That ’90s Show review: The kids are still alright in Netflix’s reboot
The gang gets back together in a revival that delivers precisely what its title promises
TV Reviews Menendez
If sitcom revivals/reboots/remakes/spinoffs in the 21st century are driven almost exclusively by nostalgia, what are we to make of That ’90s Show, a new Netflix series whose very premise requires us to examine the kind of nostalgia That ’70s Show was already mining two decades ago?
Such a circuitous question reveals, perhaps, the way in which IP development in 2023 has become stagnant. Not that that’s anything new, but this kind of project development has begun to eat into itself as streamers and networks and execs and producers (and advertisers and maybe even consumers) have arrived at a place where, in 2023, a series like That ’90s Show aims to be both novel and familiar. And, more to the point, hopes that its novelty comes from its familiarity.
In that original series, which aired from 1998 to 2006, we followed Eric Forman (a nerdy, mop-haired Topher Grace) and his cadre of friends, which included next-door neighbor and crush Donna (a lanky, dry-witted Laura Prepon), lovebirds Kelso and Jackie (Ashton Kutcher in full airhead mode alongside Mila Kunis as a spoiled brat) and “Fez” (Wilmer Valderrama as a horny exchange student whose lisping accent was a punchline in itself). Their hormonal hijinks, which often included getting high in Eric’s basement away from the prying eyes of his parents, stern Red (a lovably gruff Kurtwood Smith) and sweet Kitty (the ever-watchable Debra Jo Rupp), served as the central narrative engine of this long-running Fox sitcom.
For this 2023 edition, we basically get a Xeroxed version of such a premise. Only now we’re anchored by Eric and Donna’s daughter Leia (Callie Haverda), who decides to spend the summer of 1995 with her grandparents—and learns, in the process, that she’s well suited to spending her days getting high in their basement while pining away for a cute boy and bonding with her next-door neighbor, Gwen (Ashley Aufderheide).
If you grew up watching That ’70s Show, you’ll likely have no way of assessing whether That ’90s Show works on its own. Maybe it can’t. And maybe it doesn’t even want to. After all, its first few episodes all but hinge on those OG characters—not just Donna and Eric, but Kelso and Jackie, as well as Fez and even Tommy Chong’s Leo. For fans of the original series, those moments end up working like welcome reminders of how hilarious the Fox sitcom—equal parts irreverent and charming—could be.
But it proves to be a rocky and unsteady start to a show. In wanting to give Kitty, Red, and several of those beloved characters enough room to play (many of them interacting with Sherri, Gwen, and Nate’s mom, a very funny Andrea Anders), That ’90s Show at times forgets to let its central teenage cast shine. Sure, they may be facsimiles of the original pot-smoking, basement-dwelling kids, but their storylines are, at least in the first few episodes, almost incidental to the A-plots at hand. Which is a shame because Haverda and Mace Coronel (Jay, whom Leia is infatuated with) find that sweet spot between self-aware humor and sweet-hearted earnestness that a multi-cam show like this one requires. Then again, when even the appearance of Kitty in that iconic sitcom kitchen is enough to garner raucous applause, and when line readings by the likes of Kutcher, Kunis, and Valderrama bring the house down, maybe you too would choose to sideline your teenage ensemble.
Slowly though, and as it gains confidence in its own quirky premise (even if, at times, it rehashes “will they/won’t they” plot lines from any other high school-set series), That ’90s Show finds its arguably all-too-recognizable groove. Predictable storylines about Red hating having a neighboring child wooing his granddaughter and the kids finding a keg for a Fourth of July hangout thankfully rub up against more interesting sitcom plots, like Kitty lovingly bonding with Ozzie (a hilarious scene-stealing Reyn Doi) in a funny spin on the ’90s own “coming out” episode. And yes, in case you’re wondering, the writers have a ball finding increasingly absurd ways to ground us in its titular decade. To wit: an episode centered on a warehouse rave (with glow sticks and pacifiers aplenty!) features references to the Menendez brothers, jokes about CK1 and Batman Forever—even a Home Alone parody, not to mention a low-hanging “Ross and Rachel” quip.
Offering precisely what its title promises and building on the legacy of a Y2K era sitcom that looked back in order to appear fresh and cool, That ’90s Show is nothing new. That’s not so much a knock against it as an accurate assessment of its reason for being. In that sense, it may well be a perfect example of Netflix’s approach to television development in 2023, aiming squarely at what’s been tried and true and hoping for the best. At least in this case, they were smart enough to put their money toward giving Debra Jo Rupp every and any chance to be the funniest person on your screen for 10 episodes straight.
That ’90s Show premieres on January 19 on Netflix.
284 Comments
The original cast’s names are listed twice, but Hyde is left out both times? What a strange editorial decision, and I’d really like to know why.
The short answer is that he isn’t in the new series, and the rest of the cast is, so they review the returning characters. The long answer is the same, but with the phrase “because the actor raped a bunch of women” inserted before the word “and.”
Six rape, seven rape, eight rape bunch!
Danny come and he wan’ go home!
I don’t believe you don’t know why. If you have a problem with it, have the balls to say you have an issue with it.
He’s not in this show.
(Kurtwood Smith voice:)“Would you like to know more?”
Because those are the actors/characters returning for the sequel?
smh
And it was then decided that Hyde never existed.
It might actually kinda fit Hyde’s character if we found out he’s gone for the exact same reason his actor is…..
Kelso: Hey, where’s Hyde?Canned laughtrackEric: Kelso he’s…Hyde went to live on a farm.Canned laughtrackKelso: Oh man. I wish I got to get out of town.Canned laughtrackFez: No, you idiot. He raped a girl.Canned laughtrack
“Hey Fez, remember when you were dating teenage girls when you were pushing 30?”
[canned laughter]“And bragged about deflowering a well-known pop star on national radio?”
[canned laughter, whooping]
I mean… It was filmed with a studio audience. Probably *some* sweetening but “canned laughtrack” is just not true.
I don’t know if there is a tasteful way to handle it, it does make sense that his character would have moved out of Wisconsin for any number of reasons. Joining a weird cult being among them.
They might shy away from any weird cult jokes if they want Laura Prepon to keep showing up.
the thing is the center of the show is the new kids and the relations with the grand parents. it’s okay if he’s never mentionned.
A throwaway joke about how Hyde’s in prison for basically ever over a massive marijuana cultivation/smuggling bust. Boom, done.
Hyde was accused of rape and then people assumed guilt without evidence?
Friggin women always accusing men of rape. Go find me something to do like make me a sandwich women.
I love this response because you cant even address worthless assholes calling him a rapist despite no evidence. Love it.But let me guess: Tara Reade lied about Biden raping her, right son? Say it.
“Lack of sufficient evidence to convict” is not the same as “no evidence”.Also, it was multiple accusations from multiple parties.So… yeah. Fuck off.
Okie dokie, so you believe Biden’s accuser, right kiddo?
What does that have to do with this, kiddo?
Hyde had a couple unsavory jokes like “she can’t say no if she’s passed out drunk”. So yeah, you’re right.
This seems edgy and too on the nose but honestly I would have split my sides if they included a throwaway line that suggested as much.
In a review or two that I’ve read for this it has been pointed out that the guy characters on 90s are much less hormonally desperate than Hyde, Eric, Kelso, and Fez. And I would agree. Kelso and Hyde in particular could be pretty skeezy.
The government finally tracked down Hyde.You know, for one of his conspiracy theories.
Theory: Leo is a time traveling Hyde
Clearly the car that runs on water.
Hyde died on the way back to his home planet.
His UFO spun out over the Sea of Japan. There were no survivors.
Grandpa, get outta here! You’re not wearing a mask!
That episode still hits like a sack of bricks, even when I know it’s coming.
His UFO spun out over the Sea of Japan. There were no survivors.Nice M*A*S*H deep cut. 😁
Hyde took a strange serum that turned him into a man named Jekyll, and eventually he wasn’t able to turn back.
Tired of seeing this same joke (or not joke?) in ever single comments section about this show. We know.
“and his cadre of friends” did kind of make it conspicuous in its absence.
‘cadre’ includes Corvette / Camaro drivin’ Buddy Morgan who wanted to be more than Eric’s buddy.
I ‘member that one!
…and the rest!
Boy, Tina Louise really screwed a lot of peoples’ careers, didn’t she?
It has been 20 years – very possible that they just stopped being friends with him or he turned out much differently as he grew up. Had a best friend in high school that I hung out with every day. We went to different colleges and unfortunately, he let weed take over his life (have no issues with occasionally indulging but he smoked every day, skipped class, and stopped showering / grooming himself). Got to the point where it just wasn’t fun to be around him and so I stopped hanging out with him and now it has been fifteen years since I last even talked to him.People change – show is perfectly fine without Hyde.
Hey I am that guy….not the rapey guy but the guy who graduated and never apoke to anyone from high school ever again.It wqs liberating to be free from all that small town bullshit and the box they put you in. Went back after 20 years and saw someone i used to know and they asked if I still worked the crappy fast food job I had IN 1988. WTF.“It gets better” is not just for LGBTQ kids….
I had a friend like that too. Only it was daily weed and LSD. Haven’t seen him since 1993 or so and I miss him. I’m sure he’s not in a good place if he’s even still alive.
I vaguely know a girl like that but I thought she was pretty hot and the passed couple years I creep her social media once in a blue moon and it’s still her old job listed and nothing has moved in years and I get this sinking feeling that she’s not with us anymore.
Okay I will admit, it occurs to me you could have jokingly been agreeing with me, I can’t even tell anymore sometimes on the internet. But it sure sounded like you were implying misogyny cuz i dare point out “a woman made an accusation” isnt tangible evidence of a crime.
Yeah I’m actually that friend. I left town and never came back after college and to my understanding my crew still grab beers together except with a few extra kids now.
It’s actually to the shows credit that he doesn’t get mentioned at all. That’s what happens in real life. There’s no way in hell my old high school friends are having a drink and are constantly like “I wonder what cosmicghostrider is up to?”
I’ve never seen any concrete evidence Danny Masterson is a rapist. Yes I know he has been accused, I know there was a mistrial and I know the prosecutors are going to try to go after him again. This doesn’t mean he is guilty though.
If he is guilty? Then fuck him he is a piece of shit. If he is innocent? He is a victim. Not only did it cost him the ability to return as Hyde, but it’s why he got booted off “The Ranch” too. And I thought that was a good show.He hasn’t been found guilty of anything(cue some asshole coming in shouting “OH SO OJ IS INNOCENT?!?!”) but meh we’ll cancel him anyways just to be on the safe side. It’s getting out of control.
Does the new show mention Hyde at all?
He’s upstairs, with Chuck Cunningham.
I have three words for you: Eric’s sister, Laurie.
Not addressing the elephant in the room is how criticism works now. Don’t be objective about things your viewers might be wondering. Take a moral stance and project that onto your readers. But, not for nothing, since Kelso was my favorite, and Hyde was my least favorite because he was always an asshole to him, I find his complete erasure very amusing.
Kelso was an idiot pretty boy who deserved all the shit he ate on that show.Doesn’t mean I didn’t love the character, because I loved them all, but c’mon.ETA: Also, FWIW Eric was the best. Followed by Jackie around Season 2 when she was less of a hanger on and more one of the gang. Then a tie between Donna and Hyde. Fez and Kelso had their high points but both could really get on my nerves. IMHO, of course.
Jian Yang murdered him and stole his identity.
Yeah, not a mention of him
But he’s on trial for sex crimes? Are you condoning that?
I have a confession, I feel foolish but…apparently in the theme song for that 70s show at the end they are yelling “we’re all alright!”I…for the life of me for some reason I thought they were yelling “we’re all low riding”. I dont know why. I feel shame.
(even if, at times, it rehashes “will they/won’t they” plot lines from any other high school-set series)Or any workplace-set series. Or any sitcom, really.
Hey, some walk by night…
Noone cares about the kids. The whole thing is just a reason to bring the real cast back.
But enough about the new Star Wars trilogy…
Oh man, Ginger Princess Leia is a fantasy I didn’t even know I had!
<3
Always found it funny that they burned their Star Wars episode – and thereby pushed the show into the summer of 1977 – before the end of the first season. For a show built around the idea of “It’s the 1970’s!” they didn’t give themselves a lot of running room. (Looking it up, they managed – somehow – to stretch two and a half years out across the next seven seasons.)
Yea, timelines for any sitcom set in high school are weird.
I kinda feel the same about them setting this in 95. According to the showrunners the plan is to have every season take place over the summer, so they’ve got theoretically only 4 more seasons. 5 if they want to play a little fast and loose with 2000. Will a Netflix show LAST more than two seasons? That’s anyone’s guess.
They should have rebooted that 70s show with the original cast playing teenagers. Replace Masterson with the hottest teen that Scientology has and everything is fixed.
