Comedy Calamities
Right, I think it's time we exposed a few bits of common knowledge for the crap that they are.
Slightly aggressive opening, I know, but I've got the bit between my teeth.
In a conversation on facebook tonight, it was mentioned by someone that they had seen a couple of clips from The Office on one of those "Top 100 comedy moments shows" and it got me thinking.
It got me thinking how bloody annoying and predictable and sheep like those programmes are and indeed any programme that ever pays homage to any classic show.
My point it this. There have been many many great sitcoms over the years with many classic moments. Sadly, when it comes to featuring clips from these shows, the producers always go with the same tried and trusted clips which it has become ingrained into the national consciousness must be the best moments from these shows, because they themselves have previously seen them in similar shows. So it is taken as gospel that if you are going to show a clip from The Office then you must show the clip of David Brent dancing as according to every man and his sheep this is the funniest moment of the show. And this is my point. The worst thing is - that this clip does absolutely nothing to highlight the whole point of what The Office is about and any casual viewer watching who might never have seen the show is going to get no idea whatsoever of what it was all about.
And the same thing is repeated across all shows.
We are to believe it seems that during the entire 20 year run of Only Fools And Horses the two most amazing things that ever happened were Del falling through an open hatch and a chandelier falling down. Or if you are very lucky a clip of them as Batman and Robin. Yes - funny moments in their own way, but the crowning pinnacle of the series? Are we to ignore the remaining 30+ hours of material. Show some imagination for goodness sake!!! Del falling through the bar was quite amusing the first time I saw it - but after 50 times the joke has worn thin. Just like David Brent's dancing which quite honestly I find embarrassing now and a low point of the show.
Fawlty Towers? Basil hitting the car with a branch. One Foot In The Grave? Victor answering the phone which turns out to be a dog. Hilarious. Not. Didn't find that joke funny in the first place, in what is an amazingly funny show so why it should have become deemed a classic I don't know. Presumably someone important decided it was so everyone else who worked for him kissed his butt and said it was and then the millions of sheep who watched the clip show decided it must have been. Hey presto.
What about shows I haven't watched, well there aren't many. But I can't stand Dawn French - nothing personal but she irritates the hell out of me and for that reason I have never watched The Vicar Of Dibley. But of course I've seen the clip shows. So shall I tell you what I know about The Vicar Of Dibley? Dawn French jumps in a big puddle. Guffaw Guffaw. How amusing. And it would never happen. If that's the funniest moment that show's got to offer I'm glad I didn't waste x hours of my life watching it.
So that's point one dealt with. Point two. For which I blame John Cleese and Connie Booth, who of course wrote the fantastic and best sitcom of all time, Fawlty Towers.
Sadly, something John and Connie said after writing this show, has had repercussions since. They said that to make the show as amazing as it was, they could only possibly have written 12 episodes. In order to pack the maximum into every one of those 12 shows. I think perhaps they are right. We are used to having hundreds of episodes of US shows at our disposal, but in Britain things are rather more frugal. Imagine if there were 200+ episodes of Fawlty Towers around - would it be as good - or diluted? What would you rather have?
In the case of Fawlty Towers, perhaps 12 was right, however the legacy of this has been that so many shows since have been similarly restricted, I could name many but the fact is we have been starved of episodes of so many classics when they could have made so much more. And it's not just comedy.
We produce some amazing shows here. Take Sherlock for example. Great show. Has run for 2 series. But 3 episodes per series? Can we have a bit more please? OK they are feature length - I'd split them personally and have 6 episodes per series as 3 two part stories but that's just my preference. They make 4 per year of Lewis, and the standard run for any UK show is 6. Sometimes a few more - Shameless can be praised for extending their episode run up to 22 a year but that's very much the exception. Perhaps they looked across the pond.
Over in America, when they invest into a TV series they really invest. Sign up the stars on 7 year contracts. Have a team of writers in place. Run for 20+ episodes per season. Note - it's a season in the US, not a series as we have here. Now the generally perceived view over here is that this approach dilutes the quality - it can't be as good. Perhaps in the past that was true, and I was always one for dissing "transatlantic trash" in the past but all that has changed post Millenium. Look at the quality that comes out of the States that we can gorge on with 20+ episodes a year. Lost! Heroes! House! True Blood! The Office! These shows are produced to high quality and don't have weak or filler episodes. So why must we put up with 6 episodes of all our favourites and lengthy delays between series. You don't get that in the states, they start in September and that's it. In fact they are barely off the air all year round as unlike here they have breaks in transmission between "new" episodes.
And to illustrate my point - the fantastic Office with David Brent and his dancing ran for 14 episodes here. Then they took it over to the states. I thought - uh-oh, this is going to be shit, just like every other UK sitcom every sent over stateside - sorry, but they just don't get our humour. So I watched the opening episode - and it was woeful. They attempted to copy word for word the first UK episode - it was stilted and awful. Yep - another disaster. But I kept watching. It limped unspectacularly through an opening UK style 6 episode season (they must have felt robbed over there), and then something rather amazing happened. They stopped trying to copy the UK show and let their characters develop in their own right. Throughout that second season (a full 22 episode run) it grew and grew and became quite amazingly the most brilliant and hilarious show I have ever seen come out of the states. And I hate American sitcoms with a passion, Friends? Absolute shite. Sorry if that offends, but tough, it's mindless, annoying twaddle.
The UK version of the Office never had the chance to go on and see if it could maintain it's level of greatness, we are to believe it seems that it's quality would have been diluted as per the Cleese and Booth philosophy. But the US show shines on and shows no sign of stopping, even despite losing it's main star, Steve Carell at the end of season 7. Meanwhile, minor characters such as Keith in our UK version never had time to be much more than cameos. Yet his counterpart (Kevin) across the pond has had time to shine in his own right, as have all the other minor roles.
No point me recommending any of you watch this show because if you like it, you like it, if you're not interested you are unlikely to be swayed by my arguments. But if you do decide to try it, don't watch an episode from season one. Something they also used to say about Star Trek, The Next Generation which also had an indifferent first year. My advice on that one, is that if you are flicking through the channels and come across an episode and think about watching it, check to see if Riker has got a beard. If he hasn't, don't bother.
If you have enjoyed reading this blog, please take a look at my books on Amazon (Paperback & Kindle), where you can read lots more of the same! Click here.
Jason xx
Slightly aggressive opening, I know, but I've got the bit between my teeth.
In a conversation on facebook tonight, it was mentioned by someone that they had seen a couple of clips from The Office on one of those "Top 100 comedy moments shows" and it got me thinking.
It got me thinking how bloody annoying and predictable and sheep like those programmes are and indeed any programme that ever pays homage to any classic show.
My point it this. There have been many many great sitcoms over the years with many classic moments. Sadly, when it comes to featuring clips from these shows, the producers always go with the same tried and trusted clips which it has become ingrained into the national consciousness must be the best moments from these shows, because they themselves have previously seen them in similar shows. So it is taken as gospel that if you are going to show a clip from The Office then you must show the clip of David Brent dancing as according to every man and his sheep this is the funniest moment of the show. And this is my point. The worst thing is - that this clip does absolutely nothing to highlight the whole point of what The Office is about and any casual viewer watching who might never have seen the show is going to get no idea whatsoever of what it was all about.
 |
| Seriously, was this really the best moment of The Office? |
And the same thing is repeated across all shows.
We are to believe it seems that during the entire 20 year run of Only Fools And Horses the two most amazing things that ever happened were Del falling through an open hatch and a chandelier falling down. Or if you are very lucky a clip of them as Batman and Robin. Yes - funny moments in their own way, but the crowning pinnacle of the series? Are we to ignore the remaining 30+ hours of material. Show some imagination for goodness sake!!! Del falling through the bar was quite amusing the first time I saw it - but after 50 times the joke has worn thin. Just like David Brent's dancing which quite honestly I find embarrassing now and a low point of the show.
| Yeah great. So what happened in the rest of the episode? |
Fawlty Towers? Basil hitting the car with a branch. One Foot In The Grave? Victor answering the phone which turns out to be a dog. Hilarious. Not. Didn't find that joke funny in the first place, in what is an amazingly funny show so why it should have become deemed a classic I don't know. Presumably someone important decided it was so everyone else who worked for him kissed his butt and said it was and then the millions of sheep who watched the clip show decided it must have been. Hey presto.
