The Goofiest scene in the Three's Company Movie was when Suzanne's Husband told [Archive] - Sitcoms Online Message Boards

Edster2973

09-02-2006, 09:07 AM

Wasn't that a major leap in time between TC and the thighmaster? They tried to make them look pathetic with it, but suzanne somers became a millionaire many times over starting with the thighmaster...

What's amazing is that some of us were defending Suzanne to some degree. Not that we were condoning her behavior or her husband'd greed, but clearly the producers weren't saints either, and it was clear that both parties acted inappropriately. Look at how the producers later treated Joyce & Priscilla. Just terrible. Without even meaning to, Joyce & Priscilla actually lend credence to much of Suzanne's claims about the producers underhandedness.

Regardless, it seems Suzanne has learned very little from the experience. It was revealed that she was asked to take part in the DVD extras for Three's Company to give her a chance to talk about John Ritter in a tribute of sorts. She refused to do so without being paid mucho $$ for it. That's kind of sick.

Anne Wedgeworth, who played Lana Shields in Season 4, didn't have that great an experience with the show and her parting wasn't the sweetest behind-the-scenes, and yet she traveled half across the country to record her tribute to John and wasn't paid one cent for it. It cost her money to do the thing. Many others have done the same thing. That's class.

Suzanne, on the other hand, while claiming she's learned so much from her firing et al, wasn't willing to speak unless she was highly paid for it. That's totally her decision, mind you, but I still think it's kind of sick.

A few years ago, Suzanne had a cancer scare (John was still alive then). Had she not survived her bout with cancer, I highly doubt John would've demanded to be paid just to give a tribute to her. He even went on record saying that 'all that matters is that Suzanne get well'.

If the scene for thighmaster was to try to make Suzanne & Alan look foolish, they need not fret; their current actions/greed accomplish that task just fine... :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Ed

TVFactFan

09-02-2006, 01:47 PM

What's amazing is that some of us were defending Suzanne to some degree. Not that we were condoning her behavior or her husband'd greed, but clearly the producers weren't saints either, and it was clear that both parties acted inappropriately. Look at how the producers later treated Joyce & Priscilla. Just terrible. Without even meaning to, Joyce & Priscilla actually lend credence to much of Suzanne's claims about the producers underhandedness.

Regardless, it seems Suzanne has learned very little from the experience. It was revealed that she was asked to take part in the DVD extras for Three's Company to give her a chance to talk about John Ritter in a tribute of sorts. She refused to do so without being paid mucho $$ for it. That's kind of sick.

Anne Wedgeworth, who played Lana Shields in Season 4, didn't have that great an experience with the show and her parting wasn't the sweetest behind-the-scenes, and yet she traveled half across the country to record her tribute to John and wasn't paid one cent for it. It cost her money to do the thing. Many others have done the same thing. That's class.

Suzanne, on the other hand, while claiming she's learned so much from her firing et al, wasn't willing to speak unless she was highly paid for it. That's totally her decision, mind you, but I still think it's kind of sick.

A few years ago, Suzanne had a cancer scare (John was still alive then). Had she not survived her bout with cancer, I highly doubt John would've demanded to be paid just to give a tribute to her. He even went on record saying that 'all that matters is that Suzanne get well'.

If the scene for thighmaster was to try to make Suzanne & Alan look foolish, they need not fret; their current actions/greed accomplish that task just fine... :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Ed

When you say the Producers treated Joyce unfairly do you mean them not telling her about the Spinoff? Because They really didn't have to tell her anything

Edster2973

09-02-2006, 02:38 PM

When you say the Producers treated Joyce unfairly do you mean them not telling her about the Spinoff? Because They really didn't have to tell her anything

For the love of sanity, man, you sure love to argue. Are you going to defend the way the producers handled the spinoff? I swear you love to take the opposite view of any topic so you'll have something to post. Methinks you need a life man!

About the spinoff, yes, they should have told her, plain and simple. Were they obligated to? Not legally, but I think if one has principles, they should have. And she wasn't the only one in the dark about it. So was Priscilla Barnes, Richard Kline and Don Knotts. They even had John Ritter lie to her about it to satisfy their own agendas. That's cold. I don't care what spin you put on it, it's cold, plain and simple.

I was also referring to the many other times that the producers were mean to Joyce, as well as to the other many women on the show. As greedy a witch as Suzanne Somers was, the producers were just as out of line when dealing with her, just as they were to Jenilee Harrison, Priscilla Barnes (who remarked that the show was the 3 worst years of her life; that's pretty heavy!), Anne Wedgeworth, and Audra Lindley.

~Banishing the Ropers off to spin-off, knowing it was going to fail, is a little shady, no?
~Writing Richard Kline out of 2 Three's Company episodes simply for making a suggestion is a bit harsh, no?
~Promising Anne Wedgeworth more character development and then reducing her to 2 minutes a show is deceitful, no?
~Putting so much pressure on Jenilee Harrison to be the new Suzanne :rolleyes: and then dropping her completely without so much as an offscreen mention is pretty callous, no?
~Lying about the show being spun off constitutes as a dishonest thing to do, no? And putting John Ritter into the middle of it is just as sleazy a thing to do, no? Both John & Joyce were estranged for quite some time due to that, and even though they did find their way back to being friends again, it did put a strain on their relationship.

