Just iPlayered it. Really enjoyable episode, probably the most consistent of this series so far IMO. Good stuff.
Not Going Out - Series 3 Page 29
Quote: Badge @ February 16 2009, 1:56 AM GMTJust iPlayered it. Really enjoyable episode, probably the most consistent of this series so far IMO. Good stuff.
Agree with this. I thought it was terrific and razor sharp from minute 1 to 28. The two scenes in the bar where Lee blurts something out about Tim and a 15 year old girl just as the barman walks by was hilarious.
Quote: bigfella @ February 15 2009, 8:23 PM GMTOn the viewing figures thing. I'm sure how they get calculated but I would think that this sitcom is aimed at the 18 to mid 30s age bracket. Many of whom would be out getting pissed and trying to get laid at 9.30 of a Friday evening.
Yes. A chunk of the intended audience is no doubt not not going out on Fridays. Still, there is the iPlayer (NGO was the 3rd most popular comedy on there over the weekend) and Monday repeats allowing people to catch up, so when these are factored into the figures several million more should be added to that total.
Admittedly things are about to get tougher for Not Going Out, as next week ITV launches Al Murray's sketch show in direct competiton to NGO (which incidently is quite odd - as both are Avalon shows, with Avalon-managed stars in them - you'd have thought the company would have had words!).
This is a consistently good show. A rare example of the team writing method working for a UK sitcom. There's hopefully no reason why this can't run for a good few years yet.
Okay, as Andrew Collins posts here and works on this show I want to ask a question. Something has been bugging me and it really shouldn't be bugging me because NGO is not a realistic show nor one you should try to look for logic in....
BUT...where the hell does Lee get his money from? He owns a huge-arse flat which is nicely decorated, he employs a cleaner, has champagne in his fridge and is a regular at a trendy looking bar.
The answer can be illogical as possible, I just want an answer. I'd like it if Lee was secretly getting lump sums of cash from some mysterious source.
Thanks. 
He sold (clearly a hell of a lot of) ice cream in the previous series... 
Erm, it hadn't occurred to me to wonder this time.
It is a bloody nice flat.
Quote: zooo @ February 16 2009, 5:36 PM GMTHe sold (clearly a hell of a lot of) ice cream in the previous series...
Erm, it hadn't occurred to me to wonder this time.
Yeah, it shouldn't really be bothering me because I love how fantastically farcical this show is. But its niggling at me now...
He can't afford a fourth wall. He can't be that rich.
Quote: Leevil @ February 16 2009, 5:39 PM GMTHe can't afford a fourth wall. He can't be that rich.
But he can afford an entire film crew to document his life.
Just for 30 minutes a week though.
Lucy owns the flat. Lee rents a room. Presumably with the money he earns as an ice cream man (to which the odd reference is made, even if we don't often see him at work). Lucy is/was a reasonably successful businesswoman.
Simple.
Neither of them can afford a lock for that front door though can they!!!
Quote: Aaron @ February 16 2009, 6:04 PM GMTLucy owns the flat. Lee rents a room. Presumably with the money he earns as an ice cream man (to which the odd reference is made, even if we don't often see him at work). Lucy is/was a reasonably successful businesswoman.
Simple.
Oh! I always thought it was Lee's flat and Lucy was the one renting the room because didn't Lee own it in Series 1?
I always thought Tim owned it. I don't watch NGO that often, is he called Tim in it?
Quote: Martin Holmes @ February 16 2009, 6:32 PM GMTOh! I always thought it was Lee's flat and Lucy was the one renting the room because didn't Lee own it in Series 1?
Tim owned it. He had left Kate (pre-series 1) but she still lived there, with Lee renting the room. Half of series 2 was about Lee not being able to buy it when Tim put it up for sale, Lucy buying it from Tim (her brother), and eventually Lee renting the room, against Lucy's instinct.