Would this show have had better ratings if jack had fallin in love with janet or maby they had brought chrissy back and jack fell for her? I mean I didnt like mary cadorette much and she couldnt act nearly as well as joyce, it was said in the movie behind the scenes of threes company that susanne somers wanted the part in 3s a crowd, I wonder if it would have worked?:rolleyes:

I thinki 3s A Crowd woul;d have worked if ake Fell in love with Janet

im not sure if it would have had better ratings but i have to agree on the choice of mary cadorettie being the wrong choice i never quite warmed up to her no matter how hard i tried and the houmor and interaction with john ritter seemed forced not natiural like with all the girls on threes compnay

Would this show have had better ratings if jack had fallin in love with janet or maby they had brought chrissy back and jack fell for her? I mean I didnt like mary cadorette much and she couldnt act nearly as well as joyce, it was said in the movie behind the scenes of threes company that susanne somers wanted the part in 3s a crowd, I wonder if it would have worked?:rolleyes:


It would have still been three's company so NO. The point of Three's a crowd was to surround jack with different characters

im not sure if it would have had better ratings but i have to agree on the choice of mary cadorettie being the wrong choice i never quite warmed up to her no matter how hard i tried and the houmor and interaction with john ritter seemed forced not natiural like with all the girls on threes compnay

I think because john had real feelings for susanne somers and I think he was hurt more than angry when she pulled that im the starr crap and was forced to leave the show.

I think Three's A Crowd would really work today

I thinki 3s A Crowd woul;d have worked if ake Fell in love with Janet
That would work and it would've been Jack's mom who buys Jack's Bistro

That would work and it would've been Jack's mom who buys Jack's Bistro


Wouldn't that have been called Season 9 of THREE'S COMPANY???-lol

Wouldn't that have been called Season 9 of THREE'S COMPANY???-lol


No

No


Your answer proved to me you don't have the INTELLIGENCE to have a TV Discussion

What killed TAC was The A-Team...nothing else. The show was ranked in the 30's which today would be a hit. Making Janet or Chrissy Jack's love interest would not have changed anything because none of that was ever really hinted on the show at that time. They were like brother and sisters. I agree Mary was a bad choice to play Vicky though. She was pretty but her personality was too bland.

Your answer proved to me you don't have the INTELLIGENCE to have a TV Discussion


To TheAnalyzer

Your post was very hurtful mean and rude. You don't know me at all but I'm very Intelligent. I come to this site thinking this is a friendly board only to be put down by you. You need to stop and take a step back and look in the mirror but please don't hurt yourself when you do it ..... Please Don't hate you feel me .... Have a nice day :)

To TheAnalyzer

Your post was very hurtful mean and rude. You don't know me at all but I'm very Intelligent. I come to this site thinking this is a friendly board only to be put down by you. You need to stop and take a step back and look in the mirror but please don't hurt yourself when you do it ..... Please Don't hate you feel me .... Have a nice day :)
DOn't worry,Chad.He's been that way ever since I've been on here.He's kinda like the Simon Cowel of the Message boards

To TheAnalyzer

Your post was very hurtful mean and rude. You don't know me at all but I'm very Intelligent. I come to this site thinking this is a friendly board only to be put down by you. You need to stop and take a step back and look in the mirror but please don't hurt yourself when you do it ..... Please Don't hate you feel me .... Have a nice day :)


In the future when you make a statement on a TV message board, try to back it up with a explanation. Otherwise if u just said NO, it's hard for me to take you seriously because it would appear you are not here to have a discussion just trying to raise your post count

In the future when you make a statement on a TV message board, try to back it up with a explanation. Otherwise if u just said NO, it's hard for me to take you seriously because it would appear you are not here to have a discussion just trying to raise your post count

Look i PM you and you were hurtful and mean to me again. what you said to me in your PM was uncall for. I'm very hurt right now. I don't go out to hurt anybody in mylife. I will not come back anymore:(


Well I don't know what else to tell you, I explained how i like to communicate on a TV message board so if you are still hurt after me apologizing in the PM then nothing else for me to say.

I have always thought that Jack and Janet would have been a much better idea.

I have always thought that Jack and Janet would have been a much better idea.


But wouldn't that have still been Three' Company?

I have always thought that Jack and Janet would have been a much better idea.
I really don't think the fans back then would have accepted it. I grew up with that show and nobody at the time thought of Jack and Janet as a couple. The show was just running out of ideas and if they hooked them up then TC would have jumped the shark big time.

I really don't think the fans back then would have accepted it. I grew up with that show and nobody at the time thought of Jack and Janet as a couple. The show was just running out of ideas and if they hooked them up then TC would have jumped the shark big time.


Yeah I just think that is somthing that fans talk about now that the show is over

Having suzanne somers back as jacks girl would not have made sence and would have really just confused people in my opinion. But it would bring ratings so I guess it would work with chrissy & jack.

Yeah I just think that is somthing that fans talk about now that the show is over
Exactly. I think all this J&J talk started after the show began airing on N@N. If their was any popularity for having Jack and Janet as a couple don't you think the producers would have tried it? Afterall they were trying to save their show.

Three's Company just ran out of ideas. The show was only going to last 1 more year probably anyway so they had to try something new.

Having suzanne somers back as jacks girl would not have made sence and would have really just confused people in my opinion. But it would bring ratings so I guess it would work with chrissy & jack.
She might have helped the show but I still don't think it would have worked with her and Jack as a couple either. Maybe if she moved back in town as a neighbor or something but that would be about it. TAC's biggest problem was The A-Team and unless ABC moved the show it's ratings weren't going to change much.

Theres no way the show would have worked if Jack and Janet got together. They were best friends and they had more of a brother-sister type relationship.

I think TAC would have worked a lot better if they had brought in someone who had great chemistry with John. Mary was pretty but she wasn't a good enough actress. What they should have done at the beginning of season 8 was gotten Jack a steady girlfriend and then at the end of the 8th season they could live together or whatever. That would have given the audience more time to get to know the new character before putting her and John on another show. I mean Jack and Vicki only knew each other for a few weeks before they moved in together. That didn't make a whole lot of sense.

Three's a Crowd was still good, however and I think it was a huge mistake on ABC's part to cancel the show after the first season. If they had kept it for another year at the same time slot, it might have gotten better ratings. The A-Team's ratings dropped during the 85-86 season and it was no longer killing off other shows like it used to. Of course, there was no way to know that at the time but the ratings for TAC weren't terrible.

Theres no way the show would have worked if Jack and Janet got together. They were best friends and they had more of a brother-sister type relationship.

I think TAC would have worked a lot better if they had brought in someone who had great chemistry with John. Mary was pretty but she wasn't a good enough actress. What they should have done at the beginning of season 8 was gotten Jack a steady girlfriend and then at the end of the 8th season they could live together or whatever. That would have given the audience more time to get to know the new character before putting her and John on another show. I mean Jack and Vicki only knew each other for a few weeks before they moved in together. That didn't make a whole lot of sense.