Joyce wasn't looking for promises, she just wanted to be told the truth. In a world where dishonesty can be justified as a means of doing business doesn't absolve the liars of their dishonesty. It's still lying.

Whether Joyce is one's least favorite or biggest favorite, the fact is she helped carry the show when the going was tough and she deserved better than what she got. John Ritter wasn't the whole show, even though the producers did think that. In their minds the other actors were expendable and disposable and their actions reflected that. There's no other way to see it. They were cruel and abusive. Plain and simple.

I expect you to differ just to have something to post, since you seem to have way too much time on your hands dude. I suggest either getting a hobby or at least posting things that ACTUALLY MAKE SENSE!!!:mad:

Time will tell...

Ed

TVFactFan

09-02-2006, 02:41 PM

For the love of sanity, man, you sure love to argue. Are you going to defend the way the producers handled the spinoff? I swear you love to take the opposite view of any topic so you'll have something to post. Methinks you need a life man!

About the spinoff, yes, they should have told her, plain and simple. Were they obligated to? Not legally, but I think if one has principles, they should have. And she wasn't the only one in the dark about it. So was Priscilla Barnes, Richard Kline and Don Knotts. They even had John Ritter lie to her about it to satisfy their own agendas. That's cold. I don't care what spin you put on it, it's cold, plain and simple.

I was also referring to the many other times that the producers were mean to Joyce, as well as to the other many women on the show. As greedy a witch as Suzanne Somers was, the producers were just as cruel and out of line, just as they were to Jenilee Harrison, Priscilla Barnes (who remarked that the show was the 3 worst years of her life; that's pretty heavy!), Anne Wedgeworth, and Audra Lindley.

~Banishing the Ropers off to spin-off, knowing it was going to fail, is a little shady, no?
~Writing Richard Kline out of 2 Three's Company episodes simply for making a suggestion is a bit harsh, no?
~Promising Anne Wedgeworth more character development and then reducing her to 2 minutes a show is deceitful, no?
~Putting so much pressure on Jenilee Harrison to be the new Suzanne :rolleyes: and then dropping her completely without so much as an offscreen mention is pretty callous, no?
~Lying about the show being spun off constitutes as a dishonest thing to do, no? And putting John Ritter into the middle of it is just as sleazy a thing to do, no? Both John & Joyce were estranged for quite some time due to that, and even though they did find their way back to being friends again, it did put a strain on their relationship.

Joyce wasn't looking for promises, she just wanted to be told the truth. In a world where dishonesty can be justified as a means of doing business doesn't absolve the liars of their dishonesty. It's still lying, and whether Joyce is one's least favorite or most favorite, the fact is she helped carry the show when the going was tough and she deserved better than what she got. John Ritter wasn't the whole show, even though the producers did think that. In their minds actors were expendable and disposable and their actions reflected that. There's no other way to see it. They were cruel and abusive. Plain and simple.

I expect you to differ just to have something to post, since you seem to have way too much time on your hands dude. I suggest either getting a hobby or at least posting things that ACTUALLY MAKE SENSE!!!:mad:

Time will tell...

Ed

Why did they need to tell her when she wasn't going to be invoved in it? She was just mad because she was no longer working-lol

Edster2973

09-02-2006, 02:44 PM

Why did they need to tell her when she wasn't going to be invoved in it? She was just mad because she was no longer working-lol

I already explained why, and if you're still in the dark about why they should have, then you are a complete IDIOT!!!

:rolleyes:

Ed

TVFactFan

09-02-2006, 02:48 PM

I already explained why, and if you're still in the dark about why they should have, then you are a complete IDIOT!!!

:rolleyes:

Ed

Well why was the other actors willing to just MOVE ON with their life and not focus on why they wasn't chosen? What made Joyce so dumb was that she thught the Jack and Janet character were a COUPLE anytime she asked-"WHAT HAPPENS TO JANET? And And when Joyce admitted she was happy to see Three's A Crowd FAIL that's when I stopped liking her

Mr. Television

09-02-2006, 02:51 PM

Edster2973

09-02-2006, 03:11 PM

Well why was the other actors willing to just MOVE ON with their life and not focus on why they wasn't chosen? What made Joyce so dumb was that she thught the Jack and Janet character were a COUPLE anytime she asked-"WHAT HAPPENS TO JANET? And And when Joyce admitted she was happy to see Three's A Crowd FAIL that's when I stopped liking her

You are a complete idiot dude. There's no other way to say it.

Firstly, she wasn't upset that she wasn't chosen to do the spinoff. She was upset because she was lied to about it. There is a difference. She thought something was up at around the end of Season 7 (or the start of Season 8) and she approached her producers directly about whether they were intending to put the show in another direction. She was lied to about that. Wouldn't that have pissed you off? And for the record, Priscilla Barnes and Richard Kline also both stated that they were hurt about how the producers treated their company of actors. Richard even went on to say that it was 'bad business'.

