Well I never knew there was a - Series 1.
Following the sit of Up Pompeii! - of course there's nothing wrong with that because nobody under 35 would remember it.
A strong cast including Doon who is one of my favourites but one character looks a bit like Moss.
Not overly hilarious but enjoyable.
I love Plebs, and what a treat to get two new episodes in one night! 
Some really good guest stars, some choice scripts, and I have to say I am not disappointed at all.
I really loved this. It's brilliant. I watched all episodes of series 2 in a row :-)
Does anyone know if there will be a third series?
We're hoping and expecting so!
Alright, taking up Aaron's gauntlet in another thread, here's my cri de coeur on 'Plebs'.
(I know, I know. My life won't be worth a farthing after this.)
I'm spooked at the channel wanting a third series. Really, I am.
I've tried, I truly have.
But the humour is very, very puerile. (Another sitcom inspired by The Inbetweeners, methinks.)
Moreover, there are some things in there which should not happen to folks writing anything set in ancient Rome.
Tomatoes? Really? In 26BC?
How did they come by them? Did they order them on the electric telephone?
Well done, lads.
It's not that I expect them to be quoting Cicero, but tomatoes in the actual dialogue is a bad slip up which suggests very limited knowledge of, or care for the subject on which they are writing.
From that one concludes that there is no great love of the subject itself.
It's a theme park. An environment.
I feel that if you want to run a sitcom in such a definite setting, you ought better love the subject matter.
But mostly it's just the comedy itself which grates with me for just not going anywhere.
Granted, it is not as bad as The Inbetweeners. That would be hard to accomplish.
It's also not as insipid as the BBC's W1A. Again, hard to do.
But it's a very thin gruel indeed. Not much meat, if any.
The three guys are effectively:
The lovable loser, the dumb one and the (wo)maneater.
These are well established characters in comedy. One can do stuff with them. Funny stuff. But when you compare the scrapes such characters usually get into in various sitcoms, Plebs seems very uneventful.
I'm not a great fan of Doon Mackichan. But she does seem the only one who's really at home here.
For one she's the only character who seems possessed of some force.
To my mind she's the one who walks away with some credit.
People here seem to love Grumio. But 'the dumb one' usually is supposed to be more than just dumb.
Cue Joey from Friends as the prime example of what 'the dumb one' can be. Lovable, child like and vulnerable (in fact, merged with the (wo)maneater in the hybrid-character of Joey).
Meanwhile, compare Grumio who is just the duuuumb one.
There I think lies the weakness in the whole thing. The lead characters are fairly one dimensional.
Sitcom is character led.
Having some one dimensional, supporting stock characters can be excused. But the lead characters ought to have some ham on them.
Comedy usually also requires a fair share of exaggeration to work. This, however, is that subdued (aside from never ending knob gags, etc) that there is never really that much to work with.
I would not mind three modern guys with modern humour set in ancient Rome.
But then please make it irreverend Woody Allen and Groucho Marx style wisecracks, not this.
Over the whole thing hangs Up Pompeii! like some great shadow.
Now sure, time for a new broom, right?
But for one, you could tell that the makers of Up Pompeii! adored the subject about which they were writing. Plenty of historical puns, nods and winks. One felt they had perhaps read the odd Roman farce here or there and had plenty of access to old school books. They sure remembered their own school days. It was playful. There was a soul to it.
Plebs however strikes me as a piece of media opportunism.
Somebody clocked that there was some sets which could be used cheaply.
Sets which would give the series a more expensive feel than the actual costs would suggest. In PR speak, one had a 'unique sale proposition' to put to the channel.
My guess is the primary reason for making this was therefore not a great set of scripts, but a sales pitch:
'We can produce something unique looking, well set apart from other sitcoms, but at a regular price.'
Call me cynical, if you wish. That's what I see, when I see Plebs.
I see a media product, not a comedy. Not least as there's not much comedy to look at.
Ironically, if my guess is right, it shadows the movie 'Gladiator' in having the tail wag the dog. That began with a studio approaching the director with a Gerome painting of a victorious gladiator. One wanted the look. One didn't have a script. It showed in the final result. Ben Hur it was not.
For anyone who has read Lindsey Davis' Falco Novels - and I am one of them - Plebs must be disappointing.
Much of her Falco series celebrates the very plebby side of Rome (with much wit and sarcasm) for which this series claims to be aiming.
I think you may be able to tell, I love my Roman history. I adore comedy set within it.
I like Lurcio. I enjoyed A Funny Thing Happened On The Way To The Forum.
But Plebs. That I don't like.
It's one thing to get access to such fantastic sets. But it still doesn't excuse such lightweight fare.
I have watched a goodly sum of parts. I wanted to like it.
But it's really just a toned down The Inbetweeners in tunics.
Sadly, I think the makers of this would actually take that as a compliment.
So the general verdict?
I have yet to laugh once.
I'll summarise the above for others - it's bad and poor writing.
Just can't take the character of Hizdahr zo Loraq seriously in Game of Thrones having seen Plebs . . .
