MovieChat Forums > Happy Days (1974) Discussion > first 2 seaons were amazing

first 2 seaons were amazing


such high quality

boy did it fall fast

reply


Totally agree. The first two seasons of Happy Days was a revelation. It was a show *about* the 50s and the morality and problems of the times. I don't know if it was in some way inspired by The Summer of '42, but it seems it did. Later on, Happy Days became just a run of the mill sitcom that happened to take place in the 1950s.

Filming in front of the studio audience changes the writing entirely. Instead of the charm, the writing took on cheap jokes meant for a live audience to laugh at.

reply

Have to agree! It became the "Fonzie Show" on season 3.

reply

Yes, and "the 50s" became rather dubious after those first two seasons, which previously had made a genuine attempt to convey the atmosphere & concerns of the times.

reply

The second season is great, the first I was very disappointed by. I mean there is an entire episode dedicated to Richie feeling self conscious because his date is taller than he is.

reply

they show firts 2 seasons on pluto

reply

I think they show more than that. I think they show the whole series.

reply

What's wrong with the tall girl episode? Many high school boys on the short side can relate. And it was well-done, IMO.

reply

It was boring and uninteresting

reply

I find it interesting mostly because they used Brady Bunch sets in that episode 🙂

reply

I don't recall that specific episode, but the same storyline was used on Leave It To Beaver.

reply

Leave It To Beaver sucks in every sense of the word.

I can't even get over the pilot episode where Richie is on the couch with some chick and she goes "would you like to read", so Richie reads to her for like 10 seconds, then she's like "do you want to neck?" so they make out for like 10 seconds. Such an awkward episode.

Yeah the 1st season sucks. 2 is quite good though.

reply

Short boys should just not date anybody.
Let's be real: humanity would be better off if they just dissappeared.

reply


Whew! I dodged that bullet!

reply

I wonder how much Garry Marshall should be blamed for the lack of quality control over time. I was reading on Ken Levine's blog, and he says that when Happy Days and The Odd Couple before that, switched from single-camera to multi-camera and that proved to be wildly beneficial for both.

Somebody else added that a lot of people may knock the show that Happy Days became but you can't argue with success. It was on the verge of being canceled and Garry Marshall turned it around. They were getting killed in the ratings against Good Times and Jimmie Walker with his catchphrase "Dynomite!!" So Garry decided to go in front of a live audience, add catch phrases and focus more on The Fonz.

reply


There's no doubt that from a ratings standpoint anyway, the live audience, the shitty jokes meant for the live audience to laugh at, and the movement of Fonzie to lead character was the right choice.

For me at least, there were few bright spots from season 3 on. I stopped watching sometime in season 4 if I recall correctly.

reply

I'll second that.

It was great until they took the show in front of a live audience.

I also felt that "less is more" when it come to the "Fonz" character. The over-the-top Richie and Fonz were not my cup of tea, but that's what they became after the first two seasons. The characters were geared for getting a reaction from the audience. Ruined it for me.

reply

Yeah, the show was great during the first two seasons. It seemed as if it was a show from the 50's. Once season 3 came along, I really didn't like it. I was only 12 when season 3 came on, but I knew what quality was and knew that it was gone in season 3. Sure it became a sensation, but you can never rely on the public to support anything that is high quality.

reply