Good idea lost in the noise

Did you people see the same film I saw?

Absolutely the worst movie.

There are moments that feel comical, some horrific, and some downright inspiring but the tonal shifts hardly matter as the end results come to a film that's perfect for this time.

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.

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

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.

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.