Why have the narratives changed over the years in British sitcoms? In the 1980s and 90s the shows were more slapstick comedy (Only Fools And Horses) but now the sitcoms are explicit and have a lot of adult humour (The Inbetweeners).
Changes in British sitcom narrative
Just out of curiosity, do you have any particular reason for raising this question?
I totally agree with you 'P'. Before Miranda the only good show in recent years has been The IT Crowd, and that at times has gone too far to be considered funny. Actually, tell a lie, 'Allo 'Allo! was brought back for a one off special approx three years ago and put all the modern efforts of sitcom writing to shame.
Quote: IT David @ November 22 2009, 7:16 PM GMT...and that at times has gone too far to be considered funny.
What is *too far* to be considered funny and is this a standard measurement or just a rough rule of thumb. For instance are we talking Ipswich here or are we looking more at Paris and occasionally Prague, I really only want to know so that I understand when not to laugh because something has gone "too far to be considered funny.
Your
Worried of Nantwhich.
Quote: P Beck @ November 22 2009, 5:07 PM GMTWhy have the narratives changed over the years in British sitcoms? In the 1980s and 90s the shows were more slapstick comedy (Only Fools And Horses) but now the sitcoms are explicit and have a lot of adult humour (The Inbetweeners).
Firstly there's the issue of the plots and issues that sitcoms explore. Strikes of the 1970s and 80s aren't quite as relevant today, and you could never have had The IT Crowd back then.
It's also true that writers and producers always want to push boundaries and get away with as much as they can. Sadly, less seems to be possible today than in the 1990s as everyone's too scared of causing offence, but there's still a lot of swearing and risqué themes (The Inbetweeners, as noted).
Because of the breakdown of communal family telly viewing - not so much need for programme makers to do safe 'fun for all the family' stuff. One of many many reasons - do we need to make a list . . . ?
There seems to be more dialogue than plot these days. I saw ten minutes of an episode of Not Going Out yesterday (it was the episode which started with Lee playing the giant dart board) and I have to say it was awful: too many lines which were meant to be funny which just ... weren't. My uncle Barry is just like Lee Mack - sounds like him, talks fast etc - but he he has the same trouble: the delivery is fine, it's just the content of the lines which is the trouble.
Also, Tim's girlfriend in it is an exact copy of Charlie's neighbour in Two and a Half Men. Just thought I'd mention that last bit.
In Hancocock's Half Hour, there was a strong sense of narrative: each episode was self-contained, it told a story with a beginning/middle/end and it didn't relay on the viewer's having seen the previous week's episode. This also works for Fawlty Towers, of course.
Well Not Going Out is just the contents of a joke book strung together around a plot, in a world where everyone is a hyperactive stand-up comic (*shudders*) . . .
Quote: Dave @ November 22 2009, 11:16 PM GMTAlso, Tim's girlfriend in it is an exact copy of Charlie's neighbour in Two and a Half Men. Just thought I'd mention that last bit.
She's rather dumb. And brunette. And not rake-thin. The similarities stop there. I can't imagine Daisy doing a psychology course. Or being a stalker nympho.
Quote: Dave @ November 22 2009, 11:16 PM GMTIn Hancocock's Half Hour each episode was self-contained, it told a story with a beginning/middle/end and it didn't rely on the viewers having seen the previous week's episode.
Just as in Not Going Out then.
Quote: P Beck @ November 22 2009, 5:07 PM GMTbut now the sitcoms are explicit and have a lot of adult humour (The Inbetweeners).
Just keep your eye on the threads on here . they rarely get beyond six posts before someone makes a 'schoolboy behind the bike sheds' remark.
I could name names !
My view is that we have got coarser as a society, we have allowed certain rude words to become almost acceptable everyday usage now. Also there is a strong influence on sitcom from stand up now, and that is where a lot of the adult humour has come from. The fact that it hadn't really been aired on sitcoms before has made it the vogue now.
I don't think the topic is fair. Is Only Fools and Horses really slapstick? I know the two "classic" moments involve a pratfall and some broken crystal... but for the most part the comedy is as much dialogue driven as anything else. In my most humble of opinions it's the situation and the characters that make Fools and Horses more then the comedy itself.
Conversely, The Inbtweeners is not shy on psychical humour... Simon puking all over that girl's little brother? Hitting a disabled girl with a frisbee? Will's love making scene from the first series?
While the language might be coarser on mordern shows, I can't imagine Mary Whitehouse giving an award to OFAH. Think about some of the early plots... Rodney has a fetish for police women, scamming immigrants, just about every episode has them receiving stolen goods... these are not exactly family friendly themes.
OK, so it's not quite Some Mothers Do Have 'Em, but OFAH is jammed full of physical comedy/visual humour, surely? 
There is actually a lot of physical humour in shows such as The Office and The Thick Of It. Stylistic considerations apart, the main difference is the explicitness of the sexual references. Sex has always been a staple of comedy, but in the past much more was implied - you had to have a dirty mind to get the jokes, which made for family viewing. Nowadays sexual references are much more in your face, which I do not necessarily think makes for more sophisticated comedy. Similarly with language, people have always sworn, if not necessarily to the same degree, but it was not felt necessary for authenticity to show it. I think perhaps this shift owes something to the rise of docudrama formats, which aimed at an ersatz reality, arguably a cheap con, rather than aspiring to capture truth through the use of dramatic conventions.