As a 24 year old female, I found it annoying to watch and had to switch off. The blonde female actress is awful and it is quite obviously brainstormed whilst they feck around in a pub and something that's hilarious in a "you had to be there" kind of way, does NOT work on screen. In my opinion obviously.
Quote: YesNo @ September 17 2009, 9:01 AM BST(and it won't be a writer because they have no power)
They have the power to not agree to write or have their name on a script. And if they've got a good agent, their intellectual property rights will have been asserted in their contract (this can happen if you work with the right agent). Ultimately, even if it's your first show as a writer, it is but one show. I'd rather wait a while longer than have the first evidence of my sitcom writing career be a show that is (pretty much) universally panned (by virtue of my complicity rather than lack of talent). And then have to try and explain to producers etc why your last show wasn't funny. Of course we're all there to sell work at the end of the day, but I don't have a great deal of sympathy for writers who don't stand up for their show.
Who is it aimed at Danny Cohen?
My god, you are shit at your job.
It's not as easy as it sounds. If you piss them off they will not work with you again. You can try digging your heels in and acting like a talented gun slinger but they'd rather ditch you and lose a good show than work with someone difficult.
Even if you find a sympathetic producer he/she is still beholden to the Exec and the channel boss. If they turn up with a script that doesn't include the suggestions made by these two then it will not proceed.
You can try to be a hero, but they will win. Your only hope is to get a show away on a tiny budget that needs to be made quickly. They don't meddle as much with these. If it's a hit then you'll have the power.
I'd bet David Isaacs fought many battles along the way and lost all the important ones.
The simple truth is writers are not valued and there's nothing an agent or anyone else can do to change that. Right now I know of writers that are working for free on a BBC One sketch show, with a "we'll buy it if we like it" deal. They all have good agents, but it's a buyers market and there's not enough work to go round.
Time for a proper unionisation (with legal powers) of broadcast writers in this country. Long overdue, of course. 
Here here!
This is as close as you can get to being in a script meeting.
http://www.videosift.com/video/Mitchell-and-Webb-Writer-meets-editor
Quote: YesNo @ September 17 2009, 9:01 AM BSTRonnie is probably very close to the mark. No-one will have set out to make a crappy show, but there will have been numerous people making decisions and influencing the show. Most of these people will have limited comedic ability but a lot of power. So, if the producer thinks the Asian kid should be more gormless, he will become more gormless. The writer can argue his case, but in the end it won't matter. The BBC isn't really interested in the writer as much as creating a show that fits. There might be loads of brilliant gags that are deemed too clever, too edgy; too surreal etc etc and they will be ripped out and replaced by things that fit. If it all holds together as BBC Three type show that is far more important than actually taking any risks or being funny. The end result is something that is a pale shadow of the original concept.
I still maintain that no matter how bad I think the show is, or others on this thread, that it's no worse than say Coming of Age or Two Pints of Lager, and as such will probably find a a fairly loyal fanbase. And I wouldn't be surprised if it did well enough ratings wise to get a second series. Then a third. Then a fourth etc...
Quote: YesNo @ September 17 2009, 10:51 AM BSTHere here!
This is as close as you can get to being in a script meeting.
http://www.videosift.com/video/Mitchell-and-Webb-Writer-meets-editor
Love this sketch and it rang a few bells when I first saw it.
Quote: sitcom critic @ September 17 2009, 7:25 AM BSTAaron you said you preferred Coming Of Age? You certainly have an eye for comedy.
Why thank you! I do, don't I? 
Quote: chipolata @ September 17 2009, 10:52 AM BSTI still maintain that no matter how bad I think the show is, or others on this thread, that it's no worse than say Coming of Age or Two Pints of Lager, and as such will probably find a a fairly loyal fanbase.
As a fan of both, I genuinely don't think that this has the charm of the others in order to do so. There's no warmth to it, no love, no sympathy... It's just not there at all. Sub-Lab Rats.
But then maybe I just don't "get" this in the same way that you guys don't "get" Two Pints et al.
Quote: chipolata @ September 17 2009, 10:52 AM BSTI still maintain that no matter how bad I think the show is, or others on this thread, that it's no worse than say Coming of Age or Two Pints of Lager, and as such will probably find a a fairly loyal fanbase. And I wouldn't be surprised if it did well enough ratings wise to get a second series. Then a third. Then a fourth etc...
I do think it had a lot of charm also. It'll keep the viewers I'm sure.
I've never really agreed with the way they commission things - the producer wants the script one way, and the commissioning editor wants it another, then the director steps in - the writer doesn't get a chance to push back unless they perform one of those roles. Hence SF's rant:
http://writersguild.blogspot.com/2009/05/stephen-fry-tv-writers-treated-like.html
Quote: EllieJP @ September 17 2009, 9:08 AM BSTit is quite obviously brainstormed whilst they feck around in a pub and something that's hilarious in a "you had to be there" kind of way, does NOT work on screen. In my opinion obviously.
Why can I well imagine this? A load of over priviledged little sperms sat in a gastro-pub all thinking they're frikkin' hilarious.
'Ohh why don't we make her pregnant, I saw Juno the other day and it was so funny.'
'Ooh, I saw it too. Have you seen Knocked Up? Seth Rogan is so funny.'
*And in the corner, a man in sunglasses named Renegade Carpark cocks a sub-machine gun, smiles and waits.
It won't have been like this. Yes, they might have gone to the pub - after working all day in an air tight office at the BBC or Channel K offices, drinking piss weak tea and eating the very cheapest biscuits. There is no glamour or romance left in comedy writing because it's too much of a business. If you want to get pissed you do it in your own time and at your own expense. It's a bloody shame because I always dreamt it would be something like you described - ah, for the days of opium pipes and BBC expense accounts.
Quote: Aaron @ September 17 2009, 12:30 PM BSTAs a fan of both, I genuinely don't think that this has the charm of the others in order to do so. There's no warmth to it, no love, no sympathy... It's just not there at all. Sub-Lab Rats.
To a certain extent, I agree. And I feel the show shot itself in the foot by not being filmed in front of a studio audience. That would have not only helped it hone one-liners, but also helped it build a rapport with an audience, first in the studio, then by extension at home.
However, I do think there's something of a bunker mentality at BBC Three. The minute a show faces criticism, especially harsh criticism, they disregard it. They dismiss it as the embittered ranting of failed comedy writers, and start quoting figures about how the programme is reaching exactly the people it wants to reach. It happened with Corden and Horne and it happened with Coming of Age, both of which got recommissioned.
And for the record, I don't like it or think it's much cop. But I suspect it'll tick all the boxes the Beeb wants it to tick, thus "earning" a second series.
Viewership is the only box programmes really need to tick I guess.
I'm not sure about the bunker mentality - people just seem to be a bit hysterical with their comments. But it's good it's getting a reaction (indifference is comedy death). Plus I wasn't particuarly fond of the first episode of Psychoville, for lots of reasons I think are stated by people in its thread, but enjoyed the series.
Yeah Stan, I wouldn't compare Lunch Monkeys to Psychoville. I know the point you are trying to make, but your context is all wrong.
*RC thinks to himself, 'Am I out of step? Will the people be clamouring for a second series of Lunch Monkeys creating online petitions?' Then thinks to himself 'Course they f**king won't, it's garbage.'
