What’s the best TV show based on a movie?

MovieFanfare Movie Poll of the Week

View Results



To see a complete list of all movie polls, click here

 
Click Here to get MovieFanFare delivered to your inbox!

Share It!

Leave a Reply

  • David Savage

    C'mon! What about ALICE based on Scorsese's ALICE DOESN'T LIVE HERE ANYMORE (1975) or THE BRADY BUNCH based on YOURS MINE & OURS (1968)?

  • Anonymous.

    The TV version of M.A.S.H. was often too critical of military life, as well as the military in general. Moreover, the program never examined the cause and history of the Korean war. As a result, the writers were free to offer blind support of pacifism. To say the least, regarding the occasional need to go to war, the attitude of the show was a great deal less than thoughtful. Bottom line: M.A.S.H. WAS and IS a profoundly flawed television program.

  • Hank Zangara

    You know, The Odd Couple shouldn't really count as a candidate in this survey, because it was based the original Broadway play by Neil Simon, not the movie.

  • SAL RIGGIO

    MASH is the obvious pick here, but I went for THE PAPER CHASE. I never thought that MASH the TV show ever got near the brilliance of the movie. THE PAPER CHASE TV show had movie version John Houseman return to play the benevolent villain Professor Kingsfield, and that made all the difference.

  • Susan P

    MASH wasn't as much a statement against Korea as it was against Viet Nam which was a more current issue at that time. This groundbreaking (for its time) comedy wasn't as much a remake of the film as it was a sitcom on its own merits In the beginning all career military staffers were fools. Hawkeye, played by Alan Alda, and TrapperJohn played by Wayne Rogers,were more slapstick characters more often than they were when Rogers left the show for the entry of BJ Hunnicutt, Mike Farrell. Most of the foolish authority was left up to Majors Frank Burns, Larry Linneville & Margaret "Hotlips" Houlihan. As the series matured the company deftly portrayed all of the human emotions that war evokes including protests, and homesick love and appreciation for the USA. This series was a credit to all those who created it, and those of us who loved and appreciated it. I don't suppose it would play well today with all the right wing sentiment that lives among us. But it was and a is a credit to television's history. How many Snooky shows can say the same? Congratulations MASH. You live forever in our hearts and intelligent minds.

    When Henry Morgan came, in an excellent portrayal as the father figure Coronel Potter by Henry Morgan, the stories had more serious stories and a more adult look at war.

  • Susan P

    I'm not much of a typist. Apologies for the above errors in sentence layering.

  • Anonymous.

    I've heard the notion that M.A.S.H. was actually an indirect anti-war statement aimed at the Viet Nam conflict, but since the show was set in an earlier time and war (Korea), the view that it's really about Viet Nam is an intellectually hollow conceit. If you wish to make a point about this or that (whatever this or that happens to be) on a television show, don't draw phony analogies or create vague moral/ethical paralels with an entirely different time and place. You eventually end up twisting your scenarios into knots as you become increasingly desperate to draw those paralels. Ultimately, it never really works. That was clearly the case with M.A.S.H. The supposed analogies between Korea and Viet Nam on that series were always a great deal less than convincing. Bottom line: If the people who wrote M.A.S.H. truly wished to criticize American involvement in Viet Nam, then their series should have been set in Viet Nam, not Korea. But again, I must say that the anti-military attitude of M.A.S.H. made it a profoundly flawed television show.

  • Anonymous.

    Of course, the television version of M.A.S.H. continued for several years after the United States left Viet Nam. What exactly were they protesting during that time?

  • Raksim

    What about Happy Days, based on American Graffiti?
    That would get my vote.

  • Raksim

    What about Happy Days, based on American Graffiti? That would get my vote.

  • M. L. Wirick

    My vote goes to Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea.
    I enjoyed it very much, even more than the movie because of Richard Basehart and David Hedison.

  • Motman

    Sorry to see Logan's Run is not included. It may have been short lived, but was a quality show with several of the Star Trek writers providing scripts.

  • Evie

    No phony analogies or hollow conciet. Those of us who came of age during the Vietnam era fully understood Mash to be an anti war statement againt the Vietnam war. The sentiment and emotions of that era remained strong way after the war ended. The Deerhunter, Full Metal Jacket, Apocolypse Now. Don't critque a culture that you have never experienced.

  • Tiny Tim

    While I'm no doubt swimming up stream, I hated M.A.S.H. the TV show, and I have generally found almost all series made from movies I liked as weak, dumbed down, and castrated versions of the original. That's why I picked Buffy. It was an outstanding, unique, and highly influential series. Although it was derived from a movie, the two had very little in common beyond the basic premise developed by Josh Whedon who wrote the screenplay and created the character for the film but totally controlled the series as writer, producer, and director. The movie was mediocre at best, and since almost no one saw it the series got the benefit of a bit of name recognition with little if any preconception to live up to. It went on to create an iconic show and character that will be remembered for decades. By contrast, the movie has been a trivia question for years already. I also appreciate the choice of Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea, which was one of my very favorite programs when I was 10 or so. However, I didn't see the movie until years later, and I didn't much care for it, partly because it was nowhere nearly as "cool" as the show had been.

  • Ellen Badders

    What about Bewitched, which was loosely based on the movie Bell Book and Candle. This is truly one of my favorites.

  • John

    I agree Evie. It is obvious that never lived in that era and doesn't that the TV series was an anti Vietnam war statement. The movies that came out during that same time proves it. MASH was one of the best if not the best show of its time if not ever. That person evidently is a right winger who doesn't know any better.

  • John Quinlan

    Didn't like mash. nothing like when I was in korea. officers had nothing to do with us enlisted men. We had squad tents they had private quarters. They would not give a sh-t what happened to Radar.

  • Frank D.

    Having served in the military I can say that most of the M.A.S.H. programs I have seen are not very realistic. Someone should have introduced the writers to the world of reality.

  • Shawn McGinnis

    Happy Days was a spin off from an episode of Love American Style titled Love and the Happy Days that aired in Feb 1972. American Graffiti was released in 1973. While the fifties nostalgia American Graffiti created did help Happy Days to get its own series, the idea for the show was around before American Graffiti.

  • Martin Stumacher

    Without a doubt, my favorite was and still is the best series to be adapted for television. The comedy is about the best ever written for a the period of the 1970's and that never to be forgetten last episode. It is still considered one if not the most watched show in the history of television. True, it had a political message about the insanity of war and the comparison between the Korean War and the conflict in Vietnam. Alan Alda and the entire cast were magnificent. I have the entire series in both VHS and DVD.

