IMHO, THE GOLDEN GIRLS wins, hands down!
It's better written, better directed, and definately better acted.
From what I see, Katherine Helmond is trying to make Mona another Blanche Devereaux--and fails miserably, compared to the great Rue McClanahan.
Who's the Boss was my favorite show when I was younger..Golden Girls was ok too. Reasoning is slightly faulty though.Katherine Helmond was Mona a full year before Rue McClanahan was Blance.(WTB aired Sept 1984, GG aired Sept 1985) Mona's character was like that from the get go. I don't see how she was TRYING to make her like Blanche, maybe it was the other way around. Or maybe after they were both on the air the shows were trying to one up each other on horny grandmas? IDK. :)
The nuns were horrified. Oh the scandle of it!
OK, I'll accede that Mona preceded Blanche, but I still think Rue McClanahan was FAR funnier than Katherine Helmond.
shareno way,OP.WTB is a faaaaaaaar better show all around.i love the GG don't get me wrong,but,IMO,WTB is the clear winner.
"I think I smell mice!"
Both strong "older" women. Not afraid to get what they want. But all in all, WTB was just funnier to me. Ok..so maybe the acting was THE best sometimes but they had their moments. And I will admit that I watch the reruns all the time still. WTB held a special place in my childhood.
The nuns were horrified. Oh the scandle of it!
Katherine Helmond was the original one and the best one. No doubts. Mona rules.
shareI agree that The Golden Girls was better written, but I think both shows had good actors. On Who's The Boss, I thought the constant focus on Angela and Tony's relationship got tiring after a while. It's funny once in a while, but got overplayed. Overall, I liked Golden Girls better.
shareI admit it, generally talking, about script and performances, the golden girls was a better show than who is the boss. Who is the boss had the wonderful katherine helmond as mona and tony danza and judith light had good cheministry and where good at times, but the wonderful scripts and the marvelous performances of bea arthur,Betty White, Rue Mclahan and Stelle Getty were unbeatable.
shareWhy are you comparing these two shows? I like both shows, but I have to go with The Golden Girls as bing funnier.
We need more sitcoms like "WTB" and "GG".
[deleted]
I'm 29 & grew up watching both shows. I've loved re-visiting both series now, but I think Golden Girls is better. GG stands up even today, and doesn't seem as dated as WTB. GG is even funnier than when I watched it as a kid (I get more of the jokes now, lol) and WTB is fun to watch just b/c I can feel like an 80s kid again, but it doesn't really make me laugh and while some of the dramatic schmaltzy scenes in the series aren't quite as cringe-worthy as say Full House, it doesn't move me either, like some of the things done on GG.
As for Mona - I can't believe people like that character. Blanche was my least-fave on GG, but I still liked her & got a kick out of her. I find Mona completely repulsive, disgusting & mean and NEVER the slightest bit ammusing. I too, thought maybe she was trying to compete w/ Blanche, but if she came first, Rue at least did it MUCH better. Blanche was likeable; Mona is not.
"Are you going to your grave with unlived lives in your veins?" ~ The Good Girl
Totally desagree. Mona was the best character in the show. I liked blanche a lot, but i preffer mona. And Mona was likeable. I admit it, im a huge Katherine Helmond fan, and i think that mona is one of her best jobs ever, as good or almost as good as Jessica Tate in soap. And the two characters are so different between them; Jessica was innocent, naivy and warm. Mona was a sexpot, a bitch and a funny and witty woman.
And for Mona, she was likeable. She was the most intelligent person in the show. She could be incredible funny and sometimes witty, sarcastic and poisoning, but she was good and kind inside of her. I mean: clever, intelligent, funny,witty, sarcastic, hot, sexy,redhair. Mona was a treasure as a character and the best part in the show. Without Mona, who is the boss wouldnt be the same.
I'm an early Baby Boomer, growing up on such sitcoms as I LOVE LUCY and THE HONEYMOONERS.
So I guess I'm not as "hip" as Gen X and Y.
But while I honestly tried to warm up to WHO'S THE BOSS, I just can't help but feel that Tony is a jerk, Angela is an airhead, Mona is a slut, the kids are brats--and NONE of them are funny!
I love THE GOLDEN GIRLS because I can relate to that "old people stuff". Also, the scripts were hilarious and the actresses' timing was impeccable.
