What happened to Langham's character anyway? I recall they essentially killed him off with a throwaway line in the first episode of this series, but I can't remember how they did it.
The Thick Of It - Series 3 Page 28
Quote: Kevin Murphy @ December 7 2009, 5:16 PM GMTWhat happened to Langham's character anyway? I recall they essentially killed him off with a throwaway line in the first episode of this series, but I can't remember how they did it.
It was just simply implied that he'd be sacked in the reshuffle and that was that. Don't think they went into further detail. There was no real reaction from Glen who, if anyone, actually had a proper friendship with Hugh. Don't think there was any other way to handle it other than as briefly and discretely as possible.
Red Button stuff for episode 7: http://www.bbc.co.uk/comedy/extra/video/p005hdsm
Thought that episode was really, really excellent.
Will he come back a la Mandelson/Steve Flemind did already? Or will the opposition hire him as a consultant when they take over? 
Dan
Quote: Kevin Murphy @ December 7 2009, 2:08 PM GMTIt's pretty sad that for thirty years everybody turned a blind eye to Polanski drugging and anally raping a 14-year-old, but one of the most talented comic actors in the country gets permanently shitcanned for a (relatively) minor crime.
Glitter may be on a blacklist, but radio stations are still playing The Who, aren't they? People still buy their records.
Langham's paid the price for his crime. I say let him back on telly.
In all fairness one of the charges against Langham was also the prolonged abuse of an underage girl but if I recall that particular charge was unproven in court. Like all of these cases - whether it be Langham, Polanski, Leslie, or whomever - we will never know what truly happened, no matter what a court of law may decide. Whether or not you think he should be 'allowed' back on TV (for want of a better word) I reckon we can all take it as read that his career is f**ked.
Quote: MIKIE @ December 8 2009, 2:52 PM GMTIn all fairness one of the charges against Langham was also the prolonged abuse of an underage girl but if I recall that particular charge was unproven in court.
It was unproven because the evidence was shonky and didn't add up, meaning it was very likely untrue.
Quote: MIKIE @ December 8 2009, 2:52 PM GMTIn all fairness one of the charges against Langham was also the prolonged abuse of an underage girl but if I recall that particular charge was unproven in court.
So it should be disregarded. I think the article which there is a link to on the front page of this very site about the man is pretty interesting.
Anyway, Langham isn't in this series.
Quote: chipolata @ December 7 2009, 10:04 AM GMTAll six Chris Langham episodes are avaliable on the series 1 DVD. Hence the continued confusion as to whether this is actually series 2 or series 3.
Yeah, I managed to terribly confuse myself by forgetting about the peculiar release names. Those ruddy DVD titles are annoying.
Quote: chipolata @ December 7 2009, 10:51 AM GMTI got the impression during the Hugh Abbot years that the Julius character was Peter Mandleson to Tucker's Alistair Campbell. And Julius certainly shares a number of effete qualities with Mandleson.
Howevever, as Tim pointed out in this thread, the new Fleming represents a sort of Mandelsohn figure from the past brought in to try and revive a dying government.
Ah but you're implying there that one real person should be 'represented' in only one character on screen. And the Dark Lord particularly is too much of a grotesque to fit into just one skin.
Quote: Aaron @ December 9 2009, 4:25 AM GMTAh but you're implying there that one real person should be 'represented' in only one character on screen. And the Dark Lord particularly is too much of a grotesque to fit into just one skin.
True. Although I rather like Mandleson, even back when he had a moustache, and think some of the times he was forced to resign he didn't deserve it.
Quote: chipolata @ December 9 2009, 10:37 AM GMTTrue. Although I rather like Mandleson, even back when he had a moustache, and think some of the times he was forced to resign he didn't deserve it.
Quite ironic that on at least one of those occasions, it was Gordon who forced the issue with Blair in order to secure the resignation. Oh yes, he's got a moral compass has our Gordon. 
Quote: chipolata @ December 9 2009, 10:37 AM GMTI rather like Mandleson, even back when he had a moustache
Quote: Tim Walker @ December 9 2009, 10:39 AM GMTQuite ironic that on at least one of those occasions, it was Gordon who forced the issue with Blair in order to secure the resignation. Oh yes, he's got a moral compass has our Gordon.
Gordon Brown's compass is much like Captain Jack Sparrow's; it points to whatever he desires most.
(Normally a burger.)
Anyway. Tonight's episode, ace. Great stuff. But will there be a fourth series?
Gah! Missed the first half - just waiting for it to appear on the iPlayer - surprise to see Tom Hollander appear, playing a complete opposite to his Simon Foster character - there has to be an election special before a new series. Right . . . ?
Well that all depends on when the next series is, don't it?
Just seemed a bit anticlimactic - and Peter Capaldi is a lying swine . . . !
Quote: Slippery Jack @ December 12 2009, 10:49 PM GMTGah! Missed the first half - just waiting for it to appear on the iPlayer - surprise to see Tom Hollander appear, playing a complete opposite to his Simon Foster character - there has to be an election special before a new series. Right . . . ?
I'd say so, it seemed set up for an election special, which would be fantastic. It was great to see Tom Hollander appear, hopefully he'll stick around for future specials/series.
Long live The Thick of It.
Just reading tomorrow's Times headlines .... life imitating art?