  • William Sommerwerck

    Something has to be said for "Highlander", which was good in its own right, and considerably better than the film.

  • Gary Koca

    Only one choice here - M*A*S*H* was a terrific TV show and much better than the movie.

  • Gil

    I'm with you William! "Highlander" was a very good TV show and as you said, much better than the movie!!!!!

  • Jackie

    I just LOVED "The Odd Couple" The movie was great--
    I loved the genuine friendship protrayed amongst the guys in both the movie AND the series . It was lighthearted and funny, with a touch of pathos you do not see very much any more.Since Walter Matthow was busy,there could not have been a better actor than Jack Klugman.He was terrific and believable, with his gruff,yet tender personality.

  • Gord Jackson

    Anonymous may be surprised to learn that Arthur Miller's play "The Crucible" was based upon the history of the so-called witches of Salem in Puritan times, and Don Seigel's original "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" from 1955 a thinly-veiled critique of the very prevelant McCarthyism of the fifties. That MASH was slamming the Viet Nam war even if it is set during the Korean war is no stretch at all.

    All of that said, I voted for "Paper Chase" which I personally preferred to the movie. Still, I would like to have seen "Starman" also on offer as I think it too was a superior television series to the movie, good as the film may have been. It's too bad ABC threw the show away in a poor timeslot with little promotion, and that it is still not available of DVD.

  • stephen Farris

    Who cares about political correctness, M A S H was a
    sitcom based [loosely or tightly] on war time. Some of their episodes, did, go overboard but others were so good. They did a few [documentary-like]episodes that really stood out.Some of their antics were designed to soften the fact that there was death all around them. The operating room scenes were very inspiring.
    Hey ANY-MOUS: are you afraid to tell us who you are?

  • John Small

    Re: David Savage's comment - THE BRADY BUNCH wasn't so much based on the film YOURS MINE & OURS as it was inspired by it. There's actually a world of difference.

  • John Small

    Bottom line: If Anonymous doesn't like MASH that's his right and he's perfectly free to dislike it and not watch it. But the fact remains that it was a great show - one of the best of any kind ever made for TV - and his disapproval of their producers' and writers' point of view doesn't change that fact any. You're looking at this series through the haze of your personal and political biases, which makes your criticism every bit as "profoundly flawed" as you claim the show to be.

  • Jerry

    To all, MASH THE TV series was a Leftist/liberal/socialist slant and attack againest the U.S. government. The later years of this program was very telling, if you re-watch any of the shows and concentrate, you can see the socialist slant againest freedom and liberty. It is subtle, but the writers, even came out and bragged about their efforts. Conservative thought was fodder for Larry Gelbart et.al. Allen Alda, ever notice how he got long in the tooth the final three years?

  • Gary Vidmar

    TV shows based on movies are a drag, but nowhere near as stupifying as movies based on TV shows.

    M*A*S*H on television was a major drag: a bourgeois, soapy version of Altman's satiric, mean-spirited film. Unsurprisingly, M*A*S*H on TV succeeded by wallowing in middle-class sentimentality still popular with the commercial cable crowd today.

  • r-gordon-7

    Simply put, how could you possibly leave off "Alien Nation"?

  • bill engleson

    Dare I suggest two others...Peyton Place and Naked City?

  • William Sommerwerck

    Agreed on "Alien Nation". An excellent program, and again, far superior to a weak film.

    One cannot take seriously the views of someone who describes "M*A*S*H" as an attack on the government of the US. (Such people are commonly called a word I can't use here, that refers to those who grovel in front of power.)

    Leftist/liberal? Absolutely. Socialist? I think we have a very different understanding of what that word means.

    I was never a huge fan of "M*A*S*H" -- perhaps it was the unnecessary and annoying laugh track. The scene where Klinger dresses as the Statue of Liberty and salutes McArthur is one of the great moments in TV comedy, however.

    The author of the M*A*S*H novels, Dr Richard Hooker, was not particularly happy about the way the film skewed the story in a left-wing, anti-war direction. Regardless, however you feel, both the film and TV show are, and will likely remain, "significant".

  • Kai Ferano

    I've said it before, and I'll say it again: "The Ghost and Mrs. Muir" starring Hope Lange, Edward Mulhare, Greta Shaw (? Irish housekeeper) and the hysterical Charles Nelson Reilly. Why, oh, why doesn't that much-loved TV series be put on DVD?
    The original movie was, of course, a real tearjerker, as compared to the much lighter TV series.

  • Bill C.

    M*A*S*H in a walk. The series actually improved upon the movie. It did stretch credulity the longer it ran, knowing a draftee like Hawkeye would have been out of the service after a two year hitch (not hanging on and getting gray around the temples).

    Anonymous probably wasn't around during its original run, but M*A*S*H was most definitely seen as a comment on our involvement in Viet Nam. That it continued after that conflict ended says more about ratings. No one was going to cancel a hugely successful sitcom just because American involvement in Viet Nam ended.

    For a bit of background, Joseph Heller wrote "Catch 22." He set the book during WWII, but really based it on his experiences in Korea. And he said he hoped the book would make a comment on America's "next war" - which turned out to be Viet Nam.

    Jerry: Just for background "socialism" is an economic system. It's opposite would be "capitalism." Neither one has anything to do with "liberty" or "democracy" which are political - not economic terms. It is possible to have capitalism under a dictatorship (see Nazi Germany) and liberty/democracy under a socialist system (see Sweden). If you're going to try and smear people, at least use the correct terminology.

    BTW - has anyone thought of "Bewitched" which was obviously based on the movie "I Married a Witch?"

  • Bob

    How about "LaFemme Nikita" with Peta Wilson. I think when it was on, it was the highest rated show ever on cable TV.

  • Dilligaf

    It may have been "profoundly flawed", Anonymous, but funny as hell even after many repeated viewings

  • chrisy

    The WALTON'S based on SPENCER'S MOUNTAIN with Henry Fonda and Maureen O'hara.

  • Rita

    I agree with Chrisy, my choice would have to be The Waltons based on the movie Spencer's Mountain.

  • F.G. Kaye

    M*A*S*H, The Odd Couple, Buffy the Vampire Slayer,
    Stargate SG-1, Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea,
    The Paper Chase, The Young Indiana Jones Chronicles, Fame,
    Flipper, Gidget.

    I've listed all of the shows here, because I want to explain my vote. Yes M*A*S*H is the obvious choice, but I believe that it's
    too easy a choice, because both the movie & T.V. show were popular. The same can be said for most of the other shows
    listed here.

