Quote: Timbo @ December 20 2011, 11:16 PM GMTWas doubtful to begin with but found myself enjoying it. Though the concept does not work as well as on radio - as the old saying goes, on radio the pictures are better.
As the vast majority of the humour is based on subversions of "Dickensian" language it's not that big a surprise that it might work better on radio? The (sort-of) lavish production values are rather wasted for a show which is primarily an aural experience.
Such a shame. The beauty of BE on the radio is that it's a springboard for the listener's imagination. Mark Evans takes us on a ride. Transfer the concept to the screen and you need, somehow, to compensate. The viewer needs to be taken on Mark Evans' ride in some other way. Whatever chance the script had was murdered by leaden, plodding direction, utterly devoid of anything resembling style. Ben Fuller (or Gosling Fuller, whatever his name is), obviously with no clue as to style, covered the crap out of every scene for safety purposes and the editor just cobbled things together with no more clue as to style or tempo.
Stephen Fry might have been funny swapping hats and characters in the mirror twice - once for the revelation, the second time for perversity. But three or four times? I lost count. Robert Webb and the maiden aunts should have been very funny. It was so badly covered and cut that it killed the scene. How many times did we return to Katherine Parkinson succumbing to treacle addiction with no progression? But that was also a script problem.
Poor Katherine Parkinson looked lost. I heard her on "Loose Ends" publicising the show and she struggled - a couple of months after shooting - to explain the style. There wasn't one. Robert Webb was playing something akin to BE on the radio, hence hammy on the screen. Ditto David Mitchell, Stephen Fry, et al. On screen, with nonsense goings-on in a nonsense setting, heightened chracterisation is enough. Ham is deadly. More so when you're plodding through it.
An hour of this sort of material would always be a big ask, even with a command of style. I'll be interested to see the show in its half-hour form. I fear we'll get half as much of the same thing. I hope not.
I thought it was decent enough. Visually very good too.
Did anyone notice the Ghost of Christmas Present's coat was the wrong colour? It should have been green...
As unfunny as The Royal Bodyguard. Is the BBC losing its touch for new comedy and being taken over by E4?
It'll be a sad day, for the masses, if/when Sky usurps the Beeb as the home of British comedy. I, for one, hope it never happens.
Quote: YetanotherPaulLewis @ January 2 2012, 10:15 AM GMTAs unfunny as The Royal Bodyguard. Is the BBC losing its touch for new comedy and being taken over by E4?
I pity you if you think it was as bad in quality as "The Royal Bodyguard" though Dickensian comedy may not be everyone's thing. E4, Sky, whatever, many shows stink.
Quote: Tim Azure @ January 2 2012, 1:23 PM GMTI pity you if you think it was as bad in quality as "The Royal Bodyguard" though Dickensian comedy may not be everyone's thing. E4, Sky, whatever, many shows stink.
I enjoy Dickensian comedy a lot and you only have to read the real thing by Charles Dickens to find it in abundance. However the "The Bleak Old Shop of Tosh" was Dickensian in costume only. This is an example of the self professed "comic Intelligentsia" trying to be as smart as Dickens....and failing. An example of poor imitation being the most embarrassing form of flattery.
Compare this show to the Blackadder Christmas special and note quite how profound the diferences are.
Excellent article in Guardian today defending the BBC. Fine but I think there needs to be a few more Revs and a lot less Bodyguard, Bleak Olds etc
Quote: sootyj @ January 3 2012, 9:00 AM GMTCompare this show to the Blackadder Christmas special and note quite how profound the diferences are.
Excellent article in Guardian today defending the BBC. Fine but I think there needs to be a few more Revs and a lot less Bodyguard, Bleak Olds etc
The comparison example to Blackadder hits the nail right on the head.
Yeh that one had the characterisation of Queen Victoria predeath of Albert bag on the nail (well ok the historical version).
Now if you bare in mind that that is far and away the less well known version of Victoria (almost all TV versions and certainly comedic ones focus on the widow Victoria and "we are not amused") so it's satirising a none too well known version. That it was still funny and recognisable is extremely significant. Where as the grot pot of familiar cliches in Bleak old were just tiresome.
You think they were trying to do Dickensian humour and failed? 
I think it's very obviously modern humour, just in a Dickensian setting.
No I think they were trying to mock Victorian/Dickensian humour and mores.
I think they did it poorly.
Not youuu, sooty.
YetanotherPaulLewis...
Quote: YetanotherPaulLewis @ January 3 2012, 8:41 AM GMTI enjoy Dickensian comedy a lot and you only have to read the real thing by Charles Dickens to find it in abundance. However the "The Bleak Old Shop of Tosh" was Dickensian in costume only. This is an example of the self professed "comic Intelligentsia" trying to be as smart as Dickens....and failing. An example of poor imitation being the most embarrassing form of flattery.
