I know of 2 instances when a supporting character became more popular than the star and the star then got them booted off the show.

One was Alice where Polly Holliday was booted for upstaging Linda Lavin and the other was 227 where Jackee was booted for upstaging Marla Gibbs.

Were there any more times this has happened?

Definitely Flo on “Alice”.

This could be an interesting thread. I don't remember a thread like this here before.

Would Vivian Vance on The Lucy Show count? Some say yes, some say no.

Probably more drama tv shows than sitcoms when it comes to this subject matter.

I know of 2 instances when a supporting character became more popular than the star and the star then got them booted off the show.

One was Alice where Polly Holliday was booted for upstaging Linda Lavin and the other was 227 where Jackee was booted for upstaging Marla Gibbs.

Were there any more times this has happened?

I would definitely say Diane Ladd (as Belle) would fall under this same category, even more so than Polly. The producers liked Polly enough to give her a starring role spin-off. Those same producers gave Diane the shaft, both for the same reason...Linda Lavin's insecurity and ego.

]mary lousie wilson as ginny on one day at a time. she only lasted a season
glenn scarpelli as alex on one day a time. he didn't do the last seasson\
jason bateman on silver spoons left after either the 2nd or 3 rd season/

I would definitely say Diane Ladd (as Belle) would fall under this same category, even more so than Polly. The producers liked Polly enough to give her a starring role spin-off. Those same producers gave Diane the shaft, both for the same reason...Linda Lavin's insecurity and ego.

I had no idea the same thing happened again with Dianne Ladd. I just thought she left because the Belle character didn't click with audiences. So Lavin got her booted too? Wow, sounds like she was unpleasant to work with.

I can't think of any other instances where this happens...your right, probably more so in drama shows than sitcoms.

As for Vivian Vance, I believe there was a time where her relationship with Lucille Ball was strained and that's why she left The Lucy Show. It's nice they eventually did make up and she guested on Here's Lucy later on.

jaleel white as steve urkel on family matters
mary lousie wilson as ginny on one day at a time. she only lasted a season
glenn scarpelli as alex on one day a time. he didn't do the last seasson\
jason bateman on silver spoons left after either the 2nd or 3 rd season/

Yes Ginny! I read about that one and forgot. Bonnie Franklin didn't like the attention she was getting and upstaging her so she got her the boot.

I didn't know about the others though. Interesting about Glenn Scarpelli and Jason Bateman. I found both those characters annoying and was glad when they left.

But like Polly Holiday, Jason Bateman immediately was given a series of his own in It's Your Move. Another good show that lasted only one season and disappeared. I'm starting to sense a pattern here.

I would definitely say Diane Ladd (as Belle) would fall under this same category, even more so than Polly. The producers liked Polly enough to give her a starring role spin-off. Those same producers gave Diane the shaft, both for the same reason...Linda Lavin's insecurity and ego.

I do not recall reading anything good about Linda Lavin from those who worked with her. She had the idea she was some superstar since the show was named after her character but she was not even likeable on the show. It would have been better to give Linda the boot and keep Polly.

]mary lousie wilson as ginny on one day at a time. she only lasted a season
glenn scarpelli as alex on one day a time. he didn't do the last seasson\
jason bateman on silver spoons left after either the 2nd or 3 rd season/

Glen Scarpelli? It have never heard anything about this, but it could be true? I cannot imagine the character of Alex or the actor upstaging anyone on ODAAT. He was a minor character, wasn't he? I do not remember him being overly popular or that important to the show.

Glen Scarpelli? It have never heard anything about this, but it could be true? I cannot imagine the character of Alex or the actor upstaging anyone on ODAAT. He was a minor character, wasn't he? I do not remember him being overly popular or that important to the show.
He left ODAAT to star in Jennifer Slept Here on NBC that season.

I do not recall reading anything good about Linda Lavin from those who worked with her. She had the idea she was some superstar since the show was named after her character but she was not even likeable on the show. It would have been better to give Linda the boot and keep Polly.

True, however, it probably would have gone just as well when Valerie Harper was booted off The Hogan Family.

I do not recall reading anything good about Linda Lavin from those who worked with her. She had the idea she was some superstar since the show was named after her character but she was not even likeable on the show. It would have been better to give Linda the boot and keep Polly.

Definitely, Lavin was notorious for being vain and difficult to work with. She insisted on singing the theme song, even though she clearly did not have much of a voice. Polly Holliday was getting the big laughs, and she had to go.

Same for Mary Louise Wilson on "One Day". Bonnie Franklin complained she was getting bigger laughs than her, so bye bye Mary Louise.

As for Vivian Vance/Lucille Ball, her reason for leaving after the third season of The Lucy Show was simply due to having to fly back in forth each week to film the show. She lived with her new husband in Connecticut and had no interest in living in L.A. anymore. Her relationship with Ball was fine and had nothing to do with her decision to quit the show. And of course, she made annual visits to The Lucy Show (and later Here's Lucy), so there were certainly no hard feelings on Lucy's part.