Desagree again. I think that mona was very funny and tony and angela were funny at times. The kids, ok, were so-so, but the rest of the cast, specially mona, were more than decent. And mona is only a slut for you? Well, that is weird or even that you haven followed the series too much, because Mona could look as a slut at the first impression, but when you follow the series and see her way of behaving and so, you would realise that she was a funny, smart , sexy and witty woman.
Yes , the golden girls were better, the scripts were better, the acting in generall were better, the cheminstry and the timming betwen the girls were better, but Mona is a great character , katherine helmond is a great actress and who is the boss was a decent show.
Well, you're entitled to your opinion, doom1.
And I'm entitled to mine.
I'm almost 21 years old, both "The Golden Girls" and "Who's The Boss" went off when I was like 3 years old. I watch both shows in reruns. In fact, I can somewhat remember my Mom watching both shows and I was very young.
I can't relate to anything on "The Golden Girls", but I think a lot of the jokes are just so funny. As for "Who's The Boss", I think I like the show a little better now then I did when watching it about 6 years ago on Nick @ Nite.
It's not the funniest sitcom, but it doesn have it's moments when it is funny. Especially Mona and if Angela does something silly. The thing about "who's The Boss" is that it is a sitcom you can actually feel safe with, even though Mona did roll out some raunchy jokes.
Now, I see a lot of people were comparing Mona to Blanche. I like both, but in someways, I have to go with Mona, because Blanche toward the end of the series got tired. Although I've seen "The Golden Girls" episodes over and over, one thing I really disliked about the show was the continuity.
[deleted]
Completly agree with EISydH. Mona-Katherine Helmond looked pretty hot, sexy and desirable and Blanche-Rue Mclahan looked old and not so sex pot-ish. And even Katherine was 5 years older when the show started. Like apples and bananas.
To describe it: Blanche was a 50 something years old woman trying to look hot and sexy and to be with younger guys, Mona was a 50 something years old woman looking hot and sexy and with a lot of younger and older guys trying to get her. Vive la difference.
-Blanche was a 50 something years old woman trying to look hot and sexy and to be with younger guys,
Actually, Blanche didn't really date younger men. She may have mentioned it, and went on a date with a man that looked as if he was only 10 years younger than her in season 1 and season 6, but thoughout the shows run, Blanche mostly dated 50 something year olds. Probably because that's all she could really get.
Also, The Golden Girls weren't really seniors. Minus Sophia who was 80. I mean yes they were older, but their characters was mid 50's to early 60's by the end of the series. Seniors are 65 and up. Although their characters reduced the actors ages, by like 10 years.
[deleted]
I don't get the comparison. The shows are totally different.
share[deleted]
Well they are both 80's shows being aired on the Hallmark Channel so I guess they are targeted towards a certain demographic-- If we are that demographic,
I guess the OP wants us to decide which is better!
Very strange comparison.
I personally enjoy WTB more, but I grew up watching it w/my family so there's a lot of nostalgia there. I think GG was more consistent in its quality and humor from start to finish than WTB (which went downhill a lot in the end with the de-macho-ization of Tony - if I can create a phrase).... BUT GG didn't face the issues WTB faced that created that challenge:
They didn't have children growing up (which always impacts a show - as what was cute for a 5 or 7 year old to do/say isn't for a teen, and teens on a show is quite different from young kids).
They didn't have romantic tension between leads to contend with (sure the girls had boyfriends - but no constant tension).
They were all retired - so career changes/etc weren't part of the series (Angela went from working for an Agency to owning one - not "necessary" but it changed the dynamic, and Tony's role/responsibility changed as the kids grew up.)
And, GG was targeted at Adult Viewers, NOT families... which gave them the liberty to tackle harder topics and as a result they were much more risque and on the edge with controversy at times (they addressed a lot of "hot topics" that WTB would NEVER have broached - but children weren't "expected" to be watching GG - it wasn't designed for kids or families.).
I prefer WTB personally - but I like family sitcoms. What I strongly dislike in family sitcoms is when the man becomes a wimp in the end (happened in a lot of shows including Boss) and when they introduce a "new cute kid" in the middle to try to get laughs from that angle (Boss also guilty).
GG didn't have men or kids - so they avoided those problems. LOL!
I love both ^^
----
Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level then beat you with experience.
Golden Girls has aged better. No pun intended.
share