Noone cares about the kids! Noone for city council!
Having watched a few episodes now, I don’t entirely agree. I was a huge fan of the original show so of course I want to see the OG cast, but I’m liking the new kids. Mostly. The non-Kelso bro is a little too stupid for my tastes but I’m sure I’ll get used to it.
Nice to see recognition DJR (and Kitty!) was basically the secret weapon of the original. Far and away the best and funniest character; followed by Red.
The episode where Eric goes to work with Kitty at the hospital was one of my favourites of the original series.
I loved how the normally sweet, optimistic Kitty was the one to see her daughter for who she was.
Don’t forget her mother-in-law, even though not even Kitty could escape the rose-tinted glasses once the bitch was dead.
I was kind of hoping that Wandavision would use her for a Kitty reference , but sadly no.
I can’t agree, even though I mostly agree. As a teenager I was a mix of Eric Forman from That 70s Show and Ken from Freaks & Geeks so Eric is my #1. I laugh at just about everything he says. It’s probably a little egotistical…(To be clear, I had Eric’s attitude but Ken’s body shape and mutton chops. Lllllladies….)
In that original series, which aired from 1998 to 2006, we followed Eric Forman (a nerdy, mop-haired Topher Grace) and his cadre of friends, which included next-door neighbor and crush Donna (a lanky, dry-witted Laura Prepon), lovebirds Kelso and Jackie (Ashton Kutcher in full airhead mode alongside Mila Kunis as a spoiled brat) and “Fez” (Wilmer Valderrama as a horny exchange student whose lisping accent was a punchline in itself). Try as you you might, but you can’t separate the original series from Hyde. The actor may be a deplorable human being, but his character was obviously a huge part of That 70s Show.
Co-sign. It’s more ridiculous to leave him off the roster of original cast members. You’re not fooling anyone, and it’s frankly just silly. I can still watch the original and laugh my ass off, even when Mastersons’ in the room (i.e. a LOT).
“even when Mastersons’ in the room (i.e. a LOT).”Is it otherwise awkward living with Danny Masterson?
Apparently I’m not his type and presumably Scientology is paying his legal bills so he doesn’t hit me up for cash.
It’s also ridiculous that people are acting like Masterson is a rapist, as if it’s a matter of fact.
I honestly dont know if he is innocent or guilty. Nor does anyone else here, but he is still branded a piece of shit anyways? What concrete evidence have you seen that makes you agree he is deplorable? And if he is guilty merely for being accused, then Joe Biden is also a rapist. But I expect that is (D)ifferent right?
but why would they list Hyde here when this a write-up about the series That 90’s Show? Yes they’re listing the original returning actors but it’s still in reference to the new show so why would Hydes name be listed if he isn’t on That 90’s Show?
Ehhh… I dunno. You guys are looking at this as some kind of purposeful erasure but it seems to me more like *because* Hyde doesn’t show up in the new series it’s not really worth talking about him in a review OF the new series. Like if this was a retrospective on That 70s Show it WOULD be weird to not mention him. But it’s not. So… it’s not.
“In that original series, which aired from 1998 to 2006, we followed…”Following by a listing of everyone except Hyde.
Yeah, thanks, I can read.What is the point? Like with any of you “They didn’t mention Hyde” people? Is it a criticism of AV Club? Is it a criticism of Betancourt? Do you want people to Never Forget Steven Hyde?I love the show and I did like Hyde but come on.And if it’s some anti-AV Club bashing nonsense, also come on.
Counterpoint: Unlike the rest of the cast, his schtick wore off fast and the writers had no idea what to do with him in later seasons.
I didn’t even watch the later seasons because the show got pretty terrible. That said, it doesn’t matter if his schtick wore off, my point is that his character was part of the main cast, and therefore gets a lot of screen time. It’s impossible to separate the original series from him. It would almost be like trying to watch Cosby without acknowledging Bill Cosby’s character.
Or Rosanne without . . . huh.
So you’re either a huge fan of the Hyde character or you’re a fan of defending sex predators. You seem to be making this your hill to die on for reasons that don’t reflect well on you.
So of course they brought in Tim Reid to be his dad and had him . . . no, no hang with me here, I swear NOBODY in the history of sitcoms has ever done this: had him move in with the Formans!
I remember them giving him a black dad and sister. Hell Hyde becoming a born again Christian would have been a more compelling plot.Then it’s like every guy in the group not named Eric falls for Jackie, but WHY? She was annoying, at best.
I thought it was funny in an “I can see the hand of the showrunners” way when Jackie had to move in with Bob & Donna like Hyde did with the Formans. It really optimized the number of two-handers they could write and film, particularly once Jackie was her own character and not just Kelso’s annoying girlfriend.
once Jackie was her own character: “Kelso’s annoying ex-girlfriend”, then “Hyde’s annoying girlfriend”, and then presumably “Hyde’s annoying ex-girlfriend” (I’d pretty much lost track of the show by then)
Now now. She was ALSO Donna’s annoying best friend.And by the point that they were a thing I would say Hyde was also her dirtbag boyfriend. If we’re gonna talk shit on characters he deserves to take a hit.
Fair enough.
Now next question: ginger or blonde Donna?
Oh ginger, 1000%. But I’m not a blonde guy generally. I have no idea how Kelso could choose Laurie over Jackie.Faith over Buffy.Veronica over Betty.Dracula Winona Ryder over Edward Scissorhands Winona Ryder.
Jackie as well. So they just had her sleeping different characters. Hyde, then Fez then back to Michael.
How dare you? Jackie had some great character development, particularly in her girlfriend dynamic with Donna. Who GAF which dude character she was sleeping with?(That said, the on-again/off-again with Hyde did get pretty tiresome.)
My point was Jackie’s character development generally (especially the horrific last season) amounted to just finding a new boyfriend among the regular characters. Jackie/Hyde never really worked except as a “love the one you’re with” sort of thing. Fez was far too good for her.
And my point was no, it didn’t. A lot of plot came out of her romantic entanglements but the actual *character* came into her own. Befriending Donna pushes her towards a greater independence. Her father losing his money takes some of the princess out of her. Dating Hyde has the *character* effect of further pushing her towards self-actualization. I do think pairing her up with Fez was a mistake in that I think ANY pairing was a mistake. I won’t deny that a lot of story got built on her love life and I would have liked to see her go out on her own two feet with no guy, no socialite mom, whatever. But her development was not intrinsically tied to who she was tongue punching.
