Opposites Creating Explosions Page 10

Quote: Martin Holmes @ January 4, 2008, 7:00 PM

You misunderstand me though. I love mainstream comedy just as much as cult comedy, some of my favourite comedies are mainstream. And I would quite happily write mainstream comedy, I actually think the comedy I write could be classed as mainstream comedy...but the point I've been trying to make is that mainstream doesn't always have to be the lowest common denominator. Mainstream can still be clever, passsionate and very funny. That's the point I'm trying to make. Hey I'd write a kids TV show to and like my other writing I'd try to make that the best I possibly could and put lots of effort into making it funny. The point I disagree with is the fact that if you want to do mainstream you have to dumb down, I don't believe that. So I agree with a lot of what you say, so please don't patronise me with the "When I was you age..." stuff, because that is really annoying.

I don't get what you mean by me been hypocritical because of the Gervais thread? I agree with a lot of what Gervais says but I just think he puts across in a smug and hypocritical way.

View original

I wasn't patronising - it's just your attitude is all wrong in the way you're going on about having a cult show. It's all this 'I'm above Two Pints' stuff and 'Give me 7 viewers over 7 million' guff you're coming out with.

Most cult shows are written by the performers anyway. A sitcom writer is never going to have a cult show, it won't get picked up by anyone. If it's not easily marketable, a producer is never going to give a first time writer a chance. If you'd handed in '15 Stories High' it probably would have been rejected.

When I first started writing I thought that 8.30 was a shit timeslot and if it's not on at 10.30 and without an audience, it was shit and I wasn't interested. That's how you're coming across. But you don't have that luxury - the luxury of doing something small and cult.

I found your earlier post equally as smug as anything Gervais has said or put across in Extras.

Quote: James Williams @ January 4, 2008, 7:10 PM

I agree. I believe I said much the same earlier. (I gave the example of The Simpsons.)

View original

Of course it can - but a few years ago, when I was a fool, I didn't.

Quote: Martin Holmes @ January 3, 2008, 11:40 AM

then I stand by my opinion that most people like shit comedy, shit films and shit music, I'm not sneering at those people I just feel they need to broaden their horizons.

View original

That's incredibly sneery and insulting.

There are more fans of My Family and Two Pints than there are The Office and 15 Stories High - but I think if a better 8.30 show went out, the audiences would like it even more. It's not their fault, it's the network's who commission it.

All this 'broaden their horizons' - that's extremely patronising. You're basically saying 'They need to be exposed to MY genius'.

The fact is if you had a break through and were offered work on the next series of After You've Gone, you'd probably take it. I know I would.

Everyone's focussing on marketing their stuff to TV. There are a lot of outlets for cult stuff with a small audience. Website, YouTube, etc. It's not all TV. I'd certainly recommend flexing the creativity on these platforms before deciding it has to be TV-based and modifying what you do accordingly.

And you seem to be a little obtuse Seefacts, if I may say, in that you didn't, to my mind, respond adequately to Martin's last post - which seemed to say to me that a lot of mainstream TV is lazily written and follows well-trodden paths that apparently satisfy a mainstream audience, but are not original or 'clever' or 'sophisticated' or whatever enough to attract a more sophisticated audience. I'd want to write something a bit more 'clever' that still appeals to many than, say "2 Pints."

I'm not sure anyone here is taking an arrogant "I'll write a cult show and if noone's interested they're a bunch of fools."

Although as has been noted, this is what Larry David and Ricky Gervais basically said. They had the luxury of being relative industry insiders. So the first step is to get known on the circuit, get a job in the Beeb, whatever. Write some stuff and get Out There. Seems obvious to me.

Quote: Seefacts @ January 4, 2008, 7:17 PM

That's incredibly sneery and insulting.

There are more fans of My Family and Two Pints than there are The Office and 15 Stories High - but I think if a better 8.30 show went out, the audiences would like it even more. It's not their fault, it's the network's who commission it.

All this 'broaden their horizons' - that's extremely patronising. You're basically saying 'They need to be exposed to MY genius'.

The fact is if you had a break through and were offered work on the next series of After You've Gone, you'd probably take it. I know I would.

View original

I agree with this too.

(&I don't think you're being obtuse any more because I think what you added sufficiently addresses what Martin said.)

Quote: James Williams @ January 4, 2008, 7:21 PM

Everyone's focussing on marketing their stuff to TV. There are a lot of outlets for cult stuff with a small audience. Website, YouTube, etc. It's not all TV. I'd certainly recommend flexing the creativity on these platforms before deciding it has to be TV-based and modifying what you do accordingly.