    In the case of;
    The Paper Chase & The Young Indiana Jones Chronicles,
    the movies were a success, but the shows failed.

    So, I wouldn't vote for these 2, because of the way the question was asked.

    The way I interpreted the question was which T.V. program
    exceeded it's movie in continuity, popularity & style.

    Of all of the shows listed, only 2 fit this category;
    Buffy the Vampire Slayer & Stargate SG-1.

    Now of these 2, only the Buffy the Vampire Slayer show, greatly exceeded it's parent movie. The movie was considered a joke & no one considered that the show could be a success, because of how bad the movie was...

  • RogerZ

    MASH and The Odd Couple were the obvious choices but I really liked the Young Indiana Jones Chronicles. I was very sorry to see that in the DVD set they eliminated the character of "Old Indy" who would start and end the stories by talking to kids or museum tour guides about the true stories behind the artifacts/photos/ paintings that they were seeing.

  • Arlene

    Anonymous: What were they protesting??? WAR you damn fool!

  • Ross Biondo

    I want to respond to Anonymous : "since the show was set in an earlier time and war (Korea), the view that it's really about Viet Nam is an intellectually hollow conceit." ......
    Well, here's the deal. I grew up in the 60s. When MASH was first on TV there would have been NO WAY that any network would have aired that show based in Vietnam. It would have been seen as treason, Period. It was a full 3-4 years after Saigon fell that the first movies even came out, Deerhunter and Apocalypse Now. We take it for granted now that an excellent show like Combat Hospital is based in Afganistan. As for the show itself I'm not a big fan. Canned laughter after almost every Alan Alda line became boring. Harry Morgan though plyed the best character as Col. Potter. And FYI , back in 1970 I saw MASH and Patton together as a first run double feature in a movie theater. That's also how much times have changed.

  • Ross Biondo

    And a quick shout out from a comment above:

    r-gordon-7 says:
    August 23, 2011 at 1:41 pm
    Simply put, how could you possibly leave off "Alien Nation"?

    YES, I agree.

  • patti

    I voted for The Odd Couple, but I loved Peyton Place. I had forgotten about the series being based on the movie, (which I loved and still do) thanks for the reminder bill engleson, you would think I would have remembered having named my oldest son Ryan, after Mr. O'neil.

  • van

    With the exception of MASH, the Young Indiana Jones Chronilces is the best show on this list. Better than all the movies except the first one. Voyage To The Bottom of the Sea? Seriously? LOL!

  • Susan W.

    Yes, another vote for PEYTON PLACE. I'm too young to have seen the show when first aired but having purchased Part 1 and Part 2 of the show, I'm so hooked that the rest of the series should be put on DVD. So many actors became big names after starring in Peyton Place.

  • richard finn

    I had to go with the crowd and voted for MASH. I still watch reruns on TV Land. But I did not like how the character of Burns was portrayed as an inept surgeon. The rest of his character as an unfaithful husband, over zealous officer, and a basically dishonest character was all right. But the Army Medical Corps did not allow for lack of skill. Sure errors and mistakes occur in surgical practice, but not because of lack of skill or knowledge. I often wonder if that portraryal bu Linville led to his early death. He had been fixed in a role, and I don't recall seeing him in other TV shows following his departure from MASH. The character , the Major, who replaced Burns did his role well. And he was not made to appear inept.

    Finally why has no one mentioned Hogan's Heroes, which was based on the play and movie Stalag 17, which won William Holden an Oscar for Best Actor.

  • Anonymous.

    To Evie and all the rest of you presumptuous enough to assume that this former Air Force officer doesn't understand the Viet Nam war era, I say BAH! The Viet Namese communists were (ARE) certainly evil and any effort to stop them, initially on the part of the French, and later on the part of the United States, was morally right! You may revere the despicable Jane Fonda all you want, but here's the Bottom line: The television version of M.A.S.H. was an awful program! It was produced and written by people who knew and understood little to nothing about the Viet Nam war! Mind you, and make no mistake about it, I understood, and STILL understand, that particular war very damned well! I lived it! Finally, I re-iterate: the obvious anti-military elements of M.A.S.H. made it a great deal less than outstanding. This fact is so very clear and undeniable that there really is no SERIOUS debate about it!

  • C.G. Fan

    Topper, with Leo G. Carroll, Robert Sterling, Anne Jeffreys, Lee Patrick, and of course Neil!

  • Nora

    Also agree that my favorite would be the Waltons based on Spencer's Mountain.

  • jeanine

    Gidgit, Paper Chase, Fame.
    I loved Mash at first, but it got a little Whinny.

  • Kerry

    MASH immediately came to mind, but I chose to vote for Young Indiana Jones because I thought that was very well done. Since it hasn't been mentioned though, I'm probably one of the few that enjoyed the Sarah Conner Chronicles based on the Terminator movies. I thought that was also surprisingly well done and really captured the feel of the movies even if 'sized' for TV.

  • sugarpussoshea

    This one was easy. Definitely Bewitched based on the movie "I married a witch" with Veronica Lake, Melvyn Douglas, Susan Hayward and Rbt Benchley. Gr8 movie - but I'm not sure if I didn't like the TV series better ( with Dick York as the one and only "Durwood" as Endora wud say).

  • Bryan K

    I had to vote for MASH; I was too young to know or care about the war at the time, I just enjoyed the show for what I saw: funny! I still enjoy it.

  • John Small

    Re: Anonymous' latest comment " to assume that this former Air Force officer doesn't understand the Viet Nam war era, I say BAH!"

    To assume that this former Air Force enlisted man doesn't understand your extreme narrow-minded bias, I say HA! To dismiss a television program as "flawed" and "awful" because it does not conform to your particular world view is not only stupid but borderline un-American. If the writers and producers and actors were expressing their opinions about Vietnam or war in general, what of it? They have that right. To suggest that they should not have been allowed to present those views in my opinion makes you no better than those Communists you are railing about.

    For your information, sir, I happen to love my country. I love it and the ideals it stands for so much that I have spent a lifetime denouncing and battling those who might cause it to rot from within through censorship, bigotry, hatred or the enforced following of ANY particular sociological, religious or political tenets at the expense of any others. According to the history classes I took as a small boy that is what America is supposed to be about: freedom. And that, to me, is one of the ideals that MASH celebrated and portrayed so well.

    But all that aside the fact remains that from a purely artistic point of view - writing, directing, acting, etc. - MASH was not only the best thing on American TV for much of its 11-year run but stands head-and-shoulders above most of the drek that's being foisted upon the viewing public these days.