To be fair, they’re revisiting a show about High School friends who mostly only hung out with each other due to proximity in the first place. It’s weirder that they all still know each other in an era before social media. Dropping any of them is the easiest thing in the world, all they need is a, “Oh yeah, what happened to that guy?” “Uh, I dunno. I heard he joined a cult, or something.” THE END.
This is a weird take on high school friendships.
Works for me.
fairly normal take!
Because everybody always maintains close contact with the people they hung out with in High School? Or the “due to proximity” bit? That last part isn’t about High School friendships in general, just these characters who have little to nothing in common. It’s a normal TV show thing to have vastly different personality types bounce off of each other, but there’s no reason, for example, Kelso or Hyde would have anything to do with each other.
Just the due to proximity bit.
I’m not referring to dropping him in the new series, I’m referring to the author’s description of who the original series focused on.
Oh, right. Yeah, describing the characters of That 70s Show and leaving out Hyde completely does have a touch of “Stalin editing people he’s executed out of photos” vibe to it. Yeah, Masterson’s a shitbag, but he’s not retroactively NOT in the show anymore. Though it would be funny if someone did a “Garfield Minus Garfield” number on That 70s Show where all of Hyde’s scenes are deleted and replaced with an empty chair.
…actually you could probably make that work. With a little alteration and inspiration from Fight Club. Eric was adopted, Hyde is an alternate personality of his, and Hyde’s parents were actually Eric’s birth parents who abandoned him. Red, Kitty, and Laurie knew from an official diagnosis, with Red sarcastically giving the alter the name Hyde after the story of Dr. Jekyll.
Eventually his personality disorder would be revealed to the gang after a major breakdown following a confrontation because he had been dating both Donna and Jackie at the same time (during that time Hyde and Jackie were pretending not to be together). Maybe even show that Fez figured it out within the first week and had been helping cover for Eric since he’s the best of the group when it comes to helping others.
“Though it would be funny if someone did a “Garfield Minus Garfield” number on That 70s Show where all of Hyde’s scenes are deleted and replaced with an empty chair.”*Clint Eastwood nods in approval*
And then a boom mic falls into the shot.
I can’t say I liked Hyde, buy he did provide an important role as a source for all the weed they were smoking.
Why is he a deplorable human being? So far, none of the accusations against him have been proven. Do you have some sort of inside information?Is Joe Biden a rapist? He was accused as well.
Or, weird rape enthusiasts, they are giving a list (that never claims to be complete) of the characters that are reprising roles.Get the fuck over it.
No, they’re not. That’s why the paragraph starts “In that original series, which aired from 1998 to 2006…”
The paragraph I quote was written to describe what the original series was about. Once we start seeing more articles about the Frasier revival, wouldn’t it be odd to see a paragraph say In that original series, which aired from 19XX to 20XX, we followed Frasier Crane, Martin Crane, Dafne, and Roz with no mention of Niles? He won’t be in the revival series. I don’t see how this makes me a rape enthusiast. I have no love for Danny Masterson and think that he is probably guilty of the crimes he was accused of committing. That doesn’t mean that his character wasn’t a huge part of the original show.
This isn’t the Wikipedia entry for That 70s Show. It’s an article about the reboot. And it says “included” which implies that it is an incomplete list — it is establishing the reprising cast so that they can be referred to by their last names alone later. There were other primary cast members not reprising their roles and not listed here.This is a dumb fucking complaint demonstrating greater enthusiasm for rapists than for reading, the purpose of the piece you clicked on, or the meanings of words. Find some copy focused on discussing the original show and advocate for this rapist there if you need to.
I have some bad news about Martin Crane…(I get your point and I think Multitudes went in a bit hard, but they’re also not wrong that this isn’t a retrospective of the original show. So it’s FINE that they don’t mention Hyde.)
“which included”; yeah why would the writer talk about the cast that is in the actual new show
Also, can we discuss. I always assumed the Wilmer Valderrama character was spelled FES — you know, as in Foreign Exchange Student.
I never really thought about that, but it makes sense.
For my part, I was never certain whether Fez was supposed to be from the same country as Latka Gravas or if his accent was just a winking reference. Back then they didn’t feel the need to explain everything on TV shows.
I mean that actually makes sense! (possibly the writers had that as his given name , but his real name was something else , and then just forgot about it.
You are 100% correct. They even mention this when his character is first introduced.Having said that, this is a fool’s game. I ate a bunch of shit from commenters when I said that Shiobhan on Succession’s nickname should be spelled Shiobh instead of Shiv. People will adopt whatever spelling they want and once the show makes it canon via credits or subtitles they will never let you fucking live it down. Even IF you are absolutely right.
Look, we get it, but leaving Hyde/Masterson out of this and pretending the character doesn’t exist wasn’t the right choice.
That’s a lot like real life when people lose touch after 20 some-odd years.
I don’t think anyone’s looking to That 70’s Show or any of its sequels/spinoffs/reboots/reimagining scions to be “a lot like real life”.
It’s a lot(IT’S A LOT)It’s a lot(IT’S A LOT)It’s a lot(IT’S A LOT)It’s a lotLIKE LIFE
I meant left out of the article, not the show.
If you’re that into Hyde being around, just get the funnier, younger brother that didn’t rape anyone to play that role.
I’m not that “into Hyde being around”. The article completely omitted him and his character from the original cast as if he didn’t exist. Pretending terrible people simply don’t exist isn’t a good look for AV Club.“In that original series, which aired from 1998 to 2006, we followed Eric Forman (a nerdy, mop-haired Topher Grace) and his cadre of friends, which included next-door neighbor and crush Donna (a lanky, dry-witted Laura Prepon), lovebirds Kelso and Jackie (Ashton Kutcher in full airhead mode alongside Mila Kunis as a spoiled brat) and “Fez” (Wilmer Valderrama as a horny exchange student whose lisping accent was a punchline in itself).”I don’t need/want him in That 90’s Show.
I’m a little surprised they described Fez’s accent as “a punchline” rather than taking the opportunity to tut-tut about how ethnic types are portrayed in the TV media landscape of entertainments.
It’s important to note that the description says includes, rather just saying his friends and then listing them. Because of the word includes, it can be an incomplete list.
That’s a cop-out by AV Club, regardless if it’s valid or not. The commenters know full well they purposely omitted his name.
Yeah. We also know that it doesn’t fucking matter in a review of the new show. They also didn’t mention Laurie even though Lisa Robin Kelly was main cast for at least one season. They also didn’t mention Midge, who was a huge part of the original show. Bob even shows up on the new series and they don’t mention him either. Randy Pearson was the Eric of the show in Season 8, do you see HIM mentioned anywhere in there? Jesus Christ, should they have mentioned Pam Macey since Kelso talked about her all the time?
