Jump to content

The Spin Off Thread


Paul Raven

Recommended Posts

  • Members

Scott Baio: "If I had to do it all over again, I would’ve waited ’til Happy Days was over until I did anything else."

Too bad "Happy Days" isn't still on the air.  We could have been spared so many OTHER bad performances from Scotty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 131
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Members

I would count it more as a sequel since "Trapper John" took place after "M*A*S*H" and the character was played by a different actor.  Just as I would count the new "Perry Mason" series on HBO as a prequel to the Raymond Burr series since it's supposed to take place in the years BEFORE he became an attorney.

Edited by Khan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Speaking of MASH, we have AfterMASH which debuted at #1 but slowly dropped in the ratings in its first season, to the point that CBS replaced it with Kate & Allie which luckily for them drew viewers back to Mon @9.

For season 2 there were some changes but the show was moved to Tues @8 (traditionally a flopzone for CBS) where it was pummelled by The A Team.

What went wrong? Was the format the problem-w/o the war background and Hawkeye/Margaret/Charle

The pilot 'Walter' which in contention for the 84/85 season. It dis air at some point.

Radar is a spinoff from M *A *S *H with Gary Burghoff in a reprise of his Radar O'Reilly character, now working as a police officer in Kansas City. 20th Century-Fox Television is producing and the team of Bob Schiller and Bob Weiskopf are scripting.

Edited by Paul Raven
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Also, from what I recall reading, Trapper John, M.D. was said to be a continuation of Trapper from the M*A*S*H movie, with Elliott Gould's version, not Wayne Rogers', so that makes it a bit more complicated there.

I think - in an episode snippet I recall seeing on YT - Parnell Roberts' version of Trapper had fallen asleep at the hospital, and grainy images of the film were used as he dreamed of his past in the war, so...

Edited by Wendy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I am really shocked no one has mentioned Laverne & Shirley yet. I think it was probably the most successful spin-off as it ranked #3 in its first half-season, then #2 the next season and then #1 for the two seasons after.

It seriously dropped when it was moved from its slot after its parent, Happy Days on Tuesdays, to a Thursday time slot. It failed miserably and it was shunted to Mondays at 8 for a while before back to Tuesdays for the rest of its run where it stayed in the 20s. That next season, they moved to California, and in the last season, Shirley left the show, leaving Laverne to finish out the rest of the season. It was actually going to be renewed, but Penny Marshall wanted to move production to New York. Ultimately, this was going to be too costly, and the show ended after eight seasons.

On Happy Days, the characters were more promiscuous than they ended up being on their own show. The scripts weren't always the greatest (especially after the move to California), but Penny Marshall & Cindy Williams created some of the best physical comedy on television this side of Lucille Ball!

 

I would've been down for that.

 

We had that book in our library! Their copy stopped with the 1979-80 season, but I loved poring over that book! Years later, I saw they had updated it through the mid-80s in a bookstore, but I was too poor to purchase it at the time. That would be a great book to update every five years or so! I wish I could remember the name.

 

Edited by cct
typos
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Laverne and Shirley's collapse was interesting. The show outrated Happy Days at times and it was moved  to Mork & Mindy's timeslot so inherited a strong spot, yet immediately softened in the numbers.

Maybe creatively it was not the best time to move? Was the show becoming a little tired and viewers were watching it because of the timeslot?

ABC was big on spinoffs in the Silverman years.

Bionic Woman and Fish were 2 more examples.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Also, well before the second failed spinoff of Three's A Crowd in 1984, Three's Company also introduced the first failed spinoff, The Ropers around 1979 or so (which airs on the Three's Company channel on Pluto TV, as does Three's A Crowd!).

Of course, it is well known that Norman Fell and Audra Lindley got screwed by this spinoff. I read Norman Fell did not even want to do it, but ABC had promised him that if the spinoff failed, that he and Audra Lindley could return to Three's Company. But then TPTB hired Don Knotts as Ralph Furley, who was a hit, and the producers basically kicked Fell and Lindley to the curb following the cancellation of The Ropers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yup.  In fact, Fell theorized that ABC deliberately held off on cancelling "The Ropers" officially until the year-long clause had lapsed.  Otherwise, according to Fell, NRW would have been obligated to return him and Lindley to "Three's Company."

