17 reviews
- happipuppi13
- Sep 29, 2014
- Permalink
I don't know why ABC wanted the Ropers spun off into their own sitcom. They were crucial to the success of Three's Company. They were succeeded by the amazing Don Knott as Mr. Furley. Anyway, this show wasn't the greatest or the worst television that I ever saw but I did enjoy watching the Ropers try to settle and deal with Jeffrey Tambor's snobbish character and neighbor. Helen and Stanley Roper will always be better known for their roles as the nosy landlords downstairs who were suspicious of Jack Tripper's sexual orientation. How ironic? Anyway, the Ropers only lasted a season which was just too short. The audience loved the Ropers and they could have returned as tenants on Three's Company after not lasting in their own series. Regardless, Norman Fell and Audra Lindley as the Ropers left quite a legacy in television history that won't be forgotten. Too bad, it didn't last longer in their own show. I don't think ABC gave it a fair chance.
- Sylviastel
- Apr 13, 2007
- Permalink
Decent at most, "The Ropers" is a spin off to the ABC hit sitcom "Three's Company". The show is based off the British series "George & Mildred", which itself is a spin off of the series " Man About the House" the series "Three's" is based off of.
Stanley and Helen Roper have sold their apartment and move to a townhouse in upscale Cheviot Hills. Their neighbor the pompous stuffed shirt Jeffrey P. Brooks is also their real estate agent. Played to hilarious perfection by Jeffrey Tambor. Brooks is a married man with a child, at times his personality clashes with Stanley's and it's up to his wife Anne (Patty McCormack) and Helen to calm their spouses down. At the same time Helen deals with her snobbish sibling Ethel and her forgetful mother.
Some of the episodes are exact copies of the "George & Mildred" story lines. Much like "Three's" the series had special guest stars, and even introduced a certain actress named Stevie"Louise"Vallance who would later be one of the pioneers in Canadian animation. Unfortunately just as the series had finally found its footing ABC pulled the plug, citing bad ratings. Audra Lindley and Norman Fell both were hesitant to do this series, in fact Norman would only agree if the show flopped and he could return to "Three's", the producers decided to make the show go a season and a half and resulting in the agreement being null and void. Overall, the series was a valiant attempt but it proved that sometimes supporting cast members can not make it on their own.
Stanley and Helen Roper have sold their apartment and move to a townhouse in upscale Cheviot Hills. Their neighbor the pompous stuffed shirt Jeffrey P. Brooks is also their real estate agent. Played to hilarious perfection by Jeffrey Tambor. Brooks is a married man with a child, at times his personality clashes with Stanley's and it's up to his wife Anne (Patty McCormack) and Helen to calm their spouses down. At the same time Helen deals with her snobbish sibling Ethel and her forgetful mother.
Some of the episodes are exact copies of the "George & Mildred" story lines. Much like "Three's" the series had special guest stars, and even introduced a certain actress named Stevie"Louise"Vallance who would later be one of the pioneers in Canadian animation. Unfortunately just as the series had finally found its footing ABC pulled the plug, citing bad ratings. Audra Lindley and Norman Fell both were hesitant to do this series, in fact Norman would only agree if the show flopped and he could return to "Three's", the producers decided to make the show go a season and a half and resulting in the agreement being null and void. Overall, the series was a valiant attempt but it proved that sometimes supporting cast members can not make it on their own.
- matthew_cantrell21
- Dec 5, 2016
- Permalink
Back in the good old days, when "Three's Company" had just come on the air, there were plenty of laughs around for Jack, Janet and Chrissy. But it was the crotchety, nosy landlords Stanley and Helen Roper (Fell and Lindley) who got the big guffaws for their live-action version of "the Lockhorns". They were a riot.
So, naturally, they got their own series titled, logically, "The Ropers". Having moved out of the apartment complex, they move into a duplex owned by the EXTREMELY stuffy Jeffrey P. Brooks III (Tambor, who was terrific) and his not-as-stuffy wife (McCormack). Eventually, it was the Ropers' turn to be spied on by a suspicious neighbor.
The first few episodes of this series were great, as Fell and Lindley expanded on their corrosive repartee from the original series. Then, adding Tambor as a humorless foil to their slobbery and the double-entendres that occurred when guests would drop by (usually, Jack, Janet or Crissy) every so often, made things even more hilarious.
But it was too good to last; the writing kind of slacked off as they attempted to make the ever-bickering Ropers more understanding and sensitive to each other. This, of course, entirely missed to point to their appeal; the constant bickering was their only form of communication and, by and large, the only way they could possibly stay together. Take that away, and what do you have left? Not too much else.