Chill out, it was just an observation of an obvious omission.Hyde/Masterson was one of the main cast members for the entire series. Laurie, Bob, Pam etc were supporting cast members (yes, even Randy who filled in for Topher) this is a false equivalence. We also know that it doesn’t fucking matter in a review of the new show.I mean, it doesn’t, but the writer here clearly went out of their way to identify the original main cast – “In that original series, which aired from 1998 to 2006, we followed…” – and omit his name/character from the entire article. Not even an excerpt explaining his absence/charges. Omitting bad people by pretending they don’t exist or weren’t involved with what you’re talking about isn’t a precedence I want to see set. It’s bad journalism.
No it isn’t. It’s a reasonable expectation of cultural awareness. It’s the pop culture website reviewing a legacyquel using the context of the new show and news around an actor’s non-participation. Anyone interested in the new show either already knows why Hyde’s not in it because they were fans of the original or didn’t watch the original and thus doesn’t CARE who Hyde is. This nitpicking bullshit is bad criticism. Omitting Hyde from a rundown of the original show does no harm to a review of the new show.
This nitpicking bullshit is bad criticism. It’s not, but feel free to view it that way.
He’s fucking canceled. Fucking deal with it, you incel simp.
What proof is there Danny raped anyone? Accusations are not proof.
They asked him to be in it, but his answer was really unclear:“Yes, no, maybe. I don’t know. Can you repeat the question?”
*leaving Hyde/Masterson out of the article as if he didn’t exist. I don’t want him on the show.
Sadly, no Midge this go ‘round. Or any round.
The actress passed away, so that would be a bit difficult to bring her back to the show.
Nothin’ gets by you.
Well not with that attitude!Does that work here?
Yup, that’s the ol gang. Eric, Donna, Kelso, Jackie and Fez. The five kids.
On Hyde not being on the show – why is it so unbelievable to people? I had a best friend in high school (someone I saw every day back then and my parents knew and treated like a second son) that I stopped being friends with afterwards because he changed for the worse and wasn’t fun to hang out with anymore. Just accept that could happen with Hyde too (or any number of other explanations) and move on. Does anyone actually want Masterson in this project?
On the season grade – genuinely surprised it got a B as the trailers made the show look godawful and I wasn’t going to check it out as a result. Will give it a go if its truly a decent watch for fans of T7S.
people don’t want him on the show they just want to point out that he’s not on the show because the internet broke everyone’s brains.
Is that what did it?
It’s gotta be men who hate women tho right? Otherwise what would be the big deal. These are just dudes still looking for something to do after re-watching the Johnny Depp trial.
*raises hand* I want him on the project lol. I loved the character of Hyde and it would be cool to see what he is getting up to now.
If he’s a rapist fuck him, but so far that hasn’t been proven.
I think you’re missing most people’s points about Hyde. I made one of the comments. My point isn’t that he should be part of the new show (he shouldn’t), but that when they list the main characters of the original show he is omitted. It would be the same if someone was describing The Office and didn’t mention Dwight, or Seinfeld and left out Kramer.
…and?
And what? The person I was replying to seems to be under the impression those mentioning what I explained in my post thing Hyde should be part of the new show. I don’t, and I don’t think any of the others do either.
But why do you think it’s so important for the author to refer to the character in his review? If the reviewer were listing the characters of The Office and omitted Dwight my response would be: “oh, weird, they forgot Dwight. Moving on.” And then if I subsequently learned that Rainn Wilson had been accused of raping multiple women and obviously his character wouldn’t be returning for the hypothetical revival my response would be “oh, I see, that’s probably why.”
Because the paragraph I referenced in my post essentially said the original show was about Eric, Donna, Jackie, Fez, and Kelso. That simply isn’t accurate. Danny Masterson’s terrible behavior have nothing to do with the premise of the original show.
We’re at an impasse, because, yet again, my response is…and? The reviewer referred to the characters who are returning for the sequel and are thus relevant for the review.
My main point is this: “In that original series, which aired from 1998 to 2006, we followed Eric Forman (a nerdy, mop-haired Topher Grace) and his cadre of friends, which included next-door neighbor and crush Donna (a lanky, dry-witted Laura Prepon), lovebirds Kelso and Jackie (Ashton Kutcher in full airhead mode alongside Mila Kunis as a spoiled brat) and “Fez” (Wilmer Valderrama as a horny exchange student whose lisping accent was a punchline in itself).”I guess what it says is truthful, but it clearly omits something that was a key focus of the series. Despite appearing otherwise, I have very little emotional investment in this topic. It’s just a quiet day for me. I didn’t even like this show all that much. I enjoyed it during its original run up until the main cast started leaving, then I mostly forgot about it.
Donna wasn’t lanky. She was lusterous. ❤️
Nothing against Donna, but I was always more of a Jackie man myself. Similarly, I was always drawn more to Monica than Rachael on Friends. I guess I have thing for brunettes. Funny that I married a blonde woman.
I was also a Jackie guy. And have remained a Mila Kunis fan. (Not a stan, though. I actually think she is kind of a limited actress and I really wish she had done more comedy than sex bomb shit post-70s. But I suppose that’s on her agents more than her. Anyway…)I absolutely know that Jackie was a bit of a nightmare princess but I kiiiinda like that. And I thought she had some great character development once she became more of a girlfriend to Donna. Especially when her dad lost all his money and she had to move into the Penciotti house.(And yeah, I was a Jackie/Hyde shipper pretty hardcore. He wore a Jethro Tull shirt, I *had* to like Hyde.)
I also think that if they were doing an Office 2023 that featured a Dunder Mifflin branch in Oshkosh and a whole bunch of the O.G. actors showed up but Rainn didn’t, it wouldn’t be crazy to list the original cast and omit him. Because he won’t be part of the new show.
anyone with half a brain understands why he wasn’t mentioned – you can’t do it without bringing up why he isn’t there, and when you’re reviewing a sitcom spinoff you don’t want to allude to sexual abuse allegations, and it’s the year 2023 so it’s not like this is your only source of information on the existence of the cast of that 70s show.
I understand why he wasn’t mentioned, but it’s silly to say (paraphrasing) “the original series followed Eric, Donna, Jackie, Fez, and Kelso” without mentioning the other main character. It would be like saying Roseanne followed the lives of Dan, Becky, Darlene, and DJ, or Seinfeld was about Jerry, Elaine, and George. Mentioning one of the main characters of a show when describing it in no way shape or form condones the awful behavior of the actor who played the role.
well if you understand then you understand.
