This is one of those shows I watch out of wide-eyed fascination rather than any expectation of actual enjoyment. The dynamics of trainwrecks fascinate me.
Episodes - Series 1 Page 15
Quote: Timbo @ January 18 2011, 10:22 AM GMTThis is one of those shows I watch out of wide-eyed fascination rather than any expectation of actual enjoyment. The dynamics of trainwrecks fascinate me.
There are so many things wrong with this "sit-com".
We watched the first one and thought...oh well... I didn't watch for the second ep but if it's on and I've nothing to do, it's OK... 'American TV execs are fools' jokes are a bit old.
Quote: Charlie Boy @ January 18 2011, 10:40 AM GMTThere are so many things wrong with this "sit-com".
The word sitcom doesn't have a hyphen.
Quote: WeakFlesh @ January 18 2011, 12:04 AM GMTI don't have anything against him, I'm just pointing out that he has not had a very sucsessful career since Friends.
Like others have mentioned, out of choice. See this link;
http://ent.mobile.msn.com/en-us/wonderwall/articles.aspx?aid=1591629&avid=1591629
You also realise he was making $800,000 per episode towards the end of Friends?
He didn't need to do anything (and still doesn't)
I think I missed something... how in the restaurant did LeBlanc know he would be playing a fat character if he's never heard of the show?
Because Le Blanc assumed that Lymon's Boys was a rip off History Boys, he was referring to the character played by Richard Griffiths in History Boys, not the character played by the actor played by Richard Griffiths in Lymon's Boys, which was the character whom he would be playing, and who was nothing at all like the character in History Boys, other than sounding and looking like Richard Griffiths. I hope that clears this up.
Ah, I suppose that could be an answer. I was wondering exactly the same thing as Mark.
Quote: Griff @ January 18 2011, 9:46 PM GMTIt's never going to be in competition for my 2011 BCG Best New Sitcom vote
Don't speak too soon...
I enjoyed the second episode a lot more, some properly good laughs in there and dragged much less. Definitely got potential, we can just hope they used the second episode as the template, not the first.
So much to agree with here:
Quote: Nat Wicks @ January 18 2011, 10:08 AM GMTThe two lead writer characters are so dull, it's a huge waste of Mangan and Greig's skills.
Yup. Maybe the writers who wrote themselves as the writers are dull. Maybe they think Brit writers are dull. Although with their experience you'd think they'd be able to write themselves as interesting dull.
Quote: Nat Wicks @ January 18 2011, 10:08 AM GMTAll of the bits that have made me laugh have been from the supporting act, who at least seem to be playing 'larger than life' or slightly less one dimentional roles.
Quite right. If the leads were dull enough to be actually empty it might work this way.
Quote: Nat Wicks @ January 18 2011, 10:08 AM GMTAlso, Le Blanc's character didn't sit well with me - the character felt at odds.
Yup. But I think the direction's at fault here too. There were scenes (I'm thinking of the poolside party scene here) where you could see the joke that could have been if the director had only decided what he wanted from the whole piece. Instead we get...
Quote: Nat Wicks @ January 18 2011, 10:08 AM GMTIt looks like a shiny US show, but the writing hasn't decided which side of the pond it's on. It feels like it's puling in both directions and missing both marks.
Oh yes. Maybe because...
Quote: Griff @ January 18 2011, 9:46 PM GMTThis is definitely tipping over from sitcom into comedy drama.
God I hope so. I don't agree with earlier posts that nobody should write about the business. If anyone's going to do a snarky demolition of the process of getting a sitcom off the ground across the pond, who better than those guys? (Write about what you know, right?)
It looks like there's a good, nasty, uncomfortable comedy drama about the business struggling to get out - but at the moment we are just watching it drown in a sack.
Still, who at the BBC (ok, I know they have a US partner too) is going to tell David Crane and Jeffrey Klarick to go do a new draft from scratch?
This show, like any, has pros and cons. As of episode two I'd say the scale is tipping toward the cons, and here's why:
First, the main characters, Sean and Beverly, are essentially passive victims. It's not that they lack a want or need - it's that they don't pursue it with any clear strategy or tactics. I'm sure it can be done but I just can't think of a great sitcom wherein the main characters just sit and react to the things that happen to them.
The character of "Matt LeBlanc" is also, for the most part, passive. Sure he wants to do a show, he needs money so he can open a restaurant. But he faces no obstacles on that path. There's not much to watch there - they say "You want to do a show?" he says "Ok..." and it's all a little too easy, and therefore dull.
Second, I've never thought that characters who are jerks are all that funny or fun to watch. Merc treats everyone around him poorly, especially his blind wife. How is that funny?
Third, the style is all over the map. I think this point's already been made but just to reiterate; one minute it's over-the-top silly, the next it tries to be verbally sharp and then it tries to be quirky. Or at least that's my reading of it.
Fourth - Am I the only one that thinks it looks a little...er... cheap? From opening credits to the green screens to the flat-dimensionless lighting... I know Showtime can make beautiful half-hour comedy-dramas (Weeds) and I know BBC can (Rev) so what happened?
Both of those shows are great examples of characters who face their problems in great dramatically active ways. They go out and DO things. (Yes, they are forced to by the actions of others, making them victims, but they turn around and become active because of it.) I'm just not sure I can get into the characters of Sean and Beverly if I don't know who they are and as the old addage goes: actions speak louder than words.
But that's just my two cents...
Quote: JPM1 @ January 19 2011, 9:28 AM GMTMerc treats everyone around him poorly, especially his blind wife. How is that funny?
I found that bit pretty funny.
Was it filmed here or the States?
Quote: Matthew Stott @ January 19 2011, 9:33 AM GMTI found that bit pretty funny.
I'm assuming you do not think that mocking blind people is funny so what was the source of the funny there?
Quote: Griff @ January 19 2011, 9:39 AM GMTActually when I saw the bit when he pretends to hang himself I just thought of the Simon Callow scene in 'Four Weddings' where he does exactly the same joke/actions.
JPM1 - which bits are green-screen?
All the car stuff and the LA exteriors outside Merc's house...
Quote: chipolata @ January 19 2011, 9:43 AM GMTWas it filmed here or the States?
I know a lot of it was filmed here but some of that stuff in the restaurant where they meet LeBlanc looked like SoCal to me... not sure if it was green-screened or not...