Do you think The Lucy Show was a rip-off of I Love Lucy? If so, please explain your reasons.

I wouldn't say TLS was a rip-off of ILL. It was still somewhat the same Lucy character, but she dealt with different problems because she was in different situations (in the later series, she had no husband, she had two children, etc.) I honestly believe that the height of Lucy's television career was the first couple of seasons of "The Lucy Show". When it was just she and Vivian Vance, it was magic. After Vivian Vance retired from show business, Lucy would have done well to have done the same. Her shows were never the same without Vivian. It was she and Viv that made ILL and TLS.

Balderdash, the shows were just as good after Viv left, there's no arguing that they were a great team, but Viv's character being her equal on the early Lucy shows never looked kosher. When she CAME BACK as her FRIEND on Here's Lucy, it brought back the old magic of the early days on I Love Lucy.

Originally posted by LucyFan
Do you think The Lucy Show was a rip-off of I Love Lucy? If so, please explain your reasons.

I think Laverne & Shirley was a ripoff of The Lucy Show. I Married Joan was a ripoff of I Love Lucy.

Originally posted by SPLAIN
Balderdash, the shows were just as good after Viv left, there's no arguing that they were a great team, but Viv's character being her equal on the early Lucy shows never looked kosher.

The shows were IN NO WAY as good after Viv left. There were some chuckles here and there without Viv, but the show in general was a mere shadow of its former self without Vivian. And it was QUITE Kosher having Viv and Lucy's equal on The Lucy Show. Vivian Vance was at her absolute career best as Viv in those first couple seasons of TLS. I Love Lucy would have been that much better had Vivian been given the same license playing Ethel to be as funny as she was as Viv, and given those great sarcastic lines. Her portrayal of Vivian Bagley was delicious.

Viv portrayed her character as an annoying ***** rather than her supposed best friend and it showed, i think The Lucy Book mentions it also. Hey, it was aptly called The LUCY show, not the Lucy and Viv show. They were the Laurel and Hardy of Tv though, no argument there, and they were so equal that they both went to other things after their parting ways. Lucy went to another six year series and Viv went to Maxwell House commercials and the occasional Here's Lucy appearance where the old magic was recaptured!

Originally posted by SPLAIN
Viv portrayed her character as an annoying ***** rather than her supposed best friend and it showed, i think The Lucy Book mentions it also. Hey, it was aptly called The LUCY show, not the Lucy and Viv show. They were the Laurel and Hardy of Tv though, no argument there, and they were so equal that they both went to other things after their parting ways. Lucy went to another six year series and Viv went to Maxwell House commercials and the occasional Here's Lucy appearance where the old magic was recaptured!

Who the hell cares about the opinion of that guy who wrote The Lucy Book? I don't know anyone who agrees with him. Certainly nobody I've talked to I remember his comment about Viv's portray on TLS and I thought it was stupid. This guy gushes over some of the worst episodes of the series and criticizes some of the ones that are actually funny. This series was finally Viv's chance to be funny, but little by little Ms. Insecure Control Freak Ball started cutting Viv out of the show and reducing her dialogue, basically humiliating her. Everyone knows the show usually sucked after Vivian was gone from it.

Darlin Jane, the show sucked a little because of the bad writing and the repeating the same plot lines over and over for decades, Lucy might have had to turn into a control freak because she owned the show and the studio and knew what sold was HER and not Mary Jane or Gale or anybody else, including Viv. While i disagree with some of the reviews in The Lucy Book, it's a very nice reference book, and he did do it your way, he was honest and tore her to shreds every chance he got, LOL! As i always point out when discussing this subject, the ratings went up when Viv left and Lucy had guest stars, sometimes it worked, sometimes it didn't, but name me anybody else that succeeded for 23 years in four different series. I did however enjoy when Viv came back to visit, those were great shows, you know the ones, Here's Viv! The people wanted to see Lucy, and the poor people like Gale and Viv suffered working with her because they never got their true recognition.

