Psychoville - Series 1 Page 23

I am kind of enjoying this, but more from a production values point of view than a barrel of laughs angle. For me, the funniest moment of the whole piece to date remains the very first scene with the menacing darkness, the swirling quill and then the panning out to a post office queue to the announcement "cashier number 3 please". By and large it has, in my humble opinion, been a bit like a third album by a high profile band. The first album (League of Gents series one) was very good, the second one not so, and the third is more than just a little bit self-indulgent. Of course all the strands may well come together in a laughathon of a final show or two, but I am not holding my breath. It's certainly not a 'whoops there go my trousers' but then neither was 'League'. It did, however, have a steady stream of funny moments in the course of each 28 minute episode. This doesn't, or maybe the sleeplessness that goes with having a baby that hasn't grasped the concept of night time sleeping yet has left me with a temporary humour by-pass.

Quote: zooo @ July 10 2009, 6:08 PM BST

There was only one wasn't there?

View original

They used Hitchcok's technique when there was a close-up on the lid of the chest. I don't remember another, but was there possibly one where there was just a shot of the door to upstairs?

Really loving the show so far.

As far as I can tell, the single cut in last night's episode came where the chest was opened, to move the body.

Very pleased to see Mark Gatiss in the episode, had an inkling that it was him when he spoke from behind the door, nice to see a reunion of sorts.

Anyway.

I was on the Murder & Chips website (www.murderandchips.co.uk), just clicking around when I clicked on the UV light about halfway down the page. Something popped up on the screen:

What does it mean?

Quote: Dolly Dagger @ July 10 2009, 7:15 PM BST

They used Hitchcok's technique when there was a close-up on the lid of the chest. I don't remember another, but was there possibly one where there was just a shot of the door to upstairs?

View original

The swinging (or "louvre" as I believe they're called) doors to the kitchen was a lifted cut from Rope (though I belive that was a single swing door). Though unlike Rope I'm not certain they actually made a cut here.

For those who haven't seen Rope BTW, it really is a fantastic film and worth seeking out. With Jimmy Stewart in a great supporting role. The whole cast is really good and it is beautifully shot, with a really good premise. (One of the things I hadn't realised until Psychoville informed me, was that the music for Rope was composed by Bernard Herrmann, he who scored Psycho and Taxi Driver amongst others.)

Is my favourite Hitchcock film.

Oh dear.
I think I'm going to be going against the grain here, but I thought it was horribly self-indulgent.
My original niggle with the previous episode was that it had too many storylines to give any one of them enough space.
Now they ditch all those stories to concentrate on one.
And for why?
So they could impress a load of film nerds about their knowledge of Hitchcock?
In the process they totally disrupted the flow of the narrative.
Unforgivable.
Only two cuts. Who cares?
Why not direct it whilst balancing a cup of water on the directors head.
It's about as meaningful.
Fine, as a one off it was pretty funny.
But what happens now?
Will we just pick up where we left off, having let the writers have their bit of fun.
It's a shame.
Someone should have told them to just get over themselves.

Quote: Lazzard @ July 11 2009, 12:27 AM BST

Oh dear.
I think I'm going to be going against the grain here, but I thought it was horribly self-indulgent.
My original niggle with the previous episode was that it had too many storylines to give any one of them enough space.
Now they ditch all those stories to concentrate on one.
And for why?
So they could impress a load of film nerds about their knowledge of Hitchcock?
In the process they totally disrupted the flow of the narrative.
Unforgivable.
Only two cuts. Who cares?
Why not direct it whilst balancing a cup of water on the directors head.
It's about as meaningful.
Fine, as a one off it was pretty funny.
But what happens now?
Will we just pick up where we left off, having let the writers have their bit of fun.
It's a shame.
Someone should have told them to just get over themselves.

View original

What a lovely poem. Shades of Pinter. (Read it out loud slowly, in a deep serious voice.)

Quote: Tim Walker @ July 11 2009, 12:35 AM BST

What a lovely poem. Shades of Pinter. (Read it out loud slowly, in a deep serious voice.)

View original

I'll take that as a compliment.
Though I'm pretty sure none was intended.

Interesting discussion. I can see why some might see it as self-indulgent, but I personally I'm really glad they did the episode as it was quite remarkable.

Some people are saying it wasn't as funny as the other episodes, but I think I actually laughed more at this one. Especially as the cuckoo clock went off. As for breaking up the on-going story, well they did give David quite a bit more background, so I don't think it was a "waste" in that respect.

Some really great character acting was on display from all three actors. I thought of them all as real characters, rather than actors in wigs, which is quite a feat to achieve considering they are OTT grotesques. Incidently, great to see Mark Gatiss, they just about managed to keep that a surprise I think (although the Radio Times almost broke the pact the press had voluntarily made)

David and Maureen are definitely classic sitcom characters in the making.

Oh, and what a great twist... I didn't see that coming at all.

Quote: Renegade Carpark @ July 10 2009, 12:48 PM BST

As much as I enjoyed this week's episode, the single set and minimal actors made me think of only one thing - they blew the budget on the eleborate 'Clown Court' from last week and needed to balance out the books.

View original

There was only ever meant to be six episodes, but the BBC liked the series so much they wanted another and managed to find a (small) amount of extra money to make this special. So it was cheap in that sense, yes.

Quote: Aaron @ July 10 2009, 1:35 PM BST

No. Sides, perhaps. But I don't recall the camera going BEHIND the sofa once. In any case, I've been to plenty of TV recordings to know that you don't need that amount of space to move through.

View original

Why the big space behind the sofa? Well, take a look at the really interesting (but sadly rather short) behind-the-scenes video on the Psychoville website... http://www.bbc.co.uk/psychoville/

The camera never went around the sofa, but it did go through it! You can see in the video that a whole team of people were needed to silently slide furniture out-the-way for close-ups and then back in again as the camera moves out. So, in summary, the space was there for a reason.

Quote: fzoe @ July 10 2009, 7:20 PM BST

As far as I can tell, the single cut in last night's episode came where the chest was opened, to move the body.

View original

Hi. Welcome to the site. Thanks for posting. I couldn't work out where the cut was but, watching it back, I think you're right... it was the lid lifting wasn't it.

Quote: Mark @ July 11 2009, 1:19 PM BST

Incidently, great to see Mark Gatiss, they just about managed to keep that a surprise I think (although the Radio Times almost broke the pact the press had voluntarily made)

View original

How did they almost do it?

I didn't know there had been a pact. Some twat said he was on it on another forum.