I'm sure this topic has been done before, but it's fun to revisit. How would you have liked to see Three's Company end? Jack and Janet together? Jack getting married?

I think it would've been interesting to see Bart sell the building, causing everyone to leave. No forced/rushed weddings or relationships, just a natural end.

I know it's all make-believe, but it's weird to think of other people living in the apartment. Feels right to retire the building with the trio.

things did end kind of sad for Mr. Furley, no more trio for him or him to visit

Yeah, and Larry was on his own, too. I like to think he became even more of a ladies man to fill the void, lol.

Maybe he and Furley should have become roomies....now that would be funny.

I still hate that Terri was the last one to leave the APT lol

I still hate that Terri was the last one to leave the APT lol
What? She shouldn't have been. I'm going to have to buy the DVDs pretty soon.

What? She shouldn't have been. I'm going to have to buy the DVDs pretty soon.


Should have been Janet, she lived their the longest

Whatever happened to last one in, first one out??

Yeah the idea of Jack and Janet meeting their respective partners out of the blue just felt rushed and it also caused poor Teri to move out since she would no longer be able to pay the rent.


I think it would've been interesting to see Bart sell the building, causing everyone to leave. No forced/rushed weddings or relationships, just a natural end.
This sounds like an interesting idea but many sitcoms back then stayed with tradition in making tear jerker finales, I would've found it hilarious if instead the building was getting demolished leaving the ending rather ambiguous, would the trio stay together, or how would Furley handle the thought of his own conniving brother demoishing the building?

I picture the last scene of the trio all covered in dust sitting on their broken down couch and then fade to black, you know kind of like how the finale of Seinfeld did.

Interesting idea for the ending.

Former characters should have been brought back.
The Ropers and even Cindy. I understand that with all the happened backstage, Chrissy couldn't have been brought back.

The irony of Janet's rushed wedding is a few years earlier there was an episode where her parent's thought she was married, so Janet and Jack pretended to be married. Yet, her parents were not brought back when Janet did get married.

The irony of Janet's rushed wedding is a few years earlier there was an episode where her parent's thought she was married, so Janet and Jack pretended to be married. Yet, her parents were not brought back when Janet did get married.
In the finale 'Friends & Lovers' it's mentioned that Janet's parents couldn't make it to the wedding which is why Jack is giving the bride away, a sneaky way not having to pay for the respective actors to come back maybe.

In the finale 'Friends & Lovers' it's mentioned that Janet's parents couldn't make it to the wedding which is why Jack is giving the bride away, a sneaky way not having to pay for the respective actors to come back maybe.
The strange thing is that Janet's father guest starred on the show earlier that season.

In the finale 'Friends & Lovers' it's mentioned that Janet's parents couldn't make it to the wedding which is why Jack is giving the bride away, a sneaky way not having to pay for the respective actors to come back maybe.

$$$ is definitely a part of it.
Another reason is Janet's wedding was an afterthought anyway.
I feel the producers felt like they had to do give some closure for Janet, so they rushed a wedding for her.

$$$ is definitely a part of it.
Another reason is Janet's wedding was an afterthought anyway.
I feel the producers felt like they had to do give some closure for Janet, so they rushed a wedding for her.
All they really cared about was TAC. They even made us wait until September until they aired the final episode.

I would have liked to seen Mr. Angelino selling Mr. Bradford the building lol

Here is a list of people who should have been at the wedding:

Mr. and Mrs. Roper
Chrissy
Cindy
Janet's parents and sister Jenny (and I think she had mentioned a brother?)
Eleanor

Chrissy's father should have officiated....that would've been fun.

I also would have liked to have seen Lana and Mr Angelino there as well.

All they really cared about was TAC. They even made us wait until September until they aired the final episode.
Yeah I remember back than having to wait all summer long after the 7th season finale. I can even remember there was a 2-page spread in the TV Guide for that week of the finale, the funniest thing about that spread was Janet in a wedding gown, it was just a promotional pic of Joyce DeWitt's head pasted on another woman wearing a gown.

Now with the advent of the internet and spoilers you couldn't keep anything secret, the episode would've leaked online.

Here is a list of people who should have been at the wedding:

Mr. and Mrs. Roper
Chrissy
Cindy
Janet's parents and sister Jenny (and I think she had mentioned a brother?)
Eleanor

Chrissy's father should have officiated....that would've been fun.


It was no way Chrissy could have been there if the actress playing her was fired

Believe it or not, TVFactFan, in make-believe worlds anything can happen.

Am I the only one who would have rather seen a spin-off with Janet and Phil?

You may be in the minority....the Janet and Phil show would have had the same problem TAC had---no strong ensemble cast. I think the magic of Three's Company was in the trio plus landlord. When they go off on their own, it's fun to see them lead their own lives, but it's just not as funny or engaging. Jack was considered the "main" character and even he couldn't make a spinoff work. The chemistry and versatility of the platonic trio is the secret.

Am I the only one who would have rather seen a spin-off with Janet and Phil?


That would have been a spinoff, TAC was a continuation not a spinoff


So you like Janet better than Jack? lol

I always thought Phil was a stiff. lol

I always thought Phil was a stiff. lol


He reminded me of Dan Patrick from ESPN:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

They should have had a spin-off and ditched the TAC concept altogether. Maybe Phil and Janet move to a new town and they get a new, goofy cast of supporting characters. It worked for Frasier, Rhoda and Lou Grant. Janet's character towards the end was much more peppery than the early seasons in which she was the straight man. I think Phil could be her straight man.


The TAC premise certainly wouldn't make sense with Janet's character.

They should have had a spin-off and ditched the TAC concept altogether. Maybe Phil and Janet move to a new town and they get a new, goofy cast of supporting characters. It worked for Frasier, Rhoda and Lou Grant.

Three's Company just wasn't meant to spin off into something like Frasier, Rhoda, or Lou Grant.

I love Three's Company but it's a different kind of comedy from the above mentioned shows. The genius of Three's Company was in the performance of the actors rather than in the strength of the writing if you ask me. The above mentioned shows had more clever writing.

What I mean is I don't think it would have fit the tone of the series to turn a Three's Company spinoff into something like Mary Tyler Moore. It would have repelled the people that were drawn to Three's Company in the first place, and the people that thought 3's was dumb in the first place wouldn't have tuned in to the spinoff.