I think the Ropers (Norman Fell and Audra Lindley) were moved from Three's Company because John Ritter wanted that show to revolve around his character. I believe he also wanted Suzanne Somers off the show for the same reason.

I think the Ropers (Norman Fell and Audra Lindley) were moved from Three's Company because John Ritter wanted that show to revolve around his character. I believe he also wanted Suzanne Somers off the show for the same reason.

What makes you believe that John wanted these cast members off the show? I have never heard anyone or even John make statements about wanting certain cast members off the show for his own benefit.

When the Roper's left the show, Three's Company did not revolve around Jack any more or less that I noticed. Suzanne was off the show due to her own making, she really disrupted the show.

John Ritter did not want the Ropers removed from the show. The show was a big hit, and the producers chose to follow the blueprint of the British original, where the landlords also got their own spinoff. Later on, they continued to follow the pattern of the original, with the male lead getting his own spinoff series where he moved in with a new girlfriend above a restaurant he ran.

As for Suzanne Somers: virtually the entire cast and crew wanted her gone after her antics at the beginning of the 1980-81 season.

What makes you believe that John wanted these cast members off the show? I have never heard anyone or even John make statements about wanting certain cast members off the show for his own benefit.

When the Roper's left the show, Three's Company did not revolve around Jack any more or less that I noticed. Suzanne was off the show due to her own making, she really disrupted the show.

Three's Company went through quite a few changes during the eight seasons (actually the first season was a quarter of a season), all the changes had one thing in common, they all benefited John Ritter and no one else. Let's look at them:

Stanley (Norman Fell) and Helen (Audra Lindley) Roper were breakout characters on Three's Company, they were removed from the show moving on to there own series. Fell (I don't know about Lindley) requested a stipulation in his contract to return to Three's Company should the spin off fail, he was turned down. While uncommon there were examples of unsuccessful spin offs where the character(s) placed in the new series came back to the original series, the character of Lisa Hughes was returned to the World Turns after Our Private World failed, the character of Grady was returned to Sanford and Son after Grady failed, Florence returned to The Jeffersons after Checking In failed. Fell was concerned about the viability of The Ropers (and as it turned out with good reason).


Suzanne Somers and her husband have managed her career brilliantly and they saw what was happening on Three's Company. It was about salary, but it was also about the direction the series was taking. The 70's was an era where talent could be a bit disruptive, Carroll O'Connor, Redd Foxx, Demon Wilson, Esther Rolle just to name a few had issues with the production company they were working for the issues were resolved. In this case the issues weren't resolved, and Chrissy was a breakout character disappears.

Jenilee Harrison briefly replaces Suzanne, and I thought did a very good job, mysteriously her character is moved to the side and becomes a minor character.

Priscilla Barnes is brought in but rather than developing a new distinctive character for her she was conscripted to playing a blond Janet.

It's pretty clear Ritter wanted one star, look at the next series (Three's A Crowd) ,a strong female lead was a must for that series and look who gets cast, Mary Cadorette, a competent actress but ill-suited for this major role.

Three's Company went through quite a few changes during the eight seasons (actually the first season was a quarter of a season), all the changes had one thing in common, they all benefited John Ritter and no one else. Let's look at them:

Stanley (Norman Fell) and Helen (Audra Lindley) Roper were breakout characters on Three's Company, they were removed from the show moving on to there own series. Fell (I don't know about Lindley) requested a stipulation in his contract to return to Three's Company should the spin off fail, he was turned down. While uncommon there were examples of unsuccessful spin offs where the character(s) placed in the new series came back to the original series, the character of Lisa Hughes was returned to the World Turns after Our Private World failed, the character of Grady was returned to Sanford and Son after Grady failed, Florence returned to The Jeffersons after Checking In failed. Fell was concerned about the viability of The Ropers (and as it turned out with good reason).


Suzanne Somers and her husband have managed her career brilliantly and they saw what was happening on Three's Company. It was about salary, but it was also about the direction the series was taking. The 70's was an era where talent could be a bit disruptive, Carroll O'Connor, Redd Foxx, Demon Wilson, Esther Rolle just to name a few had issues with the production company they were working for the issues were resolved. In this case the issues weren't resolved, and Chrissy was a breakout character disappears.

Jenilee Harrison briefly replaces Suzanne, and I thought did a very good job, mysteriously her character is moved to the side and becomes a minor character.

Priscilla Barnes is brought in but rather than developing a new distinctive character for her she was conscripted to playing a blond Janet.

It's pretty clear Ritter wanted one star, look at the next series (Three's A Crowd) ,a strong female lead was a must for that series and look who gets cast, Mary Cadorette, a competent actress but ill-suited for this major role.

Suzanne Somers solely wanted more money on the misguided belief that the sole reason people were watching was because of her perceived fanservice, and actually forced some of the crew members to shoot her scenes after hours when pretty much everyone else had gone home for the day, just because it was so awkward for her to be even in the same room with John Ritter and Joyce DeWitt. As for Norman Fell and Audra Lindley, the reason why they didn't return was that Don Knotts had done such a terrific job replacing them, that the producers did not want to "rock the boat."