I understand, I just think it’s silly.
but why does it bother you so much? You’re either a huge Hyde fan or you don’t like to see men getting charged for sex crimes. I’m not buying that you’re just randomly passionate today about the accuracy of cast listings. That’s bullshit to “hyde” behind (see what I did there).
To be fair to panthercougar, I know that I myself have hopped on weird hills to die on for no good reason that I could think of once it was pointed out to me. I agree that it’s dumb to care that this review doesn’t mention Hyde, but I don’t think they *actually* care. At this point it’s probably more defensive than substantive.
but why do you care tho? Are you related to Danny Masterson. Why does it bother you.
yeah that’s a weird hangup for people to have. He’s not in the show. he’s not mentionned because whatever the teenager cast from the 70s are just guests in this; it’s already forced to have them all make an appearence as it is.
I binged it last night, it’s cute, nostalgic, and has some good laughs. As this review says, at first its best moments are the cameos from the original cast but it the new kids do find their own groove. I enjoyed it and hope there will be another season or two.
extremely funny seeing people be like ‘while i don’t think danny masterson should be on the show, and agree his behavior is irredeemable, but i am shocked and appalled that when this review was describing the first show they didn’t mention his character’whooooo fucking cares.
What do you want us to talk about? I doubt any of us have seen the damn thing.
I’m gonna give it a spin tonight. I liked the original series. This sounds fine enough for “nothing’s been on since a week before Christmas” season. I’m a 90’s kid, I’m sure I’ll snort if they talk about pogs or MSN messenger or something.
Interestingly nobody seems to be upset that Eric’s sister Laurie isn’t mentioned in the article or accounted for in the new show, as far as we know.
Yeah but the actress for Laurie wasn’t deemed a rapist and cancelled without evidence.
“Yeah but the actress for Laurie wasn’t deemed a rapist and cancelled without evidence.”Truly go fuck yourself, you incel piece of shit.
Lol I’m an incel because I correctly point out the dude was canceled without evidence?
You’re defending a rapist, who’s going to go away to prison. Second, do you even know how the fuck trials work? You can’t get something to trial without evidence. 5 women accused him of rape, 2 of them didn’t have enough remaining evidence + statute of limitations expired, so he’s got 3 counts *with evidence* against him in the trial. He’s a piece of shit and you’re an even bigger one for defending him, incel shitwad.
You have no proof he is going to prison since not all trials lead to guilty verdicts lol. Jesus man.I will defend ANYONE accused of a crime until they are proven guilty.. Fuck you.
You are assuming he’s INNOCENT, which is significantly different than not guilty. There’s EVIDENCE of his crimes. Whether a jury convicts him or not, he still COMMITTED them. You’re still a fucking shitwad incel, so go die in a fire, seriously.
Name the evidence.
I’m not a prosecutor and I don’t have access to said evidence. However, it’s quite clear you don’t know how trials work. Go it up sparky. Trials can’t brought in front of a judge with no evidence; they get summarily dismissed immediately. This isn’t television.
I know enough about how they work to know not everyone brought to trial is found guilty. Yet you act like irrefutable proof is required before it can be brought to trial. Again: if this was the case then everyone would be found guilty who gets put on trial.The evidence could be strong, it could be flimsy. Are you naive enough to say that this countries justice system is so pure that we have never had cases with flimsy evidence go to trial?
He COULD be guilty, but unless you’re related to the accusers I don’t know why you’d wanna jump on their side. You believe in this country right? One of its ideals is innocent until proven guilty, and while sure legally on the courts need to follow that…wouldn’t it be nice if most of society did? Trying people in the media is getting oh so fucking tiresome.
And heck, the original show itself forgot that Donna had a little sister.
She did?
Yes! And apparently she also had an older sister that I forgot about!https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_That_%2770s_and_%2790s_Show_characters#Intended_recurring_roles
She also wasn’t part of the main cast.
she was totally billed as part of the main cast for a couple seasons until the actresses drug problems got in the way. They even added her to the opening
My memory is not 100% on this but I *think* Lisa Robin Kelly was main cast in Season 2.Addressing Laurie would be awkward for different reasons. I mean… technically she got recast so they *could* bring her back? But yeesh. I’m only a few episodes into the 90s Show so I don’t know if they mention Midge either.
She drank herself to death on the way to her home planet’s liquor store.
She ran off with Chuck from Happy Days.
That actually does bother me although I feel like I was already confronted with these feelings when they abruptly replaced the actresses who plays Laurie in season 6
And what about Chuck Cunningham? 🤣
The vehemence is very weird. “Say what you will about Danny Masterson, but you honor the memory of beloved television icon Stephen Hyde!”
it’s also like…do they think that not mentioning him somehow erases his existence? this is an av club review in 2023 that maybe 500 people will read.
frankly this whole discussion is surreal. who cares about Hyde; it’s twenty years later and the show centers around the new kids. It’s still kindof an exploitative show that play on nostalgia for an old show; they were gonna bring back guests; but not you couldn’t expect all of them. plus, you know; the guy is a rapist.
you seem care enough to repeatedly respond to their comments on multiple threads
So a Netflix show. End on a cliffhanger and canceled after 1 season and then have the mighty algorithm recommend it to everyone?
I know this is like complaining about how Monica and Rachel afforded that huge Greenwich Village pad, or how Al Bundy’s shoe salesman job somehow afforded him a two-story, three-bedroom home in a decent neighborhood (they lived across the street from Marcy, who was shown to be very successful), but(deep breath)
HOW THE HELL DOES RED NOT SMELL ALL THAT POT SMOKE?
More importantly: they find an old stash of Eric’s weed and smoke it. The weed is over a decade old wtf.
Yeah talk about a waste of time pot that old won’t even get you high a decade or more later.
And they’re all acting stoned. Hell they are lucky they didnt get sick.
Wait what? That’s just illogical. That’s like buying weed pre-grinded.
It’s not logical. Still the Velma tv show makes that 90s show look like fucking Casablanca in terms of quality.
Even worse: Leo is in the show lol. They could have EASILY had them get weed from him. Or heck, they steal it from him when he isnt paying attention.
Maybe he tragically lost his sense of smell in…I want to say Korea? Red’s a vet, right? My dad’s biggest complaint about That 70s Show was “nobody used the word ‘dumbass’ in the seventies.”
