I could still make loads of criticisms about this, but once again I laughed a lot, which means they're probably irrelevant. Superba performances...but imagine how stellar it could have been if the script had actually been good. 
Vicious - Series 1 Page 12
Quote: gappy @ May 7 2013, 10:48 AM BST...but imagine how stellar it could have been if the script had actually been good.
...and if they had taken a theme tune less awful than this one.
Brian Sewell is unhappy with the portrayal of gayness: http://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/brian-sewell-vicious-is-a-throwback-to-far-darker-gay-times-8606142.html
Quote: Tursiops @ May 7 2013, 7:41 PM BSTBrian Sewell is unhappy with the portrayal of gayness: http://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/brian-sewell-vicious-is-a-throwback-to-far-darker-gay-times-8606142.html
Now I know why the BBC chickens out of repeating It Ain't Half Hot Mum.
Watched the first one. Pretty much everything has been covered.. except: it seems strange to me that the two lead characters are exactly the same more or less, either could play each other's parts or swap lines without changing character. Seems to me you can have pair of 'vicious old queens' but put them in conflict with themselves character wise. In the first ep we saw there was no real conflict between them when Hobbit Wizard apologised and I Claudius said that's alright then let's have a cup of tea. I guess the story centred on here's an unopened letter to be read out... ahem. Anyway let's see if there is any narrative in the next ep to uderpin the Men Who Put The Ham in Hamlet schtick.
I think it fair to point out that the audience in the studio are getting an entirely different viewing experience in this, in a far more notable way than most studio sitcoms.
Just watched episode two, I really like it, it's just warm, harmless, bitchy fun. Nothing wrong with it.
Quote: Marc P @ May 8 2013, 10:01 AM BSTWatched the first one. Pretty much everything has been covered.. except: it seems strange to me that the two lead characters are exactly the same more or less, either could play each other's parts or swap lines without changing character. Seems to me you can have pair of 'vicious old queens' but put them in conflict with themselves character wise. In the first ep we saw there was no real conflict between them when Hobbit Wizard apologised and I Claudius said that's alright then let's have a cup of tea.
In ep 2 there was a little character gradation between them, but you're right, they're essentially a gestalt character in two bodies, and sort of Tweedle Dum and Tweedle Dum Chum.
It does seem that British comedy is moving backwards. The portrayal of a gay couple in "Modern Family", for example, the US sitcom, is far more nuanced and real, and funnier too. In fact I no longer see them as a gay couple. They're just a couple.
"Vicious", on the other hand, does little more than resurrect stereotypes. But perhaps it will improve.
It is a moth eaten theatrical piece but one that is funnier than most comedy plays I have seen because I foolishly read: "uproariously funny" "must see" "*****" on the poster.
Quote: evan rubivellian @ May 8 2013, 1:29 PM BSTIt does seem that British comedy is moving backwards. The portrayal of a gay couple in "Modern Family", for example, the US sitcom, is far more nuanced and real, and funnier too. In fact I no longer see them as a gay couple. They're just a couple.
"Vicious", on the other hand, does little more than resurrect stereotypes. But perhaps it will improve.
They are a modern couple in Modern Family, these two are not, they are of their generation (not admitting to the mother about being a couple, though the mother blatantly knows anyway being an example) they aren't meant to be politically correct, realistic, modern characters. They are intended to be old bitchy, vicious queens who long after their faded youth. I know a few people like them, though watered down versions.
I often do electrical work in an 'exclusive' clothes shop.
This is run by two queens not dissimilar to those in Vicious.
They bitch and fight like those two, make 'stage whisper' comments about each other and fall out almost constantly.
One of them is an amateur opera singer and will belt out a song without any notice. The other will always say something like 'you can't sing dear, I don't know why you try' or 'it's a good thing you have a day job' etc.
It is hilarious from the minute I walk in to leaving. They are as camp and stereotypical as the two in vicious are portrayed.
It might seem like old fashioned comedy - but it's also real life.
