Wednesday, December 04, 2013

Will Roseanne please go away FOREVER

Are you as sick of Roseanne as I am? For God sakes, what does it take to get this sick hateful woman to just go away? I thought when she moved to Hawaii she’d disappear or fall into a volcano, but I was wrong.   Like shingles, she’s back again -- once more in the news thanks to a series of vicious stupid rants she tweeted (and then missives a few days later saying she was drunk and to disregard the first series of bile gibberish).  Like all is forgiven.

As longtime readers of this blog know, I have had my run-ins with Roseanne. She personally attacked me on several occasions and I suspect this post will result in a lot more. Last time I was a balless Ass hat who hated women. This time I’ll probably be the Anti-Christ. So what? I’ll be laughing it off anyway.

When I got in a blog war with Ms Barr her comment section filled quickly with bootlickers who took her side. And when some Colonel in the Army posted that he thought my position was fair and respectful she replied to him by saying “What do you know? You’re in the military. You can’t get a real job.” This of course caused a minor firestorm and she quickly deleted her response… as she has done with her Friday night rant-a-thon.

The woman is clearly unbalanced. And I feel sorry for her on that account, but when she repeatedly publicly trashes people it’s hard to stay sympathetic. At some point you just wanna say – go the fuck away! Take your meds, go to yoga, raise goats, paint, whatever – but get out of our lives and stay there. Enough already.

NBC foolishly has commissioned a pilot with Roseanne and that was the target of her recent ravings. The showrunner assigned to write the piroject Linda Wallem (one of the co-creators of NURSE JACKIE so no slouch) apparently did not include Roseanne in the creative process to her satisfaction. And NBC didn’t properly stand behind her to her satisfaction. So she lashed out at everybody. Somehow even Anderson Cooper got caught in the gunfire. Roseanne tweeted:

‘censor this s*** u f****ing p***k mother****ing a**hole dispshit banjkster w***es of Hollywood neo con anti semites. ANDERSON COOPER IS A TOAD.’

And he had nothing to do with the NBC pilot. How did Roseanne miss me in this barrage?

Here are some of her other delightful tweets:

‘everything-every word I turned in to nbc and nbc studios was censored and thrown out-they wanted ‘my brand’ w/o me in it. Worse than matt w.’ (referring to Matt Williams who created ROSEANNE)

‘I’ve ben disrespected and ripped off by Hollywood. f*** hollywood. f*** every stupid p***k there. Misogynist classist white colonial f***.

‘f*** these hollywood anti semite b*****d jewish women loathing f***tards… the women in hollywood cannot fall to their knees to suck d*** fast enough.’

Nice, huh? Even when she likes you it’s insane. This is her support of Alec Baldwin and his recent flare-up:

‘no wonder alex baldwin calls ppl names and s**t-he shld lay off gays and go for morons tho.’ 

What is NBC doing even being in business with this mad hatter? It’s not enough she’s unstable; she’s also over. When was the last time Roseanne was relevant? When was the last time Roseanne commanded an audience? Like all networks, NBC is chasing younger viewers. Why are they interested in a 61-year-old woman whose only recent claim to fame is alienating people? It’s like if the Lakers gave a ten-day contract to Dennis Rodman. Why? Seriously – WHY?

Her retraction means nothing. Her credibility means nothing. My hope is that NBC rids itself of this unnecessary migraine.  My guess is they will. And when Roseanne rants that she’s never going to work in Hollywood again that it’s (a) true, and (b) Hollywood’s choice, not hers.

Goodbye. Go away. Visit a volcano.

79 comments:

Richard J. Marcej said...

To tell you the truth Ken, if you hadn't brought her up, I wouldn't have thought about her at all. I hadn't heard anything from her or about her since…. well, I guess since you wrote about her last time. Seriously, she hasn't been "relevant" in my life since the better season's of her sitcom.

ScottyB said...

Holy jeez. Exactly what *is* "her brand" anyway? What *is* there to rip off? It's not like she's offered any specifics.

