Friends

Always number 1

In the days of a social media and a new generation discovering Friends through Netflix and Comedy Central, there have been a plethora of "why Ross was the worst friend" "why Rachel had the best hair" articles popping up on the likes of her.ie etc and it got me thinking..

As Friends went through the seasons, the trials and tribulations of Ross and Rachel were fairly prominent but with the benefit of hindsight and now that it is finished, I think the real storyline that ran through Friends is actually all about Monica and Chandler.

Monica is the glue that holds the group together. Her apartment is the go to place (when they're not in Central Perk) she mammys them when needed. She has her romantic ups and downs as does Chandler and they finally get together in London they marry and adopt the babies and are preparing to leave the city when the season ends. Almost all the flashback episodes allude to them flirting or getting together.. Ross and Rachel may be the 'glamour' couple but in my opinion, the show would not have been as successful or popular if it wasn't for the Bings..

banie01

1999 called, it wants its thread back!

JP Liz V1

I think all the cast worked well together

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Those articles are stoopid. All the Friends do questionable things and there wouldn’t be much of a show if they didn’t.

punisher5112

Pivat

Tzardine

Jesus you could have put a spoiler alert in the OP.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

punisher5112 wrote: »

Pivat

How can one little word be so funny. But it is.

Jurgen The German

A terrible show about terrible people.

Tammy!

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

How can one little word be so funny. But it is.

If you Google Ross Gellar, before you click into the Wikipedia page, click the little sofa in the right hand corner

punisher5112

Tammy! wrote: »

If you Google Ross Gellar, before you click into the Wikipedia page, click the little sofa in the right hand corner

Keep pressing and it breaks....

alchemist33

punisher5112 wrote: »

Pivat

Who?

Charles Leclerc

Jurgen The German wrote: »

A terrible show about terrible people.

A great show about 6 loyal friends.

It seems to be cool to hate on Friends these days. :cool:

punisher5112

alchemist33 wrote: »

Who?

Ross has a new couch, gets help from chandler and Rachel.....

The couch is about thrice too big to fit

Homelander

I don't really get people who claim the show is terrible, was never funny.....I mean, sure it's got ups and downs, but the best episodes are all-time TV classics in my opinion. Most of which involve Ross in some way. I think the 'PIVOT' couch scene alone is hands down my favorite, but it doesn't really work if you're not already a fan of the show and familiar with Ross's personality. Never was a big fan of Ross and Rachel as a couple but the 'we were on a break' bit that ran right through to Season 10 was hilarious.

But then again while I enjoy most other sitcoms to varying degrees, I find the Big Bang Theory unfunny, painfully so at times, despite it being one of the most popular sitcoms ever, so I'm not really one to talk.

quickbeam

Tammy! wrote: »

If you Google Ross Gellar, before you click into the Wikipedia page, click the little sofa in the right hand corner

Stuff happens if you do the same with them all, except Rachel.

pixelburp

Friends occupies the same space as the Simpsons in being a show that, in its prime, was quite funny, only to slide way off the cliff into parody and irrelevance. At least Friends got to definitively end, albeit like that other show, long after it was funny.

It was strange to think just how obsessed people were about it though. Like, it was a genuine phenomenon and pop culture sensation of its time, prior to the internet being a thing - let alone the concept of viral hits. Though yeah, watching it now there's an element of confusion over why it was so popular.

Dial Hard

alchemist33 wrote: »

Who?

It should say pivot. And that was one of the worst episodes ever.

Liamalone

I don't think I've ever lasted a full episode of Friends, thankfully.

AMKC

Liamalone wrote: »

I don't think I've ever lasted a full episode of Friends, thankfully.

I have seen full episode unfortunately not by choice. I have never seen what people see in it or why they think it is funny. It is all so forced. Sure give me a million bucks a week and I could do that to maybe.
My advice to anyone thinking of watching it is don't bother. Ross is depressing, Phoepe is annoying and the rest well are just forgettable.
Its just a show about some rich so called friends in an apartment trying to be funny.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Charles Leclerc wrote: »

A great show about 6 loyal friends.

It seems to be cool to hate on Friends these days. :cool:

It was always cool to hate on Friends. Usually whilst mentioning how much better Seinfeld was. Of course, it just might not be somebody’s thing but the insulting of people who do like it is pretty pathetic.

Dial Hard wrote: »

It should say pivot. And that was one of the worst episodes ever.

They were going for phonetic spelling, I think, to emulate how Ross says it.

bb12

ross in the tanning booth and the episode with the leather trousers and talcum powder were pretty funny

Never got into it, always preferred Seinfeld, suppose it’s just my sense of humour!