Quote: evan rubivellian @ May 8 2013, 1:29 PM BSTIt does seem that British comedy is moving backwards. The portrayal of a gay couple in "Modern Family", for example, the US sitcom, is far more nuanced and real, and funnier too. In fact I no longer see them as a gay couple. They're just a couple.
"Vicious", on the other hand, does little more than resurrect stereotypes. But perhaps it will improve.
Why does it have to be real? This is a sitcom not a documentary.
You seem to think all sitcoms should be a social commentary rather than just be funny.
Well there is a thing called the willing suspension of disbelief. Penned by the old wag Coleridge. Basically a young guy turns up at the flat of two elderly gay men, he comes in even though he knows it is the wrong flat and in under sixty seconds asks to use the toilet. Now then.... why? As the flat he wants is just up the stairs. From the perspective of the young man he would just go. From the perspective of the elderly men they would think check the f**king valuables Gerald it's one of those hoodies on the rob. Now for the sake of comic contrivance they want to get him out of the room and to the toilet in the script. How to do it? Therein lies the craft, the wit and the comedy of these sorts of things. What would Joe Orton make of it one wonders?
Interesting to see the next ep, now the characters have been established this sort of thing won't matter so much, but it seemed a bit early for a throw away contrivance.
Quote: David Carmon @ May 8 2013, 2:49 PM BSTThey are a modern couple in Modern Family, these two are not, they are of their generation (not admitting to the mother about being a couple, though the mother blatantly knows anyway being an example)they aren't meant to be politically correct, realistic, modern characters. They are intended to be old bitchy, vicious queens who long after their faded youth. I know a few people like them, though watered down versions.
You agree that the characters in Vicious are not realistic, but then you say that you know a few people like them? They are realistic,then, in your viewpoint.
Except that the people you know are watered-down versions.
But that means the characters in Vicious are more realistic than the actual people you know?
I can't argue with that!
Quote: Stephen Goodlad @ May 8 2013, 3:17 PM BSTI often do electrical work in an 'exclusive' clothes shop.
This is run by two queens not dissimilar to those in Vicious.They bitch and fight like those two, make 'stage whisper' comments about each other and fall out almost constantly.
One of them is an amateur opera singer and will belt out a song without any notice. The other will always say something like 'you can't sing dear, I don't know why you try' or 'it's a good thing you have a day job' etc.
It is hilarious from the minute I walk in to leaving. They are as camp and stereotypical as the two in vicious are portrayed.It might seem like old fashioned comedy - but it's also real life.
Of course flamboyant queens exist! But people are often more than what they appear to be on the surface. Or less. And that is what good art is about.
Quote: dennispennis123 @ May 8 2013, 3:47 PM BSTWhy does it have to be real? This is a sitcom not a documentary.
You seem to think all sitcoms should be a social commentary rather than just be funny.
Well, in a way all sitcoms ARE a social commentary.
Quote: Marc P @ May 8 2013, 4:11 PM BSTWell there is a thing called the willing suspension of disbelief. Penned by the old wag Coleridge. Basically a young guy turns up at the flat of two elderly gay men, he comes in even though he knows it is the wrong flat and in under sixty seconds asks to use the toilet. Now then.... why? As the flat he wants is just up the stairs. From the perspective of the young man he would just go. From the perspective of the elderly men they would think check the f**king valuables Gerald it's one of those hoodies on the rob. Now for the sake of comic contrivance they want to get him out of the room and to the toilet in the script. How to do it? Therein lies the craft, the wit and the comedy of these sorts of things. What would Joe Orton make of it one wonders?
Interesting to see the next ep, now the characters have been established this sort of thing won;t matter so much, but it seemed a bit early for a throw away contrivance.
Haven't read through all of this, but put me down for DISAGREE just to be consistent!
Excellent second episode too, again very funny with the quick fire quips, Frances De La Tour is marvellous, and Ash has a touch of a young Richard Beckinsale in Rising Damp....but I am hoping as it goes along we will get to see the two mains at least fleshed out a bit more, them being given moments of genuine emotion and pathos to contrast with the casual bitchiness, else it's in danger of feeling a bit light, and these two acting legends are capable of and deserve a lot more than light.