Suzanne Somers solely wanted more money on the misguided belief that the sole reason people were watching was because of her perceived fanservice, and actually forced some of the crew members to shoot her scenes after hours when pretty much everyone else had gone home for the day, just because it was so awkward for her to be even in the same room with John Ritter and Joyce DeWitt. As for Norman Fell and Audra Lindley, the reason why they didn't return was that Don Knotts had done such a terrific job replacing them, that the producers did not want to "rock the boat."

You're wrong. Fell requested the return stipulation be placed in his contract prior to The Ropers, the production company refused. Knotts was a pro, I'm not questioning that, but his best years were behind him, he wanted a steady paycheck and he knew how to survive without stepping on toes. His character never had the impact The Ropers had.

With respect to Somers, it was the production company that made the decision on shooting her separate from the rest of the cast. Somers career was brilliantly managed, she want star dollars (so did Ritter) but she also wanted to sure the show didn't go from Three's Company to Jack and Company.

I always thought that Norman Fell had a stipulation that he could return to Three's Company if The Ropers only lasted a season or less and that the producers wouldn't let him and Audra Lindley back on Three's Company because The Ropers lasted for just a little longer than a full season.

I always thought that Norman Fell had a stipulation that he could return to Three's Company if The Ropers only lasted a season or less and that the producers wouldn't let him and Audra Lindley back on Three's Company because The Ropers lasted for just a little longer than a full season.

This is what Norman Fell and Audra Lindley have always stated before their deaths, so I tend to believe this. I also think glickmam is spot on with his assessment on the situation.

John Ritter did not want the Ropers removed from the show. The show was a big hit, and the producers chose to follow the blueprint of the British original, where the landlords also got their own spinoff. Later on, they continued to follow the pattern of the original, with the male lead getting his own spinoff series where he moved in with a new girlfriend above a restaurant he ran.

As for Suzanne Somers: virtually the entire cast and crew wanted her gone after her antics at the beginning of the 1980-81 season.

With respect to the British blueprint, the landlord series was only developed after the orginal series (Man About The House) had concluded its run.


With respect to Somers (and consistent with the topic of this thread), Ritter wanted to be the star of Three's Company everything that happened around that series benefited him and no one else, the issues with Somers could have been worked out and they weren't, and that is no accident.

This is what Norman Fell and Audra Lindley have always stated before their deaths, so I tend to believe this. I also think glickmam is spot on with his assessment on the situation.

I guess we're going to have to agree to disagree here. I don't know about Lindley, but Fell clearly felt he was railroaded off the series. You take a look at everything else that happened (as I noted above), all to benefit of one party, the bitterness after the series ended, but before Ritter in death achieved icon status, and I think it's clear what went on behind the scenes. As I said everyone is entitled to their opinion.

With respect to Somers (and consistent with the topic of this thread), Ritter wanted to be the star of Three's Company everything that happened around that series benefited him and no one else, the issues with Somers could have been worked out and they weren't, and that is no accident.


If this is true, it's disheartening to know. I always liked Ritter and to learn he was like that with regard to the show is a bitter pill to swallow. To me Three's Company was an ensemble cast where all 3 original room-mates were on equal standing in my eyes.

When I watched as a kid in the 70's, I never thought one person was the "star", but all 3 of them were. Hence the title, "Three's Company" which refers to all 3 of them.

It's possible that Ritter & Somers were both divas with star complexes and clashed with Somers eventually getting the boot.

If only all 3 of them would have banded together in solidarity like the "Friends" cast did 2 decades later, things would probably have been different. Those actors on "Friends" had the right attitude where they all perceived each other to be on equal footing with no one pulling the star diva act.

And I think it would have been a better show had they reconciled their issues and Somers stayed for the full 8 seasons. When she left, the show lost some of it's luster and I only enjoy watching the Somers seasons now on Antenna TV.

If this is true, it's disheartening to know. I always liked Ritter and to learn he was like that with regard to the show is a bitter pill to swallow. To me Three's Company was an ensemble cast where all 3 original room-mates were on equal standing in my eyes.

When I watched as a kid in the 70's, I never thought one person was the "star", but all 3 of them were. Hence the title, "Three's Company" which refers to all 3 of them.

It's possible that Ritter & Somers were both divas with star complexes and clashed with Somers eventually getting the boot.

If only all 3 of them would have banded together in solidarity like the "Friends" cast did 2 decades later, things would probably have been different. Those actors on "Friends" had the right attitude where they all perceived each other to be on equal footing with no one pulling the star diva act.

And I think it would have been a better show had they reconciled their issues and Somers stayed for the full 8 seasons. When she left, the show lost some of it's luster and I only enjoy watching the Somers seasons now on Antenna TV.

Good comments. I agree the show was a favorite of mine during the Somers years but after she left the show really went downhill. This is no criticism of either Harrison or Barnes both were talented actresses who were not given the opportunity to develop their characters. Joyce DeWitt was hurt by the fact that the Terri Alden character was too similar to the Janet Wood character.

With respect to the British blueprint, the landlord series was only developed after the orginal series (Man About The House) had concluded its run.