Three's a Crowd was still good, however and I think it was a huge mistake on ABC's part to cancel the show after the first season. If they had kept it for another year at the same time slot, it might have gotten better ratings. The A-Team's ratings dropped during the 85-86 season and it was no longer killing off other shows like it used to. Of course, there was no way to know that at the time but the ratings for TAC weren't terrible.


ABC didn't cancel the show, they were bringing it back in Midseason, Jan of 86 but Ritter told ABC he has no interest since they couldn't give the show a full season.

Theres no way the show would have worked if Jack and Janet got together. They were best friends and they had more of a brother-sister type relationship.

I think TAC would have worked a lot better if they had brought in someone who had great chemistry with John. Mary was pretty but she wasn't a good enough actress. What they should have done at the beginning of season 8 was gotten Jack a steady girlfriend and then at the end of the 8th season they could live together or whatever. That would have given the audience more time to get to know the new character before putting her and John on another show. I mean Jack and Vicki only knew each other for a few weeks before they moved in together. That didn't make a whole lot of sense.

Three's a Crowd was still good, however and I think it was a huge mistake on ABC's part to cancel the show after the first season. If they had kept it for another year at the same time slot, it might have gotten better ratings. The A-Team's ratings dropped during the 85-86 season and it was no longer killing off other shows like it used to. Of course, there was no way to know that at the time but the ratings for TAC weren't terrible.
You are absolutely right. Mary was pretty but she had no chemistry with John at all. I think the fact that the fans didn't have time to get used to her had a lot to do with the dislike of her. The fans don't seem to like Phillip that much either. Probably for the same reason :lol: Also maybe if they had Larry as a regular and brought Philipe in as cook that would have made the show better too. The audience already knew them.

And you are right, the ratings weren't bad. They were ranked in the 30's which were about the same ratings that WTB was getting and ABC gave that show a chance to become a hit. During 1985-86 the show that replaced TAC in that timeslot was Growing Pains and that became a big hit for ABC. ABC in fact had just about renewed TAC but changed their mind in order to pick up the last season of Different Strokes. Boy was that a mistake.

You are absolutely right. Mary was pretty but she had no chemistry with John at all. I think the fact that the fans didn't have time to get used to her had a lot to do with the dislike of her. The fans don't seem to like Phillip that much either. Probably for the same reason :lol: Also maybe if they had Larry as a regular and brought Philipe in as cook that would have made the show better too. The audience already knew them.

And you are right, the ratings weren't bad. They were ranked in the 30's which were about the same ratings that WTB was getting and ABC gave that show a chance to become a hit. During 1985-86 the show that replaced TAC in that timeslot was Growing Pains and that became a big hit for ABC. ABC in fact had just about renewed TAC but changed their mind in order to pick up the last season of Different Strokes. Boy was that a mistake.


ABC was going to renew TAC but for only 13 eps and john Ritter said forget it since they didn't renew for an entire season

ABC didn't cancel the show, they were bringing it back in Midseason, Jan of 86 but Ritter told ABC he has no interest since they couldn't give the show a full season.

Oh really? I wasn't aware of that. That's pretty much the kiss of death though, when a show that has already had at least one full season and comes back as a mid season replacement. Yes Dear is the only sitcom I can think of that came back as a mid season replacement and was renewed for another season after that. I don't blame Ritter for turning it down.

ABC was going to renew TAC but for only 13 eps and john Ritter said forget it since they didn't renew for an entire season
I never heard that. I remember reading the Lifestyle section of USA Today the day it was announced that TAC wasn't coming back and it did say it was canceled. They had a quote from the ABC Entertainment President saying they loved John and loved the show but it was just not performing like they wanted it to.

I never heard that. I remember reading the Lifestyle section of USA Today the day it was announced that TAC wasn't coming back and it did say it was canceled. They had a quote from the ABC Entertainment President saying they loved John and loved the show but it was just not performing like they wanted it to.


They probably said all that after he decided not to accept the midseason start-lol

You are absolutely right. Mary was pretty but she had no chemistry with John at all. I think the fact that the fans didn't have time to get used to her had a lot to do with the dislike of her. The fans don't seem to like Phillip that much either. Probably for the same reason :lol: Also maybe if they had Larry as a regular and brought Philipe in as cook that would have made the show better too. The audience already knew them.

And you are right, the ratings weren't bad. They were ranked in the 30's which were about the same ratings that WTB was getting and ABC gave that show a chance to become a hit. During 1985-86 the show that replaced TAC in that timeslot was Growing Pains and that became a big hit for ABC. ABC in fact had just about renewed TAC but changed their mind in order to pick up the last season of Different Strokes. Boy was that a mistake.

Mary looked great in a nightgown, but when she opened her mouth I wanted to hit the mute button. :lol:

It's like the people in charge of producing and writing Three's Company didn't give a damn anymore the way they just introduced those characters near the very end of the show. Everything was rushed, heck they didn't even have Janet's parents at the wedding and I believe it was because they were just too cheap to hire the actors and actresses to play Janet's relatives. The writers and producers were probably too busy working on Three's A Crowd and it's a shame too cause Three's Company should have had a better finale.

I agree, Larry would have been a great addition to TAC. I think I remember hearing that they offered Richard a role on the show but he turned it down cause he wanted to work on another show. It's too bad too cause I don't think the show he was on even aired on tv.

It sounds like they kinda expected TAC to do as good as Three's Company in the ratings and that would have been very hard. I guess it's not such a bad thing cause if TAC had had another full season and kept the same timeslot, Growing Pains probably would have been a one year wonder. :lol: I don't even remember the last season of DS. Did they even have a series finale?

Mary looked great in a nightgown, but when she opened her mouth I wanted to hit the mute button. :lol:

It's like the people in charge of producing and writing Three's Company didn't give a damn anymore the way they just introduced those characters near the very end of the show. Everything was rushed, heck they didn't even have Janet's parents at the wedding and I believe it was because they were just too cheap to hire the actors and actresses to play Janet's relatives. The writers and producers were probably too busy working on Three's A Crowd and it's a shame too cause Three's Company should have had a better finale.

I agree, Larry would have been a great addition to TAC. I think I remember hearing that they offered Richard a role on the show but he turned it down cause he wanted to work on another show. It's too bad too cause I don't think the show he was on even aired on tv.

It sounds like they kinda expected TAC to do as good as Three's Company in the ratings and that would have been very hard. I guess it's not such a bad thing cause if TAC had had another full season and kept the same timeslot, Growing Pains probably would have been a one year wonder. :lol: I don't even remember the last season of DS. Did they even have a series finale?
:rofl: I think the producers must have been in a trance when they cast her. She was so wooden.

That's so true. At that time I think all they cared about was TAC. Look at what they did with Terri in the finale. Out of the blue she's going to Hawaii. Phillip came on and Janet swept him off his feet. How? I didn't see it. :lol: Her parents weren't at the wedding even though Malcolm McCalman who played her father was on an episode that season. They could have brought The Ropers and Cindy back and made it a big event. Larry and Furley's futures were left up in the air too.

Yea Richard had taped a pilot called His and Hers. CBS aired it that spring and I actually saw it and it was pretty good. He Co-Starred with Shelley Fabares but it wasn't picked up.

No Different Strokes just died a quiet death. It aired opposite Dallas so I didn't even see many episodes that year. :lol: I did catch some of them when it went into syndication though and Their were very few episodes were all the cast were in a show together.

Mary and John looked like they were both there just for the money those 22 episodes. It wasn't even any fun to watch. The story lines were just too dull, simple, and boring, which made it not seem like a Three's Company spinoff. It's no doubt The Ropers, centered on 2 people in their late 50's, was more exciting.

But, today, Three's a Crows would be the next hit comedy series. I mean, today, all sitcoms seem to be about the same storylines, such as as married people getting along with each other, so this would fit right in. If they could just get a great cast togehter, they could make this series a hit today.

Mary and John looked like they were both there just for the money those 22 episodes. It wasn't even any fun to watch. The story lines were just too dull, simple, and boring, which made it not seem like a Three's Company spinoff. It's no doubt The Ropers, centered on 2 people in their late 50's, was more exciting.

But, today, Three's a Crows would be the next hit comedy series. I mean, today, all sitcoms seem to be about the same storylines, such as as married people getting along with each other, so this would fit right in. If they could just get a great cast togehter, they could make this series a hit today.


Can you please give me a DETAIL EXPLANATION as to why you feel the Ropers was more watchable than Three's a Crowd? And give you give examples too, thanks

:rofl: I think the producers must have been in a trance when they cast her. She was so wooden.

That's so true. At that time I think all they cared about was TAC. Look at what they did with Terri in the finale. Out of the blue she's going to Hawaii. Phillip came on and Janet swept him off his feet. How? I didn't see it. :lol: Her parents weren't at the wedding even though Malcolm McCalman who played her father was on an episode that season. They could have brought The Ropers and Cindy back and made it a big event. Larry and Furley's futures were left up in the air too.

Yea Richard had taped a pilot called His and Hers. CBS aired it that spring and I actually saw it and it was pretty good. He Co-Starred with Shelley Fabares but it wasn't picked up.

No Different Strokes just died a quiet death. It aired opposite Dallas so I didn't even see many episodes that year. :lol: I did catch some of them when it went into syndication though and Their were very few episodes were all the cast were in a show together.

:lol: They must have been. I don't care how beautiful an actress is. If she can't act, the audience is gonna find out real fast.

That was so stupid. They should have had Terri look for some new roommates or something. :rolleyes: Having her go to Hawaii was ridiculous. Phillip was such a boring character and it didn't make any sense for Janet to marry him so soon. She only knew him for a short time, Janet wasn't the type of woman to just go off and marry someone like that. It only made Janet look foolish. Oh yeah, I forgot about that. They should have at least brought back Cindy and the Ropers, it would have been great to see them one last time, especially Cindy. At least the Ropers got to come back for one episode during the 5th season though, that was a classic. :lol:

:lol: I don't know what's worse. Putting a show up against the A-Team or putting it up against Dallas. :lol:

Wouldn't that have been called Season 9 of THREE'S COMPANY???-lol
If it was just Jack and Janet, with no other characters from the last or any seasons of Three's Company (give or take a special appearance by a close friend) and they lived in a different location and actually had to act like adults, then no, it wouldn't have been just another season of Three's Company.
I do agree with most who say Jack and Janet are more brother & sister than lovers, so it would've been weird to see them as lovers, but they do have chemistry together.

If it was just Jack and Janet, with no other characters from the last or any seasons of Three's Company (give or take a special appearance by a close friend) and they lived in a different location and actually had to act like adults, then no, it wouldn't have been just another season of Three's Company.


If you think about iit really wasn't a spinoff anyway since the main character was still involved and we still saw Jack's bistro

A spin-off can be a spin-off if a main character is involved.

A spin-off can be a spin-off if a main character is involved.


No if the main character is still involved you call it a Continuation. It's basically a continuation of the Original series which is retitled due to the different situation

[
Yea Richard had taped a pilot called His and Hers. CBS aired it that spring and I actually saw it and it was pretty good. He Co-Starred with Shelley Fabares but it wasn't picked up.
]

It actually aired for like 4-6 episodes IIRC. Then afterwards, Richard got cast as Richie on It's A Living (playing the husband of Barrie Youngfellow's character) but he was so sparingly used, it was a big disappoinment.

[
Yea Richard had taped a pilot called His and Hers. CBS aired it that spring and I actually saw it and it was pretty good. He Co-Starred with Shelley Fabares but it wasn't picked up.
]

It actually aired for like 4-6 episodes IIRC. Then afterwards, Richard got cast as Richie on It's A Living (playing the husband of Barrie Youngfellow's character) but he was so sparingly used, it was a big disappoinment.



He should have been on Three's a Crowd from day 1 which would have still had a small connect to three's company. Shame it never happened

Maybe the producers didn't see the end of TC and the beginning of TAC as the definite break most fans took it to be. And perhaps that's why the transition may seem a little open-ended. (Although, disregarding TAC completely, I think the openness of the TC finale is actually its greatest point.)

For example, I distinctly remember reading an entertainment-news story in '84 in which Michael Ross said he hoped the former cast members, and DeWitt in particular, would make the occasional appearance on TAC. Kline did appear, of course, but I guess DeWitt, Barnes, and maybe even Knotts were sufficiently angry at whatever they were angry at not to take them up.

I actually thought TAC worked really well. There were two episodes that I still remember very well, despite not having seen them in almost a quarter century: the string quartet and the celebrity crowd. But the time for that kind of show had definitely passed for a while.

Maybe the producers didn't see the end of TC and the beginning of TAC as the definite break most fans took it to be. And perhaps that's why the transition may seem a little open-ended. (Although, disregarding TAC completely, I think the openness of the TC finale is actually its greatest point.)

For example, I distinctly remember reading an entertainment-news story in '84 in which Michael Ross said he hoped the former cast members, and DeWitt in particular, would make the occasional appearance on TAC. Kline did appear, of course, but I guess DeWitt, Barnes, and maybe even Knotts were sufficiently angry at whatever they were angry at not to take them up.

I actually thought TAC worked really well. There were two episodes that I still remember very well, despite not having seen them in almost a quarter century: the string quartet and the celebrity crowd. But the time for that kind of show had definitely passed for a while.


In all honesty, it was no need for the Girls to appear on the show, just Larry or maybe Furley going to the Bistro. Plus the way they both were written out you kind of knew as a viewer that there would not be any guest appearances since Terri moved to Hawaii and janet had a new life with Phillip.

In all honesty, it was no need for the Girls to appear on the show, just Larry or maybe Furley going to the Bistro. Plus the way they both were written out you kind of knew as a viewer that there would not be any guest appearances since Terri moved to Hawaii and janet had a new life with Phillip.

You're probably right. Still, the unanswerable thing is the guest list for the TAC season-two wedding we never saw. :)

You're probably right. Still, the unanswerable thing is the guest list for the TAC season-two wedding we never saw. :)


I think the wedding should have been in mid season 1

I think the wedding should have been in mid season 1

I wonder... would it have extended the show, or merely aborted it?