Joyce told Chris Mann in that book of his that she was sort of relieved to be away from the producers and their abusive ways of doing 'business', but was hurt that the producers thought so little of her (and the other actors) as to lie to her about it. She was also hurt to think that John Ritter, who she regarded as one of her best friends, would be a party to that deception. She also stated to Chris Mann that she didn't see Jack & Janet as a romantic couple, and that if they were to ever hook up romantically, it'd probably be in the 100th season (or some other number; I don't remember exactly) of the show. She wasn't counting on Janet being Jack's soulmate. She even went on to say that she wondered why the producers didn't choose Anne Schedeen (who played Jack's girlfriend Linda in the early seasons) as Jack's girlfriend since Anne & John had great chemistry and Anne had come on the show in Season 7 as a new character. Yeah, that sounds really bitter to me.

And by the way, she never said that she was 'glad' that Three's a Crowd failed; she just said that she wasn't surprised by it. She felt (and I strongly agree with her in this) that Jack Tripper wasn't the whole show of Three's Company and that the show's fans loved the other characters that Jack had relationships with and that some element of those relationships (whether it included Joyce or not) should have been in the new show. But it was like they never existed. She said that if the producers had valued the other actors and their roles, they would've realized that. They didn't and it's why the show tanked. Jack Tripper needs the relationships around him to work. Three's a Crowd is proof of that. It was an OK show and it did make me laugh, but I missed some of the other characters that Jack knew and loved, and so did most of the audience. You cut out Jack's other relationships and you cut out half of his heart. That is what Joyce was referring to, and that is why she said she wasn't surprised that Three's a Crowd failed. She wasn't ever 'happy' about it.

Get your facts straight dude...

Ed

TVFactFan

09-02-2006, 03:19 PM

You are a complete idiot dude. There's no other way to say it.

Firstly, she wasn't upset that she wasn't chosen to do the spinoff. She was upset because she was lied to about it. There is a difference. She thought something was up at around the end of Season 7 (or the start of Season 8) and she approached her producers directly about whether they were intending to put the show in another direction. She was lied to about that. Wouldn't that have pissed you off? And for the record, Priscilla Barnes and Richard Kline also both stated that they were hurt about how the producers treated their company of actors. Richard even went on to say that it was 'bad business'.

Joyce told Chris Mann in that book of his that she was sort of relieved to be away from the producers and their abusive ways of doing 'business', but was hurt that the producers thought so little of her (and the other actors) as to lie to her about it. She was also hurt to think that John Ritter, who she regarded as one of her best friends, would be a party to that deception. She also stated to Chris Mann that she didn't see Jack & Janet as a romantic couple, and that if they were to ever hook up romantically, it'd probably be in the 100th season (or some other number; I don't remember exactly) of the show. She wasn't counting on Janet being Jack's soulmate. She even went on to say that she wondered why the producers didn't choose Anne Schedeen (who played Jack's girlfriend Linda in the early seasons) as Jack's girlfriend since Anne & John had great chemistry and Anne had come on the show in Season 7 as a new character. Yeah, that sounds real bitter to me.

And by the way, she never said that she was 'glad' that Three's a Crowd failed; she just said that she wasn't surprised by it. She felt (and I strongly agree with her in this) that Jack Tripper wasn't the whole show of Three's Company and that the show's fans loved the other characters that Jack had relationships with and that some element of those relationships (whether it included Joyce or not) should have been in the new show. But it was like they never existed. She said that if the producers had valued the other actors and their roles, they would've realized that. They didn't and it's why the show tanked. Jack Tripper needs the relationships around him to work. Three's a Crowd is proof of that. It was an OK show and it did make me laugh, but I missed some of the other characters that Jack knew and loved, and so did most of the audience. You cut out Jack's other relationships and you cut out half of his heart. That is what Joyce was referring to, and that is why she said she wasn't surprised that Three's a Crowd failed. She wasn't ever 'happy' about it.

Get your facts straight dude...

Ed

She sounded happy to me when she said this in regards to TAC being cancelled-

"That's what happens when you try to build a house on sand"

And Priscilla and Richard had no problem about not being on the spinoff. They SUCKED IT UP like Joyce should have

Mr. Television

09-02-2006, 03:22 PM

She sounded happy to me when she said this in regards to TAC being cancelled-

"That's what happens when you try to build a house on sand"

And Priscilla and Richard had no problem about not being on the spinoff. They SUCKED IT UP like Joyce should have
Richard was asked to be on the spin-off but he turned it down because he had filmed a pilot for CBS that wasn't picked up in the end.

Edster2973

09-02-2006, 03:24 PM

She sounded happy to me when she said this in regards to TAC being cancelled-

"That's what happens when you try to build a house on sand"

And Priscilla and Richard had no problem about not being on the spinoff. They SUCKED IT UP like Joyce should have

Around and around we go, eh Solomon? I swear man, you need a life.

I'll even do you one better.

Good Times is a spinoff from Maude...

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Ed

TVFactFan

09-02-2006, 03:27 PM

Around and around we go, eh Solomon? I swear man, you need a life.

I'll even do you one better.

Good Times is a spinoff from Maude...

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Ed

ED you lost that debate last year but I do agree with you about how they did the Ropers. That wasn't right at all

Edster2973

09-02-2006, 03:27 PM

Richard was asked to be on the spin-off but he turned it down because he had filmed a pilot for CBS that wasn't picked up in the end.