With respect to Somers (and consistent with the topic of this thread), Ritter wanted to be the star of Three's Company everything that happened around that series benefited him and no one else, the issues with Somers could have been worked out and they weren't, and that is no accident.


Ritter was ALWAYS and already considered the star of the show. He was paid more than the other cast members. I do not see how the chain of events of the cast members changing benefited Ritter in any way with his star status

On top of Suzanne Somer's demands for a HUGE salary increase, she failed to show up for work one to many times and that was it. ABC finally said enough also!

richie cunningham form happy days
richie cunningham brother form happy days
brandon form step by step
judy form family matters

The "Alice" comments reminded me of how the same thing might have happened with Lisa Bonet of "The Cosby Show". She was given her own spinoff "A Different World", which was great for the one season she was on it with Marisa Tomei, who I simply adored, but then she was fired after that one season and didn't return to "Cosby" for a long time. Both series went downhill after that year.

The "Alice" comments reminded me of how the same thing might have happened with Lisa Bonet of "The Cosby Show". She was given her own spinoff "A Different World", which was great for the one season she was on it with Marisa Tomei, who I simply adored, but then she was fired after that one season and didn't return to "Cosby" for a long time. Both series went downhill after that year.

Bonet was written off A Different World because she was pregnant with her and husband Lenny Kravitz's child. Also, A Different World lasted for six seasons and became more critically acclaimed when Bonet left, so I hardly say it went downhill.

With respect to the British blueprint, the landlord series was only developed after the orginal series (Man About The House) had concluded its run.
TC was as huge hit. The American producers weren’t going to wait until the show ended to try to develop a spinoff.

With respect to Somers (and consistent with the topic of this thread), Ritter wanted to be the star of Three's Company everything that happened around that series benefited him and no one else, the issues with Somers could have been worked out and they weren't, and that is no accident.

That contradicts everything I’ve read about the show and about Ritter. The producers were the driving force behind that show. The Chris Mann “Come and Knock on Our Door” book is meticulously researched, and has quotes from cast about how the producers were the parents, and the actors were treated like children. Yes, things could have been worked out with Suzanne at the end and she basically capitulated. But the producers wanted to punish her. Suzanne tells a story of her final encounter with Michael Ross, and it leaves no doubt about who was in charge and made the decision about her departure.

Bonet was written off A Different World because she was pregnant with her and husband Lenny Kravitz's child. Also, A Different World lasted for six seasons and became more critically acclaimed when Bonet left, so I hardly say it went downhill.

Exactly. Lisa Bonet's character was written out of A Different World because the character of Denise was single (not in any kind of relationship) and Bill Cosby wasn't happy Lisa Bonet got pregnant and didn't want the character of Denise on the show being a single pregnant woman. The character of Denise wasn't brought back to The Cosby Show right away because Bill Cosby and Lisa Bonet never really got along anyways. Of course knowing what we know about Bill Cosby now I can't imagine why (sarcasm). :rolleyes: But then I always thought the man came off too preachy and self-righteous, and look what he was hiding all that time. The scumbag.

Ed.

Ritter was ALWAYS and already considered the star of the show. He was paid more than the other cast members. I do not see how the chain of events of the cast members changing benefited Ritter in any way with his star status

On top of Suzanne Somer's demands for a HUGE salary increase, she failed to show up for work one to many times and that was it. ABC finally said enough also!


Here's the title of the thread:

"When a supporting character upstaged the star...and then got the boot".

My original post is about John Ritter (who didn't get the boot) therefore I think it's reasonable to assume who the star was in the example I gave, so how did we get to this:

"Ritter was ALWAYS and already considered the star of the show".

Ritter wanted the focus of that show to be on his character and he didn't want to be upstaged. Stars are very particular about things like that, Fell mugged for the camera and did great takes as I'm sure you recall.

There were numerous issues going on around Somers departure, money was certainly one of them, but things could have been worked out (as they were in many of the series of that era), this wasn't, like I said, no accident.

Suzanne Somers solely wanted more money on the misguided belief that the sole reason people were watching was because of her perceived fanservice

She was pretty popular from the show. No questioning it.

I think she was pretty rankled when ABC offered her just a $5,000 salary increase. Typically, one negotiates ask high (and for her, she asked high to be on par with John Ritter - rather ambitious), but she probably would have settled somewhere in the middle. ABC offered her peanuts, probably with the fact that Joyce DeWitt will take peanuts. It would have helped if she was together with Joyce DeWitt.

Jenilee Harrison briefly replaces Suzanne, and I thought did a very good job, mysteriously her character is moved to the side and becomes a minor character.


Jennilee Harrison was just a temporary fill in. Unfortunate for her but she had no chance. She was still a Snow, written as a cousin of Chrissy, while the legal battles were still present with the original blonde Snow. They eventually decided on a replacement nothing like Chrissy (except being blonde) and unrelated to her; the producers introduce a smarter roommate, one who is a nurse. I would have liked to see Cindy as a guest/friend a bit longer, but she was just dumped unceremoniously.

Of course, nothing like more modern times, i.e. Friends or Big Bang Theory, where cast are more united, and there is still budget for having guest and recurring characters around.

