Quote: Micheal Jacob @ July 29 2013, 9:11 PM BSTIt's three well-defined characters
It really didn't come across like that in the first episode. Granted, one of them looks like a Bill Oddie/ Grahame Garden 'cut n shut' which helps distinguish him from the two, tall, interchangeable simpletons. But apart from that it's just three blokes being zany and doing puns. Very little 'character' in that.
Quote: Micheal Jacob @ July 30 2013, 9:21 AM BSTSurely Matthew is the one who tries to be grown up but fails,
He doesn't seem to be trying very hard if I'm honest.
Well, I guess I see things in it that others don't, just as people see things in Count Arthur Strong that completely pass me by. Nice to have a broad range of comedy to choose from and debate in the knowledge that no view is definitive.
Well, I'm glad 2 of them died at the end of the episode - that should put an end to that!
But seriously, I thought it was pretty poor. I just don't understand why people would stick up for this show? None of the characters were likeable and the jokes were poor. The audience who laughed at every line must have been on drugs.
People constantly talk about how there's not been a good British sitcom for years and the amount of excuses as to why this is shit is a reason why. We're too eager to give something shite a chance or say that we might not quite be the intended audience. The bottom line is that this was very bad.
Maybe 1 in 10 BBC Three sitcoms are ok... this wasn't one of them.
Yes trashing every new sitcom that is not an instant classic is the way to help comedy thrive! Sheeesh!
If people had not been prepared to give shows that were a bit shite a chance, then OFAH, Blackadder and Red Dwarf, to name but a few, would not have got past the first series.
Would you say this was half as good as any of the first episodes of the series' you posted?
Being unable to say whether my powers of foresight are the equal of my powers of hindsight, I feel unable to answer that question.
It's very BBC Three-ish, that's for sure. It had a few laughs, but just like the rest of the channel's "hip" comedy, it didn't really sit well with me.
I think this is the shitest BBC Three comedy there has been.
Quote: george roper @ July 30 2013, 7:52 PM BSTI think this is the shitest BBC Three comedy there has been.
It's a contender.
And I think people do give comedies a chance - that's why the classics become the classics but if you hate sushi it ain't going to drastically change having a second one.
Quote: george roper @ July 30 2013, 7:52 PM BSTI think this is the shitest BBC Three comedy there has been.
You are completely wrong, but go on.
I tried to find the viewing figures for the first episode but all I discovered was that Family Guy makes up the entire top ten for BBC Three.
Thank God the BBC don't have to chase viewing figures and can allow shows such as Badults (ropey as it is) a chance to get to the screen instead of just putting Family Guy on 40 hours a week.
The Twitter reviews make pleasing reading that very very few are getting this - 99% are horrified and rightly so.
Quote: Scartledge @ July 30 2013, 4:44 PM BSTWe're too eager to give something shite a chance or say that we might not quite be the intended audience.
Really? That's what you find? I find the complete opposite. I think there are way more people who just want to bash everything. In fact one of the comments on this thread was posted DURING episode 2.
As for Twitter, it's just not possible to judge how many comments are genuine or just trolls being vile for the sake of it on there.
Quote: Ringo @ July 30 2013, 10:53 PM BSTReally? That's what you find? I find the complete opposite. I think there are way more people who just want to bash everything.
I definitely find the same.
