Quote: James Cotter @ January 12 2011, 1:35 PM GMT

Walliams and Lucas are not making fun of racist, sexist or Asian stereotypes. There playing characters with different ethnic origins and sexual orientations as these are some of the people you would see in a airport. And describing something as Chav comedy makes you the one putting the 14 odd million who watched episode one into the chav bracket.

View original

It's called target audience, James. And they don't even play those characters very well. Plus the 'comedy' and writing just aren't funny. The whole point of a gag is you don't see it coming but this is as transparent as a pane of glass. The only characters of any note are the husband and wife pilots. Might have worked 10-15 years ago but they don't realise thet rest of us have moved on.

Quote: bob4apples @ January 12 2011, 6:24 PM GMT

It's called target audience, James. And they don't even play those characters very well. Plus the 'comedy' and writing just aren't funny. The whole point of a gag is you don't see it coming but this is as transparent as a pane of glass. The only characters of any note are the husband and wife pilots. Might have worked 10-15 years ago but they don't realise thet rest of us have moved on.

View original

Not what the BBC think and I think they've got a little more knowledge of what is and what isn't funny. And the 14 million people who watched episode one. A chav audience is not what you would call a target audience. It's a type of people not a target audience which would be arranged in demographics or social grades such as A, B and C1.

bob4apples 0 - 0 James Cotter

Quote: don rushmore @ January 12 2011, 6:51 PM GMT

bob4apples 0 - 1 James Cotter

View original

Quote: Schwen @ January 12 2011, 2:08 PM GMT

I don't like you James Cotter, you seem to be awfully misguided

View original

Hey, lay off the Cotter.

There's a pecking order round here, get to the back of the queue.

Quote: James Cotter @ January 12 2011, 6:42 PM GMT

Not what the BBC think and I think they've got a little more knowledge of what is and what isn't funny. And the 14 million people who watched episode one. A chav audience is not what you would call a target audience. It's a type of people not a target audience which would be arranged in demographics or social grades such as A, B and C1.

View original

Given Little Britain's long run and the BBC's overhyping to saturation point of CFWM's first episode on Christmas Day, the ratings should be high. But you forgot to mention episode 3 got less than half those ratings (under 6.5 m). And with generally poor reviews from the 'quality' papers, it's not difficult to see who they are trying to sell this to.

bob4apples 15 James 1

CFWM WTF

A new Welsh comedy

Quote: bob4apples @ January 13 2011, 1:28 AM GMT

(under 6.5 m).

View original

Which is still an amazing figure for a sketch show.

Quote: Matthew Stott @ January 13 2011, 8:55 AM GMT

Which is still an amazing figure for a sketch show.

View original

Home > Forums > Sitcoms > Come Fly With Me

based on an original idea by Tim Walker

Dan

Quote: bob4apples @ January 13 2011, 1:28 AM GMT

it's not difficult to see who they are trying to sell this to.

View original

As many people as possible, I would imagine; it's a big mainstream show on BBC One from the writer/stars of one of the biggest comedy hits of the last decade.

Quote: swerytd @ January 13 2011, 8:58 AM GMT

Home > Forums > Sitcoms > Come Fly With Me

based on an original idea by Tim Walker

Dan

View original

I've watched all three episodes so far, even going to the length of tracking the 2nd down on iPlayer (God help me) in the interests of giving this a fair crack. I'll probably stick it out with the remaining three also, although I'm not entirely sure why. Perhaps I'm a glutton for punishment.

In my opinion this show is weak and is pretty much a straight follow on to L B. The sketches and characters would sit quite comfortably as inserts into any episode of latter day L B.

As others on here and in the press have commented, the spoof airport documentary as the show's vehicle seems oddly out of date too, and some of the characters, in particular the xenophobic Immigration Officer, are laughable but for the wrong reasons. The moustache gag was Cringe City Arizona as was the previous 'gag' in an earlier episode where the passport photo differed from the real life image of the suspect, in stupid details like for example the photo was in monochrome. It could be argued that these are whimsical and silly jokes but to my mind they are just infantile and I wouldn't feel happy about having let them into a final edit of the show.

There is certainly mileage in highlighting the xenophobia that undoubtedly exists in Britain, but I for one would like to see it done with a bit more imagination and clever scripting.

I always like Lucas & Walliams when they appear on other shows out of character, and I loved L B on radio and the 1st TV series, but now I feel they need a different shop window to sell their comedy wares. Maybe a decent sitcom?

But hey, what the hell would I know? I'm just a paying punter.

Considering that Lucas, Walliams and other writers have had a few years to put together a follow-up to Little Britain, this new comedy series seems pretty feeble and unimpressive, and simply goes over old territory from LB to watered-down, Law-of-Diminishing-Returns effect. I welcome the lack of shock tactics thus far, however history tells us that this may be the team's final 'ace up their sleeve' as the series progresses/regresses, as after the wafer-thin characterisations have been established, there is not a lot of comedy potential to milk, and I'm expecting less than 'cup-of-human-kindness' unpleasantness over the upcoming weeks.

This show has the backing of a conglomerate empire ---Auntie Beeb to you--- and it's a mark of the ability of low-quality writing and concepts able to get substandard fare on screen that reflects the low standards of UK comedy at this point in time.

Pointless, by-the-numbers formulae that is more akin to what LWT were putting out in 1969: the makers of this show have only the 'saving grace' of plying on shock-tactics in the last half of the series (at least that's what I'm expecting) to make their work appear 'contemporary'.

Not so much disappointing as expected and 'required' by the BBC comedy dept.

Quote: Matthew Stott @ January 13 2011, 8:58 AM GMT

As many people as possible, I would imagine; it's a big mainstream show on BBC 1 from the writer/stars of one of the biggest comedy hits of the last decade.

View original

I'm referring to the type of audience they are aiming at. The ratings have halved after 3 episodes and at this rate by episode 6 it will around 1-2m. Would such a drop be acceptable for any mainstream show? And I suppose critical acclaim shouldn't come into it even though the reviews have been bad.

And it just goes to show that writers/stars of big comedy hits can make lame, substandard follow-ups. Wouldn't be the first time.

Quote: bob4apples @ January 12 2011, 6:24 PM GMT

The whole point of a gag is you don't see it coming

View original

No. The whole point of a gag is that it makes you laugh. Whether you predict it or not is irrelevant.

Quote: Aaron @ January 13 2011, 2:47 PM GMT

No. The whole point of a gag is that it makes you laugh. Whether you predict it or not is irrelevant.

View original

Couldn't have said it better myself Aaron.