Agent Coulson

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

It was always cool to hate on Friends. Usually whilst mentioning how much better Seinfeld was.

Hulu paid $180m for the streaming rights to Sienfeld in 2015 and turns out it was a huge waste of money as less than 5% of it streamers watch it and they were very happy to let the rights run out and not bid again for them.


Compare that to Friends wherever it is shown it has record viewing numbers.

S.M.B.

quickbeam wrote: »

Stuff happens if you do the same with them all, except Rachel.

Rachels is an image search link to "The Rachel" haircut.

Dog Murphy

Agent Coulson wrote: »

Hulu paid $180m for the streaming rights to Sienfeld in 2015 and turns out it was a huge waste of money as less than 5% of it streamers watch it and they were very happy to let the rights run out and not bid again for them.


Compare that to Friends wherever it is shown it has record viewing numbers.

Just because Friends is popular is no indication of it's quality.

It's popularity is to do with the fact that it isn't particularly brilliant or funny.The likes of Seinfeld and Frasier you actually have to watch and pay attention to Friends is pleasant background noise and this aids it's popularity.

castle_lover

Recently rewatched all seasons, brilliant show. Would like a one off reunion to see what they come up with, but nothing more than a tv special.

yerwanthere123

Always love the edgy boardsies who try tell us how terrible Friends was and why we shouldn't like it. It is, and will always remain, one of the all time great TV shows, and no amount of angsty forum posts will change that, sorry :cool:

Dog Murphy

yerwanthere123 wrote: »

Always love the edgy boardsies who try tell us how terrible Friends was and why we shouldn't like it. It is, and will always remain, one of the all time great TV shows, and no amount of angsty forum posts will change that, sorry :cool:

It was very popular.

There is a difference between a TV show/book/film being great and being popular.

yerwanthere123

Dog Murphy wrote: »

It was very popular.

There is a difference between a TV show/book/film being great and being popular.

What defines a great TV show, in your opinion?

Always makes me laugh the people who fall over themselves in here trying to explain how Friends wasn't good and trying to pick apart its legacy. Same goes for the people who can't wait to declare they've never watched an episode, as we've seen on this thread :pac:

Dog Murphy

yerwanthere123 wrote: »

What defines a great TV show, in your opinion?

Always makes me laugh the people who fall over themselves in here trying to explain how Friends wasn't good and trying to pick apart its legacy. Same goes for the people who can't wait to declare they've never watched an episode, as we've seen on this thread :pac:

Being good for more than a couple of seasons.

For the first couple of seasons Friends was excellent but then it became more and more annoying and the characters all became parody's of themselves.

For example Joey went from being slightly dim to having the intelligence level of a 6 year old but was still able to pick up whatever woman he wanted.

Frank O. Pinion

Deja Boo wrote: »

I can't even sit through one, single, monotonous episode of Seinfeld - the endless whining (by every character) and without any humour whatsoever.

Dog Murphy

Deja Boo wrote: »

Like he said at the end... "I'm too tired" --> (not my cuppa tea). A parody or a pure whacko and the rest of the characters are all whiners, is all that comprises the show. Nothing of interest there.

The reason why Seinfeld is good and was so popular is precisely because of the cynical and selfish nature of it's characters. There's something horribly realistic about the way they think and I think people could empathize with them for that reason.

pixelburp

yerwanthere123 wrote: »

What defines a great TV show, in your opinion?

Always makes me laugh the people who fall over themselves in here trying to explain how Friends wasn't good and trying to pick apart its legacy. Same goes for the people who can't wait to declare they've never watched an episode, as we've seen on this thread :pac:

Or, you know, opinions. And people looking back wondering if pop culture obsessions were all that hot. Happens every generation *shrug*

So share then, what's Friends' legacy? If we assume "legacy" as being some lasting strand or concept you can trace back to that originator, I'm curious what persists to this day cos I don't immediately see it

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Agent Coulson wrote: »

Hulu paid $180m for the streaming rights to Sienfeld in 2015 and turns out it was a huge waste of money as less than 5% of it streamers watch it and they were very happy to let the rights run out and not bid again for them.


Compare that to Friends wherever it is shown it has record viewing numbers.

In the US, Seinfeld had higher ratings than Friends though.

Dog Murphy wrote: »

Just because Friends is popular is no indication of it's quality.

It's popularity is to do with the fact that it isn't particularly brilliant or funny.The likes of Seinfeld and Frasier you actually have to watch and pay attention to Friends is pleasant background noise and this aids it's popularity.

Well, Seinfeld was more watched than Friends in the US. I believe almost consistently higher ratings. Where does that leave your theory?

Greyfox

Dog Murphy wrote: »

There is a difference between a TV show/book/film being great and being popular.

