I have just rewatched the first episode of series 1 of the orginal 'Fall and Rise' series and I was amazed to hear the mention of 'pumice' (which the first episode of this update was all about) . When the results come in for the top 3 exotic ices from the computer there is an error and the results say 'Bookends, pumice stone, and West Germany'. This causes CJ to say
"I didn't get where I am today selling ice creams tasting of bookends, pumice stone, and West Germany".
I totally concur with all those who say Andrew Collins is criticizing the concept, not the actual series. (well reasoned nonetheless)
Andrew, have you seen any preview DVDs? if so I take it all back!
Quote: johnny smith @ April 28 2009, 11:24 AM BSTI have just rewatched the first episode of series 1 of the orginal 'Fall and Rise' series and I was amazed to hear the mention of 'pumice' (which the first episode of this update was all about) . When the results come in for the top 3 exotic ices from the computer there is an error and the results say 'Bookends, pumice stone, and West Germany'. This causes CJ to say
"I didn't get where I am today selling ice creams tasting of bookends, pumice stone, and West Germany".
Cor!
Quote: johnny smith @ April 28 2009, 11:24 AM BSTI have just rewatched the first episode of series 1 of the orginal 'Fall and Rise' series and I was amazed to hear the mention of 'pumice' (which the first episode of this update was all about) . When the results come in for the top 3 exotic ices from the computer there is an error and the results say 'Bookends, pumice stone, and West Germany'. This causes CJ to say
"I didn't get where I am today selling ice creams tasting of bookends, pumice stone, and West Germany".
You mean you've only just realised that this new ep was based loosely around the original? Yikes.
Having seen it now I can't help thinking what exactly David Nobbs did on the new one? It looks like Simon Nye wrote it, gave it to Nobbs to have a look, Nobbs said that'll do and then asked when do I get paid.
It had its moments but overall it was about what I expected. It lacked the original's bite and seemed a bit pointless. The audience seemed like they were under the threat of death unless they laughed.
I'm a bit mystified why some on here think it's brilliant but there you go.
The best thing in it was Neil Stuke's CJ. Like to have seen more of him. At least Clunes looked like he'd lost some weight.
Even if you are somone who has never seen 'The Fall and Rise', you should at least be aware of it's reputation as one of the greatest and funniest sitcoms ever made.
I had seen the odd clip and had heard of the title of the show when I was younger (I am 19 now) and I have got the complete boxset a year or two ago and I still haven't watched every single episode yet but I am familiar enough with it to know that this new update, as well as being extremely pointless, is also extremely lame, old fashioned, embarrassing to watch and most of all - extremely unfunny - the exact opposite of the original.
Remaking or updating a show like this really is like updating or writing a sequel to a sacred religious text. The original series was a case (one of many) of all the show's components (the writer and the performers) coming together at the right time to produce pure comedy genius. It is something that you could never recapture or recreate and, until now, nobody would have even dreamed of doing so.
Andrew Collins was right when he said that some of the scenes in Reggie Perrin resemble a sketch from a sketch show where modern technology exists in the 1970s and the two factors really juxtapose with one another.
If there was to be a remake of 'Fall and Rise' in terms of setup and issues and topics raised, I think that Dylan Moran would be a great choice to play the 'Reggie' of the piece (mainly because his Bernard Black is like a 21st century Reginald Perrin - well, to me anyway) and Chris Morris as the 'CJ' eqivalent because I found his Denholm character from 'The IT Crowd' to be quite similar to CJ because of the bizarre things Denholm would come out with and the way he tents his fingers whilst sitting at his desk.
It did have a very seventies feel about it all. My main problem is that they seem to have fallen victim to events outside of their control. At a time when the world is in recession and the UK heading for a Depression, the trivial middle management phoney marketing nonsense just doesn't ring true for the times and so isn't funny. A couple of years ago in the madness peak of property prices etc, maybe - but nowadays not really.
Quote: Marc P @ April 28 2009, 1:57 PM BSTIt did have a very seventies feel about it all. My main problem is that they seem to have fallen victim to events outside of their control. At a time when the world is in recession and the UK heading for a Depression, the trivial middle management phoney marketing nonsense just doesn't ring true for the times and so isn't funny. A couple of years ago in the madness peak of property prices etc, maybe - but nowadays not really.
But surely you can still find things funny even if they aren't entirely relevant or seem slightly dated? Why must everything be a reflection or snapshot of this very instant in time? And let's face it, very few recent mainstream BBC One sitcoms have reflected what's going on in today's society.
Can't quite believe this, but I agree with chip.
When people are talking about being out of date and "seventies", what exactly are you referring to? The sets? The look? That it's not a fly-on-the-wall type setup? The characterisation...?
Quote: chipolata @ April 28 2009, 2:09 PM BSTBut surely you can still find things funny even if they aren't entirely relevant or seem slightly dated? Why must everything be a reflection or snapshot of this very instant in time? And let's face it, very few recent mainstream BBC One sitcoms have reflected what's going on in today's society.
I know what you mean and I agree in principle. But there has to be some sort of root in reality even if it is a completely made up mad reality. At essense the show is about a mid life crisis I guess, a man driven to distraction by the nonsense of the business world. Does it matter etc, what slogan you come up with. The absurdities are an exaggeration of what really was going on at the time of the book and now they are not. Everyone in the business world is fearful for their job more or less and so the show feels disjointed not just beacause of its history but because of events outside. There is a satirical thrust to the first show - undoubtedly - which is present in every strand here - it's just the target of the satire has changed. It's not always about reflecting what is going on, but if you are satirising something, it kind of does have to be topical yes.
Quote: Aaron @ April 28 2009, 2:31 PM BSTWhen people are talking about being out of date and "seventies", what exactly are you referring to? The sets? The look? That it's not a fly-on-the-wall type setup? The characterisation...?
The office set was straight out of the McMahon and Tate Advertising Agency!
Quote: Marc P @ April 28 2009, 2:35 PM BSTI know what you mean and I agree in principle. But there has to be some sort of root in reality even if it is a completely made up mad reality. At essense the show is about a mid life crisis I guess, a man driven to distraction by the nonsense of the business world. Does it matter etc, what slogan you come up with. The absurdities are an exaggeration of what really was going on at the time of the book and now they are not. Everyone in the business world is fearful for their job more or less and so the show feels disjointed not just beacause of its history but because of events outside. There is a satirical thrust to the first show - undoubtedly - which is present in every strand here - it's just the target of the satire has changed. It's not always about reflecting what is going on, but if you are satirising something, it kind of does have to be topical yes.
I agree that at the moment there is a fearfulness in the business community about losing their jobs, the nonsense and excesses of that world still continue. And probably will for all of our lifetimes. Giving Reggie Perrin a certain timelessness.
Quote: chipolata @ April 28 2009, 2:45 PM BSTI agree that at the moment there is a fearfulness in the business community about losing their jobs, the nonsense and excesses of that world still continue. And probably will for all of our lifetimes. Giving Reggie Perrin a certain timelessness.
Yeah I'm not saying they were at fault, it's just world events happened in a way nobody could have predicted and we all know how long it takes to develop something. I think it will have an impact on the show's success, particuarly as the new boss is a thrusting city banker type of personna now. There is something a bit too thrusting and manly about Reggie too with your man playing him, which can't be helped. Rossiter was always the mouse that was about to turn but Martin Clunes is kind of physically against that type. Looking forward to watching the rest of the series mind.
Quote: Marc P @ April 28 2009, 2:56 PM BSTYeah I'm not saying they were at fault, it's just world events happened in a way nobody could have predicted and we all know how long it takes to develop something.
I'm saying, regardless of the current crisis, business trundles along in much the same way it always has. Look at how after countless banks had cocked up on an enormous scale, bankers were still slapping themselves on the back and giving themselves huge bonuses and pension deals. They seemed completely removed from reality...
Quote: Marc P @ April 28 2009, 2:56 PM BSTLooking forward to watching the rest of the series mind.
Me too. It's been an interesting experiment that has worked much better than expected.
Quote: Marc P @ April 28 2009, 2:56 PM BSTI think it will have an impact on the show's success
Seriously? Do you really think that people other than us lot evaluate shows to that degree? As chip has said, there's a timelessness about someone growing disillusioned with their job, particularly a monotonous office-based one, which will always ring true. Perhaps even more so now - not less - as people are becoming discontented in general and re-assessing where they're spending their money; just what they're doing with themselves.
Quote: Aaron @ April 28 2009, 3:15 PM BSTSeriously? Do you really think that people other than us lot evaluate shows to that degree? As chip has said, there's a timelessness about someone growing disillusioned with their job, particularly a monotonous office-based one, which will always ring true. Perhaps even more so now - not less - as people are becoming discontented in general and re-assessing where they're spending their money; just what they're doing with themselves.
I honestly don't know Aaron. I hope not. I think the original show was around about 75/76 before the recession kicked in. Not sure when that was, maybe about the same time so I could be talking out of my fundament. It might have been timed pefectly. And I am sure people don't analyse like we do, I hope not anyway, makes it all a bit sad. And I really try not to whilst watching something but afterwards have a ponder maybe. I think Martin Clunes is great and I reckon the public do too. It's a Zeitgeisty thing with comedy sometimes, the public go with it or not. And that is something you can never predict scientifically. I still don't like the new boss though! 
