The Ropers

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.

An ambitious effort from Norman Fell and Audra Lindley as they portrayed the hilarious landlord couple Stanley and Helen Roper from the hit series Three's Company. In the spin off show, Stanley and Helen moved from their Santa Monica apartment to the upscale neighbourhood called Cheviott Hills and their new neighbour was not fond of having them as part of the community. The show just didn't seem to be as good as Three's Company. Stanley and Helen were better as supporting cast members rather than as series leads. The cast was small including Jeffrey Tambor as the neighbour Jeffrey P. Brooks III. He's not a likable character, but his dislike towards Stanley and his quirks behind closed doors made the show funny. Recurring cast included Helen's troublemaker sister Ethel, and her mother; these two characters did not appear on Three's Company.

The Ropers were spun off of Three's Company after the third season. This spin-off actually fared better than the later spin-off Three's a Crowd in 1984, lasting roughly two seasons versus TAC's one season.

I personally find the Ropers (the show) to be very funny and humorous. Sure, it didn't have the sexual innuendos or physical comedic value that its parent series did but it had plenty of misunderstandings to make it a pleasant watch.

Jeffrey Tambor excels as Jeffrey P. Brookes III, the snooty and high-brow real estate agent that ends up being the Ropers' neighbor. His wife Anne is very down-to-earth and genuine, making friends with Helen Roper instantly. But it's no surprise that Brookes and Roper wouldn't get along with Roper being very unsophisticated and Brookes the opposite. Roper and Brookes are funny to watch but they can't hold the series up by themselves.

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.

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.