However, Sex and The City is one show from not too long ago - same time era as Friends, where we now know that Kim Cattrall and Sarah Jessica Parker weren't united or friends off the set...However, the tension didn't reach the brink with Kim Cattrall leaving the show. She was involved in two post-series franchised movies as well. Those movies sucked but Kim Cattrall likely got somewhat a better financial deal than more seasons on HBO. I'm surprised though that HBO couldn't just replace her with a fourth new gal, while Kim Cattrall sought roles outside the show. Then again, Sex and the City the TV series started concluding too fast, and by the sixth season, it seemed ready to end. If better planned, it could have been milked to 8-10 seasons.

TC was as huge hit. The American producers weren’t going to wait until the show ended to try to develop a spinoff.


That contradicts everything I’ve read about the show and about Ritter. The producers were the driving force behind that show. The Chris Mann “Come and Knock on Our Door” book is meticulously researched, and has quotes from cast about how the producers were the parents, and the actors were treated like children. Yes, things could have been worked out with Suzanne at the end and she basically capitulated. But the producers wanted to punish her. Suzanne tells a story of her final encounter with Michael Ross, and it leaves no doubt about who was in charge and made the decision about her departure.

[QUOTE=TV Guy;5571880]TC was as huge hit. The American producers weren’t going to wait until the show ended to try to develop a spinoff.

The break between the two British series was about 4 months. The Ropers was rushed out and clearly the series was not ready to go. The British version had many more subtle details, and George and Mildred as society interlopers is a funnier concept in the UK because of mores of that society. Fell knew this and that's why he wanted a commitment to be brought back to the original series.



With respect to Somers we are going to have to agree to disagree. Somers and her husband are brilliant business people that have been able to monetize her persona beyond anyones wildest expectation. There would have been nothing to gain for her by the time we get to Mann's book to rehash what was something in the deep past.

I think the Ropers (Norman Fell and Audra Lindley) were moved from Three's Company because John Ritter wanted that show to revolve around his character. I believe he also wanted Suzanne Somers off the show for the same reason.

Suzanne got too big for her britches and was booted cause she dared to ask for pay parity with Ritter. Unfortunately, Joyce Dewitt turned on her and didn't support her.

Addison Montgomery (Kate Walsh) on Grey's Anatomy was given her own spin-off after she became more popular than Meredith Grey (Ellen Pompeo) the title character of that show.

Jennilee Harrison was just a temporary fill in. Unfortunate for her but she had no chance. She was still a Snow, written as a cousin of Chrissy, while the legal battles were still present with the original blonde Snow. They eventually decided on a replacement nothing like Chrissy (except being blonde) and unrelated to her; the producers introduce a smarter roommate, one who is a nurse. I would have liked to see Cindy as a guest/friend a bit longer, but she was just dumped unceremoniously.

Of course, nothing like more modern times, i.e. Friends or Big Bang Theory, where cast are more united, and there is still budget for having guest and recurring characters around.

However, Sex and The City is one show from not too long ago - same time era as Friends, where we now know that Kim Cattrall and Sarah Jessica Parker weren't united or friends off the set...However, the tension didn't reach the brink with Kim Cattrall leaving the show. She was involved in two post-series franchised movies as well. Those movies sucked but Kim Cattrall likely got somewhat a better financial deal than more seasons on HBO. I'm surprised though that HBO couldn't just replace her with a fourth new gal, while Kim Cattrall sought roles outside the show. Then again, Sex and the City the TV series started concluding too fast, and by the sixth season, it seemed ready to end. If better planned, it could have been milked to 8-10 seasons.

One of the foundation blocks of comedy is contrasting characters, fat, skinny; short, tall; neat, sloppy; old, young; organized, scatter brain; etc. To introduce a new roommate who was a blond version of Janet functionally changed the entire series. When the show started it was about the problems encountered by three roommates with a unique living arrangement and the people they interact with. With the addition of Terri (Priscilla Barnes) the show became Jack and the people in his orbit, his roommates, his best friend, his landlord, his cooking career, his romantic life. This is about a star Ritter pushing changes behind the scenes. The show was not as good the final three seasons.

Suzanne got too big for her britches and was booted cause she dared to ask for pay parity with Ritter. Unfortunately, Joyce Dewitt turned on her and didn't support her.

I think Suzanne was a little ahead of her time. It was an ensemble show. once she left, the end had begun.

Now days, it would be like Modern Family where all members of the ensemble band together and get the same pay.

I think that is what she wanted but the other 2 wouldn't go along with her. She'd get it now.

I think Suzanne was a little ahead of her time. It was an ensemble show. once she left, the end had begun.

Now days, it would be like Modern Family where all members of the ensemble band together and get the same pay.

I think that is what she wanted but the other 2 wouldn't go along with her. She'd get it now.

Was Somers and DeWitt earning a lesser salary than Ritter at this time? I agree this definitely was an ensemble show and if the producers and Ritter thought it was HIS show and he was the star, they were out of their minds.