And you seem to be a little obtuse Seefacts, if I may say, in that you didn't, to my mind, respond adequately to Martin's last post - which seemed to say to me that a lot of mainstream TV is lazily written and follows well-trodden paths that apparently satisfy a mainstream audience, but are not original or 'clever' or 'sophisticated' or whatever enough to attract a more sophisticated audience. I'd want to write something a bit more 'clever' that still appeals to many than, say "2 Pints."

I'm not sure anyone here is taking an arrogant "I'll write a cult show and if noone's interested they're a bunch of fools."

Although as has been noted, this is what Larry David and Ricky Gervais basically said. They had the luxury of being relative industry insiders. So the first step is to get known on the circuit, get a job in the Beeb, whatever. Write some stuff and get Out There. Seems obvious to me.

View original

I think mainstream stuff is unchallenging and lazy, BUT that's because I think the TV industry is fundamentally flawed. There's much better stuff out there but it's much easier for the BBC to churn out stuff by hacks.

It's the lauding of 'It must be cult!' that gets me. If a funny comedy goes out at 8.30 and is broad but funny, and one goes out at 10.30 and is left-field but just as funny - is one intrinsically better than the other because it gets less viewers.? No. But too many people think that it is.

Sometimes I think people WANT their show to get commissioned but then cancelled
so they can beam at how the network didn't 'get it', because that's better than getting 8 million people who don't over-analyse comedy watching.

Quote: James Williams @ January 4, 2008, 7:26 PM

(&I don't think you're being obtuse any more because I think what you added sufficiently addresses what Martin said.)

View original

Oh . . . I just expanded now! My fingers hurt . . .

I just expanded and my fingers hurt. Cramp, I think.

Ho ho ho.

I think the point that is missing here gents is viewing figures. If a show, any show gets 7 or 8 million viewers, the powers that be aren’t going to give a shit whether it’s mainstream, cleaver, or downright boring, it will go on air. As long the great British viewing public watch these programmes and they do, in their millions, the TV companies will continue to produce them, and that my friends is fact.

Quote: Ray Dawson @ January 4, 2008, 7:55 PM

I think the point that is missing here gents is viewing figures. If a show, any show gets 7 or 8 million viewers, the powers that be aren’t going to give a shit whether it’s mainstream, cleaver, or downright boring, it will go on air. As long the great British viewing public watch these programmes and they do, in their millions, the TV companies will continue to produce them, and that my friends is fact.

View original

But there ARE better mainstream writers out there, they just don't get a chance. It's easier to let Paul Alexander write something because they've got his phone number.

A better show would get more viewers and be successful, doesn't mean the writer is a sell out or he should be shunned by hardcore comedy fans just because gran's might be watching it.

I agree, there are better writers on here, but while we are banging on about what we like and what we find funny. The plain simple fact of the matter is, mainstream is in this year, not cleaver, not dark. The viewing public have decided and the people in the suits have taken note.

Quote: Seefacts @ January 4, 2008, 7:17 PM

I wasn't patronising - it's just your attitude is all wrong in the way you're going on about having a cult show. It's all this 'I'm above Two Pints' stuff and 'Give me 7 viewers over 7 million' guff you're coming out with.

Most cult shows are written by the performers anyway. A sitcom writer is never going to have a cult show, it won't get picked up by anyone. If it's not easily marketable, a producer is never going to give a first time writer a chance. If you'd handed in '15 Stories High' it probably would have been rejected.

When I first started writing I thought that 8.30 was a shit timeslot and if it's not on at 10.30 and without an audience, it was shit and I wasn't interested. That's how you're coming across. But you don't have that luxury - the luxury of doing something small and cult.

View original

So just totally ignore everything I've said again. I WRITE MAINSTREAM COMEDY NOT CULT COMEDY. But what I'm saying is, for about the tenth time is that mainstream doesn't always have to be lazy, I haven't even mentioned 15 Storeys High or The Office, I've mentioned shows like Fawlty Towers and Monty Python which are and were mainstream yet still incredibly passionate, well written and hilarious sitcoms. That's the type of thing I aspire to make. I would happily take an 8.30 timeslot, that's you that said you wouldn't take a timeslot unless it was 10.30..I've never said that, you're making my argument up for yourself!

I would take any time slot and I would do the best I could with that timeslot, like I say just because something is mainstream doesn't mean it has to be dumbed down it can still be smart and funny.

Quote: Seefacts @ January 4, 2008, 7:17 PM

That's incredibly sneery and insulting.

There are more fans of My Family and Two Pints than there are The Office and 15 Stories High - but I think if a better 8.30 show went out, the audiences would like it even more. It's not their fault, it's the network's who commission it.

All this 'broaden their horizons' - that's extremely patronising. You're basically saying 'They need to be exposed to MY genius'.

View original

Again totally missed the point of that post, which I've already explained, the point I was making is that people aren't like that because they would rather watch more sitcoms like Fawlty Towers rather than sitcoms like My Family.

