I just picked up a copy of THE BOYS: A MEMOIR OF HOLLYWOOD AND FAMILY by Ron and Clint Howard, published quite recently, in 2021. I did not know about this book but saw a copy at my library's book sale and snapped it up. Lots of interesting material about the filming of TAGS and the relationships with the cast.

However, at one point in the book Ron recalls himself as a child comparing himself to other child actors on TV of the time. I was very dismayed by what he had to say about LITB. Here is the quote:

"I concluded that, in terms of acting prowess, I was second only to Johnny Crawford. Jay North I respected as more or less an equal. The rest? In my cocky state, I concluded that they weren't on my level. Johnny brought a truthfulness to his performance, an honesty that seemed lived in. The actors on Leave It to Beaver, which began in 1957, were hamstrung by how dated their format was. That show struck me as corny, synthetic TV that encouraged a forced, mannered brand of acting."

I am dumbfounded by these remarks and by what Howard could possibly mean by faulting the LITB actors for "forced, mannered" acting. Wasn't the show notable for its low-key, dry humor and understated performances? And what does he mean by LITB having a "dated format"? The show was very up-to-date in its filming style, just as was TAGS. I am very disheartened by Howard's comments and don't understand why he had to include an invidious comparison with LITB in his memoir about TAGS. I will be interested to hear what others think about this.

I just picked up a copy of THE BOYS: A MEMOIR OF HOLLYWOOD AND FAMILY by Ron and Clint Howard, published quite recently, in 2021. I did not know about this book but saw a copy at my library's book sale and snapped it up. Lots of interesting material about the filming of TAGS and the relationships with the cast.

However, at one point in the book Ron recalls himself as a child comparing himself to other child actors on TV of the time. I was very dismayed by what he had to say about LITB. Here is the quote:

"I concluded that, in terms of acting prowess, I was second only to Johnny Crawford. Jay North I respected as more or less an equal. The rest? In my cocky state, I concluded that they weren't on my level. Johnny brought a truthfulness to his performance, an honesty that seemed lived in. The actors on Leave It to Beaver, which began in 1957, were hamstrung by how dated their format was. That show struck me as corny, synthetic TV that encouraged a forced, mannered brand of acting."

I am dumbfounded by these remarks and by what Howard could possibly mean by faulting the LITB actors for "forced, mannered" acting. Wasn't the show notable for its low-key, dry humor and understated performances? And what does he mean by LITB having a "dated format"? The show was very up-to-date in its filming style, just as was TAGS. I am very disheartened by Howard's comments and don't understand why he had to include an invidious comparison with LITB in his memoir about TAGS. I will be interested to hear what others think about this.

He did say in his cocky state. I think LITB was always praised by how natural the kid actors where. I always thought LITB and TAGS were pretty close in quality.

He seems to be describing what he thought of himself at the time. I suppose as time went on and TAGS, and maybe he, got more accolades, it could swell a kid actor's head. Just as could be and was written into sitcom scripts, such as when a kid makes a winning touchdown.

That said, there's no reason to think he doesn't still hold that "swelled head" opinion.

I'm not sure what he means by a dated format. It's a single camera sitcom with a laugh track, as was TAGS. He doesn't appear to be saying it's a product of its time; if he were, it's true of both shows.

With regard to to his comparisons of the specific talents of the kid actors he mentions, I'd say they all, including Ron, are about on a par with each other. We all know Howard's standout scenes, like in the bird episode. I could point out Mathers' outstanding scenes, too--such as an escalating frenzy Beaver went into when fleeing from the dinner table, about his freckles. And there are tit-for-tat others. Ron places himself on a par with Jay North (they acted together in the first season of Dennis the Menace); surely he doesn't give Jay more prowess than Mathers (he groups all the LITB actors together). That's flat out wrong.

As all four grew older in their roles I think their performances aged away from the cute kid personas, and by time they all reached their final seasons, they were pretty much still on a par.

And Clint, younger than all of them--I'm not as familiar with him, as his main show, Gentle Ben, has kind of faded from memory. He had extra roles in TAGS--not enough to judge from. I don't know how Ron would rate him--even though it's his brother, I'm sure, in Ron's mind, Ron is still at the top of the group.

It's sort of refreshing to hear someone like Ron Howard to actually give an honest opinion about his and his contemporaries acting abilities. I'd rather hear an honest opinion than today's fake praising everyone in fear of getting cancelled.

Let's state this plainly, Ron Howard has no right to compare himself with Jay North, Johnny Crawford, Jerry Mathers or Tony Dow, his character was not a lead character. North was playing the lead character, Dennis the Menace depended on his performance. Jerry Mathers was playing the lead character, LITB depended on his performance and the performance of Tony Dow. Johnny Crawford while not playing the lead character had the second most important role on the show, his performance was critical to the success of The Rifleman. Howard was a flop when he played the lead character in Happy Days, his role was reduced with Henry Winkler taking over the lead.