(I don't know whether that's all true, but I have heard Fell express that belief.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Three's a crowd was so dull. Vicky was boring as hell. Who thought of pairing John Ritter with her?

54th place..where it belonged

I know John Ritter was crushed it failed.

 

Please register in order to view this content

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Agree.  As I've said in the past, the Ropers were a one-joke couple, and that one joke was old the first time they told it.

Agree.  The writers gave her no personality whatsoever.  And while they gave E.Z. a personality, unfortunately, it was the wrong one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • I love many things about BTG very much. For me, it's greatest strength is how the family relationships are so beautifully written. The deep love between family members while acknowledging each other's flaws--it's SO GOOD.  The best of the best is the two sister relationships: loving but very different sisters Dani and Nicole and adversarial sisters Kat and Eva. These two relationships can anchor the show for many years to come, in my opinion. (The one caveat is that the young and very talented Colby and Ambyr may want to leave the show sooner rather than later, but that's to be expected). My biggest problem with this show is this: Where are the romantic love stories? Where are the star-crossed lovers? Almost every character on this show is married, or in a committed relationship, or just fooling around. Right now the only potential for this are in the Ashley/Andre/Derek and Kat/Tomas/Eva situations. Like a lot of people, I feel the sooner they ditch Ashley and Derek, the better. I hate picking on actors, but the characters are so blah and bland it's like they're a parody of soap characters. I like Andre, and there's some indication they might have him become more serious about Dani, but I don't see that becoming a big love story. I could be wrong. Kat and Eva fighting over a man would be amazing. Over Tomas? No.  I've noticed on social media some people are starting to ship Kat and Jacob. I think that shows how much viewers long for a messy love story. There is much I enjoy about BTG and I have no intention of bailing on it. But over all my many years of watching soap operas, the thing that always got me the most excited about them was the question: "When are those two finally going to get together?"
    • FROM THE VAULT: WEEKLY DAYTIME NIELSEN RATINGS: WEEKS OF 11/26/73-11/30/73 & 12/3/73-12/7/73:

      Please register in order to view this content

    • Please register in order to view this content

        Some initial thoughts.   1) a Who's who back in the day with an assortment of well known performers. 2) Surprised Debra Messing would agree to play a conservative character 3) Not surprised a network didn't pick this up because showing a conservative that is human/likable is a no no in Hollywood LOL
    • Yes from when they went on Let’s Make a Deal too. Pam stole Forrester designs for Jackie M. Of course a month later we saw Nick, Lesley, Owen, and Bridget all exit in the same episode.
    • Great pairing that seemed to come out of the blue! Around that time, it felt like Sheffer/Goutman didn’t really know what to do with Emily or Hal. And KM and BH had surprisingly great chemistry. It was good for Emily especially because she was coming off those unsympathetic years with the Tom affair and then running the Intruder and essentially just being a busybody.
    • I think the issue with Lulu is less the character (which was the issue in the Julie Berman days under Guza II) and more the lack of nuance. The current GH team rarely writes nuance for any character or at least can't sustain it for long, or they reserve it for a favored few. I also think the rooting interest at GH BTS often remains on preferred characters or actors - BLQ/Setton - vs. Laura's kids. So it's easy to make Lulu the heavy if you think Brook Lynn and Chase are the money on this show. I don't, but I think FV does. And that's not to say I think Amanda Setton is bad in the role, or that I would get rid of BLQ. I don't trend towards either (though I do think that if Setton's personal beliefs keep getting in the way of material I would reluctantly recast). I think Brook Lynn is essential to use as a lead presently. But I don't think it needs to be the black and white dichotomy of suffering young matriarch BLQ and aggressor Lulu. While it's good that unlike in the Guza years they can recognize that Lulu can be obnoxious and rash, can be her own worst enemy and that that is part of the character, it can be toned down or given more layers than it has of late. There's nothing wrong there the writing can't fix.
    • 1999: I just watched it. It felt so primetime. La Lucci is making history. Aretha's daydreaming segment. @Contessa Donatella Thank you, my love. So helpful and informative as always. adding them to my queue.
    • I know this isn’t a usual or anywhere near universal take, but I loved the relatively brief Hal/Emily relationship/marriage more than I ever thought I would have with KMH/BH.
    • In my field (not that) I've written my share of dreck when it's what people wanted vs. something good. In the end what matters is the check. These pilots may not be great, but whether or not those writers intended otherwise they got paid.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy