I thought the 2nd episode was better than the 1st. Hmph.
The Peter Serafinowicz Show Page 9
Quote: CHUNDA @ October 15, 2007, 4:14 PMthis show is certainly causing some comment on this forum,but there's no getting away from the fact that the 1st show was ok, but the 2nd show was very poor indeed...........let's hope he's had his "difficult 3rd album" a bit earlier than normal!
There is some getting away from it, if you dont agree.
LOL - 2nd one was better for me.
Only saw last 10 mins of ep 2 but it was much better on the whole than ep 1 for me. So I'm in the ep 2 camp.
Episode 1 - 5/10
Episode 2 - 3/10
No new writer would ever be able to get this stuff on screen. And it doesn't deserve to be on IMO. TV should be filled with your very best work and it should take ages and ages to write yet look incredibly simple. Our standard is far too low.
Quote: Matthew Stott @ October 14, 2007, 7:58 PMEvery episode of Father Ted, for instance, has the same basic surrounding and set up, but whats contained within is its own episode, new material within a returning format; and Im sure you wouldnt accuse that of just being the same old repetative tosh each week just because the set up is the same.
Can't believe you're comparing this crap sketch show to one of the all time great sitcoms: shooting yourself in the foot methinks?
I don't think this show has gone for any cheap gags or took the viewer on an easy ride. Sure it hasn't challenged convention, but it also isn't just another LB clone.
Peter is a good impressionist and doesn't wear his talents thin, although admittedly some of the sketches can be.
I appreciate the lack of canned laughter and actually have the chance to get the joke myself and laugh at other more subtle jokes, without sounding like a loon.
It's not brilliant, but the second episode, I really enjoyed. It's original and silly enough to just kick back, relax and have a laugh at.
I like it a lot and is the only decent sketch show I've seen since Smack the Pony.
I have heard about this programme and people have been saying that it is no good
but some people say it is good it won't beat catherine tate 
Quote: David H @ October 15, 2007, 11:11 PMNo new writer would ever be able to get this stuff on screen. And it doesn't deserve to be on IMO. TV should be filled with your very best work and it should take ages and ages to write yet look incredibly simple. Our standard is far too low.
That's the industry all over. Once you're in it looks like you can crap on a plate and serve it as Swiss Roll
Quote: Philly Baby @ October 16, 2007, 2:16 PMCan't believe you're comparing this crap sketch show to one of the all time great sitcoms: shooting yourself in the foot methinks?
If you actually read it you would see that im not comparing it in terms of quality, in fact what I was saying had nothing to do with whether the show itself was funny or not.
this show is not funny and a bit boring
interesting mixed views on the Show, I feel that Peter Serafinowicz is very talented. I really enjoyed ep 2 and couldnt help liking Brian Butterfield.
If anyone is interested there are tickets up for grabs on www.myspace.com/bbc2comedy for an exclusive screening of episode 6 on 29th October, London 6.30 pm. There is a Q and A session afterwards also with Peter Serafinowicz and James Serafinowicz.
Quote: jamie jones @ October 16, 2007, 3:09 PMI have heard about this programme and people have been saying that it is no good
but some people say it is good it won't beat catherine tate
I wouldn't say it was that bad.
Quote: Leevil @ October 16, 2007, 2:31 PMPeter is a good impressionist and doesn't wear his talents thin, although admittedly some of the sketches can be.
Did you see the Elvis and The Beatles impressions?
Quote: jamie jones @ October 16, 2007, 3:09 PMbut some people say it is good it won't beat catherine tate
I wish someone would beat Catherine Tate preferably with a blunt object