Like Ken said, she has been irrelevant for a few decades already. Yeah, there have been truly talented people who got a break and came back after some years to reap some good fortune because, well, they still had something to offer.

I dunno. If I was in her spot, I'd mind my plantation, enjoy the fruits of my labor in an amazing location on the planet that few people will ever get to have, and work on just being *plain funny* again if network-TV work was what I really wanted to get back into.

Steve said...

Ken,

please stop talking about that weird old woman. I don't like to read about her, nor do I care about her. Thank you. More Friday Questions for example!

Best
Steve

Hamid said...

I'll give Roseanne her due, her sitcom back in the day WAS funny and she performed it well, but from what I've read, she treated the people around her horrifically, and after her show outstayed its welcome by about 4 years, she descended into being almost a parody of herself, this comic-horror monster figure who throws tantrums and then uses her psychological issues as her get-out-of-jail-free card every single time. You can forgive someone's outbursts only so many times before you realize that their "issues" are actually being used as an excuse.

Roseanne should call up Pauly Shore and collaborate on something. They both have the same level of appeal and they both have a work schedule that's as full as OJ Simpson's.

Kevin C. said...

As the great philosophers of Motley Crue once said, "Girl, don't go away mad. Girl, just go away."

Scooter Schechtman said...

Didn't "Ten Things I Hate..." er, I mean "Much Ado About Nothing" start this way? I hear wedding bells!

Mike Barer said...

It seems like once the actor loses a job, they can lose their "purpose" as well. I would not wish harm to her, but maybe she can find something to occupy her time so she won't have time to "twitter" her time away. At least maybe she can have a publicist (they'r paid to make you look good)tweet for her.

VincentS said...

I lost interest in Rosanne when she claimed she had multiple personalities. As you say, Ken, this is a pathetic woman obsessed with being noticed. It would be sad if she weren't so obnoxious. How dare she say that about some one in the military who is putting his life on the line so that she has the freedom to say such things.

Eduardo Jencarelli said...

@VincentS

The biggest lie the military proclaims is the whole 'fighting for our freedoms' excuse. They haven't done that since World War II.

Roseanne may have her issues, but her rant against the military is the absolute truth. Not a real job. It's a group of mercenaries in service of heartless corporations.

John Leader Alfenito said...

Roseanne is an angry, unhappy person who cannot deal with her professional irrelevancy.
Good riddance.

Max Shenk said...

I'm with Richard Marcej on this one. The first thing I thought when I saw your blog post in my newsfeed wasn't "Well, here she goes again" but "She's still alive?"

JT Anthony said...

Why do you bother giving her the attention she so desperately seeks? Even though you're right, YOU keep her relevant by taking her bait.
Friday question: are Hollywood execs, agents et al as brutal and vapid as depicted?

Trevor said...

I enjoyed her old sitcom up until a few years ago. Now I can't watch without thinking about how nasty and crazy she is. It's wrecked for me -- not unlike Two and a Half Men.

The fact that NBC gave her any kind of deal just shows how desperate they've become.

Kosmo13 said...

There are some things you can't ignore: like when the dog throws up on the living room floor. You have to clean that up.

The subject of this thread and her behavior is more like when the dog passes wind. Just ignore it.

VincentS said...

@Eduardo Jencarlli. I should neither dignify your comment nor digress from the subject matter by responding to your posting, but I feel I must. You are entitled to your own opinion, Eduardo, but you are not entitled to your own facts. In the first place, I made the comment about laying down one's life for one's country, not the gentleman in the military who responded to Rosanne's tweet. Moreover, whatever your personal views may be regarding the military as an institution and however justified they may be, the people in uniform - of whom Mr. Levine was one - do put their lives on the line for us every day which enables you and Rosanne and anybody else to criticize them without fear of punishment be they saints or assholes.

Nick said...

You cannot control what Roseanne does, but you can control what Ken Levine does, and you can simply ignore her, if you choose to do so.

gottacook said...

"Linda Wallen" should be Linda Wallem, who first became well known (and properly so) in the 1980s as part of Dudley Riggs' Brave New Workshop, the long-running Minneapolis improv troupe.

