It has the look and feel of a 1970s or 1980s sitcom. Surely it's now illegal to smoke in the workplace and has been since 2007? Dodgy plot, clumsy slapstick plus a dodgy laughter track. Nice surreal performances by Matt Lucas and Tim Brooke-Taylor though.
It's nice to see another main character called Rupert on TV. There aren't nearly enough these days.
Quote: TheBlueNun @ 21st October 2015, 10:35 PM BSTIt has the look and feel of a 1970s or 1980s sitcom.
Isn't it brilliant?! 
Sometimes you watch a comedy that makes you admire the writing, praise the acting, chuckle all the way through it, and laugh out loud at certain parts.
Sadly Bull was not one of those.
I had seen plenty of clips for it on Gold over the last few weeks, and have to say I was expecting the worst as the clips looked pretty awful.
And I was right.
It did have a "Father Ted" feel about it, with the people running the shop somewhat in the "Father Ted" mould.
Robert Lindsay playing the "Father Ted" character (trying to do everything right but just not being very good), Toby was the "Dougal" character, rather stupid and dimwitted, and Maureen Lipman playing the "Jack Hackett" character, a bit of a slob with a fag hanging out of her mouth all through the show and falling asleep all the time (in fact she hardly moved from the stool all episode).
(In fact while Dougal in Father Ted played someone dim but in an inoffensive way, the Toby character in Bull seemed to be playing him as though he was mentally ill which I found a little offensive).
It also had that "surreal" edge that Father Ted had, which I usually like (I love zany comedy) but in this case I don't think it was funny.
Only George Lucas came out with any credit.
I actually think it could have been directed better and better use made of the material.
I guess Lindsay and Lipman were offered a big wad of money to play their parts because I can't think of any other reason they would be in it.
And while I know comedy storylines should not be taken too seriously when a young girl comes in to ask for a job, then proceeds to knock everything over and destroy half the contents of the shop, is she then really going to be offered a job?
(In fact when she knocked everything over a second time it was all the same things being knocked over, they seem to just reuse the same bit of film. I wonder if they also showed the "knocking over" segment at the start to give it a "funnier" show opening - not that it was that funny. It may have fitted better ONLY in the middle of the show, AFTER she had got the job, not before).
I will give it another go next week, but don't hold out much hope.
Quote: Guilbert @ 22nd October 2015, 11:47 AM BSTSadly Bull was not
It's got Maureen Lipman, Robert Lindsay and Lucas. I've never seen Lindsay fail. Tell me it's not true. It got a OK review in the Independant.
Quote: Guilbert @ 22nd October 2015, 11:47 AM BSTOnly George Lucas came out with any credit.
Well, someone had to point it out... 
Quote: Guilbert @ 22nd October 2015, 11:47 AM BSTSometimes you watch a comedy that makes you admire the writing, praise the acting, chuckle all the way through it, and laugh out loud at certain parts.
Sadly Bull was not one of those.
I had seen plenty of clips for it on Gold over the last few weeks, and have to say I was expecting the worst as the clips looked pretty awful.
And I was right.
It did have a "Father Ted" feel about it, with the people running the shop somewhat in the "Father Ted" mould.
Robert Lindsay playing the "Father Ted" character (trying to do everything right but just not being very good), Toby was the "Dougal" character, rather stupid and dimwitted, and Maureen Lipman playing the "Jack Hackett" character, a bit of a slob with a fag hanging out of her mouth all through the show and falling asleep all the time (in fact she hardly moved from the stool all episode).
(In fact while Dougal in Father Ted played someone dim but in an inoffensive way, the Toby character in Bull seemed to be playing him as though he was mentally ill which I found a little offensive).
It also had that "surreal" edge that Father Ted had, which I usually like (I love zany comedy) but in this case I don't think it was funny.
Only George Lucas came out with any credit.
I actually think it could have been directed better and better use made of the material.
I guess Lindsay and Lipman were offered a big wad of money to play their parts because I can't think of any other reason they would be in it.
And while I know comedy storylines should not be taken too seriously when a young girl comes in to ask for a job, then proceeds to knock everything over and destroy half the contents of the shop, is she then really going to be offered a job?