I don’t know about “dumbass”, but I remember Donna saying “dill hole” a few times and thinking “Did they say ‘dill hole’ in the 70’s?” I guess I associate it with Beavis & Butthead, but I might be wrong.
Well, maybe it’s just that Red invented the term. It’s certainly his go-to phrase. It was at least around in the ‘80s.
Maybe he was a pioneer? “Hey Chuck, I was hanging out with a pal of mine the other day and he used this really funny new word, ‘dumbass’. I’ve been calling all sorts of people dumbass now, it really takes the edge off.”
Canonically, he coined the word.
“It reminds me of that time I shot at the North Korean and didn’t miss”… I seem to recall some inconsistency about what he did in Korea, but yes, that was Red Forman’s war.
Kurtwood Smith (b. 1943) is a bit young for the character—the military time for someone his age would have been Cold War, maybe early Vietnam if he made a career of it—but he pulled it off with acting talent and, by then, being kinda in the right general age range, a long span when your looks change but slowly.I wonder whether my parents—the WW2 generation, and one of them a heavy (tobacco) smoker, which kinda does a number on your ability to smell other things for a while—would have recognized marijuana unless the baggie were so labeled. I doubt the characters on this show would have had much access to anything remotely resembling today’s redolent weed anyway.
Addendum: According to several write-ups by people who paid closer attention than me, Red had also been in WW2. Navy both times. (https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/off-duty/military-culture/2023/01/18/red-forman-cantankerous-navy-vet-of-that-70s-show-is-back-dumbass/
at this point I think he knows and pretends not to
Red knows. And he knows that stoned kids in the basement aren’t upstairs bothering him.
Congenital anosmia.
Apparently the apartment Monica owned was rent controlled. She got it from her grandmother who lived there before her.
And she killed here to take the apartment.
Fans, incense, and towels under the door are absolutely foolproof methods that work every time, as anyone who has lived in a college dorm will tell you.
Honestly parent’s or grandparents in this case can be pretty oblivious. As a teen I smoked quite a bit, I know what a surprise, at my house. Even in the bathroom litterally next door to my moms room, and she never knew, or didn’t let on that she knew until I was almost 18 which is funny because SHE used to smoke as well.
Could just mean your mom’s cool…
lol she was a good mom but certainly didn’t want me smoking. Funny enough once she did “find out” I did while she wasn’t happy it’s not like she was searching my room for it, and when I was partying drinking 40’s and boones with my buddies, if I came home drunk, of course I did, and she was awake I just said I was high LOL. She didn’t know I drank until I moved out and was closer to you know legal drinking age.
Ah, the well-navigated walk of shame…
LOL right like admitting I was high AF was PREFERABLE to admitting I was drunk.
they addressed that when he does find out they smoke weed.
He thought it was incense
Wasn’t there scene where Red & Kitty were smoking in the basement too?
But anyho, I think I have to watch this. For some reason I’ve got quite big soft spot for 70’s show. Dunno why.
I assumed they were all just heavily in debt.(and Red just subconsciously filters the smell out so he can avoid dumbasses)
Spoilers:What bugs me is the revelation that Jackie cheated on Fez and left him for Kelso. She gave Kelso so much shit for being a cheating manwhore, but she turns around and acts like a cheating hoe.
I guess they are both trash and deserve each other?
Maybe one of the story arcs will be like a Depp/Heard-style cycle of mutual abuse and eventual divorce.
The finale of the original took place on the last day of 1979. This takes place in 1995. So this is about a 14-year-old smoking weed?
To be fair, Point Place existed in some weird time warp wherein 1976-1979 somehow spanned 8 years. In that regard a 16-year-old who should really be 14 isn’t too shocking.
There was an explanation for that. Each season was half a calendar year. You could tell the changing years by the sticker on the license plate during the opening credits. They definitely played fast and loose with it.
Honestly, she looks like she’s 14.
She’s actually 15 and a half and Randy’s kid…“yeah..everyone fuh ..forgot…forgot about Randy ..RANDY!! I existed!! I was real you BASTARDS!!”
Or she’s 16 and Kelso’s brother’s kid. Donna went to California to have her in secret.
Fucking Casey Kelso… god I hated him… Fun character, but I am an Eric guy.Oh, ARE they?(…. that’s a… half-hearted Luke Wilson joke… nevermind…)
this show is in a really weird place. They did xeroxed the beat and characters from the original series; it’s the same kind of writing; but still everything in it feels forced. I mean a multicam show with a laugh track is already supercringe nowadays so there’s that. In the end Red and Kitty kindof support the whole thing. Also I don’t know the deal about the 90s; it’s not that special (maybe because I grew up in it, but a lot of the aspects that are supposed to be period related cringed me a lot as well). The original cast seems weirdly to have not aged at all.
From some angles Laura Prepon looks like she’s about 70.
There’s nothing “cringe” about a multicam show. It’s a stylistic choice. That’s like saying “Westerns are cringe” or “Hourlong medical dramas are cringe”. And FWIW, the new show was shot with an audience. I suspect there is probably some sweetening added in post but that was also true of the live audience shows back in the day as well.
Scientology working overtime here
Non-reboot show ideas (the wilder the better):A female plumber who has a promiscuous Gen Y queer son and they fight ghosts in computers.
A store run by a chain smoking sassy woman that sells people’s missed opportunities to people who think their lives are boring. Only thing is, those who accept their new path have also sacrificed their own destiny and regret their choice.
A boy who finds an amulet that turns him into a child superhero only to find that it is cursed and has also released demons on the earth who happen to eat his family. Now, 10 years later as a teen, he must collect those demons who are constantly wrecking havoc on the planet.
Your turn!
A case-of-the-week detective story told from the point of view of the magnifying glass.A bunch of high-schoolers make a bet to see who can lose their virginity first. Flash-forward to them in their seventies; they’re all still virgins and their obsession with trying to have sex has ruined their lives. We watch as they try to rebuild their shattered sense of identity.A serial killer wants to settle down and try to channel his urges into running a small diner. He has a regular band of wacky customers, who are all also serial killers.A show about a mouse.
The computer from Electric Dreams, an early GLADos from Portal and the computer part of Kitt (unplugged from the automobile, he looks like a car stereo crossed with an Atari 2600) escape from a government lab. And form a detective agency.Also , I dunno …the grown up version of D.A.R.Y.L. helps them by pushing them around on a trolley or the girl from Small Wonder , whichever’s cheaper.Does it break the reboot rule? yes How many fucks do I have to give ? None.