Uh no, he wasn't. It was John who asked Richard to be in the spin-off, not the producers. Richard was just as much in the dark about the spin-off as John was, and only when it was brought out in the open did John invite him to be a part of it. Even John knew that Jack needed his other relationships. And yes, when asked by John, Richard did turn it down and chose the failed CBS pilot. He even mentions that on one of the Season 7 commentaries.

Thanks for posting, I Walk The Line. It's refreshing to converse with someone who has his/her facts straight instead of just posting opinions as if it were gospel. You have no idea how refreshing it is...

Ed

Edster2973

09-02-2006, 03:29 PM

ED you lost that debate last year but I do agree with you about how they did the Ropers. That wasn't right at all

Who lost anything? You just keep insisting. That's not proving anything. And for the record, I was just trying to get to you the way you get to me by pointing something that's been discussed ad nauseum. You love going in circles. Were you ever a hamster running on a wheel in a former life????

Ed

TVFactFan

09-02-2006, 03:33 PM

Who lost anything? You just keep insisting. That's not proving anything. And for the record, I was just trying to get to you the way you get to me by pointing something that's been discussed ad nauseum. You love going in circles. Were you ever a hamster running on a wheel in a former life????

Ed

Joyce should have been enough to realize that the Jack and Janet and Tterri characters couldn't live together forever. That my point, Edster. Understand what I'm trying to explain to you?

Edster2973

09-02-2006, 03:38 PM

Joyce should have been enough to realize that the Jack and Janet and Tterri characters couldn't live together forever. That my point, Edster. Understand what I'm trying to explain to you?

She did know that imbecile. She just wanted to be told the truth. She was lied to and didn't appreciate it. They had John lie to her as well, which hurt her (and the others as well) deeply. You understand sh*t for brains?

What do you do, read only 2 lines of everything I post? I hate having to write and re-write the same thing over and over and over and over again...

Duh, my name is Solomon...

Ed

TVFactFan

09-02-2006, 03:44 PM

She did know that imbecile. She just wanted to be told the truth. She was lied to and didn't appreciate it. They had John lie to her as well, which hurt her (and the others as well) deeply. You understand sh*t for brains?

What do you do, read only 2 lines of everything I post? I hate having to write and re-write the same thing over and over and over and over again...

Duh, my name is Solomon...

Ed

If I was John I would have done the same thing if told to keep a tight lip about the Spinoff. It was none of their concern and it was something he was doing for HIS CAREER. So he didnt have to tell Joyce SH*T, she wasn't his WIFE. It was up to Joyce to find another way to support herself and stop being childish

Edster2973

09-02-2006, 03:53 PM

If I was John I would have done the same thing if told to keep a tight lip about the Spinoff. It was none of their concern and it was something he was doing for HIS CAREER. So he didnt have to tell Joyce SH*T, she wasn't his WIFE. It was up to Joyce to find another way to support herself and stop being childish

This is the thread that never ends, it just goes on and on my friends. Some dummy started posting it, not knowing anything, and he will keep on posting things forever just because this is the thread that never ends...

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: ...

TVFactFan

09-02-2006, 03:59 PM

This is the thread that never ends, it just goes on and on my friends. Some dummy started posting it, not knowing anything, and he will keep on posting things forever just because this is the thread that never ends...

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: ...

You sir are a JOKE-lol

Edster2973

09-02-2006, 04:04 PM

You sir are a JOKE-lol

Hello pot, this is the kettle... you're black!

Ed

snl 70s show fan

09-02-2006, 04:59 PM

I remember really, really hating all of Alan's Alpha Beta commercials. I thought he was an ass.im not sure if he was really an ass but he annoyed me as i kid with those commercials

Ireneparalegal

09-02-2006, 05:05 PM

She sounded happy to me when she said this in regards to TAC being cancelled-

"That's what happens when you try to build a house on sand"

And Priscilla and Richard had no problem about not being on the spinoff. They SUCKED IT UP like Joyce should have
No one knows what Richard and Priscilla "thought"...what they ended up doing career-wise and what they wanted to do career-wise are two different things. No one here was there, and it's not fair to say that Joyce needed to suck it up. When it comes to someone else's work/career, it's easy to say "suck it up"...until it is you who is out of work.

I have no doubt that Priscilla and Richard had mortgages to pay and other bills like the rest of us...if offered a chance to be on a spin-off, I am sure they would have jumped at the chance. Why mess with a good thing?

TVFactFan

09-02-2006, 05:13 PM

No one knows what Richard and Priscilla "thought"...what they ended up doing career-wise and what they wanted to do career-wise are two different things. No one here was there, and it's not fair to say that Joyce needed to suck it up. When it comes to someone else's work/career, it's easy to say "suck it up"...until it is you who is out of work.

I have no doubt that Priscilla and Richard had mortgages to pay and other bills like the rest of us...if offered a chance to be on a spin-off, I am sure they would have jumped at the chance. Why mess with a good thing?

Yeah but she had no reason to be upset with John because he had a tight lip about the situation. That was his business and they wanted him for the project and that should have been the end of it. Yes I know it was her career but TC wasn't going to last forever. It was clear that Joyce was Jealous of John and Suzanne.

