If there is one rumor that never dies it's the one about the possibility of a Friends reunion. Since the series finale aired in May 2004, rumors about a reunion popped up here, there and everywhere. Sometimes the rumor takes the form of "there will be another spinoff" (remember Joey?) but most of the time it's a "there are talks about a movie but one of the stars doesn't want to commit." This week's revival of the rumor is of the latter kind.
According to Showbiz Spy, Courteney Cox Arquette, who played Monica on the hit NBC series for 10 seasons, is desperate for a big-screen adaptation of Friends. Yeah, I know, Showbiz Spy isn't the most legit source out there, but being a Friends fan, I can't help myself but wonder if it'll happen or not even though I'm not too keen on a reunion now since I doubt it would live up to my extremely high expectations.
Wonder why I chose a picture from the show that doesn't include Rachel, played by Jennifer Aniston? Well, it's because the Showbiz Spy article claims that Aniston is the only one not ready to reprise her role. Supposedly, the actress is afraid of being stereotyped by a movie version of the series and that it would prevent her from getting more serious roles.
Interestingly, David Schwimmer announced last September that he would not take part in a Friends reunion if there ever was one. So if the Spy article is legit, why did he change his mind? Is it for the big pay check that he would get from a reunion? Is it to get some exposure to be able to advertise his other projects? Who knows!
It's no surprise that this rumor is revisited this week since the Sex and the City movie is currently airing in theaters and is not doing too bad at the box office.
So let me ask the question for the 1000th time, do you want a Friends reunion? If so, what type? Movie? TV special?
[via AOL]
The TV Squad Podcast: Linda Purl talks about The Office, we talk spoilers, and more
Ask TV Squad: Ghost Whisperer and more!
The TV Squad Podcast: Bill Scheft of The Late Show, Cake Boss, Mad Men and more
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
6-13-2008 @ 2:53PM
Nick said...
I misread the title. I thought it said "The Rumor that SHOULD die..." If only.
Reply
6-13-2008 @ 2:57PM
Isabelle Carreau said...
Indeed, it's time the rumor dies but it seems unlikely that it will.
6-13-2008 @ 3:24PM
Darren said...
Yes the rumor will die - ONCE they finally smarten up and make a movie!!! Get on it already - it needs to be a Thanksgiving Themed movie as well. Have it at Monica and Chandler's new place and let do it already!
Reply
6-13-2008 @ 3:43PM
gooby said...
Can't this show just die. It's bad enough they keep rerunning the show.
Reply
6-13-2008 @ 3:47PM
fowak said...
okay - i think i'm the first actual fan of the show to comment, but i am skeptical. i love the show. it's a great DVD set that i can pop in at anytime and have a guaranteed laugh. like isabelle, i'm afraid my expectations would be too high and i'd be let down. if it ain't broke, don't fix it...
Reply
6-13-2008 @ 4:27PM
willmore2000 said...
Aniston doesn't want to be stereotyped as Rachel ... which of her roles were not Rachel? Hell, can she even act in a role that's not Rachel?
Reply
6-13-2008 @ 4:29PM
Richard Leach said...
Make the movie. I loved the show.
Reply
6-13-2008 @ 5:35PM
Steve Flack said...
No! Only because seeing a non-sitcom style adventure of the Friends cast would creep me out. I don't need to see that fourth wall!
-Steve!
Reply
6-13-2008 @ 5:41PM
MERVE-THE-PERVE said...
Maybe they are holding out for $100,000,000 each.
Reply
6-13-2008 @ 5:52PM
StillBash said...
The last season was so unwanted, unneeded and felt like such a goiter on an otherwise great nine season run that I would not want to see ANYTHING on the big screen of this show.
They axed Sex And The City after only six years, with a considerably smaller amount of episodes (all in all just about 13 episodes a season which is about a quarter of the eps that friends did all in all). Everything on friends is said, especially because "Joey" continued the story of one of the characters and showed us that it doesn't turn out to be that interesting (the most laughable idea was the addition of the token black guy at the beginning of season two).
I don't need a movie with a cast that doesn't need the money, a story that doesn't need telling and an audience that doesn't want to see all that.
Reply
6-13-2008 @ 7:38PM
Graham said...
I would quite happily watch some screen specials (e.g. Thanksgive/Xmas), just one or two. I think when judged by TV standards it wuld be a fantastic success, and could keep the fourth wall (Altho, since Arrested Development, I've been loathe to watch stage-style sitcoms), whereas a movie could find some obstacles in the way (change of filming style, extended runtime, box-office gross).
But either way, I am up for it. If it's terrible, I can disregard it, and if it's great it's worth it. It's fun to see what happens next, if handled diligently, and the way I see it, you either have already stereotyped the cast or you havn't.I don't think a sequel of some kind will make a massive impact on that figure. It won't massively harm them, or it might do them good. It's fair to celebrate what was one of the biggest sitcoms of our time and, with time moving on, fair to reprise it if the idea is right. And it's mega-bucks all round!
And again, I know there's enough posts about it this week, but an Arrested Development movie would be nice please!
Reply
6-13-2008 @ 8:06PM
Ashley Boyd said...
I don't want the movie, in effect that I would actively try and get it made, but I would go see it if it were made.
Reply
6-13-2008 @ 9:22PM
Sam said...
Any true friends fan would love it and there are 30 million of you guys out there, the negative ones commenting here are the ones who didn't watch the show.
Reply
6-14-2008 @ 9:01PM
Darren said...
You are exactly correct!
6-13-2008 @ 11:21PM
Kate said...
They should only do it if they can get all the Friends back. Otherwise it's just a waste of time. They should wait another five years or so until even Jennifer Aniston can't get any roles. Then she'll be begging to do it.
Reply
6-16-2008 @ 2:15PM
Stephie said...
I love the show but I don't see how it could translate into a movie format. They did the extended episodes on TV and sometimes even those felt a little long. A 90-minute (or more) movie might be a bit much. If they made it into a movie, skeptical or not, I'd go see it!
Reply
6-17-2008 @ 10:35PM
Singing Duck said...
Quick! Name any sit-com that successfully made the transition to the big screen...
I'll save you the trouble. None.
SNL skits and cartoons have had more success than your typical sit-com. Action shows, yes. Dramas, yes. Family fare (re: The Brady Bunch) yeah, a little. But sitcoms?
Not likely.
And despite all of FRIENDS popularity-armor, it would be just as suseptible.
And because I truly enjoyed this program - for it's entire run - I would have to say 'no' to a movie.
If the cast were honestly willing to do it again (for more than just the payday), an annual Thanksgiving Special would be terrific.
Want to know the best idea?
Bring the show back.
Update it. Go after the same core audience it won the first time, instead of trying to gain new viewers. Make it for the aging baby-boomer.
There's so much material there, the writers can't go wrong. Especially if it's the same writing team.
And yes, as willmore2000 said; do any of us attending a Jennifer Aniston movie actually see anyone other than Rachel Green?
Reply
6-18-2008 @ 9:42AM
Tim said...
Here's a question: canned laughter?
Would they use it in a movie for possibly the first time in history? Would the show work without it? I'd say no to both
Reply
6-20-2008 @ 9:21AM
Riley Freeman said...
always hated this show. but who the hell is david schwimmer to say no. he should be begging for a movie.
seinfeld movie thats what needs to happen best show ever
and married with children to get some proper closure the series never gave
Reply