    Bottom line: MASH was a great series and remains one of the finest examples of television art that has ever aired in this country. The word "classic" gets overused a lot in the business; I can name the series I feel are truly deserving of that label on the fingers of my hands, and MASH tops the list. To quote you, sir, this fact is so very clear and undeniable that there really is no SERIOUS debate about it!

    So there.

  • Joy

    I voted for Buffy the Vampire Slayer because I am a huge Josh Whedon fan and it was fresh and different at the time. I only mourn that it has kicked off the rash of terrible things that are being inflicted upon us now on TV. I loved Buffy and Angel but the stuff they are churning out now is even too dark and bloody for my tastes.
    Does anyone agree? Or am I on my Own?

  • Anonymous.

    Hello my good friend Mr. Small...

    M.A.S.H. isn't a profoundly flawed program because it was badly done. That certainly wasn't the case. I possess enough insight to recognize it's artistic merits. It's flawed because the attitude of the program regarding any number of subjects is just plain wrong. Of course, to suggest that I may actually be un-American or somehow stupid, is... well... Stupid. I certainly didn't write anything that would cause a genuinely thoughtful person to come to those conclusions. I'm well aware of the fact that the people who worked on M.A.S.H. were perfectly free to create their nonsense. And viewers remain free to watch the program. I have no power to censor. Nor do I desire any such power. I'm simply trying to point out the fact that the writers didn't know or understand nearly as much as they (and apparently, you and others) thought they knew. You're right when you say that writers, producers, actors, etc., are free to offer their opinions. And they may do so to their hearts content. But when they're obviously wrong regarding almost everything, it becomes necessary to eventually call them on it. Now... I'm certainly not trying to enforce any sociologic, religious, or political view. We are, after all, only talking about a television show. But you force me to again focus on the most glaring problem with the show: it's constant anti-military drumbeat. Frankly, it just makes no sense. Add to this a plainly naive view of war in general and Viet Nam in particular (no matter what any anti-war activist may think or believe), and you clearly have a profoundly flawed television show. Was it a funny TV show? Yes. Of course it was. And it still is. But CONTENT matters. And the content of M.A.S.H. was and certainly remains plainly wrong. Therefore, it is a profoundly flawed program. This is a fact. It's inescapable. And no amount of name-calling on your part will change it.

  • Alfie

    There are quite a few opinions here, so I'll offer mine. M.A.S.H. was an excellent TV program - so long as one overlooked Alan Alda's numerous anti-war references. Everyone knew he was an anti-war zealot, and of course since he was the star of the show, who's going to stop him from working his views into the scripts? Some of them were believeable - especially comments made by the doctors about losing fine young men to such injuries caused by war - in spite of their best medical efforts to save them. Such general comments are acceptable by everyone. However, Alda's character pushed it to the boundaries, and sometimes beyond. The entire cast was so funny, so outrageous, and so good, that it remains a pleasure to see it in re-runs even today. And for you younger people seeking to tie it to Viet Nam - forget it. It was and will forever remain all about the Korean war. Regardless of was on the minds of Alan Alda and his writers at the time.

  • KarenG

    I loved Mash; it was a great show. People who can't laugh at themselves are the ones that are seriously flawed. The cast was just outstanding, and the show presented some good values.

    So this was a tough choice, but I picked Buffy the Vampire Slayer. Also an excellent show with an outstanding cast and amazing writing. I will agree, though, with someone else here who said she regrets the stream of other, related shows that Buffy has spawned that are not nearly as well written.

  • Bill C.

    Anonymous:

    You started out claiming that M*A*S*H couldn't be making a comment about Viet Nam because it was set in Korea. Once that wrong-headed notion was demolished, you shifted your argument to M*A*S*H couldn't be a good show because it disagrees with your position on the military.

    Obviously, you are in a minority. You are in a minority here as M*A*S*H has racked up more votes than all of the other series mentioned combined - and by a wide margin.

    You were in a minority when M*A*S*H aired as it was consistently among the top rated programs during its long and successful run. Its final episode was the most watched episode of a TV series in history to that point.

    It has enjoyed a long and healthy run in syndication.

    But being in the minority or holding an unpopular opinion is one of the things that America is all about.

    And you are quite correct - there is no debate when one party has a closed mind.

  • Susan

    Here's my list:
    The Walton's
    Topper
    Gidget
    Bewitched
    The Ghost & Mrs. Muir
    Flipper
    MASH

    I chose Gidget in the poll as it seemed to me the only choice to have come close to the true essence of the original movie. It was cute, funny, family watchable and even Sally Fields has stated she would have preferred it to continue over the ridiculous scenario of The Flying Nun.

    Yes, Bewitched was based on the movie "I Married a Witch" and I liked it better than the movie and agree it was never the same after Dick York left. I liked Dick Sargeant, but "Durwood" was such an established character, not the actors fault, it just changed the dynamic.

    I enjoyed MASH for it's comedic element never took it as the reality of war and didn't care what their political agenda was, just saw it as entertainment. Sometimes faced with the reality of REAL LIFE we all just need to laugh.

  • Susan

    oops I left off The Odd Couple. The TV casting was brilliant.

  • William Grove

    MASH was a comedy. Hit or miss like most comedies in the past 30-35 years. The Waltons were an offshoot of a TV movie about Thanksgiving on Walton's Mountain, which I can't remember the title. Spencer's Mountain, I believe, was written by Earl Hamner Jr. as was the Waltons. If I'm wrong, I'm sorry. Thank you for your time.

  • Omar Soliman

    Always hated MASH TV show! Never liked Alan Alda. I always thought that the show was sluggish and the cast uninspired. MacLean Stevenson was the only funny person on the show. The idea that Gelbart and crew conceived of Groucho goes to war might only have worked with a better Groucho impersonator. I doubt that any modern war would be good fodder for a sit-com. It did not work for me,.. never. Besides the Marx brothers already did it in DUCK SOUP. Why try to redo something that the masters already did right?

  • Susan

    Earl Hamner Jr wrote the book Spencer's Mountain which became a Hollywood movie (in which the time frame and location were changed to suit budgets and what they thought would sell to an audience at the time), The Homecoming was a Christmas movie based on one Christmas from his childhood. The Walton's was created in response to the ratings from The Homecoming. All incarnations were based on Mr. Hamner's family. Even Falcon Crest written by Mr Hamner was inspired by his mother's family that immigrated from Italy and were vintners.

