Quote: Timbo @ October 11 2010, 9:58 PM BSTPossibly they were the only people to really get the jokes.
I've heard that levelled at the series before, and it clearly isn't true.
Anyway, why has this thread become about Nathan Barley!
Inn Mates Page 13
Well say what you want about Nathan Barley I have no problems with divided opinion on that, but Inn Mates was poor!
Quote: Adam Singleton @ October 18 2010, 10:36 PM BSTWell say what you want about Nathan Barley
It was wank. 
Quote: chipolata @ October 20 2010, 6:55 PM BSTIt was wank.
You're wank.
Check and mate.
Quote: chipolata @ October 20 2010, 6:55 PM BSTIt was wank.
Well I have seen very few comedy pilots so Barley was easy for me to make the comparison. How about The Services by Peter Kay? Another brilliant comedy pilot, although not turned in to a series, you can see how it helped develop Phoenix Nights, another fantastic comedy. But if your opinion is that Inn Mates was funnier than something created by 2 incredibly funny men (Morris and Brooker) then I guess you are entitled to that - I just can't respect it. I am not particularly fussy about comedy. I love most things that make me laugh; the problem with Inn Mates is it wasn't funny.
Quote: Adam Singleton @ October 21 2010, 5:45 PM BSTWell how about the services by Peter Kay another brilliant comedy pilot although not turned in to a series
Er, yes it was (effectively). 'The Services' was Kay's C4 Comedy Lab show, which was used as the pilot for his series That Peter Kay Thing (it's on the DVD btw). 'The Services' was never designed to be a series/sitcom set within the one location, but to demonstrate a show in which Kay played various characters in mockumentary-style stand alone episodes.
Ahh yes, I forgot about That Peter Kay Thing. That was awesome, I loved the ice cream one and the old guy who delivered papers. I'm sure I loved it all but cannot remember much.
This article by John has ruffled a feather or two with the likes of Sam Bain and Graham Linehan weighing in to the Twitter debate.
Still, it's an interesting perspective from a writer's point of view when the process isn't going smoothly and people are pulling in different directions. I've been there myself and it can be frustrating. The truth is though that nobody ever sets out to make a bad show, not the writer, the execs, the director, nobody. But I think what is universally accepted is that the best shows have a very stiff rudder that keeps the heading true.
The other problem (as I see it, anyway) is there seems to be a palpable nervousness when a new writer is at the helm. And of course there should be, to a degree, because a lot of money and reputation is at stake with any TV show being made. But any parent will know that when a child learns to ride a bike, eventually the stabilisers will have to come off. So off they come and junior pedals away - a little wobbly to begin with but soon he's happily whizzing about and pulling wheelies with the best of them. Whereas the overly-cautious Mum and Dad will keep the stabilisers on for far too long, and junior never gains the confidence that he would have done if he was only allowed to pedal free. In my humble opinion there should be more trust in the new writer's ability. After all, his / her show is being developed because the writing is good.
In Warby's case, his script got to the top of a very large pile. (Over a thousand, I believe.) And out of that pile, a shortlist was drawn-up, and out of that shortlist, Inn Mates was chosen to be made into a pilot. This decision was made by people with years and years of TV comedy experience. So the script was good. It must have been, or it wouldn't have beaten all the other contenders and got to the stage it did. But then things went a bit wrong. I don't know where, I don't know how, but the show lost itself. From what I remember, the show had lots of good ideas but it didn't quite mesh. It was quite naturalistic in parts then oddly surreal in others. So I may be wrong but I got the distinct impression that different people wanted different things from the show, and so the rudder was all over the place.
Maybe I'm over-simplifying things. Only the people who made the show will know what really happened. But it just goes to show how difficult it is to get the ingredients perfect.
Anyroad, I wish John well. He's a nice fella and a very talented comedian to boot. And I hope one day he comes back to TV comedy and writes a smasher.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2013/jun/30/tv-commissioning-sitcoms
Yup!
Quote: Micheal Jacob @ August 5 2010, 4:50 PM BSTJohn met the producer, me and my fellow exec as soon as we knew we had a commission to talk about every aspect of the show. He was involved in discussions about style with the director, and attended casting sessions. He was naturally at the cast readthrough before we began filming, and was on set every day. He also attended the edit. So, as it should be, the writer was involved and contributing throughout.
In the nature of things, though, there are voices involved other than the writer's, and there are essential elements to do with cost and practicality which a writer has to take into account, so it can never be quite the pure vision.
I think John would say he learned a lot from the experience, which I'm sure will feed into future work.
Quote: random @ July 1 2013, 7:15 PM BST
Yeah, what was THAT all about? And why was he so late to speak up? 
He's still a member here isn't he?