Count Arthur Strong - Series 1 (TV) Page 12

I was going to write some thoughts, but Lazzard's already said it all.

Quote: Lazzard @ July 22 2013, 9:15 PM BST

Exactly.
By physically dividing the two story lines this week they made even more apparent what should by now be bleedin' obvious.
Count Arthur Strong is a funny character.
The Rory Kinnear story is weak - and totally redundant.

Imagine taking an episode of Fawlty Towers, chucking away half the material so you could cut away to the bitter-sweet story of Manuel's brother trying to trace his long lost uncle.
I really can't think what possessed them.
The fact that huge chunks of the 'radio play' stuff was lifted from a previous CASRS - and worked perfectly well on TV - shows that they really didn't need to tinker with this.
One can only hope that Series 2 may learn the lesson.
But I shan't hold my breath.

View original

Think I missed the first ten minutes but that was good sitcom I saw. Busy and funny. Seems not a bad idea to transfer this to telly, the actor has screen presence. Another funny studio sitcom on TV to add to the revival.

Lazzard/Aaron

As I said after the first episode, the Rory Kinnear character is entirely superfluous and not funny. It's a problem of structure and writing, so the same would be true were it played by someone who was actually funny, or had comic timing, or was a plausible straightman, none of which is true of Kinnear. There might be someone who can, within a year or so, give a well-regarded Hamlet at the National and then be funny in a studio sit com, but the NT is in its fiftieth anniversary year and it hasn't happened yet. But anyway, it wouldn't help this mess.

The problem is that they're unconvinced by the basic premise that Arthur is funny. Linehan, presumably, doesn't believe Arthur is funny (it's hard to see why Delaney would suddenly disown his own creation) and thinks that the series can only be rescued by adding a rather generic subplot. It's not just that the subplot wastes time, as in Lazzard's excellent analogy with Fawlty Towers. More seriously, when focus is back on the titular count, a lot of what he does has to do with the subplot. Which we don't care about, and which isn't funny.

So it ends up being a third subplot (not funny), a third things that Arthur does because of the subpolot (not funny) and a third Arthur qua Arthur (funny, if that's your thing). No-one on earth is going to find the Kinnear character funny, or care about his relationship with Arthur, so even if you think Strong is the funniest character ever created and every line he speaks is the purest comedy gold, the show is still only going to be intermittently funny.

If the creatives on the series don't think Strong is funny, they should have canned the project, rather than produced this mish-mash.

I again loved last night's episode, I felt it was rather funny. Arthur and his pocket breakfast

Quote: Tokyo Nambu @ July 23 2013, 8:30 AM BST

The problem is that they're unconvinced by the basic premise that Arthur is funny. Linehan, presumably, doesn't believe Arthur is funny

View original

Why would you think that someone like Linehan would work on something he doesn't find funny? (It's not true, by the way)

Kinnear was almost funny when he did his first sofa pratfall, but the gag wasn't sold properly.

Thoroughly enjoyed the third episode too.

I didn't find it hilarious or anything, but it kept me far from being bored as I thought it was very entertaining.

Quote: Ringo @ July 22 2013, 9:52 PM BST

Haha. No, that would only put me in the minority when it comes to everyone you know. Are you this angry in everyday life?

View original

No, I just know a load of rubbish when I see it.

Quote: lofthouse @ July 22 2013, 9:46 PM BST

Well everyone I know really likes it

So what happens now?

Do we call it a draw?

Anyway why are you reading and contributing to a thread about a comedy you don't like?

View original

Sorry I forgot we could only comment about something positively on this 'forum'. Let's just everything is brilliant, even if it's puerile, unfunny nonsense.

Quote: lofthouse @ July 22 2013, 9:51 PM BST

I fail to see what the British Society of Gastroenterology forum has got to do with anything?

View original

Don't be silly. I meant the crew of the Battlestar Galactica thought it was awful as well

Quote: Matthew Stott @ July 23 2013, 8:48 AM BST

Why would you think that someone like Linehan would work on something he doesn't find funny? (It's not true, by the way)

View original

So why, then, add a major subplot so that Arthur is no longer the main focus of the show? Linehan presumably added the whole Kinnear thing, so presumably he thinks the show is funnier with that than it would be without (as otherwise he wouldn't have done it). Conclusion: in Linehan's eyes, Strong himself isn't funny enough to sustain 28 minutes.

Quote: Tokyo Nambu @ July 23 2013, 10:05 AM BST

So why, then, add a major subplot so that Arthur is no longer the main focus of the show? Linehan presumably added the whole Kinnear thing, so presumably he thinks the show is funnier with that than it would be without (as otherwise he wouldn't have done it). Conclusion: in Linehan's eyes, Strong himself isn't funny enough to sustain 28 minutes.

View original

As I said, you're wrong; having other characters involved has nothing to do with Linehan not finding the character funny. He himself was the one who originally approached Delaney saying how much he liked the character and would like to help bring it to TV. This is the second attempt the two have made, after ealrier dropping the idea of having him host a pretend game show after shooting a pilot. The reasons for bringing other characters in are clear and understandable, if you think it's failed, and the decision to do so has ruined the show, well that's another matter. But the show was made because Linehan (and of course Delaney) love the character and think he's funny.

Quote: Matthew Stott @ July 23 2013, 10:30 AM BST

The reasons for bringing other characters in are clear and understandable,

View original

Are they?
What problem are they trying to solve?

Quote: Lazzard @ July 23 2013, 10:40 AM BST

Are they?
What problem are they trying to solve?

View original

I'm not here to defend the show if you don't like it. I know they made certain choices for what seemed like good reasons; if you don't like the outcome and think they were wrong to do so, then there we are. As a writer yourself you can probably understand the thinking that went into it without me having to tell you.

Quote: Matthew Stott @ July 23 2013, 10:30 AM BST

after ealrier dropping the idea of having him host a pretend game show after shooting a pilot.

View original

Which was hilarious. I wish I could get hold of a recording of that.

Quote: Matthew Stott @ July 23 2013, 10:42 AM BST

I'm not here to defend the show if you don't like it. I know they made certain choices for what seemed like good reasons; if you don't like the outcome and think they were wrong to do so, then there we are. As a writer yourself you can probably understand the thinking that went into it without me having to tell you.

View original

Well, as a writer, it feels more like a bit of corporate decsision-making rather than anything creative.
Or, is it the dread fear of being dubbed 'old-fashioned'?
I genuinely don't get it.
Of course he needs some sort of side-kick - a Betty, or a Sybil or a Sid James character.
But why the dumb story arc?
It's essentially a farce - like Fawlty Towers or Some Mothers or Miranda, come to that.
By introducing real world elements the thing blows up in you face.
I can think of half-a-dozen of the original radio scripts that could have been translated practically verbatim and would have worked brilliantly on the screen.

Quote: Lazzard @ July 23 2013, 10:49 AM BST

Well, as a writer, it feels more like a bit of corporate decsision-making rather than anything creative.
Or, is it the dread fear of being dubbed 'old-fashioned'?
I genuinely don't get it.
Of course he needs some sort of side-kick - a Betty, or a Sybil or a Sid James character.
But why the dumb story arc?
It's essentially a farce - like Fawlty Towers or Some Mothers or Miranda, come to that.
By introducing real world elements the thing blows up in you face.
I can think of half-a-dozen of the original radio scripts that could have been translated practically verbatim and would have worked brilliantly on the screen.

View original

Dumb story arc? You don't get it? Sounds like bad writing. Just because Linehan is involved doesn't mean that it must be brilliant. Though others might not agree.