Cat said...

I can find Roseanne on several TV stations per day, even at the same time. Frankly, I'd rather they show Cheers instead!

AJS said...

Ken

Take a deep breath. Let it go. Not worth getting riled up about.

Chester said...

"Why are they interested in a 61-year-old woman whose only recent claim to fame is alienating people?"

Ken, I’m surprised you’d use Roseanne’s age as a reason the network shouldn’t be interested in her. Sixty-one is not old. You’re echoing the misguided notion that anyone over 40 has little to offer creatively. And please don’t say you’re simply expressing the reality within the industry, not your personal opinion. At least Roseanne was drunk when she uttered rubbish. I assume the same can’t be said for you.

Personally, I have no feelings about Roseanne either way. Perhaps she is "irrelevant" —but have you seen what networks are broadcasting these days? Tell me how any of the Real Housewives, or the Kardashians, or Honey Boo-Boo, or the Duck Dynasty boys are any more relevant? From what I can see, relevance and broadcasters are terms that have little apparent connection.

I tend to agree with others. Maybe it's time to retire your rant against Roseanne. With each one, you seem to be getting a little more like her. ;-)

Marisa said...

Honestly, Ken, the only time I ever hear about Rosanne is when you write about her. I think I have seen a small blurb about a rant of hers somewhere on some site sometime recently... but I of course didn't give it the time to really read it. Why would I? You are giving her much more satisfaction, I'm sure, by devoting your only post for the day entirely to her. I would MUCH rather read something else you write than an Ode to Rosanne Barr!

Joseph Scarbrough said...

While we're at it, could we also make Joan Rivers and Kirstie Alley go away too, please? Oh, and Chelsea Handler too. And definitely the Krapdashians.

SharoneRosen said...

Go away??? I thought she was gone. Actually, never gave her a thought... no "whatever happened to...?" crossed my mind.

Someone in programming at NBC obviously suffered a stroke.

I miss smart sitcoms. When are you going back to work, Ken?

Conner Kid said...

"she’s also over. When was the last time Roseanne was relevant?"

If you truly felt she was irrelevant why would you take the time to research her tweets and dedicate an entire post to her?

"When was the last time Roseanne commanded an audience?"

Every day, on multiple channels, multiple time slots. Roseanne was a ground breaking show many of your friends worked on. She has an unrepresented voice. You may not agree with her but she still carries an audience. That's why you wrote this piece, for your share...

RCP said...

I must be psychic: Roseanne appeared in a dream last night - she entered a room and glanced up at herself on the television - now here she is again.

At her best, Roseanne is (was) talented and funny - but she's too out of control and this has cost her credibility - it's like she has no idea. As for being a 61-year-old woman, that was Betty White 30 years ago.

As always, great rant!


Anonymous said...

On the bright side, I can't picture her naked...

Jim said...

Are you as sick of Roseanne as I am?

Honestly, I can't say that I pay any attention to what Roseanne says or does, just as I pay no attention to most of the other "Hey, look at me! Look at me! I'm being outrageous! Look at what I'm doing! Look at what I'm wearing! Look at what I'm saying!" types that show business tends to attract.

Johnny Walker said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
MaryMary said...

It took me some time to go through all the links you referenced, Ken. Including the original New York Magazine article by Roseanne (I suggest you read it again).

From my point of view, you totally mischaracterized what she wrote in your May 23, 2011, blog synopsis where you opine she should blame her handlers, not Matt Williams, for her loss of creator credit.

In the NYT article, she DID blame her handlers. She clearly states they misguided her when she signed the contract. And she blames producers. Quote:

"I figured out that Carsey and Werner had bullshitted Matt Williams into believing that it was his show and I was his “star” as effectively as they had bullshitted me into thinking that it was my show and Matt Williams was my “scribe.”"

However, from that point on she then goes after male writers. That's when you made it about you. All about you. And she counterpunched. And you're back here again with her twitter posts.

I ask you to consider your huge part in this -- you negated and invalidated everything SHE experienced and expressed in that NYT piece simply because you felt it wasn't true of YOU.