A conversation I'll always remember is when Stanley (Fell) is complaining that something Helen (Lindley) was doing was effeminate. Her comeback - "I AM effeminate - just like you're emasculate." Cue laugh track.
Well, I'll always remember the good parts of "The Ropers", anyway.
Six stars for "The Ropers" - the best neighbors you could ever have - move away, that is.
So, naturally, they got their own series titled, logically, "The Ropers". Having moved out of the apartment complex, they move into a duplex owned by the EXTREMELY stuffy Jeffrey P. Brooks III (Tambor, who was terrific) and his not-as-stuffy wife (McCormack). Eventually, it was the Ropers' turn to be spied on by a suspicious neighbor.
The first few episodes of this series were great, as Fell and Lindley expanded on their corrosive repartee from the original series. Then, adding Tambor as a humorless foil to their slobbery and the double-entendres that occurred when guests would drop by (usually, Jack, Janet or Crissy) every so often, made things even more hilarious.
But it was too good to last; the writing kind of slacked off as they attempted to make the ever-bickering Ropers more understanding and sensitive to each other. This, of course, entirely missed to point to their appeal; the constant bickering was their only form of communication and, by and large, the only way they could possibly stay together. Take that away, and what do you have left? Not too much else.
A conversation I'll always remember is when Stanley (Fell) is complaining that something Helen (Lindley) was doing was effeminate. Her comeback - "I AM effeminate - just like you're emasculate." Cue laugh track.
Well, I'll always remember the good parts of "The Ropers", anyway.
Six stars for "The Ropers" - the best neighbors you could ever have - move away, that is.
Just finished a month-long nostalgia kick: all eight seasons of Three's Company, two seasons of The Ropers, and the sole season of Three's a Crowd.
The Ropers is too often maligned, often making Internet lists for "Worst Spin-Off" or "Top Ten Terrible Spin-Offs." Make no mistake. The Ropers is no disaster like Joanie Loves Chachi or AfterMASH. In fact, The Ropers is quite palatable; often, it is hilarious. Norman Fell and Audra Lindley are terrific as always, and Jeffrey Tambor shines (thanks to his bald crown, of course) as the Ropers' uptight, upward-obsessed neighbor.
As others have stated, The Ropers may not be great. The couple are stronger in small doses. Still, the fact that this show lasted only a season plus six (season one is only six episodes) is a shame. The Ropers was a ratings smash for that first mini-season but tanked once it was switched to Saturday nights opposite CHiPS (why do television programmers do this?). It's a shame.
Concerns? As stated, Stanley/Fell and Helen/Lindley struggle to carry the weight of entire show, but what's really missing is a stronger supporting cast. Tambor is fantastic--don't get me wrong--but there's little else. Patricia McCormack is perfectly acceptable as Tambor's wife, and Evan Cohen is likable as the little boy, but Three's Company always boasted at least five strong characters, while The Ropers at times can feel claustrophobic: the two neighboring couples and not much else.
I don't know much about the history of The Ropers' ratings, but my guess is the addition of Stephanie Vallance as Jenny in the last ten episodes or so was a desperate attempt to inject a new storyline. This gambit is understandable, but Jenny, a young adult runaway with a heart of gold who moves in with the Ropers as their surrogate child of sorts, makes for an odd addition. Jenny is perfectly anodyne, and that's the problem. The show desperately needs another character or three, but only if that character is A) interesting and B) funny.
The Ropers deserved a better fate. It's certainly a good enough show to last four or five seasons. It's equally as good as, and often better than, other sitcoms that enjoyed healthy runs. And who knows? Given a chance to grow, The Ropers might have blossomed into something beyond its surface pleasures. Oh well.
The Ropers is too often maligned, often making Internet lists for "Worst Spin-Off" or "Top Ten Terrible Spin-Offs." Make no mistake. The Ropers is no disaster like Joanie Loves Chachi or AfterMASH. In fact, The Ropers is quite palatable; often, it is hilarious. Norman Fell and Audra Lindley are terrific as always, and Jeffrey Tambor shines (thanks to his bald crown, of course) as the Ropers' uptight, upward-obsessed neighbor.
As others have stated, The Ropers may not be great. The couple are stronger in small doses. Still, the fact that this show lasted only a season plus six (season one is only six episodes) is a shame. The Ropers was a ratings smash for that first mini-season but tanked once it was switched to Saturday nights opposite CHiPS (why do television programmers do this?). It's a shame.
