TV Home Forum

BBC Sitcom season.

Part of 60 years of the television sitcom. (August 2016)

This site closed in March 2021 and is now a read-only archive
WH
Whataday Founding member
davidhorman posted:
Quote:
On a similar note, when they shot the first series of Goodnight Sweetheart, on watching back the rushes the producer felt the scenes shot in 1940 looked too modern, so they adjusted the hue to reduce the colour blue. It was a subtle tweak but from then on the adjustment was made every time Gary went back in time.


Huh, never noticed that (and wasn't supposed to). Good call though.


*

It's a very subtle difference - but what is more noticeable (once you've been told about it) is how the colour blue features heavily in the 90s scenes, both in the decor and costumes. It's barely used in the 40s.

*

*
Last edited by Whataday on 30 August 2016 12:12am - 2 times in total
Night Thoughts and Larry the Loafer gave kudos
JA
james-2001
davidhorman posted:
It was definitely 2 5 fps, in the trailer anyway.


Well, whether it's 25p or 50i it's still 25fps Wink
JA
james-2001
Whataday posted:
On a similar note, when they shot the first series of Goodnight Sweetheart, on watching back the rushes the producer felt the scenes shot in 1940 looked too modern, so they adjusted the hue to reduce the colour blue. It was a subtle tweak but from then on the adjustment was made every time Gary went back in time.


There's the possiblity that they've decided with the newer one to shoot the 1962 stuff 25p and the 2016 stuff in 50i? One way to differentiate their look I guess beyond just colour grading.

I can't judge on how it look on the trailer though, cos I've only seen it on the BBC website in 25p form anyway.
DJ
DJGM
623058 posted:

AYBS really is right down the middle, I'm in the camp which loved it, I would like
to see a new series. I do get the other half dont get it.


If AYBS was to be recommissioned for a new series, they'd ultimately have to retcon Grace & Favour!
JA
james-2001
One if it ran long enough to get past being set in 1992 Wink
BA
bilky asko
London Lite posted:
The only criticism was the actress who played Miss Brahms who sounded like she was still on The Catherine Tate Show as Vicky Pollard's friend.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/staticarchive/1917e8beb50b159effab597457cfe18f3b568195.jpg*

They could be twins.
CW
Charlie Wells Moderator
Watching both Are You Being Served and Porridge last night the latter definitely seemed to be the better of the two episodes.

For me the Are You Being Served episode seemed to rely too heavily on jokes relating to Mr Humphries' being camp and Slocombe's pussy. It was nice to see a photo of the original young Mr Grace in the office. I think they would struggle to get a new full series from it, though the episode's ending did hint that Captain Peacock and Mrs Slocombe might get sacked.

As for Porridge I was dubious when I first saw it was to be set in modern times, though pleasantly surprised. Nice nod to the original series (and Going Straight) in making him Fletcher's grandson, and his prison cell mate remembering the original Fletcher. Joke wise there were a few classic lines from the old series, and I thought Kevin Bishop played the character well.

Edit: Maybe part of the reason Porridge worked better was due to the episode being written by the original series writers Dick Clement and Ian La Frenais.
Last edited by Charlie Wells on 30 August 2016 9:08am
GL
Gluben
deejay posted:
I thought Porridge was excellent, and if they don't make a series it will have been a very good opportunity missed. Affectionate and sympathetic to the original, but really taking the thing on - a proper reboot. Are You Being Served was less of a success in my opinion, just modern day actors doing their version of the original and yet this was also mishmashed with a reboot idea, of setting it in a store faced with modern competition. I think they should have etither done a straight remake, or done a reboot - but that's just my opinion. I liked it, but not as much as Porridge.


Really though? Is that all the BBC (and to a lesser extent ITV) are good for these days? Just a reboot of a show that was popular in the 1970s?

The whole idea of the Sitcom Season is ridiculous. If you're going to celebrate old shows, just repeat them, or at least show documentaries about how they were made. There's a quote from the Head of Comedy which says that they shouldn't be focusing so much on the new. Why? Isn't that the point? Isn't his job to help create new, memorable comedy?

And before people say "Oh lighten up, it's just a one-off...", that's what was said about Still Open All Hours. They're clearly trialing them for full series. They shouldn't be calling up older writers just to make this, no matter how good the scripts are. It strikes me as harking back to the old boys' club ideology of the 1950s and 1960s. It's laziness.