What about shows I haven't watched, well there aren't many. But I can't stand Dawn French - nothing personal but she irritates the hell out of me and for that reason I have never watched The Vicar Of Dibley. But of course I've seen the clip shows. So shall I tell you what I know about The Vicar Of Dibley? Dawn French jumps in a big puddle. Guffaw Guffaw. How amusing. And it would never happen. If that's the funniest moment that show's got to offer I'm glad I didn't waste x hours of my life watching it.
So that's point one dealt with. Point two. For which I blame John Cleese and Connie Booth, who of course wrote the fantastic and best sitcom of all time, Fawlty Towers.
Sadly, something John and Connie said after writing this show, has had repercussions since. They said that to make the show as amazing as it was, they could only possibly have written 12 episodes. In order to pack the maximum into every one of those 12 shows. I think perhaps they are right. We are used to having hundreds of episodes of US shows at our disposal, but in Britain things are rather more frugal. Imagine if there were 200+ episodes of Fawlty Towers around - would it be as good - or diluted? What would you rather have?
In the case of Fawlty Towers, perhaps 12 was right, however the legacy of this has been that so many shows since have been similarly restricted, I could name many but the fact is we have been starved of episodes of so many classics when they could have made so much more. And it's not just comedy.
We produce some amazing shows here. Take Sherlock for example. Great show. Has run for 2 series. But 3 episodes per series? Can we have a bit more please? OK they are feature length - I'd split them personally and have 6 episodes per series as 3 two part stories but that's just my preference. They make 4 per year of Lewis, and the standard run for any UK show is 6. Sometimes a few more - Shameless can be praised for extending their episode run up to 22 a year but that's very much the exception. Perhaps they looked across the pond.
Over in America, when they invest into a TV series they really invest. Sign up the stars on 7 year contracts. Have a team of writers in place. Run for 20+ episodes per season. Note - it's a season in the US, not a series as we have here. Now the generally perceived view over here is that this approach dilutes the quality - it can't be as good. Perhaps in the past that was true, and I was always one for dissing "transatlantic trash" in the past but all that has changed post Millenium. Look at the quality that comes out of the States that we can gorge on with 20+ episodes a year. Lost! Heroes! House! True Blood! The Office! These shows are produced to high quality and don't have weak or filler episodes. So why must we put up with 6 episodes of all our favourites and lengthy delays between series. You don't get that in the states, they start in September and that's it. In fact they are barely off the air all year round as unlike here they have breaks in transmission between "new" episodes.
And to illustrate my point - the fantastic Office with David Brent and his dancing ran for 14 episodes here. Then they took it over to the states. I thought - uh-oh, this is going to be shit, just like every other UK sitcom every sent over stateside - sorry, but they just don't get our humour. So I watched the opening episode - and it was woeful. They attempted to copy word for word the first UK episode - it was stilted and awful. Yep - another disaster. But I kept watching. It limped unspectacularly through an opening UK style 6 episode season (they must have felt robbed over there), and then something rather amazing happened. They stopped trying to copy the UK show and let their characters develop in their own right. Throughout that second season (a full 22 episode run) it grew and grew and became quite amazingly the most brilliant and hilarious show I have ever seen come out of the states. And I hate American sitcoms with a passion, Friends? Absolute shite. Sorry if that offends, but tough, it's mindless, annoying twaddle.
| Nauseating shite. |
The UK version of the Office never had the chance to go on and see if it could maintain it's level of greatness, we are to believe it seems that it's quality would have been diluted as per the Cleese and Booth philosophy. But the US show shines on and shows no sign of stopping, even despite losing it's main star, Steve Carell at the end of season 7. Meanwhile, minor characters such as Keith in our UK version never had time to be much more than cameos. Yet his counterpart (Kevin) across the pond has had time to shine in his own right, as have all the other minor roles.
No point me recommending any of you watch this show because if you like it, you like it, if you're not interested you are unlikely to be swayed by my arguments. But if you do decide to try it, don't watch an episode from season one. Something they also used to say about Star Trek, The Next Generation which also had an indifferent first year. My advice on that one, is that if you are flicking through the channels and come across an episode and think about watching it, check to see if Riker has got a beard. If he hasn't, don't bother.
 |
| Good episode |
| Crap episode. |
Jason xx
Comments
Post a Comment