Concerns? As stated, Stanley/Fell and Helen/Lindley struggle to carry the weight of entire show, but what's really missing is a stronger supporting cast. Tambor is fantastic--don't get me wrong--but there's little else. Patricia McCormack is perfectly acceptable as Tambor's wife, and Evan Cohen is likable as the little boy, but Three's Company always boasted at least five strong characters, while The Ropers at times can feel claustrophobic: the two neighboring couples and not much else.
I don't know much about the history of The Ropers' ratings, but my guess is the addition of Stephanie Vallance as Jenny in the last ten episodes or so was a desperate attempt to inject a new storyline. This gambit is understandable, but Jenny, a young adult runaway with a heart of gold who moves in with the Ropers as their surrogate child of sorts, makes for an odd addition. Jenny is perfectly anodyne, and that's the problem. The show desperately needs another character or three, but only if that character is A) interesting and B) funny.
The Ropers deserved a better fate. It's certainly a good enough show to last four or five seasons. It's equally as good as, and often better than, other sitcoms that enjoyed healthy runs. And who knows? Given a chance to grow, The Ropers might have blossomed into something beyond its surface pleasures. Oh well.
The Ropers were spun off of Three's Company after the third season. This spin-off actually fared better than the later spin-off Three's a Crowd in 1984, lasting roughly two seasons versus TAC's one season.
I personally find the Ropers (the show) to be very funny and humorous. Sure, it didn't have the sexual innuendos or physical comedic value that its parent series did but it had plenty of misunderstandings to make it a pleasant watch.
Jeffrey Tambor excels as Jeffrey P. Brookes III, the snooty and high-brow real estate agent that ends up being the Ropers' neighbor. His wife Anne is very down-to-earth and genuine, making friends with Helen Roper instantly. But it's no surprise that Brookes and Roper wouldn't get along with Roper being very unsophisticated and Brookes the opposite. Roper and Brookes are funny to watch but they can't hold the series up by themselves.
I personally find the Ropers (the show) to be very funny and humorous. Sure, it didn't have the sexual innuendos or physical comedic value that its parent series did but it had plenty of misunderstandings to make it a pleasant watch.
Jeffrey Tambor excels as Jeffrey P. Brookes III, the snooty and high-brow real estate agent that ends up being the Ropers' neighbor. His wife Anne is very down-to-earth and genuine, making friends with Helen Roper instantly. But it's no surprise that Brookes and Roper wouldn't get along with Roper being very unsophisticated and Brookes the opposite. Roper and Brookes are funny to watch but they can't hold the series up by themselves.
- nickb-22813
- May 24, 2022
- Permalink
Gaining widespread popularity from the hit sitcom "Three's Company", producers looked to give the Ropers (Norman Fell and Audra Lindley, respectively) their own series. The result is this short-lived spin-off (itself based on "George and Mildred", the British spin-off of "Man About the House", on which "Three's Company" was based). True to their characters, Lindley was excited for the opportunity while Fell was reluctant to leave a good role on a proven hit show. He was finally won over by a promise from the producers to give the show a year, and if canceled before that, they would return to their roles on "Three's Company". However, the legendary Don Knotts had come on board to replace the Ropers, and became a highly popular character in his own right. "The Ropers" ran for 28 episodes over two short seasons in 1979-80. The sitcom finds Stanley and Helen having sold their apartment building to move into a more luxurious locale in the affluent neighborhood of Cheviot Hills. Unlike her husband, Helen tries hard to fit in. Stanley is often at odds with their realtor, next-door neighbor Jeffrey P. Brooks III (Jeffrey Tambor), while Helen befriends his wife Anne (Patty McCormack) and their seven-year-old son David (Evan Cohen).
Make no mistake, the Ropers are beloved characters of television. But, they thrive in short bursts or working off top talent, as the case with John Ritter and "Three's Company". A show revolving around them was a struggle to ever find a way to takeoff. The kept their character traits, but the writing was prone to weak plots. The comedy was there, however, and at times hilarious. In some episodes there are two plots- a storyline with the Ropers and a completely unrelated one with the Brookes. Unlike a show such as "Seinfeld" where the different storylines ingeniously connect, the ones presented here sometimes exist well apart from one another. In these instances, the Brooke's plot is vague, limited and weak. In the second season they "jumped the shark" by adding a young homeless girl who had unknowingly been living in their attic to stay on in a recurring role.
A few personal favorite episodes are "The Party" (the only one with Jack, Janet, and Chrissy from "Three's Company"), "The Other Woman", and a tender script for "Baby Talk".
