Close
Which sitcoms would you bring back?
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Jolanta Zofia Nowak said:
Ok, you're allowed 2 choices: you can bring back, complete with un-aged actors, a sitcom from the last ten years and one from any time before that.
My votes go immediately to Green Wing and Fawlty Towers. Oh, hang on - maybe...
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Oooo, now this is a good question!
Unfortunately I don't have a clue.
I expect many answers will be Spaced, in the last decade.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, hotzappa11 said:
Spaced should stay how it is. 14 episodes of fanboy gloriousness. Is that even a word? I don't know.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, graham said:
Quote: Jolanta Zofia Nowak @ May 3 2008, 9:15 PM BSTOk, you're allowed 2 choices: you can bring back, complete with un-aged actors, a sitcom from the last ten years and one from any time before that.
View original
Dear John and Help.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Rebecca Davies said:
I second Green Wing... annnnnd... *thinks* I might stay recent and go with Fraiser. Presuming the quality of both shows continued.
Oh damnit, you said BEFORE that........................................... In that case........... I don't know, I'm too young for such questions. How long ago was Black Adder? Lets say that.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: graham @ May 3 2008, 10:38 PM BSTDear John and Help.
View original
Two extremely good suggestions.
(Although strictly speaking it's Dear John..., but yeah, agreed.)
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Richard Wells said:
Duck Patrol haha.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Rebecca Davies said:
Quote: Aaron @ May 3 2008, 10:52 PM BST
(Although strictly speaking it's Dear John..., but yeah, agreed.)
View original
Obsessive Compulsive much dear Aaron?
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, hotzappa11 said:
Oh, I definetly agree with Help. I'd like another series of The Thin Blue Line.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, shaggy292 said:
Ever Decreasing Circles. Just....nice.
And Green Wing. Just....fucking funny.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, puffinpol said:
Alan Partridge (Travel Tavern series) and Reggie Perrin - the plot construction would be impossible to continue, so more of the same of the first series.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: Richard Wells @ May 3 2008, 10:55 PM BSTDuck Patrol haha.
View original
Quote: Rebecca Davies @ May 3 2008, 10:55 PM BSTObsessive Compulsive much dear Aaron?
View original
And then some.
Quote: hotzappa11 @ May 3 2008, 11:00 PM BSTOh, I definetly agree with Help. I'd like another series of The Thin Blue Line.
View original
I actually think that there would be quite a lot of scope for a third series of The Thin Blue Line. It was actually one of my instinctive answers (along with Is It Legal?), and now I think about it more, there weren't really any loose ends or anything which were tied up, were there? Nothing to stop the series from continuing, as far as story goes at least. Good nomination!
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Richard Wells said:
I always wished they had made another series of the peter principle.
If anybody remembers it as I find it hard to remember it as well but I know at the time I really rated it quite high.
Jim Broadbent was in it and I think he went to hollywood soon after thus why we never got another series.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
It's out on DVD, although I'm not sure where. Under its crazy American title, The Boss, if you want to try and search for it.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Richard Wells said:
Ok thanks.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Jack Massey said:
Definetly would go for another series of The Thin Blue Line and would also nominate Men Behaving Badly.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, zooo said:
Quote: Richard Wells @ May 3 2008, 10:55 PM BSTDuck Patrol haha.
View original
Yeah!
Only I'm not joking.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, catskillz said:
I'd probably just go for Partridge and The Young Ones.
By the way, I've always thought The Thin Blue Line was terrible.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: zooo @ May 4 2008, 12:40 AM BSTYeah!
Only I'm not joking.
View original
Well we know that!
I have to say, I've only seen the first three episodes (anyone got the rest?), but I found the slow, meandering tone of the show very comforting. It wasn't can't-breathe-I'm-laughing-so-much, but I found it extremely English. Reminded me of Outside Edge quite a bit.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, roscoff said:
Dear John was excellent but also Colin's Sandwich which I've been doing a bit of work on. Much underrated IMO
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Godot Taxis said:
Partridge and Porridge. And if I'm allowed a third go: a much needed third series of 15 Storeys High
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, JerryG said:
Quote: catskillz @ May 4 2008, 12:48 AM BSTI'd probably just go for Partridge and The Young Ones.
By the way, I've always thought The Thin Blue Line was terrible.
View original
I could never get into "Thin Blue Line" either.
I rather see Rowan in another set of "Black Adder II," and "Coupling" for the more recent returnee.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Tuumble said:
Coupling just needed one more series but they couldn't get the actors together at the same time. `The baby would change the dynamic but it would reflect stages of life and would be great to see how Geoff would cope. 
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Jack Massey said:
Just to sum a few things up. The Thin Blue Line was not awful it is a superb sitcom. This Duck Patrol thing. Was Richard Wilson in it? I think I've vaguley seen it, but can't remember if it was any good or not.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Yes. Duck Patrol starred Richard Wilson, David Tennant, Sue Johnston, and a handful of others I can't remember. It was about river police.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, manchester's trendy chorlton said:
The Thin Blue line was fine for what it was: mainstream bbc1 slosh to keep the easily pleased, pleased. And to it's credit, it knew this.
Two to retun: Alan Partridge and Friends - purely just to see if either could reach former heights.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Baumski said:
'Love Thy Neighbour' but maybe in the interest of reflecting our multicultural society it should be truly inclusive and less stereotypical by making the neighbours West Indian/Asian, Protestant/Catholic, Jewish/Arab or even Muslim/Gypsies.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Jack Massey said:
I personally think Love thy Neighbour has been remade. I think the show is called 'Never the Twain' Neighbours Smallbridge and Peel can't stand each other and throw insults in each others faces. But the jokes aren't about race- but about class.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, David Chapman said:
I remember liking Agony but it probably doesn't stand the test of time - I've got a thing about Maureen Lipman.
If you can't count Auf Weidersehn Pet as not purely a sitcom then probably the Likely Lads.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Jack Massey said:
Problem with that. Messrs Bolam and Bewes don't like each other anymore in real life.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, David Chapman said:
Quote: Jack Massey @ May 4 2008, 9:23 AM BSTJust to sum a few things up. The Thin Blue Line was not awful it is a superb sitcom.
View original
Oh no it's not!
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Jack Massey said:
OH YES IT IS
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, David Chapman said:
It's behind you.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Jack Massey said:
Oh no it isn't
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: David Chapman @ May 4 2008, 10:49 PM BSTI remember liking Agony but it probably doesn't stand the test of time
View original
It's done alright for itself.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, garyd said:
Quote: Jack Massey @ May 4 2008, 10:51 PM BSTProblem with that. Messrs Bolam and Bewes don't like each other anymore in real life.
View original
Likely Lads/What Ever Happened To would be good.
I read an article on Bewes who said he would like to get together with Bolam but Bolam just isn't interested in meeting him and Bewes says he has no idea why.
Lets face it, Bolam has done plenty of good TV since the original Likely Lads but I reckon Bewes has done mainly stage so maybe Bolam thinks he owes the LL team nothing.
Shame though. Have only just finished watching the Likely Lads/What ever Happened To box set and it is absolutely classic! The writing and acting is superb throughout.
