Gervais interview in Radio Times Page 2

At the same time though, Godot, there are at least two creative people in an interview like this, and the placing of the anecdote about the Japanese bank at the top of the piece could just as easily tell a story about the author as it could about Gervais. I've just read it; I didn't learn anything new about Gervais but I did think it was a highly-spun interview with an agenda. I guess none of us knows whether the agenda was pre-determined or whether she had an open mind before meeting him and just thought he was an arse.

I think the importance she attaches to the pyjamas thing is plain weird.

I read a really good interview with Gervais in one of the Sundays last year, where I felt I did learn something and from that I got a similar impression to Dolly. But I think the RT job was just a bad job, for both Gervais and journo.

A million pounds for a one off job is obscene. She decided that him mentioning that was 'showing off', I see it as him trying to show how ridiculous the showbiz world is.

Quote: Badge @ April 28 2010, 1:17 AM BST

At the same time though, Godot, there are at least two creative people in an interview like this, and the placing of the anecdote about the Japanese bank at the top of the piece could just as easily tell a story about the author as it could about Gervais. I've just read it; I didn't learn anything new about Gervais but I did think it was a highly-spun interview with an agenda. I guess none of us knows whether the agenda was pre-determined or whether she had an open mind before meeting him and just thought he was an arse.

I think the importance she attaches to the pyjamas thing is plain weird.

I read a really good interview with Gervais in one of the Sundays last year, where I felt I did learn something and from that I got a similar impression to Dolly. But I think the RT job was just a bad job, for both Gervais and journo.

View original

You have to ask why Gervais told the interviewer about a job he didn't take and why he felt the need to give precise details of the fee. Presumably the purpose of the interview was to promote his cartoon show and latest film. I doubt whether he was booked to talk about profligate salaries paid to comedians. And who do you think brought the story up?

In the course of the interview RG mentions this, the Golden Globes, name drops Groening, Ben Stiller, Christopher Guest, John Cleese and his visit to the White House. He also describes his new project (about a pog actor) as 'sort of like Curb your Enthusiasm' and jokes that the BBC can 'bid for it!'. At the same time he says he doesn't care if he had none of this, he would just film his comedy with a camcorder and put it up on YouTube. The interviewer just responds to this. It is highly reminiscent of the 'Open Paper' scene in the Office - as I outlined in my previous post.

I honestly think this is all a front Gervais puts on to retain some privacy and protect himself. It reminds me of those people who use very harsh or outrageous online personas, but are really quite sweet sensitive people in real life.

I remember him talking once about his mother's funeral and how he and his brother used 'inappropriate' humour - presumably to cope with it.

He probably hates doing interviews but see them as a neccessary evil and so use flippancy and smugness to get through them. Plus it's the old trick of deliberately coming across as not very nice so that if no one likes you you can tell yourself it's because of this. I expect.

But then I really, really like Gervais' work and - from what I've seen and heard - like him too.

Quote: Godot Taxis @ April 28 2010, 5:57 PM BST

In the course of the interview RG mentions this, the Golden Globes, name drops Groening, Ben Stiller, Christopher Guest, John Cleese and his visit to the White House. He also describes his new project (about a pog actor) as 'sort of like Curb your Enthusiasm' and jokes that the BBC can 'bid for it!'.

View original

I can't say it bothers me in any way when he talks like that.

For me this is just apologia for an unbelievably egocentric and crass man. However the Office is excellent as is the first series of Extras. The second series is considerably weaker and fairly sour - especially towards the BBC - which Gervais obviously has a love/hate relationship with, and his stand up is mean-spirited and padded.

To me he is a f**k-up of Tony Hancock proportions and if he remains a relevant figure will one day provide rich pickings to biographers as well as newspaper hacks.

A multi-millionaire who brings foil wrapped sandwiches from home to an interview and a photoshoot? A man who wears his pyjamas to the White House because he flew to the States with one pair of trousers as he doesn't like queuing for his luggage?

Quote: Godot Taxis @ April 28 2010, 6:51 PM BST

For me this is just apologia for an unbelievably egocentric and crass man.

View original

Haven't we known that for a long time? I'm not sure this particular interview tells us anything we weren't already aware of. And I'm sure when Gervais is dead and lying in his money-lined gold coffin, they'll be plenty of exposes telling us what a shit he was, in the same way you get them about Hancock etc nowadays.

Personally, I'm not much fussed with whether someone like Gervais is a tool or not, it has no effect on me, I only care about the work he's producing.

I think he's one of the very few comedians who isn't an emotional f**k up. Like Dolly mentioned, his wife and friends have stuck around him for years. (Since way before he was either rich or famous). They just wouldn't do that if he was a c**t. He'd be going through wives like nobody's business.