Howard was good in TAGS but Opie was not the lead character, that a whole different level of acting and he never demonstrated he could pull that off.

Ron stating "how dated their format was" when commenting on LITB is ironic, because that series was actually innovative for TV by taking the children's perspective -- something that hadn't been done when series like Ozzie & Harriet, Father Knows Best, and Make Room for Daddy were formulated.

Anyway, generally I think it's bad form for someone in the entertainment industry to call into question or even denigrate other entertainers' work or talents. One could argue that there were far more "corny" aspects of Happy Days than LITB, although likely Ron's take is that in a way HD was satirizing the "dated" way of life that took place in late '50s/early '60s U.S.

Either way, if one finds a series "corny" it has much more to do with the creators & writers than the actors. Roy Clark & Buck Owens were great musicians on the corny Hee Haw for example.

I would like to have more context for this quote. Without further context at this point, I'm not crazy about his comments on Leave it to Beaver.

He seems to be describing what he thought of himself at the time. I suppose as time went on and TAGS, and maybe he, got more accolades, it could swell a kid actor's head. Just as could be and was written into sitcom scripts, such as when a kid makes a winning touchdown.

That said, there's no reason to think he doesn't still hold that "swelled head" opinion.

He at least strongly implies that he still thinks this way about LITB; he never says that his views changed. And in the entirety of the book Jerry Mathers is mentioned in passing one other time, Tony Dow never, nor anyone else from LITB.

I would like to have more context for this quote. Without further context at this point, I'm not crazy about his comments on Leave it to Beaver.

The quote comes in the context of Howard reminiscing about how his confidence and knowledge - and cockiness - as a child actor grew as he continued his work on TAGS and other shows and movies. He had previously mentioned hanging out and forming a friendship with Jay North.

To me, his statements about LITB could not be more wrongheaded. Howard misses the irony that often underlay the supposed "corniness" of the show as well as how innovative the show was. And good points made about the difference between being a lead and being a supporting player. For my money Mathers showed far greater range than Howard. I'm amazed that Howard can denigrate LITB and at the same time speak favorably of DENNIS THE MENACE. OK, so he was friends with Jay North and not apparently with Jerry Mathers, but let's keep a sense of proportion here. Howard should be in the business of celebrating the early sitcom in general, not finding fault and making criticisms that are to my mind misinformed. At least, Howard could have provided a more balanced critique from the point of view of himself as an adult. The comments seem slightly self-serving to me.

I don't think Mathers or LITB ever got as pukey as latter-day Andy Griffith or Happy Days, or Howard in them. He never rose an inch above the level of those shows in their declining years.

The actors on Leave It to Beaver, which began in 1957, were hamstrung by how dated their format was. That show struck me as corny, synthetic TV that encouraged a forced, mannered brand of acting


I think that I understand what he's saying here: I think that Andy Griffith and Dick van Dyke Show were written at a more sophisticated level than what came before. That doesn't mean the actors couldn't be above that level. I think all the extended kids cast on LITB was above that level.

The quote comes in the context of Howard reminiscing about how his confidence and knowledge - and cockiness - as a child actor grew as he continued his work on TAGS and other shows and movies. He had previously mentioned hanging out and forming a friendship with Jay North.

To me, his statements about LITB could not be more wrongheaded. Howard misses the irony that often underlay the supposed "corniness" of the show as well as how innovative the show was. And good points made about the difference between being a lead and being a supporting player. For my money Mathers showed far greater range than Howard. I'm amazed that Howard can denigrate LITB and at the same time speak favorably of DENNIS THE MENACE. OK, so he was friends with Jay North and not apparently with Jerry Mathers, but let's keep a sense of proportion here. Howard should be in the business of celebrating the early sitcom in general, not finding fault and making criticisms that are to my mind misinformed. At least, Howard could have provided a more balanced critique from the point of view of himself as an adult. The comments seem slightly self-serving to me.

Wow. Well, now that I have some context, I'm surprised Ron Howard would have said what he did. I agree with your points. So he's friends with Jay North. Glad to hear it. But why disparage the Beaver Boys? He's really wrong for that. And he's not right either. (I always knew Opie was kind of a brat!) :D

Ron's just trying to keep his progressive-liberal credibility by dissing LITB (it's their favorite show to trash) and he's probably never seen more than a few minutes of LITB. Frankly, none of these old guys should be dissing each other's work since the ever shrinking fanbase for all of these shows are the same people. Maybe Jerry made more money per episode than Ron did and he's still jealous!

It's not an honest assessment, since he places himself on a par with Jay North because they worked together and became friends.