One more 'Flowery Twats' would be cool, too.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, catskillz said:
One of the things I didn't like about The Thin Blue Line, was that Richard Curtis spent far too much time, using the show as a way of constantly criticising the Police, rather than the people who commit crimes. He did this via the Rowan Atkinson character, who was always criticising the bald one with the moustache, and his little sidekick, who were obviously meant to represent the average Policeman. Yes, those two characters were idiots, but so is the average criminal.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Ben Elton, not Richard Curtis.
But yeah, I guess you're right. Not that I ever read such an undertone into it, of course.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Bad dog said:
Never bring back Fawlty Towers, it just couldn't compete with its past.
I'd like some more Game On, perhaps give the series a conclusion. You'd have to have Andrew Davies writing it, though.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, manchester's trendy chorlton said:
I would suggest that fawlty towers could not compete with the present.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, zooo said:
Quote: Bad dog @ May 5 2008, 10:28 AM BST
I'd like some more Game On, perhaps give the series a conclusion. You'd have to have Andrew Davies writing it, though.
View original
And Ben Chaplin starring in it.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: manchester's trendy chorlton @ May 5 2008, 11:30 AM BSTI would suggest that fawlty towers could not compete with the present.
View original
No, indeed. It couldn't lower itself to such a poor standard as the past 15 years or so if it tried.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, manchester's trendy chorlton said:
Fawlty Towers was a good period piece, in it's day it worked very well and kind of captured the feel of 1970s television.
It's enduring popularity is more based on a kind of 'comedy of comfort'. Fawlty towers fans' tend to be the kind of people that can recite every line, describe every nuance of the show. This is humour by memory, the fan will watch an episode and be waiting for the line that makes them laugh. In other words, the laugh will be memory based rather than based on a consideration of the material that they are currently watching.
this process is one that tends to strengthen after more and more views. So by this day, we have a piece of work that is accepted as a classic - and as such, in the eyes of many, above serious critique. However, there is an argument to be made that Fawlty towers is, by modern standards, incredibly outdated and totally irrelevant to modern television comedy...
Static characters? CHECK.
1-Dimensional Stereotypes? CHECK.
No deviation from a cut and paste set-scenario? CHECK.
Theatrical, rahter than screen, acting? CHECK.
I can accept the view that Fawlty Towers is a great example of 1970s television, and does provide comfort and familiarity to a lot of its fans - but this does not change the idea that it is almost entirely irrelevant to modern comedy, both in its writing and performance.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
And that's why modern comedy is so shite.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, manchester's trendy chorlton said:
Yeah, nice one.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Pity the same can't be said of modern comedy.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, manchester's trendy chorlton said:
Fair play to you, man. God loves a reactionary comedy fan!
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Jolanta Zofia Nowak said:
Quote: manchester's trendy chorlton @ May 5 2008, 1:19 PM BSTFawlty Towers was a good period piece, in it's day it worked very well and kind of captured the feel of 1970s television.
It's enduring popularity is more based on a kind of 'comedy of comfort'. Fawlty towers fans' tend to be the kind of people that can recite every line, describe every nuance of the show. This is humour by memory, the fan will watch an episode and be waiting for the line that makes them laugh. In other words, the laugh will be memory based rather than based on a consideration of the material that they are currently watching.
this process is one that tends to strengthen after more and more views. So by this day, we have a piece of work that is accepted as a classic - and as such, in the eyes of many, above serious critique. However, there is an argument to be made that Fawlty towers is, by modern standards, incredibly outdated and totally irrelevant to modern television comedy...
Static characters? CHECK.
1-Dimensional Stereotypes? CHECK.
No deviation from a cut and paste set-scenario? CHECK.
Theatrical, rahter than screen, acting? CHECK.
I can accept the view that Fawlty Towers is a great example of 1970s television, and does provide comfort and familiarity to a lot of its fans - but this does not change the idea that it is almost entirely irrelevant to modern comedy, both in its writing and performance.
View original
This is over analytical. The fact is that we LIKE uncomplicated characters, plots and sets in our sitcoms. Multi-faceted personalities agonising over abstruse, murky corners of the human condition are fine but belong in other genres.
Fawlty Towers if remade, I make the point seriously, would be a hit all over again now or in another forty years time precisely because it ticks most of the boxes necessary to make us chuckle. I think it goes without saying that the Cleese/Scales/Sachs cast was a huge plus but it would take a significant effort at finding someone truly unfunny - as has been successfully achieved in many modern 'sitcoms' - to torpedo the concept.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, catskillz said:
By the way, did you know that Manuel was said to be from Naples, Italy, when the show was shown in Spain?
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Jolanta Zofia Nowak said:
Hmmm.... 'he's from Naples'...
Doesn't quite have the same ring, somehow...
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, manchester's trendy chorlton said:
'...we LIKE uncomplicated characters'
Do we? I certainly don't. I appreciate that there is a segment of the demogrpahic that does - and I'm not knocking them, it's their choice.
But television comedy has moved on, the modern viewer has a far more televisually sophisticated appreciation of comedy. and again, that is not to say that Fawlty Towers can't still be considered funny; but it does require being put into context of what it is - 1970s television, made for the 1970s television audience.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Griff said:
I agree with some of what you say about Fawlty Towers - the "farce" style theatrical acting in places is very different to the hyper-realistic style of The Office etc. which we are used to now.
But I don't consider Basil Fawlty to be uncomplicated or one-dimensional. His views on class, his hangups about sex, his relationship with his wife, the way he treats his staff, his views on politics, his woeful mixture of aggression and cowardice, and above all his Little Englander sense of desperation, are beautifully written and realised. I can think of very few characters in comedy who have been written as well since then - my personal list would include Mark from Peep Show, David Brent, and Alan Partridge.
(I wouldn't want it brought back though, unless someone could find a "lost" episode from the original series.)
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, garyd said:
Quote: manchester's trendy chorlton @ May 5 2008, 1:19 PM BSTFawlty Towers was a good period piece, in it's day it worked very well and kind of captured the feel of 1970s television.
It's enduring popularity is more based on a kind of 'comedy of comfort'. Fawlty towers fans' tend to be the kind of people that can recite every line, describe every nuance of the show. This is humour by memory, the fan will watch an episode and be waiting for the line that makes them laugh. In other words, the laugh will be memory based rather than based on a consideration of the material that they are currently watching.
this process is one that tends to strengthen after more and more views. So by this day, we have a piece of work that is accepted as a classic - and as such, in the eyes of many, above serious critique. However, there is an argument to be made that Fawlty towers is, by modern standards, incredibly outdated and totally irrelevant to modern television comedy...
Static characters? CHECK.
1-Dimensional Stereotypes? CHECK.
No deviation from a cut and paste set-scenario? CHECK.
Theatrical, rahter than screen, acting? CHECK.
I can accept the view that Fawlty Towers is a great example of 1970s television, and does provide comfort and familiarity to a lot of its fans - but this does not change the idea that it is almost entirely irrelevant to modern comedy, both in its writing and performance.
View original
Blimey!
So it wasn't funny then?
Actually I currently couldn't cite any lines therefore I intend to learn some so I can find it even funnier next time I watch it.
Static characters? I'm sure there was plenty of movement when I watched it.
1-Dimensional Stereotypes? So Basil's obvious character changes (split personality) was a figbox (anyone remember Hope and Keen?) of my imigination?
No deviation from a cut and paste set-scenario? I never saw any computers!
Theatrical, rather than screen, acting? You mean that the acting was dramatic instead of todays nonsensical?
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, manchester's trendy chorlton said:
Griff, you make a good point there about Basil - fair enough.
Garyd - nonsensical rant.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, monkeybeard said:
Quote: shaggy292 @ May 3 2008, 11:03 PM BSTEver Decreasing Circles. Just....nice.
View original
Ever Decreasing Circles is one of the best sitcoms ever made but it ended so perfectly that I wouldn't want another series of it. It wouldn't work if they weren't living in the close anymore.
One of my votes is for Dear John....I'll have to think about the other one
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, chipolata said:
Quote: manchester's trendy chorlton @ May 5 2008, 1:19 PM BST
It's enduring popularity is more based on a kind of 'comedy of comfort'. Fawlty towers fans' tend to be the kind of people that can recite every line, describe every nuance of the show. This is humour by memory, the fan will watch an episode and be waiting for the line that makes them laugh. In other words, the laugh will be memory based rather than based on a consideration of the material that they are currently watching.
View original
Aren't all sitcoms pretty much "comedy of comfort"? Name one that isn't?
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Reiss Ellesse said:
Girls On Top Cheers Ritchie Ritch & Catflap The New Statesman
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Griff said:
Quote:Aren't all sitcoms pretty much "comedy of comfort"? Name one that isn't?
I think comfort was pretty thin on the ground in Nighty Night...
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, chipolata said:
I disagree. It was pantomime villainy that bore little relation to reality.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
And arguably little relation to the 'com' part of 'sitcom'.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, chipolata said:
It was okay, but mainly because Julia Davis is hot in a horsey kind of way.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, manchester's trendy chorlton said:
Quote: chipolata @ May 6 2008, 9:47 AM BSTAren't all sitcoms pretty much "comedy of comfort"? Name one that isn't?
View original
The Larry Sanders Show, The Office, The Thick of It, The Mighty Boosh, Nighty Night...um, pretty much all of the best output over the last several years.
But either way, the point about Fawlty towers is that it has become comedy of comfort due to years and years of repeats and media goodwill. Not to mention slavish fanboy devotion.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: chipolata @ May 6 2008, 10:26 AM BSTIt was okay, but mainly because Julia Davis is hot in a horsey kind of way.
View original
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, shaggy292 said:
Quote: monkeybeard @ May 6 2008, 9:23 AM BSTEver Decreasing Circles is one of the best sitcoms ever made but it ended so perfectly that I wouldn't want another series of it. It wouldn't work if they weren't living in the close anymore.
View original
I don't know why I chose this actually. I've only seen the frist two series and don't know how it all ends. I just enjoy it, think the Martin Bryce character is superb. Must watch the rest now.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: manchester's trendy chorlton @ May 6 2008, 10:27 AM BSTFawlty towers ... has become comedy of comfort due to years and years of repeats and media goodwill. Not to mention slavish fanboy devotion.
View original
Quote: manchester's trendy chorlton @ May 6 2008, 10:27 AM BSTThe Office, The Mighty Boosh...
View original
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, monkeybeard said:
Quote: shaggy292 @ May 6 2008, 10:29 AM BSTI don't know why I chose this actually. I've only seen the frist two series and don't know how it all ends. I just enjoy it, think the Martin Bryce character is superb. Must watch the rest now.
View original
You'll enjoy watching the rest of the series. The quality of writing and performance lasts throughout. A brilliant sitcom.
You're right, the character Martin Bryce is one of the all time sitcom greats and the best Richard Briers has ever been
I still can't think of a second choice. It's a difficult question, as most of the sitcoms I love I wouldn't wish to spoil by having more episodes.
Of very recent times I hope there is a second series of Empty. I really enjoyed watching the first series. Pleasantly surprised.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, zooo said:
Quote: manchester's trendy chorlton @ May 6 2008, 10:27 AM BSTThe Larry Sanders Show, The Office, The Thick of It, The Mighty Boosh, Nighty Night...um, pretty much all of the best output over the last several years.
View original
I find all of those very comforting!
But perhaps because I've watched them so much, and like the world they create.
I'm trying to think of a sitcom I like that makes me feel uncomfortable...
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, manchester's trendy chorlton said:
Oh dear, you have misunderstood the point.
Re-read my original point: what is comforting for the viewer is that they know exactly when the joke is coming, exactly what the joke will be. This is due to repeat viewing over a period of years. Once this stage has been reached, it becomes difficult for the viewer to take an impartial view of whether the comedy is working. and thus, you get a comedy like FT, which everyone assumes is flawless - but only because people refuse to critique it.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, zooo said:
I understand you perfectly, you're not that complex.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Griff said:
We understand the point MTC. We just don't agree with it.
But let's agree to differ.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: zooo @ May 6 2008, 10:54 AM BSTI understand you perfectly, you're not that complex.
View original
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, chipolata said:
Quote: manchester's trendy chorlton @ May 6 2008, 10:27 AM BSTThe Larry Sanders Show, The Office, The Thick of It, The Mighty Boosh, Nighty Night...um, pretty much all of the best output over the last several years.
But either way, the point about Fawlty towers is that it has become comedy of comfort due to years and years of repeats and media goodwill. Not to mention slavish fanboy devotion.
View original
In their own way, all those shows are just as comfortable and safe as Man About The House and Fresh Fields.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: manchester's trendy chorlton @ May 6 2008, 10:51 AM BSTOh dear, you have misunderstood the point.
Re-read my original point: what is comforting for the viewer is that they know exactly when the joke is coming, exactly what the joke will be. This is due to repeat viewing over a period of years. Once this stage has been reached, it becomes difficult for the viewer to take an impartial view of whether the comedy is working. and thus, you get a comedy like FT, which everyone assumes is flawless - but only because people refuse to critique it.
View original
I'd be happy to critique it, if I saw anything TO critique. I loved it the first time I saw it. A perfect mixture of numerous types of comedy, notably lots of farce, with sharp writing throughout.
Oh, and I rarely watch it, just so it's that bit fresher when I do. It's one of my favourite sitcoms, but I don't remember what jokes is coming, and when.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, chipolata said:
To get back back to the original question I'd love to see another series of How Do You Want Me (assuming you could perfect reanimation since one of the cast is dead). And Joking Apart, which I much prefferred to Coupling.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, manchester's trendy chorlton said:
Correction: Trendy is complex. He is an enigma wrapped inside a riddle, underneath a vibrant layer of charisma.
And Fawlty Towers is outdated crap! Old stuff is rubbish!
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, zooo said:
What's wrapped around the charisma? Must be some sort of impenetrable bullet proof casing.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: manchester's trendy chorlton @ May 6 2008, 11:17 AM BSTAnd Fawlty Towers is outdated crap! Old stuff is rubbish!
View original
No, old shows are far better than new shows. Give me Are You Being Served? over The Office any day of the week. Spaced, vastly outweighed by Terry and June.
Anyway, it is interesting that your coherent - if not totally bollocks - argument descends to such outlandish statements once other people provide evidence to the contrary of the exact points you make.
