Jump to content

Recommended Posts

TV Land just started showing MASH from the beginning and those early episodes are tough to beat. I liked Trapper better as a supporting partner for Hawkeye. Henry Blake was a great character as was Sherman Potter. I could take or leave BJ Hunnicutt as a character....I didn't think he added as much to the show as many of the others.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I read somewhere that the character of Henry Blake was written specifically for McLean Stevenson, who subsequently left the show very early on seeking *ahem* better things ("Hello Larry" anyone?).

I couldn't convince myself to participate in the poll. Both sets of characters and actors were separate masterpieces and stand on their own. :beatnik:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I kind of agree with Shawna... difficult to chose, because BJ was a great character and Potter was a more "official" looking colonel. On the other hand Henry was funnier and Trapper WAS the original "roomie" for Hawkeye.

so I forced myself to make a choice...

:drummer:

Link to post
Share on other sites

While the movie wasn't as good as the show (IMHO) the characters were established. When the show was developed, the characters were adapted for TV, this is why Henry is an inept commander as in the film, this gave the show the whole chemistry of mayhem within mayhem. When Potter replaced him, the show lost this quality, it was, after all, an anti-military theme. That's what made it so funny.

As for Trapper, he was the philandering side-kick that was the "team" of Hawkeye and Trapper. His full blown, from the gut, laughter could be felt across the entire compound. BJ was sedate and conservative. A flat character.

The writing was superior in the first few seasons, then it went "on a mission", rather than just being funny. When they started getting all "political" and "preachy", I stared losing interest.

That's my review.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, I'm not trying to stir up trouble here...

Am I the only one who doesn't care for the show? I've never seen the movie, but I'd like to. I think my problem is general issues with Alan Alda.

Das...you need to see the movie, it is excellent! I saw it after I started watching the TV show and it was weird watching the show then, anyway....it is a good show!! I had a crush on Charles and just love Henry Blake!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

I agree with Pinkfloyd about the writing. Generally speaking, the earlier episodes were funnier than the later ones. Once Alan Alda started writing and taking greater creative control, the show seemed to become a forum for Alda to express his political views.

In terms of the characters, I like Blake and Potter equally. I much prefer the womanizing, devil-may-care Trapper John to the bland, staid B.J. Hunnicutt. While Larry Linville was very good as Frank Burns, David Ogden Stiers was brilliant as Charles Emerson Winchester. Burns was basically a punching bag for Hawkeye and Trapper/B.J., while Winchester was a worthy adversary who gave as good as he got.

I'm not a big fan of the movie. It was a little too dark and the laughs, IMO, were few and far between. Unlike the characters in the TV series, those in the movie had few, if any, admirable qualities. I still think the television series is one of the top shows of all time. I still watch and enjoy reruns, even though I've seen many of the episodes five or six times.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...