Popularity is one of the measures you have to use when judging a great TV show particularly a comedy. For me its one of the 5 greatest TV shows ever made and funnier than any film. Father ted is the only thing comparable.

The general consensus from critics anyway is it was a very good show at a minimum. It spoke to a generation like no other show and stands the test of time very well. The reason so many people rewatch it is because its absolutely miles better than any comedy made in the last 7 or 8 years. I find it strange when I hear people under 50 not liking friends but sure there's always going to be a small minority that dont like something the majority love.

Relikk

Always found the humour to be very predictable in American sitcoms like Friends and similar shows like Big Bang Theory. You can see the punchlines a mile away. That, and the fact that I genuinely don't find stupid characters that lack a sarcastic edge to be in any way funny. Joey, Phoebe and Penny are cringe-inducingly stupid.

Dog Murphy

Greyfox wrote: »

Popularity is one of the measures you have to use when judging a great TV show particularly a comedy. For me its one of the 5 greatest TV shows ever made and funnier than any film. Father ted is the only thing comparable.

The general consensus from critics anyway is it was a very good show at a minimum. It spoke to a generation like no other show and stands the test of time very well. The reason so many people rewatch it is because its absolutely miles better than any comedy made in the last 7 or 8 years. I find it strange when I hear people under 50 not liking friends but sure there's always going to be a small minority that dont like something the majority love.

First 2-3 seasons were good, it went steadily downhill after that and was very very poor at the end of it's run.It's not a patch on the Simpsons,Frasier,Seinfeld all of which were on at the same time.



If popularity means something is excellent then Dan Brown is one of the greatest novelists of all time (which of course he isn't).

Plumbthedepths

Jurgen The German wrote: »

A terrible show about terrible people.

A German with no sense of humour? I'm shocked.....

vatvatie

a show about selfish people...

Greyfox

Dog Murphy wrote: »

First 2-3 seasons were good, it went steadily downhill after that and was very very poor at the end of it's run.It's not a patch on the Simpsons,Frasier,Seinfeld all of which were on at the same time.

If popularity means something is excellent then Dan Brown is one of the greatest novelists of all time (which of course he isn't).

The first 6 or 7 seasons where amazing and there was a small decline with the last few seasons. It was better than the Simpsons and miles better than Seinfeld or Fraiser. It's popularity tells you most people found it very funny. Dan Brown was popular as he wrote fast paced trashy novels that their will always be a market for. Popularity isnt as important as critical acclaim but it's still important.

chandlerbing2

If Chandler wasn't in it I probably wouldn't have bothered watching it. Definitely one of the best sitcom characters of all time.

Chandler made the show and without him it would have been a flop.


Phoebe - Really Really annoying in the earlier seasons to the point I almost stopped watching it. Ruined the show. Remember the episode she thought her grandma was a cat, giving birth to her brothers triplets etc.

Joey and Chandlers friendship was always a good laugh but Joey's stupidity was a bit much.

Ross - I found to be utterly annoying but did like the pivot and leather pants episodes.

Rachel and Monica - There friendship was good but boring as hell characters. There characters were just really sluts in the show.

Dog Murphy

Greyfox wrote: »

The first 6 or 7 seasons where amazing and there was a small decline with the last few seasons. It was better than the Simpsons and miles better than Seinfeld or Fraiser. It's popularity tells you most people found it very funny. Dan Brown was popular as he wrote fast paced trashy novels that their will always be a market for. Popularity isnt as important as critical acclaim but it's still important.

You are probably the only person in the world who thinks that, you're obviously a Friends fanatic in which case there is no point even trying to have a reasonable discussion with you about the show.

Greyfox

Dog Murphy wrote: »

You are probably the only person in the world who thinks that, you're obviously a Friends fanatic in which case there is no point even trying to have a reasonable discussion with you about the show.

We both know there's plenty of people who agree with me, Friends was on a different level to almost every other sitcom which is why its still popular on Netflix. It had characters and situations that where easy to relate to and the writing and comic timing was superb.

FunLover18

Friends is a very good show but just as there are people who love to criticise it, there are those will not here a bad word against it and insist it's an all time great. I watched it all again a couple of years ago and for me it really goes down hill in the fifth season. Chandler and Joey's friendship was always the best part for me and when they split them up it had a knock-on effect. Like others have said, and like what happens with most sitcoms that go on too long, the characters became caricatures. I've watched the first few seasons of Seinfeld and I have to say I don't get it. It's fine but I don't love it. For me personally, I think Cheers is one of the finest sitcoms and Frasier as well for the first 7 seasons (personally I don't like how they handled the Niles Daphne relationship). But it's all opinion.