Quote: jacparov @ January 31 2009, 10:00 AM GMT

At least it has jokes though, proper jokes, not just embarrassed silences or whatever.

View original

Definitely.

Quote: jacparov @ January 31 2009, 10:00 AM GMT

One of the reasons I like the show is because it has a fair amount of physical gags in it, which always get me, probably because I love the Marx Brothers.

View original

Yes, love physical gags (Tim's slipping in the shop as a great example). For me, it's just such a well-rounded show, with elements of everything I love in a comedy.

'Cept Sid James. But that would be asking a bit...

I found another Lee Mack interview:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2009/jan/31/family-values-lee-mack

Loved the first episode of series 3! Up there with their best. Written solely by Lee Mack, I see. No, it's not the most believable sitcom, but I don't think it's trying to be. It's basically just a half hour laugh generator. Sally and Miranda were the best they've ever been. I wasn't sure about either character at the beginning on series 2, but I think they've settled now. I look forward to the next episode.

I liked this first episode. 'Twas good. I know there was a juvenile element to the plot but thought it was turned into a whole story really well. Nice twists and turns too.

I agree about Sally Bretton being much better than she was last series. She did seem a lot more comfortable this time than last year. Maybe it is to do with the kind of sitcom as she didn't seem too stuttered in The Office, Absolute Power or Green Wing but the sheer amount, speed and importance of the punchlines wasn't as important - maybe she's trying too hard to get it right! Those sitcoms weren't audience-based though, so maybe it's a whole different style for her to work in front of an audience. That said, she seemed more comfortable in this new series so maybe she's getting used to it.

Anyway, looking good for this series again. Very entertaining, which is what it's all about really.

Dan

My series 2 DVD arrived in the post today. woo! It's like a Not Going Out marathon this weekend. Oooh there are 2 discs! I'm gonna settle down to watch it now...

Enjoyed it very much, although had to tell my daughter I didn't understand what was going on as she was asking what on earth had he done in the bath....definitely post watershed stuff, even if to save parental embarassment....

Yes SB has come along, more natural this time, and Miranda Hart was fab - hope she gets more airtime in future episodes.

At last - some decent comedy to watch, and it's on at a reasonable time! Hope Old Guys is good fun too tonight.

Loving the extras on the DVD! The commentaries are all great - love the banter between Lee and Tim. Also, the behind the scenes documentary of the rehearsals is brilliant - really interesting and very funny. Includes a very sweet wrestle between Lee Mack and Miranda Hart!

Quote: jacparov @ January 30 2009, 10:28 PM GMT

Yep very good, at last something to stay in for on a Friday night, I'm too old to keep getting pissed.

View original

You're never too old.

Yes - it's unbelievable and a contrived gag fest - but so what? It's funny.

If you ARE a fan of Not Going Out (as I am), then episode one of this 3rd series will have delivered in spades - entirely as expected. It's interesting though to read the initial first thoughts of those who were less enamoured of this first episode. If you enjoyed NGO then you must surely believe that those who were less than impressed, are from another planet as how on earth can anyone NOT laugh? Eh?

Perhaps it's a case of expecting even higher standards than have hitherto been achieved. A bit like the Barack Obama syndrome - with such a loyal following and high approval ratings, just how on earth is he going to please EVERYBODY? Physical impossibility! Whatever he does, some groups are going to be disappointed and point to the clay feet of the new president. Personally I think there were such (unexpected) high spots of excellence in previous episodes from both series one and two, that it's asking an awful lot to top them straight-out-the-gate in the first show of the new series. I'm talking about this kind of thing from the previous series (Lee under a Chav attack) - http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=1U6-bWv5jzI

There's not a word out of place nor a dull moment - it's sheer genius. (If I'm wrong and anyone thinks this paticular clip is not funny, say so, as I don't think such a person exists.)

And if you haven't seen the previous series or the above clip before and are wondering what all the fuss is about, check out a couple more clips of excellence gathered here, again from the previous series - https://www.comedy.co.uk/tv/not_going_out/videos/

And that's exactly it - you expect the same or better next time, but then you're entering the Barack Obama syndrome; how to please everyone? How to top that clip? Some will be disappointed if they perceive anything new from Lee that is not better or at least it's equal.

However Lee himself in his interview, again on this very site at https://www.comedy.co.uk/tv/not_going_out/interview/lee_mack/
says that he has no problems with the negative comments on here as even those who dislike his show are:
'a bit more clued up' and 'say so in an intelligent way'.

Which is just how I found the post of Blenkinsop on page 15. There's no need to tread lightly amongst the aficionados of NGO Blenkinsop, as your observations are well made, reasoned, and polite, so no need for the:[color=red]"I must run away and hide before the backlash comes . . ."[/color]

Some of the worthy points brought up by Blekinsop: [color=red]"lacks any *natural & believable* qualities."[/color]

I like the setting with the night-life background music when cutting to the watering hole of Lee and Tim, and yes how do they get there? By taxi? On foot, by car? Personally I don't care, but for some there will always be the demand for reassurance of seeing employers, work colleagues, characters setting off to work and the like. They just exist.