The thing is, though Jack and Vicki were definitely getting hotter as the season progressed, I don't remember any explicit hint they were shortly to tie the knot. Like almost everyone else, I suppose, I only found out that a wedding was in the cards from Mann's book.

I think Larry should have at least been a recurring character. And why have dumb EZ as the assistant cook? They could have brought back Phillipe'!

I think Larry should have at least been a recurring character. And why have dumb EZ as the assistant cook? They could have brought back Phillipe'!


I can't believe I'm admitting this but in some eps he actually made me laugh-lol

Who made you laugh? EZ?? When he did his imitation of a stomach ache--that was funny. I did catch Alan Campbell on an ep of FOL--where he played Jo's ballroom dancing partner and it was hard to believe it was the same actor!! LOL

Who made you laugh? EZ?? When he did his imitation of a stomach ache--that was funny. I did catch Alan Campbell on an ep of FOL--where he played Jo's ballroom dancing partner and it was hard to believe it was the same actor!! LOL


Yeah I love Jack's reaction to his WACKINESS-lol Plus that was my first time seeing Jack around a WEIRD Male character, only weird female characters like Chrissy and Cindy

I wonder... would it have extended the show, or merely aborted it?

The thing is, though Jack and Vicki were definitely getting hotter as the season progressed, I don't remember any explicit hint they were shortly to tie the knot. Like almost everyone else, I suppose, I only found out that a wedding was in the cards from Mann's book.
Their was an article in my local paper at the time spelling out that they were supposed to get married in a 3 part season premiere. Alas they were canceled.

I barely remember this show, but it was kind of like a continuation of Three's Company, right? Well, sort of. I mean, Jack was supposed to marry this woman (and they just decided to live together, right?) and her dad moved in with them.

I may have the facts wrong. In fact I had forgotten about this show until I saw the section for it. From what I remember it wasn't that great. Too predictable. How much can they do with the dad always interfering with the couple? I think it got old fast, or else that people loved "Three's Company" more.

Andrea

That would work and it would've been Jack's mom who buys Jack's Bistro


Jack should've definitely moved in with Janet. It would've lasted at least 2 years. I'm not sure about Jack's mom though since there seems to be more story possibilities with a father than a mother.

They kept using actors for different purposes during the show anyway so they could've brought back Janet's dad as the man who played Vicki's dad and no one would've cared as long as the show was funny.

Jack should've definitely moved in with Janet. It would've lasted at least 2 years. I'm not sure about Jack's mom though since there seems to be more story possibilities with a father than a mother.

They kept using actors for different purposes during the show anyway so they could've brought back Janet's dad as the man who played Vicki's dad and no one would've cared as long as the show was funny.


Jack was already living with Janet-lol

I barely remember this show, but it was kind of like a continuation of Three's Company, right? Well, sort of. I mean, Jack was supposed to marry this woman (and they just decided to live together, right?) and her dad moved in with them.

I may have the facts wrong. In fact I had forgotten about this show until I saw the section for it. From what I remember it wasn't that great. Too predictable. How much can they do with the dad always interfering with the couple? I think it got old fast, or else that people loved "Three's Company" more.

Andrea




Yeah I think people started seeing the show as Three' Company without

Janet, Terri, Larry, and Mr. Furley-lol

Had it been setup as simply a continuation of Three's Company, it may have worked better...the new couple getting pop up visits from Larry (heck he could moved in next door and been the annoying next door neighbor), Mr. Furley, Janet. I think Robert Mandan's character was just too irritating--he should not have been a regular--maybe recurring at best.

Had it been setup as simply a continuation of Three's Company, it may have worked better...the new couple getting pop up visits from Larry (heck he could moved in next door and been the annoying next door neighbor), Mr. Furley, Janet. I think Robert Mandan's character was just too irritating--he should not have been a regular--maybe recurring at best.


It was a continuation but just focused primarily on Jack Tripper

Yeah I think people started seeing the show as Three' Company without

Janet, Terri, Larry, and Mr. Furley-lol

That's the bad thing about doing spin-offs. People will always compare it to the original. In most cases, that's not good, but a few have worked... actually several. But definitely not this show!

Andrea

Mary and John looked like they were both there just for the money those 22 episodes. It wasn't even any fun to watch. The story lines were just too dull, simple, and boring, which made it not seem like a Three's Company spinoff. It's no doubt The Ropers, centered on 2 people in their late 50's, was more exciting.

But, today, Three's a Crows would be the next hit comedy series. I mean, today, all sitcoms seem to be about the same storylines, such as as married people getting along with each other, so this would fit right in. If they could just get a great cast togehter, they could make this series a hit today.

You could NEVER do it without John Ritter. John played Jack Tripper perfectly and no actor on earth could duplicate that. That's why I don't see TAC being a hit today unless someone brought back John from the dead and made him in his 30s again! I guess he could even do it if were older but it would be kind of odd.

As far as ABC cancelling TAC for Diff'rent Strokes I could've sworn I read that they were willing to bring back TAC midseason or something for a half a season but John didn't want that?

And they definitely should've brough Felipe back for TAC. He was hilarious and sometimes even funnier than John like those great kitchen scenes with Felipe as the salad man.

It was a continuation but just focused primarily on Jack Tripper


Uh, thanks for that BRILLIANT observation, Sol. We know this. I was adding my viewpoint on what would have helped TAC.

BTW, what is with the constant changing of your username? :lol:

You could NEVER do it without John Ritter. John played Jack Tripper perfectly and no actor on earth could duplicate that. That's why I don't see TAC being a hit today unless someone brought back John from the dead and made him in his 30s again! I guess he could even do it if were older but it would be kind of odd.

As far as ABC cancelling TAC for Diff'rent Strokes I could've sworn I read that they were willing to bring back TAC midseason or something for a half a season but John didn't want that?

And they definitely should've brough Felipe back for TAC. He was hilarious and sometimes even funnier than John like those great kitchen scenes with Felipe as the salad man.


I agree, since he such a small role on Three's Company he would have made more sense to have Felip as the Chef instead of EZ

Uh, thanks for that BRILLIANT observation, Sol. We know this. I was adding my viewpoint on what would have helped TAC.

BTW, what is with the constant changing of your username? :lol:


I wanted to have a Sports Theme Username for a change-lol

oh well, I was tired of my old one as well :)

Felipe would have been the perfect sidekick to Jack in the bistro!

"What's wrong with the shicken? ok......you're gonna a kitchen full of shicken!"

:lol:

oh well, I was tired of my old one as well :)

Felipe would have been the perfect sidekick to Jack in the bistro!

"What's wrong with the shicken? ok......you're gonna a kitchen full of shicken!"

:lol:


Exactly, they should have took one small TC character on to TAC like Felipe or Larry

What I didn't like about Three's a Crowd was Vicky's father. I found him to be extremely annoying and not all that funny. Having Don Knotts continue on Three's a Crowd would have helped. If you recall the Three's Company episode "Impossible Dream" where Furley helps Jack in the kitchen and Larry sings...that was hilarious...Furley would have been a riot as Jack's kitchen helper. EZ was just stupid.

