8 Simple Rules (2002–2005)
Give the show a break. It is what it is and nothing more or less!
30 October 2002
I have read the catalog of comments here about how John Ritter's career is over, how the acting on this show is not worthy of an Emmy, and how the humor is trite, etc...

Give it up, people. There is an audience for this show, and the one that follows it ("According to Jim"). If it is not for you, then don't waste your time here. YOU are the one with the problem if you came back to watch "Three's Company" twenty-five years after. Criticizing John Ritter's appearance as so many have (give the guy a break--he looks great for his age!) shows where you mind is. Go watch "That 70's Show" if you are still stuck there.

This show was not created to win awards or to serve as a true lesson in parenting. It is funny, fluffy, and the story lines are simple and cute. I can watch it with my kids, and there is always a clever exchange or two to remember from each episode. As for the acting, it is adequate. If anything, Ritter upstages the others at points, but with the nature of the writing, the kids work as a great foil without making him look too much like the "dumb dad." Katey Segal has enough talent to pull off the supporting role here, and I would actually like to see more shows surrounding her. While the story lines are a tad pedestrian at the moment, given a chance to bloom, I can see this show getting better and better.

And by the way, whoever wrote that the daughters are ugly are just plain mean and WRONG. They are both very attractive, and their acting is not exaggerated or a caricature. If people would just quit trying to be mean about this show they could see that it simply is what it is... If it is not your cup of tea, watch something else!
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed

 
\n \n \n\n\n