Danielle Pinnock was heartbroken to see her friend get “sucked off” on Ghosts
In an interview with The A.V. Club, Pinnock shared her feelings on Ghosts' big season three departure
Aux News Ghosts
[Note: this article contains spoilers for season three of CBS’ Ghosts.]
Never before has a show used the term “sucked off” in such a profound manner. In a cheeky double entendre that actually means “moving on to the afterlife,” it was revealed that beloved Ghosts specter Flower (Sheila Carrasco)—a ’60s era hippie who died trying to hug a bear during a particularly bad acid trip—was, indeed, sucked off in the show’s recently aired third season. R.I.P…. for real this time.
This loss was as tough for the cast as it was for their characters, who’ve all grown close during their time at the Woodstone B&B. In a recent interview with The A.V. Club, Danielle Pinnock, who plays a 1920s jazz singer ghost named Alberta, called the sucking off “hard” because “Sheila Carrasco is my best friend.” “I was like, ‘oh my gosh!’” she said of receiving the news. Still, Flower fans shouldn’t despair just yet. “I understand why, but I will also encourage viewers just to stay tuned,” Pinnock continued. “It’s heartbreaking and we love our girl so much, but there are other ways that she’ll appear back in here, whether it’s through flashbacks or things like that.”
Even missing Carrasco, this season—initially delayed due to the writers and actors strikes—sounds like it was a blast for Pinnock and the rest of the cast to film. “It was incredible. This season is so special because it’s the season after the strike, so as actors we’ve been out of work for a while and to be able to get back on set for the first time, it’s almost like when you see your friends at summer camp after a year of not being with them,” she shared. “We just fell back into the rhythm of the show. A lot of times on set we talk about finding the musicality of the scene and the show. This season, I feel like we’re finally singing our song.”
You can watch new episodes of Ghosts season three Thursdays on Paramount+.
49 Comments
I know it’s common for people to like original (UK shows) better than the American remakes, but the American Ghosts is so so fun. The ghosts are way funnier.
I recently started watching the UK show simply because I missed the American one, and it’s not nearly as good.
Same here. It’s not terrible, but I much prefer the American version.
For anyone curious about where you can watch the UK ghosts in the US? You can watch it on the Max App. Or at least you could unless it was removed.
I believe that’s how I’m currently watching it
“Ghosts UK” as they call it is also on Paramount+ now, since they’re airing it on CBS.Not sure if either Max or P+ have the final season/special yet, though.
You can also get DVDs on Amazon. Ones with proper region codes, too.
TBH I’ve felt this way about several famous UK sitcoms. The central characters are these put-upon sad sacks who are punished for no reason, surrounded by incredibly off-putting or annoying personalities with few redeeming qualities who never change. I’ll watch an episode and find the whole experience mean-spirited or miserable. See also: the UK Office, IT Crowd, etc.Ghosts UK feels like that. The broad brushes and characters are the same in the US version, just slightly less pathetic, more competent, more self-aware, less hopeless. Which is an improvement for a low-impact network sitcom I’m engaging with instead of a dense prestige drama.
And thus you have succinctly identified the core difference bewteen British and American Humour.As Steven Fry obsvered when referenceing the party scene in Animal House in which Belushi detroys a drippy troubadour’s guitar: An American comic would always wish to be the guitar smasher where a British comedian would opt for the role of the put upon musician.
Exactly. I was going to cite the same Stephen Fry bit, but you beat me to it. Stars for you.
It may have been Fry or John Cleese who (also?) observered that American shows are built to continue, with writer’s rooms, so they do longer runs better overall instead.
That’s a famous observation, but it’s not really true. The “loser/sadasack” comic archetype has a long and storied history in American sitcoms, which some of the most beloved characters are part of: George Costanza, Larry Sanders, Liz Lemon, Micheal Bluth, the entire cast of Taxi, etc. Meanwhile, the “loud brash undeserving winner” character is as much a UK comedy staple as it is a US one.
If you mapped the two versions of the Office to that Animal House example, you’d more naturally put the UK’s David Brent in the John Belushi part and the US’s Micheal Scott in the meek troubaour’s part.
The real difference is that the baseline of American comedy is, frankly, more sophisticated, diverse, and nuanced than the baseline of British comedy, which relies far more on stock characters (which are often based around class). This is also why when British people compare British humor to American humor, they look though that lens almost exclusively.Of course, there are a lot of standout British shows and a lot of miserably average American shows, so this reality can be hard to recognize.
I actually did like the British The Office better, but that might be because it didn’t wear out its welcome. That aside, I agree with you.
