Partridge film Page 2

Not sure a films a good idea, but I agree with those who thought series two was great. I think why some people dont like it is down to the fact that expectation was so high, especially with the amount of time that passed between series one and two, and because the format was altered a bit; it wasnt exactly the same show with Alan in the hotel. These, I think, must be partly the reason a lot of people are so negative about series two, because its fantastic! The bit when Partridge is trying to do a presentation and is dry heaving always has me in pain Im laughing so much. A disaster? Not even close.

That bit where he's drunk outside the caravan and says something about a helicopter is the funniest thing I've ever seen.

Not that I can remember what he says...

Quote: Skibbington von Skubber @ November 15, 2007, 8:03 PM

A film is just 3 consecutive episodes.

View original

????
You don't really believe that do you?

Quote: Badge @ November 15, 2007, 9:37 PM

????
You don't really believe that do you?

View original

Marber's involvement would be one of the reasons why I would have some vague hope that a film could be successful. Clearly most sitcom to film adaptations in this country have been underwhelming but at least Marber is experienced in working with the longer format and could maybe help to maintain the story arc for 90 minutes or so.

Quote: Badge @ November 15, 2007, 9:37 PM

????
You don't really believe that do you?

View original

Yes I do.

I'd rather see a 90 minute film the equivalent of three shows in a row with three arcs running through it than see Alan Partridge reduced to some sort of Mr Bean type of fish-out-of-water character wrongly accused of murder who then spends the rest of the flick running from one jam into another (directed by Ben Stiller).

On an unrelated note:
I will be throwing £20 notes from my car in fifteen minutes along the High street in Strood.

It's going to be fun!

I agree with people that Series 2 dropped in quality, I still liked it and laughed plenty at it but compared to KMKY and IAP1 it was not in the same league. Even Armando Iannucci when he watched it back didn't like it at all.

The first series though is a pure example of a perfect sitcom from top to bottom.

Not sure about a film, I'd rather they put there full effort into making an original third series.

It would be like The Simpsons Movie, very funny but not cinematic!

I think Partridge is a TV character, no more and certainly no less.

I can't think of a single sitcom that's made a great film, so I hope a Partridge film never happens.

Dad's Army didn't do half bad. And the second (I think) Steptoe movie was very enjoyable (not the one with the fiancee and holiday). Porridge was far from "awful" too. Rising Damp just didn't work without audience laughter, and was comprised of almost all scenes from previous episodes anyway.

AYBS? undoubtedly the worst though.

I hate to to write something off before its even out, but I can't see a film doing the business. It's flopped so often when UK sitcoms reach the big screen and I just can't see this working either.

The fact that Coogan is now accepted in America (well, at least from what I read earlier in the thread) just gives me the fear that everything will be done to suck up the Yanks (even though they wouldn't understand a single previous episode if they watched it a 1000 times). I can just see a long, drawn out, cliched, tired old plot involving, as it says, terrorists, or if not then drug dealers, with lots of running about, an inevitable car chase, and with Partridge finishing up as some kind of national hero with feel good ending.

Sorry, I'm in a bad mood today.

The only sitcom I can think of that's made a really satisfactory transition to the big screen is South Park, and then only because they really grabbed hold of the format and parodied a full-length musical. The ones that just do a longer version of a sitcom don't work cos it's dragged out; the ones that try to turn sitcom characters into film characters don't work cos they have to spend too much time giving us empathy or background motivation. Steer clear, I say.

anything with partridge in would be brilliant, they made 9 boring hours of that stupid hobbit thing but nobody moaned, surely there is room for this.

I'd love to see him on match of the day.

I think it would work if it was done properly. But with most films you can see the cogs whirring, the 'make money, make money, make money' cogs. If that gets in the way then the chances are that despite Coogan, the movie would be too much of a compromise (except for diehard fans of course, who'll accept 'owt!)

Why bother making a Partridge movie anyway? And who for?

Making a film for TV would be fine. But why do they always want to translate to the cinema? It's weird.

I'm getting so sick of all our best TV talent f**king off and making films for the rest of their lives.

For me. Because it would be one of the funniest things ever made. Because the yanks would pay for it and we could appreciate it. Becasue some times, partridge is the only thing that can cheer me up.

Thanks.