  • Anonymous.

    Bill...

    Why am I being forced to repeat myself? OK, I'll give it another try. I said that M.A.S.H. is set within the Korean war, which, of course, it is. Therefore, at face value, it's about the Korean war. On a purely superficial level, it's about nothing else. However, as I pointed out in an earlier post, I am well aware of the fact that the program was an anti-war statement about the Viet Nam conflict. Which, of course, it is. I also stated that trying to connect Korea to Viet Nam was problematic for the writers. Which, of course, it was. Basically, they had to twist their scenarios into knots to get them to fit their world view. Anyway... None of these facts have anything to do with the main question, which is: was M.A.S.H. a good show? Well, of course it was. Was it funny? Of course it was and still is. Was M.A.S.H. a highly rated program? Again, of course it was. It must have been. After all, the Korean war lasted for 3 years. On M.A.S.H., that particular war played out over 7 years. No one can say that it wasn't popular. Still... the fact that M.A.S.H. is a praiseworthy television program is absolutely meaningless. It has nothing at all to do with my criticism of it. HEAR YE, HEAR YE, ONE AND ALL... Please pay attention! I said that M.A.S.H. offers a naive view of war in general and Viet Nam in particular. Which, of course it does. I also said that M.A.S.H. promoted a great deal of thoughtless anti-military rhetoric. Which, of course, it does. Please allow me to emphatically repeat that point. The show wasn't just anti-war or anti-Viet Nam. It was also plainly anti-military. That attitude is plainly illogical. Therefore, for these reasons it's reasonable to conclude that M.A.S.H. was and remains a profoundly flawed TV program. Which, of course, it is. Finally, if you go back and re-read my posts on this subject, including this one, you certainly will not find a so-called "closed mind." It's just plain silly to suggest such a thing. But that's OK. Much like M.A.S.H., it's often too obvious when someone is wrong. As far as that is concerned, all anyone ever has to do is point it out. Therefore, I just have to say, of course you're wrong.

  • Bill C.

    To me, the epitome of a closed mind is believing that in matters of opinion one can be either "right" or "wrong."

    Your belief that M*A*S*H promoted "thoughtless anti-military rhetoric" is simply your opinion. It cannot be proved or disproved. I found M*A*S*H to be the product of very thoughtful writing. I further think it also promoted many instances of thoughtful criticism of the military. I do not believe any institution in a free society is above review or criticism from the citizens it serves. That is my opinion. Neither opinion in right or wrong.

    M*A*S*H was not a serious drama nor did the producers of the show ever claim it was a realistic depiction of either Korea or Viet Nam. It was a comedy. Its job was not to be realistic. Its job was to be funny (which you admit, it was).

    You could claim that "Night Court" was "deeply flawed" because its portrayal of a night court was not realistic. Or that "Smallville" was deeply flawed because no small town in Kansas has a super-power alien growing up there. Or "Perry Mason" was deeply flawed because no attorney ever won all of their cases.

    But those would simply be opinions and one cannot be wrong simply because their opinion differs from yours.

  • Barbara

    Agree with some folks: Highlander, Alien Nation, Stargate SG-1, Topper.
    Never could stand MASH.

  • Anonymous.

    P.S...

    Just to clarify. When I said that M.A.S.H. was an awful program, I meant it. And I continue to stand by that view. It's awful if you dig beyond the superficial. However, if you just pay attention to the silliness and jokes, then it's a great program. I, on the other hand, cannot ignore the editorial comments. Now, when it comes to my supposed opinion regarding the anti-military rhetoric of M.A.S.H., the fact that the program offered obvious anti-milititary nonsense was and is very clear. One would have to be deaf, blind, and dumb not to recognize it. It's just too obvious to deny. It was not and is not a matter of opinion. Red is red. Blue is blue. M.A.S.H. clearly indulged in anti-military rhetoric. Face it. It's an obvious fact. And just because I choose to point out this obvious fact does not indicate a closed mind on my part. Once again I say, that view is just silly.

  • Richard

    I really enjoyed mash to let you people know a real mash unit is pretty much like it show there on tv butwith more milatery discapline lets say the humer is still there the wacky people are still there I had to spend a week in a mash unit one summer as a reservist my favorite is 12 O' clock high bought the whole set of dvds

  • Richard

    I have served 12 years in the army never did combat saw the remains of war (falkland island) the nice shiny boxes with flags and all so I can't imangine being in a mash unit in a war and and what they have to go through every day and not be silly, anti-milatery or anything like that it really does suck mentaly and physicly in a nuc missle batt. we had people act like that and sound off like that as a co commander I had to listen to it council on it and drive on if you don't people will blow steam off some other way and that will cause problems

  • gloee

    As the daughter of a WWII Army Vet who was in school during the 60's I voted for MASH because it was a great TV show. Anonymous I softly suggest vigorous excercise for the as you say to deal with obvious whatever you perceive that to be. I am saddened that the only blog I have experienced up to this time as a dare I say it "liberal forum" of opinions of movies tv etc. has now been exposed to political divisions of our times..as only one group being right & all others wrong..up until this time most of us I am sure have expressed our views without trying to impose our beliefs & perceptions on others..I personally believe that is the most dangerous thing I have seen in the current times..jmo & oh yeah one of my cousins did 3 tours of duty in the Air Force in Vietnam, another cousin's son did 2 stints in Iraq...so besides my dad who has passed now we're pretty "Pro Military" & think they like MASH also..

  • Patrick

    I also would like to put in a vote for La Femme Nikita. Much as I dug the often-brilliant Luc Besson source movie (I even like some of the rip-offs and remakes, like Jade Leung's HK version in Black Cat), the TV series created an entirely different kind of ambient cool: stylish camera work, tight scripting, innovative use of music, and Peta Wilson's constantly metamorphosing title character made it a delight to watch.

  • Anonymous.

    I enjoy the give and take on this site. And of course, there is nothing wrong with offering a difference of opinion regarding anything under the Sun. This includes politics. That's what sharing opinions are all about. Moreover, when a film or television show delves into social and/or political issues, then those subjects are fair game. Of course, it goes without saying that it's OK to disagree, even vehemently. Disagreement can promote thought and discussion. We often learn from others in this manner. So have at. Hit me with your best shot. Just remember, if I disagree with you, I will give as good as I get. There is just one thing I don't understand... Why are so many posts so poorly written that they're not just difficult to decipher, they're often IMPOSSIBLE to decipher?! If you truly wish to make a point and be understood, your writing should be sharp and clear. Why should anyway care about your opinion if you don't care enough to make it understandable? Use a dictionary. Use correct punctuation. Use capital letters when you start a sentence. Surely you learned all this in grade school, didn't you? Frankly, it's not unlike trying to read a long dead language. And to tell you the truth, I'm really not an expert in ancient Sanskrit!

