Monday, May 9, 2016

Three's Company: Pilot #1

Three's Company: Pilot #1
ABC
Mid-March 1976
Sitcom
DVD
C+

With Man About the House wrapping up in the U.K., an American adaptation was in the works, but it took a few tries to get the right mix.  I would say this episode is more interesting than entertaining.  On my earlier blog (http://mathw3sc.blogspot.com/), I went into a very detailed comparison of this to not only the MAtH pilot but also the 3's C Pilot #3.  For now I just want to examine this pilot in relative isolation.

I was curious to see how Gelbart's script comes across, since he at this point had contributed some of the best and worst moments on M*A*S*H.  There was at least one line of David's that sounded like Hawkeyesque false modesty.  And there's quite a bit of sex humor, some of it kinkier than anything that could've aired on ABC at that time.  I also found a certain Californian and/or post-'60s quality running throughout the show, from the jokes about religion to David's remark that he delivered a baby to a lady in a neighboring tree at a rock concert.

I didn't feel like I really got a fix on the characters, except for Mr. Roper.  (Here called George, as in England, although the Missus is Helen.)  Fell's line readings and even some of his hand gestures are much like they would be.  As Lindley herself recognized, this Mrs. Roper wasn't going to work as a character, too tough and hard.  Susanne Zenor (who was Nurse Murphy on M*A*S*H) as Samantha doesn't come into focus too well.  I like 30-year-old Valerie Curtin, but having her call Zoey (Bobbie Mitchell, who was almost done playing various nurses on M*A*S*H at this point) a "banana person" feels off because she's kind of loopy herself.  And as I said five years ago, David Bell is too drifty and pseudo-intellectual to fit as a John Ritter character, although I do like that he's nicer to the girls than Jack would be.

I think overall this pilot is trying to be outrageous in several directions and there's no sensible/solid base here.  The series would precisely define its characters and settings, sometimes overdoing the stereotypes, but in a way that led to wonderful farce when it worked.

Dooty-dooty-doot-doo!

No comments:

Post a Comment