Quote: Tim Walker @ August 9 2009, 8:37 PM BSTWell, episode one was awful...
Episode two...
...was risible.
Jam & Jerusalem - Series 3 Page 5
First episode pretty mediocre. Mildly entertaining but no discernable funny. Second part was quite improved. Laughed a good few times. Picked up the pace relatively well.
Still nothing special or worth recommendation though.
Loved it.
I quite liked it! Second more than the first.
I thought I might get bored with an hour of it, but I didn't.
David Mitchell and Tim Vine 
Works well as an hour and got better as it went along. Good stuff.
Because they were hour long shows, should they have edited out the 'Part Two' text or something? Bit of a disruption to the flow of the show or am I being picky?
Hooray for Tim Vine!
I only saw a bit as I had to shoot out but I have to admit it works better not being a sitcom.
Quote: Aaron @ August 9 2009, 8:13 PM BSTThe hippie-type woman doesn't seem to be able to decide if she's West Country of* Sloane Square.
* or....
I love J & J and was happy to see it return.. I think the 3 hour long episodes is a big mistake.. I enjoyed the first epidode although I missed Queenie not being in it.. I hope it returns for a series 4..
I thought this latest episode was better than the previous series (for example, they've toned down how mad Rosie is), but it is still far from good.
Tim Vine almost made up for the weaknesses though!
I've always liked this show. I don't see it as a sitcom but as light entertainment with a few laughs thrown in. I think only half an hour might work better but I'll give the hour long episodes a chance as I liked the new episode. David and Tim together were great.
"When do those bloody bells stop?"
"When the people stop pulling the ropes usually" 
Quote: Sean Prower @ August 10 2009, 9:32 AM BSTBecause they were hour long shows, should they have edited out the 'Part Two' text or something? Bit of a disruption to the flow of the show or am I being picky?
Quote: Chappers @ August 10 2009, 10:38 AM BSTI only saw a bit as I had to shoot out but I have to admit it works better not being a sitcom.
Well obviously it was written and produced as six half-hour shows, then the BBC decided to bolt them together into three one-hour shows. I don't think this was an artistic decision on the part of Saunders et al, but shows an understandable lack of faith in the show by the BBC. Bung it out in August, three Sundays evenings and it's over, got it out of the way etc.
I suspect the reason the 'Part Two' was left in was at the director's and producers' insistence, so there could be no confusion that this show wasn't intended to be a six-parter (and hence any criticism of that decision shouldn't come their way).
With the long-standing contract with JS (which the BBC is likely regretting) they were obliged to put out one series of hers this year. It was either this or another series of Vivienne Vyle, so they went for the lesser of two evils, really.
I'm not saying this is a terrible show in terms of light drama, but in terms of being a sitcom or comedy-drama it simply isn't funny or engaging enough, IMO. JS and this cast were never going to produce a dreadful piece of television, but considering the talent involved it falls well below the standard one might expect.
Quote: Sean Prower @ August 10 2009, 9:32 AM BSTBecause they were hour long shows, should they have edited out the 'Part Two' text or something? Bit of a disruption to the flow of the show or am I being picky?
They edited in the 'Part Two' text because it was commissioned (and filmed) as a 6x 30 min series.
Quote: Tim Walker @ August 10 2009, 1:58 PM BSTthe BBC decided to bolt them together into ... one-hour shows.
They've been doing that a lot recently. Really weird and really annoying behaviour.
Quote: Aaron @ August 10 2009, 5:39 PM BSTThey edited in the 'Part Two' text because it was commissioned (and filmed) as a 6x 30 min series.
What I meant to say was, since they had been changed from the original 1/2 hour to 1 hour, I thought they might have took that 'Part Two' out to make it run better.
Jam and Jerusalem did however get good ratings. What they were at the end of the show is anyones guess. Beat Top Gear which surprised me though (repeat, mind). Here come the facts. Yawn:
Jam & Jerusalem 4.18m (19.9%)
Top Gear repeat 3.81m (18.1%)
Enjoyed J&J. Will watch it next week.
Quote: Sean Prower @ August 10 2009, 7:57 PM BSTWhat I meant to say was, since they had been changed from the original 1/2 hour to 1 hour, I thought they might have took that 'Part Two' out to make it run better.
It was clear to me that there was a break between the two 'parts'. That it wasn't one smooth episode. The on-screen title made that more clear, but it was fairly evident just in what was going on, I thought. As Mark observed (although I don't think mentioned in this thread), there was the best part of 20 minutes of scenes in the pub - you wouldn't get that much in that location if it had been intended as one episode. They put the titles in so it didn't look like a badly written mess.