"Sanford and Son" Pot Luck (TV Episode 1973) Poster

(TV Series)

(1973)

User Reviews

Review this title
2 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
8/10
Jonathan Harris as Emile Bonnet
kevinolzak17 December 2016
Warning: Spoilers
"Pot Luck" was the 16th and final episode directly adapted from the British STEPTOE AND SON, almost a rewrite of the debut episode "Crossed Swords." Fred introduces plastic flowers in the junkyard and wants to know what Lamont has been doing: "this is what separates the little businessman from the big businessman, the lamb from the wolf, and the cow from the bull" "okay then, let's cut out the bull and tell me!" He paid $20 for a 19th century English commode (complete with chamber pot) from an old white woman, which might net as much as a $400 profit. Lamont enthuses about a piece of history but his father is less impressed: "I am looking at a toilet!" Mister Osborne (Herb Voland) is the husband of the woman who sold Lamont the commode, paying $200 to get it back. On top of that, collector Emile Bonnet (Jonathan Harris) has offered $900 for it, leaving his phone number which turns out to be for a McDonald's hamburger place. Fred schools his son on the lowdown between the two crooks, their check still bouncing: "he who liveth by the sword shall be stucketh!"
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Were Lamont and Fred Drinking Before Shooting?
christmashtn31 August 2008
My roommate and I have been thoroughly enjoying this classic series on DVD, episode by episode. As soon as Lamont exits the Sanford + Son pick up truck in this "Pot Luck" episode, it is apparent that he is drunk for at least the first half of this episode. It does not take long to figure that he is not acting. Lamont slurs his words, has huge bags under his eyes, and behaves and speaks more angrily than accustomed. His attire is also worn somewhat more ragged if one looks closely. Fred though not drunk is obviously tipsy, and even forgets a line. He ad libs it all brilliantly like a total professional, not once laughing, and keeping everything under control. As a result, there was probably no need to re-shoot the sequence, in all likelihood the final result being all the more funnier. Can anyone shed any additional lights on these observations? Any interesting behind the scenes facts out there?
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed