The Armstrong & Miller Show Page 6

Quote: Nick @ November 3, 2007, 1:56 PM

Are you really judging this show on its merits Martin? It seems that because you like the PS show, you feel the need to criticise this one as you see it as some sort of competition.

Your comments about repetition don't really add up as well. The PS show also uses a lot of repetition both from week to week and during each episode so to single out A&M for that doesn't make too much sense.

View original

I want to like this show because I do like Armstrong & Miller and some of their old work but this show is just really really average I feel. The PS Show is no great I admit that, but I think it's funnier and yes it does use repetition too much in each episode but in the week to week repeat sketches it does at least try to expand on them in some way.

On A&M last night it repeated sketches from last week(lots of them as well, the dentist, the pilots, the teacher, the West Wing corridor one, the Dad and son etc) and it also repeated sketches within the episode. The Hat Quiz and the doll ones were good sketches I felt but the rest of the show was really bad.

I'm still waiting for the British sketch show equivalent of Mr Show but it looks like we'll be waiting a long time to get it.

I agree Martin the past few years have been disappointing... which is a shame because I love sketch shows, Big Train and Mr Show (thanks Martin) are good sketch shows which can't seem to be replicated easily.

summary - Average... again

I thought this latest episode was very good, but yes the repetition which kills so many sketch shows has started to creep in.

The musical numbers with those two old chaps make me laugh (going to the loo on the train).

I take back what I said about liking the doll sketch because it was ripped off this old John Cleese and Terry Gilliam sketch:

http://dethroner.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/05/helpmag_christopher.jpg

Quote: Martin Holmes @ November 3, 2007, 11:08 PM

I take back what I said about liking the doll sketch because it was ripped off this old John Cleese and Terry Gilliam sketch:

http://dethroner.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/05/helpmag_christopher.jpg

View original

I think thats a little over the top, its more than possible for two people, over the space of many, many years, to come up with the same idea. You can say its very similar, but you cant actually claim out right that its ripped off, because you dont know.

Okay I can't say for definite but the idea is really similar and I'm sure Armstrong & Miller knew about it beforehand. Maybe it happened subconsciously though.

In what respect DID you like it? It's writing? It's humour?

Right ive just watched this and would have thought it was an average sketch show apart from one very very disturbing sketch. The sketch where the man dates a childs doll is just sickening. I can see no merit in it, the punchline was shit and thw whole thing smacked of very thinly veiled paedohpilia. I have no idea how they got the audience to laugh at it as i just watched with bewilderment. Sorry if this has been touched on earlier.

The rest of the show was alright and had a high hit rate. I just can't see past that sketch.

Quote: Martin Holmes @ November 3, 2007, 2:11 PM

I want to like this show because I do like Armstrong & Miller and some of their old work but this show is just really really average I feel.

View original

What crossed my mind is that although you're right, this is still a better crafted and funnier show than, say, Mitchell and Web who, as a team, make Hale and Pace look like a classy double act.

Quote: ajp29 @ November 4, 2007, 9:45 AM

Right ive just watched this and would have thought it was an average sketch show apart from one very very disturbing sketch. The sketch where the man dates a childs doll is just sickening. I can see no merit in it, the punchline was shit and thw whole thing smacked of very thinly veiled paedohpilia. I have no idea how they got the audience to laugh at it as i just watched with bewilderment. Sorry if this has been touched on earlier.

The rest of the show was alright and had a high hit rate. I just can't see past that sketch.

View original

I honestly cant believe you just said that! That is very odd, its just a sketch about a man and a woman both falling for little plastic dolls, its silly and absurd, not dark and disturbing!!! How you can say it smacks of thinly veiled paedophilia is just beyond me, you honestly think thats what they were getting at, because I really dont think they were, the very idea is ridiculous! I think you reading way too much into it and adding layers to it that only exist in your head! How about if the man had fallen in love with a bouncy castle, would that still have constituted paedophilia? Because innocent little kids bounce on those things you know! And does that expose Rainbow as having had a secret bestiality agenda? Your telling me a grown man living with all those friendly animals and nothing was going on??

There was some repetitiveness in this weeks show. Recurring characters simply have less of an impact each time you see them.

I really don't get the paedophilia accusations though. The punchline to that sketch was so predictable though - that annoyed me a little bit.

I think the only great uk sketch show of the last 10 years is Big Train. Although, saying that, Monkey Dust was certainly funny and a brave venture. Oh and Jam as well, that was bloody hilarious.

Quote: Matthew Stott @ November 4, 2007, 10:20 AM

I honestly cant believe you just said that! That is very odd, its just a sketch about a man and a woman both falling for little plastic dolls, its silly and absurd, not dark and disturbing!!! How you can say it smacks of thinly veiled paedophilia is just beyond me, you honestly think thats what they were getting at, because I really dont think they were, the very idea is ridiculous! I think you reading way too much into it and adding layers to it that only exist in your head! How about if the man had fallen in love with a bouncy castle, would that still have constituted paedophilia? Because innocent little kids boince on those things you know! And does that expose Rainbow as having had a secret bestiality agenda? Your telling me a grown man living with all those friendly animals and nothing was going on??

View original

Well firstly no its not the same a falling in love with a bouncy castle. Big Train did a very funny sketch with a puppet. Why did it start in a toy shop and why is it a child's doll? Why is the man finding a children's toy sexually arousing? It should have been a bouncy castle or something like that. The fact that the doll appears in the man's eyes to be a helpless easily manipulated object is clearly some sort of metaphor. Theres definately some disturbing personification going on.

I am reading into it but I don't think too much. If it wasn't deliberate then in my eyes its reckless. My main point really is how this got through production. Its shocking. Did no-one think maybe we need a sketch with a better punchline or what are we trying to say with this sketch. Like most sketch shows all the jokes have been done before so what diferentiates them is the style and presentation of it. Therefore wirters do think about the different 'layers' of their sketches.

Political Correctness and tabloid paranoia have caused some riduculous accusations but this is clearly, in my eyes, not the case with my objection.

Feel free to think i'm a looney. I just wanted to share my opinion.

Would it have been better if it was a teddy bear?
Or would that be just the same to you.

Quote: ajp29 @ November 4, 2007, 9:45 AM

The sketch where the man dates a childs doll is just sickening. I can see no merit in it, the punchline was shit and thw whole thing smacked of very thinly veiled paedohpilia.

View original

Couldn't see that myself. Without wishing to tread too deeply, these were mature 'adult' dolls who knew what they were letting themselves in for when they signed the standard contract. The fact is they were happy to take the money for their 15 minutes of fame. We all do things that we later regret and they'll just have to live with the consequences and as such, I'll have no truck with this absurd nonsense.

You are not a looney AJP29. I also found that sketch uncomfortable. The rest of the show was very entertaining and I really like Armstrong and Miller. I can only think that there must have been some sort of discussion about it's inclusion and the yes's won the vote. IMHO it wasn't necessary contribution to the show.