NOTE IMDb
5,9/10
1,3 k
MA NOTE
Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueStanley and Helen Roper sold their apartment complex and moved into a new one. Their characteristic quirks are intact as they deal with new neighbors and frequent visits from Helen's sister.Stanley and Helen Roper sold their apartment complex and moved into a new one. Their characteristic quirks are intact as they deal with new neighbors and frequent visits from Helen's sister.Stanley and Helen Roper sold their apartment complex and moved into a new one. Their characteristic quirks are intact as they deal with new neighbors and frequent visits from Helen's sister.
Parcourir les épisodes
Avis à la une
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.
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.
I don't know why ABC wanted the Ropers spun off into their own sitcom. They were crucial to the success of Three's Company. They were succeeded by the amazing Don Knott as Mr. Furley. Anyway, this show wasn't the greatest or the worst television that I ever saw but I did enjoy watching the Ropers try to settle and deal with Jeffrey Tambor's snobbish character and neighbor. Helen and Stanley Roper will always be better known for their roles as the nosy landlords downstairs who were suspicious of Jack Tripper's sexual orientation. How ironic? Anyway, the Ropers only lasted a season which was just too short. The audience loved the Ropers and they could have returned as tenants on Three's Company after not lasting in their own series. Regardless, Norman Fell and Audra Lindley as the Ropers left quite a legacy in television history that won't be forgotten. Too bad, it didn't last longer in their own show. I don't think ABC gave it a fair chance.
This is a pretty good spin-off from Three's Company, where the kids' landlords, Stanley and Helen Roper, sold their apartment building and moved into a new house.
The Ropers have the same dynamic as they had in Three's Company, and it was fun seeing them deal with their neighbors and visiting relatives. Not too keen on Jeffrey Tambor's character though - seems only a one dimensional character with no redeeming qualities.
I do enjoy the guest appearances of the Three's Company characters - makes you feel like you're watching that show again. Quite an entertaining show - too bad it didn't last longer.
Grade B
The Ropers have the same dynamic as they had in Three's Company, and it was fun seeing them deal with their neighbors and visiting relatives. Not too keen on Jeffrey Tambor's character though - seems only a one dimensional character with no redeeming qualities.
I do enjoy the guest appearances of the Three's Company characters - makes you feel like you're watching that show again. Quite an entertaining show - too bad it didn't last longer.
Grade B
The British did a series called Man About The House which in the USA became Three's Company ,there were two spin-offs from Man About The House,one was called Robin's Nest which in the USA became Three's A Crowd and the other was called George and Mildred which in the USA became this show The Ropers.
The premise-Helen and Stanley selling the apt building and moving into an upper class neighborhood with snooty neighbors. I know I watched this show when I was a young teen in 1979 but hardly remembered it since it didn't last very long however this past weekend during TVLAND's Three's Company marathon they showed a few episodes of the short lived series.The show did have a few laughs ,however it was quite evident that the main characters could not keep this show afloat.While the British spin off had much more background and substance the Ropers did not.Helen's love starved landlady and her bickering with Stanley worked great on Three's Company as a supporting act but you couldn't continue to play that gag as a main act.So they started having Stanley and Helen get along better and become more sympathetic to each other.This obviously turned off audiences who had grown to love the zingers between the two. According to IMDb trivia even the stars Norman Fell and Audra Lindley didn't feel good about doing this spin off. They should have heeded their feelings. Making a deal with the network that they could return to Three's Company full time if the show didn't last a season was a curse. The show lasted a season and a half and after a guest appearance on Three's Company they were gone for good. I will always remember them as The Ropers on Three's Company where they should have stayed.
The premise-Helen and Stanley selling the apt building and moving into an upper class neighborhood with snooty neighbors. I know I watched this show when I was a young teen in 1979 but hardly remembered it since it didn't last very long however this past weekend during TVLAND's Three's Company marathon they showed a few episodes of the short lived series.The show did have a few laughs ,however it was quite evident that the main characters could not keep this show afloat.While the British spin off had much more background and substance the Ropers did not.Helen's love starved landlady and her bickering with Stanley worked great on Three's Company as a supporting act but you couldn't continue to play that gag as a main act.So they started having Stanley and Helen get along better and become more sympathetic to each other.This obviously turned off audiences who had grown to love the zingers between the two. According to IMDb trivia even the stars Norman Fell and Audra Lindley didn't feel good about doing this spin off. They should have heeded their feelings. Making a deal with the network that they could return to Three's Company full time if the show didn't last a season was a curse. The show lasted a season and a half and after a guest appearance on Three's Company they were gone for good. I will always remember them as The Ropers on Three's Company where they should have stayed.
A couple of talented people, Audra Lindley and Norman Fell had some great supporting roles in Three's Company. Audra was a forty/fifty something who wanted a little romance in her life or at least some sex from her husband. Living on the beach front as they did I'm surprised that Lindley didn't have her pick of surfer dudes to fill her with high octane. But that was the characters that were created, the disinterested husband and the lovelorn wife.
They were great supporting characters. But that's all they were, supporting characters. So it was no surprise that The Ropers who sold their building just could not carry a show built around them for more than one season.
Somehow they should have been worked back into Three's Company.
They were great supporting characters. But that's all they were, supporting characters. So it was no surprise that The Ropers who sold their building just could not carry a show built around them for more than one season.
Somehow they should have been worked back into Three's Company.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesJeffrey Tambor later appeared in three episodes of "Three's Company" in seasons 5, 6 and 7 but as different characters.
- Versions alternativesEpisodes aired in syndication feature the Three's Company theme instead of the series regular theme.
- ConnexionsReferenced in Vivre à trois: An Anniversary Surprise (1979)
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
Détails
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant