The Royal Bodyguard Page 13

The Royal Bodyguard. Image shows from L to R: Colonel Dennis Whittington (Geoffrey Whitehead), Yates (Tim Downie), Captain Guy Hubble (David Jason), Sir Edward Hastings (Timothy Bentinck).

The Royal Bodyguard

Sir David Jason stars as newly promoted Royal Protection Officer Captain Guy Hubble, a man unquestionably totally out of his depth

Avatar

dennispennis123

  • Thursday 2nd February 2012, 1:06am [Edited]
  • United Kingdom
  • 420 posts

Under 3m for a 9pm Monday slot in January is very poor. Mondays are usually one of the most watched nights of the week and Mrs Brown is getting around 5m Under 3m for a 9pm Monday slot in January is very poor. Mondays are usually one of the most watched nights of the week and Mrs Brown is getting around 5m afterwards which should put TRB's performance into context.

It's also a bit misleading by comparing TRB's ratings in January to IWTF and My Family both which aired in the summer when viewing is much lower.

No offence Aaron but there is no way you can call the ratings healthy. It's gone from 8.3m to around 3m in a few episodes. That is very bad indeed. If the BBC feel that the ratings are "respectable" as you call them, then I would expect a recommission but they aren't and the BBC will bury the show and hope it gets forgotten. Even Sir David has admittied it was shit but of course put it more diplomatically.

Avatar

Aaron

  • Thursday 2nd February 2012, 1:26am [Edited]
  • Royal Berkshire, England
  • 68,735 posts
Quote: dennispennis123 @ February 2 2012, 1:06 AM GMT Under 3m for a 9pm Monday slot in January is very poor. Mondays are usually one of the most watched nights of the week and Mrs Brown is getting around 5m Under 3m for a 9pm Monday slot in January is very poor. Mondays are usually one of the most watched nights of the week and Mrs Brown is getting around 5m afterwards which should put TRB's performance into context.

It's also a bit misleading by comparing TRB's ratings in January to IWTF and My Family both which aired in the summer when viewing is much lower.


Comparing any show to the inexplicable hit of Mrs. Brown's Boys is equally 'misleading', I'd argue! There's no denying that The Royal Bodyguard pales in comparison, but a truly poor rating for the show would be far closer to 1m, given that circa 5m MBB comparison. No one's claiming that TRB has done well, but it's not done nearly as badly as some portray.

It may be misleading to compare summer with winter (I don't believe there's that much difference in overall viewership as is sometimes claimed, as an aside, but that's a different discussion), but My Family had the traditional comedy scheduling working in its favour, and In With The Flynns a more suitable timeslot for its style. So, y'know, swings and roundabouts on each of the three.

Quote: dennispennis123 @ February 2 2012, 1:06 AM GMT No offence Aaron but there is no way you can call the ratings healthy. It's gone from 8.3m to around 3m in a few episodes.


You call my stats misleading, then go with that?! Not sure where the 8.3m figure comes from, but I assume it's the first episode? On Boxing Day. They could have broadcast a photograph of a plate of half rotten fish and chips for 30 minutes in that slot and it would have got a broadly similar audience figure. Let's be fair and look at episode 3 onwards, where it kept a steady audience of just under 3 million. Continue to keep in mind the amount of negative coverage the series got, and that's a healthy number.

Anyway, the above is irrelevant: no one's claiming the show was any kind of sleeper, underground smash hit, nor that it met the BBC's hopes; but the bottom line is that the circa 3 million figure and 11% share is within the realm of comparable recommissions, and I'm sure higher than some.

Avatar

Badge

  • Thursday 2nd February 2012, 1:36am
  • London, England
  • 9,490 posts
Quote: Aaron @ February 2 2012, 1:26 AM GMT Anyway, the above is irrelevant: no one's claiming the show was any kind of sleeper, underground smash hit, nor that it met the BBC's hopes; but the bottom line is that the circa 3 million figure and 11% share is within the realm of comparable recommissions, and I'm sure higher than some.


Maybe, but surely not the point? This was a mainstream Christmas-trumped show WITH DAVID JASON IN IT.

Sorry to shout, but if the BBC are anything but severely gutted by the ratings from "return of Del Boy" to their screens then they are nuts. And you, Mr Aaron Brown, are doing this website a disservice by suggesting, or even hinting, that it has been anything other than a terrible ratings flop. Them's the facts.

Of course I don't give a shit about ratings. All I'm interested in is whether it's any good. My verdict? I don't know. I haven't watched it.

Avatar

Aaron

  • Thursday 2nd February 2012, 1:51am [Edited]
  • Royal Berkshire, England
  • 68,735 posts
Quote: Badge @ February 2 2012, 1:36 AM GMT Maybe, but surely not the point? This was a mainstream Christmas-trumped show WITH DAVID JASON IN IT.


Well the original argument, IIRC, was someone disagreeing with the notion that the figures were healthier than the reviews suggested they should be, and that the Beeb paying attention to the former would more likely lead to recommission... So it sort of is the point in the context of this discussion!

But yes, it's still a very fair point that it clearly didn't meet the hopes that the corporation had in it, including that it starred David Jason.

Again, just to be clear, we're not suggesting that the ratings were necessarily objectively impressive or not, but that within the whole context the show's audience figure didn't suffer nearly as much as might've been expected, so a recommission based on those figures is - whilst, yes, unlikely - not to be ruled out. :)

Avatar

dennispennis123

  • Thursday 2nd February 2012, 1:57am [Edited]
  • United Kingdom
  • 420 posts
Quote: Aaron @ February 2 2012, 1:26 AM GMT Comparing any show to the inexplicable hit of Mrs. Brown's Boys is equally 'misleading', I'd argue! There's no denying that The Royal Bodyguard pales in comparison, but a truly poor rating for the show would be far closer to 1m, given that circa 5m MBB comparison. No one's claiming that TRB has done well, but it's not done nearly as badly as some portray.

It may be misleading to compare summer with winter (I don't believe there's that much difference in overall viewership as is sometimes claimed, as an aside, but that's a different discussion), but My Family had the traditional comedy scheduling working in its favour, and In With The Flynns a more suitable timeslot for its style. So, y'know, swings and roundabouts on each of the three.


No 9pm show has ever gone as low as 1m on BBC1. I think the record low is around 1.8/1.9m for weeknights and 1.5/1.6m for weekends.

TRB would probabaly have gone lower if MBB hadnt been following and had fans of that show tune in early and boost the end of TRB. The success of MBB on Mondays also sort of dispels your argument about TRB suffering because its on a Monday and sitcoms havent aired on that night for a while.

You call my stats misleading, then go with that?! Not sure where the 8.3m figure comes from, but I assume it's the first episode? On Boxing Day. They could have broadcast a photograph of a plate of half rotten fish and chips for 30 minutes in that slot and it would have got a broadly similar audience figure. Let's be fair and look at episode 3 onwards, where it kept a steady audience of just under 3 million. Continue to keep in mind the amount of negative coverage the series got, and that's a healthy number.

Anyway, the above is irrelevant: no one's claiming the show was any kind of sleeper, underground smash hit, nor that it met the BBC's hopes; but the bottom line is that the circa 3 million figure and 11% share is within the realm of comparable recommissions, and I'm sure higher than some.


8.35m is the official rating for the Boxing Day episode. I agree that many other shows would have got a high figure on Boxing Day but TRB had over 8m see the first episode, not many shows get the chance to appeal to so many viewers with their first episode. So if we look from episode 3 onwards it stabilised and kept a steady audience. However, under 3m is nowhere near good enough for that slot. And I think that is the crux of the argument, you think 2.8m for that slot is acceptable and I certainly dont.

If you can find any comparable recommisions then please post them but I don't think there any.

Avatar

Badge

  • Thursday 2nd February 2012, 1:57am
  • London, England
  • 9,490 posts

You can't expect me to follow the argument! It's a 13 page thread about a show I haven't seen!

:)

Avatar

Aaron

  • Thursday 2nd February 2012, 1:59am
  • Royal Berkshire, England
  • 68,735 posts
Quote: Badge @ February 2 2012, 1:57 AM GMT You can't expect me to follow the argument! It's a 13 page thread about a show I haven't seen!

:)

:D

(Don't bother - I'm quite sure you won't like it!)

Avatar

sootyj

  • Thursday 2nd February 2012, 8:47am
  • England
  • 51,287 posts

This show is quite awful in my view.

One thing that jumps out at me is David Jason is in his 70s. Hubble if he is a serving military officer at the beginning would be at most in his 50s.

So Jason is playing a character 20 years younger than his age.

Why didn't they just make Hubble a beefeater or a Chelsea Pensioner?

It's the kind of lazy detail. Like when he escaped the boot in a completely unamusing way.

That reflects a show that wasn't only not very funny in my view and completely unoriginal. But also feels unloved by all involved.

nb Aaron's right of course it got a spike on Boxing Day. Noel Edmonds shitting in the Deal or no Deal boxes would get a spike.

3 million is pretty good viewers, so it would appear the audience is part of the problem.

Avatar

3SOCKSMORGAN

  • Saturday 7th November 2015, 2:40pm
  • England
  • 92 posts

I genuinely think this wasn't as bad as everyone made out to be. It wasn't 10 out of 10 but it was a good watch. Still better than the recent comedies which nearly all rely on sex jokes as their main laughs.

Avatar

Paul Wimsett

  • Friday 13th November 2015, 3:08pm
  • Folkestone, United Kingdom
  • 3,394 posts
Quote: Badge @ 2nd February 2012, 1:57 AM GMT You can't expect me to follow the argument! It's a 13 page thread about a show I haven't seen!

Are you sure you don't work for the commissioners? They hadn't seen the show either.

Avatar

Aaron

  • Friday 13th November 2015, 3:26pm
  • Royal Berkshire, England
  • 68,735 posts
Quote: Paul Wimsett @ 13th November 2015, 3:08 PM GMT Are you sure you don't work for the commissioners? They hadn't seen the show either.

No one had. That's how commissioning works.