[Aside: For future reference -- next time a woman tells you something negative she's experienced at the hands of men resist making it about you and surreptitiously painting her as a liar because YOU would never do THAT. It really pisses a woman off.]

Perhaps, if Roseanne had used a qualifier like 'some male writers' or '90% of male writers,' you would have put yourself in the innocent 10% and none of this would've happened over three years ago. But Roseanne did not use a qualifier so you perpetuated the showdown by hauling out three former women who worked for you offering their testimonials to prove you're not sexist.

I'm sorry, bubbalah, but that made me laugh. Three women? In a career as long as yours? Three? The subtext alone supports a lot of what Roseanne said in her original article about industry bias against women.

Worse, it's like someone dragging out three African-American friends to prove they're not racist.

Look -- I'm not defending the tone of her delivery but I do understand why she called you "balless." Because you give awfully short shrift to the validity of her claims that the film/TV industry is hostile to women. Instead, you shoot the messenger because she hurt your feelings. "Go away. Go away," you say. "Go away."

Cap'n Bob said...

She started her career by stealing Phyllis Diller's act, but she was funny. The TV show, which I saw a couple of times, made me want to throw up. I was reminded of hogs wallowing in mud. Apologies to the hogs. Her insipid publicity stunts and asinine rendering of the national anthem cemented her place on my permanent shit list. Give her hell, Ken. She's earned it.


Eduardo: You're an idiot.

RyderDA said...

Without her, who would Tom Ford learn from?

Roger R. said...

Ken -
I left a message with 1988 to get their counsel. Let me know if they return the call.

I'm here to help.

Brian Drake said...

When she was doing stand-up and her original show, she certainly seemed balanced enough--then again, we didn't have Twitter then. I can't help thinking, though, that this unbalanced version of Rosanne didn't start happening until after her attempt to sing the National Anthem, which she was shredded for, namely by President Bush the Elder, so, you could say that her condition is all Bush's fault.

Wayne said...

Ken, you're really razing the Barr.

Pamela Jaye said...

I never watched her (first) show when it was on. I hear some people thought it was good but my friends hated it. I can't remember the exact reason for that, but they tried it - I didn't bother.
If you ever want to talk about irrelevant, irrational , formerly famous TV nutcases, I'm sure Kate Gosselin would love the publicity (and be happy to hate you). Roseanne is too old to ruin young lives, but Kate is still out there, trying to get the world's attention while she does so. I always feel sorry for her kids. Three episodes of her show and I knew she was Mommie Dearest. (In fact, I finally read that book because of her.)

MaryMary said...

An afterthought -- I find it amusing you mention Roseanne's age somehow makes her irrelevant when I just learned from your IMDB page you're two years older than her.

Jeffrey Mark said...

I actually bothered watching (and, uh, liking)Rosanne back in the early nineties. It wasn't half bad and my wife and I enjoyed it. For a while. It got dumber and dumber and more incomprehensible as the nineties wore on and we finally stopped watching around '93. Once in a great while we tuned in an episode for old time's sake and found Rosanne getting more cynical and mean-spirited on the show. You can see her attitude coming out on those last seasons. And then, like most people, we forgot about her.

Anonymous said...

I once worked with Roseanne and while she was nice to me, I did notice that there seemed to be something wrong with her. To quote a David Letterman line about Andy Kaufman "When you look into (her) eyes you can see that the lights are on but nobody's home." It fell into place for me years later when I saw her on the Actors Studio. She said when she was 15 she was hit by a car, thrown over it, and landed on her head. She said after that, her family said she was never the same. If this story is true, it might indicate some real brain damage.

Igor said...


Ken wrote: Why are they interested in a 61-year-old woman whose only recent claim to fame is alienating people?"

Hey, Ken - What's the relevance of her age in that equation? Since you're in the neighborhood of 61, isn't that age reference worse than surplusage?

Nixon said...