Somers did have the right attitude asking for equal pay as her co-star was getting. It's a shame DeWitt was apparently weak and didn't stand with her on it.
All 3 of them should've been earning the same pay from the get go. But I also realize this was a different era where women in general were expected to earn less than men regardless of the situation.

Ritter also should've stood by Somers as well and the fact that he didn't, tells me he didn't think his 2 co stars were on the same footing as him. Not right.

I'm surprised that DeWitt was apparently comfortable with it all after Somers got the boot. She really must have needed to keep that job bad.

Was Somers and DeWitt earning a lesser salary than Ritter at this time? I agree this definitely was an ensemble show and if the producers and Ritter thought it was HIS show and he was the star, they were out of their minds.

Somers did have the right attitude asking for equal pay as her co-star was getting. It's a shame DeWitt was apparently weak and didn't stand with her on it.
All 3 of them should've been earning the same pay from the get go. But I also realize this was a different era where women in general were expected to earn less than men regardless of the situation.

Ritter also should've stood by Somers as well and the fact that he didn't, tells me he didn't think his 2 co stars were on the same footing as him. Not right.

I'm surprised that DeWitt was apparently comfortable with it all after Somers got the boot. She really must have needed to keep that job bad.


Yes, Somers and Dewitt were making considerably less than Ritter. Keep in mind that it was very much common practice for the male actors to command higher salaries than female stars. This was after all the 1970's we're talking about.

Suzanne had the right idea but at the wrong time in history and had no support from anybody else on-set.

Good comments. I agree the show was a favorite of mine during the Somers years but after she left the show really went downhill. This is no criticism of either Harrison or Barnes both were talented actresses who were not given the opportunity to develop their characters. Joyce DeWitt was hurt by the fact that the Terri Alden character was too similar to the Janet Wood character.

As someone who watched the show when it first ran, it always tickles me pink how people exaggerate Susanne Somer's importance. I never once at the time felt that the show went off the rails when she left, because as so many others pointed out, John Ritter was the star of Three's Company. If you were watching the show just for Jack Tripper, then the show never missed a step.

And besides, her character was getting so stupid and one dimensional that it had basically run out of steam. How many Chrissy-centric episodes and scenarios could they have written when she was basically reduced to a mentally challenged eight year old? The whole point of the show initially was to push the envelope in terms of sex but Chrissy was so dumb by the time Somers left that she couldn't even tell that her friend from school was a call girl even though it was blatantly obvious.

I thought the most famous example of what the OP is asking for was Joe Flynn from the Joey Bishop show getting canned because he got too many laughs.

Was Somers and DeWitt earning a lesser salary than Ritter at this time? I agree this definitely was an ensemble show and if the producers and Ritter thought it was HIS show and he was the star, they were out of their minds.

Somers did have the right attitude asking for equal pay as her co-star was getting. It's a shame DeWitt was apparently weak and didn't stand with her on it.
All 3 of them should've been earning the same pay from the get go. But I also realize this was a different era where women in general were expected to earn less than men regardless of the situation.

Ritter also should've stood by Somers as well and the fact that he didn't, tells me he didn't think his 2 co stars were on the same footing as him. Not right.

I'm surprised that DeWitt was apparently comfortable with it all after Somers got the boot. She really must have needed to keep that job bad.

It amazed me DeWitt sided with Ritter. All she had to do was side with Sumors, demand the same pay, Ritter gets a raise, they all go up to his level and everybody is happy.

It was a little ahead of their time, but Sumors wasn't wrong. It was an ensemble show. She just wanted parity, Ritter would have gotten a huge raise, they would have demanded parity and got it, and the show goes on.

She wasn't wrong to demand that. Just ahead of her time.

She wasn't wrong to demand that. Just ahead of her time.


She paved the way for future start to pull the same thing only successfully. I'm sure the casts of future shows like "Friends" for example looked back on the Somers experience and knew from what happened there that they had to band together with no one being out, and they'd have the producers where they'd want em.

Had DeWitt sided with Somers, I think it definitely would have worked for all three of them because surely producers weren't going to fire BOTH girls. (or would they?)

In any case, it worked out to be a blessing for Somers. She successfully ditched the "Chrissy" persona that could have stuck with her for life had she continued on for more seasons.

And she made a gazillion off that 80's Thighmaster contraption, squeezing her thighs all the way to the bank while Ritter & DeWitt's careers pretty much faded after Threes Company. So she wound up getting the last laugh. :lol:

And she made a gazillion off that 80's Thighmaster contraption, squeezing her thighs all the way to the bank while Ritter & DeWitt's careers pretty much faded after Threes Company. So she wound up getting the last laugh. :lol:

Ritter's career didn't fade. He starred in a series of movies and a TV show in the 80s that admittedly didn't match the success of Three's Company, but then had a major comeback with Sling Blade and 8 Simple Rules. He couldn't have been more popular when he died, which was what made his sudden death all the more tragic.

I don't see how Somers' career soared, either. She was the David Caruso of her day and will forever be remembered as the actress who stupidly sabotaged her career, much like Caruso did.