No doubting you're northern...
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, chipolata said:
I like MTC because he is undoubtedly THE most patronising BSG member there has ever been. I salute him.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, zooo said:
You have to admire that kind of achievement.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, monkeybeard said:
There were great old shows and rubbish old shows.
There are great new shows and rubbish new shows.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: zooo @ May 6 2008, 11:25 AM BSTYou have to admire that kind of achievement.
View original
I actually did a little lol, it's that true.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, manchester's trendy chorlton said:
Perhaps my proclamation that old stuff is rubbish was spoken with my tongue (pronounced 'tong') firmly in cheek. Perhaps.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, zooo said:
How old is Mr. trendy chorlton?
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, manchester's trendy chorlton said:
Twenty seven. But I look 25. However I expect to hit my absolute peak in my early thirties (looks-wise and creatively).
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, zooo said:
Quote: manchester's trendy chorlton @ May 6 2008, 12:11 PM BSTTwenty seven. But I look 25.
View original
Ha!
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, manchester's trendy chorlton said:
I don't want come across as an ass, but being good looking in this industry is not an advantage. anyone else have that problem? Or have any decent tips on uglying-up?
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Sofa_Matt said:
Quote: manchester's trendy chorlton @ May 6 2008, 12:56 PM BSTI don't want come across as an ass, but being good looking in this industry is not an advantage. anyone else have that problem? Or have any decent tips on uglying-up?
View original
Wake up next to me in the morning, it worked for all the girls I slept with.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, zooo said:
Quote: manchester's trendy chorlton @ May 6 2008, 12:56 PM BSTI don't want come across as an ass, but being good looking in this industry is not an advantage. anyone else have that problem?
View original
We all do. We're all fucking stunners.
Quote:Or have any decent tips on uglying-up?
Grow a beard. Gain many hundreds of pounds. Become Johnny Vegas.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Afinkawan said:
From the last ten years, I'd like to see another series of Nighty Night.
And from longer ago, Chance in a Million as I think it had great potential but never really found its feet properly.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Jolanta Zofia Nowak said:
I find it to be a genuinely interesting observation that some folk cannot bring themselves to attribute value to anything which occurred before (or after) what they consider as 'their' time.
Would I be the only one to posit the possibility that this says more about THEM than anything else?
I've had more than the odd rant about the more modern stuff but I still reckon I can recognise inherently good productions when I see them.
Therefore, I give myself a smug, self-congratulatory pat on the back for being a renaissance-type person for all seasons and shuffle off down the Corridor of Ultimate Complacency, muttering dark things about the Intolerance of the Young...
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
I dunno, certainly in part that's true.
Generally, I think it's fairly self-evident that people would find the shows that they grew up with - whether first-hand watching, or discovered later but being the same kind of humour as they grew up with - to be, in general, preferable to those of earlier or later dates.
But then that's not a strict rule of course: personally, I'm open-minded and will watch anything from any era before making a decision about it. There is definite value, IMO, to pretty much any comedy from any year, I just find that I more consistently prefer shows from the 60s and 70s than shows from the 90s and 00s. But then, having not been around then, it could be argued that that's because I largely only get to see the better of the shows from that era (through DVD releases etc.), whereas I'm now exposed to every last piece of shit that's produced.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, roscoff said:
Quote: manchester's trendy chorlton @ May 6 2008, 11:17 AM BSTCorrection:
And Fawlty Towers is outdated crap! Old stuff is rubbish!
View original
You should be beaten over the bonnet with a large tree branch until your brain starts working again and kick starts your good taste buds.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, shaggy292 said:
Quote: Afinkawan @ May 6 2008, 1:31 PM BST
And from longer ago, Chance in a Million as I think it had great potential but never really found its feet properly.
View original
Oh, Chance In A Million was (takes long swig of beer) BRILLIANT!
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Curt said:
I would bring back Spaced...at gun point...MAKE ME MORE EPISODES! Get going you!
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, graham said:
Quote: Aaron @ May 3 2008, 10:52 PM BSTTwo extremely good suggestions.
(Although strictly speaking it's Dear John..., but yeah, agreed.)
View original
Lol. Thanks for the correction!
Isn't comedy great? How can we agree on Dear John... and Help, but you then say you like Dinnerladies and Thin Blue Line?!
Anyway, yeah - Help, nothing like it! I suspect that Dear John... would seem a little dated now however.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
There are certain aspects of it which have inevitably dated a bit (mainly the bedsit and clothing really), but the central singles dating thing is still bang on the money, as they say.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Spagett said:
I live in hope that one day Alan Gordon Partridge makes his triumphant return like a chat out of hell.
Also I cannot believe anybody in their right mind would put forward the opinion that Terry and June is better than Spaced apart from maybe June herself and even then I don't know.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Quite easily!
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Spagett said:
I understand that you love shows from pre 1990's and whilst I understand that there are many gems from before that era I honestly don't see what is funny about Terry and June and I can't understand how you don't like Spaced.
So I sort of agree with MTC. Maybe it is a Northern thing.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Don't like Spaced because it's just not funny.
*shrug*
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Spagett said:
Fair Enough.
Each to their own.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, zooo said:
I guess even Aaron has to be wrong about something. 
I can sort of, maybe, understand why he doesn't find it laugh-a-minute. (I laugh at it, but I can see that someone wouldn't) I just can't really understand how someone could watch Spaced and not fall in love with the characters and want to spend more time with them. They're so sweet and inoffensive and damaged and lovely and geeky.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
I really don't know. I'm sure I'll re-watch it at some point and try again, but I just felt nothing for them. Sure, it's a pretty entertaining show I guess, but through the whole 2 (I keep thinking it's three) series', I did no more than raise a smile. Perhaps there was just nothing in it for me to identify with.
And sorry zooo, I'm not always right.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, zooo said:
It's a harsh realisation.
I'll just have to deal with it as best I can...
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, catskillz said:
Favourite Spaced momoent: Tim wathcing the end of Return of the Jedi, with tears running down his face.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, hotzappa11 said:
I got some jaffa cakes in my coat pocket!
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, zooo said:
Eeeeeeyyyy!
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, hotzappa11 said:
Where's Brian?
In the garden with no clothes on.
Eeeeeeyyyy!
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Jolanta Zofia Nowak said:
I always love it when a thread goes OT...
That's a quote from yet another sitcom, the 'A-Team'.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Dave said:
Quote: Aaron @ May 3 2008, 10:52 PM BSTTwo extremely good suggestions.
(Although strictly speaking it's Dear John..., but yeah, agreed.)
View original
I've just watched both series of Dear John last week. I thought the second series, although good, wasn't as great as the first one. Kate was missing from three episodes, I didn't care for the Rikki Fortune double episode and Sylvia wasn't much of a character etc. Maybe not quite as good, but the downturn in quality was marginal and very subtle. Ostensibly, it could have run and run, but the second series took too long re-establishing itself.
Ralph Bates died in 1991 amid plans for a third series.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
I do agree - but it was still far better than much of the pap churned out around the same time. IMO, the shining episode of the entire run was the very first. Absolutely hilarious.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Joeono said:
I'd like to see some more Seinfeld episodes but since Michael Richards had a melt down on stage that's pretty much killed that one stone dead I think. Seinfeld has got to be one of my all time favourites. And it would have to have Larry David involved.