I agree, he's probably seen very little LITB; surprisingly, he's evidently seen quite a bit of The Rifleman.

Wally was a heartthrob. I don't think Richie Cunningham was. It could be some sort of jealousy. LOL

Wally was a heartthrob. I don't think Richie Cunningham was. It could be some sort of jealousy. LOL

Jealousy could be his middle name. I'd imagine Henry Winkler isn't one of his favorite people, either.

"...I concluded that they weren't on my level..."

This sounds like the Beaver episode, where he concluded he was a football hero.

The mind of a 13 or 14 year old. What a JERK!

I wonder what Ron thinks of Jon Provost and Tommy Rettig? Those two had the hardest job of all....avoid getting upstaged by the dog! :lol:

Lee Aaker (also competing with a dog), Tommy Rettig, Paul Petersen, Billy Gray, Jon Provost, Rusty Hamer, Stanley Livingston--all mere peons, in comparison.

Wally was a heartthrob. I don't think Richie Cunningham was. It could be some sort of jealousy. LOL

In another part of the book Howard tells about how while he was on TAGS he went to an autograph signing event, but he still was too young to be able to write well. As he was trying to sign, the kid who asked for his autograph saw Jerry Mathers and went up to him instead!

That's the only place in the book where Mathers is mentioned by name.

Jealousy could be his middle name. I'd imagine Henry Winkler isn't one of his favorite people, either.

Right? :D

In another part of the book Howard tells about how while he was on TAGS he went to an autograph signing event, but he still was too young to be able to write well. As he was trying to sign, the kid who asked for his autograph saw Jerry Mathers and went up to him instead!

That's the only place in the book where Mathers is mentioned by name.

:lol:

Let's state this plainly, Ron Howard has no right to compare himself with Jay North, Johnny Crawford, Jerry Mathers or Tony Dow, his character was not a lead character. North was playing the lead character, Dennis the Menace depended on his performance. Jerry Mathers was playing the lead character, LITB depended on his performance and the performance of Tony Dow. Johnny Crawford while not playing the lead character had the second most important role on the show, his performance was critical to the success of The Rifleman. Howard was a flop when he played the lead character in Happy Days, his role was reduced with Henry Winkler taking over the lead.

Howard was good in TAGS but Opie was not the lead character, that a whole different level of acting and he never demonstrated he could pull that off.
Excellent point here! I agree.

Ron's just trying to keep his progressive-liberal credibility by dissing LITB (it's their favorite show to trash) and he's probably never seen more than a few minutes of LITB. Frankly, none of these old guys should be dissing each other's work since the ever shrinking fanbase for all of these shows are the same people. Maybe Jerry made more money per episode than Ron did and he's still jealous!

I wonder who Ron Howard’s good friend, Hunter Biden, prefers: Opie Taylor or Beaver Cleaver?

(Somehow, I think the presidential son would prefer and relate more to, fellow kindred spirit, Eddie Haskell.)

^I didn't know they were buds.

Anyway, it seems to be "open up" season from the TAGS cast; some old comments from AG on Don Knotts' acting on Threes...--

https://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/showthread.php?t=442330

I agree with "Paper Clips" comment in that thread.

Johnny Crawford while not playing the lead character had the second most important role on the show, his performance was critical to the success of The Rifleman. Howard was a flop when he played the lead character in Happy Days, his role was reduced with Henry Winkler taking over the lead.

Howard was good in TAGS but Opie was not the lead character, that a whole different level of acting and he never demonstrated he could pull that off.Ron Howard was not a flop as the Happy Days lead. Henry Winkler just became so popular that Fonzie got a lot of attention (like Family Matters and Urkel, which FM definitely overdid), but Richie still got plenty of screen time and did well. Using your logic about Johnny Crawford, Ron Howard still had the second most important role on the Happy Days show (and even remained billed first), so he and Johnny Crawford had equal ranks there. I am not one of them, but many fans think Happy Days jumped the shark (figuratively, not Fonzie's literal shark jump) when Ron left and don't like the seasons without him.

All the audience screams and much of the writing focus shifted to Fonzie, particularly when the show shifted formats in season 3. None of which probably sat well with Mr. Perfect, despite his credited but faux starring role.

There's also no denying, IMO, that Ron's leaving weakened the show, mostly due to the addition of a confusing succession of minor parts, changing nearly every season, played by unknowns.

Ron Howard was not a flop as the Happy Days lead. Henry Winkler just became so popular that Fonzie got a lot of attention (like Family Matters and Urkel, which FM definitely overdid), but Richie still got plenty of screen time and did well. Using your logic about Johnny Crawford, Ron Howard still had the second most important role on the Happy Days show (and even remained billed first), so he and Johnny Crawford had equal ranks there. I am not one of them, but many fans think Happy Days jumped the shark (figuratively, not Fonzie's literal shark jump) when Ron left and don't like the seasons without him.

