Friday Night Dinner - Series 1 Page 6

Quote: Michael in London @ March 1 2011, 1:03 AM GMT

The shows just have too much in common, and Tasmin Grieg seemingly doing an impression of Rebecca Front's grandma only enforce that further.

View original

1) I was rather under the impression that Rebecca Front played the mother, not the grandma in that show? I may be wrong of course, but then I wasn't a huge fan of the show.

2) The only idea that Tamsin may have got from watching Front's performance was probably 'don't play a Jewish mum as if she were written by Nick Griffin'. Front played a cartoon Jew, whereas I thought Tamsin showed commendable restraint.

Quote: Tim Walker @ March 1 2011, 6:32 AM GMT

1) I was rather under the impression that Rebecca Front played the mother, not the grandma in that show? I may be wrong of course, but then I wasn't a huge fan of the show.

View original

Obviously I meant grandma to Simon's unborn adoptive African son, do I really need to spell that out?

(Yes, you are right).

Quote: Tim Walker @ March 1 2011, 6:32 AM GMT

2) The only idea that Tamsin may have got from watching Front's performance was probably 'don't play a Jewish mum as if she were written by Nick Griffin'. Front played a cartoon Jew, whereas I thought Tamsin showed commendable restraint.

View original

I did not notice much difference between them, nor with Front in general. And much like Simon's unborn adoptive African son, my grandma was Jewish too.

Quote: chipolata @ February 25 2011, 10:38 PM GMT

Didn't do anything for me. Some nice moments, and Garth Merenghi asking Heap how he broke his toilet made me LOL, but overall it felt a bit artificial and empty. Even Heap seemed Heap by Numbers.

View original

Ditto. Had heard nothing but praise for the show, so really felt very let down by what we saw. It wasn't bad, it just wasn't good either.

Quote: chipolata @ February 27 2011, 1:44 PM GMT

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.

View original

Yes, perfect summation.

Quote: Aaron @ March 2 2011, 7:48 PM GMT

Yes, perfect summation.

View original

That this show is nothing more than 'artistic machismo'??

Personally I consider artistic machismo to be the dismissing of an entire style of comedy that you do not like but which plenty of other people do. Not every show or performance has to have something to say, so long as they are funny and enjoyable then that is a justifiable worth in itself.

Quote: Matthew Stott @ March 2 2011, 8:06 PM GMT

That this show is nothing more than 'artistic machismo'??

View original

That many recent shows, this first episode included, appear to be little more than concept for the sake of concept.

Quote: Matthew Stott @ March 2 2011, 8:06 PM GMT

That this show is nothing more than 'artistic machismo'??

View original

Are you really so myopic that you can't understand hubris, Stott? Let me put it another way, why constrain yourself to build an entire series around Friday night dinners? By all means have one episode about that, but not six. It's arrogant, especially when you have bugger all to say.

Quote: Michael in London @ March 2 2011, 8:41 PM GMT

Personally I consider artistic machismo to be the dismissing of an entire style of comedy that you do not like but which plenty of other people do. Not every show or performance has to have something to say, so long as they are funny and enjoyable then that is a justifiable worth in itself.

View original

True. But most of the sitcoms that last and resonate with audiences tend to be about something.

Quote: chipolata @ March 2 2011, 10:01 PM GMT

Are you really so myopic that you can't understand hubris, Stott?

View original

Well done Chip. Nice.

Quote: chipolata @ March 2 2011, 10:04 PM GMT

It's arrogant,

View original

Using that kind of language to describe a writer's desire to write a show set around a family who meet once a week for dinner is just silly. By all means say it's a bad idea, or limiting and overly constrictive, but saying it's arrogant is just silly.

Quote: Matthew Stott @ March 2 2011, 10:07 PM GMT

Ah, an insult, well done Chip. Nice. Using that kind of language to describe a writer's desire to write a show set around a family who meet once a week for dinner is just silly. By all means say it's a bad idea, or limiting and overly constrictive, but saying it's arrogant is just silly.

View original

Why? Do you really not understand what arrogance means? It's simply a case of a writer being presumptious. Of them thinking they can make such a narrow and constrictive format work instead of having the good sense to realise that it's slightly idiotic to hobble yourself.

Quote: bob4apples @ February 28 2011, 7:33 PM GMT

This is very true. I know someone who is a good friend of Popper's and the main characters (father, mother, brother) are based on Popper's own family.

View original

They should have gone with 'My Family' as the title then. A bit confusing, I suppose, as an equally unfunny show already exists.

Yes, I don't know what arrogance means. Why so feisty Chip? Man-period?

I'd say, rather than arrogance, Popper actually just found an idea, based on his own experiences, that he was interested in exploring. Much, as he has said elsewhere, comes directly from his own life. He then had the confidence (or arrogance, if you must; but surely every writer is arrogant to think others should enjoy their made up shit) to follow through on that idea. Is it idiotic? Well let's see how the series goes, it's unfair to make such proclamations based on one episode.

Finally got round to watching the first episode this morning and what a dull show this is.

I can understand the comparisons with "Grandma's House" as both have nothing happening and are totally laughter free. Not good news from a supposed comedy.

Will give it one more go but if it doesn't vastly improve, that'll be it.

Poor.

Quote: Matthew Stott @ March 2 2011, 10:28 PM GMT

I'd say, rather than arrogance, Popper actually just found an idea, based on his own experiences, that he was interested in exploring. Much, as he has said elsewhere, comes directly from his own life.

View original

Unfortunately it didn't feel like that. It felt flimsy and phony. And certainly didn't feel as authentic as shows like The Royle Family or Early Doors.

Quote: Matthew Stott @ March 2 2011, 10:28 PM GMT

Well let's see how the series goes, it's unfair to make such proclamations based on one episode.

View original

Unfortunately that's the culture we live in. And almost without exception, if a show doesn't deliver in its first episode then it probably won't deliver during the next five.

And unlike Grandma's House, this is on a commercial station and hasn't got the licence fee to underwrite it, so if it doesn't deliver audiences then it'll be a one-series wonder.

Well let's see, it's far too early to write it off. For me, at least.

Quote: chipolata @ March 3 2011, 9:39 AM GMT

It felt flimsy and phony.

View original

If that's your take on it then fair enough; I can't say it exactly felt 'phony' to me though.

Quote: Matthew Stott @ March 3 2011, 9:42 AM GMT

Well let's see, it's far too early to write it off. For me, at least.

View original

It is too early to write it off. Just like Grandma's House, this reportedly gets better as it goes along. Plus, hey, we haven't had a chance to get to know the characters properly yet.

(I happened to like Episode 1 anyway as it happens. Loving Mark Heap.)