Gavin & Stacey

I totally agree about the cynical baggage thing, but go to any other comedy forum and that's *all* there is. We should be grateful there's as little as there is here.
 

Well said Zooo. I like to think that we praise and criticise in equal measure the things we like and don't like.
 

It seems to me that anything newly-commissioned tends to get hammered by a lot of the writers on the forum. This, then, smacks of 'a writer scorned'.
However, I have done no analysis on this and it could be a false impression.

 

I totally agree. But heyho.
 

Its mainly only stuff which is lower than the standards we set oursleves. No writer here has criticised the new series of Peep Show because we recognise how talented the writers are. But I agree that it inevitably informs our opinion (I'm being very grown up today...Boobs, bush, minge. Thats better).
 

Well, yes of course, but the trouble is, stuff like My Family, After You've Gone, and dare I say even Two Pints and My Hero are very popular, despite the 'quality' of the actual humour. If it's what the public wants, then it's what the public wants. Less time should be spent complaining and point-blank deriding these shows, and much more time spent appreciating what aspects of them make them so popular! Obviously as a writer one wouldn't want to recreate another show (aside from its popularity perhaps), but surely the first step to commissioning success for a new writer is to work out what the current trends are, and, well not emulate them, but take them into account?
Well that made sense to me anyway. Hmph.

Mini-rant over.
 

I agree with you Aaron. I was just trying to explain why sometimes we criticise. I don't think I did it very well. But as a rule I think you should be positive unless something really really annoys you. Because being flippant is stupid and can annoy people, then you're arguing for/against something you don't really feel that strongly about. (I'm being grownup again...pants, bum and bugger [not instrcuctions btw])
 

Very wise words tonight!
 

When you're as old as me you remember stuff that really was good (Yawn yawn).

A lot of stuff seems so lazy and just gets littered with swear words for a few extra laughs. (who said Boring old git?)
 

I'm getting that already David. I'm longing for the glorius days of Britpop. What will it be next 'those were the days George Bush, Iraq and Terrorism.'
 

I think if something is good it will get praised, if its below standards it will get criticised, that's fair I say.

I don't dislike every new commissioned series, when Ideal firs started a couple of years ago I really liked that and still do. Same with Peep Show, The Thick Of It, Early Doors.

It's just that we get more bad comedies than good comedies, so expect more complaining. And just because a show appeals to some people doesn't mean that you have to pretend to yourself that maybe it is actually good.


 

I just try to give my honest opinion. I'm passionate about writing and comedy itself. I think it's good that we pull apart a new script and analyse it to see what works, what doesn't, what's cheap and what's quality.

For a bad example; My dad hates those Builders From Hell type shows, because it gives everyone else a bad name, making everyone think their all cowboys, my dad, who is actually a gardener, which they do feature, gets concerned that it will effect his business.

My point being that we care about our business, we don't want British comedy to be a laughing stock(bit of irony for you there) We want to produce quality and we'll jump to the defence when obviously poor shows get produced because it's the safe thing to do.

Here's a bad metaphor: Would you rather buy the supermarket brand or the better quality named brand?
 

Ideal is really good because -

A) It's an original and slightly dangerous theme
B) It's well written
C) It's well acted

Not many other new series can boost all 3. Just B & C would be a start.
 

The problem with comedy (and the good thing) is that it is so subjective. However, this means that when you criticise a show that others like it will be seen as cynicism because the other person can't see why you don't like it. When you agree with someone you can relax knowing that you both have excellent taste in comedy.

Brushing off contrary opinion as sour grapes is easy unless it's a show that you personally dislike, then does it suddenly become considered opinion? I enjoy finding out why people like or dislike a show. I think differences just mean that there's another reason to celebrate individuality, rather than a reason to get mad at each other.

My main gripe was derived from the writer's own comment about the origin of the series. Ask yourselves this question:

How can an executive tell from a half sheet of A4 that describes a different scenario to the one that the executive wants (with it's main premise being quote 'a wedding in which nothing much happens') that it's comedy gold? How does he then send the writers a reply that says go write 6 episodes of a different series?

Does the fact that the 1/2 page sheet of vague description come from 2 known names in the ascendancy have something to do with it? Would that same sheet of vague ideas have generated the request to write a series on a different premise if it had come from you or me?

Be honest.


To counter the earlier claim that the executive 'saw genius' in the idea, he clearly didn't. He told them to go away and write something different. So what he saw on the paper wasn't brilliant, or he'd have said 'write that' instead.

If we really believe that a vague idea gets such a response through talent alone, why are we wasting our time writing complete pilots? Just send off the vague idea and win a commission writing an idea that the producer suggests instead.

Whether the show is good or bad is personal opinion but bear in mind that when you have the Beeb and Baby Cow involved it's going to end up slick because of their input. For an example of how creative input along the line can lift a script, look at the Office. As a script alone it died. No one saw potential in it. It took a pilot to make the rejected script come alive. When everyone got involved the end-result was way above the script. There are plenty of examples where the reverse happened but having the Beeb and Baby Cow involved is going to let a script reach max potential.
 

I did read somewhere at an award do Steve Coogan said to Ruth Jones, "You scrub up well, do you want to play my wife in my new series?" That series was the one he did to do with pets, name escapes me.

I watched the two episodes online and it was what I come to expect. It meandered along in a quite harmless way but there were no laughs and everything seemed to go as planned. Not really a comedy IMO. I didn't bother watching Ep 3 but if he's proposing in Ep 2 they're going at a brisk pace.

Some of the scenes like where he was doing a pub quiz, what did that tell us? The main characters barely spoke to each other. The scene about the sunglasses and the spot was first draft stuff I thought.