“The broad brushes and characters are the same in the US version, just slightly less pathetic, more competent, more self-aware, less hopeless.”This right here is precisely why I greatly prefer the UK version. There’s a strong tragic undercurrent in the UK version because living together for (near-)eternity with the same messed-up people and not being able to move on is, you know, kind of sad. The US version, on the other hand, is somehow all about self-actualization—yes, even ghosts can have it all!—and whacky ghost powers. The Major in the UK version is clearly gay, but likely will never be able to admit that to himself, and that adds so much more weight to the few flashbacks we see of his tragic love story. Isaac, on the other hand, is out and proud and dating(!) by the end of the first US season. “The central characters are these put-upon sad sacks who are punished for no reason, surrounded by incredibly off-putting or annoying personalities with few redeeming qualities who never change.”Yes, admittedly, the UK version is sadder, but if you think no one ever changes or develops redeeming qualities then you’ve clearly not watched past the first couple of episodes. Alison and Mike are always struggling, not because they’re being “punished for no reason,” but because attempting to restore and convert a 500-year-old mansion into a bed and breakfast when you’re already broke is a legitimately insane idea. But they stick with it because they come to love the house and the ghosts so much that they don’t want to leave. UK Ghosts is, imo, much more moving and heartwarming than US Ghosts precisely because everyone is so flawed and they don’t already love each other to begin with. I like US Ghosts fine, and they do as good a job as can be expected converting a 35-episode series into a 100+ episode series–and thus requiring three times as many plotlines–but the whole thing does feel quite a bit shallower in comparison.
Right, obviously we want different things from it, which is fine. A dramatic take on this pretty high concept, about the existential toll of ghosts doomed to passively observe the world from a place of meaningless stasis, would be great; David Lowery’s A Ghost Story does essentially that.But the arch silliness and sometimes slapstick nature of this episodic sitcom combined with these extremely tragic, depressing, and often unpleasant characters just leave me feeling alienated. It’s still mostly very wacky, feels very much like a low-impact network sitcom in tone or style, so these intensely sad undercurrents often hit me as part of the joke. Which feels to me less like complexity and more like cynicism for its own sake. I wish I could enjoy it as the tragicomic experience you’re describing.
To each their own of course. The US show is much broader, and while I appreciate where it is taking new roads, the UK version is so much more touching.
Agreed – I am generally in that camp of “The British original is better” but I just didn’t find the UK Ghosts series to be as good/funny. There’s something very endearing about Rose McIver and Utkarsh Ambudkar as the living (I also really liked McIver in iZombie).
Yeah, I think I prefer the ghosts from the UK version but I love Rose McIver and Utkarsh Ambudkar as the couple so much that the US version works better for me just because of that.
The one thing that really bugs me about the US cast is that most of the main ghosts are significantly younger and hotter than their UK counterparts. It’s like the showrunners were scared Americans wouldn’t watch if any of the characters had grey hair or wrinkles. There’s not even a trendy-at-at-the-time-but-laughable-today hairstyle/facial hair! Nobody is allowed to look old or really dorky.
I like both series quite a bit, but the US version slightly more.
Flower’s my favorite. I have a funny feeling that she’ll be back. Somehow.
I think it was an unknown ghost or one of the Brits that got sucked off and Flower is lost on the property, again.
I think so too. I think the ghost that got sucked off might be the basement ghost that hooked up with attic girl Stephanie
Yeah, my wife immediately clocked that they had the scene of them hooking up in the recap section preceding the episode proper. I…didn’t. It’s contrived, but I’ll be happy when my girl Flower’s back.
I agree!
she’s my favorite too and really hope she comes back! her facial expressions and her not in your face comedy was so good.
“Never before has a show used the term “sucked off” in such a profound manner.”Except, y’know, the original British show this one is based on.
I really don’t think that Flower is permanently gone. Her absence IRL is due to her pregnancy but I have a difficult time believing that she was a) sucked off and b) if she was, that it is permanent. I really think that it is a case of misdirection but that does not explain who was actually sucked off or why Danielle’s statements make it sound like Flower was truly sucked off. If at the conclusion of the season, it turns out that it was really Flower, I will be upset.
Yeah getting sucked off temporarily seems realistic, getting sucked off permanently sounds like a good idea at the time but…
Could have been Attic Prom Girl and Flower is the one asleep up in her bed, when headless greaser checked.
That’s how I expected the episode to end.
I (and others) called it, as of the 3/7 episode, Flower has not been sucked off. I will not say anything else for those that did not watch tonight’s ep.
Personally, I’m happy for the show that it’s Flower gone. Her schtick was belabored, especially when paired with the cartoonish Thor. Now there’s a chance for more pathos and depth, not just because of the smaller cast. It’s a chance to grow for everyone.
I disagree, to me Flower was one of the funniest characters. She was so quirky and loved how her character had deeper storylines than at first apperance. i also liked she was latina but not in your face typical latina role. big fan of flower and hope she comes back to the show!
This show is so damn funny and good. Sad no Emmy noms. Hope it’s around for a while.
I truly only came here cus of the misleading headline. I’ll find my way out.
Why are black women so fat?
Wait, this show’s good? I’ve only ever seen the ads they run during the Super Bowl(s) the past couple of years and they did not do a good job selling it, I gotta say.
It’s such a funny show. I recommend you start from first episode and you’ll be hooked after the first few. It’s seriously funny.
It’s really solid.
It’s hilarious and sweet, and good family watching too; my 11yo and I both love it.
it is so funny, whole family loves it and the fandom is amazing
And by the ghost actors being sucked off, I imagine the producers of the show like that aspect of the show’s premise. It prevents the ghost actors from forming a cabal like on Friends where they were able to put the screws to the producers for more money. Being sucked off = no actors’ leverage.
Why are you interviewing Danielle? Why not Sheila? Strange…
Is this your first day on the internet?
I knew the headline wasn’t what it seemed but it was enough to get me to click anyway. No ragrets.