I love Spaced but I think it should be left as it is. I think a lot of sitcoms are products of their time and therefore should be left alone. Absoulutely Fabulous anyone, brilliant the first time round, slightly shite the second.
Comedy has got to be the most subjective things there is. You either like something or you don't, which is fair enough, there's room for everyone and their different tastes. What I don't like though is when people slate a show they don't like and try to make everyone else think the same way, that gets on my tits. I don't really like Two Pints of Lager, but it's seems to be popular and I can't really understand why, I have tried many times to get it but I can't. I watched the live show though and I did chuckle a few times though I have to be honest, but in the past I have found it to be coarse and always going for the cheap laugh. But it's OK I'm not going to go out of my way to slag it off.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, David Chapman said:
Quote: Dave @ May 11 2008, 2:51 PM BSTI've just watched both series of Dear John last week. I thought the second series, although good, wasn't as great as the first one. Kate was missing from three episodes, I didn't care for the Rikki Fortune double episode and Sylvia wasn't much of a character etc. Maybe not quite as good, but the downturn in quality was marginal and very subtle. Ostensibly, it could have run and run, but the second series took too long re-establishing itself.
View original
Who were the female actors in it?
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Belinda Lang.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, David Chapman said:
Oh yes.
And there was another wasn't there?
I suppose I could search on that web site...
What's it called?
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Another what? Woman?
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, David Chapman said:
Quote: Aaron @ May 11 2008, 9:40 PM BSTAnother what? Woman?
View original
Yes - woman.
Maybe I'll go on look up top.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Griff said:
I'm with Aaron on the no love for Spaced. I found it unbelievably tedious.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, David Chapman said:
Quote: Aaron @ May 11 2008, 9:40 PM BSTAnother what? Woman?
View original
You haven't got anything about it.
Useless site.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, zooo said:
Quote: Griff @ May 11 2008, 9:45 PM BSTI'm with Aaron on the no love for Spaced. I found it unbelievably tedious.
View original
I don't know what you are.
[/Avid Merrion]
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: David Chapman @ May 11 2008, 9:42 PM BSTYes - woman.
Maybe I'll go on look up top.
View original
Rachel Bell as well.
Quote: Griff @ May 11 2008, 9:45 PM BSTI'm with Aaron on the no love for Spaced. I found it unbelievably tedious.
View original
Quote: David Chapman @ May 11 2008, 9:45 PM BSTYou haven't got anything about it.
Useless site.
View original
I'm fairly sure I wrote a page up about it. Mark's hopeless! *shakes fist in his general direction*
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Jolanta Zofia Nowak said:
So here's another pairing:
1. Black Books
2. The Good Life
Ah, 'tis a good combination: a nice juxtaposition of the irreverent and surreal with the homely and comfy.
Think I'll bomb off and watch an episode from each. The trick will be to decide exactly which.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, oldcowgrazing said:
I was wondering about this the other day and although this wasn't a sitcom but a children's tv show, I think Catweazle should be brought back. They could cast Mackenzie Crook for the role. It'd be Catweazle 21st century style. Perhaps he could work in IT. Think of all hilarity (!) that would ensue.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, NickTheDon said:
More Black Books would be fantastic. I wasn't such of a fan of the last 2 series though, if they could recapture the form of the first series it would be brilliant.
I would dearly love for Spaced to make a comeback one day. I think I'm going to be too scared to watch any of the American version in case they completely ruin it for me!
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, EllieJP said:
I would most definitely bring Black Books back! I love it.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: NickTheDon @ May 13 2008, 5:26 PM BSTI think I'm going to be too scared to watch any of the American version in case they completely ruin it for me!
View original
It's been cancelled anyway.
http://www.sitcom.co.uk/news/news.php?story=000443
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Jolanta Zofia Nowak said:
Quote: NickTheDon @ May 13 2008, 5:26 PM BSTMore Black Books would be fantastic. I wasn't such of a fan of the last 2 series though, if they could recapture the form of the first series it would be brilliant.
I would dearly love for Spaced to make a comeback one day. I think I'm going to be too scared to watch any of the American version in case they completely ruin it for me!
View original
OMG I hadn't realised there was an American version. Please God, no.
I've just finished watching - or should I say 'enduring' - an online showing of the US first pilot of 'Red Dwarf' and I dearly wish the thought had never crossed my mind...
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, NickTheDon said:
Quote: Jolanta Zofia Nowak @ May 13 2008, 6:08 PM BSTOMG I hadn't realised there was an American version. Please God, no.
I've just finished watching - or should I say 'enduring' - an online showing of the US first pilot of 'Red Dwarf' and I dearly wish the thought had never crossed my mind...
View original
When I first heard of it I thought it was a joke. Spaced is so English it hurts, I can't really see how they can convincingly Americanise it.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Charly said:
Black Books! Also Father Ted, but the main actor died. Aaaaw.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, NickTheDon said:
Quote: Jolanta Zofia Nowak @ May 13 2008, 6:08 PM BSTOMG I hadn't realised there was an American version. Please God, no.
I've just finished watching - or should I say 'enduring' - an online showing of the US first pilot of 'Red Dwarf' and I dearly wish the thought had never crossed my mind...
View original
Rejoice! I just saw an article on the home page that says the US version isn't likely to go ahead as apparently the pilot wasn't very good at all:
http://www.sitcom.co.uk/news/news.php?story=000443
Thank the lord.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Erm...
Quote: Aaron @ May 13 2008, 6:06 PM BSTIt's been cancelled anyway.
http://www.sitcom.co.uk/news/news.php?story=000443
View original
Do people not read?!
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Jolanta Zofia Nowak said:
Quote: Aaron @ May 14 2008, 9:57 AM BSTErm...
Do people not read?!
View original
Er, my reading of it seems to produce 'it is believed' rather than any statement of fact...
Just a minor point, I know, but there you go.
Quote: NickTheDon @ May 14 2008, 1:16 AM BSTRejoice! I just saw an article on the home page that says the US version isn't likely to go ahead as apparently the pilot wasn't very good at all:
http://www.sitcom.co.uk/news/news.php?story=000443
Thank the lord.
View original
Judge for yourselves:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KwymOX6ey_g
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, manchester's trendy chorlton said:
Quote: NickTheDon @ May 13 2008, 6:10 PM BSTWhen I first heard of it I thought it was a joke. Spaced is so English it hurts, I can't really see how they can convincingly Americanise it.
View original
Absolute nonsesne, typical pub-bore speak as Gervais puts it.
'...so english it hurts'...um, yet it references American pop culture pretty much non-stop. Nice one.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, monkeybeard said:
I also would like to see a return of Black Books. They never really wrapped it all up and I feel it had a lot more mileage in it.
I miss those characters
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: manchester's trendy chorlton @ May 14 2008, 11:50 AM BSTAbsolute nonsesne, typical pub-bore speak as Gervais puts it.
'...so english it hurts'...um, yet it references American pop culture pretty much non-stop. Nice one.
View original
I'm not defending him, but I'm pretty sure that what something references plays little-to-no part in how (insert nationality here) it is. It's the way in which the reference is made. And Nick seems to believe that that style and tone of homage, reference, etc, is very English.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, NickTheDon said:
Yeah there are lots of Star Wars and comic book references and things, but I just think the characters are very English, or not American at all at least.
I don't think the idea of a man and woman pretending to be in a relationship to get a house would work in an American comedy. I could see them turning Daisy into a ditzy blonde bimbo and brutalising Nick Frost's character and have him worshipping the Iraq war or something. Of course I could be wrong, I just don't see it working at all. But the American Office was pretty successful and I thought it would bomb, so what do I know.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Roseo92 said:
FATHER TED!!
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, NickTheDon said:
Father Ted would be impossible without Dermot Morgan!
There's a few that I wouldn't want to bring back for fear of spoiling them. While I'd love a few more episodes of Blackadder, I'd be a bit scared in case it was terrible. The one off episodes for Comic Relief were pretty ropey too.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Griff said:
Quote:I don't think the idea of a man and woman pretending to be in a relationship to get a house would work in an American comedy.
Didn't this happen about a million times in Friends ? And probably Seinfeld too ?
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, NickTheDon said:
[quote name="Griff" post="155517" date="May 14 2008, 7:21 PM BST"]
Quote:I don't think the idea of a man and woman pretending to be in a relationship to get a house would work in an American comedy.
Didn't this happen about a million times in Friends ? And probably Seinfeld too ?
[/quote]
Don't know about Seinfeld, no one ever pretended to be in a relationship to get a house/apartment in Friends though. But to be fair you did have guys and girls living together when they were just friends. I can't put it well into words I just really didn't like the idea of an American version of Spaced.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, manchester's trendy chorlton said:
The truth is, all/any sitcom could be translated into another culture very successfully. The key factor is who does the translating. The Office: An American Workplace is so fantastic because it has a brilliant team of writers, producers and actors. The only thing stopping Spaced from being any good would have been the team behind it - or interfering network producers.
this mist-trust of American television is a bit provincial, and naive given the fact that the most successful UK figure in sitcom over the last few years (Gervais) has made it clear that The Office was created with a very stong American influence.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Griff said:
Quote:no one ever pretended to be in a relationship to get a house/apartment in Friends though.
Well there were certainly a couple of "pretending to be married" episodes in Friends, although not for a house admittedly. (eg Ross and Rachel pretending to be married in front of relatives.) And there's a Seinfeld episode where Jerry pretends to be married to a girl in order to share her dry cleaning discount. So I guess it's not a completely alien concept to American viewers.
But no, I don't like the idea of an American Spaced either, but mostly because I can't stand the British one either! (sorry).
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, zooo said:
I don't like the idea of an American Spaced. (not that it's apparently happening anymore.)
But the transfers that make me angry and baffled are ones like the Mighty Boosh remake.
You can technically make a US version of Spaced, it has a simple plot line mentioned above. (It would be pointless in my opinion, but it can be done.)
But the Mighty Boosh isn't about the plots. It's two very specific comedians being themselves and creating their own universe.
You can't translate that!
It's fucking ridiculous.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, NickTheDon said:
Quote: zooo @ May 14 2008, 7:48 PM BSTI don't like the idea of an American Spaced. (not that it's apparently happening anymore.)
But the transfers that make me angry and baffled are ones like the Mighty Boosh remake.
You can technically make a US version of Spaced, it has a simple plot line mentioned above. (It would be pointless in my opinion, but it can be done.)
But the Mighty Boosh isn't about the plots. It's two very specific comedians being themselves and creating their own universe.
You can't translate that!
It's fucking ridiculous.
View original
That sounds like it's going to be hideous to watch. Why are they bothering with remaking loads of British shows? Why not just show them more over in the States?
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Matthew Stott said:
Quote: manchester's trendy chorlton @ May 14 2008, 7:27 PM BSTthis mist-trust of American television is a bit provincial, and naive given the fact that the most successful UK figure in sitcom over the last few years (Gervais) has made it clear that The Office was created with a very stong American influence.
View original
Nothing wrong with fans not wanting something they love re-made, whoever and wherever the remaking is taking place. If that made sense. Its not a mistrust of American television, its just people not wanting something they love messed around with. Personally I wouldnt have minded seeing what they did with Spaced, it would have been interesting to see the resulting show, but i cant imagine it being a success; especially not with that 'director' McG at the helm. Thankfully it appears to have bitten the dust.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, zooo said:
Quote: NickTheDon @ May 14 2008, 7:53 PM BSTThat sounds like it's going to be hideous to watch. Why are they bothering with remaking loads of British shows? Why not just show them more over in the States?
View original
I totally agree. Show the original. Or commission writers' original ideas over in America. There's plenty of them.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Matthew Stott said:
And yeah Zoo, if they do actually go ahead and remake The Boosh that would make no sense; the Boosh is Barratt and Fielding, not the show itself; a rather stretched equivalent would be someone buying the rights to remake epsiodes of Morecombe And Wise and casting two new leads! Unless The Boosh boys are going to appear in it, like the American version of Little Britain. Have to say I havent heard a peep about the American Boosh for a long time though, so think it might not be getting off the ground afterall.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, zooo said:
Crossed fingers!
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, manchester's trendy chorlton said:
Typical provincial attitudes. But still, everyone has a right to their own opinions.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Matthew Stott said:
Quote: manchester's trendy chorlton @ May 14 2008, 8:20 PM BSTTypical provincial attitudes. But still, everyone has a right to their own opinions.
View original
??? Did you read what I put? I said Id like to have seen what they did with Spaced! And no, I dont think a Boosh remake would be a good idea, because the Boosh isnt the show as such, its the comedians in the show, so unless an American network were taking Barratt and Fielding as well then it seems pointless; Zoo agrees with that point. Thats not provincial; actually read whats put.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, NickTheDon said:
Quote: manchester's trendy chorlton @ May 14 2008, 8:20 PM BSTTypical provincial attitudes. But still, everyone has a right to their own opinions.
View original
No, like somebody said previously, we just don't like seeing comedies we like being remade. Like zooo said, why not show the original, or commission writers for original ideas.
What are people's thoughts on the US version of Gavin and Stacey? They're surely going to have to be so different that wouldn't it have been far easier to come up with an original comedy?
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, zooo said:
Precisely.
Also, it seems like a waste of money paying the originators for the rights, when they could have probably just copied the bits they wanted, changed it a bit, and no one would have been any the wiser!
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Matthew Stott said:
Quote: zooo @ May 14 2008, 8:29 PM BSTAlso, it seems like a waste of money paying the originators for the rights, when they could have probably just copied the bits they wanted, changed it a bit, and no one would have been any the wiser!
View original
Yeah, its not as though the central premise of something like Gavin And Stacey is so different or unique; two people from very different home towns fall in love, both have odd families; hardly groundbreaking; why bother paying for the rights?
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, zooo said:
It baffles me.
I hate being baffled.
Baffle.
That is a fun word.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Alan C said:
Quote: zooo @ May 14 2008, 8:33 PM BSTIt baffles me.
Baffle.
That is a fun word.
View original
It rhymes with filafel but not waffle - strange?!
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, NickTheDon said:
Baffle at your waffle.