Quote: Seefacts @ January 4, 2008, 7:17 PM

The fact is if you had a break through and were offered work on the next series of
After You've Gone, you'd probably take it. I know I would.

View original

Of course I would and I would put lots of effort into making the show good, which has been my entire point throughout this thread. I would put so much passion and effort into writing on any sitcom I was given to make it the best I could possibly make it. I wouldn't just suddenly dumb down.

I think we pretty much are arguing the same point but you seem to have it in your head that I only want to make cult shows and hate mainstream. I love mainstream comedy when it's good and that's the type of comedy I want to make. I only said I'd rather have a cult audience than do a "dumded down mainstream" show, but like you say mainstream can be just as clever and funny as a cult show and that's what I aspire to do with my writing.

Quote: Martin Holmes @ January 4, 2008, 8:13 PM

So just totally ignore everything I've said again. I WRITE MAINSTREAM COMEDY NOT CULT COMEDY. But what I'm saying is, for about the tenth time is that mainstream doesn't always have to be lazy, I haven't even mentioned 15 Storeys High or The Office, I've mentioned shows like Fawlty Towers and Monty Python which are and were mainstream yet still incredibly passionate, well written and hilarious sitcoms. That's the type of thing I aspire to make. I would happily take an 8.30 timeslot, that's you that said you wouldn't take a timeslot unless it was 10.30..I've never said that, you're making my argument up for yourself!

I would take any time slot and I would do the best I could with that timeslot, like I say just because something is mainstream doesn't mean it has to be dumbed down it can still be smart and funny.

Again totally missed the point of that post, which I've already explained, the point I was making is that people aren't like that because they would rather watch more sitcoms like Fawlty Towers rather than sitcoms like My Family.

Of course I would and I would put lots of effort into making the show good, which has been my entire point throughout this thread. I would put so much passion and effort into writing on any sitcom I was given to make it the best I could possibly make it. I wouldn't just suddenly dumb down.

Hey I didn't mention anything about cult but I'm sure that's what your next reply will be based upon.

View original

The tone of your earlier post from yesterday was very much dismissive of anyone who laughs at mainstream stuff and that if you don't have an in depth knowledge of obscure comedy then you were an idiot.

That's how I read it - because I was very much the same when I was a bit more naive.

Quote: Seefacts @ January 4, 2008, 8:22 PM

The tone of your earlier post from yesterday was very much dismissive of anyone who laughs at mainstream stuff and that if you don't have an in depth knowledge of obscure comedy then you were an idiot.

That's how I read it - because I was very much the same when I was a bit more naive.

View original

But then that's your fault if you were like that and if that's what you think I was saying. Read back through my earlier posts they'll mention all the mainstream shows that I love and the point I've always been trying to make is that you don't have to dumb down to do mainstream, you can do good, smart and funny mainstream.

Quote: Martin Holmes @ January 4, 2008, 8:45 PM

But then that's your fault if you were like that and if that's what you think I was saying. Read back through my earlier posts they'll mention all the mainstream shows that I love and the point I've always been trying to make is that you don't have to dumb down to do mainstream, you can do good, smart and funny mainstream.

View original

Of course mainstream can be good - it just hasn't been for over 10 years now.

I just believe you've got a slight naivety about you when it comes to writing.

I also got a hint of arrogance from your posts in this thread, and that's what I'm basing my opinions on.

Shoot me!

I wonder what the word count is on this thread. Probably a record.

Quote: David Chapman @ January 4, 2008, 9:52 PM

I wonder what the word count is on this thread. Probably a record.

View original

I do love a good debate.

I also hope people don't think I've been too strong and come across as a bit of a willy.

I mean I AM one obviously, but I don't want people finding out.

So. You've discussed writing kids' shows, but would you cast Mark Speight in the lead role?

Quote: Martin Holmes @ January 4, 2008, 8:13 PM

I've mentioned shows like Fawlty Towers and Monty Python which are and were mainstream yet still incredibly passionate, well written and hilarious sitcoms.

View original

Apart from Monty Python not being a sitcom and both programmes appearing on a minority channel (BBC2), fair enough.

Sorry for the cheap jibe but at the end of the day, doesn't everyone agree about all this anyway? Everyone wants the best quality comedy to appear on TV and for it to reach the biggest possible audience.

Where people seem to disagree seems to me to be down to matters of opinion. I'm not a fan of Two Pints or My Family but they aren't written for me. I actually like the fact they are made and that people like them - why shouldn't I? I don't want to deprive people of their entertainment. I like stuff like Peep Show, Flight of the Conchords and Curb, and it isn't shown on peak time telly. So what? I can still find it on sufficient channels and I can record it if I'm out.

I'd hate comedy to be all the same. If I liked it all I don't think I'd like any of it any more.