No. I've never see as much as a second of it. Not lying to sound different. 
The title doesn't exactly draw you in.
Not Going Out - Series 3 Page 21
(Many flat lines) - but the jokes themselves make up for that. I've only just started watching and this is rapidly becoming a favourite!
Quote: Godot Taxis @ February 7 2009, 1:01 AM GMTNo. I've never see as much as a second of it. Not lying to sound different.
The title doesn't exactly draw you in.
Titles? Seinfeld no more draws you in than Frasier.
"The characters must never develop or come to any kind of self-awareness, nor find any resolution to their lives. They must retain their 'shallowness' to the end of each episode and indeed the series end."
For many of us, isn't that the truth about life? We like to think we live in a linear way, starting off a blank sheet and by the end of our lives the experiences we've encountered have given us wisdom and answers to living a better life. But some argue no matter what, we all still die wondering: what is the point of life? Having failed to find the answer. Life; it's about nothing - Seinfeld in a nutshell (that's the premise of the show, but truly, Seinfeld's a laugh a minute).
Quote: Godot Taxis @ February 7 2009, 12:19 AM GMTAre you talking to me, Laura? I haven't seen Seinfeld so I wouldn't know.
Seriously?! I'm shocked. Go out and buy series four, otherwise I can't trust another view on comedy that comes out of your mouth!
Life is about nothing Danny, no doubt about that. But art isn't.
I've only seen ever one episode of Frasier. (It was very funny) The title really puts me off with that one - and I can't stand the way people say Frase-ure instead of Frase-ier.
Quote: Godot Taxis @ February 7 2009, 1:31 AM GMTLife is about nothing Danny, no doubt about that. But art isn't.
Neither, really, is Seinfeld. It was dubbed the show about nothing, and they even used that themselves, but it obviously isn't really true. Plus it's the greatest sitcom of all time (series 3/4 onwards).
Quote: Godot Taxis @ February 7 2009, 1:31 AM GMTLife is about nothing Danny, no doubt about that. But art isn't.
I've only seen ever one episode of Frasier.
ONLY ONE???!!!???
My God! You have simply got to skive a couple of mornings off work or at the very least set your video recorder, (or the digital stuff) to record. Frasier runs every weekday mornings on Channel 4.
Quote: Matthew Stott @ February 7 2009, 1:33 AM GMTPlus it's the greatest sitcom of all time (series 3/4 onwards).
Is it though? How can a show that isn't about anything be the best sitcom of all time. Funny isn't enough. Friends is funny - no doubt about it, but it's also completely shit.
Quote: Godot Taxis @ February 7 2009, 1:43 AM GMTIs it though? How can a show that isn't about anything be the best sitcom of all time.
Yes it can be and it is, although I have added other sit-com's to co-share that best-ever title, but it's time to stop asking how? and start viewing.
Back to NGOut. GT, if you feel NGOut is a show 'with no heart' almost as has been suggested, comparable to a show about nothing, then I hope the unsolicited testimonials here, help convince you that a show about nothing can also still be the dog's bollox.
NGOut rules! Esp episode 2; the finest so far of series 3.
The sequence with the insurance puns ("we comprehensively covered it earlier...") was pretty classy.
Very funny.
Great plotting - the whole thing interweaved very well - the Collins influence? - and loads of nice lines.
I hope they keep getting better, but I've a sneaking suspicion this might be the best one of the lot.
Quote: woble @ February 5 2009, 11:31 PM GMTHow is it that comedy is so often wide of the mark in terms of quality? I may be on my own here but I think that basic... basic standards of quality are so often missed. Do TV companies think people will laugh at anything? Is this just me?
Is it?...is it? Oh dear.
With regard to NGO I am afraid it is "just you".
Last night's episode (Competition) was brilliant, this is true laugh out loud stuff, just like Series 1.
But each to their own, personally it's the sort of comedy I like.
I thought that last night's ep was a big return to form. A well structured script and some really good gags made it a big improvement on the first ep. I still think that Lucy is a poor character and the fact that this edition was mostly based around Lee and Tim probably accounted for a lot of the enjoyment.
Never really been a fan of NGO, but having persevered I can say I am warming to it. I still can't agree with some of the 'outstanding' comments I've read on the thread, to the point that I wonder if the BBC are actually sending out two versions and I'm not getting the one you are raving about. That said I am enjoying Lee Mack more now that I can watch him with up to the second subtitles. His delivery is so fast that it's difficult if one is a bit 'Mutt and Jeff'.
Quote: Andrew Collins @ February 7 2009, 12:07 AM GMTEach to their own, obviously, but it's quite hard to read such a systematic dismantling of a programme I've had such a big hand in. Hey, I'll live. But just to address a couple of points:
I'm not quite sure what the budget has to do with it. You compare the budget to the price of a fridge, which suggests you think it is too low. It's a studio-based sitcom and makes no attempt to disguise that, but it's actually a hell of a lot cheaper to make a "one camera" show like Lead Balloon or The Office, and yet they look more "filmic" and less stagey and perhaps more expensive? Either way, to criticise the lack of budget is a practical rather than a creative complaint so it's difficult to defend: it costs what it costs.
It wasn't commissioned because Lee Mack was a "name", as he was much less well know than he is now when we got the green light, back in 2005, before he'd even hosted They Think It's All Over or been on Jack Dee's Live At The Apollo. Certainly he'd been in The Sketch Show on ITV, but as part of a team, and the BBC gave us the commission based on a pilot we made, not on his celebrity. We are in our third series now, and the BBC simply don't recommission unless they feel the figures are good, or that they've got a critical hit on their hands, or both! Our numbers have been steady throughout, which is why they have made a commitment to the show. We are very grateful for this support. It does seem that a solid number of viewers return to the show.
As for the notion that if a "nobody" had sent in the script it wouldn't have been made - it's an odious hypothetical. There are so many factors that influence whether or not a script is made or not. I can assure you that not all first-draft scripts were accepted and taken to second draft. Some were rejected. This one was accepted - and not because Lee wrote it - he is a co-executive producer, but the other execs and the producer act as quality controllers and sounding boards for all scripts. It was chosen to open the series because it was felt that it introduced the characters well, which would make it inclusive for first-time viewers. Even with the first series, the episodes went out in a different order to the one we planned. If you don't like the show, clearly this won't change your mind, but the scripts go through many rigorous stages before they are filmed, with jokes being changed and added right up until recording (as anyone who attended the audience read-throughs will know: these are designed to test the material with an audience to see if they work. Not many other TV comedies do this, but we do.)
Also, on the plot point about the bath water, if you'd watched to the end, you'd know that Lucy didn't know Lee had been in the bath, so they didn't knowingly share bath water. It doesn't matter, really, as you'd turned off or over.
I feel the comparison with Lab Rats was tenuous too, other than the fact that you didn't like that either. That was certainly not commissioned because of a "name". It was developed from a pilot on BBC Three where "new talent" is nurtured. (Chris Addison is well known to those who see a lot of live comedy, but The Thick Of It is a BBC Four show, with a relatively small, clued-in audience. He's exactly the kind of new talent the BBC should be bringing through, and it is.)
I don't mean this to sound too defensive, I just felt that the main charge about why the programme was commissioned was off the mark.
I return to my original thesis: each to their own. I'm just glad you weren't actually sick.
Now I see why you are a prolific writer!
Didn't see the first two series. Saw the Christmas special thought it was brilliant, have ordered the first two series on DVD. If it helps.