That's not a euphemism by the way.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Alan C said:
Quote: NickTheDon @ May 14 2008, 8:37 PM BSTThat's not a euphemism by the way.
View original
I used to play one of those in a brass band but got thrown out because my fingering was too quick!
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, manchester's trendy chorlton said:
MatthewScott, I read what you wrote and concur.
My comment was aimed at Zoo and NicktheDong; the fan-boy obsessive protectiveness, inward-looking, 'we fear change' attitudes are almost tangible. They don't want anything that they slave over remade out of some kind of entirely misplaced loyalty to the original. That is bananas.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, NickTheDon said:
Being abusive on an internet forum - as pointless as a blunt pencil.
Why can't you debate without retorting to childish name calling? What's wrong with not wanting remakes of comedies we like?
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, manchester's trendy chorlton said:
Name calling? What? Where?
I have explained quite clearly what is wrong with screaming and bitching about remakes...if this was a spoken conversation I guess I would repeat it. but as it is written word, you can just look back at my previoous post.
But either way, if you're happy being a fan-boy then really, I don't mind - eeach to their own.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: NickTheDon @ May 14 2008, 7:20 PM BSTFather Ted would be impossible without Dermot Morgan!
View original
But as the original question was to bring back the cast as they were, the exact age and everything - so we're not talking of reviving a series, but of there actually being more episodes - that point is pretty irrelevant!
Quote: zooo @ May 14 2008, 7:48 PM BSTI don't like the idea of an American Spaced. (not that it's apparently happening anymore.)
But the transfers that make me angry and baffled are ones like the Mighty Boosh remake.
You can technically make a US version of Spaced, it has a simple plot line mentioned above. (It would be pointless in my opinion, but it can be done.)
But the Mighty Boosh isn't about the plots. It's two very specific comedians being themselves and creating their own universe.
You can't translate that!
It's fucking ridiculous.
View original
I agree in part, but does the average audience member see it like that? They just enjoy the show. It doesn't occur to them that it's the worryingly insane minds of the stars, rather than something they've created to be a show. If that makes sense. So the world which comes across on screen, and the style of humour, could be easily copied!
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Griff said:
Quote:Name calling? What? Where?
You don't consider "NickTheDong" to be name calling then, MTC ?
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: NickTheDon @ May 14 2008, 7:53 PM BSTWhy are they bothering with remaking loads of British shows? Why not just show them more over in the States?
View original
Because the American general TV-watching public are notoriously brain-dead and unwilling to accept anything even slightly different from what they already know. If they did watch, they'd complain that they couldn't understand the accents of the Australians, and that the season was too short to bother with!
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, manchester's trendy chorlton said:
Oh shit, I've just re-read my post - that was a genuine typo error. Albeit an hilarious one.
Yeah that's right Aaron, that's why The Larry Sanders Show was such an unprecedented hit - because American TV audiences aren't smart.
An interesting comparison you might want to make is between Friends and Coupling. Friends was infintely smarter than Coupling and is one of the all time most successful sitcoms in America. Coupling on the other hand, is base by comparison.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, NickTheDon said:
Quote: Aaron @ May 14 2008, 9:44 PM BSTBecause the American general TV-watching public are notoriously brain-dead and unwilling to accept anything even slightly different from what they already know. If they did watch, they'd complain that they couldn't understand the accents of the Australians, and that the season was too short to bother with!
View original
You'll be accused of having a provincial attitude with a post like that!
Regarding MTC's name calling, I wasn't even referring to NickTheDong (very inventive I must say), more the "fan boy obsessive" bits. It's quite hilarious how liking a comedy in its original state and not wanting it remade constitutes being an obsessive fan-boy.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Griff said:
Quote:Oh shit, I've just re-read my post - that was a genuine typo error.
We'll believe you, MTC. Just this time.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Alan C said:
The Gnomes of Dulwich would be my choice of sitcom to bring back. I'd cast Ronnie Corbett as Big and Johnny Vegas as Small and I'd change the Empire Gnomes to Euro Gnomes and cast Arsene Wenger, Rafa Benitez and Avram Grant in their place.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: manchester's trendy chorlton @ May 14 2008, 9:53 PM BSTYeah that's right Aaron, that's why The Larry Sanders Show was such an unprecedented hit - because American TV audiences aren't smart.
View original
That's not what I said. Please stop interpreting your own meanings in other posts in order to back up your own argument (or more to the point, belittle theirs).
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, zooo said:
Where exactly was I fanboy obsessive, Manchester's-long-name-that-I-can't-remember?
Not that I'm necessarily denying it, just interested to know.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, David Chapman said:
Quote: NickTheDon @ May 14 2008, 9:56 PM BSTYou'll be accused of having a provincial attitude with a post like that!
Regarding MTC's name calling, I wasn't even referring to NickTheDong (very inventive I must say),
View original
I think Charley caled you that first - hopefully!
I don't agree with the Americans remaking any of our sitcoms ....
Because they've basically got no idea.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, zooo said:
It works both ways.
Our remake of That Seventies Show was crap.
We had the original! We were watching the original!
It's such a colossal waste of money and time.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, manchester's trendy chorlton said:
Quote: Aaron @ May 14 2008, 10:43 PM BSTThat's not what I said. Please stop interpreting your own meanings in other posts in order to back up your own argument (or more to the point, belittle theirs).
View original
No, that is exactly what you said. You saw an opportunity to have a dig at American people and implied rather crassly that they were stupid, especially in terms of their television viewing habits. I brought up the fact that The Larry Sanders Show, which is unquestionably a very sophisticated an nuanced show, was a massive success in America; thereby suggesting that Americans are actually very smart when it comes to their viewing.
And even after I have made my point, you still get someone (dave chapman) saying that 'they don't have a clue' or words to that effect. Dear lord, do the research, learn about the industry a bit before making such bananas remarks.
But, Trendy accepts that everyone has a right to an opinion and he can only point people in a certain direction - whether they take heed is up to them.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
And again...
But, hey, nevermind.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, manchester's trendy chorlton said:
I love you.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Jolanta Zofia Nowak said:
Quote: NickTheDon @ May 14 2008, 7:20 PM BSTFather Ted would be impossible without Dermot Morgan!
There's a few that I wouldn't want to bring back for fear of spoiling them. While I'd love a few more episodes of Blackadder, I'd be a bit scared in case it was terrible. The one off episodes for Comic Relief were pretty ropey too.
View original
Yes but in my OP I stated clearly that you could have the original actors back.
This was a hypothetical carte blanche. A shame people can't be bothered to actually read the thread.
Aaron, is there any way we can close this thread now? People simply won't stick to the original topic and go swanning off into totally irrelevant areas. In all the 170 or so postings, I've had about 5 relevant replies...
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, David Chapman said:
Have Manchester people not got a sense of humour?
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: Jolanta Zofia Nowak @ May 15 2008, 7:15 PM BSTAaron, is there any way we can close this thread now? People simply won't stick to the original topic and go swanning off into totally irrelevant areas. In all the 170 or so postings, I've had about 5 relevant replies...
