened. God, I wish ALL of this Roseanne shit, ALL the fucking characters on that show, would just go away. It's OVER.

I sure miss my Roseanne reruns. I hope they start airing them again.

Having just seen 'Three Tall Women,' I'd like to see Laurie Metcalf collect the $3 million dollar check ABC has to give her anyway, skip the 'Roseanne' spin-off, and keep challenging herself in quality theater productions. She's a superb actor, but the writing for Jackie in the revival didn't do her justice.

Done deal.

Good luck with that.

What R201 said.

Roseanne got a big fat settlement. What do you think she settled for, a bag of marbles??? She must have gotten millions and millions. ABC is full of shit when they say she is in no way profiting from this new show. Totally lies, but that is the deplorable way, lie every time you open you mouth or write something.

It was awful

R208 I think The Conners is great.