(In fact when she knocked everything over a second time it was all the same things being knocked over, they seem to just reuse the same bit of film. I wonder if they also showed the "knocking over" segment at the start to give it a "funnier" show opening - not that it was that funny. It may have fitted better ONLY in the middle of the show, AFTER she had got the job, not before).
I will give it another go next week, but don't hold out much hope.
You've expressed exactly the same sentiments as me, but in a much more fluent and detailed manner. Yes, it was exactly like a low rent version of Father Ted, but much much worse. Oh dear! I can applaud Gold for commissioning new material and totally understand the three episode concept of 'trialing' a new show, but this just didn't hit the mark. I will, however, give it another go next week though.
Quote: Aaron @ 21st October 2015, 11:40 PM BSTIsn't it brilliant?!
Er, not really. Period pieces are period pieces, apart from when they're parodied such as in Garth Marenghi's Darkplace. Bull just wasn't that clever.
I have a sneaking suspicion that your flat looks spookily like the Notting Hill abode of Chrissy, Jo and Robin? I reckon that you also own one of those tasteless aprons that Robin loved to sport.
(The TBN now ceases this conversation lest she's thrown off of the site for insulting Aaron.)
If only.
Awful. Truly awful.
Gosh, watching this now.
I see why it's called 'Bull' - I'm certainly thinking "it's a load of..." as I'm watching it.
I'm not laughing at any point. They are trying to be stupid,to get laughs, but they don't posess the skill Graham Linehan has for making stupid, funny. It's just embarrassing watching them try to copy that approach to comedy, badly. Overusing physical gags much guys? If you're going to use basic childish comedy writing filters, at least make them funny.
The acting is terrible. Dougal wannabe, Del Boy wannabe, straight out of drama school, clipped voice wannabe. I'm not writing a Spice Girls song; I'm just angry that this show has been commissioned.
Shows in the 70s/80s etc. were funny because of the humour at the time, now we watch them back and laugh while enjoying the nostalgia. It doesn't work to try and make your comedy seem like it's in-the-style-of these classics. It just feels forced and fake.
Hate it. Why was it commissioned? You need the backing of a production company to pitch to UKTV, so it had that, it's not like it was an amateur jobby.
I've lost laughs that I will never get back.
But what do you really think, Jo?
Quote: JoChall @ 27th October 2015, 7:57 PM GMTGosh, watching this now.
I see why it's called 'Bull' - I'm certainly thinking "it's a load of..." as I'm watching it.
I'm not laughing at any point. They are trying to be stupid,to get laughs, but they don't posess the skill Graham Linehan has for making stupid, funny. It's just embarrassing watching them try to copy that approach to comedy, badly. Overusing physical gags much guys? If you're going to use basic childish comedy writing filters, at least make them funny.
The acting is terrible. Dougal wannabe, Del Boy wannabe, straight out of drama school, clipped voice wannabe. I'm not writing a Spice Girls song; I'm just angry that this show has been commissioned.
Shows in the 70s/80s etc. were funny because of the humour at the time, now we watch them back and laugh while enjoying the nostalgia. It doesn't work to try and make your comedy seem like it's in-the-style-of these classics. It just feels forced and fake.
Hate it. Why was it commissioned? You need the backing of a production company to pitch to UKTV, so it had that, it's not like it was an amateur jobby.
I've lost laughs that I will never get back.
That's exactly how I feel about 'Bull' Jo. Whilst I admire Gold's commitment to producing and broadcasting new comedy, this one seems to waste the comedic timing and nuances of a talented cast. I often wonder what the audience demographics are for the Gold channel during primetime? I'm guessing 35+.
Episode two: surreal, yet still shite. Turned off at the ad break; deleted, series link cancelled.
On a first watch, I had mixed feelings about episode one but after re-watching it again earlier in the week I did find myself enjoying it a lot more. Whilst Bull isn't the best sitcom ever made, it is watchable enough.
I find it both funny and roll-your-eyes tragic in places.
It was clearly trying harder in Ep2, but there was just something amiss.