I don't think the show would have been any better if one of the roommates had been Jack's new girlfriend--especially Chrissy. That idea pitched by Suzanne's husband was CRAZY. It might have helped if Vicky was introduced to Three's Company viewers much earlier in the final season. It seemed too fast and not believable that Jack would fall in love and want to marry Vicky so quickly which of course was done just for the spin off series to begin.

The problem is the producers waited too long to spring the idea of the spinoff on the cast. It's no wonder Joyce and Priscilla were taken aback and felt disregarded. Had they began the season right off the back with "look guys, 3's Compnay is starting to show its age and we want to take the show in a new direction, so we will use this season to set this all up" it may have well played better. If Phillip had been introduced in say episode 2 or 3 and Vicky shortly thereafter, it certainly would have been more believable storyline wise.

The problem is the producers waited too long to spring the idea of the spinoff on the cast. It's no wonder Joyce and Priscilla were taken aback and felt disregarded. Had they began the season right off the back with "look guys, 3's Compnay is starting to show its age and we want to take the show in a new direction, so we will use this season to set this all up" it may have well played better. If Phillip had been introduced in say episode 2 or 3 and Vicky shortly thereafter, it certainly would have been more believable storyline wise.
I agree. I think the whole idea was poorly executed. Whatever happened to Mary Cadorette, anyway? :confused:

After Three's a Crowd, she did the movie "Stewardess School" (a ripoff of the Police Academy movies), then was on The Bradys as Valerie for one episode (where Peter breaks up with her). After that, she seemed to drift off into obscurity.

After Three's a Crowd, she did the movie "Stewardess School" (a ripoff of the Police Academy movies), then was on The Bradys as Valerie for one episode (where Peter breaks up with her). After that, she seemed to drift off into obscurity.
Thanks, Jude.

I was never a fan of Vicki on TAC, who would have been a better choice?

The problem is the producers waited too long to spring the idea of the spinoff on the cast. It's no wonder Joyce and Priscilla were taken aback and felt disregarded. Had they began the season right off the back with "look guys, 3's Compnay is starting to show its age and we want to take the show in a new direction, so we will use this season to set this all up" it may have well played better. If Phillip had been introduced in say episode 2 or 3 and Vicky shortly thereafter, it certainly would have been more believable storyline wise.

I agree, but I wish they got someone else besides Mary Cadorette to play Vicky. She wasn't that good.

Her Vicky was just too....uhmmmm......sanitized? a daddy's girl? And a too bit manipulative when it came to Jack.

I was never a fan of Vicki on TAC, who would have been a better choice?
Pam Dawber, maybe?

After Three's a Crowd, she did the movie "Stewardess School" (a ripoff of the Police Academy movies), then was on The Bradys as Valerie for one episode (where Peter breaks up with her). After that, she seemed to drift off into obscurity.
She was a regular on Night Court for a year too. I haven't seen her since.

What I didn't like about Three's a Crowd was Vicky's father. I found him to be extremely annoying and not all that funny. Having Don Knotts continue on Three's a Crowd would have helped. If you recall the Three's Company episode "Impossible Dream" where Furley helps Jack in the kitchen and Larry sings...that was hilarious...Furley would have been a riot as Jack's kitchen helper. EZ was just stupid.

I don't think the show would have been any better if one of the roommates had been Jack's new girlfriend--especially Chrissy. That idea pitched by Suzanne's husband was CRAZY. It might have helped if Vicky was introduced to Three's Company viewers much earlier in the final season. It seemed too fast and not believable that Jack would fall in love and want to marry Vicky so quickly which of course was done just for the spin off series to begin.
I always said they should have had Furley and Larry as Jack's roommates. That would have been a better 3's A Crowd. :lol:

I would've watched it!! :D

Hey, what about Gregory Sierra as Vicki's dad? :D

Hey, what about Gregory Sierra as Vicki's dad? :D
I think he would've been too young for the part. :lol: He DID play Gina's overprotective dad on Nurses back in the early 1990s. :lol:

How about Gregory Sierra as Jack's sous chef, then? :D

^ Great idea. :D He DID play a chef in The Golden Palace years later - his character was friends/rivals with Cheech Marin's. :lol:

I just received a DVD set of "Three's A Crowd" and have watched 16 of the 22 episodes. This show failed because it tried too hard to separate itself from the sitcom that spawned it, "Three's Company". I remember in the final episode of Three's Company, Jack told both Larry and Furley that he'd be living only a mile away from their old apartment. If that were indeed the case, then why copuldn't Larry and Furley make a few cameo appearances in "Three's A Crowd"? I understand that Larry did make an appearance in TAC very late in the show's run (sometime in the final season) but that was too little, too late. Perhaps the producers should have reached out to Suzanne Somers and asked that she come back to be a regular, in some way. By the time 1984 rolled around, I have to believe all the bad blood that was created back in the late 70s was water under the bridge. Somers (Crissy Snow) would have brought a lot of eyeballs to TAC, which might have boosted its ratings and kept it around for another season at least. I was 15 years old when TAC aired, and I remember abandoning it soon after it started because it wasn't as good as Three's Company. Watching it for the first time 25 years later has been entertaining. There were many quality "Jack Tripper Moments" that brought me to laughter, but the show was very repetitive and predictable. Each week you can expect: Jack and Vicki making out with Viki's father burtsing in and disapproving. They tried to weave some slap-stick comedy in but it just seemed too forced. If Anchor Bay really wanted this show to succeed, it should have worked in the characters of Ralph Furley and Larry Dallas from time to time (not in every show) as well as extend and olive branch to Somers and try to bring her back in some capacity. Maybe Crissy would've have made EZ Taylor more tolerable because Jack would have had to decipher two "stupid" people playing off each other. John Ritter was an extremely gifted actor, but he alone couldn't carry TAC. The supporting cast on Three's Company often times made the Jack Tripper character what he was. The Vicki Bradford character on TAC was just too "vanilla" and had no edge. I didn't dislike her; I just think after 8 years of great dialogue between Jack, Janet, Crissy, Cindy & Terry, Vicki was a HUGH let down.

In short, Anchor Bay should've done everything in its power to maintain the "lighting in a bottle" created by Three's Company, but they wanted instead to completely go in a different direction while maintaining the Jack Tripper character. Didn't work, however, I am glad that I have all 22 episodes of TAC on DVD and will continue to watch them on occasion.

Just my two cents.