View original
I won't close it, because there might actually be someone at some point with a real response, but I'll be starting to beat people up (including myself) for not staying on-topic in the British Sitcoms and Other British Comedy forums from now on.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Alan C said:
Quote: manchester's trendy chorlton @ May 15 2008, 8:38 AM BSTAnd even after I have made my point, you still get someone (dave chapman) saying that 'they don't have a clue' or words to that effect. Dear lord, do the research, learn about the industry a bit before making such bananas remarks.
View original
My bias against American sitcoms is quite simple - I cannot relate to the people or the situations. No question they are well written and well produced but for the amount of money thrown at them and the number of writers needed to create these shows I would be very surprised if they weren't excellent productions. However, I truly admire the ability of British writers to create comedy in isolation and to know that they are the only person responsible for the dialogue. They stand and fall by what they write and cannot hide behind a team nor do they have to create 22-24 episodes in order to fill a season. Creativity should not be predominantly a commodity and, alas, American networks would never have given a chance to some of our greatest comedy hits because they would not have seen the dollars flooding in after three shows.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, David Chapman said:
Quote: Alan Cornforth @ May 15 2008, 9:55 PM BSTMy bias against American sitcoms is quite simple - I cannot relate to the people or the situations. No question they are well written and well produced but for the amount of money thrown at them and the number of writers needed to create these shows I would be very surprised if they weren't excellent productions. However, I truly admire the ability of British writers to create comedy in isolation and to know that they are the only person responsible for the dialogue. They stand and fall by what they write and cannot hide behind a team nor do they have to create 22-24 episodes in order to fill a season. Creativity should not be predominantly a commodity and, alas, American networks would never have given a chance to some of our greatest comedy hits because they would not have seen the dollars flooding in after three shows.
View original
I agree entirely.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Alan C said:
Quote: David Chapman @ May 15 2008, 10:28 PM BSTI agree entirely.
View original
Please call me Alan, I only use the name "entirely" when I'm being more expansive
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, manchester's trendy chorlton said:
Interesting point regarding network pressure. An alternate take on that is that the very severity of the networks (poor auidence reaction = cancelled mid season) leads to a greater neccessity for better writing.
Had Ricky Gervais wanted, he could have written endless series' of The Office or Extras, regardless of quality. This simply would not happen in the US. There is no sentimentality or cosy creator/show/network relationships. If The Office: American Workplace starts dropping its standards, it will be cancelled - and it nearly was midway through it's first season. But it wasn't, and guess what, four seasons later it is still maintaining an incredible standard.
And as for not relating to the 'character or the situations'. People are pretty much universal in their issues. You should be a little more open minded perhaps. One love.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Alan C said:
[quote name="manchester's trendy chorlton" post="156562" date="
And as for not relating to the 'character or the situations'. People are pretty much universal in their issues. You should be a little more open minded perhaps. One love.
[/quote]
Yes I am new to ths planet and I watched one American show and didn't like it! Must try harder to be assimilated - get a McDonalds, watch The Simpsons, ... wow these American shows are fantastic aren't they!?
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, manchester's trendy chorlton said:
A very well considered response, good luck in your career as a writer and musician. Keep waving that flag!
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, chipolata said:
Quote: manchester's trendy chorlton @ May 16 2008, 9:11 AM BST
If The Office: American Workplace starts dropping its standards, it will be cancelled.
View original
No, if it starts dropping audience figures, it will be cancelled. An audience drop might be DUE to a drop in standards, but this isn't always the case.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, zooo said:
Well said chips.
Countless shows I've thought have been fantastic - well written, hilarious, well acted, have been cancelled due to lower viewing figures than they wanted.
Incredibly frustrating.
Sometimes (often) they don't give a show time to build up from word of mouth etc, they could have achieved those viewing figures if they'd given it a chance.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Graham Bandage said:
Quote: zooo @ May 16 2008, 10:39 AM BSTWell said chips.
Countless shows I've thought have been fantastic - well written, hilarious, well acted, have been cancelled due to lower viewing figures than they wanted.
Incredibly frustrating.
Sometimes they don't give a show time.
View original
Arrested Development, anyone?
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Alan C said:
Quote: manchester's trendy chorlton @ May 16 2008, 10:23 AM BSTA very well considered response, good luck in your career as a writer and musician. Keep waving that flag!
View original
You will note that I did not address your main response because it was a well-considered and interesting point. However, when you took it upon yourself to take a dig at me for not being open-minded - despite not knowing anything about me or my life experience - then I chose to be less than serious in my reply. Lo and behold you come back with another dig at me. I have noted that certain people in these forums can not resist being judgemental about the person they are speaking to when they do not share the same opinion as them.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, chipolata said:
Let it wash over you, Alan, otherwise you just end up getting involved in lots of little petty squabbles about nothing.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, manchester's trendy chorlton said:
Good points, and I certainly accept that some shows have been cut off beofre their time.
however, I still think that this harsh system serves to eliminate poor work and failing shows. The cost will be that one or two will be cut off unduly - unfortunate, but better than countless shows being allowed to go on when they clearly are not working.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, chipolata said:
I think there's probably an awful lot of dreary and ordinary shows that trundle on for years in the states, but the channels here tend to cherry pick the best ones for us to watch.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, manchester's trendy chorlton said:
Possibly (probably) on the minor networks. Certainly not on the majors.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Alan C said:
Quote: chipolata @ May 16 2008, 10:57 AM BSTI think there's probably an awful lot of dreary and ordinary shows that trundle on for years in the states, but the channels here tend to cherry pick the best ones for us to watch.
View original
Frasier went through a very mediocre period towards the end before coming back with a strong-ish final series.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, chipolata said:
You're right, it did. It really rallied towards the end and got back to what had made it so great in the first place.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Jolanta Zofia Nowak said:
May I thank all of those who have made suggestions as to which sitcoms they would bring back...
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Perfect World.
Perfect World. Perfect World. Perfect World. Perfect World.
My God, I want more episodes.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Alan C said:
Quote: Aaron @ May 17 2008, 1:08 PM BSTPerfect World.
Perfect World. Perfect World. Perfect World. Perfect World.
My God, I want more episodes.
View original
I saw an episode of this from S2 being filmed at Television Centre - I was a fan as well until then. I got 6 tickets and took some of my work colleagues ... they never wanted to go anywhere else with me after that!
Same happened with I'm Alan Partridge .. the curse of the 2nd series!
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Aaron said:
No, the second series isn't quite up to the standards of the first. I never really warmed to the office's makeover. But it still makes me laugh out very loud, very frequently, and I really wish that they'd made more than just two series'!
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, zooo said:
You didn't like series 2 Alan Partridge??
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Alan C said:
Quote: zooo @ May 17 2008, 1:39 PM BSTYou didn't like series 2 Alan Partridge??
View original
I didn't say I didn't like it - just that it wasn't anywhere near as good as the first. Also the episode I saw being filmed had the majority of the action set in the trailer and, incredibly, the set was out of sight of the studio audience!
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, zooo said:
Oh, well fair enough then.
How silly.
On Wednesday 31st December 1969 GMT at 7:00 PM GMT, Matthew Stott said:
Quote: zooo @ May 17 2008, 1:39 PM BSTYou didn't like series 2 Alan Partridge??
View original
Series two ruled. As did series one. I want a third series, so Id bring this back, as long as the original writing team were all back.