This opinion even shocks me, as an ardent Ross hater for eons. But in rewatched, Ross always has the best comedic moments:
It took a few seasons for him to break out of his Eeyore-ness, but once he embraced his chaotic self, he became 10x better as a character.
It’s funny, because I remember hearing he was considered the breakout after season 1 (and they all negotiated salary off of him), but I don’t consider him a star until a few seasons in.
I was reminiscing the other day about posters I had in my room growing up and one of them was this absolutely unhinged promo photo of the Friends cast all laying in bed together in various head-to-toe configurations. Matthew Perry's head is straight-up resting on Jennifer Aniston's butt! Courtney Cox and David Schwimmer are intimately holding hands even though they play siblings! I loved this poster!
See for yourself: https://www.ebay.com/itm/360951459440 (Might have to add this to our Should I Buy This? thread tbh).
But, really, all of the Friends promo photos from back in the day were so bizarre and so very, very 90s.
Could they BE sitting any more awkwardly on stairs? https://www.tvfanatic.com/slideshows/friends-cast-photos-remember-when/
What time is it? Time for the girls to take off their shoes, evidently: https://entrepreneurshandbook.co/how-team-negotiation-made-a-group-of-friends-each-20-million-a-year-e20a501951d6
I love all of these, they are RIDICULOUS.
Remember when Chandler dated Joanna, and complained to Rachel about the mascara goop in the corner of her eye? Watching that as a kid, I was convinced that mascara goop thus must be THE most unattractive thing about a woman for a man. This feeling carried into adulthood, so much so that whenever I saw some mascara in the wrong place on my eye, I'd chide myself. And I'm STILL overly cautious about it.
This is ridiculous, I know, mostly because it's surprising enough in the first place that Chandler even knows what mascara is. (Joey, sure, but Chandler? No way.) But I couldn't have been the only one made neurotic about this from Friends, right? Bueller?
Look, I know on paper it seems truly insane to say anyone could do better than a sweet, funny, piano-playing Paul Rudd, but every time I watch Friends (which is often) I'm always struck by how damn good Lisa Kudrow's chemistry is with Hank Azaria.
David worshipped the ground that Phoebe walked on and their time together was electric and they really did seem like each other's lobsters, didn't they? Just kind of the perfect encapsulation of opposites attract. Don't get me wrong, Mike is one hell of a runner-up and David certainly missed his window by following his career over love, but I always feel like it would have been so romantic if Phoebe *finally* just got to be with her adorable scientist man.
Am I the only one thing thinks that David and Phoebe were really the ones who deserved a fairytale ending? Or is everyone Team Mike?
I wouldn't even venture to guess how many times I've rewatched Friends over the course of my life, and I'd probably be horrified if I knew the real number. Suffice to say, I've watched Friends A LOT and I can't help but notice some serious plot holes and inconsistencies.
Now, I'm willing to let some stuff slide (Monica and Rachel's apartment magically changes from 5 to 20 and all of their ages seem to jump all over the place over the course of the show) but there's stuff that makes me genuinely crazy that the writers missed or just ignored entirely.
The one that sticks out the most is Monica introduces Rachel to Chandler in the pilot even though flashback episodes have them meeting MULTIPLE times throughout their college years. I have a hard time believing Rachel would forget the guy at Thanksgiving who lost his little toe. AND they kissed one time at a party!
That's hardly the only major inconsistency in the show (what the hell happens to the chick and the duck?! what about Phoebe's birth mom?!) so I'm curious to know which one bugs you the most. This is all just to say I love the show with all my heart, but come on, writers!
I know the entire series is a will they-won't they about Ross and Rachel — ending with a "they did" — but there is no way the two of them would have remained together.
The only reason they got together in the first place is because, for Ross, Rachel was a nostalgic crush that he needed to prove he could be with, and, for Rachel, Ross was a guy who worshipped her during a time when her confidence was lowest. Both characters grew WAY too much emotionally during the tenure of the show to be in that same place, and I don't see how you get past the "we were on a break" fight. That would haunt a relationship for life.
I think the only reason they got back together was because of Emma, and that's not quite the healthiest reason to be together.
But, prove me wrong: tell me why Ross and Rachel would still be together. And, while we're at it, how are Monica and Chandler doing? (And will Phoebe have finally found David?)
Character actor Mike Hagerty sadly passed away this week at the age of 67: https://deadline.com/2022/05/mike-hagerty-dead-friends-mr-treeger-seinfeld-actor-1235018164/.
While he starred in a variety of movies and TV shows (including Wayne's World, Austin Powers, Seinfeld, Brooklyn Nine-Nine and the wildly underrated HBO dramedy Somebody Somewhere) he was, perhaps, best known as Mr. Treeger on Friends. Hagerty played the curmudgeonly super who almost evicts the girls from their apartment until Joey (and his dance moves) save the day.
It's another side character that the Friends world has lost, as fans said goodbye to James Michael Tyler (aka Gunther) back in October 2021. RIP <3