David Sussman
Just finished a month-long nostalgia kick: all eight seasons of Three's Company, two seasons of The Ropers, and the sole season of Three's a Crowd.The Ropers is too often maligned, often making Internet lists for "Worst Spin-Off" or "Top Ten Terrible Spin-Offs." Make no mistake. The Ropers is no disaster like Joanie Loves Chachi or AfterMASH. In fact, The Ropers is quite palatable; often, it is hilarious. Norman Fell and Audra Lindley are terrific as always, and Jeffrey Tambor shines (thanks to his bald crown, of course) as the Ropers' uptight, upward-obsessed neighbor.As others have stated, The Ropers may not be great. The couple are stronger in small doses. Still, the fact that this show lasted only a season plus six (season one is only six episodes) is a shame. The Ropers was a ratings smash for that first mini-season but tanked once it was switched to Saturday nights opposite CHiPS (why do television programmers do this?). It's a shame. Concerns? As stated, Stanley/Fell and Helen/Lindley struggle to carry the weight of entire show, but what's really missing is a stronger supporting cast. Tambor is fantastic--don't get me wrong--but there's little else. Patricia McCormack is perfectly acceptable as Tambor's wife, and Evan Cohen is likable as the little boy, but Three's Company always boasted at least five strong characters, while The Ropers at times can feel claustrophobic: the two neighboring couples and not much else.I don't know much about the history of The Ropers' ratings, but my guess is the addition of Stephanie Vallance as Jenny in the last ten episodes or so was a desperate attempt to inject a new storyline. This gambit is understandable, but Jenny, a young adult runaway with a heart of gold who moves in with the Ropers as their surrogate child of sorts, makes for an odd addition. Jenny is perfectly anodyne, and that's the problem. The show desperately needs another character or three, but only if that character is A) interesting and B) funny. The Ropers deserved a better fate. It's certainly a good enough show to last four or five seasons. It's equally as good as, and often better than, other sitcoms that enjoyed healthy runs. And who knows? Given a chance to grow, The Ropers might have blossomed into something beyond its surface pleasures. Oh well.
happipuppi13
In the 35 (+) years since this spin-off's debut,critics of all ages and viewers alike,have taken an almost 'delight' in saying how horrible this series was. Also calling it a mistake,a shambles and an insult to intelligent viewers everywhere.Well,as one who did see the show on ABC, I can say that for a long time,I could only say "I guess they're right." I was 10 and 11 back in 1979-1980 and,as any young person would,I thought it was funny. Of course,kids also laugh at people when they fall down or make a silly face.Now that the show is back on Antenna TV and I'm seeing it for the first time since 1980,I can offer a mature perspective. (Without commenting on the behind the scenes feud of Fell & Lindley vs. ABC.) I now can honestly say...the show really isn't the worst sitcom or even program I've ever seen.Fell & Lindley made a great bickering pair on Three's Company and Fell made Stanley a great foil for Jack & the girls. Lindley,also great as Helen who knows how to put Stanley in his place. The Ropers were also there to be part of the crazy situations & misunderstandings that would arise. Usually because of something Stanley assumed....but,The Ropers were not lead characters and Fell & Lindley,not the lead actor types. They were great comic character actors and usually,putting this kind of an actor in a lead (even in comedy) leads to less than expected results.The six episodes of Season 1,had the backing of Three's Company,to bring in viewers,which later helped it finish at #8 for the 1978-1979 season. So yes,it "was" a top 10 hit...that year.I will give credit to Jeffery Tambor's comic timing as a big part of that. His reaction as Jefferey Brooks,to people like Stanley & Helen moving into the posh Palm Dale Hills Townhouses in Chevoit Hills,is priceless. Especially Stanley's air-polluting DeSoto. While Patricia McCormack & Evan Cohen as his wife & son,make for some cute to touching moments between him and The Ropers as well.Another problem though,is once this is established and 'that' joke is made,the series has to move forward from there. Season 1 does have good comedy writing and timing on the part of it's 3 main leads (Fell,Lindley & Tambor). The best of those 6 are,Ep. 1 "Moving On","Friends and Neighbors","Your Money Or Your Life" and "The Doris Letters" . "Opprtunity Knocks" is pretty good and an excuse to have Larry Dallas (Richard Kline) pop in. The lesser players and guest actors,sometimes,come across as either new at comedy and not 100% into character. (Being a new show,they may not have had time to do so.) ..but there's even times when,with the main cast,where some things don't work that should have. I'd say the weakest and worst in Season 1 is "The Family Planning" episode. A show that makes humor out of an elderly woman's failing memory & a family that seems too heartless to take her in,in her old age. Helen's sister Ethel is nothing short of an unlikable person. She acts like she hates her own mother.Season 2 gave us 22 episodes but the unwarranted move to Saturday nights is what really killed this show. Because,given time,things like (as mentioned) writing,acting & timing can always be improved.Like season 1,though,there's some really funny shows here,like "The Party" (with guests Jack,Janet & Chrissy),"Power Play" (great in watching Norman Fell getting laughs out of Stanley not paying the electric bill),"Two For The Road" and a few others."Mother's Wake"(the final show) is a real downer. Some laughs and i see where Helen's mother is coming from but.... like "Family Planning",the subject is really not the stuff of comedy. Not a good episode to go out on,to be sure. The best of all these 28,for writing,acting & overall storyline is "Baby Talk". An almost serious look at the (then) realities for child adoption,for people over 50. Which says to me that,had their been more episodes like this,with good comedy added,they could have become a classic. I'm clueless,though, to explain why anyone involved in the show, thought another character (that being young Jenny) was needed. Finding her sleeping in their storage room,seemed like a set up for another series. I guess she was supposed to bring in younger viewers or be the voice of reason. Or...just make the older people look stupid in comparison to her youthful outlook. She really added little here. Anyhow,let me conclude by saying that while "The Ropers" is not "Televsion Hall Of Fame" material,it's also not such a bad show that it's 100% unwatchable. I think had it been successful,it would have lasted 5 seasons. With over 30 years gone since its end,let's be fair. If you've never seen it,I'd hope you wouldn't judge it based only on what you've heard. Tune into Antenna TV (or get it on DVD) and see it for yourselves. 5 stars from me,some good stuff but just as equally some not so great stuff. (END)
uknumbergb
The Ropers was a remake of the English TV show "George and Mildred", which itself was a spin-off of "Man About The House" (the English Television show that was remade in the USA as "Three's Company"). I have yet to the the American version of "George And Mildred", or as it is called in the USA "The Ropers", mainly because it wasn't that big of a hit (though it did run for two seasons). Unlike the UK original which was a huge success. However, I have seen both "Man About The House" and it's American re-make "Three's Company" (as I now reside in the USA). I have to say I prefer the original, but still love the US version too. John Ritter is one of my favorite actors. Anyway, I'll have to look out for reruns of "the ropers".