Originally posted by SPLAIN
As i always point out when discussing this subject, the ratings went up when Viv left and Lucy had guest stars,

As I always point out when discussing this subject, the RANKING went up, not the ratings. The ratings (I'm talking about numbers of viewers) actually held steady or declined after Viv left. Television viewership was declining in general, so the show was able to keep the same rating and lower ratings but rank higher. Also, the show wasn't competing against much in those later seasons, just mediocre fare like Rat Patrol. TLS would have done even better if Viv had remained. She was the reference point that made Lucy's comedy work.

Well, i've said many times i can't argue with you, you're too good at it, so i give up on this one, i will only console myself with the fact that at least, i'm not married to you! LOL! God punished me anyway, my station here that was showing the Lucy show stopped at the end of season three which means i'm still not seing the ones i want to see, with the guests stars after Viv left, they were my favorites, because Lucy did not shine in shows with kids and her best friend but rather with the guest stars. Maybe when i've seen all of those last three seasons i will see your point but so far my memory of watching them as a kid was that i wanted Lucy to shine and she did, regardless of who was with her, they all suffered for it because if they were next to her, NOBODY noticed them, one Emmy for Viv and none for Gale is a perfect example.

Originally posted by SPLAIN
one Emmy for Viv and none for Gale is a perfect example.

I don't put too much value in Emmys or Oscars. There's so much politics involved. But Gale Gordon did get a nomination in 1971, but lost (I think) to Ed Asner.

Originally posted by JaneTVFan


I don't put too much value in Emmys or Oscars. There's so much politics involved. But Gale Gordon did get a nomination in 1971, but lost (I think) to Ed Asner.

Incidentally, Gale Gordon is the only Here's Lucy cast member who ever got an Emmy nomination during HL's entire six year run. So if you put significance in Emmy nominations, then it would appear Gale Gordon outshined Lucille Ball on Here's Lucy.

No, it wasn't that, darlin Jane, it was the fact that Lucy lobbied for him to be nominated and eventually, when he lost, she was the presenter to Edward Asner, the winner and she was not too happy about it. She LOVED that man, no argument there. As for her not getting a nomination, it was because she read from cue cards at that point and most fans were being vocal about the lousy stale scripts, not so much their love for her having diminished, she had FOUR Emmy awards at that point, so there was no big effort to get her a fifth, the Emmy awards had to go to the NEW HOT shows like Maude and the All in the Family types. There, you have me, none of the awards ever go to the most deserving or the ones that should get them, popularity contests and many things that go on behind the scenes that we never know about, hey, back then, we didn't know how impossible she could be to work with, you know professional and not lazy like so many others, so, her glory days behind her, and people who kept harping on the fact that none of her shows were as great as that OTHER show she used to be on, well, no wonder she did not get Emmy awards at this stage of her life.

Leave it to me to get into a conversation WAY to late, but here I am...

lol


Anyway...

There is one point I agree with Jane on...the author of "The Lucy Book" has no clue what he's talking about when crticizing Lucy's work after ILL.


That said, saying the show just didn't work without Viv is a misstatement. If it didn't work ratings would've slid. Television viewership overall going down at the time has nothing to do with it (I cant dispute this because I do not have anything infront of me to prove or disprove those comments). If the audience who watched didn't appreciate it, the ratings would have suffered. They didn't....

In retrospect, we can say we prefer this part of the series (The "Vivan Vance" years), verses another (The "California" years) or vice-versa, but to say it just didn't work or wasn't as good is wrong, imho.

Thanks, totally agree with you, but Jane would have made a good lawyer or politician, she says everything with such force that you start questionning your beliefs. I think there's a spot in the Bush administration for you Jane, LOL! Listen, the real reason i'm backing off is i haven't seen the last three seasons of the show for decades, so how can i argue, what if my memory is not on target, i will be getting them soon, and to be fair, i have seen some of those shows like The Dean Martin one after Viv left and that was so much better than them trying to steal each other's dates, but you're right, not as good as them installing a shower!

Okay, this thread is about 5 years old, but wow, what an interesting read and debate! :lol:

I'll say this....Lucy overused the "big guest star" of the week in the later seasons. yea, it kept the ratings high, but watching them now from a story viewpoint, the show really suffered. The show in its first three seasons had some sense of character growth and continuity, but once Lucy's famed writers, Bob and Madelyn left (as well as Vivian), it was simply let's see how Lucy reacts to meeting BIG movie star A or TV star B or singing sensation C.