Auntie Krist...
She used to be really funny and at one time had a really good TV show but I haven't heard anything about her in years so maybe she is trying to get back in the limelight and be current and relevant with these rants that sound similar to the dialogue we hear on Top Chef, a Simon Cowell talent review, conservative talk show discussion of liberals or lyrics on a Top 40 radio song. Maybe she's just trying to re-infiltrate popular culture by using the style of communication that is currently en vogue.
In light of today's blog entry it seems to have cracked open the door a hair.

Igor said...


Oh, and other than to watch John Goodman, I never had much interest in "Roseanne".

Brian O. said...

I come here to see what Roseanne is up to.

Eric J said...

When someone is irrelevant, we don't bother to talk about them. We don't blog about them and generate 41 comments either. If we do, then they must be, by definition, relevant.

BTW, the Captcha text to post this was IATurd 149. Is Roseanne writing your login material?

Dana Gabbard said...

I understand there is a scene in
Neal Gabler's ''Winchell: Gossip, Power and the Culture of Celebrity'' where someone describes coming upon Winchell sitting in the dark in a bungalow at the Ambassador Hotel. "Get Out" he told the visitor and resumed brooding. This was after his fame had vanished and by the 1960s he was a relic. Once you have enjoyed the roar of the crowd and acclaim as the song goes you can't resisit taking that extra bow. Once your day in the spotlight is over it is hard to accept that your time has come and gone. Maybe this is the rot consuming Rosanne. Sad.

http://www.nytimes.com/1998/11/18/arts/he-turned-gossip-into-tawdry-power-walter-winchell-who-climbed-high-fell-far.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm

Dana Gabbard said...

MaryMary, one small point to consider is this is Ken's blog. He could delete your message. But although it is quite critical of him he is allowing it to remain. In similar circumstances would Roseanne do the same thing?

I agree with the other posters who feel ignoring Roseanne is the best response. Also I am sure that is the one thing sure to make her furious. Along with my regretable mis-spelling of Ms. Barr's last name in my prior post. I apologize for that.

D. McEwan said...

I was amused by "MaryMary"'s extended defense of Roseanne. She actually thinks we care about the specifics of this particular tantrum.

Roseanne makes me sad. She was a great talent, but she's Old-Caligula now, no one's dared disagree with her to her face on anything any more. Decades of surrounding herself with fawning sychophants have eroded her once-fine mind. She'll be appointing her horse as an executive producer any day now.

C.J. said...

her comment section filled quickly with bootlickers who took her side

Just as you have your sycophants who rush to take your side on pretty much anything you write about. Sometimes I think you could write a column arguing that GOMER PYLE is TV's great undiscovered gem of a sitcom, and the comments section would be filled with people telling you your absolutely right and they've always felt that way.

Regarding Roseanne, just stop feeding the troll.

Stephan said...

She actually thinks we care about the specifics of this particular tantrum

Obviously Ken thinks so, too, or he wouldn't have wasted an entire column on this nonsense.

Barefoot Billy Aloha said...

So, what's an "asshat?" I live up here in the mountains of Oregon where it'll be 17 tonight...and an asshat sounds like it'd keep me warm.

What's R's number? Maybe I can order one from her like I can order a doll from Marie Osmond.

Freezingly yours...

Jerry Bachman said...

Perhaps at the core of Roseanne's "issues" is that, unlike John Goodman who has never stopped working since the sitcom ended, Roseanne has never really succeeded at any other major TV or movie project.

The public seems to love her as Roseanne Conner, a fictional character that faded away as the series wore on. The real Roseanne was never truly embraced by the public. To someone as "fragile" as the real Roseanne, that has to hurt and is likely part of why she lashes out at anyone and anything. Add to that the star diva ego fed by syncophants and you have a recipe for madness.

Not unlike Norma Desmond. Only this time is NBC rather than DeMille.

Aaron Sheckley said...

This is a prime example of why I think it's awesome that celebrities use Twitter. Once you remove all the agents, managers, and other assorted handlers from the equation, Twitter becomes the forum where you get to view a celebrity's true unfiltered character. It's like an electronic version of booze. Nothing reveals the douchebaggery of a Roseanne Barr or an Alec Baldwin like their own unguarded tweets.

