I disagree. I've only seen the first two episodes so far, but they've been very funny. Great I Love Lucy style comedy, done well. Certainly better than Here's Lucy which was on at the same time.
I know it's directed by Desi Arnaz and written by some I Love Lucy writers, and it shows. A very fun show.
I don't necessarily think that it is God-awful. Rather, I think that it didn't "age" well.
It was probably quite hysterical in its day (1967-1968). But, much of its comedy, humor, situations, etc., seem to fall flat when you watch this today (2014).
Keep in mind that the rating score of 7.5 - which is quite high - is only based on the opinions of a very small number of viewers (less than 300 people).
I'd expect that most of the people who come to The Mothers-in-Law IMDb page are fans of the show. (Really, who else would be on the page of an old show from nearly 50 years ago?)
Also, I'd expect that most of the people who even bother to rate the show - i.e., that small group of 300 viewers - are fans of the show.
In other words, people who - in general - don't like the show are not going to really bother to visit its IMDb page, much less take the time to rate it. Fans of the show, however, will do both.
This show, with a score of 7.5, was only rated by 300 viewers. Less than 300, actually; it is only 271. That is a very tiny number. For comparison and for perspective:
* 300,000 viewers rated the show Friends;
* 123,000 viewers rated the show Seinfeld;
* 175,000 viewers rated the show The Family Guy; and
* 177,000 viewers rated the show The Simpsons.
Also, the main fan-base of the above TV shows are people in the younger generation and, therefore, more inclined to use the internet and visit IMDb.
The main fan-base of The Mothers-in-Law are people from the older generation and, therefore, much less likely to be familiar with the internet or to visit IMDb.
The main fan-base of The Mothers-in-Law are people from the older generation and, therefore, much less likely to be familiar with the internet or to visit IMDb.This is true and means that the score would be higher if those folks were accounted for.
Excellent post. I agree with your sentiments.
It is indeed a good show. We have to remember that it was written, produced, directed, filmed, performed, aired, and viewed in its own day and time (1967-1968).
So, you can't "judge" a 1967 show by contemporary (2015) standards and perspectives.
You have to (mentally) "transport" yourself and transplant yourself back to 1967, in order to truly appreciate the show and its humor.
All of those elements (writing, producing, directing, acting, filming, etc.) meant very different things back then, as compared to what those crafts mean today.
I love this show, too. Something makes me come back to it every few years and re-watch it. I feel some episodes are bit more flat than others (not as funny)...but they're all charming. And the funniest shows are truly hysterical. And I love the Eve-Kaye dynamic.
Agreed. All good points. Thanks.
shareI just watched the one where Jeanette Nolan plays the babies' Scottish nanny. So good. That whole bagpipe/dancing scene is classic. Then she goes into the other room and returns in her own costume and joins them. I just laughed so hard.
This show is a notch above some of the Lucy stuff, because it has Eve doing the Lucy shtick, Kaye serving as Ethel, Roger as Fred, and Herb (somewhat) like Ricky. But on top of this stuff, it has great musical scenes. And both Kaye and Eve sing wonderfully on this show. Add the young newlyweds, and the babies in the second half of season two, and you have a multigenerational show that is vastly entertaining.
Yes. I remember that episode.
If I remember correctly, this show used the same writers from the I Love Lucy show, also.
Yes, this show was created by those writers (Bob Carroll Jr. & Madelyn Davis), and they scripted half the episodes for THE MOTHERS-IN-LAW.
At first, I was put off by some of the plots-- seeing them as stories that were probably intended for Lucy on her earlier shows. The meatball episode, which is very funny, seemed very Lucy-ish.
But I came to judge the show on its own merits, of whether it entertains. And ultimately it doesn't matter if it's Lucy or Eve, or Ethel or Kaye, doing some of those antics-- because it's great fun to watch.
One other thing this program has over Lucy's three sitcoms (I Love Lucy, The Lucy Show and Here's Lucy) is that these women are allowed to be grandmothers. Lucy was not seen as a grandmother on camera till the mid-80s when she appeared in the short-lived Life with Lucy...which by the way, was created by these same headwriters. I think Lucille Ball was trying to appear younger than her actual age in the 60s and 70s...but by the time the 80s rolled around, she was willing to grow and play more age-appropriate characters.
