With reports that there is to be no third series of Extras, only a final Christmas episode.
What’s your view, is it better to run with a successful sitcom and risk “it’s not as good as it was” criticism or move on to new projects.
Fawlty Towers is the classic example of the quit while your ahead, where as the like of Only Fools seem to find it’s feet later on in it’s run.
Your views and examples
I quite like the 'don't-flog-it-to-death' attitude of a lot of comedy shows.
The Office was wrapped up nicely, I thought. Phoenix Nights sits nicely at two series (though a third wouldn't go amiss), as did Fawlty Towers.
There's only so much you can do with a lot of series and they do get a little strained. Also, from a writing point of view, you get so involved in the process, living and breathing those characters for a good year for each series, that it's nice to leave them behind I'd have thought.
This of course means we end up with the problem such as shit like Bo' Selecta having more episodes than either Fawlty Towers or The Office, but what can you do...
Dan
Even though the sitcom I'm currently writing is with the view of having five series, I understand where Ricky G is coming from. I was never expecting a third series of Extras anyway. I thought the final episode of series two wrapped things up quite nicely actually.
i liked extras but i think they should also quit while they are ahead,at this satge i think it would be better to write another classic rather than risk ruining one.
If they could recreate what made series 1 so great then I think there's plenty of mileage left.
I watched last night, and as good as 'Extras' is, I found that in the main the way the charcters were acting and reacting, it was just like watching 'The Office'. Perhaps it's time RG stretched himself because sometimes I get the feeling that no matter what he does, and as funny as he is, he's only playing a comic version of himself.
I really thought they started to hit their stride in the second series. They relied less on the guest names and started to develop Maggie and the Agent. I think they should do a third series with a view to wrapping it up rather than blowing it all off in an Xmas special.
While some sitcoms do go on to long, I think hitting 2 series and quitting shows a lack of bottle and possibly a lack of talent. Plenty of shows have had long runs of 5 or more series without degradation.
As a big fan of the show, I have to say "BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO" to Gervais.
I see where Ricky is coming from but I also don't think doing a show for longer is that bad an idea. If a show is really good and extremely popular what's wrong with making more? OK, we might end up with several episodes at the end being dodgy but what if we got another 2 or 3 full series out of it first before it went downhill. I for one would not mind another 12 episodes of Fawly Towers if it meant getting a couple of mediocre ones at the end. With all the crap being thrown onto our screens from the very FIRST episode surely this is a small price to pay for a little more quality comedy?
Quote: Baumski @ March 19, 2007, 1:49 PMI watched last night, and as good as 'Extras' is, I found that in the main the way the charcters were acting and reacting, it was just like watching 'The Office'. Perhaps it's time RG stretched himself because sometimes I get the feeling that no matter what he does, and as funny as he is, he's only playing a comic version of himself.
Ermmm...
Quote: Rick Skelton @ March 19, 2007, 5:31 PMI really thought they started to hit their stride in the second series. They relied less on the guest names and started to develop Maggie and the Agent. I think they should do a third series with a view to wrapping it up rather than blowing it all off in an Xmas special.
Really? All the commentary I've read has said the EXACT opposite - too much reliance on guests and using Maggie purely to set up embarassment for Andy. Interesting.
i think as soon as you do a clip episode you should be taken off the air lazy lazy writers. As for extras I cant get into it Andy is to mmm I will think of a clever word and edit it in later. Any way leave em wanting more is the way to do then your next project has guaranteed rating
When I get my sitcom commissioned 
. I think I'll only make a few series, because I'll get bored and want to do something new and fresh.
Quote: Leevil @ March 19, 2007, 9:14 PMWhen I get my sitcom commissioned
When it get commissioned, will you tell us all how it’s going or will you be too busy living it up with your celebrity pals to bother with your old friends at BSG. 
Only Fools is amazing as it lasted so long with mainly one writer in John Sullivan. And it certainly got better as it went along. In the US team writers can extend a sitcom for many years but Gervais and Merchant (remember there are two) are the only writers of the Office and Extras.
I think Extras became too templated. Taking the mickey out of the celebs all the time. There is only so much you can do with it.
As for Gervais changing his style of comedy, thats a joke in its self. Should Jack Dee be more like Lee Evans? Gervais is a master of behaviourial/reality comedy which i think is great as you can relate to it, unlike those sitcoms that are just full of gags.
Quote: Britcom Barry @ March 19, 2007, 10:29 PMWhen it get commissioned, will you tell us all how it’s going or will you be too busy living it up with your celebrity pals to bother with your old friends at BSG.
Yeah I think I'll start hanging around with Johnathan Ross and David Bowie.
Young ones, fawlty towers, spaced, office, black books etc. All very short, all very sweet. I have to say I dont like it when shows drag on, but then again you should go as far as the premise will let you stretch it out without losing quality. Some shows do get better later into their run, for instance i thought the men behaving badly reached its peak in the fifth series. If you want a good argument for fewer but higher quality seasons, we need look no further than the simpsons. Im glad that gervais and merchant know the limits of their shows.
