MovieChat Forums > The George Burns and Gracie Allen Show (1950) Discussion > Which format did you prefer?

Which format did you prefer?

posted 12 years ago by cheerioaway_92
17 replies | jump to latest

Having seen most of the episodes now, I feel like I can comment on the show a little better. Did you prefer the first two live seasons (/two/ different Harrys in the first season alone, Bill Goodwin as announcer prior to Harry Von Zell), the filmed seasons without Ronnie (3-5), or the filmed seasons with Ronnie (6-onwards)?

I think that I prefer the last three seasons myself- the cast seemed to finally gel together and as a result made situations even funnier, if possible. Having Ronnie also helped add new plotlines to the show and added a "youthful" element to the show without totally changing the show (I can think of a lot of shows that were ruined by adding kids.) The earlier episodes seemed more like radio sketches to me, and it was hard watching the show knowing that Harry Morton was going to be replaced every few episodes or so. =P

[–] MissMargoChanning 12 years ago

I admit that I love them all but I love the ones with Ronnie. They make me laugh out loud when I see George wathcing what is going on when he watches TV in his den upstairs.
I love everything about this show though. George and Gracie really were special together. No matter how absured the situation created by Gracie, George understood her and all was explained in the end.
They were great!

"Fasten your seat belts!
It's going to be a bumpy night!"

[–] thextguy 12 years ago

I agree with you, the best episodes are the last three (?) years with Ronnie Burns and George Burns viewing everything that is happening up on the TV in his den.

Larry Keating is perfect as a stuffy, pompous Harry Morton. Fred Clark. who played Harry before Keating joined the cast, just didn't quite suit the role. I barely remember the guy before him but he was even less suitable.

Ronnie Burns did add a welcome 'youthful' element to the show and it really did help the series.

I think many very early TV series (late 1940's to early 1950's) were merely "rdaio shows with pictures". As TV began to mature, they moved away from that concept and B&A shows this through its 8 year run.

[–] cheerioaway_92 12 years ago

Larry Keating is by far my favorite Harry Morton also. I think he had the best chemistry with Bea Benaderet-- their silly arguments really made the show for me. I also loved any scenes he had with George in his den. Fred Clark was funny too, but his obsession with food got tiring. I haven't seen as many episodes with the previous two, but I didn't care for them either.

It's interesting to see often little things in the show changed-- for example, at first Gracie's stories about her relatives were clumsily placed in the middle of the episode, totally halting the plot. I think starting in the fifth season George and Gracie started doing the routines at the very end of the episode. Also, minor characters such as Mr. Beasley the postman and the Vanderlips disappeared after a while. And, as each new Harry Morton appeared, Blanche seemed to change from being a normal cook to an awful one.

[–] Qanqor 12 years ago

I see things differently. I break the series up into four sections:

1) The first two live seasons

2) The Pre-Ronnie filmed seasons

3) The New York episodes

4) The post-New York final episodes.

For me, like them all for different reasons: The live ones interest me just because I haven't seen most of them. The pre-Ronnie filmed ones are really probably the best ones, in terms of overall quality. The New York ones are very good, and Ronnie adds a nice new dimension, both in his opposition to his parents' vaudeville comedian roots, and in just broadening George and Gracie's characters by showing them as parents. I think the last set are the weakest, by far, but their one saving grace is I love the schtick of George watching the proceedings on this tv.

The last episodes are weak for three reasons: 1) The idea of changing Ronnie from serious-actor to girl-chaser was just weak. It made him a vastly more mundane character. 2) While doing the old Vaudeville routines at the end of the episodes was nice, it left less time for the rest of the show and resulted in significantly less interesting and less developed plots. 3) Gracie herself got rather watered down. She became less about her unique illogical-logic and more about Lucy-esque scheming and plotting (albeit without all the physical comedy).

When I reflect on the show, of my three favorite episode, two are in the pre-Ronnie filmed set, and one is in New York.

[–] VinnieRattolle 11 years ago

I started at the beginning of the final season, caught some fourth season episodes on weekends and am now back on season 3 (Antannae TV seems to be skipping the kinescope years). Most long-running shows are stale when they end ("Lucy" is a perfect example) but from my estimation, George and Gracie went out on top. George's TV was an ingenious device responsible for all sorts of fun convolutions and contrivances and the cast had become so familiar with one another that they totally sold even the lamest of jokes. The vaudeville routines are admittedly pretty dumb, but Gracie got so caught up in her ridiculous stories that they're still entertaining.

Contrarily, I'm not as into the earlier episodes. Keating and Benadaret's chemistry was overwhelming, but she didn't seem to have any chemistry at all with Clark (I haven't seen the other actors yet). The writing doesn't seem as sharp in seasons 3 and 4, and it feels incomplete (and much more Lucy-ish) without Ronnie.

I plan to watch every episode in all their edited glory (man, I wish they hadn't butchered the hell out of these to jam in more commercials) but I'm not feeling anywhere near as much love for the early seasons as I did for the last.