Interesting background. Thanks.
I never really liked any of those later Lucy sitcoms. After I Love Lucy, she'd have big shoes to fill. And those other subsequent sit-coms really were not able to deliver.
I was looking at episodes of Here's Lucy on Hulu. And the best ones were without a doubt the ones written by Bob Carroll & Madelyn Davis. Most of the other ones were just too far-fetched, too loud and too unfunny.
Lucille Ball actually had a falling out with Carroll & Davis in 1964, firing them from The Lucy Show. But Desi hired them to create and headwrite The Mothers-in-Law in '67. After The Mothers-in-Law ended in '69, Lucy patched up her differences with the two writers and they started writing scripts for Here's Lucy in 1970, which they continued to do for her until the sitcom went off the air in 1974.
Yes, the writers were very talented!
shareThe Mothers-In-Law was, in my opinion, much better in the first season than the second. Richard Deacon, whom I loved in the Dick Van Dyke Show and other roles, was an odd and sub-par choice to replace Roger C. Carmel. The chemistry isn't there with Kaye Ballard at all.
Regarding Lucille Ball, I liked The Lucy Show, but thought Here's Lucy was pretty lame. Every show had some guest star, usually in an outlandish plot (much like The Simpsons would use guest voices in ridiculous situations three decades later). After a year or two, it seemed to me that the kids didn't even want to be there. The fact that it lasted until 1974 (All In The Family was into it's 4th season by then) still blows me away.
Yeah. After the classic black-and-white I Love Lucy show from the 50's, I pretty much stopped watching.
I caught a few episodes here and there and I didn't like them.
I probably was being unfair and never "gave them a chance". I was probably wanting "more" of I Love Lucy.
So I never gave the new shows a fair shake.
Totally agree. Love Eve Arden and Kaye Ballard. They had great chemistry.
shareBtw, since the OP comment, the show has risen to a 7.7 rating as of May, 2016.
shareBtw, since the OP comment, the show has risen to a 7.7 rating as of May, 2016.
I have given it a 9, but after watching a few episodes again on Hulu tonight-- I think I'm going to upgrade my rating to a 10.
The one where they all go on the honeymoon together (at the beginning of the first season)...and they are screaming at the motorcycle gang outside the window--it was perfectly played. Yes, it was loud, but it was supposed to be loud, since these are excitable people in a threatening situation. The writing covered all the angles, they milked every laugh they could, with one gag after another as that long scene played.
Another one i watched, where the women were locked in the department store-- the whole routine with Desi in bed in Barcelona, such a classic scene, played perfectly by a bunch of old pros. Shows should be half as good today and television would be vastly better.
I was in my early teens when the show first aired, and I have the DVD set now - it's a bit dated but I think it's still funny.
Desi Arnaz was brilliant at blocking comedy and you can see his fine hand in this show. And he had two of I Love Lucy's original writers, Madelyn Pugh and Bob Carroll Jr., behind the scripts.
I did enjoy this venture more than the Here's Lucy shows. Especially after Vivian Vance left the post-I Love Lucy series. I always thought Lucille Ball was a riot - but as the lead in the post-Desi shows, it felt like we all were waiting for the Ricardo's and Mertzes to re-unite.
Ironically, when you watch this show, Eve Arden's hair is a lighter auburn that Lucille Ball's carrot top, and she does come across as a watered down version of Lucy. Herb Rudley as her husband is almost as cranky as Fred Mertz and Roger C. Carmel and Kaye Ballard as their counterparts are all almost a less funny (much less funny) take on the I Love Lucy formula.
The plots of The MILs sometimes seem to be watered-down versions of I Love Lucy, but they are funny. Kaye Ballard flaunts her Italian heritage almost the way Ricky Ricardo's Cuban heritage was shown.
Even as far as use of the Westport plots: the barbecue in the backyard when Lucy thinks she lost her ring is mirrored in the episode when the MILs are running a catering business and Suzie, the daughter, thinks she lost her ring when they were rolling meatballs. Pugh and Carroll relied on tried and true storylines, but because the times were changing, the formula didn't quite fit the same 1950's patterns.
It really is a funny show; I just think the cast tried just a bit too hard with the material. Or, it might have been that the
"I laughed, I cried, it became a part of me..."