Quote: sootyj @ September 16 2011, 12:46 PM BSTAlso is this an example of bad karma coming around?
No.
Quote: sootyj @ September 16 2011, 12:46 PM BSTAlso is this an example of bad karma coming around?
No.
Quote: ScotiaNova @ September 16 2011, 11:39 AM BSTReece has tweeted that they weren't cancelled . . . they had ideas for a third but chose not to submit them and then end up bring cancelled . . . this way it's ended at 2 series of their own volition.
If a show has bad ratings for the slot then they are doing the right thing. What is the point of spending months working on a show that a dwindling proportion of viewers are following? Makes perfect sense to end it now. Was it any good, I've not seen this yet?
Quote: Alfred J Kipper @ September 16 2011, 1:17 PM BSTIf a show has bad ratings for the slot then they are doing the right thing. What is the point of spending months working on a show that a dwindling proportion of viewers are following? Makes perfect sense to end it now. Was it any good, I've not seen this yet?
The thing is that I think the scheduling of the 2nd series killed it . . . and I think it changed nights for the finale.
The first series was Thursday at 2200 (I think)
Series 2 was 2230 on a Monday (again, not sure) . . . not a great comedy slot.
Reece has clarified that they have been commissioned to do 2 series of separate shows not 2 series of a single show . . . the mores the merrier.
I've just seen S2E3 on GOLD and thought it was excellent.
Like The League of Gentlemen (e.g. Papa Lazarou) sometimes it's hard to tell if I am *supposed* to laugh at this.
I particularly liked Mr Lomax, because of the Tony Hancock thing. They could have made a film out of this.
It must have been tricky for the writers because they obviously weren't trying to insult the memory of the real Tony Hancock, but the Mr Lomax character believes he was Anthony Aloysius St John Hancock. The Hancock character.
I think it is also a bit self indulgent of the writers to have done this. To dress up as a loved comedy actor when Mr Lomax dresses in the famous hat and coat. I also think they did use the real puppet from The Punch and Judy Man film when he visits the Hoity Toity shop.
With just one episode I can't see how the story hangs together. Does he want Snappy the crocodile because the Crocodile is another character from Punch and Judy? I understood he likes the thrill of the chase.
Like all League Of Gentlemen productions there never seems to be any proper conclusion and nobody ever seems to find happiness or completeness. At least in some horror films there is a conclusion e.g. good conquers over evil or something.
Being a massive fan of The Lad Himself I didn't find anything wrong with this and in fact was rather pleased at what I considered a homage.
And no, it is not the same Mr.Punch puppet, although that would also have been a nice touch if it had been the case.
Made me chuckle to see that the British 'brother' that Samuel L Jackson has been complaining about is none other than Tealeaf from Psychoville!
He wants snappy because it's the only "commodity" missing from his collection. There's more to it than that that ties into why he was in the mental hospital with the others , but I don't want to ruin the ending of the Snappy plot arc. Though, the post above about this is over a year old...so it probably doesn't matter.
The cliffhanger endings, I think worked well, but it's not a show you can really jump into on a random episode not having seen what comes before it or it won't make any sense. I think Inside No 9 being just the opposite was in reaction to that fact. I liked S1 moreso than S2. A lot of people complained about the ending to S1, but I actually prefer that ending to the S2 ending. I don't think it's just about the ending though, it's the way they arrive at the ending that makes it compelling. That and the characters. Tealeaf, and Mr. Jelly, Jeremy Goode, and Joy Aston, and David and Maureen Sowerbutts are definitely favorites of mine.
I like the guy who played Tealeaf, Daniel Kaluuya. I think he did a brilliant job. He sort of ends up being the most cunning character and the only one who really sees the bigger picture and puts some of the key pieces together, and Daniel plays him in such a perfectly casual but always composed manner. It's odd to have such a sane character with no apparent character flaws from Reece and Steve. Haven't heard about Samuel L Jackson complaining about him, though. What's all that about?
Quote: Davida Grimes @ 11th March 2017, 8:04 PMHe wants snappy because it's the only "commodity" missing from his collection. There's more to it than that that ties into why he was in the mental hospital with the others , but I don't want to ruin the ending of the Snappy plot arc. Though, the post above about this is over a year old...so it probably doesn't matter.
The cliffhanger endings, I think worked well, but it's not a show you can really jump into on a random episode not having seen what comes before it or it won't make any sense. I think Inside No 9 being just the opposite was in reaction to that fact. I liked S1 moreso than S2. A lot of people complained about the ending to S1, but I actually prefer that ending to the S2 ending. I don't think it's just about the ending though, it's the way they arrive at the ending that makes it compelling. That and the characters. Tealeaf, and Mr. Jelly, Jeremy Goode, and Joy Aston, and David and Maureen Sowerbutts are definitely favorites of mine.
I like the guy who played Tealeaf, Daniel Kaluuya. I think he did a brilliant job. He sort of ends up being the most cunning character and the only one who really sees the bigger picture and puts some of the key pieces together, and Daniel plays him in such a perfectly casual but always composed manner. It's odd to have such a sane character with no apparent character flaws from Reece and Steve. Haven't heard about Samuel L Jackson complaining about him, though. What's all that about?
Samuel L Jackson basically complained that black British actors shouldn't be given certain movie roles. For example, Daniel Kaluuya being cast to play a man with a white girlfriend because apparently British black men don't have to deal with the same prejudices.
Uh, what? I think Samuel L Jackson has lost the plot.