I just received a DVD set of "Three's A Crowd" and have watched 16 of the 22 episodes. This show failed because it tried too hard to separate itself from the sitcom that spawned it, "Three's Company". I remember in the final episode of Three's Company, Jack told both Larry and Furley that he'd be living only a mile away from their old apartment. If that were indeed the case, then why copuldn't Larry and Furley make a few cameo appearances in "Three's A Crowd"? I understand that Larry did make an appearance in TAC very late in the show's run (sometime in the final season) but that was too little, too late. Perhaps the producers should have reached out to Suzanne Somers and asked that she come back to be a regular, in some way. By the time 1984 rolled around, I have to believe all the bad blood that was created back in the late 70s was water under the bridge. Somers (Crissy Snow) would have brought a lot of eyeballs to TAC, which might have boosted its ratings and kept it around for another season at least. I was 15 years old when TAC aired, and I remember abandoning it soon after it started because it wasn't as good as Three's Company. Watching it for the first time 25 years later has been entertaining. There were many quality "Jack Tripper Moments" that brought me to laughter, but the show was very repetitive and predictable. Each week you can expect: Jack and Vicki making out with Viki's father burtsing in and disapproving. They tried to weave some slap-stick comedy in but it just seemed too forced. If Anchor Bay really wanted this show to succeed, it should have worked in the characters of Ralph Furley and Larry Dallas from time to time (not in every show) as well as extend and olive branch to Somers and try to bring her back in some capacity. Maybe Crissy would've have made EZ Taylor more tolerable because Jack would have had to decipher two "stupid" people playing off each other. John Ritter was an extremely gifted actor, but he alone couldn't carry TAC. The supporting cast on Three's Company often times made the Jack Tripper character what he was. The Vicki Bradford characher was just too "vanilla" abd had no edge.

Just my two cents.


Jack was settled down which means that Larry would not have to be seen that much. He did make a guest appearance in one ep of THree's a Crowd. And yes they were trying to seperate the show from THree's company because it was a different situation. And why would Furley need to be seen when he was the landlord?

Jack was settled down which means that Larry would not have to be seen that much. He did make a guest appearance in one ep of THree's a Crowd. And yes they were trying to seperate the show from THree's company because it was a different situation. And why would Furley need to be seen when he was the landlord?

But just because Jack was "settled down" shouldn't mean he abandon his friends, especially his "best friend". I know Furley wasn't the landlord of the restaurant; James Bradford was, but an occasional appearance from Donn Knotts would have brought great comic relief. Knotts and Mandan could have had some quality comedic moments.

Again, I go back to what Ritter said in the final episode of Three's Company. He said that he'd "be living a mile away". Consequently, I feel that both Larry and Knotts should have been utilized more in TAC. Heck, I would go as far as saying that the Ropers could have made an appearance or two. Maybe Cindy Snow could have been inserted into a few episodes. Janet could have come back for a few episodes during the February, 1985 sweeps period complaining if marital issues and Ritter could have helped her work through those, all while bringing back the high-level of chemistry and dialogue enjoyed between the two on Three's Company. There's no reason why spin-offs should completely ween themselves from that hand that once fed them. TAC tried too hard to do just that out of the gate, not willing to take full advantage of the 8 years of momentum created by many of the supporting characters from Three's Company, and in the end it led to a short-lived existence. By no means am I saying that TAC would have gone on to enjoy nearly a decade on TV, but I strongly believe if it had chosen to insert some surprise guest cameo appearances from many of the former Three's Company characters it certainly would have lasted longer than 22 episodes.

But just because Jack was "settled down" shouldn't mean he abandon his friends, especially his "best friend". I know Furley wasn't the landlord of the restaurant; James Bradford was, but an occasional appearance from Donn Knotts would have brought great comic relief. Knotts and Mandan could have had some quality comedic moments.

Again, I go back to what Ritter said in the final episode of Three's Company. He said that he'd "be living a mile away". Consequently, I feel that both Larry and Knotts should have been utilized more in TAC. Heck, I would go as far as saying that the Ropers could have made an appearance or two. Maybe Cindy Snow could have been inserted into a few episodes. Janet could have come back for a few episodes during the February, 1985 sweeps period complaining if marital issues and Ritter could have helped her work through those, all while bringing back the high-level of chemistry and dialogue enjoyed between the two on Three's Company. There's no reason why spin-offs should completely ween themselves from that hand that once fed them. TAC tried too hard to do just that out of the gate, not willing to take full advantage of the 8 years of momentum created by many of the supporting characters from Three's Company, and in the end it led to a short-lived existence. By no means am I saying that TAC would have gone on to enjoy nearly a decade on TV, but I strongly believe if it had chosen to insert some surprise guest cameo appearances from many of the former Three's Company characters it certainly would have lasted longer than 22 episodes.

Yes, they should've brought back all the characters from 3's Company occasionally.

Furley could've actually bought part of the building from Bradford and they could've been CO-OWNERS!!

Janet could've had on and off again marriage trouble or maybe Phil got into some trouble and Jack needed his help and there would've been some crazy hijinks there!

Larry could've stopped by once in a while and temtped Jack to stray with other women and it would've been hilarious how Jack reacted to it.

Of course TAC should've gone on longer but wasn't there actually an offer for TAC to go on a half season longer or something but Jack refused it??

But just because Jack was "settled down" shouldn't mean he abandon his friends, especially his "best friend". I know Furley wasn't the landlord of the restaurant; James Bradford was, but an occasional appearance from Donn Knotts would have brought great comic relief. Knotts and Mandan could have had some quality comedic moments.

Again, I go back to what Ritter said in the final episode of Three's Company. He said that he'd "be living a mile away". Consequently, I feel that both Larry and Knotts should have been utilized more in TAC. Heck, I would go as far as saying that the Ropers could have made an appearance or two. Maybe Cindy Snow could have been inserted into a few episodes. Janet could have come back for a few episodes during the February, 1985 sweeps period complaining if marital issues and Ritter could have helped her work through those, all while bringing back the high-level of chemistry and dialogue enjoyed between the two on Three's Company. There's no reason why spin-offs should completely ween themselves from that hand that once fed them. TAC tried too hard to do just that out of the gate, not willing to take full advantage of the 8 years of momentum created by many of the supporting characters from Three's Company, and in the end it led to a short-lived existence. By no means am I saying that TAC would have gone on to enjoy nearly a decade on TV, but I strongly believe if it had chosen to insert some surprise guest cameo appearances from many of the former Three's Company characters it certainly would have lasted longer than 22 episodes.
I've always said that they should have spun off Jack, Larry and Furley into TAC and it would have been a better show. It just didn't make any sense that everyone was still in the same town and yet nobody but Larry ( on one occasion) made a guest appearance. That appearance BTW was the highest rated TAC episode so fans wanted to see the old gang. Richard Kline was offered a regular role when TAC was being developed but he turned it down because he was filming a pilot with Shelley Fabres on a show that wasn't picked up. CBS did air that pilot and I didn't think it was that bad. Maybe he would have appeared in more episodes if the show had continued. I understand why the producers wanted to seperate the show from TC. They wanted to go in a different direction. I think the weak link was Mary Cadorette. I never thought she was a good actress...very pretty though. Suzanne Somers was never an option. She actually asked the producers if she could be considered for the show and was turned down. There was too many hard feelings with her. I still thought TAC was a good show and watched it every week. Ratings were not that bad. There were times when it looked like the show would be picked up.

