I don't think it's bad writing - just inappropriate for the situation.
And elements of it are funny in their own right - I actually think Rory Kinnear does a very good job and has excellent comic timing - they just don't contribute.
It's a case of wrong place, wrong time.
I don't know anything about the radio series or the gestation of the show but I do know that the head of comedy commissioning and everyone in the writersroom should prostrate themselves and beg forgiveness to the un-broadcast comedy writers of Britain.
This reminded me of Mrs Brown's Boys in that while you are watching it you can't believe it's actually going out over a TV network.
I think there's a link between Fathers Ted and Dougal. If Dougal screwed up you would just go "Who cares?" It needs Father Ted.
Rory Kinnear plays the same role, you would want him to do well. Except he's not as likeable an actor as Dermot Morgan.
Quote: Matthew Stott @ July 23 2013, 10:30 AM BSTThe reasons for bringing other characters in are clear and understandable
No, please, do enlighten us. Because I genuinely haven't a f**king clue for Michael's existence.
Overnight audience of 0.69m for ep 3.
Really not convinced this character stands any chance now of appealing to the necessary viewership, but stranger things have happened.
Quote: Aaron @ July 23 2013, 1:02 PM BSTNo, please, do enlighten us. Because I genuinely haven't a f**king clue for Michael's existence.
I kind of made an attempt at explaining.
Quote: Tim Azure @ July 23 2013, 2:15 PM BSTI kind of made an attempt at explaining.
I think it's more a question of why they need it now, when they didn't before.
When it was popular.
Quote: Lazzard @ July 23 2013, 10:49 AM BSTBut why the dumb story arc?
Never mind "dumb", why the story arc? It's writer-wank. It's a sitcom. There's no need for any sort of arc. Even in episodic drama, arcs are a pain: it was Moffat's obsession with story arcs that killed at least one, if not two, series of Doctor Who stone dead. But in a sitcom? FFS. Why? Make it funny. Make the characters engaging. Make it look half decent. That's enough to be getting on with, isn't it?
Quote: Tokyo Nambu @ July 23 2013, 3:28 PM BSTNever mind "dumb", why the story arc? It's writer-wank. It's a sitcom. There's no need for any sort of arc. Even in episodic drama, arcs are a pain: it was Moffat's obsession with story arcs that killed at least one, if not two, series of Doctor Who stone dead. But in a sitcom? FFS. Why? Make it funny. Make the characters engaging. Make it look half decent. That's enough to be getting on with, isn't it?
I find myself in violent agreement with you on this.
Unfortunately the 'story arc' is considered an essential ingredient of TV comedy these days.
They don't call it 'narrative comedy' instead of sitcom for no reason.
The thinking is that the unfolding story will keep viewers looking in. I think it's as likely to drive people away.
Quote: Lazzard @ July 23 2013, 3:50 PM BSTI find myself in violent agreement with you on this.
Quote: Godot Taxis @ July 23 2013, 4:05 PM BSTUnfortunately the 'story arc' is considered an essential ingredient of TV comedy these days.
I naively assumed that "being funny" was the sine qua non of a TV comedy show. Obviously not.
Could Michael's existence be due to the TV adaptors just wanting to be creative? There doesn't need to a sixth floor explaination of his existence?
Though I must admit story arcs are a bit daft.
Quote: Tim Azure @ July 23 2013, 5:06 PM BSTCould Michael's existence be due to the TV adaptors just wanting to be creative? There doesn't need to a sixth floor explaination of his existence?
Though I must admit story arcs are a bit daft.
I think the word I used was tinkering.
The fact of the matter is, they should have gone with an execution that was as broad as the character.
Quote: Tim Azure @ July 23 2013, 5:06 PM BSTCould Michael's existence be due to the TV adaptors just wanting to be creative?
The polite word for that is self-indulgence.
Yeah agree. The Micheal parts/ story arc seems weak, but I did love the whole Radio studio setup. However I do think it can be funny, he was fine in Jack the Ripper gag IMO. But still I wish Linehan didn't concentrate on the "story" arc. That's why I loved IT Crowd and Ted so much FFS. Pure sitcom for me, why the need to add a story arc or anything to it? Especially I really feared I was going to hate it when it started out with a typically depressing childhood memory. Ugh. And Kinnear seems to be terribly miscast at that as well.
Overall I liked it again.