Oh, and F**K You, Eduardo.

Oliver said...

There seems to be a cycle of fading notoriously difficult stars. They burn bridges and find it increasingly hard to find work... up until some new network exec wonders why they aren't up to much and gets the bright idea of casting them in a new show.

Debi/Spookypeenut said...

I am having an awful time sleeping so here I am half past dead & I randomly fell upon this article & with little else to do, I read it. I'm just wanting to say THANK YOU!! I echo your sentiments to the letter. You also saved me the time and energy of writing a nearly exact replica of your reply! Yet, I would love to add the following to your post. I hope you do not.mind & I apologize in advance if I am.taking unwanted liberties here...

I sincerely had almost totally forgotten Rosanne Barr after her sitcom ended. Now I actually pray I never have to see Dawg the Bounty Hunter, that Kid Rock wannabe Exterminator Guy, Gene Nauseating Simmons & any Gypsies beating the crap out of one another in wedding dresses that I have had nightmares about being forced to wear! Lastly & for the record, without mentioning any quite obvious names, let me just finish off by saying if a person so chooses to go into a forrest, jungle or river & annoy wildlife in general, I have no sympathy when the creatures sees them as an uninvited guest & either has them for their supper or perhaps finds them crunchy and now knows that annoying humans can make a great appetizer! Nitey Nite & tyvm once again.

Anonymous said...

Do I hear applause? You certainly deserve a big round!! Yes, there are celebs that I never ever wish to see nude and some who cannot keep their clothes on so I remain fighting bouts of nausea simply because I couldn't get to.the remote or cable box fast enough to change the channel!!

Barry Traylor said...

I did not think she was funny back when she was funny (if you get my drift) What a hateful vitriol filled person she is.

Hamid said...

Everyone calm down. Whatever our differences of opinion on Roseanne, we can all at least agree on two things: one, that John Goodman is awesome and we should at least be thankful he was on her show, and two, that Laurie Metcalf is awesome and we should at least be thankful she was on her show.

MaryMary said...

Bottom line -- she's achieved more than the vast majority of her detractors here will ever achieve. She started at zero and it was her talent that carried her to the top. Her show was her original concept, based on her stand-up routine, which was based on her life. And that's why it resonated with people. Because it felt real to them. Can't say that about the vast majority of scripted sit-coms these days.

I hope Ken is happy he's bloodied Roseanne enough that he can now sit back and watch the sharks descend to finish the job of demeaning her accomplishments over a couple of drunken tweets.

Eduardo Jencarelli said...

The fact that people chose to respond so candidly to my harmless remark only proves I have a very good point.

'Protecting the freedom' is a marketing line, a very effective marketing line, that was able to brainwash generations of americans with dubious patriotism.

Freedom was only threatened once: World War II. Every war after that was basically America being the bully, fighting for economical and political reasons, curtailing everybody else's freedom (other countries have them too, you know).

If the best argument others can come up in defense of the military is telling me to shove it, no wonder everyone else hates America.

Idealism doesn't apply today. Any person with a bit of perspective (most of them non-Americans) knows fighting for freedom is as phony as it gets. The military doesn't stand for freedom. If it ever did, it was only when it suited them.

Anonymous said...

Our military troops are pawns of the ruling class, Republican and Democrat, who don't give a crap about any of us. I think the claims Roseanne made about her parents are unforgivable. Julie, Burlington, Iowa

JT Anthony said...

Well said, MaryMary.
And Dana--see post below--she's not so much defending RB as she's pointing out Kens' poor arguments, which are faulty and shallow, in this case.
Must be nice to get attention himself, (surprisingly at age 63). This is what must happen after 60-- a couple of old jewish ladies bitching about irrelevant stuff.

rockgolf said...

Why is it that some celebs feet they can tweet really crude stuff, delete it and pretend it never happened?
I was looking at the page of a non-acting TV celeb/author, recently and found his board had been slammed by spammers and sent him a tweet:
"Hey, just letting you know spammers filled three index pages of your board."
His reply was: "Hey, just letting you know I filled your mama with three index fingers."