But just because Jack was "settled down" shouldn't mean he abandon his friends, especially his "best friend". I know Furley wasn't the landlord of the restaurant; James Bradford was, but an occasional appearance from Donn Knotts would have brought great comic relief. Knotts and Mandan could have had some quality comedic moments.

Again, I go back to what Ritter said in the final episode of Three's Company. He said that he'd "be living a mile away". Consequently, I feel that both Larry and Knotts should have been utilized more in TAC. Heck, I would go as far as saying that the Ropers could have made an appearance or two. Maybe Cindy Snow could have been inserted into a few episodes. Janet could have come back for a few episodes during the February, 1985 sweeps period complaining if marital issues and Ritter could have helped her work through those, all while bringing back the high-level of chemistry and dialogue enjoyed between the two on Three's Company. There's no reason why spin-offs should completely ween themselves from that hand that once fed them. TAC tried too hard to do just that out of the gate, not willing to take full advantage of the 8 years of momentum created by many of the supporting characters from Three's Company, and in the end it led to a short-lived existence. By no means am I saying that TAC would have gone on to enjoy nearly a decade on TV, but I strongly believe if it had chosen to insert some surprise guest cameo appearances from many of the former Three's Company characters it certainly would have lasted longer than 22 episodes.


Jack was no longer living downstairs from Larry and was in a committed relationship. So in that situation with Larry being a mile away knowing that Jack was in a relationship he would know that he wouldn't expect Jack to be with him as much because he was in a relationship. And since that was the case Larry should not have been seen no more than 3 times in a season. Furley maybe could have been seen coming into the Bistro since he was still ion the area but as far as the girls it would not have made sense for them to be seen since Janet was no longer in the area and married and Terri was living in Hawaii

So the only guest appearance that would have made since was Furley and Larry

I just received all 22 episodes on DVD a week or so ago and have watched 15 of them so far. There were several quality "Jack Tripper moments". So far, my favorite one "A Case of Sour Grapes" (episode 14) when Vicki asked Jack to "invest" her $1,900 bonus check. Jack spent it on a case of vintage wine, but early in the episode realized the wine was bad and needed a second job to recoup the money. He got hired at a Japanese restaurant where he tried to cook like a seasoned Japanese chef. The slapstick Ritter put forth near the tail end of that episode rivaled anything he did during the 8 years on TC!

The show felt like it operated on a very low budget and it never really got any traction. I will agree with an earlier poster that Mary Cadorette was not a great actress in that show. She was just too "vanilla".

I also wondered why the "Regal Begal" was never seen in TAC. I know the RB was a pub, and pubs are where single people usually hang out, but it would have been nice for Jack to pop in there from time to time. Perhaps he could have run into Larry or Furley there and created some funny dialogue.

I'm looking forward to watching the final 7 episodes. I never watched TAC when it came on 26 years ago so it's very enjoyable for me to complete the storyline of the Jack Tripper character.

I just received all 22 episodes on DVD a week or so ago and have watched 15 of them so far. There were several quality "Jack Tripper moments". So far, my favorite one "A Case of Sour Grapes" (episode 14) when Vicki asked Jack to "invest" her $1,900 bonus check. Jack spent it on a case of vintage wine, but early in the episode realized the wine was bad and needed a second job to recoup the money. He got hired at a Japanese restaurant where he tried to cook like a seasoned Japanese chef. The slapstick Ritter put forth near the tail end of that episode rivaled anything he did during the 8 years on TC!

The show felt like it operated on a very low budget and it never really got any traction. I will agree with an earlier poster that Mary Cadorette was not a great actress in that show. She was just too "vanilla".

I also wondered why the "Regal Begal" was never seen in TAC. I know the RB was a pub, and pubs are where single people usually hang out, but it would have been nice for Jack to pop in there from time to time. Perhaps he could have run into Larry or Furley there and created some funny dialogue.

I'm looking forward to watching the final 7 episodes. I never watched TAC when it came on 26 years ago so it's very enjoyable for me to complete the storyline of the Jack Tripper character.


The Reagle Beagle was slowly phased out on THree's Compsny in Early season 8 so you know it would never be seen on TAC.

The Reagle Beagle was slowly phased out on THree's Compsny in Early season 8 so you know it would never be seen on TAC.

But they could've brought it back for TAC if they wanted to. The bottom line is the Jack Tripper character is the funniest sitcom character EVER and they should've kept him alive as long as possible.

TAC should've lasted at least a couple seasons so we'd have more classic Tripper moments. I agree Mary was not the best actress but she was doable since Ritter was always the main focus even on TC since the show revolved around him.

I thinki 3s A Crowd woul;d have worked if ake Fell in love with Janet
That would have been rediculous! I mean they lived together for 8 years! Then all of a sudden they fall in love, not realistic!

That would have been rediculous! I mean they lived together for 8 years! Then all of a sudden they fall in love, not realistic!

Of course it's realistic. When 2 people live together long enough they can fall in love. It's VERY realistic.

Richard Kline was a fool to turn down 3's a Crowd. He had caught lightning in a bottle and he himself said it was the best TV job anyone coul ask for. 3's Company that is and he had a golden opportunity to continue that.

If Larry was on TAC I bet it would've lasted AT LEAST 2 seasons.

But wouldn't that have still been Three' Company?
Although you do have a good point TVFF. I have to say that I disagree. The idea of 3s company was 2 girls and 1 guy living together. If Jack and Janet had fell in love and say it was janets dad that was the probelm, then it still could have been 3s a crowd. Even if it were just Jack and Janet living together in the apartment over the Bistro, then it still would have ceased to become 3s company.

I thinki 3s A Crowd woul;d have worked if ake Fell in love with Janet

YES!!

That's what they should've done! But they should've had Robert Mandan as Janet's father. I know someone else played Janet's father on TC but they use new actors all the time for parts so it's no big deal.

Although you do have a good point TVFF. I have to say that I disagree. The idea of 3s company was 2 girls and 1 guy living together. If Jack and Janet had fell in love and say it was janets dad that was the probelm, then it still could have been 3s a crowd. Even if it were just Jack and Janet living together in the apartment over the Bistro, then it still would have ceased to become 3s company.


i think you guys have it all wrong.

what all of you are missing was that not Janet or Chrissy woulda been a good storyline....but Terri.

the Threes a Crowd show shoulda been made with Terri as Jacks love interest. Priscilla Barnes was hot, likeable, was a good actress, and hers and Jacks relationship had started off strained in the beginning and woulda made for a nice storyline going forward.

I think it would have been very realistic for Jack and Janet to realize they had feelings for each other, especially in light of Janet's wedding in the last episode of Three's Company serving as the perfect launching pad for this revelation...

As for the brother/sister comments I always see people cling to, I'm just not buying it. Jack was always finding new ways to kiss Janet or find a way into Janet's bed, etc. Granted, he was joking, but if she had played along, he wouldn't have turned her down.

That said, while I think Janet would have been my first choice as the co-star of the spinoff, I think it would have worked with any of the blond roommates as well...but I think Janet had the BEST chemistry with him.

I think it would have been very realistic for Jack and Janet to realize they had feelings for each other, especially in light of Janet's wedding in the last episode of Three's Company serving as the perfect launching pad for this revelation...

