Three's Company (1977 to 1984)

Discussion in 'Visual Arts' started by jason88cubs, Sep 5, 2020.

  1. palisantrancho

    palisantrancho Forum Resident

    Yeah. Only $500 now! I only have season 4. Should have bought the entire series when it was available.
     
    Grant likes this.
  2. Grant

    Grant Senior Member

    Location:
    United States
    That's how I feel about a lot of TV shows. I never bought the whole series for a lot of them, and if they aren't re-packaged, i'll never get the complete sets.
     
    palisantrancho likes this.
  3. Vidiot

    Vidiot Now in 4K HDR!

    Location:
    Hollywood, USA
    I think SAG-AFTRA is more involved with benefits and working conditions. The moment the actor gets more than SAG-minimum, it's out of their hands. Contract law is separate and distinct from the SAG basic agreement. If the actor suddenly quits and demands more money than they had agreed to in the contract, it's a problem. A lot boils down to how valuable the actor is to the show.
     
    eddiel and OldSoul like this.
  4. Shoes1916

    Shoes1916 Active Member

    Location:
    United States
    There's a really good TV movie about the series - probably lost to time...
     
  5. Kyle B

    Kyle B Forum Resident

    Location:
    Chicago
    I think they spent about $10 on that intro to The Ropers. Notice how the camera pulled back too far during Jeffery Tambor’s credit and lost some of the blue backdrop, but they apparently weren’t going to spend the money to reshoot it.
     
    tonesteroc likes this.
  6. Vidiot

    Vidiot Now in 4K HDR!

    Location:
    Hollywood, USA
    Those were very, very cheap shows in terms of sets and crews.
     
  7. 905

    905 Forum Resident

    Location:
    St. Louis
    Jack and Mr Roper slept together after having too much to drink at a party. Classic episode.
     
    Last edited: Sep 14, 2020
    Grand_Ennui and Grant like this.
  8. 905

    905 Forum Resident

    Location:
    St. Louis
  9. Grant

    Grant Senior Member

    Location:
    United States
    I have been binge-watching the show on DVD. Just got though with the one where Jack keeps lying to get out of accidentally double-dating two women. Hilarious stuff.
     
    905 likes this.
  10. Shoes1916

    Shoes1916 Active Member

    Location:
    United States
    Agreed that he was phoning it in during his run on the show, but elsewhere?

    A legend & a genius.
     
  11. Shoes1916

    Shoes1916 Active Member

    Location:
    United States
    I think it was very much a product of its era.

    Like Dallas or Dynasty, if you didn't take it too seriously, you could enjoy it.
     
    Grant likes this.
  12. Shoes1916

    Shoes1916 Active Member

    Location:
    United States
    That is a GREAT theme - just trying to figure out the lyrics before the internet! :doh:

    Down at our rendezvous - three is company too!
     
    wrappedinsky and OldSoul like this.
  13. Shoes1916

    Shoes1916 Active Member

    Location:
    United States
    In addition to being a genuinely nice guy, Ritter was a brilliant slapstick artist.

    And his appearances on Scrubs! :edthumbs:
     
    Grant likes this.
  14. Grant

    Grant Senior Member

    Location:
    United States
    And his final role in Bad Santa.:agree:
     
    Pete Puma and Shoes1916 like this.
  15. Vidiot

    Vidiot Now in 4K HDR!

    Location:
    Hollywood, USA
    Oh, I got paid to work on Dallas, Dynasty, and Knott's Landing for about six months, and that's the only way I could watch those shows. They were haaaaaarible. I don't dispute they had a huge audience for their time... but that was 35 years ago.
     
    cloggedmind likes this.
  16. Big Jimbo

    Big Jimbo Forum Resident

    Location:
    NY
    Antenna TV started a new cycle of “Three’s Company” last week so I decided to record and watch them for the first time in 40 years. I have watched the first three episodes and it simply is not a good show (I am being charitable). I am tempted erase the few on the machine since even if improves, it still isn’t much. Suzanne Somers was better looking than I remember her but that’s all I can say for it.
    The backstage drama was more interesting than the show.
     
  17. Shoes1916

    Shoes1916 Active Member

    Location:
    United States
    Well, they weren't as insanely fun as Dukes or CHiPs, but for those able to turn their brains off & roll with the idiot punches, w00t!

    :wiggle:
     
  18. Shoes1916

    Shoes1916 Active Member

    Location:
    United States
    The backstage drama WAS the best; I wish I could see that TV movie about the show again!
     
  19. SomeCallMeTim

    SomeCallMeTim Forum Resident

    Location:
    Rockville, CT
    Oh, but it was legal, even in Santa Monica, at least in 1977 when the show premiered. There were protections against discrimination based on race, religion, and the presence of children in the household. Owners of buildings of certain sizes (IIRC, six units or less) were also allowed to turn applicants away for any reason other than their race, provided the owners lived on the property. There is still a remaining loophole at the federal level, and that of many states, that allows a property owner to refuse housing to a couple living together without being married.

    That said, Roper's stipulation that Jack had to go unless he was gay seemed a bit Puritanical for southern California at the time.
     
    OldSoul, eddiel and Jack Lord like this.
  20. the pope ondine

    the pope ondine Forum Resident

    Location:
    Virginia
    [​IMG]


    great ep, this was on the other night
     
    905 likes this.
  21. Jack Lord

    Jack Lord Forum Resident

    Location:
    Washington, DC
    Mad Magazine did a spoof of the show as they did for most. The final scene has Mr. Roper deciding to sell the building and divorce "that dirty old lady." Jack hopes that the new landlord will be as tolerant towards Gays. Enter Anita Bryant holding a whip and proclaiming there would be changes coming while Jack cringes in fear.

    Different times ...
     
    RobMac, SomeCallMeTim and Pete Puma like this.
  22. Kyle B

    Kyle B Forum Resident

    Location:
    Chicago
    That first short season of six shows is pretty embryonic, for lack of a better term. The characterizations and writing and cast chemistry hadn’t quite gelled yet. There’s a marked difference between those spring 1977 shows, and the shows from the full 1977-78 season. They were also re-using scripts from the British original during that first season. When they started using original or scripts that fall (or at least more tailored adaptations), they came into their own.
     
    eddiel likes this.
  23. Grand_Ennui

    Grand_Ennui Forum Resident

    Location:
    WI

    FWIW, I think Janet's hair was probably the best in that first embryonic season.
     
    OldSoul, LSP2003, 905 and 2 others like this.
  24. Luvtemps

    Luvtemps Forum Resident

    Location:
    P.G.County,Md.
    Good clean fun..classic series.
     
    Grand_Ennui likes this.
  25. palisantrancho

    palisantrancho Forum Resident

    I have always loved the show. I started watching a couple days ago from the beginning and am now at episode 21. This will be a struggle to get through the entire series in a quick fashion. It was going smoothly until a few dull episodes crept in. I know it picks back up but it will be hard to keep up the enthusiasm for 8 seasons with all the repetition and weak episodes. I will power through but it might take a long time to finish the series.

    How many of you have tried watching the entire series from beginning to end? How long did it take you?
     

Share This Page