Make no mistake, the Ropers are beloved characters of television. But, they thrive in short bursts or working off top talent, as the case with John Ritter and "Three's Company". A show revolving around them was a struggle to ever find a way to takeoff. The kept their character traits, but the writing was prone to weak plots. The comedy was there, however, and at times hilarious. In some episodes there are two plots- a storyline with the Ropers and a completely unrelated one with the Brookes. Unlike a show such as "Seinfeld" where the different storylines ingeniously connect, the ones presented here sometimes exist well apart from one another. In these instances, the Brooke's plot is vague, limited and weak. In the second season they "jumped the shark" by adding a young homeless girl who had unknowingly been living in their attic to stay on in a recurring role.
A few personal favorite episodes are "The Party" (the only one with Jack, Janet, and Chrissy from "Three's Company"), "The Other Woman", and a tender script for "Baby Talk".
- JordanThomasHall
- Oct 15, 2020
- Permalink
A couple of talented people, Audra Lindley and Norman Fell had some great supporting roles in Three's Company. Audra was a forty/fifty something who wanted a little romance in her life or at least some sex from her husband. Living on the beach front as they did I'm surprised that Lindley didn't have her pick of surfer dudes to fill her with high octane. But that was the characters that were created, the disinterested husband and the lovelorn wife.
They were great supporting characters. But that's all they were, supporting characters. So it was no surprise that The Ropers who sold their building just could not carry a show built around them for more than one season.
Somehow they should have been worked back into Three's Company.
They were great supporting characters. But that's all they were, supporting characters. So it was no surprise that The Ropers who sold their building just could not carry a show built around them for more than one season.
Somehow they should have been worked back into Three's Company.
- bkoganbing
- May 28, 2016
- Permalink
I have seen all of the episodes and been trying for many years to find this on DVD?
- tinker-95667
- Jun 11, 2021
- Permalink
Without a doubt The Ropers will go down as one of the worst spinoffs ever. The producers thought they can capitalize on Three's Company popularity but the Ropers was just so boring. You can only go with Norman Fell's facial takes for so long and Helen was just tacky. As for the Ropers neighbors the Brooks Jeffrey Tambor was funny as the stuffed shirt and Patty McCormack was sort of hot and as for the son he was basically the cute kid but had no personality. The Ropers also had the worst intro ever cause there was no thought into it and was bland as with the theme song. Luckily it only lasted barely two seasons but sadly as for Norman Fell and Audra Lindley they could not return to Three's Company cause they were replaced by Don Knotts.
- coreycitn63
- Apr 12, 2022
- Permalink
This is a pretty good spin-off from Three's Company, where the kids' landlords, Stanley and Helen Roper, sold their apartment building and moved into a new house.
The Ropers have the same dynamic as they had in Three's Company, and it was fun seeing them deal with their neighbors and visiting relatives. Not too keen on Jeffrey Tambor's character though - seems only a one dimensional character with no redeeming qualities.
I do enjoy the guest appearances of the Three's Company characters - makes you feel like you're watching that show again. Quite an entertaining show - too bad it didn't last longer.
Grade B
The Ropers have the same dynamic as they had in Three's Company, and it was fun seeing them deal with their neighbors and visiting relatives. Not too keen on Jeffrey Tambor's character though - seems only a one dimensional character with no redeeming qualities.
I do enjoy the guest appearances of the Three's Company characters - makes you feel like you're watching that show again. Quite an entertaining show - too bad it didn't last longer.
Grade B
- OllieSuave-007
- Nov 11, 2017
- Permalink
It's pretty clear that they only created this show to cash in on the unimaginable success of Three's Company.The Roper's weren't characters who needed a spin-off.They were just bit players in a below average sitcom, not charismatic superstars.Sadly, The Ropers is basically the exact same show as Three's Company except that the neighbors are married.Every plot/joke is about a misunderstanding.It's lazy writing but why would a good writer want to work on this show?The only bright spot in this sad excuse for a sitcom is the performance of Jeffrey Tambor.Too bad it would be twenty years until he was in a good show.And even worse that FOX cancelled it.Don't watch this show.Trust me.
The British did a series called Man About The House which in the USA became Three's Company ,there were two spin-offs from Man About The House,one was called Robin's Nest which in the USA became Three's A Crowd and the other was called George and Mildred which in the USA became this show The Ropers.
The premise-Helen and Stanley selling the apt building and moving into an upper class neighborhood with snooty neighbors. I know I watched this show when I was a young teen in 1979 but hardly remembered it since it didn't last very long however this past weekend during TVLAND's Three's Company marathon they showed a few episodes of the short lived series.The show did have a few laughs ,however it was quite evident that the main characters could not keep this show afloat.While the British spin off had much more background and substance the Ropers did not.Helen's love starved landlady and her bickering with Stanley worked great on Three's Company as a supporting act but you couldn't continue to play that gag as a main act.So they started having Stanley and Helen get along better and become more sympathetic to each other.This obviously turned off audiences who had grown to love the zingers between the two. According to IMDb trivia even the stars Norman Fell and Audra Lindley didn't feel good about doing this spin off. They should have heeded their feelings. Making a deal with the network that they could return to Three's Company full time if the show didn't last a season was a curse. The show lasted a season and a half and after a guest appearance on Three's Company they were gone for good. I will always remember them as The Ropers on Three's Company where they should have stayed.
