British Comedy Guide

Reggie Perrin - Series 1 Page 24

Quote: Nick @ May 10 2009, 2:34 PM BST

Isn't a lot of that to do with the fact that she is too busy doing other things in the new series? The original Elizabeth was a bit of a doormat in the first series of the original which worked in the 1970s but wouldn't work now.

Personally I think that Elizabeth's character could have been fleshed out more but I like the idea that she now has her own career and it is because they spend so little time together that Reggie looks elsewhere.

The thing that strikes me about the dynamic between Mr & Mrs Perrin in this series is that the relationship seems to be portrayed in the same way as an advert for washing up liquid: men are dumb and women are smart and take little notice of them.

How does taking little notice of your husband make you a smart woman?

Well he is a bit of a twat...
And happens to be trying to get off with another woman. :)

Quote: johnny smith @ May 10 2009, 6:00 PM BST

How does taking little notice of your husband make you a smart woman?

It's not that so much as the feel of it - script and acting. You know, those crappy adverts where the typical man can't cook, clean, wash or iron and the woman has to show him how its *supposed* to be done. It's the same vibe on this; Reggie complains or does something out of character, and instead of being shocked or concerned as per the original series, this time she just tuts, rolls her eyes and goes off to yoga or something.

Quite enjoyed this at the start, but have come to the conclusion that it isn't actually very good. Rather uninspired and a tad dull. And more than a bit repetetive. And not in a good way. The way they've taken some of the old elements and welded them onto the new version are rather jarring. The whole 'dad' character just seems like an excuse to wheel another of the 'catchphrases' out.

The whole thing just seems somehow strangely lifeless.

There seems to be fewer characters in this new one. There's no Tom, the son-in-law, no daughter or son; plus the secretary is pretty characterless. It's interesting to note that Martin Clunes is older than Rossiter was when he played the role, although Rossiter coming from another generation seemed older, I think. But it wouldn't be believable that Clunes would have a grown up daughter.

The character of Chris is markedly different from John Barron's portrayal. This new guy throws the "I didn't get where I am today ... " line away, and he doesn't have any difficulty with malapropisms and dundrearyisms, which was a cornerstone of the original character.

Although Geoffrey Whitehead is a good actor, Palmer has a grumpy face which suites the Jimmy character, making him prone to self-pity. Also, as has been mentioned, Whitehead's "William" is a bit posh to be scrounging, and given his age is seems a little sad.

Perhaps the most glaring alteration is the depiction of Fay Ripley's Nichola against Pauline Yates' Elizabeth. Where as Elizabeth was a largely one-dimensional character (which was seriously bothersome in The Legacy of Reginald Perrin when the character was given more screen time), and was a typical sitcom housewife who cooks the dinner in time for the working husband to arrive home; it would be perhaps too contrasting to have Nichola being a post-modern feminist, although that's what the writers seem to be suggesting.

The modern day yes-men Anthony and Steve are terrible; they are far too American-influenced. The original characters of David and Tony had at least some character to them: Tony was overconfident and didn't take much seriously; almost a prototype yuppy, while David was the contrast: very nervous, shy, cursed with a low self-esteem and was incredibly jumpy around Reggie.

Whereas Rossiter's Reggie seemed half-way through a breakdown when we first meet him, Clunes' Reggie seems to be mildly discontented, undoubtedly designed to be relatable to millions of dissatisfied commuters.

Given the subject matter and excuses for absurd set pieces (driving through a field instead of waiting in the traffic jam), I think the concept would have worked better as a film instead of a 6-part TV series. And as the series goes on, it will naturally distance itself from the original. I don't think Clunes' Reggie will be faking his own death, opening a shop which sells rubbish or found a commune. As such, this new version needs to find its own direction - sooner, rather than later.

I'm still quite enjoying it but it was down to 3.8 million (18% share) for episode 3.

This could get interesting - we all know what happened to the last series that got 3.8m in that timeslot......

Quote: PhilSug @ May 11 2009, 3:02 PM BST

I'm still quite enjoying it but it was down to 3.8 million (18% share) for episode 3.

This could get interesting - we all know what happened to the last series that got 3.8m in that timeslot......

That would be interesting because Perrin's viewers are dropping away whilst Not Going Out's were on the way up.

Based on the series so far, I would say that half of Simon Nye's ideas have worked and half haven't at all.

I like the updates to C.J.'s character, the wellness person, the fact that Reggie's wife now works and Lucy Liemann.

The other characters in the office are weak though and there are too many of them. Just having a secretary and maybe 1 other annoying co-worker whose personality was more fleshed out could have worked better.

The character of William has been wasted thus far as well. Obviously Geoffrey Whitehead was always going to face an uphill task in replacing Geoffrey Palmer who I would say is a genuinely great actor. But the original series and Fairly Secret Army proved that William/Jimmy/Harry is much more than a couple of catchphrases.

David Nobbs has said this series is more Nye than him and I can't help but wish that he had made a bigger contribution. Also after going back to the original novel, I think there are some ideas in that that weren't used in the 1970s that could have added depth to the new shows.

Here's a reminder of what Simon Nye is capable of http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zjsD-9ldBI0 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lGW-PSdnTXE

It's good but no great. I'd set it at usual 2009 quality (ie not great)

Must admit I've lost interest in this show now. I gave it a whirl, but it hasn't held my attention despite an okay and not terrible start.

Good episode, very enjoyable stuff. Coming into its own and diverting further from the Rossiter series. Looking forward to the rest of the series, and hopefully further commissioned. Also nice that, for a change, it's not really clear what we're meant to think or whose side we're meant to be on, regarding the-affair-that's-not.

I liked his first pitch to the Finland company.

It was rather enjoyable tonight. It should have been at this level throughout. Maybe a three-parter or even a film version would have been better. Less shots of Reggie on the train commuting all the time.

Share this page