Ritter's career didn't fade. He starred in a series of movies and a TV show in the 80s that admittedly didn't match the success of Three's Company, but then had a major comeback with Sling Blade and 8 Simple Rules. He couldn't have been more popular when he died, which was what made his sudden death all the more tragic.

I don't see how Somers' career soared, either. She was the David Caruso of her day and will forever be remembered as the actress who stupidly sabotaged her career, much like Caruso did.

In comparison to Three's Company, Ritter's career certainly DID fade. Throughout the late 80's and all the 90's he may have worked, but nowhere near the success of his sitcom.

I remember he tried 2 TV shows in the 90's that both failed. "Hooperman" and "Hearts Afire" (neither of which I watched)

As for his films, I heard of Sling Blade, but had no idea he was even in that until reading your post. And I had the misfortune of seeing that God awful 89 film "Skin Deep". The glow in the dark condom scene is all I remember of that wretched film 30 years later.

And Suzanne's career certainly did soar at least financially. As mentioned, the Thighmaster earned her millions, as well as her various health and recipe books.
She knew how to continue earning millions after TC. And she was on a successful sitcom for 7 seasons with Step by Step.

So in comparison to each other, Somers' career was much more successful than Ritters after TC was done.

One of the foundation blocks of comedy is contrasting characters, fat, skinny; short, tall; neat, sloppy; old, young; organized, scatter brain; etc. To introduce a new roommate who was a blond version of Janet functionally changed the entire series. When the show started it was about the problems encountered by three roommates with a unique living arrangement and the people they interact with. With the addition of Terri (Priscilla Barnes) the show became Jack and the people in his orbit, his roommates, his best friend, his landlord, his cooking career, his romantic life. This is about a star Ritter pushing changes behind the scenes. The show was not as good the final three seasons.

I agree - the show was definitely better in the earlier seasons with Chrissy and the contrasting characters.

However, I did like the cast change with Don Knotts replacing The Ropers as the landlord, as the Ropers schtick would have become tired. After The Ropers was cancelled - I wouldn't mind though if the Ropers would have come back but just as neighbors though. It was kind of boring for Larry to be the only friend.

In comparison to Three's Company, Ritter's career certainly DID fade. Throughout the late 80's and all the 90's he may have worked, but nowhere near the success of his sitcom.

I remember he tried 2 TV shows in the 90's that both failed. "Hooperman" and "Hearts Afire" (neither of which I watched)

As for his films, I heard of Sling Blade, but had no idea he was even in that until reading your post. And I had the misfortune of seeing that God awful 89 film "Skin Deep". The glow in the dark condom scene is all I remember of that wretched film 30 years later.

And Suzanne's career certainly did soar at least financially. As mentioned, the Thighmaster earned her millions, as well as her various health and recipe books.
She knew how to continue earning millions after TC. And she was on a successful sitcom for 7 seasons with Step by Step.

So in comparison to each other, Somers' career was much more successful than Ritters after TC was done.

Well they both had a significant period in the 80s/90s where neither of them were relevant. Suzanne definitely became successful again later in her life as you mentioned, but mainly outside of acting. But, Step By Step was just a TGIF show in the late 90s, but it was a long enough gig. She also became co-host on on Candid Camera. From there, she really rebounded and guest starred on Oprah.

John Ritter was the dad in the Problem Child franchise in the early 90s, movies panned by critics but was somewhat recognized then. (The politically correct of today would never allow Hollywood to make a movie called Problem Child), and I think 8 Simple Rules (in the 2000s) could have been very successful had he survived.

I'm glad that Suzanne and Joyce re-united many years later. Too bad, John and Suzanne didn't (at least on screen).

Speaking of parity, Gillian Anderson of X Files was offered a lot less than co-star David Duchovny and had to fight for parity for when negotiating for the series return. In 2016/2018.

I thought the most famous example of what the OP is asking for was Joe Flynn from the Joey Bishop show getting canned because he got too many laughs.

This is the example I was going to post if no one else had. TV Guide had an article back in March 1962 pretty much stating this point exactly. Joe Flynn was getting more laughs than Joey Bishop, so Flynn had to go.

This is the example I was going to post if no one else had. TV Guide had an article back in March 1962 pretty much stating this point exactly. Joe Flynn was getting more laughs than Joey Bishop, so Flynn had to go.

Bishop was some piece of work if you believe showbiz old timers. He treated his writers horribly, Rich Little characterized him as difficult and pompous, Jack Carter described him as a bulls**t act. He played a dual role in an episode of his series, his own character (Joey Barnes) and his cousin, he complained that his cousin was getting bigger laughs than him.

Joe Flynn wasn't the only one that Joey Bishop fired, he also fired Guy Marks about mid way into the 2nd season. Marks leaving the show doesn't bother me because I think Corbett Monica is much better in the role of Joey's writer/manager. Joe Flynn wasn't on the show long enough to make much of an impression, but those early 1st season episodes he was in are pretty good. I'm not sure but I think Flynn's last episode in the series is the one where they strike oil in Joey's back yard.