  • John Small

    RE: "It's flawed because the attitude of the program regarding any number of subjects is just plain wrong."

    In your opinion. Your saying so does not make it a fact, no matter how many times or how many different ways you try to explain it. It was never my intention to get caught up in a debate over the subject and I'm sure the other folks reading this are growing weary of the discussion as well, so as far as I'm concerned this is my final word on the subject.

    Other than to say this: What you insist on labeling as "anti-military rhetoric" I have always seen instead as "anti-war rhetoric," which is something very different indeed. I realize that war cannot always be avoided; however, I also believe that IF war can be avoided then it SHOULD be avoided. And I also believe- as I stated many, many times during this country's mostly misguided mission in Iraq - that the best way to support our troops is to try to avoid war and keep them safe from harm as much as possible, which is something that certain U.S. leaders have never seemed to grasp. That's my opinion; your have yours as you have made abundantly clear (although, like so many of your mindset, you choose to present your opinions as "fact"), and we're obviously never going to change one another's mind on the issue. So in conclusion let me simply suggest that if MASH offends you so much, just go to whatever lengths are necessary for you to avoid it. The way I do with Fox News and Rush Limbaugh.

    Thank you and have a nice day.

  • John Small

    Re: "Why are so many posts so poorly written that they're not just difficult to decipher, they're often IMPOSSIBLE to decipher?!"

    On this point, at least, we are in complete agreement. Although (at the risk of starting another debate, which is NOT my intent) I have to admit I find it a little disconcerting to see so many choose to either identify themselves by use of some silly (and sometimes offensive) nickname or, as in your case, to not identify themselves at all. Perhaps that's just the newspaper columnist in me, though; I've spent a career putting my name on my opinions for all the world to see. (The newspaper I work for, in fact, has a policy that it will not print letters to the editor that are unsigned; the publisher's feeling is that we are willing to put our name behind what we say, so others should as well.)

  • Anonymous.

    Mr. Small...

    M.A.S.H. certainly has a painfully naive anti-war attitude. But it is also clearly anti-military. This is not a simple matter of opinion. It's a matter of obvious FACT. Just to provide one glaring example, I remember an episode (that's right, I DID watch the program when it was on prime-time) in which a major character seriously considered re-enlisting. Hawkeye wouldn't hear of it. He actively discouraged his friend from re-enlisting, going so far as to suggest, in no uncertain terms, that the military is not a decent place to be. Of course that's stupid, but it's also something else. It's clearly anti-military. But it's just one of countless major and minor examples that can be found throughout the life of the show. Ergo, M.A.S.H. was filled with ant-military messages. Red is red. Blue is blue. What's obvious is obvious. M.A.S.H. was plainly anti-military. Moreover, it's no surprise that an admitted liberal such as yourself would be such a huge fan of M.A.S.H. After all, the program was geared to appeal to liberals. Therefore, I don't understand why you don't recognize so much of what the show was very clearly trying to say. Finally, what the heck does Fox News and Rush Limbaugh have to do with anything? Apparently, you presume to suggest that I am not a liberal. It's true that I accept the inevitability of war, as well as the nobility of the U.S. military. I also acknowledge the fact that the Korean and Viet Namese communists were, and are, evil. Does all this mean that I can't possibly be a liberal in all other respects? Hmmmm...?

  • Anonymous.

    Mr. Small...

    The reason I call myself "Anonymous" is very simple. As a working writer I have no desire to risk the wrath of current and/or future clients. At the same time, as you and others well know, I'm very opinionated (mind you, there's nothing wrong with that as long as your arguments are cogent). And like yourself, I offer my thoughts because I'm interested in what others have to say in response. Heck, isn't that what this site is all about: everyone's opinion?

  • Bug Snellinger

    VOYAGE TO THE BOTTOM OF THE SEA leads the parade for me. Stalwart lead actors and guest stars, interesting plots, undersea adventure, a GREAT submarine, wacky monsters and cheezy special effects (most every episode you could count on the sub rocking back and forth while the instrument panels in the bridge would shoot sparks everywhere) all contributed collectively to provide top entertainment. I recently viewed some episodes from a dvd set and the entertainment value hasn't diminished a bit. If anything, they're even more fun forty years after their first airings. With Hollywood's penchant for remaking movies and tv shows, it would be excellent if a new movie series and/or television series of the adventures of the Seaview would be produced.

    A lesser entertaining TV series from a movie would be PLANET OF THE APES. It had its moments but, for the most part, became dull viewing.

  • Clay Robinson

    Let me see the question was; What is my favorite TV. series based on a movie? How about Topper from the late '50's. starring Leo G. Carroll,who was great as the title character (much more convincing that Roland Young was in 1937 movie); and Ann Jefferies and Robert Sterling playing the ghosts, George and Marion, certainly as well as Cary Grant and Constance Bennett had; but I was just a kid then, and did not discover the movie version until TCM's premier showing in the early 90's. So what do I know. But this is an unrefutable fact; or maybe it is just my opinion.
    But wait, we need to use this blog to air our political biases and personal values aside from whatever charm and entertainment value a movie /TV show might have for us. So her goes...
    Topper obviously was a up tight capitalist (afterall he was a banker; maybe even an early Archie Bunker) and the "ghosts" who taunted him obviously enjoyed expressing their hedonistic lifestyle, so popular with knee jerk liberals, at a bewildered Topper's expense--literally and symbolicly.
    This whole program was a cleverly disguised attempt by the producers and writers to promote their own liberal agendas through the new medium of TV --trying to show up the utltraconservative values which were under attack by Reds and fellow travelers so active in our country at that time.
    This same conflict, of course, had been evident in the late 1930's as New Dealers were constantly undermining basic American values of free enterprize and rugged indiviualism under the vailed pretext of protecting civil rights of workers, farmers and the elderly through the expanision of federal governmental power.
    Well, so much for looking at a relatively entertaining TV program of bygone days in terms of a political-sociological (sociologic--is there such a word) dicotomy (oops, is this spelled correctly?),which will never be resolved much less discussed intelligently by open minded Americans --"under the Sun"!
    (Should this term be capitalized because it refers to the god to which the ancient Egyptians believed?) You got me.