And: [color=red]"comes across as contrived and purely a vehicle for the joke rather than having any real narrative value."[/color]

It's the prodigious almost Guinness-book-of-records rush of non-stop gags that misleads you there Blenky, and in fact it's not the case at all. Lee Mack himself would take issue with you as in the Independent interview (see link in Lindyloop's post on page 13) he patently contradicts such sentiments with:

"On a writing day, he starts off with a one-line idea for an episode and breaks it down into scenes and "mini-structures" of dramatic moments, a formula that he feels he has come close to mastering [color=blue]*(actually coming up with the gag is the last thing he does).*"[/color]

More: [color=red]"The bit about the wanking in the bath was just juvenile"[/color]

True enough, but hey ho, there we go. However I think it just about slides under the brave umbrella of total-lack-of-creative-fear that this statement by playwright Richard Bean, makes:

"The problem with our playwrights is that they're all so polite. They daren't say anything about anybody, unless they're slagging off America. What would Joe Orton do if he were alive? He'd go around, find the open wound and pour salt in it."

Wanking in the bath? Well one man's meat is another man's . . . oops one man's meat? Ooh err missus, I better stop there and move on.

More still: [color=red]"Mrs B watched it with me and commented on the "unreal look and feel" of it"[/color]

With this you're on firmer ground as many paid professional critics have picked up on that. Again I don't mind, but do we really want another familiar and comfortable My Family reassuring feel to it? Or, as it's mostly set in a flat do we want more of the now stale flat life of Delboy's or the reassuring upmarket Frasier flat? (Nothing wrong with those.) If so we can't complain there's nothing new and exciting and above all DIFFERENT on TV anymore.

However, it's fine if it's not your cup of tea - truly it is. I hate it when a niche thing becomes mass market, so all the better for us niche aficionados to keep to ourselves.

Oh and Blenky, don't as you say 'run away and hide' - your excellent criticisms will ensure that Lee has to stay on his toes; after all, he knows he's got 'us' in his back pocket - for series four he has to target reeling you, Mrs B and any like-minded lurkers out there, into his back pocket too!

Better finish here - it's time for The Old Guys.

Although I didn't notice it in this episode the one problem I have with NGO is that whenever they enter the flat they leave the bloody door open! No real northerner would do that, think of the heating bill!

Quote: Danny K @ January 31 2009, 9:30 PM GMT

for series four he has to target reeling you, Mrs B and any like-minded lurkers out there, into his back pocket too!

View original

Hi Danny

I read your take on my crit with interest and I must say that you make your points well and fairly.

I'm not really sure why I posted my piece as NGO is by no means a *bad* show by any stretch of the imagination, and indeed as an aspiring writer myself, I have already doffed my cap to the quality of the writing. It's just that in the pantheon of great British sitcoms it seems to me to warrant no more than a footnote.

I suppose I was alluding to the "This is brill" comments I've read, but there seems to be no real reason being given as to why the show is actually brill in others' views. Other than the sheer amount and quality of the gaggery but that's not enough to make a great show (IMO)

Of course it's true that those proffering such opinions do not have to make any justification for them, but I just get the feeling of "The Emperor's new clothes syndrome" in many cases.

I watched EP 1 of series one and felt pretty much the same way that I did when I commented on Friday's show. By Ep 3 of series 1 I had mellowed somewhat but still wasn't hooked enough to watch any more.

I swerved all of series 2 and returned to series 3 to see what, if anything, had changed. I found it to be the same workman-like show that had failed to engage me back in series 1 and for whatever reason, perhaps blind jealously, I felt that I wanted to put my thoughts into the written word.

As I said before, NGO is not a bad show but I just don't get why it is so lauded in some quarters. Its main fault for me is that I don't really care or feel for any of its characters; so much so that if they all fell under the wheels of the Clapham omnibus tomorrow then I don't think that I'd shed much in the way of tears.

And for me I suppose that's *really* what I'm saying. If Terry or Bob, Harold or Albert Steptoe, Spike Dixon or Ted Bovis, Norman Stanley Fletcher or Young Godber, Jim Royle or David Brent were stricken with some illness or befell some tragedy then I'd care. If the NGO characters suffered a similar fate then I really wouldn't give a monkey's chuff.

In summary NGO is a well-crafted piece of comedy but overall it is too cold in its delivery and in the world that it seeks to create.

As one great comic turn used to say:

"First rule of comedy Spike, you gotta have reality" and for me that's just what's missing.

OK it's pretty much established that I love Lee Mack and he can do no wrong in my eyes, same goes for NGO... but when she said "April Fools!!" I really cringed. It just seemed so wrong and I thought lacked a bit of imagination. For me it sort of ruined it a little which is pretty sad as I laughed a lot throughout. But my bum cheeks did tense in embarrassment. Maybe it was just me though?

I think I may just erase that bit from my memory and keep my fingers crossed for something a little less corny next Friday.

I did love the cleaner just coming out with (along the lines of) "You mean you had a wank?"

NGO is funny, it's a gagfest but lacks decent narrative - which is what a sitcom should have. It's got better but episode 1 ended really badly. They built up the storyline and gave us no pay-off with the "it's a joke" line. Sorry that was a cop-out.

Quote: earman2009 @ January 31 2009, 3:16 PM GMT

Written solely by Lee Mack, I see.

View original

With additional material by Simon Evans, Paul Kerensa, Dave Cohen, Oliver Dennis, Simon Griffiths, David Isaac and Liam Woodman.