Jack Carter guest starred in a season 3 episode, it's a pretty good episode. Season 3 is in my opinion the best season of the series. Joey Bishop might have been a difficult person but his sitcom is pretty good. Uneven at times, not every episode is great but the good ones are funny.

Bishop was some piece of work if you believe showbiz old timers. He treated his writers horribly, Rich Little characterized him as difficult and pompous, Jack Carter described him as a bulls**t act. He played a dual role in an episode of his series, his own character (Joey Barnes) and his cousin, he complained that his cousin was getting bigger laughs than him.

Indeed, Bishop really should have followed Jack Benny's mantra: "I don't care who gets the laughs on my show, as long as the show is funny."

]mary lousie wilson as ginny on one day at a time. she only lasted a season
glenn scarpelli as alex on one day a time. he didn't do the last seasson\
jason bateman on silver spoons left after either the 2nd or 3 rd season/Jason Bateman was overrated on Silver Spoons. He didn't add much to the show, and I would not consider him to have upstaged Ricky Schroder. Plus Jason Bateman never made it into the opening credits or a series regular, while his replacement Alfonso Ribeiro did.

I do not recall reading anything good about Linda Lavin from those who worked with her. She had the idea she was some superstar since the show was named after her character but she was not even likeable on the show. It would have been better to give Linda the boot and keep Polly.

You mean fire the person that portrays the title character? Then this would be grounds for a Hogan Family-like situation. I think there would've been a lawsuit from Linda if she were forced out of Alice, and there would have either been a re-cast of the Alice character, or the show's name would be forced to change.

You mean fire the person that portrays the title character? Then this would be grounds for a Hogan Family-like situation. I think there would've been a lawsuit from Linda if she were forced out of Alice, and there would have either been a re-cast of the Alice character, or the show's name would be forced to change.

Linda would have lost that lawsuit in a heartbeat. Lavin played the lead but the series was based on the movie "Alice Doesn't Live Here Anymore", Valerie was the name of the series and Valerie Harper of course played the lead. The name Valerie was picked to better connect the series to the star and derive the advantages of the goodwill created by the star.


I don't think any of this would have come into play, if Lavin left or was fired the producers wouldn't want the connection to a character no longer in the show. The series probably would have changed names to Mel's or Mel's Diner, either would have identified the series to fans of the sitcom. One final point, Lavin was obviously difficult to get along with, but she is a very talented actress who fully developed that character adding many nuances to the characterization. Stars can be difficult, but the series had a long run, I don't think replacing Lavin ever entered anyone's head.

You mean fire the person that portrays the title character? Then this would be grounds for a Hogan Family-like situation. I think there would've been a lawsuit from Linda if she were forced out of Alice, and there would have either been a re-cast of the Alice character, or the show's name would be forced to change.

Exactly. In fact, even if there was no lawsuit filed, who do you think the general public at large are going to sympathize with, the actors or the producers? You guessed it, the actors, given how they're more etched into the public consciousness and are more known to the public than producers are.

I do not recall reading anything good about Linda Lavin from those who worked with her. She had the idea she was some superstar since the show was named after her character but she was not even likeable on the show. It would have been better to give Linda the boot and keep Polly.

I disagree I think Alice was likable. But there were times it was obvious onscreen there was friction between Linda Lavin and Polly Holliday. But you don't get that stuff when you're just a kid LOL.

Ed.

How about Valerie Harper and Cloris Leachman leaving MTM to star in their own shows?

Is is possible that Mary was envious of their characters on her show?

How about Valerie Harper and Cloris Leachman leaving MTM to star in their own shows?

Is is possible that Mary was envious of their characters on her show?

In a word no. In addition to being the star of the series she was also an owner of the production company, brand expansion was very big in the 70's, both moves made perfect sense.

This is what Norman Fell and Audra Lindley have always stated before their deaths, so I tend to believe this. I also think glickmam is spot on with his assessment on the situation.

Thank you for backing me up. I really do appreciate it.

In a word no. In addition to being the star of the series she was also an owner of the production company, brand expansion was very big in the 70's, both moves made perfect sense.

I recently read Valerie Harper's book and currently reading Mary Tyler Moore's at the moment (Moore's is much more interesting and surprisingly candid btw). In Harper's book, she explained how the network was talking about spinning off Rhoda early on during the very first season of MTM.

Not that they wanted to do it that early, but they already knew during that first season that Rhoda was getting her own show and they let her know. So it had absolutely nothing to do with any type of envy on Moore's part.

Valerie also mentions how terrified she was about the thought of leaving a hit show for her own, but it was Moore who ensured her that if it failed, Rhoda would immediately move back to Minneapolis and back to the show.

I haven't yet reached the part of Moore's book where she talks about the MTM show, but from what i've already read, she wasn't that kind of person in the slightest. If she was envious of any co stars, I sincerely doubt she would've wanted anyone kicked off to keep her in the main spotlight.

And just look at her role on MTM as being the straight person to all the nutty characters around her. IMO that shows that she allowed others to snag the spotlight and get the laughs around her and was a great sport about it.

Who knows though? Maybe when I get to that part of her book, i'll find she reveals that she was secretly seething inside. :lol: