Page 2 of 3

Re: Who do you like more.....

Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2011 9:35 pm
by Dan
I think everyone had there little thing that made them good like when trapper and hawkeye would tlk in they're english accents.But i really enjoyed the show is when they had BJ and Frank both on the show like in the episode Dear Sigmund when BJ filled up Franks fox hole with water and had sydney yell AIR RAID!!!! Was one BJ Honeycuts best jokes ever

I dont think its who replaced who its who worked with who what made some of the special moments on MASH

Re: Who do you like more.....

Posted: Tue Dec 13, 2011 7:36 pm
by Alex
Trapper or BJ?

maybe at first everyone is tempted to chose BJ.I think a reason could be that Trapper was just for 3 seasons and Bj was present almost 3 times more than Trapper,so had more time to develope the character and make the lovely Bj than everyone appreciated.
When you comapre this to characters it's impossible to not have Hawkeye in all this debate,because both of them wouldn't so enjoyable without Hawk arround them.
Trapper and Hawkeye were on the same rythm,have the same hobby and interests.On their relationship even if seams that they are like brothers Hawk seams the boss between them,but that is not an issue that anyone discuss,but they know really well who is where.After my opinion Trapper leaved to soon the series,in just 3 seasons he couldn't get the same impression that BJ had.

BJ and Hawkeye
Bj was just different,a big joker wich maked Hawk go to defense,with Trapper he didn't experienced that,so he knew is not like Trap,he and Bj were on the same level.On various ocassions he was beaten by Bj pranks and sometimes malicious,he maked hawk in some of episode to step in front and he had a good laugh.What i didn't like about BJ is that Peg and Erin were broght in to many ocassions and he looked so vurnerable on that issue.Trapper was married too but wasn't complaining and make such a case like Bj did.

Sorry to say,with plus and minus of the characters i just like both of them as they were.I don't think a comparation between them is the best thing to do.

p.s.I apolagise if my english is not so good but i hope people will understand what i wanted to say.

Re: Who do you like more.....

Posted: Fri May 25, 2012 7:30 am
by MASHGuy
Since I watched the movie before I ever watched the series, I would have to say... :trapper: :frank: :henry: These guys were in the comedy years (Season 1-5). They just made me laugh.

Re: Who do you like more.....

Posted: Thu May 31, 2012 5:51 am
by Dear Sigmund
Hello all,

I'm new to this particular MASH forum, but i figured my first post should be on this topic sinces its pretty interesting.

Between Trapper and BJ, I would have to go with Trapper. While BJ is great and all, there was a nice subtleness to the way that Trapper was portrayed. He wasn't someone who got riled up very often like BJ did, he was just a fun going guy and was truly, Hawkeyes other half. I always enjoyed Trapper and I still remember the first time I watched the show, when I realized he wasn't coming back, I was kind of upset. ( I still get sad when season 3 ends :( )

Blake and Potter was a toss up. Both of them were great and both were completely different people. One of the things I loved most about Potter was that he actually "lead" his hospital, never took crap from Hot Lips or Burns, and brought to MASH a unique character and perspective, that being he was much older than everyone else. Blake on the other hand was just a riot to watch and was one of my favorites by far, partly because he was, in a sense, "one of the guys" along with Trapper and Hawkeye.

Now with Charles and Frank...A lot of people are quick to pick Charles hands down..While I do agree that I enjoyed his character more, I honestly loved Burns character in seasons 1-3. He was truly everyones enemy, with it always being Hawkeye, Trapper and Henry vs Hot Lips and Burns. The thing that changed it all for Burns character, at least IMO, was the arrival of Potter. Frank could no longer "push" the colonel around as he often tried to do with Henry. Once Morgan's Potter came to the show, it was pretty much bye bye Frank. From then on, the show just kind of "went with the flow," stringing Linville's character along for the ride with a bunch of useless parts and episodes. I was sad to see him go as well, but there really wasn't much else to do with Burn's Character. I did however enjoy the few instances during seasons 4-5 where Hawkeye and BJ stood up for and actually befriended Frank, like in "Margeret's Marriage". It was interesting to see them not fighting with each other. Getting to Charles, simply put, he was the perfect nemesis for BJ and Hawk. Smart, intelligent, and witty. Much more of a challenge then Frank had been.

Thats just my two cents...

Re: Who do you like more.....

Posted: Mon Aug 31, 2015 6:07 pm
by Frank's Girl
I am finding this topic especially tired (namely) on reddit... since I don't have an account there (and not sure I want to), I thought I'd complain here.

BJ and Trapper are most easily compared as both were Hawkeye's friend, a good surgeon and a similar age, married with children, etc. It is unfair to compare Frank to Charles and Henry to Potter. Frank's situation, home life, education, competency, etc, were so different than Charles'; why do they need to be compared? Merely because they were "replacements"? It seems if you are more of a fan of the first three to five years, you probably are more of a Trapper, Frank, and Henry person and if you like the later, "dramady" episodes, you probably are more of a Charles, Potter, BJ person, but that doesn't mean one is necessarily better than the other. I love Charles and I (obviously) love Frank, but I can't compare the two. It's apples and oranges. Also, with Henry and Potter, I like them both... I don't think one is better than the other because they were two wildly different characters with different backgrounds. Now, to ask me who I'd rather be lead by, that's one thing. To ask which I'd rather have a beer with, that's another.

As for BJ and Trapper as Hawkeye's friend and the fourth surgeon of the camp, I like Trapper better because he was more fun and not so whiny about being away from home. BJ could be a real downer and whether he was missing his daughter saying "daddy" for the first time, or that Peg needed the gutters cleaned out or that he was missing an anniversary... they're all just really the same B story and performance.

Also, you rarely see anyone ask who they preferred as company clerk: Radar or Klinger?

Re: Who do you like more.....

Posted: Thu Sep 03, 2015 8:13 am
by Moe_Hawk
Arguments that BJ was a more developed character than Trapper are a bit bizarre to me... of course he was, Trapper was on the show for 3 season, BJ = 8.

Personally, I always thought Trapper was a much better character myself. It took the producers 2 seasons to figure out how to use him properly and he absolutely tore it up in Season 3. BJ on other hand... it takes them nearly 5 seasons to do anything worthwhile with him at all. It's not until we get the angry... chip on the shoulder BJ of the last few seasons that to me, he's interesting. Up to that point, he's just a clean cut, 'nice guy' who's only capacity for comedy is to make play on words again and again. Even his joker shtick doesn't come on until later.

What bothers me more though is that the characters around BJ suffer because of his inability to work with them... or do anything with them other than be right all the time and hold the moral high ground.

He's a Grim Reaper for Frank and forces Linville to accept the character of Burns to just become stupider and stupider... he has no good storylines at all with Margaret... no good ones come to mind with Potter, few with Radar and Klinger, and whilst he has some moments in his later seasons with Charles... they pale in comparison to what Trapper was able to bring to the series.

Trapper is really really good with Frank... they have a good comedic chemistry. Trapper and Margaret loosely developed the angle where she finds him quite 'desirable' and had Trapper stayed on, that probably would have become more than a comedy sketch. Whilst he doesn't have much happening with the other minor character, I think McIntyre's relationship with Hawkeye had better potential too... he was more willing to challenge Pierce and go out on his own.
People always criticise Trapper for being too much of Hawkeye's patsy but ironically it's actually BJ that falls into this role for far far longer.

Potter Vs Blake on the other hand is much harder to pick. Both characters were the near perfect versions of themselves almost right off the bat though I guess it took Potter a bit longer to become likeable but that was just his character.
I think the correct answer to this question depends predominantly on what type of show you prefer... the whacky, golf in the minefields, comedic chaos of the early seasons that Henry ran, or the more drama focused, reflective series that the show became in Potter's era. Personally I like both and see no need to choose. I wonder if Henry could have ever developed anything with Winchester... it's hard to see it, but if he could that would ply be enough to tip the scales.

Frank and Winchester is pbly the easiest of the equations to answer I think. Whilst I have a lot of love and appreciation for just how funny Burns was, anyhow great an actor Linville was... Winchester really is a much better all round character... and once the writers figure him out, he really turns into one of the most compelling characters on the show... funny and serious.

Re: Who do you like more.....

Posted: Mon Sep 14, 2015 12:46 pm
by kkt
Potter was a near-perfect CO... while that would have made him better to work under, it was also unrealistic. There are a whole lot more administrators, and people in general who are kind of muddling through trying to do the right things, but with lots of character flaws -- drinking, womanizing, laziness, bickering, excessive ego. Blake was a more interesting and more realistic character.

Frank, on the other hand, was gradually dehumanized during the show. As portrayed by season 5 he really had no redeeming qualities. His patriotism was a sham, a menace as a surgeon, lousy sense of humor, He would have been more interesting with some good qualities -- maybe a real sense of patriotism that wouldn't leave him cowering in a corner when the sniper came around? Charles, on the other hand, was able to be Haweye's foil and yet also be a great surgeon, at least equal to Hawkeye and BJ in wordplay, and also had some great humanizing moments. Sometimes I think Charles is my favorite character on the show.

I don't think Trapper was used very well. He seemed to be just along for the ride a lot of the time.

The other consideration is that every time a character was replaced, they were replaced with less of a womanizer, more straight-laced person generally. Blake was bumbling and womanizing, replaced by sure-of-himself Potter who did not play around. Trapper was as big a drinker and womanizer as Hawkeye, BJ drank but not as much as Trapper, and didn't womanize at all. Frank had long affair, but Charles (even though he wasn't married with kids at home) only had a few flings while in Korea. Although each of those changes had good aspects, the effect of all three of them was a much more straight show, to the point of being unrealistic about how people behaved when they were away from their loved ones under great stress for an indefinite period.

Re: Who do you like more.....

Posted: Fri Dec 04, 2015 1:47 am
by hottestlips
Ozzy Baxter wrote:I am in the minority here when I say I prefer Trapper John McIntyre and Col. Henry Blake over BJ and Potter. Just my personal enjoyment level, but I always preferred MASH when it was primarily about chasing nurses, getting drunk, and tormenting Frank. When they were fighting against the system, versus morality plays. That's not to say I don't respect the latter years. There's a reason it's one of the cornerstones of televisual history. But, for re-watching enjoyment, I'll take a fun 'how will Hawkeye & Trapper get this one over on Frank' episode from the first three years. ;) :hawkeye: :trapper: :henry: :frank: :charles:

P.S. I must admit, I love Frank and Charles equally. No one plays a funnier foil than Frank. And no one has a rapier wit and pompous charm like Charles.
I think you have hit the nail on the head there :)

Re: Who do you like more.....

Posted: Tue Dec 08, 2015 4:20 pm
by The Quirkster
For the sake of my brain being dead at the moment, I won't go into the details of whom I prefer between Trapper and BJ, and Henry and Col. Potter, but I do have just enough brain power to eke out why I prefer Charles.

Frank had no redeeming characteristics. He was a fantastic character to suit the show for a certain period of time, but there became a less and less area of development to explore the character. There proved, ultimately, to be a time when his role within the dynamic of the M*A*S*H narrative had become outdated, and the rapidity of his deteriorating state of mind made it too cumbersome to keep him, without making some sort of contrivance that would, in my opinion, have been acceptable.

Charles, on the other hand, had redeeming characteristics. The spectrum of his behaviour, for example his reaction to the treatment of the stuttering private, which had befallen Honoria, was quite violent and showed a very special area of his life that, when compared to his pompous swagger, engaged him more to the narrative, and more to a man that had, despite his arrogance and insufferability, been affected over time by the misery he saw every day.

To me, Charles' dignity, and his attempts to keep it, proved to be far more humorous. He believed so strongly in this sense of entitlement, his skills, his intelligence, his wit, his own self-importance, that when he would have those moments of embarrassment and hubris, it provided such a humbling to his ego that he faltered and fell, and despite his "breeding" and his cultured and civilised life, he was unable to retain this proud dignity.

That Charles could reach the full spectrum of the human experience gave him such a strong importance to the narrative.

To me, Charles is a more complex and interesting character, and he was wittier, and gave a stronger presence than Frank had (Don't get me wrong, I love Frank).

Okay, my brain is dead. Post is over. Thank you for making it this far, "gentlemen."

Re: Who do you like more.....

Posted: Fri Dec 09, 2016 6:52 pm
by BeccaLeo1972
B.J.- he was a better friend to Hawkeye. The relationship dynamic was more significant between the two men. Trapper was just a buddy to Hawk while B.J. was a best friend.

Charles- a skilled surgeon who cared about his patients and underneath the self involved exterior he had a heart of gold. Frank was someone you didn't like but felt bad for due to being raised in a dysfunctional home.

Potter- a strong commander who knew when to step in and when to leave it alone. A smart, caring, regular army man with a kind heart. Henry was like a brother to Radar while Potter was a father to him.

Re: Who do you like more.....

Posted: Mon Dec 12, 2016 7:04 pm
by Big Daddy O'Reilly
BeccaLeo1972 wrote:B.J.- he was a better friend to Hawkeye. The relationship dynamic was more significant between the two men. Trapper was just a buddy to Hawk while B.J. was a best friend.
That's how I've felt about Hawkeye's respective friendships with Trapper and B.J. To me, I feel like Trapper's friendship was one out of convenience, but as I've said before, I feel like it was also built on their shared interests and common pastimes, such as boozing their brains out, chasing nurses, and tormenting Frank. B.J.'s friendship took time to form, because he was new to Korea, Hawkeye took him under his wing to try to ease the transition, and in the process, they actually bonded.

That being said, however, I must admit that the more I pay attention, I feel like that overall chemistry was better between Alan and Wayne than Alan and Mike. Alan and Wayne were really good friends in real life, and you can see their affection for each other shine through the camera's lens: the twinkle in their eyes, the sly little smiles, and Wayne even said he and Alan would try to crack each other up on the set . . . meanwhile, I read in Alan's book that Mike would often try to practice Judo on him, lol.

Re: Who do you like more.....

Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2016 7:13 pm
by BeccaLeo1972
I agree that Wayne and Alan had good chemistry. Alan and Mike didn't really connect until Season 5 and it progressed very well through the years.

Re: Who do you like more.....

Posted: Mon May 01, 2017 9:59 am
by Major Tuttle Jnr
For me personally, the changes didn't matter, because it kept the M*A*S*H series going for so long and added to the dimension of the 'work'. It represented a real life situation, as personnel change in real life. There were constant changes to the other staff (extras) on the set. So for my own stand point, they were all as good as one another, because the whole was greater than the sum of the parts. Just my opinion. :D

Re: Who do you like more.....

Posted: Thu Jul 20, 2017 10:06 am
by Ferret Face
Overall, I prefer the replacement characters. With Potter and BJ, I think it may be a bit unfair to compare. Both characters were in what I consider to be the peak of the series (from season 4 to either season 8 or 9), and the writers didn't really flesh out the characters as much in the early seasons as they did in the later ones. I do feel like each of the characters added a lot to the seasons they were in, and both Trapper and Henry did have their great moments, helped by their respective actors. However, BJ and especially Colonel Potter were very likeable characters, who had a lot more shining moments to make me love them.

As for Frank vs. Charles, Frank has been my least favorite character for a while. To be fair, I think Larry Linville did a great job with the character. And during my current rewatch of the series (I'm up to season 6), I have gained more of an appreciation for his character. For one thing, he was very important to the anti-military humor, and represented that overly-patriotic attitude certain people have. And beyond that, there was just enough depth to the character to make him believable. He had a bad childhood with an abusive father and no real friends, and ended up in a loveless marriage, so it makes sense he'd be this weaselly, paranoid person who wants to force people to respect him through his military rank. I do think the character was weakened and one-dimensional in seasons 4 and 5 (the latter often reducing him to desperate attempts at winning Margaret back), it actually makes sense, and seems like a kind of unintentional two-season arc, when he realized BJ wouldn't give him any more respect than Trapper did, he couldn't boss Colonel Potter around like he could with Henry, and even Margaret started to see what a weak, weaselly person he is, and eventually left him. I do have to hand it to Larry Linville for recognizing that they'd taken him about as far as they could, before either becoming too stale or becoming a completely different character.

And I'm also grateful to him, because his departure also allowed them to introduce Charles, who ended up being one of my favorite characters on the show. I'll admit that Larry Linville was probably a better comedic actor, but I thought David Ogden Stiers was great at portraying Charles' dryer humor, specifically with his biting sarcasm, and his great pompous attitude. I also loved that they made Charles pretty much an equal to Hawkeye and BJ in nearly every way, outside of his humanity towards other people (most of the time) and having to adjust to the harsher realities of living and working in a MASH unit. And of course, I loved that they specifically designed a character that was able to grow, occasionally be humbled, and just act like a decent human being, despite his arrogant nature. I will say that the 6th season had its moments when his character seemed to be falling back into Frank's role a bit too much, such has his scheme in "Change Day," or his failed potential romance with Margaret, but once they got his character down, the writers did a pretty great job with his character, both in terms of comedy and drama. In fact, so many of his dramatic stories worked incredibly well.

Re: Who do you like more.....

Posted: Tue Jul 25, 2017 6:51 pm
by BeccaLeo1972
Trapper was kind, smart, funny, skilled as a surgeon, a prankster who knew where to draw the line, never apologized for this behavior and stood his ground without being self righteous. However, if he had stayed on i could see that changing to angry over missing out on his children's lives and yes missing his wife. I believe Trapper loved his wife and that we didn't know the entire story. B.J. was funny, smart, down to earth, kind, skilled as a surgeon and reasonable. I understand why he became upset at times even toward Hawkeye who stepped into self righteousness a lot in the later years of the series. Hawkeye didn't know when to leave it alone in many Season 9 thru 11 episodes irritating not just B.J. but Potter, Klinger, Mulcahy, Margaret, and Charles. So i don't hold it against B.J. for giving Hawkeye a taste once in awhile of his own medicine.

I love Potter and Henry. They each brought their signature style/perspective to their command.

Frank and Charles. Charles was really a sensitive, thoughtful human being, and talented doctor/surgeon. I can't help but feel bad for Frank due to his abusive childhood. He did have moderate surgical skill and could be one of the guys when he wanted. Underneath it he was a scared, insecure little boy who didn't know who to break the cycle of abuse so he lashed out at others as a defense mechanism. Frank did have a softer side that came out a few times and his smile was like a little boy who just wanted to love, be loved, and liked.