For a first episode from a young first time writer it had plenty going for it. I laughed quite a few times and a strong cast could cover Amstell's less than stellar acting abilities. Comedies based around families saying daft things is nothing new and needs to distinguish itself better, but I'll watch it again.

I don't buy all this chippy 'more BBC jobs for the boys' stuff on this thread. He's not Dan Snow and his position as a TV host may have given him a foot in the door but how does that guarantee a sit-com commission?

Is it me being chippy? I do not think it is jobs for the boys (certainly not in the Dan Snow sense, though his new Norman Walks series is actually quite good.) But the Beeb is a 'talent' focussed organisation, and this would not have been made without Amstell's participation. Of course money would not have been thrown at it based solely on the Beebs belief in Amstell's star pulling power, but it sure as hell helped. That is not necessarily a bad thing, as Amstell is clearly talented, and was probably allowed more artistic control, than, for instance, the writer of Inn Mates.

Indeed there is actually quite a lot that is good about the show; and there is nothing wrong with having a sitcom about the home life of a comedian - sitcom started that way with Jack Benny, and dozens of comedians have gone down that route since. Even Amstell's limited comic acting ability is not insurmountable. But the juxtaposition of lower middle class suburban domestic sitcom and star comedian vehicle to me felt odd, and I am not sure the right balance has been struck. The domestic sitcom seems to have crowded out the star vehicle, which makes Amstell's presence jar.

Bottom line though is that the show smacks of star ego out of control, because it is supposed to; that is an integral part of the joke. It is all very post modern, and more than a little troubling. But I shall probably give it another go to see if I warm to it.

Don't see what especially makes it post-modern. It's a thin premise, badly written, poorly constructed and inconsistently performed. Whatever the background arguments about the genesis of the show, those faults were (imo) glaring in this first episode.

The show is about him deciding he want to do something more authentic after Buzzcocks, but what he has actually decided to do is this show. I think in his own mind he is attempting something clever and post-modern; whether that is what has been produced is another matter. But I suspect he would be disappointed if we were to discuss the show without discussing his ego and how it has been indulged by the Beeb.

Quote: Aaron @ August 10 2010, 12:38 PM BST

I'm failing to come up with a reason why this has produced such opposed and vehement responses. Quite strange.

View original

I think certain people have decided that it was only made on the basis of Simon Amstell's huge name.

*exercises huge restraint and does not respond*

The Independent were trying to describe it as being like Curb Your Enthusiasm, but I didn't really see that. In the same article, they and Amstell were trying to extol the virtues of anxiety and neurosis in comedy, but, again, I didn't really see that in the show...

Anyway, as I said earlier, I liked it. Interesting to see just how split the BCG crowd is on this. It's like Stewart Lee's Comedy Vehicle all over again!

I'll be honest: I think my live blog comments are the best summary so far.

In an egg: good, with room for improvement.

Look back at my Knowledge and see for yourselves.

Quote: Ben @ August 10 2010, 7:30 PM BST

The Independent were trying to describe it as being like Curb Your Enthusiasm, but I didn't really see that.

View original

I think they must have been just talking about the fact that, as in Curb, Amstell is playing a version of himself; becuase they content certainly wasn't similar.