I enjoyed the opener. The one thing that bothered me though was that I think the show missed an opportunity to be a bit more consistent (and amusing) had Jez's inebriation and Mark's robe carried over from where series 6 left off as they headed to the hospital with Sophie driving.
Quote: Aaron @ November 29 2010, 10:11 PM GMTProduct placement isn't allowed on television here (yet). If KFC paid Objective/Channel 4, they can expect a large fine.
Hey Aaron,
I was under the impression that only the BBC was restricted from product placements - is it all television?
Quote: JPM1 @ November 30 2010, 6:00 PM GMTI was under the impression that only the BBC was restricted from product placements - is it all television?
It's all TV, although the rules come up for review quite a lot. Could change.
EDIT: make that "will" change
Quote: JPM1 @ November 30 2010, 6:00 PM GMTHey Aaron,
I was under the impression that only the BBC was restricted from product placements - is it all television?
Yes, all television. With obvious allowances (they can't control what's in a Hollywood blockbuster that they happen to be broadcsating, for example). If the proposed changes come into effect, as is likely, then there'll still be exemptions (probably outlined in Kevin's linked-to article) such as kids' and news programming, but in general it will be permitted. Although I think that the BBC may still be restricted in further ways, but don't quote me on that one.
I too was under the impression that only the BBC had product placement restrictions. That said, I find it hard to believe that Col. Sanders got at least 10 seconds of face time for free. Could the production company not charge an advertising fee for the actual broadcast, but a fee for the DVD or internet broadcast? They could always blur out the Col. if there wasn't payment...
Interestingly in the scene after KFC, the video-game Mark is playing has it's title plate removed from the cabinet. We all know where you get chicken in a bucket.... but is the game Time Crisis? Virtua Cop? something else? I don't know!
Quote: MTpromises @ November 30 2010, 10:28 PM GMTI too was under the impression that only the BBC had product placement restrictions. That said, I find it hard to believe that Col. Sanders got at least 10 seconds of face time for free. Could the production company not charge an advertising fee for the actual broadcast, but a fee for the DVD or internet broadcast?
I don't think that'd be entirely impossible for DVD, but it would be getting very complicated and rather into risky territory. I'm not sure consumers would stand for having such a thing cut either.
Quote: chipolata @ November 28 2010, 3:18 PM GMTIt can't have many series left in it
Really? This is one of the few sitcoms thesedays that I could see quite happily running for a few more series without (necessarily) a drop in quality. The set-up is such that it isn't limited in terms of where you take the story arcs. And the characters are so strong that you can put them into any number of new situations/plots and they'll work. The V/O element itself allows scope for hundreds of more funny thought-lines.
It's rare to write a (British) sitcom this good. Rarer still to write one that has the scope to run past three series without struggling for ideas. I would think it reasonable for Bain & Armstrong to be contemplating taking the show through to series 10.
Quote: MTpromises @ November 30 2010, 10:28 PM GMTInterestingly in the scene after KFC, the video-game Mark is playing has it's title plate removed from the cabinet. We all know where you get chicken in a bucket.... but is the game Time Crisis? Virtua Cop? something else? I don't know!
Good question and it's 'on-topic', just. My money's on Pac-Man. Or Frogger.
Quote: Tim Walker @ December 1 2010, 12:04 AM GMTReally? This is one of the few sitcoms thesedays that I could see quite happily running for a few more series without (necessarily) a drop in quality. The set-up is such that it isn't limited in terms of where you take the story arcs. And the characters are so strong that you can put them into any number of new situations/plots and they'll work. The V/O element itself allows scope for hundreds of more funny thought-lines.
It's rare to write a (British) sitcom this good. Rarer still to write one that has the scope to run past three series without struggling for ideas. I would think it reasonable for Bain & Armstrong to be contemplating taking the show through to series 10.
I was thinking more in terms of the main people involved just wanting to move on. I too would be happy to see them run to 10 series, but there will surely come a point when they want to stop.
Quote: chipolata @ December 1 2010, 5:45 PM GMTI too would be happy to see them run to 10 series, but there will surely come a point when they want to stop.
The eleventh series?
Some Cambridge twonk trying to suggest Peep Show has 'jumped the shark', because he didn't like the first episode. I also don't think he understands what the phrase 'jump the shark' actually means; because it certainly doesn't just mean a show going from good to bad.
http://blog.varsity.co.uk/laurie-tuffrey/2010/12/02/peep-show-and-the-curse-of-a-series-too-far/
Why do people insist on making such judgements - and such public judgements, at that - on the basis of one single episode? Idiot.
It's nothing new. I seem to remember alot of people - including some on here - had a real downer on series 4. Claiming it had lost the essence of Peep Show. Or something.
Why do people insist on making such judgements - and such public judgements, at that - on the basis of one single episode? Idiot.
Agreed. People making rash judgements after one episode is unforgivable.
Glad we don't do that 'round here.
Stop being a loser in Leisure Games you're spoiling it for me
