I love NGO; half an hour of fun plots and brilliant jokes. Call me old fashioned or boring or whatever, but I like my light entertainment light.
Not Going Out - Series 4 Page 9
All good fun as always.
But returning to old problems with this show. SHUT THE FUCKING DOOR.
Why was the word "f**king" bleeped out in this show, which is on after the watershed?
If you are wondering the context was this:
Lee: He means manor as in To The Manor Born.
Butcher: Yeah! And I'm f**king Penelope Keith.
Lee: Does Peter Bowles know?
Quote: Badge @ January 7 2011, 9:06 PM GMTI do like the show, and I'm very pleased it's back. I accept it often revolves around a lot of implausible things happening, but I thought this particular episode stretched plausibility beyond its limit.
Whether he died or not, this is exactly how I felt about this episode. 
Another thing I don't understand was how the guy was able to tie Lee and Tim up when, as big as he was, there was only one of him, and two of them. Maybe he tied Lee up first, and Tim wasn't very good at fighting him. Or vice versa. I don't know. I'm babbling. I'd better stop because thinking of Lee Mack tied up is making come over all unnecessary. 
Anyway... I must say, that George at Asda scene was great! And was that Magda from Lead Balloon?
It was, yes (Anna Crilly). And I thought it perfectly believable that he could overcome the both of them, given their characters!
Yep, I think you're right!
But how much of any drama (not just comedy) on TV is believable? Maybe I'm missing something, but isn't part of the idea to do with escapism and suspension of beliefs etc?
We all know that most of the things we see in drama aren't usually totally possible - so why analyse it so critically?
Quote: Juan Kerr @ January 8 2011, 11:06 AM GMTBut how much of any drama (not just comedy) on TV is believable? Maybe I'm missing something, but isn't part of the idea to do with escapism and suspension of beliefs etc?
We all know that most of the things we see in drama aren't usually totally possible - so why analyse it so critically?
Exactly. Totally agree.
Quote: Juan Kerr @ January 8 2011, 11:06 AM GMTBut how much of any drama (not just comedy) on TV is believable? Maybe I'm missing something, but isn't part of the idea to do with escapism and suspension of beliefs etc?
We all know that most of the things we see in drama aren't usually totally possible - so why analyse it so critically?
I don't want it to be believable, I want it to be believable within its own parameters. This episode failed that test (despite having lots of good gags that made me laugh).
Quote: Badge @ January 8 2011, 12:29 PM GMTI don't want it to be believable, I want it to be believable within its own parameters. This episode failed that test (despite having lots of good gags that made me laugh).
I think I know what you mean. It's about subjectivity I guess?
Quote: Juan Kerr @ January 8 2011, 11:06 AM GMTBut how much of any drama (not just comedy) on TV is believable? Maybe I'm missing something, but isn't part of the idea to do with escapism and suspension of beliefs etc?
We all know that most of the things we see in drama aren't usually totally possible - so why analyse it so critically?
I agree, to an extent. As Badge hints toward, a show sort of 'establishes' its own world and what kind of things and laws-of-physics are possible in that world, and Not Going Out had set itself up as very much set in our reality, which many of us found the nail gun bit to be at odds with.
But I do also think that there are a lot of people whose, frankly, ability to watch TV, relax and just be immersed and believe in what they're seeing has been harmed by a constant feed of reality programmes and comedy series trying to cash in on the hyper-realism popularised by The Office.
Quote: Aaron @ January 8 2011, 1:53 PM GMTability to watch TV, relax and just be immersed and believe in what they're seeing has been harmed by a constant feed of reality programmes and comedy series trying to cash in on the hyper-realism popularised by The Office.
Don't be daft. When are reality programmes ever based in reality? There's no such thing as the ability to enjoy TV, you either like it or you don't.
Quote: Leevil @ January 8 2011, 2:05 PM GMTThere's no such thing as the ability to enjoy TV, you either like it or you don't.
Many posts on this very website suggest strongly otherwise.
It made me laugh and was full of great gags, but I do wish there was a bit more depth and emotion to the characters. They come across as clothes horses for jokes.