Why was the Ropers given their own show when Three's Company was doing so well? - Sitcoms Online Message Boards

TVFactFan · 09-21-2002, 12:40 PM

It appeared to me that Norman Fell, Audrey Linsey, John Ritter, Joyce Dewitt, and Suzanne Somers were working so well together to put the show Three's company high in the ratings. I'm trying to figure ot why-The show at that time was only on the air for 2 years-So giving the Ropers their own show was a litlle too fast wasn't it? I feel they the Ropers should have stayed-Norman Fell was my favorite character-he was defintely a original. But does someone know the REAL reason the Ropers were giving their own show?

Brian Damage · 09-21-2002, 03:35 PM

The Ropers were popular and the network felt what could be better than one hit sitcom?...Two hit sitcoms! Sadly for the Ropers, it didn't work out that way. Besides, Three's Company was an idea taken from a British sitcom, Man about the house. It was almost exactly like Three's company. On the Britcom, the roomates also had landlords. They were named George and Mildred. The landlords on the Britcom also got their own show called George and Mildred.

I think from the beginning, the Three's Company writers had an idea that The Ropers would one day get their own spinoff show.

TVFactFan · 09-21-2002, 03:45 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by briandamage
The Ropers were popular and the network felt what could be better than one hit sitcom?...Two hit sitcoms! Sadly for the Ropers, it didn't work out that way. Besides, Three's Company was an idea taken from a British sitcom, Man about the house. It was almost exactly like Three's company. On the Britcom, the roomates also had landlords. They were named George and Mildred. The landlords on the Britcom also got their own show called George and Mildred.

I think from the beginning, the Three's Company writers had an idea that The Ropers would one day get their own spinoff show.

Why wasn't the Ropers let back when their show was cancelled? And how did the producers get the Ropers to come back for that one episode with Mr. Furley when they decided not to make them regulars on the show again.

Sean Snow · 09-21-2002, 06:04 PM

Don Knotts cost less then Audra and Norman because he was only one person. The 1981 episode was only a guest appearence, they were not planning on bringing them back.

TVFactFan · 09-21-2002, 06:10 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sean Snow
Don Knotts cost less then Audra and Norman because he was only one person. The 1981 episode was only a guest appearence, they were not planning on bringing them back.

But I was surprised that Norman Fell and Audrey Lindsey decided to make a guest appearance because when they wanted to come back as regulars the producers said no-So maybe both Fell and Lindsey were offered a nice amount money to do to that one episode.

TelevisionQueen · 09-22-2002, 03:27 PM

Norman didn't want to do the spin-off; he wanted to stay on Three's Company, but Audra wanted to do the spin-off, so the producers made a deal with Norman that if the show didn't last for one season, then they could come back on the show. Well, the show got cancelled after like, 1 1/2 seasons, and so Norman went back to the TC producers, but they told him that they had already got a replacement that was cheaper.

TVFactFan · 09-22-2002, 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by TelevisionQueen
Norman didn't want to do the spin-off; he wanted to stay on Three's Company, but Audra wanted to do the spin-off, so the producers made a deal with Norman that if the show didn't last for one season, then they could come back on the show. Well, the show got cancelled after like, 1 1/2 seasons, and so Norman went back to the TC producers, but they told him that they had already got a replacement that was cheaper.

Well if the TC Producers did Norman Fell that dirty, how was they able to get Norman to guest star on the episode when The Ropers met Mr. furley? I would have thought he would have said no since he was lied to about being able to return to TC if the spinoff did not make it.

Krisalicious · 09-22-2002, 04:46 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by SOLOMON
But I was surprised that Norman Fell and Audrey Lindsey decided to make a guest appearance because when they wanted to come back as regulars the producers said no-So maybe both Fell and Lindsey were offered a nice amount money to do to that one episode.

Can i just say one thing................

HER NAME IS AUDRA LINDLEY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

TelevisionQueen · 09-22-2002, 05:31 PM

AH! Lindsey, that's funny!!!!

TVFactFan · 09-22-2002, 06:37 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Shane West's Angel
Can i just say one thing................

HER NAME IS AUDRA LINDLEY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I figured i had it wrong-but i was just too lazy to find out her exact name since most people who know who i was referring to.

09-21-2002, 12:40 PM	#1
TVFactFan Member Forum Junkie Join Date: Aug 17, 2002 Posts: 99,055	Why was the Ropers given their own show when Three's Company was doing so well? It appeared to me that Norman Fell, Audrey Linsey, John Ritter, Joyce Dewitt, and Suzanne Somers were working so well together to put the show Three's company high in the ratings. I'm trying to figure ot why-The show at that time was only on the air for 2 years-So giving the Ropers their own show was a litlle too fast wasn't it? I feel they the Ropers should have stayed-Norman Fell was my favorite character-he was defintely a original. But does someone know the REAL reason the Ropers were giving their own show?

09-21-2002, 03:35 PM	#2
Brian Damage I'm Rich Bitch Forum Icon Join Date: Feb 03, 2002 Location: What Ain't No Country I Ever Heard Of...They Speak English in What? Posts: 63,107	The Ropers were popular and the network felt what could be better than one hit sitcom?...Two hit sitcoms! Sadly for the Ropers, it didn't work out that way. Besides, Three's Company was an idea taken from a British sitcom, Man about the house. It was almost exactly like Three's company. On the Britcom, the roomates also had landlords. They were named George and Mildred. The landlords on the Britcom also got their own show called George and Mildred. I think from the beginning, the Three's Company writers had an idea that The Ropers would one day get their own spinoff show.
	__________________ The Key to the Kingdom of Heaven: John 3:3 *Money Doesn't Buy Happiness...But I'd Rather Cry in My Private Jet*

09-21-2002, 06:04 PM	#4
Sean Snow moo Forum Fanatic Join Date: May 06, 2001 Location: Georgia Posts: 10,408	Don Knotts cost less then Audra and Norman because he was only one person. The 1981 episode was only a guest appearence, they were not planning on bringing them back.
	__________________ If by a "Liberal" they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people — their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties — someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a "Liberal," then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal." - John F. Kennedy

09-22-2002, 03:27 PM	#6
TelevisionQueen Just like his Dad Frequent Poster Join Date: Aug 10, 2002 Location: Drooling over my small collection of Jason Ritter pictures...what a hunk! Posts: 338	Norman didn't want to do the spin-off; he wanted to stay on Three's Company, but Audra wanted to do the spin-off, so the producers made a deal with Norman that if the show didn't last for one season, then they could come back on the show. Well, the show got cancelled after like, 1 1/2 seasons, and so Norman went back to the TC producers, but they told him that they had already got a replacement that was cheaper.
	__________________ RIP John Ritter - Where the kisses are hers and hers and his...Three's Company too...

09-22-2002, 05:31 PM	#9
TelevisionQueen Just like his Dad Frequent Poster Join Date: Aug 10, 2002 Location: Drooling over my small collection of Jason Ritter pictures...what a hunk! Posts: 338	AH! Lindsey, that's funny!!!!