Ireneparalegal

09-02-2006, 05:16 PM

Yeah but she had no reason to be upset with John because he had a tight lip about the situation. That was his business and they wanted him for the project and that should have been the end of it. Yes I know it was her career but TC wasn't going to last forever. It was clear that Joyce was Jealous of John and Suzanne.
Being jealous and being hurt are two different things. She was hurt. And with hurt, comes anger. She could be upset with whomever she wanted, she was human. If John wasn't her friend, she wouldn't of cared. But he was her friend. And obviously she put that crap behind her because who was friends with him til the end? Joyce was. Not Suzanne. Suzanne wanted $$$$$.

TVFactFan

09-02-2006, 05:23 PM

Being jealous and being hurt are two different things. She was hurt. And with hurt, comes anger. She could be upset with whomever she wanted, she was human. If John wasn't her friend, she wouldn't of cared. But he was her friend. And obviously she put that crap behind her because who was friends with him til the end? Joyce was. Not Suzanne. Suzanne wanted $$$$$.

Yes him nd Joyce were friends but what was John supposed to do? Not continue to support his family because of how JOYCE FELT? Your Wife and Kids come before your Co-worker feelings and that's what he did. He knew that he couldn't have said anything about adding the Janet character because that would have messed up his Financial situation. Yeah they were friends but was he going to pay his mortgage if he said-"LOOK UNLESS YOU ADD JOYCE TO THE SHOW I WON "T DO IT"

Ireneparalegal

09-02-2006, 05:35 PM

Yes him nd Joyce were friends but what was John supposed to do? Not continue to support his family because of how JOYCE FELT? Your Wife and Kids come before your Co-worker feelings and that's what he did. He knew that he couldn't have said anything about adding the Janet character because that would have messed up his Financial situation. Yeah they were friends but was he going to pay his mortgage if he said-"LOOK UNLESS YOU ADD JOYCE TO THE SHOW I WON "T DO IT"
You are taking this somewhere else.

I am only saying Joyce was hurt. She got over it. They were friends til the end (when he died)...where was Suzanne? She sure as hell didn't think abt anyone's job on that set. Joyce and John WERE HURT BY HER ACTIONS. Joyce probably felt another stab in the back when this new show with John occurred. But, she was an adult who got over it and remained friends with John. If she was really upset abt that part of her career, she wouldn't OWN UP TO IT...Suzanne never would. Who was the true friend in this situation? Hmmm, seems it was Joyce. Friends can and do fight, hurt each other, etc. To say she needed to suck it up is not a good choice of words when one is trying to pay the mortgage. Seems we all have been in a situation where our jobs were on the line for one reason or another, it sure wouldn't help if someone said, "Hey, suck it up." You are making something out of nothing.

TVFactFan

09-02-2006, 05:44 PM

You are taking this somewhere else.

I am only saying Joyce was hurt. She got over it. They were friends til the end (when he died)...where was Suzanne? She sure as hell didn't think abt anyone's job on that set. Joyce and John WERE HURT BY HER ACTIONS. Joyce probably felt another stab in the back when this new show with John occurred. But, she was an adult who got over it and remained friends with John. If she was really upset abt that part of her career, she wouldn't OWN UP TO IT...Suzanne never would. Who was the true friend in this situation? Hmmm, seems it was Joyce. Friends can and do fight, hurt each other, etc. To say she needed to suck it up is not a good choice of words when one is trying to pay the mortgage. Seems we all have been in a situation where our jobs were on the line for one reason or another, it sure wouldn't help if someone said, "Hey, suck it up." You are making something out of nothing.

Irene I'm just saying that John had to do what he had to do for his Family. You cant be concerned about ho a co-worker/friend is going to feel because you still have to pay bills. That's my point

Ireneparalegal

09-02-2006, 06:12 PM

I never even mentioned John. I don't doubt he had to worry abt himself, I would. I am only remarking that Joyce had a right to feel what she did, even if she may have gone abt it all wrong. She got over it though. That's what is more important. Someone who couldn't get over it is something else. Like Suzanne.

TVFactFan

09-02-2006, 06:17 PM

Ireneparalegal

09-02-2006, 06:21 PM

LOL_but I'm still confused as to why did she had the right to be mad at John during that time?
When one gets mad, it stems from hurt. SHE WAS HURT. According to movie she felt hurt by him. He was a friend. She may have done what ever she could had the shoe been on the other foot. But that is how she would have done it. John didn't. She probably assumed. Big deal. She got hurt, it turned to anger (who doesn't) and SHE GOT OVER IT. It doesn't bother me that she felt that way. It seems to bother you though. I am bothered more by the fact that Suzanne didn't give a rat's ass abt ANYONE'S JOB when she did what she did back then. And wasn't on friendly terms with John up until he died.

TVFactFan

09-02-2006, 06:35 PM

Edster2973

09-02-2006, 06:47 PM

When one gets mad, it stems from hurt. SHE WAS HURT. According to movie she felt hurt by him. He was a friend. She may have done what ever she could had the shoe been on the other foot. But that is how she would have done it. John didn't. She probably assumed. Big deal. She got hurt, it turned to anger (who doesn't) and SHE GOT OVER IT. It doesn't bother me that she felt that way. It seems to bother you though. I am bothered more by the fact that Suzanne didn't give a rat's ass abt ANYONE'S JOB when she did what she did back then. And wasn't on friendly terms with John up until he died.