  • Ingrid Nuernberg

    Boy, this one generated a lot of discussion. I voted for MASH which I feel is the best television comedy ever. That said, I would have voted for BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER, which is one of my absolute favourite TV shows, except that the show was so far superior to the awful movie, it really couldn't count as an adaptation. Hey, Joss Whedon has even said he created the TV show because he was so disappointed in how the movie turned out!

  • Adler

    I nominate Peyton Place. It was adult in it's story telling. The show was so popular, it was on televison three evenings a week in prime time. The cast which included Dorothy Malone, Babara Parkinns, Ed Nelson and others was stellar. The beautiful theme music by Franz Waxman was used with the tiles against the background of the church tower. For me this was the first prime time soap opera that made an impact.

  • version

    No mention of The Fugitive?? BUssy & MASH had nice long runs and big followings. I'm glad someone mentioned Bewitched.

    Then Came Bronson - but that was rather short lived. Naked City for sure - ahead of its time - with its grittiness.

    Topper was okay - The Invaders certainly has its roots in several movies.

    Loved Voyage - even with big reappearing rubber monsters - its was never missed.

    SG-1 was an improvement over the movie too.

  • David Pierce

    I voted for the Paper Chase as I loved both the movie and TV shows and wanted to see more and I don't as a rule trust lawyers - so normally I’d never watch it - so that's pretty impressive.
    Buffy, the vampire slayer, Fame, Voyage to the bottom of the sea and Highlander are very strong options.
    MASH - I'd watch from time to time but not regularly. The rest I did watch most of the time. Now most of the comments about MASH seem to be about the wars and that's fine - My reason for not watching MASH was I don't like comedy and I see nothing funny about war. But filming the show as a antiwar comedy makes sense. Mostly because being antiwar it would get the publics support and being a war based show would have many victims of wars support it as they could connect to a story line. So the shows needed to be comedy to lighten things up.
    Buffy the vampire slayer is easily the most improved show over the movie. The show was first rate - the movie not so much. My favorite show of the series was the musical - but I love musicals anyway. I just liked the way the musical was shot.
    Highlander's movie was strong - not perfect but fun - so was the TV shows - it was going to have a very hard time connecting with the movies fans but it did.
    Fame - the original that is was heart pounding, and exciting at the theater - the TV show nearly as good but the TV show’s tended to have messages attached - not that I’m complaining. A good message will connect with an audience. What Killed Fame I think was the actor that played Bruno’s father dying. After that the show worked very hard to stay afloat but seemed to of lost some of it’s warmth and heart. Death does that. But I’m glade they didn’t try to substitute a different actor as Bruno’s dad. I think they made the right choice there and they let the audience grieve with the cast and crew.

  • Anne

    I voted for Buffy. Never liked M*A*S*H the TV show because it was very different from the movie. The film was biting and satirical and quite anti-war and (yes, Anonymous) in some instances anti-military. I thought of it really as less anti-military and more anti the stupidity of some in the military. The attitude that the film displayed towards the military did not offend me at all, as it evidently did Anonymous.

    I loved the bitter anarchic attitude of the two leads (played by Elliot Gould and Donald Sutherland,as I recall), and missed that in the TV show. The two leads were not especially nice people in the film, but they were softened up in the TV show, and that disappointed me. Loved the film, hated the TV show. So that was never in the running for me.

    I thought that Buffy was the best on the list, in this poll.

  • John Small

    RE: " As a working writer I have no desire to risk the wrath of current and/or future clients."

    I am also a working writer and people know what they get when they hire me. The day I start trying to hide who I am or what I believe in because I'm afraid of how others will react is the day I start looking for a new line of work.

    And the only episode I recall off the top of my head (granted, it's been a while since I watched my DVDs of the series straight though; guess I'm going to have to do so again at some point if this pointless debate is going to continue) in which Hawkeye tries talking someone out of re-enlisting is the episode in which Klinger says he's going to re-enlist because his wife has been unfaithful to him. And the rationale Hawkeye uses is NOT that the military is bad, but rather that Klinger is simply over-reacting to bad news from home and about to do something he'll only regret later since Klinger has never been happy in the service to begin with. That's a far cry from "the military is not a decent place to be"; indeed, when I served in the military I knew of a number of occasions in which airmen were advised against re-enlisting by their commanding officers for just that very reason.

    Again, and hopefully for the last time, your entire argument is based not on fact but on your own prejudices or pre-conceived notions or whatever you want to call them. You can argue the point until you're blue in the face - I suspect from the tone of your constant keyboard pounding that you're fully prepared to do just that - but as I said before, your saying so doesn't make it so.

    And for what it's worth I happen to know a LOT of self-proclaimed conservatives who happen to love MASH.

  • John Small

    Re: David Pierce's comment "I see nothing funny about war."

    That, in fact, was the very thing that prompted many of the MASH actors and writers to become involved in the series in the first place. They felt exactly as you do and were hoping to get that message across in some form or fashion; Alan Alda made the famous comment about how he only agreed to do the series after he was assured by the producers that the show wouldn't be "Abbott & Costello Go To Korea." (Not that he was putting down A&C, you understand; he was just wanting to make sure the subject was treated with some degree of seriousness.)

    The whole point of the show - particularly early on - was not to make light of war but to show how people in that kind of circumstance react to what's going on around them. A great many Korean War vets came forward to say that they appreciated that about the show; anyone who has ever done any kind of research into the show's origins know that many of the stories came directly from interviews conducted by the producers and the writer with actual Korean War vets. Not all of them by any means, perhaps not even most, but certainly enough so that the writers had a feel for what those experiences must have been like for the people they spoke to.

    Unlike some here, I suspect, I've actually had the opportunity to talk with Mr. Alda and learn first hand about what the show's intent was. The point was to show how the horrors of war affect those who are there - whether it be the enlistee who doesn't completely understand why he was drafted in the first place to the doctors for whom "meatball surgery" oft times goes against what they were taught in medical school to the gung-ho officers who sometimes get so wrapped up in accomplishing the mission that they don't always see how stupid some of their actions and decisions might actually be. It was NOT to be anti-military; had that been the intent it would have been a much different show because many of the behind the scenes folks and even some of the actors had been in the military at some point in their lives. (The actor who played Klinger, Jamie Farr, actually served in Korea. Look it up, it's true.)

  • Bill C.

    "No mention of the Fugitive?"

    No. that would be a TV series that was turned into a movie. This thread about the opposite, movies that were turned into TV series.

    The Fugitive TV series was not based on any movie, but was, in fact, based on a real life murder story involving a Cleveland Doctor named Sam Shepard who went to jail for killing his wife. Many believe he was unjustly imprisoned. His conviction was later overturned (after The Fugitive TV series had been launched on ABC).

  • Anne

    Let's continue what Bill C. started! WORST movie based on a TV series: The Avengers. Best, anyone?

  • Joy

    At the risk of rasing Anonymous' ire I would like to remind people that to talk about movies and politics are one thing, but to attack a person who wrote simply because of their skills with a key board or a dictionary is below the belt.
    Not the function of this forum either!!!!!

  • chad

    To John Small and Anonymous,

    I think it is fair to say that our perceptions, beliefs, and prior experiences cloud and shape every future experience and opinion that we have. I think it is also fair to say that the line between anti-war and anti-military can be just as murky, and defined by the above. You have both stated your cases very well and I was thouroughly entertained. Bravo!
    I voted for Buffy. Along with Sanford and Son, it is my favorite network tv series of all time.

  • WT

    My votes go to Topper, the Ghost and Mrs. Muir, and the Highlander. The cast for the TV version of Topper were perfect, including Neil, the dog. The movie was cute, but the TV Kirbys were more sophisticated and more affectionate, perhaps because Robert Sterling and Anne Jefferies. Both Roland Young and Leo G. Carroll were equally "dumbfounded"; however, Lee Patrick was NEVER as "ditsy" as Billie Burke. Hope Lange brought more warmth than Gene Tierney to the role of Mrs. Muir, and Adrian Paul was MUCH more effective as the Highlander Duncan McCloud than Christopher Lambert was in the Highlander movie. If it weren't for Sean Connery, the Highlander movie would have been a sleeper.

  • WT

    I'm sorry. I meant to say that both Robert Sterling and Anne Jefferies were married in real life.

  • Susan P

    I make this entry twice because I want Mr. Small to be encouraged that he is appreciated and he should know that he has fans for his effort and his views. Regarding Mr. A, when one who can't seem to empathize or sympathize with others, he is at times diagnosed by professionals with disorders including Asperger's Syndrome or may even be called a Sociopath. Anonymous doesn't seem to be able to understand or validate the feelings or views of others. Poor thing probably keeps a lot of guns under his bed in preparation for being attacked by Liberals. His birth was likely the result of a sperm donation from Ann Coulter.

  • Anonymous.

    Susan...

    Wow! TWICE?! You wrote that silly, thoughtless, mean spirited message TWICE?! That's amazingly obsessive behavior, Susan! And YOU think I'VE got a problem?! You must be joking (of course! How silly of me! You ARE joking! It's just more of your satire! After all, a normal person certainly wouldn't be so painfully obsessive! Once again, I have to admit the fact that I never would have thought of it myself! I'm just not as creative as you! Bravo!)! However, there's just one little fact that I need to point out. When you come across as though you're angry just because you disagree with someone else's opinion, a great many people may actually conclude that you are truly short tempered and intolerant. This may be an unfair reaction to your message but it's certainly understandable. After all... Just because I know you're clowning around, that doesn't mean everyone else will recognize the fact that it's just satire. You may well find it hard to believe that anyone would actually take it seriously, but a lot of people just aren't as sophisticated as you may assume. Sometimes, even though the message may be deliberate idiocy (such as that which you wrote above), it still may be misunderstood. With this in mind you may wish to be more careful in the the future when you write ranting nonsense.

  • Susan P

    Interesting that you would call anyone obsessive. Silly perhaps, but it did fit. As for writing it twice, it was insurance that it would be seen so it might get a rise out of you. Intolerant? When you were so dismissive and rude of the opinions that were in opposition to yours calling them illogical, intellectually hollow and incapable, you should have seen some people who would not take you seriously. You write as if all of your commentary is profound and void of error. Silly lies in the eye of the beholder. Ann Coulter is probably spinning in her armchair for she has a sense of humor.

  • Anonymous.

    Susan... Susan... Susan...

    Sorry to say that your message above is vaguely redundant. That's the reason it's so plainly boring. C'mon, try harder. I know you can do it. Your previous satire was so extremely outrageous it was funny as Hell! This new message is just... Well... It's dumb. There... I said it. It's really dumb. But don't give up. I would like to encourage you to try again. Sophisticated humor isn't easy to pull off. But you can do it. I KNOW you can. After all, you did it very well in the recent past. I have faith in you. As before, if you just allow your anger to take hold, then I'm sure the ridiculous nonsense will flow out in an overwhelming torrent.

  • Susan P

    Enough I have better things to do than to continue sparring with an egotistic mass that has so much hot air he could blow up Japan. But you keep going. Evidently you are fixed on seeing your own name in print. Get a life.

  • Anonymous.

    I'm fixed on seeing my own name in print? Where?

  • marjorie

    Anonymous: I completely understand your point of view. Anyone who takes the duty and sacrifice of the military to heart and views MASH in that light could well have issues with the fact that there was a distinct lack of support for the necessity of war in the writing that is somewhat inconsistent with my own experience of military people in general - they joke, they gripe but beneath it all they believe in that what they're doing is necessary and serves a higher cause.

    That said, the show was about a camp of officers that were doctors/surgeons in civilian life, whose upbringing might have tended more toward higher-education and liberal the liberal politics of the institution than heartland values and conservatism of other officers. People whose profession requires a level of self-assurance that often cheats over the line into an infallibility of judgement complex where non-medical matters are concerned.

    It is for this reason that I never particularly liked Hawkeye's character - he was the most irreverent. Was it for laughs? Sure. Was it also a soap box? maybe and if so that's kind of rude - after all we weren't tuning in to be lectured. Is it possible part of it had to do with the actor portraying the part's personal feelings on the matter? I've often wondered.

    But the bottom line is this - Ignoring the occasional preachy moments, Mash was a truly entertaining and funny show.

    Thinking of this topic puts me in mind of the West Wing. A democratic machine, but I'm hard pressed to think of an issue they didn't show both sides of on general principle, in any of the episodes I watched.

  • Ken

    I think most of the above armchair critics take the shows and themselves way too seriously! Lighten up and enjoy the shows for what they were intended; entertainment.File this comment under For What its Worth.

  • Susan

    Bravo Ken !! If a movie or a TV show does not entertain me I simply don't watch it. I also respect that it may entertain someone else. My husband and I have very different tastes generally speaking in what we enjoy watching, that doesn't make either one of us right or wrong. We are mature enough to respect that we each have the right to our own individual likes and dislikes.

Read More Posts From…