Ron Howard was a flop as the lead in Happy Days, I didn't set the bar Ron did by comparing himself to Jay North and by implication to Mathers and Dow lead actors who were critical to the success of their series. Ron was nowhere near that important to TAGS, if Larry Mathews had been cast as Opie would he have been as good as Ron was in the part, no way, would TAGS still have been the hit series it was, I say yes. Could Mathews have played Dennis or the Beaver, no way, the shows would have bombed.

Happy Days was not getting over with Howard in the lead role, the show was headed for the chopping block as its second season came to an end. To save the series, Winkler's Fonzie became the lead character and Ron was in a take it or leave it position. I think if a better actor had been cast in the role of Richie Cunningham at the start of the series the show might have been a bigger hit in the early seasons and stayed with the original premise. Kevin Bacon was 16 in 1974, if he had been cast as Richie from the outset, I believe the show would have been a bigger hit and retained the original premise. If Tim Daly who was 18 at the time had been cast as Richie at the outset I believe the show would have been a hit from the start. Howard is a competent actor no question about that but he's way off base comparing himself to lead actors.

One final point, credits are negotiated before a series is on, the production company would have been in breach of contract to change the credit order. That is the only reason Howard was billed first.

I think most people consider Ron Howard one of the best child actors of all time. I don't agree with what he said but next to Fonzie he was the main reason people tuned into HD. It was never the same after he left the show. I do agree that he wasn't vital to TAGS. That show went downhill after Don Knotts left.

^I didn't know they were buds.

Anyway, it seems to be "open up" season from the TAGS cast; some old comments from AG on Don Knotts' acting on Threes...--

https://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/showthread.php?t=442330

I agree with "Paper Clips" comment in that thread.
Yea I agree. Don was hilarious on TC.

I think most people consider Ron Howard one of the best child actors of all time. I don't agree with what he said but next to Fonzie he was the main reason people tuned into HD. It was never the same after he left the show. I do agree that he wasn't vital to TAGS. That show went downhill after Don Knotts left.

He did have a few memorable scenes in TAGS' black and white years, there's no denying that. In the color years he basically set up Andy.

I certainly can't think of anything memorable about any of his HD scenes. We all know who the memorable actor was in HD.

Like I said above, after Howard left HD, the problem was the parade of un-associated characters they brought in. If the show depended so much on Ron, it wouldn't have gone on several more seasons.

I don't watch The Andy Griffith Show much because I'm not fond of most of the actors on the show. One actor that I like is Jim Nabors and he ended up getting his own show, Gomer Pyle USMC. Jim Nabors and Frank Sutton are funny in that show and have good acting chemistry together.

To me, Frances Bavier looks out of place in The Andy Griffith Show. I can see her in a show like Family Affair, being the housekeeper and looking after the kids if Sebastian Cabot didn't have that role.

On the subject of Ron Howard, I've seen him in an episode of the classic FBI TV series, he's in a 4th season episode titled The Runaways, Ron plays a runaway kid who meets and teams up with a killer who's on the run from the FBI.

Frank Sutton was a fantastic choice for Gomer Pyle USMC, as was Barbara Stuart for his girlfriend.

I read the book, and it's a really good read.

All I can say is, I'm glad no one judges the adult me by the cocky crap I said when I was the age Ron was when he made those comments.

To me, Frances Bavier looks out of place in The Andy Griffith Show. I can see her in a show like Family Affair, being the housekeeper and looking after the kids if Sebastian Cabot didn't have that role.



Did you know that Madge Blake (Mrs. Mondello on LITB) was the original choice to play Aunt Bee? She couldn't do it because she was under contract to LITB at the time. I would have preferred her in the role.

Did you know that Madge Blake (Mrs. Mondello on LITB) was the original choice to play Aunt Bee? She couldn't do it because she was under contract to LITB at the time. I would have preferred her in the role.

Where did this piece of information come from? It doesn't make any sense!

I doubt Blake had a contract with LITB, she had a small part appearing in only 11 episodes of the 117 episodes that constituted the first three seasons of the series. Her final LITB appearance was in February of 1960 a full seven months prior to the premiere of TAGS. As a matter of fact the character of Aunt Bee did not appear in the back door pilot which interestingly enough hit the airwaves at about he same time as Blake's final Beaver appearance. Richard Deacon continued in the role of Fred Rutherford while playing the role of Mel Cooley on The Dick Van Dyke Show, so no matter how you look at it the story just doesn't wash.

With respect to your preference of Blake over Bavier, you are entitled to your opinion, but you are in a tiny minority. Bavier may have been pain to work with, somewhat of an oddball, but she was very well received in that role by the audience. In fact she was retained in the follow-up series Mayberry RFD because of her popularity.