The premise-Helen and Stanley selling the apt building and moving into an upper class neighborhood with snooty neighbors. I know I watched this show when I was a young teen in 1979 but hardly remembered it since it didn't last very long however this past weekend during TVLAND's Three's Company marathon they showed a few episodes of the short lived series.The show did have a few laughs ,however it was quite evident that the main characters could not keep this show afloat.While the British spin off had much more background and substance the Ropers did not.Helen's love starved landlady and her bickering with Stanley worked great on Three's Company as a supporting act but you couldn't continue to play that gag as a main act.So they started having Stanley and Helen get along better and become more sympathetic to each other.This obviously turned off audiences who had grown to love the zingers between the two. According to IMDb trivia even the stars Norman Fell and Audra Lindley didn't feel good about doing this spin off. They should have heeded their feelings. Making a deal with the network that they could return to Three's Company full time if the show didn't last a season was a curse. The show lasted a season and a half and after a guest appearance on Three's Company they were gone for good. I will always remember them as The Ropers on Three's Company where they should have stayed.
- BigWhiskers
- Sep 17, 2006
- Permalink
After selling their building, Stanley Roper (Norman Fell) wants to live in an RV but his wife Helen (Audra Lindley) pushes him to buy a house eight miles away. The problem is that the seller, Jeffrey P. Brookes III (Jeffrey Tambor), is also going to be their new neighbor. Jeffrey is pompous and dislikes the Ropers. Stanley doesn't like him either. Jeffrey is married to lovely Anne with a young son named David.
This is a spin-off of the highly successful Three's Company. It's a mistake. It's not a mistake for Three's Company or Don Knotts. The legendary Knotts is an upgrade and that show never missed the Ropers. It's a mistake for this show. The Ropers are side characters with singular moves. The issue is that they fail to develop them as multi-dimensional characters. It could have been interesting to have them move in with a few kids or do the full Golden Girls by moving in with other seniors. The only truly interesting addition is the talented Jeffrey Tambor. It's also another one dimensional character and his family is a dud. He's a grump and Stanley's a grump. There is a bitterness to this sitcom. By the second season, the show figured it needed something and tries to add runaway Jenny who moves in with the Ropers. It's a desperation move of a failing show. It had a good run in the first season with six episodes helped by its iconic originating show. It ends after a full second season when the people eventually figured it out. It's not a good show.
This is a spin-off of the highly successful Three's Company. It's a mistake. It's not a mistake for Three's Company or Don Knotts. The legendary Knotts is an upgrade and that show never missed the Ropers. It's a mistake for this show. The Ropers are side characters with singular moves. The issue is that they fail to develop them as multi-dimensional characters. It could have been interesting to have them move in with a few kids or do the full Golden Girls by moving in with other seniors. The only truly interesting addition is the talented Jeffrey Tambor. It's also another one dimensional character and his family is a dud. He's a grump and Stanley's a grump. There is a bitterness to this sitcom. By the second season, the show figured it needed something and tries to add runaway Jenny who moves in with the Ropers. It's a desperation move of a failing show. It had a good run in the first season with six episodes helped by its iconic originating show. It ends after a full second season when the people eventually figured it out. It's not a good show.
- SnoopyStyle
- Apr 20, 2019
- Permalink
- stuarttomanek
- Oct 6, 2023
- Permalink
An ambitious effort from Norman Fell and Audra Lindley as they portrayed the hilarious landlord couple Stanley and Helen Roper from the hit series Three's Company. In the spin off show, Stanley and Helen moved from their Santa Monica apartment to the upscale neighbourhood called Cheviott Hills and their new neighbour was not fond of having them as part of the community. The show just didn't seem to be as good as Three's Company. Stanley and Helen were better as supporting cast members rather than as series leads. The cast was small including Jeffrey Tambor as the neighbour Jeffrey P. Brooks III. He's not a likable character, but his dislike towards Stanley and his quirks behind closed doors made the show funny. Recurring cast included Helen's troublemaker sister Ethel, and her mother; these two characters did not appear on Three's Company.
- phbalanced
- Mar 7, 2006
- Permalink
- uknumbergb
- Mar 5, 2006
- Permalink