Admin - Pilot

Quote: ContainsNuts @ May 13 2008, 12:22 PM BST

Well that's wrong because I haven't given a favourable view of the show at all, in fact I haven't given any yet. I have a favourable view that someone on here made a break through and deserved less bluntness. You can read what people have posted to see what I mean.

View Original

Ok, fair enough. I still think that people have been pretty fair in comparison to what they could have said, but I suppose we'll have to disagree.


Either way, the one thing I think everyone has agreed on is that it's good to see a new writer given a chance, and best of luck in future.
 

Sorry to say but I didn't really enjoy it. A couple of moments where I chuckled but that was it. I thought Jessica Hall's performance as the pregnant girl stood out above the rest of the cast though. But it's good see someone having success.

By the way, does anyone know or David himself whether he sent the script to Channel K through their website at all? Because I see they allow submissions.

Quote: Seefacts @ May 13 2008, 11:37 AM BST

Well, giving back slaps all round is just as damaging and very patronising.

View Original

You don't go in the critique forum much do you

Maybe some of the responses are born of frustration rather than jealousy - i know i was dying for this to be good. If it had been it would have been clear proof that there is a way into TV for us "nobodies"...so i had high hopes - which where dashed because it was poor. I also have an issue with this current trend for childish adult humour in TV so i was doubly gutted that this was full of that too.

Had it been good i'd have been happy to have liked it.

Firstly, well done David for getting a pilot made! A HUGE congratulations (you must be walking on air right now).

Secondly, the pilot did have a few teething problems (as others have pointed out) but the bottom line is that it has an array of interesting characters, and certainly potential for future episodes.

How many sitcom pilots have been fantastic? Not many; most series take a couple of episodes to warm up. I hope the Beeb gives our David a chance to explore these characters further.
 

What people on here criticise is the script. When somebody comes on here and says they've had a commission we're all delighted for them. It's great news. But you're judged on your work.

You see David Renwick in one corner of the room and Susan Nickson in the other, what springs to mind? Their work.

Quote: David H @ May 13 2008, 3:48 PM BST

What people on here criticise is the script.

View Original

And the BBC Commissioning Priorities.
And the Casting.
And the 'MA scriptwriting course at Salford Uni'.
And some other stuff (probably).
 

Why are people upset that theres been some bad reviews about this show on here? Just because hes a member doesnt mean anyone should lie, or pretend; if they dont like it then thay dont like it; it would be a bit pathetic if people tip toed around. I havent watched it yet, so dont know if its any good or not, but if I dont end up liking it then I should be able to say so; why shouldnt I? I dont see any bitterness on this thread, or any overly spiteful remarks; no more so then what people hand out to any other show they dont like, so to call it jealosy is just plain wrong.
 

I watched it online last night and whilst it's not ground breaking stuff I found some of it amusing. I would certainly like to see a series made and see the characters develop.


Also I must be well fick cos most people on this thread said they saw the cock joke a mile off. Well I didn't. But you're right, they didn't need the "that looks like a cock" comment because the drawing told us that. Less is more etc.

Quote: Matthew Stott @ May 13 2008, 6:14 PM BST

Why are people upset that theres been some bad reviews about this show on here? Just because hes a member doesnt mean anyone should lie, or pretend; if they dont like it then thay dont like it; it would be a bit pathetic if people tip toed around. I havent watched it yet, so dont know if its any good or not, but if I dont end up liking it then I should be able to say so; why shouldnt I? I dont see any bitterness on this thread, or any overly spiteful remarks; no more so then what people hand out to any other show they dont like, so to call it jealosy is just plain wrong.

View Original

Can you please read this thread properly before saying 'Just because hes a member doesnt mean anyone should lie, or pretend', no one said you should lie or pretend, I've said a few times that you should be as honest as you like. People are missing the point.
 

Quote: ContainsNuts @ May 13 2008, 6:51 PM BST

Can you please read this thread properly before saying 'Just because hes a member doesnt mean anyone should lie, or pretend', no one said you should lie or pretend, I've said a few times that you should be as honest as you like. People are missing the point.

View Original

I read it properly, people were saying others shouldnt tell it like they saw it, but to water it down because hes a member and we should be supportive. If you say people should be honest, then that means, um, being hones doesnt it? Which means that if someone thinks its shit, they can say 'I thought it was shit'. No one on here is under any obligation to water that down to spare a members feelings. So there.
 

Who's a member? I wasnt listening.
 

Mathew, what ContainsNuts meant was that people should give balanced critiques, rather than vague and broad smackdowns. If you haven't been in a formal creative environment you might find that difficult to comprehend. In all honesty, much of the criticism on here does seem quite knee-jerk and ill considered.

Quote: manchester's trendy chorlton @ May 13 2008, 7:47 PM BST

In all honesty, much of the criticism on here does seem quite knee-jerk and ill considered.

View Original

Not that that's ever happened around here before.
 

Quote: Matthew Stott @ May 13 2008, 7:00 PM BST

I read it properly, people were saying others shouldnt tell it like they saw it, but to water it down because hes a member and we should be supportive. If you say people should be honest, then that means, um, being hones doesnt it? Which means that if someone thinks its shit, they can say 'I thought it was shit'. No one on here is under any obligation to water that down to spare a members feelings. So there.

View Original

Yeah well I'm glad I don't know you in real life if you go around telling people they are shit. I was just saying we could be a little more respectful to someone in our group. Saying something is plain shit is just disrespectful, its beyond what you need to say to a person who is part of this crowd. What's wrong with 'not funny'. I thought a writer would appreciate a little kindness from others, I was wrong about some people here. In fact I was wrong about here - full stop.

Quote: manchester's trendy chorlton @ May 13 2008, 7:47 PM BST

Mathew, what ContainsNuts meant was that people should give balanced critiques, rather than vague and broad smackdowns. If you haven't been in a formal creative environment you might find that difficult to comprehend. In all honesty, much of the criticism on here does seem quite knee-jerk and ill considered.

View Original

That's the thing, he is a creative and done some good stuff, I thought people saying so would mean something.
 

Quote: ContainsNuts @ May 13 2008, 7:53 PM BST

Saying something is plain shit is just disrespectful, its beyond what you need to say to a person who is part of this crowd. What's wrong with 'not funny'.

View Original

So again, if Susan Nickson was a member...?