Sorry, rant over!
CW
Charlie Wells Moderator
Gluben posted:
The whole idea of the Sitcom Season is ridiculous. If you're going to celebrate old shows, just repeat them, or at least show documentaries about how they were made. There's a quote from the Head of Comedy which says that they shouldn't be focusing so much on the new. Why? Isn't that the point? Isn't his job to help create new, memorable comedy?

To be fair they did show (repeats of) Comedy Connections for both shows, albeit unhelpfully after the news & MOTD2 at 11:25pm. BBC2 has also been quietly reshowing various sitcoms during weekday afternoons for some time and Saturday evenings.

Gluben posted:
Really though? Is that all the BBC (and to a lesser extent ITV) are good for these days? Just a reboot of a show that was popular in the 1970s?

This is also something that film industry has also been guilty of doing for quite some time to an even greater extent.
WH
Whataday Founding member
I don't understand the barrage of criticism the sitcom season has attracted.

Out of the four programmes that have attracted the most attention, one is a loyal remake, almost a tribute (AYBS), one is a reboot (Porridge), one a prequel comedy drama (Young Hyacinth) and one a revival 17 years on (Goodnight Sweetheart). Each bring something very different to the table. I wouldn't call any of them lazy recommissions.

And for each of those programmes there are many other new brand programmes being screened as part of the season:

Our Ex Wife
http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/corporate2/images/width/live/p0/44/7t/p0447t32.jpg/624

Home from Home
http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/corporate2/images/width/live/p0/44/wf/p044wf0j.jpg/624

The Coopers vs The Rest
http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/corporate2/images/width/live/p0/44/7s/p0447srg.jpg/624

We The Jury
http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/corporate2/images/width/live/p0/44/7t/p0447tht.jpg/624

Motherland
http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/corporate2/images/width/live/p0/44/z1/p044z15m.jpg/624

And a new series of BBC Three's Comedy Feeds with six brand new comedies showcasing the next generation of comedy talent.

There's a panel show:
We Love Sitcom
http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/corporate2/images/width/live/p0/44/yx/p044yxz9.jpg/624

There's a game show (Pointless Sitcom Special)
There's a Horizon Special about the science of laughter

And there's a huge retrospective documentary, British Sitcom: 60 Years Of Laughing At Ourselves scheduled later in the month.

It really is a rounded season of programming, so to criticise it because of one element isn't really fair.
LL
Larry the Loafer
I think some of the criticism stems from those in comedy, particularly writers and performers, who have become tired of television allegedly not taking risks anymore, something Johnny Vegas was very vocal about on one occasion when he was accepting a comedy award. As a result, it's become difficult for new talent to penetrate and showcase their stuff.

I know there are new shows coming, as Whataday has stated, but I think it's probably rubbed a bit of salt into the wounds of the aforementioned by the BBC proudly saying "let's celebrate our history of comedy by going and doing something we've already done" instead of also saying "and look at all the new stuff we're bringing to you as well". Therefore, those people have probably been armed and ready to critique them at whatever moment they can. I suppose it's a little similar to gamers who go out and buy new consoles only to be offered remasters of old games.

I don't completely share this opinion - although I do understand it - but it's just a theory I have.
WI
Wicko
Larry the Loafer posted:
I think some of the criticism stems from those in comedy, particularly writers and performers, who have become tired of television allegedly not taking risks anymore, something Johnny Vegas was very vocal about on one occasion when he was accepting a comedy award. As a result, it's become difficult for new talent to penetrate and showcase their stuff.

I know there are new shows coming, as Whataday has stated, but I think it's probably rubbed a bit of salt into the wounds of the aforementioned by the BBC proudly saying "let's celebrate our history of comedy by going and doing something we've already done" instead of also saying "and look at all the new stuff we're bringing to you as well". Therefore, those people have probably been armed and ready to critique them at whatever moment they can. I suppose it's a little similar to gamers who go out and buy new consoles only to be offered remasters of old games.

I don't completely share this opinion - although I do understand it - but it's just a theory I have.


Well, perhaps writers should make them funny then. It is telling that two of the biggest BBC sitcoms of recent years, Mrs. Brown's Boys and Miranda, are traditional in style and substance. They don't try to be sophisticated, they don't try to be intelligent or clever. Make a sitcom simple with characters we can relate to and laugh with, and they'll be successful. I don't think Citizen Khan is funny at all because the character is a complete idiot and annoying. AYBS? was funny because the characters are already established and therefore we could relate with them.

Newer posts