Roper should have sued Jim Walsh - Sitcoms Online Message Boards

JSP · 08-28-2014, 05:59 PM

It made no sense he was holding Jack, Chrissy, and Janet responsible for the damage Walsh did to the apartment furniture.

Jim Walsh really needed to get his comeuppance in this episode. So unsatisfying how he got away with so much B.S.

JackJanetChrissy · 08-28-2014, 06:39 PM

Yeah, that is the one episode that I don't watch. It's such a downer. Not only does he not get his comeuppance, but I find the trio frustrating, too. They break the suspension of disbelief. Usually we as the audience can accept the lack of communication, etc, because the ensuing misunderstanding distracts us. But in this episode they are just willfully obtuse with no comedy to redeem it.

I feel like yelling at the TV....why don't they call the police? Why doesn't Jack stand up to him? Why don't the Ropers get more agitated when they see what's up? Lol, I guess I get really invested.

Mace Dolex · 08-28-2014, 07:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JackJanetChrissy

I feel like yelling at the TV....why don't they call the police? Why doesn't Jack stand up to him? Why don't the Ropers get more agitated when they see what's up? Lol, I guess I get really invested.

Those are some questions we will never know, I mean like for example in season 5 when Jack is being harrassed by the bully Max played by Terry Kiser, why didn't he call the police then too?

JackJanetChrissy · 08-28-2014, 08:02 PM

I agree. But the Terry Kiser episode was funny enough to distract me from the glaring plot holes. Let's face it, TC was centered around glaring plot holes, ha ha. They were easier to ignore in some episodes more than others.

TVFactFan · 08-30-2014, 05:46 PM

The Terry Kiser had a humorous feel to it, the episode with the blind guy just didn't feel right at all

He comes in assualting Jack and damaging their property

Something we never see again after this episode

08-28-2014, 05:59 PM	#1
JSP Member Senior Member Join Date: Aug 19, 2003 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 2,735	Roper should have sued Jim Walsh It made no sense he was holding Jack, Chrissy, and Janet responsible for the damage Walsh did to the apartment furniture. Jim Walsh really needed to get his comeuppance in this episode. So unsatisfying how he got away with so much B.S.

08-28-2014, 06:39 PM	#2
JackJanetChrissy Member Forum Regular Join Date: Jun 18, 2014 Posts: 1,005	Yeah, that is the one episode that I don't watch. It's such a downer. Not only does he not get his comeuppance, but I find the trio frustrating, too. They break the suspension of disbelief. Usually we as the audience can accept the lack of communication, etc, because the ensuing misunderstanding distracts us. But in this episode they are just willfully obtuse with no comedy to redeem it. I feel like yelling at the TV....why don't they call the police? Why doesn't Jack stand up to him? Why don't the Ropers get more agitated when they see what's up? Lol, I guess I get really invested.

08-28-2014, 08:02 PM	#4
JackJanetChrissy Member Forum Regular Join Date: Jun 18, 2014 Posts: 1,005	I agree. But the Terry Kiser episode was funny enough to distract me from the glaring plot holes. Let's face it, TC was centered around glaring plot holes, ha ha. They were easier to ignore in some episodes more than others.

08-30-2014, 05:46 PM	#5
TVFactFan Member Forum Junkie Join Date: Aug 17, 2002 Posts: 99,023	The Terry Kiser had a humorous feel to it, the episode with the blind guy just didn't feel right at all He comes in assualting Jack and damaging their property Something we never see again after this episode