Wasn't this just a Royle Family rip off that got made because a BBC in-house talent attached his name to it, and then had to play himself because he can't act?
Grandma's House - Series 1 Page 9
Really liked it, very funny; and I liked Amstell and his almost acting!
Wasn't this just a Royle Family rip off that got made because a BBC in-house talent attached his name to it, and then had to play himself because he can't act?
No it was even worse than that...
It had talent from all over ... I don't know why they would all be involved in such dire writing though.
talent there was ended to be read in inverted commas.
It could have been worse, but that was not an enjoyable half hour of sitcom watching for me, have to say. Lame, very pointless, very indulgent, a little self satisfied, or is that just because Amstall can't stop himself from smirking, as someone else rightly mentioned?
Little bits had merit, I thought, but no where near enough to redeem this excercise in self indulgence and miscommissioning. Another hammer blow in the credibility of the BBC, they must put a stop to this inward looking nonsense and think twice about simply giving good sitcom contracts to non sitcom experienced comedians. Very few become really good at it overnight. Just because Cleese and Gervais did, doesn't mean everyone else will, or can. Get off this treadmill, BBC, and look for real sitcom writing talent once again, please! (You have my address already.)
Quote: Alfred J Kipper @ August 9 2010, 11:08 PM BST(You have my address already.)
Probably filed under 'N'.
It would be really helpful if people could stick to being just one person in each thread.
I wanted to like it to spite Kipper but I found it dull and uninspiring. I doubt I'll watch again and I don't think it will do too well ratings wise.
You would have thought that the Beeb might have learnt something from Johnny Vaughan's vanity project.
On a related note...
http://www.chortle.co.uk/news/2010/08/09/11519/jupitus%3A_i_almost_quit_buzzcocks
I don't think Mr Jupitus quite gets the idea of the show. Amstell's "bitching" towards the guests was one of the reasons to watch after Lamarr left.
Hope I'm okay posting a link to a rival comedy website, by the way... 
I wish Jupitas had quit, the unfunny twat.
It was weak rather than terrible, in my humble view. Absolutely nothing new, nothing in the slightest remarkable or original about it. But I suppose I should give the other five episodes a chance to prove me wrong. I was trying to give up drinking on Monday nights but I couldn't sit through this sober again.
I wonder if he had quit, would he have made a Royle Family rip off? Making jokes about a line up of FICTIONAL popstars - but slightly tamer...
Phill Jupitus is a stand up that is clearly disillusioned with Buzzcocks.
My advice based on Amstell's pursuit ... go back to your roots.
Dear oh dear. A shockingly bad opening episode. Writing via the scatter-gun approach, performances (and accents) pitched all over the place, with no set continuity in style. Not funny, of course, but that was almost the least of its problems. What on earth was this trying to be? Perhaps it's all very clever and I'm a dullard, but I get the impression none of those involved really knew what this was all about either.
A big difference between composing witty rejoinders to put-down minor celebrities and writing strong narrative comedy.
Pity, as I was rather hoping/expecting to be impressed by this.
Quote: Joey Moose @ August 9 2010, 11:20 PM BSTOn a related note...
http://www.chortle.co.uk/news/2010/08/09/11519/jupitus%3A_i_almost_quit_buzzcocks
Hope I'm okay posting a link to a rival comedy website, by the way...
It's alright they robbed it from the Guardian anyway.
On the subject of the show: yet another single camera 'gentle comedy' piece along with Rev and that new Dawn French/Alfred Molina thing. Where are all the bold studio sitcoms that the BBC were telling us to write and that it was ushering in?
This was crying out for a studio audience - then they might have stopped it before the end.