[–] rycki1138 11 years ago

George and Gracie didn't exactly go out when the show was still good. Gracie did, but not George. Gracie Allen retired from show business in 1958 following season 8 because of a bad heart. George tried to bring the show back without Gracie the following season. It was George, Harry Von Zell, Ronnie Burns & the Mortons and was titled The George Burns Show. It only lasted 1 season because the audience was always wondering when Gracie was going to show up. The show is mostly forgotten now.

When Gracie retired in 1958, as a sign of solidarity her best friend (and Jack Benny's wife), Mary Livingstone, also retired from show business. That's why Mary's not on the Jack Benny Program in the later years. But Jack Benny's show went on for 7 more years without her. Even though they were really married Mary never played Jack's wife on his show so her absence from the show wasn't as jarring as Gracie's was on The George Burns Show.

(knock,knock,knock) Penny (knock,knock,knock) Penny (knock,knock,knock) Penny

[–] VinnieRattolle 10 years ago

I've now seen the majority of episodes and recant my original opinion of Fred Clark. The trio of original Harry Mortons were totally different from Larry Keating's characterization, and the difference was jarring since I'd seen Keating first. I've really come to love Clark, who was the best of the original three. But my opinion of the final two seasons remains unchanged -- I still think they were the best of the series. Some of the episodes were do-overs ("Locked Out," "Hole in the Carpet," etc.) and I felt like they improved them the second time around. The vaudeville routines, however, went downhill. Originally they were all over the map (shopping, sightseeing in Manhattan, going to the post office/library, visiting fortune tellers, etc.) but by the end they limited the schtick exclusively to Gracie's relatives, the stories became more outlandish and less funny.

Going back to Lucy (it's difficult not to compare), her show really ran out of steam when they moved to the country -- though admittedly, a lot of that probably had to do with Lucy & Desi's increasingly tense relationship. With Burns & Allen it was just the opposite; the cast/crew had mutated into such a well oiled machine that even on the 50th go-round of a joke it was still funny.

As for "The George Burns Show," I refuse to form an opinion based on the one episode that's in circulation. It's from after they retooled the show and frankly, it's not a great episode -- but it's still better than half the crap on TV today. I sincerely hope some more episodes find thier way online. It sorta reminds me of "Three's a Crowd," which wasn't a bad show in its own rite, but "Three's Company" had cast such a tall shadow over it that it was doomed from the start.

And about Mary Livingston, very few of the episodes that she appeared in were memorably good and many were annoyingly bad (like "The May Co. Reunion," which was the story of how she and Jack met -- a dreadfully unfunny episode). I literally didn't know anything about her when I decided I didn't like her, and later discovered everyone else felt the same way. She was the weakest link in the cast, and it's kind of a shame that there wasn't a regular Gracie, Lucy, Imagene or Carol for Jack to play off of. And I surmise the reason for that is because Mary wouldn't hear of it.

[–] robert4770 10 years ago

Where did you view that episode of "The George Burns Show"? I have always wanted to see one.

[–] mwmtampa 10 years ago

I agree with most of the responders on this board.

The show was better as it aged through the years, and the ones with Ronnie were absolutely fantastic. I loved everyone in the show at that point, and the episodes were crisp and the epitome of the classic sitcom format in its final years.

And also preferred Larry Keating in the role of Harry Morton -he pulled it off perfectly in the style they had developed that character into. But I thought Fred Clark was pretty good also.

[–] robert4770 10 years ago

I don't think this show gets enough credit. To me it's in the same caliber as "I Love Lucy"

[–] tampammm 10 years ago

I agree Robert.

This can compare to I Love Lucy, or any of the greatest comedies of all time.

[–] [email protected] 10 years ago

According to the George Burns bio "George Burns & the Hundred Year Dash", Mary Livingston was jealous of Gracie and always tried to either do the same thing or something better such as a bigger house, fancier address, etc.

When Gracie decided to retire, Mary opted to do so because it would make news and put her in the spotlight.

btw, has anyone seen the episodes where George announces John Brown & Fred Clark as the new Harry Morton? I have seen the Larry Keating and Harry von Zell introduction episodes, though von Zell appeared in the prior episode to that.

[–] kryptoman102 9 years ago

I love all the formats. The show is a classic that should be shown in syndication all the time!

[–] brooksshows 9 years ago

For me personally, I like the original format of the first two seasons. From a purely creative standpoint it offers so much innovation that had never been attempted before. The original marketing tactic of brand placement within the skit, a bold move that was way ahead of it's time. Even the aspect of George routinely "stepping out of the scene" to deliver a monologue, then rejoining... just a brilliant concept that no one else was doing.

The plots were usually very complicated for a 30 min show, to the point of often being the source of self-deprecating humor from Burns over how the writers could have produced such a mess.. always to be tied up neatly in the end.