I watched this show Thursday this was my first time ever seeing this show. Anyways, I watched the one episode that came on Thursday and it wasn't to bad. It reminded me a lot of Cheers.
Of course I would go with Cheers that is a classic show and who can forget that theme song.
Cheers had James Burrows and the Charles brothers to write most of the shows. As a result Cheers was a brilliantly funny well written show.
Sullivan and Son on the other hand reverts to cheap sex jokes, which don't take much talent and thought to write.
That is true. Its like back then with sitcoms writers took their time to write a great TV show and they didn't have to try hard to be funny the humor just came naturally. Today like you said with most sitcoms its just cheap sex jokes and not much talent.
sharesullivan + son for the win!
The circulation of confidence is better than the circulation of money.-James Madison
cheers for me, but like sullivan and son
shareno ted danson is a good thing.
The circulation of confidence is better than the circulation of money.-James Madison
I'm currently watching Cheers as someone new to the series (I was a Frasier fan but was a bit young to watch Cheers when it was out) and I don't really get how it's any better than Sullivan and Son. The stories are just as forgettable, the characters are even more one-dimensional and the writing is just as obvious. Cheers explained: The bar staff talks about stuff, Norm comes in and everyone screams his name and he says a silly one-liner, Frasier comes in and has some kind of relationship issue, Dianne complains and complains, etc. It's just a sitcom. The fact that it resonated with so many people shows that it actually wasn't that smart because smart shows carve out a niche, they aren't mainstream mega-hits.
Sullivan and Son is merely a copy of Cheers for today's world. More hilarious racial and sexual jokes, fewer moments of relationship drama. I see them as being on par with each other, both have their flaws and their good aspects.
great points.
and woody harrelson is really annoying.
The circulation of confidence is better than the circulation of money.-James Madison
I love Woody as an actor, but in Cheers his character was so annoying. It was like they needed that moron when Coach died and Woody was coach's replacement to keep the show's intellectual level grounded. Sam is a dumb jock, but has moments of intelligence, but if he was the dumbest character on the show it would not have resonated with everyone as much.
shareCarol Walsh, the oversexed hag is Rhea Perlman.
Owen the space cadet is Woody the space cadet.
Brian-Doyle (suspenders man) is Norm.
Steve is Sam Malone
You could even argue that Ok Cha is the other side of Rhea Perlman, the sarcastic / mean half as opposed to the oversexed half. However, I'd say that Ok Cha is the most original character.
The show is enjoyable, I can't stand Sam/Carol combo. Steve, OK Cha, and the rest are tolerable, and everybody knows your na-a-a-ame.
* Edit *
They try to make her look frumpy for the show, but I'd bang, Vivian Bang any day of the week.
In my honest opinion, Cheers was the was better show. Sullivan and Son is fun to watch, but Cheers had excellent writing, the chemistry of the cast was amazing and even though it was a comedy, it had some very poignant moments. I still watch Cheers till this day and nothing will ever compare to it.
shareI watch this show and don't mind it, but c'mon, how in god's holy name can this be compared to Cheers? I'm not even a huge Cheers fan, but still, it was a mega-hit that produced characters who are still recognizable today, over 20 years after the show ended it's run. Comparing Cheers to this show is like comparing a Picasso to the Paint-by-Numbers drawing your kid recently made you. You still appreciate the drawing because your kid made it for you, but you understand realistically where it stands next to the Picasso.....
share