As for the brother/sister comments I always see people cling to, I'm just not buying it. Jack was always finding new ways to kiss Janet or find a way into Janet's bed, etc. Granted, he was joking, but if she had played along, he wouldn't have turned her down.

That said, while I think Janet would have been my first choice as the co-star of the spinoff, I think it would have worked with any of the blond roommates as well...but I think Janet had the BEST chemistry with him.


If janet was on there it still would have been three's company

I think it would have been very realistic for Jack and Janet to realize they had feelings for each other, especially in light of Janet's wedding in the last episode of Three's Company serving as the perfect launching pad for this revelation...

As for the brother/sister comments I always see people cling to, I'm just not buying it. Jack was always finding new ways to kiss Janet or find a way into Janet's bed, etc. Granted, he was joking, but if she had played along, he wouldn't have turned her down.

That said, while I think Janet would have been my first choice as the co-star of the spinoff, I think it would have worked with any of the blond roommates as well...but I think Janet had the BEST chemistry with him.
He did that with all the roommates. Of all the dates that Janet went on, I never saw one episode where Jack was truly jealous. He loved her but as a sister.

If janet was on there it still would have been three's company
The show wouldn't have worked. Ratings were falling with Janet. They needed something different.

But wouldn't that have still been Three' Company?
I don't think it would have been. Threes company was about 2 girls and a guy. If you eliminate one of the girls and have the other fall for the guy, then it's somethong else. Janet's father could have been brought into the story and it still could have been Threes a crowd. I don't think Joyce would have been apposed to the idea of her character being with Jack. And BTW, Jack and Janet falling in love would have been different. I think viewers would have bought it.

it was too much revamping ,too much change,people didn't accept vicky too much history with the old cast.its rare that you spin off a member of a cast in a different situation and it works. Joannie loves Chachi bombed,Joey bombed, After Mash bombed the only series that spun off well this way that i can think of was FRASIER .People just like there old friends and when there old friends play with new friends people lose intreats.Three's a Crowd was domed from the starting gate.

Three's a Crowd wasn't really a spinoff just a continuation of the original series under a different name with the same main character.

Yeah I love Jack's reaction to his WACKINESS-lol Plus that was my first time seeing Jack around a WEIRD Male character, only weird female characters like Chrissy and Cindy

You don't think Ralph Furley was weird?

You don't think Ralph Furley was weird?


He was weird but nothing like EZ

It would have still been three's company so NO. The point of Three's a crowd was to surround jack with different characters

Part of the problem with Three's a Crowd is that the show did NOT surround Jack with different characters, but stuck him with the same 3 characters every day, non-stop: his live-in girlfriend whom he lacked physical & comedic chemistry, her relentlessly insulting father and that surfer dude who moves and talks like he's in a martini shaker for some mysterious reason lol.

Part of the problem with Three's a Crowd is that the show did NOT surround Jack with different characters, but stuck him with the same 3 characters every day, non-stop: his live-in girlfriend whom he lacked physical & comedic chemistry, her relentlessly insulting father and that surfer dude who moves and talks like he's in a martini shaker for some mysterious reason lol.

True but he can't be dating girls you know? What other characters can they bring in each and every episode?

Part of the problem with Three's a Crowd is that the show did NOT surround Jack with different characters, but stuck him with the same 3 characters every day, non-stop: his live-in girlfriend whom he lacked physical & comedic chemistry, her relentlessly insulting father and that surfer dude who moves and talks like he's in a martini shaker for some mysterious reason lol.


Now that's a good point, you never really saw any guest stars

Now that's a good point, you never really saw any guest stars

They just showed that fat tree hugger neighbor plus 2 different EZ girlfriends! Are you guys visually impaired or something?? LOL

They just showed that fat tree hugger neighbor plus 2 different EZ girlfriends! Are you guys visually impaired or something?? LOL


Yeah but they were not part of the storyline. On Three's Company a guest star would be part of the storyline like

Jack's Dad
Janet's Mom
Chrissy's Mom

They just showed that fat tree hugger neighbor plus 2 different EZ girlfriends! Are you guys visually impaired or something?? LOL

You say that as if it were a significant contribution of some kind to the show, or it's story. They play such keystone, pivotal roles, you even remember their names...oh wait that's right, they have not, and you didn't. Are you mentally impaired or something?

You say that as if it were a significant contribution of some kind to the show, or it's story. They play such keystone, pivotal roles, you even remember their names...oh wait that's right, they have not, and you didn't. Are you mentally impaired or something?

He said you never really saw any guest stars so I was just correcting him. There were guest stars.

What you guys are saying is they didn't use them properly.

Hi I'm a long time viewer, first time poster,
After watching the final episode of threes company, I can say I already didnt like premise of threes a crowd, or at least some of the characters or lack thereof. For example the father was a character you'd just hate not love to hate. I didnt really like what he brought to the show at all. One thing that would have cool instead of having the father buy the restaurant from Angelino, have Mr.Roper buy it. Then we would have the familiar characters of the Ropers again. With that said they could change the premise a little so it would almost parody threes company. for example the ropers buy the building and Mr. roper doesnt want a man and a woman living together who are not married, so Jack and Vicki pretend to be married or something alongs those lines. My next suggestion make Larry a cast member. He could be a waiter at jacks bistro or something.

Hi I'm a long time viewer, first time poster,
After watching the final episode of threes company, I can say I already didnt like premise of threes a crowd, or at least some of the characters or lack thereof. For example the father was a character you'd just hate not love to hate. I didnt really like what he brought to the show at all. One thing that would have cool instead of having the father buy the restaurant from Angelino, have Mr.Roper buy it. Then we would have the familiar characters of the Ropers again. With that said they could change the premise a little so it would almost parody threes company. for example the ropers buy the building and Mr. roper doesnt want a man and a woman living together who are not married, so Jack and Vicki pretend to be married or something alongs those lines. My next suggestion make Larry a cast member. He could be a waiter at jacks bistro or something.


The point of Three's a crowd was for Jack to be in a NEW SITUATION so there was not going to be any other TC characters on the show. I do feel they could have atleast have FELIPE be the chef at the Bistro since he was a minor character on TC

YES!!

That's what they should've done! But they should've had Robert Mandan as Janet's father. I know someone else played Janet's father on TC but they use new actors all the time for parts so it's no big deal.
I think it was in the E! True Hollywood Story about TC that John Ritter mentions that having Jack go off and live as a couple with Janet, Chrissy or Teri wouldn't have worked for the premise of Three's A Crowd because during TC's run the audience already had seen the girls fathers (eg, Reverend Snow, etc.) that there was no conflict for TAC which was the point.

I think it was in the E! True Hollywood Story about TC that John Ritter mentions that having Jack go off and live as a couple with Janet, Chrissy or Teri wouldn't have worked for the premise of Three's A Crowd because during TC's run the audience already had seen the girls fathers (eg, Reverend Snow, etc.) that there was no conflict for TAC which was the point.


But that would have just been season 9 of Three's Company instead of a new show