Quote: chipolata @ February 25 2011, 11:18 PM GMTThis, Grandma's House, Roger and Val, Him and Her - why do programme makers think there's such an appetite for shows with such narrow and constricting premises? Surely the beauty of TV is that you can do anything, yet we get a steady stream of shows that pride themselves on doing nothing. No wonder viewing figures are in terminal decline.
Spot on! nuff said.
Quote: Griff @ February 27 2011, 1:00 PM GMTWe have plenty of TV shows that "do anything". Like Doctor Who. But why would you want a sitcom that "does anything"? I want Steptoe and Son to be arguing in the rag-and-bone yard every time I tune in, not zipping off to Disneyland one week and solving crimes the next.
OK, some sitcoms suit a wider story remit than others - The Simpsons or Red Dwarf for example - but in general I don't see what the problem is with a sitcom having a simple scenario. Porridge has a more restricted setup than My Hero but I know which I prefer.
Well, I think you're slightly missing my point, Griff (or, as I tend to think of you now, Elder Abuser!).
I don't mind a limited set up if the show has been written with a clear passion to say something. For example, both The Royle Family and Early Doors seemed to say something about familes or communities. And be very funny to boot. And that goes for countless other succesful sitcoms that have restricted set-ups.
My problem with the shows I mentioned is that they appear to be empty creative-writing exercises, in which the creators aren't really saying anything. It's a nothing more than artistic machismo. Concept for the sake of concept. And certainly Friday Night Dinner falls slap bang into this category.
I haven't really watched Roger and Val properly, so you might be right on that one (although I wonder if it might be better suited as a one off drama?). But the others certainly strike me as self-congratulatory creative-wank fests.
Quote: chipolata @ February 27 2011, 2:47 PM GMTBut the others certainly strike me as self-congratulatory creative-wank fests.
I doubt anyone goes into writing a sitcom with such an odd frame of mind as that. Popper has stated that the concept behind this show comes directly from his own experiences and was something he wanted to explore. Not 'artistic machismo', whatever that is.
Quote: chipolata @ February 27 2011, 2:47 PM GMTI haven't really watched Roger and Val properly
Did you watch Grandma's House properly?
Did you think 'damn, if only they'd done a few scenes in a supermarket or a pub, I would have bloody loved this'?
You bleedin' mental.
Back on topic, is Mark Heap going to be in the whole series? I wonder how they'll get him in. Unless his toilet's going to be broken for weeks.
Quote: zooo @ February 27 2011, 3:10 PM GMTDid you watch Grandma's House properly? Did you think 'damn, if only they'd done a few scenes in a supermarket or a pub, I would have bloody loved this'? You bleedin' mental.
No, but I did think, "Damn, if this had a good script, and somebody who could act in the lead, and an actual point above and beyond a shallow vanity-project then I'd bloody love it!"
Grandma's House was great, best new Brit sitcom of last year for me.
Quote: chipolata @ February 27 2011, 3:25 PM GMTNo, but I did think, "Damn, if this had a good script, and somebody who could act in the lead, and an actual point above and beyond a shallow vanity-project then I'd bloody love it!"
Ha. Each to their own! Even if they're massive wrong'ns.
Anyway, ahem, as I said - back on topic we go!
Quote: zooo @ February 27 2011, 3:10 PM GMTBack on topic, is Mark Heap going to be in the whole series? I wonder how they'll get him in. Unless his toilet's going to be broken for weeks.
I dare say he'll just keep popping by, uninvited, making up excuses to be there.
Just caught up with this on 4OD and liked it. Subtle as some have said, not a lot happening as others have said and I agree with those comments. However it does have a nice 'vibe' (get me with the hippy shit) and I enjoyed watching.
There were some elements of farce, almost reminiscent of Fawlty Towers which I really liked (sofa bed getting stuck on landing) and I felt that maybe a Barry and Paul Chuckle cameo "to me, to you" might have gone a bomb at that point.
Overall a good start for me and I think that it will develop quite nicely. I will be watching future episodes.
I liked it. LOL'd at the salty tea scene as well as one or two others.
LOL'd, like actually making a proper noise.
Tom Rosenthal looks disturbingly like his dad; I keep expecting him to announce that Bulgaria vs. Venezuala is coming up next - which come to think of it might have been more entertaining.
Enjoyable opener. Established the premise and the characters very well. I can see this being a "grower" and personally I find myself wanting to spend more time with these charactes. Actors cast well, with Mark Heap yet again the funniest man in the (smallest) room. 
The drinking of salty water, holding onto New Scientists and watching Masterchef are unusually un-earth-shattering plot devices. I assume this show is trying to carve a very subtle niche for itself, and time will tell if they pull it off.
Having just watched this I quite enjoyed it. I didn't really get the jist of Grandma's House (probably because of Amstell. It is hard to think of him outside of the persona created by himself on Buzzcocks and as a stand-up), but I liked plot devices and the way they interconnected. I have to agree that Heap's character was the best.