Daniel said...

MaryMary, here's what Roseanne wrote:

I took responsiblity for bad behavior, but explained that the bad behavior was during a nervous breakdown brought on by having to work in a hostile work environment, and I am pretty sure that women who have worked for you in the past (if indeed there were ANY) worked in a hostile work environment. Let me know, women writers out there--how were you treated on Ken Levine's staff?

She asked a question of women writers, and women writers answered.

Roseanne also suggested, without evidence, that Ken created a hostile work environment for his female co-workers. You haven't provided any evidence to suggest that he mistreated his staff, either, so your argument sounds a lot like "When did you stop beating your wife?"

David said...

Ken beats his wife? Well, that is sick and wrong and disturbed on so many levels. I cannot even bring myself to read the blog of someone who would do that.

Dana Gabbard said...

MaryMary, may I suggest a positive action in support of the empowerment you believe Roseanne represents is purchasing one of
the holiday brass CDs that supports International Women's Brass Conference which "exists to provide opportunities that will educate, develop, support and inspire all women brass musicians who desire to pursue professional careers in music". The concert I attended Tuesday in Koreatown here in Los Angeles was fantastic and I was glad it was in support of such a great cause.

Just a suggestion...

Marty Fufkin said...

For those of you who say "I only hear about this woman on your blog, stop giving her attention..."

Don't forget, Ken lives and works in Hollywood, and Roseanne's antics affect his peers in ways that we don't read about in Entertainment Weekly. This blog isn't just for us fans, but is also an extension of the conversations that happen in Hollywood circles.

Consider this post as an insight into what's on the minds of "backstage LA".

MaryMary said...

Look at the chain of events and try to be fair minded. Roseanne's original 2011 New York Magazine article did not mention Ken Levine. But Ken Levine blasted her on it in his blog as if she did.

Roseanne's big mistake was responding to him via her blog. And their short-lived bickering got a lot of press for Ken's blog. Articles all over the place about their feud (google them). Other blogs, 100s of them, reprinting the articles. This feud is included in Ken Levine's Wiki page (as if it were a professional accomplishment) and takes up a third the hmm, I wonder how it ended up there).

Clearly Ken got a lot of attention and site traffic back then thanks to Roseanne's mistake: responding to him. But she hasn't repeated that mistake again and thus denying him further press.

Not for lack of trying on his part. There's this post and the one he published, October 9, of this year: "Crazy Roseanne is at it again."

If she's truly mentally ill as he has said more than once, why has Ken used her as a topic twice in the last 60 days? What does that say about him?

Both of those are rhetorical questions, btw.
I'm out.

Ken Levine said...

May I just weigh in here? I will not debate my position. It's my viewpoint and I stick by it. But to clarify some things for MaryMary (whose comments I appreciate, by the way, and I especially appreciate that she doesn't hide behind anonymity):

When the original New York Magazine article came out I received literally hundreds of requests from readers to offer my thoughts on it. This happens frequently. Some article or celebrity quote will come out and I'll get requests to comment on them. I do if I have a strong opinion and know something about the subject matter.

So I wrote my original piece on the article (which I stand by as well). That caused the shit storm. After a couple of days it seemed silly and I cut it off. I'm sure I could have milked it much longer if indeed I was seeking publicity. I write blog posts every day. My aim is not to calculate what will go viral. I write about what interests ME. People find the content entertaining or informative and stay, or they don't and don't.

Every time Roseanne opens her big mouth I get a flood of requests to respond. With my last post I was basically saying to all I'm tired of this idiotic woman and I'm done.

Now I shall step aside and let you all debate each other. All I ask is that you kids play nice. Thanks.

D. McEwan said...

"Stephan said...
'She actually thinks we care about the specifics of this particular tantrum'

Obviously Ken thinks so, too, or he wouldn't have wasted an entire column on this nonsense."


Ken never discussed the specifics of whatever the heck bug is up Roseanne's roomy butt this week, only that the tiresome old cow is off and raving again. Only Roseanne herself, and it seems, Marymary, give two pennies and a fart for whatever it's about this time. It's "about" a once-brilliant woman having the world's slowest, loudest mental breakdown.

