Good story, Not enough for a whole film

Best movie ever!

Absolutely the worst movie.

A Masterpiece!

Why did the histories of Mary and Rhoda have to be so dour? Divorced women with indifferent daughters. And why very little reference to the original show and characters? The daughter characters were silly and uninteresting. Why can't there ever be daughters who like their mother's on TV? It makes sense that Mary would leave Minneapolis, and Rhoda would return to NYC, but why couldn't Phyllis or Sue Ann Nivens be guest stars? It just seems a pitiful way to remember such wonderful characters. It was good to see Mary and Rhoda together of course, but it could have been better, much better. Well, there has been a Mary Tyler Moore Show Reunion, a Dick Van Dyke Show Reunion, hopefully Mary will do better next time if she revisits her old Mary Richards stomping grounds again.

On the back burner for years (so it was reported) this television reunion of two of the most beloved characters in sitcom history started off badly - and went straight downhill from there. TV movies which re-visit once-popular shows just can't seem to recapture the magic which made the original so popular. And,yet, they keep on trying. Mary Richards (Mary Tyler Moore) and her best friend Rhoda Morganstern (Valerie Harper) meet in New York after a long estrangement and catch up on each other's lives. But, sad to relate, nothing worth talking about (let alone making a movie about) has happened to either of them in the intervening years. Instead,the script contents itself with throwing out one hoary old plot device after another (most having to do with older women in the workplace), while completely missing the quirky charm and sophistication that produced a comedy classic. The supporting cast is instantly forgettable, the humor is nonexistent, and the chemistry which Moore and Harper once had together is gone. Moore allegedly stalled this project for years, waiting for "just the right script" before committing herself. (If this was the one she considered "right", what on earth were the ones she turned down like?) It's not the age of the characters that does this in (for time inevitably marches on), but the almost complete lack of imagination coupled with a blatant disregard for the elements that made the series work. At one time this was intended as a pilot but, all to obviously, it failed to generate any interest among potential sponsors. Or for that matter, among potential audiences. And since it wasn't much as a movie, it was even less as a pilot. Quickly and mercifully forgotten, the film is a travesty and an insult to a classic.

I'm sorry, but I'd rather not see a reunion of these two stars if it can't be done with some humor, like the original MTM show had. Frankly, these reunion shows NEVER work and "Mary and Rhoda" is no exception. A lame script and cheesy acting make this a HUGE disappointment. And why in the world was Mary Richards in New York? She was a Minneapolis gal and putting her in the big apple just ruined the whole show for me. It's obvious Mary Tyler Moore wanted to make this movie in New York because she lives there. BAD idea Mary.Well ( heavy sigh ) at least they tried.Do yourself a favor and skip this sad excuse for a Mary Richards update.

So Mary and Rhoda have aged--who hasn't? I was a teen when Mary premiered, and a "young adult" when it left the air. Yes, it was great to see Mary and Rho together, and yes, maybe the film didn't sustain the comedy of the original series, but there were enough moments that recalled the spirit of the series to make this a fitting tribute. Example: the producer who hires Mary and then dictates the idea for a new series about "old people." Isn't this typical of the mentality of present-day Hollywood TV and film "bean counters?" This may not be THE MARY TYLER MOORE SHOW at its best--but it's a pretty damned good look back at one of the best shows we grew up with in the 70s.