They can ride around on Johnny 5’s back. 🤓
I’m a big fan of the original. I tend to think it works better if you’re in your teens or twenties, along with the main cast. I did watch the first episode of this one, and I wasn’t thrilled. It was fine but the young cast didn’t really grab me. But again, maybe an age thing? Still I feel like the original cast just seemed extra mature to me, even back then. Happy to see Red and the other adults return, but I’m not sure I can keep up with the teenage romantic drama nowadays.
Also it was odd how quickly the central romance was set up. You could have been out of the room grabbing a snack and come back, “oh, Leia and Jay are interested in each other now? When did that happen?”
Having now watched its entirety, I ultimately like the new kids but I think they’re evidence of why some sitcoms work better in the old 22 episode season model. They need more time to develop into interesting characters. If That 70s Show only had 8 or 10 episodes a season I don’t think we’d have gotten as attached to those characters. I also feel like the teen romantic drama of the original wasn’t quite as heightened as this was. Eric and Donna were in an awkward pre-dating phase for like half a season and Jackie/Kelso was as settled as Kelso’s man-whoring would allow. There wasn’t much actual *drama* until the Hyde/Jackie/Kelso triangle.
The episode length thing makes some sense. I watched episode 2 and thought it was very awkward how Red and Kitty seemed to know the kids already. Including hanging around with them in some scenes. Lately in some streaming shows I’ve already been thinking there are some advantages to long seasons. Especially with a sitcom. There’s some negatives to it, but building character and the audience getting to know characters can work better with 20+ shows.
Yep. You can’t expect audiences to get invested in characters they only see in 20-30 minute storylines for 10 episodes. Sitcoms don’t require as much character depth so development isn’t as big a deal but dynamics ARE. And yeah, it did feel a little rushed that Leia makes these new friends and the Formans are already pals with them by episode 2. The 70s Show advantage was not only season length but the characters already had set dynamics. There wasn’t an audience surrogate character. We start episode one with Eric already friends with everyone and already on the verge of asking out Donna.
*bursts through the door, wild-eyed and out of breath*
Am I too late to point out that Hyde was also a character on That 70s Show and that I too am against doing a rape!?
No! There’s still time!
how racially diverse is the town now? Did they have to start in 1995? Mid-decade? In the early 90s there were at least some cool things that happened.Will they reference the OJ Simpson trial? Michael Jackson jokes?
“Hey Leia Forman…what does “OJ” stand for?”
Oral Job
The original show started in 1976, believe it or not.
I liked it.It’s exactly what you expect it to be. It’s nostalgia out the ass; it’s a warm, safe, comforting blanket of the same stuff and you know what? Sometimes that’s fine.I don’t have anything bad to say about it. The new kids really grew on me, Red/Kitty carry it of course and it was just a fun watch.
Yeah same, it was a cosy watch. Not everything has to be a cinematic masterpiece.
Yeah I am 4 episodes in and its, ok. Not great not terrible, but Red and Kitty are the best.
When I began I was like “this nostalgia trap wont get me, I’m too fucking clever!”Me not longer after: IT’S FREE WILLY, GO WILLY GO, BE FREEEEEEEEEThey dropped one ball tho: show takes place in july of 1995. Guess what came out in July of 1995? FUCKING FREE WILLY 2!!They should have had an ep of them going to see it at theaters, like the original cast going to see star wars.
I don’t know if the warm fuzzy nostalgia show would or even *should* get into it but I have mixed feelings about Red and Ozzie. Given his past characterization and the context of a fairly broadly drawn war veteran Midwestern dad, I thought it was odd if understandable that we never saw a hint of homophobia OR anti-Asian sentiment from Red. I know he’s had the edges sanded off by being a grandpa and maybe those are tensions the show didn’t want to invoke. But it still gave me pause. I thought if they were going to have one of the two accept Ozzie it would have been more dramatically compelling for that to be Red. Kitty is a sweetheart who wouldn’t turn any kid away. Red might. Higher stakes. But that’s Monday morning showrunning.
The reveal of Jay’s last name, and Red’s reaction to it in context, got me.
Right like Kelso was his LEAST favorite of the OG group, and finding out there is ANOTHER one wow.
Yeah, that was a really fun moment. Maybe I should have seen it coming but I didn’t and it got a big smile and laugh out of me.
Alright, after Hyde jokes I got around to the pilot episode.
It’s not great.
The kids unfortunately have the Nickelodeon vibe to them (Gwen, who I assume is the romantic interest, is fucking terrible).
Also, what kind of character is Leia Foreman supposed to be? Is she a good kid, a rebel? Her actions or why she’s spending the summer with the grand parents don’t seem to have much explanation.
Ehhh… I slightly disagree. Clearly Eric is a bit of a smotherer and Leia is looking for some freedom, which she thinks she’ll get by staying with Red and Kitty. She seems to be a good kid who is having a rebellious phase.
I appreciate your take on it.
The one old flashback episode had Hyde go to jail in his 20s, well, it came true
HA they should have slightly changed history and been like “nobody has seen Hyde since he shot Reagan in the 80s”
lol, that is dark. What would have been funny is Hyde made a engine that ran on water then he vanished.
“Hyde made a car that he said ran on water, his body was found floating in a lake”
Just like the three real people that did, problem solved!
Really good cast but the writing is poor. it has made me want to watch a really good 3 camera sitcom though.
Also, why isn’t Liea and Gwen the will they/won’t they? they have great chemistry.
In the final episode, out of fucking nowhere, suddenly she wants to hook up with Nate?
I read an article about the show that argued this before I watched actual episodes and I got pretty annoyed. I was like, “Can two people of the same gender not just fucking be friends?!”And then I watched the pilot. And… yeah. I actually kinda agree.
Having now watched a few more episodes…. Holy shit yes! They have SOOOO much more chemistry than anyone else on the show!
Anyone notice the timeline and the age of Eric and Donna’s kid and Kelso and Jackie’s? Means pretty much RIGHT after the show ended, Donna get pregnant lol. And it means Jackie cheated on Fez and immediately got dicked by Kelso and also pregnant.
It’s just weird considering Donna and her personality, you would think she would wanna wait? I mean there is an episode literally about her getting on birth control so you can’t blame ignorance.
This shit fucking sucks.
Is there beef between some of the cast members I don’t know about? I thought it was super weird how Mila Kunis and Ashton Kutcher showed up right after Eric and Donna left…like why give up the opportunity for those four characters (and supposed best friends) to share a scene together?
Why weren’t there more women born in the early ‘80s named Leia?