Anonymous said...

Ken Said:

"Every time Roseanne opens her big mouth I get a flood of requests to respond. With my last post I was basically saying to all I'm tired of this idiotic woman and I'm done. "

It must be so hard for you to get so many emails demanding that you tear down Roseanne. What's a grown man to do, except give the people with plenty of extra time on their hands what they demand, and broadcast his bitter contempt for a woman he acknowledges might be bipolar or suffering some other problem?

Stay strong, Ken. Stay classy.

Aaron Sheckley said...

Don't flatter yourself, Eduardo. I wasn't responding to your comment that American military forces were fighting to preserve people's freedom. It's easy to make an argument that fighting in Afghanistan doesn't do a thing to protect your freedom. I'm not saying the argument would be valid; only that it's possible to make the argument. However, you definitely deserve the royal "F**k You" for your asinine comment that people in the military don't have a real job. Your job can't get much more real than sticking your neck out far enough that it might get a bullet in it. To characterize a 22 year old Buck Sergeant squad leader in combat who is trying to keep his squad alive as a mercenary in the service of a heartless corporation only marks you as the worst kind of knee jerk liberal, and the kind that makes me embarrassed to call myself a liberal. You can argue all you want about the validity of the presence of the American military in another country, but to denigrate the legitimate sacrifices of the footsoldier on the ground (who often doesn't give a damn about politics) highlights the fact that you don't have a clue what you're talking about. Curse the military machine all you want, but go serve a hitch before you mock the idea that the soldier or Marine or sailor or Airman doesn't have a "real job".

Mike Schryver said...

Just FYI, I'm another one who only hears about Roseanne when Ken writes about her. I suppose a comparison might be with Ken's baseball posts, which I love but others might not care about.

the Sherlocked Blog said...

Take your meds, go to yoga, raise goats, paint, whatever – but get out of our lives and stay there.

She's not in my life. Why are you going out of your way to keep her in yours?

Cory said...

Mary-Mary said that she has done more than any of the commenter here ever will.

So what?

I mean, she had a decent stand up career, a hit TV show and has spent the last 25 years or so either talking about her mental illness or exploiting her talking about mental illness.

Some of us have decided that rather than go into performing, we treat people with mental illness and help them go on to attempt to lead happy, functional lives.

Some of us have jobs in offices making sure our fellow co-workers get their paycheck on time, or that their benefits cover their medical issues. Some of us work hard on raising children who will live happy lives.

Sure, we won't be on TeeVee talking about how we have "multiple personality disorder" (which is not considered an actual mental illness anymore)...but I think we'll do just fine.

As for Roseanne, I haven't put any money in her pockets and will continue to do so. But I'm glad she gave Joss Whedon a job, because I really like his work since he was on her show.

Hamid said...

What Cory said.

Jake Mabe said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Jake Mabe said...

She's a disgusting slob of a human being -- a term which barely applies to Her Blimpness -- whose claim to fame was a television series that should have been titled "The John Goodman Show."

Hank Gillette said...

Everything you say about Ms. Barr may be true (she certainly comes across as at least borderline mentally ill), but I dispute the idea that Matt Williams “created” Roseanne. He may have gotten the official credit, but clearly what he did was adapt Ms. Barr’s standup routine to the sitcom format. She did all the heavy lifting and I can’t blame her for feeling that she got screwed by the network. That doesn’t excuse her subsequent behavior, of course.

M. Vance Hill said...

Had an entertainment attorney some time back who wrote jokes for Roseanne's... I want to say talk show? I never saw it and I'm going off something he told me back in 2000. Anyway, he was invited out for a week and eventually turned down a full time job because HE COULDN'T STAND BEING ANYWHERE NEAR HER. Said fond goodbyes to the rest of the staff and slammed her on the way out.

Anonymous said...

I googled 'please make Kirstie Alley go away' and found you...a kindred spirit. I wanted to scream as the promos are running incessantly, but there was no one here to hear me. Thank you, I feel heard now.