Irene, you've explained yourself as clearly as possible, as have I, and Solomon still isn't going to get it. He loves to go on tangents because it empowers him. I've heard him declare that there's no way such and such a show will ever see a DVD release and then he's proven wrong when it comes out a year later. He'll also argue ad nauseum about trite stuff that no one ever thinks about. It's just the way his mind works.

I confess I fall into it every time he & I have an exchange. I make my points as succinctly as possible and it's like he doesn't even read what is posted. Perhaps he has ADD or something. I don't really know how to explain it (and I'm not trying to make fun of anyone who has ADD).

You and I seem to be on the same page as to the Joyce thing. It's funny, this thread was about how foolish Suzanne was made to look in the movie and Solomon makes a bigger tangent about how Joyce acted during the last season, as if Joyce is the one who should be embarrassed. She was clearly the victim, as was Priscilla, Don & Richard but because she was more vocal about it, she's labelled the bitter bitch. She isn't bitter, she's just telling it like it is. In our society, men can talk the talk of how ugly things are and still be a man but when a woman does it, she's no longer a lady but is labelled a bitch. Go figure.

As far as anger goes, I do think she may have been angered by how it all came about. She was told one thing and it proved to be a lie. Her unemployment was almost foisted upon her as a sabotage. Yes, it does happen like that in the real business world, but she still had a right to be hurt/angered by that and to question who it was she could really trust. For Solomon to say otherwise is just another form of victimization. I doubt he realizes what his comments imply.

Joyce did what she was told and was a team player and expected rightfully to be told the truth about how the show was ending. She had no expectations of the show being loyal to her. She wasn't stupid. She knew she could be replaced at the blink of an eye (again, this is stated in Chris Mann's book) but she did expect not to be lied to about it. If Solomon can't understand why anyone would feel that they don't have the right to know the truth about what is going to affect their livelihood, then he's a lost cause. I suspect we're dealing with someone who's either very young or, if not, someone who's very isolated and who doesn't get out much by way of socializing. I in no way mean that as insulting but based on his posts in the past and how he chooses to respond to them, what else can we assume? It's too bad, 'cause he's not a bad fellow. He is a kind soul, just not a very bright one...

Ed

TVFactFan

09-02-2006, 06:51 PM

Irene, you've explained yourself as clearly as possible, as have I, and Solomon still isn't going to get it. He loves to go on tangents because it empowers him. I've heard him declare that there's no way such and such a show will ever see a DVD release and then he's proven wrong when it comes out a year later. He'll also argue ad nauseum about trite stuff that no one ever thinks about. It's just the way his mind works.

I confess I fall into it every time he & I have an exchange. I make my points as succinctly as possible and it's like he doesn't even read what is posted. Perhaps he has ADD or something. I don't really know how to explain it (and I'm not trying to make fun of anyone who has ADD).

You and I seem to be on the same page as to the Joyce thing. It's funny, this thread was about how foolish Suzanne was made to look in the movie and Solomon makes a bigger tangent about how Joyce acted during the last season, as if Joyce is the one who should be embarrassed. She was clearly the victim, as was Priscilla, Don & Richard but because she was more vocal about it, she's labelled the bitter bitch. She isn't bitter, she's just telling it like it is. In our society, men can talk the talk of how ugly things are and still be a man but when a woman does it, she's no longer a lady but is labelled a bitch. Go figure.

As far as anger goes, I do think she may have been angered by how it all came about. She was told one thing and it proved to be a lie. Her unemployment was almost foisted upon her as a sabotage. Yes, it does happen like that in the real business world, but she still had a right to be hurt/angered by that and to question who it was she could really trust. For Solomon to say that she didn't have that right is just another form of victimization.

Joyce did what she was told and was a team player and expected rightfully to be told the truth about how the show was ending. She had no expectations of the show being loyal to her. She wasn't stupid. She knew she could be replaced at the blink of an eye (again, this is stated in Chris Mann's book) but she did expect not to be lied to about it. If Solomon can't understand why anyone would feel that they don't have the right to know the truth about what is going to affect their livelihood, then he's a lost cause. I suspect we're dealing with someone who's either very young or, if not, someone who's very isolated and who doesn't get out much by way of socializing. I in no way mean that as insulting but based on his posts in the past and how he chooses to respond to them, what else can we assume? It's too bad, 'cause he's not a bad fellow. He is a kind soul, just not a very bright one...

Ed

Ed I did say Joyce had a right to be angry, but with the producers for not being UPFRONT with her NOT JOHN RITTER.

Edster2973

09-02-2006, 06:59 PM

Ed I did say Joyce had a right to be angry, but with the producers for not being UPFRONT with her NOT JOHN RITTER.

That is not what you said. You said:
Why did they need to tell her when she wasn't going to be invoved in it? She was just mad because she was no longer working-lol

Sounds to me you were begrudging her for feeling hurt, as if she didn't have the right to expect honesty. She was a professional and knew that her job could end at any moment. The show didn't owe her the rest of her life, but they did owe her the *professional courtesy* of letting her know her job would soon be over. To suggest otherwise is just plain stupid.

Ed

TVFactFan

09-02-2006, 07:08 PM

That is not what you said. You said:

Sounds to me you were begrudging her for feeling hurt, as if she didn't have the right to expect honesty. She was a professional and knew that her job could end at any moment. The show didn't owe her the rest of her life, but they did owe her the *professional courtesy* of letting her know her job would soon be over. To suggest otherwise is just plain stupid.

Ed

At this point, I really don't give a sh*T

Ireneparalegal

09-02-2006, 07:10 PM

At this point, I really don't give a sh*T
:rofl: That's the best response.

Edster2973

09-02-2006, 07:11 PM

At this point, I really don't give a sh*T

Awwww, poor baby.

Actually, you shouldn't be mad. If Joyce couldn't be upset with her producers and with John, you can't be upset with us for defending Joyce. Har-de-har-har... :wave: :crazy: :lol: :p

Ed

TVFactFan

09-02-2006, 07:14 PM

Awwww, poor baby.

Actually, you shouldn't be mad. If Joyce couldn't be upset with her producers and with John, you can't be upset with us for defending Joyce. Har-de-har-har... :wave: :crazy: :lol: :p

Ed

That was toward you because I have no interest in discussing anything with you on this board since you want to act like a LITTLE GIRL and call me names. So just do me a favor and go away

TVFactFan

09-02-2006, 07:17 PM

:rofl: That's the best response.

LOL-Irene that was Toward Edster for acting like a little girl. Since he can't have a TV Discussion without name calling than he can go ELSEWHERE. I'm done with him

Ireneparalegal

09-02-2006, 07:18 PM

LOL-Irene that was Toward Edster for acting like a little girl. Since he can't have a TV Discussion without name calling than he can go ELSEWHERE. I'm done with him
I realize who it was towards...I am just glad you are done with this discussion. It went from the thighmaster to this...:rofl:

Edster2973

09-02-2006, 07:23 PM

LOL-Irene that was Toward Edster for acting like a little girl. Since he can't have a TV Discussion without name calling than he can go ELSEWHERE. I'm done with him

Hallelujah! Hallelujah! Hallelujah! Hallelujah! Hallelujah!

Ed

Edster2973

09-02-2006, 08:06 PM

I realize who it was towards...I am just glad you are done with this discussion. It went from the thighmaster to this...:rofl:

Yeah, it was very pointless, wasn't it? I kept making the same argument on Joyce's behalf like you were doing, and we both were going in circles with Solomon because he just wasn't getting it. It's incredibly frustrating having to make the same point over and over because of his inferring something that isn't even there. And then when he's proven wrong, he responds with a statement that's the complete opposite of the point that he was making in the first place. He's consistently inconsistent... :lol:

Oh well, it's done. Glad to see we were on the same page though.

Peace,

Ed

TVFactFan

09-02-2006, 09:22 PM

Yeah, it was very pointless, wasn't it? I kept making the same argument on Joyce's behalf like you were doing, and we both were going in circles with Solomon because he just wasn't getting it. It's incredibly frustrating having to make the same point over and over because of his inferring something that isn't even there. And then when he's proven wrong, he responds with a statement that's the complete opposite of the point that he was making in the first place. He's consistently inconsistent... :lol:

Oh well, it's done. Glad to see we were on the same page though.

Peace,

Ed

You Back Again?

Edster2973

09-03-2006, 09:32 AM

You Back Again?

Dude, I'm never leaving. I've done nothing wrong and don't feel the least bit guilty about any of what's gone on. You love to go around in circles and I called you up on it, which is why you're throwing a little fit. Now, if you're all done with me, then why do you keep posting responses to my posts? See, you're proving my point. You love to go around in circles.

I swear you were a hamster running on a wheel in a former life... :rolleyes:

Ed

TVFactFan

09-03-2006, 12:54 PM

Dude, I'm never leaving. I've done nothing wrong and don't feel the least bit guilty about any of what's gone on. You love to go around in circles and I called you up on it, which is why you're throwing a little fit. Now, if you're all done with me, then why do you keep posting responses to my posts? See, you're proving my point. You love to go around in circles.

I swear you were a hamster running on a wheel in a former life... :rolleyes:

Ed

ED I enjoyed Debating with you but You started NAME CALLING and that's Why I was confused. Esopecially since we never called each other names in the past. So if you can stop taking these debates so seriously then we are cool

queenFrostine278

09-03-2006, 07:51 PM

*giggles and wonders how many times we're going to go back and forth before we REALLY terminate this bickering teheheheheheh*

Edster2973

09-04-2006, 01:51 PM

So much love here. This board is a joke. You people are ALL pathetic. Fighting over behind-the-scenes events on a TV SHOW, like you all know what happened. Grow up, and God bless.

It's a good thing we have you to straighten us all out by being a good example of how not to stir things up ("grow up" indeed!). You grow up and go to h*ll...

Ed

queenFrostine278

09-04-2006, 02:52 PM

PEOPLE 'ROUND THE WORLD JOIN HANDS FORM A LOVE TRAIN, A LOVE TRAIN

Mr. Television

09-04-2006, 03:11 PM

So much love here. This board is a joke. You people are ALL pathetic. Fighting over behind-the-scenes events on a TV SHOW, like you all know what happened. Grow up, and God bless.
It seems like you like to cause trouble on every board you go to...I wouldn't talk.

AustinTripper

09-04-2006, 03:21 PM

I have no doubt that Priscilla and Richard had mortgages to pay and other bills like the rest of us...if offered a chance to be on a spin-off, I am sure they would have jumped at the chance. Why mess with a good thing?

Actually (per John ritter's request) Richard Kline was asked to be in the majority of the episodes of the spinoff but turned them down in order to do a pilot for another show. He said he preferred not to continue playing the same character given the choice. It's in the Mann book.

Larry and Jack were my 2 favorite characters. While I would have liked to see him in the spinoff I can't blame him for making a career decision.

Mr. Television

09-04-2006, 03:27 PM

Actually (per John ritter's request) Richard Kline was asked to be in the majority of the episodes of the spinoff but turned them down in order to do a pilot for another show. He said he preferred not to continue playing the same character given the choice. It's in the Mann book.

Larry and Jack were my 2 favorite characters. While I would have liked to see him in the spinoff I can't blame him for making a career decision.
I think the show would have been better with Larry in it. Jack really needed someone to play off of.

TVFactFan

09-04-2006, 03:27 PM

Actually (per John ritter's request) Richard Kline was asked to be in the majority of the episodes of the spinoff but turned them down in order to do a pilot for another show. He said he preferred not to continue playing the same character given the choice. It's in the Mann book.

Larry and Jack were my 2 favorite characters. While I would have liked to see him in the spinoff I can't blame him for making a career decision.

I wished he had made about 2 or 3 more appearances on Three's a Crowd

TVFactFan

09-04-2006, 03:36 PM

I think the show would have been better with Larry in it. Jack really needed someone to play off of.

I thought he played off Mr. Bradford pretty well-lol

Mr. Television

09-04-2006, 03:43 PM

I thought he played off Mr. Bradford pretty well-lol
Yea he did. That was probably the best part of the show...but Larry could have done more because he always got Jack in Trouble. I can picture Mr. Bradford's expressions if those 2 would have got together. lol

TVFactFan

09-04-2006, 03:47 PM

Yea he did. That was probably the best part of the show...but Larry could have done more because he always got Jack in Trouble. I can picture Mr. Bradford's expressions if those 2 would have got together. lol

I remember when Vicky introduced Larry to her Dad and said-"This is Jack's best Friend" and Mr. Bradford says-"Why doesn't that surprise me?-lol

Mr. Television

09-04-2006, 03:53 PM

I remember when Vicky introduced Larry to her Dad and said-"This is Jack's best Friend" and Mr. Bradford says-"Why doesn't that surprise me?-lol
I remember that. :lol:

Edster2973

09-05-2006, 08:34 AM

Wow, I kind of envy some of you recalling moments of Three's a Crowd. I have no recollection of the show at all. I know I watched it and even caught eps when it was shown in daytime syndication in 1985 on ABC but I have absolutely no idea what the episodes were about.

How is it that some of you remember specific incidents with this show? Has this show aired recently on TVLand? I know it's going to be aired soon on TVLand in early September but other than that, has anyone seen any of the episodes recently? Myself, I don't have cable, so I won't be able to catch any of the episodes when they air on TVLand. I'm still holding out hope for a DVD release of the show (along with The Ropers) once Season 8 wraps up. I'd think that if sales of Three's Company were healthy, Anchor Bay would want to capitalize on that by releasing the spinoffs. In this case, I hope they get greedy and release them... :happyface

Ed

Ireneparalegal

09-05-2006, 11:12 AM

Mr. Television

09-05-2006, 12:52 PM

TVFactFan

09-05-2006, 04:46 PM

comedyfreak

09-07-2006, 05:57 AM

I was obsessed with TC in the early 1980's. I had no VCR then but I audio taped all the shows and when TAC came on I audio taped it too. I used to play it over and over again. I still have a few of the casettes from that show although it's not in very good shape.
Wow! I did the same thing with Three's Company, LOL.

Edster2973

09-07-2006, 08:20 PM

Wow! I did the same thing with Three's Company, LOL.

As did I. The first episode I ever audio taped was when Jack, Janet & Chrissy are trying to keep the dog away from Mr. Roper. I used to go to bed listening to the episodes at night and would fall asleep more often than night before the tape ran out (which was convenient since the tape player would turn off automatically when a tape finished).

Who else had their own versions of Three's Company radio?

Ed

Ireneparalegal

09-07-2006, 08:33 PM

As did I. The first episode I ever audio taped was when Jack, Janet & Chrissy are trying to keep the dog away from Mr. Roper. I used to go to bed listening to the episodes at night and would fall asleep more often than night before the tape ran out (which was convenient since the tape player would turn off automatically when a tape finished).

Who else had their own versions of Three's Company radio?

Ed
Not me, but I did audiotape HAPPY DAYS...one of the ones I remember tape recording was the episode when Fonzie and Joanie entered the dance contest. I played that episode along with the others over and over and over again. To this day, whenever I see those particular episodes, I am reminded of those audio tapes!!!!!! Funny thing was, I could also hear stuff going on in the background such as my sister yellling, a door shutting. :rofl: