British Comedy Guide

Harry & Paul - Series 4 Page 2

Who, why? How! Eh?

I sat down to watch it via iPlayer tonight and turned it off after five minutes.

I love Harry Enfield and Chums but this was drivel.

I only saw a snatch of this because I was watching the atrocious new series of Misfits, but the old women talking about somebody from a fish shop made me laugh. I shall definitely watch properly next week.

I thought the second series in 2008 was a return to form, but series 3 was poor. Doesn't sound like much has changed.

Thought the first few sketches (Dragons Den, Question Time, Parking Pataweyo) were decent but then it nosedived. I didn't understand what I was supposed to be laughing at in the sketch with the two old women, the Italian curse sketch was interminable and the rest was either spoken in a very posh accent or used as an excuse to slip in the c word.

Disappointing.

Simply amazed at the crits in this thread. You lot really don't know shit from shinola.

Enfield and Whitehouse are always watchable and interesting but I thought there was real polish to this opener. Clever writing; 'But I don't look thirty, do I?', 'Cambridge ringroad university', 'wanker's beard' - Inspired acting and business - Sophie Winkleman as 'Nutella' and Enfield when he proffers the £20 and £10 notes in the newsagent sketch or looks too long at the camera as the sweating Dragon's Den contestant who'd left the 'Solution to the world's problems' in the car.

I wonder if you have to over forty to like it, because this is exactly what I want to see on my TV not derivative and superficial wank like 'Hebburn' - two performers at the height of their powers building sketches out of what they find funny about modern life. Perhaps it also helps if you live in London and have actually seen shops in Shoreditch selling 70s music centres for £150.

No.

No, it was piss poor lazy bull splat

Quote: Godot Taxis @ November 1 2012, 1:47 PM GMT

Simply amazed at the crits in this thread. You lot really don't know shit from shinola.

To be fair, I didn't even know what shinola was for many years, later found out it's a type of boot polish.

Harry and Paul are well past their best - at least in terms of choosing funny sketches to perform - and no amount of doughy eyed nostalgia is going to change that.

Boring, out of touch shite like The Minor Royals is pretty typical of two comedians who have become boring and out of touch themselves. But I do agree that older people probably find the notion of them dressed up like the Dragons to be absolutely hilarious, because they recognise them 'off da telly'.

I'm chuffed that you get so much out of it, but for the vast majority of us here, it's yesterday's comedy performed by yesterday's men. It's amazing that the same people who caused Radio 1 to sack all their DJs and completely re-brand their organisation based upon a comedy sketch have been reduced to this pile of unremarkable slush.

Quote: Godot Taxis @ November 1 2012, 1:47 PM GMT

Simply amazed at the crits in this thread. You lot really don't know shit from shinola.

Enfield and Whitehouse are always watchable and interesting but I thought there was real polish to this opener. Clever writing; 'But I don't look thirty, do I?', 'Cambridge ringroad university', 'wanker's beard' - Inspired acting and business - Sophie Winkleman as 'Nutella' and Enfield when he proffers the £20 and £10 notes in the newsagent sketch or looks too long at the camera as the sweating Dragon's Den contestant who'd left the 'Solution to the world's problems' in the car.

I wonder if you have to over forty to like it, because this is exactly what I want to see on my TV not derivative and superficial wank like 'Hebburn' - two performers at the height of their powers building sketches out of what they find funny about modern life. Perhaps it also helps if you live in London and have actually seen shops in Shoreditch selling 70s music centres for £150.

I'm over forty, and this was drivel. Their previous series was extremely unfunny, reusing the same sketches from the previous week. Very lazy!

I enjoyed the last series (although admittedly it wasn't brilliant), particularly the Beatles sketches. But I agree this episode seemed quite tired and uninspired. I'll give it another go next week, sometimes it takes a couple of goes for new characters to grow on you.

I hope they bring back the scumbags with the incessantly barking dog. I find that stuff inexplicably hilarious.

Quote: Charlie Boy @ November 1 2012, 7:50 PM GMT

I'm over forty, and this was drivel. Their previous series was extremely unfunny, reusing the same sketches from the previous week. Very lazy!

Wot he said!

Great performances as usual, but apart from the Danish sketch - which was brilliant - there weren't too many laughs this time. They're always watchable though.

Quote: Renegade Carpark @ November 1 2012, 6:23 PM GMT

To be fair, I didn't even know what shinola was for many years, later found out it's a type of boot polish.

Harry and Paul are well past their best - at least in terms of choosing funny sketches to perform - and no amount of doughy eyed nostalgia is going to change that.

Boring, out of touch shite like The Minor Royals is pretty typical of two comedians who have become boring and out of touch themselves. But I do agree that older people probably find the notion of them dressed up like the Dragons to be absolutely hilarious, because they recognise them 'off da telly'.

I'm chuffed that you get so much out of it, but for the vast majority of us here, it's yesterday's comedy performed by yesterday's men. It's amazing that the same people who caused Radio 1 to sack all their DJs and completely re-brand their organisation based upon a comedy sketch have been reduced to this pile of unremarkable slush.

It's interesting that you attribute nostalgia to me, and that other posters talk about shows that were on 14 years ago - Harry Enfield and Chums - as I think you and they watched what you thought Harry and Paul were rather than the actual show they put out. I'd go so far as to say that if you watched the episode again in six months time you wouldn't realise that you'd already seen it.

Your patronising comments about older people are also misplaced. Older people are much more intelligent and perceptive observers of life than younger people. You do after get much better at things the longer you do it, You may have met lots of stupid and intellectually decrepit older people but believe me they would have been worse when they were younger.

Quote: Godot Taxis @ November 3 2012, 9:28 AM GMT

It's interesting that you attribute nostalgia to me, and that other posters talk about shows that were on 14 years ago - Harry Enfield and Chums - as I think you and they watched what you thought Harry and Paul were rather than the actual show they put out. I'd go so far as to say that if you watched the episode again in six months time you wouldn't realise that you'd already seen it.

Your patronising comments about older people are also misplaced. Older people are much more intelligent and perceptive observers of life than younger people. You do after get much better at things the longer you do it, You may have met lots of stupid and intellectually decrepit older people but believe me they would have been worse when they were younger.

Harry and Paul are definitely NOT getting better as they get older!

Share this page