It was good as a one off but i doubt a full series would make much sense.
Are You Being Served? 2016 special Page 5
Since when has any commissioning made sense?
Am I living in the past? It just seems like 5 million for a peak slot on Sunday for BBC seems small for me. 11.2 million people watched Bake Off, for instance.
Dreadful and pointless, and badly acted. However I did enjoy hearing that old line by Mr Grainger about meeting his wife and taking the stairs next time. But the only thing that comes to mind, as with the truly rueful Porridge reboot, is why bother?
Quote: Paul Wimsett @ 31st August 2016, 7:58 AMAm I living in the past? It just seems like 5 million for a peak slot on Sunday for BBC seems small for me. 11.2 million people watched Bake Off, for instance.
Yes, you are living in the past. 5 million is astronomic for a modern comedy.
Considering the amount of channels people have available to them I'd say 5m is a very good rating. And you can't compare its ratings to Bake Off because that's one of the BBC's prime shows.
I've never watched the original but was intrigued to see what this was like.
I fell asleep after ten minutes and woke up to find it was still on. Nightmare.
Old, outdated, over the top and unfunny. I can appreciate the BBC wanting to celebrate the sitcom but stepping back in time with a remake is not leaving something where it belongs, in the past with nostalgia.
Seems like the BBC are struggling with comedy. If it wasn't so difficult for new writers to be given a chance maybe there would be some new and interesting shows to enjoy. I know there is the Writersroom submissions but even that seems questionable when one of the staff employed to read and recommend scripts gets through with one of their own.
I'm late to the party, but I didn't laugh once. Yes, Sherrie Hewson and Roy Barrowclough were both excellent, but ... Mathew Horne was a gurning idiot and I wish that he will be forever haunted by the portrait of Young Mr Grace.
What was the point? I liked AYBS at the time, but the 'double entendres' are as subtle as a housebrick in 2016. I do hope that the BBC don't throw any more money at a full series.
Quote: TheBlueNun @ 2nd September 2016, 10:00 PMI'm late to the party, but I didn't laugh once. Yes, Sherrie Hewson and Roy Barrowclough were both excellent, but ... Mathew Horne was a gurning idiot and I wish that he will be forever haunted by the portrait of Young Mr Grace.
What was the point? I liked AYBS at the time, but the 'double entendres' are as subtle as a housebrick in 2016. I do hope that the BBC don't throw any more money at a full series.
Well said, Mathew Horne was shockingly bad.
Well I enjoyed that much more than I thought I would
I preferred it to the original
But I did only watch that when i was young,
So the only things I missed this time around was Wendy Richard's loveliness, and John Inman's brilliance in that role
It wasn't a show I liked that much at the time, but with 3 channels you'd watch any comedy back then
But watching it now I was giggling at all the lame jokes, because the cast did a pretty good job at delivering them in the right way
Yes Mathew Horne was superfluous
Quote: Steve Sunshine @ 3rd September 2016, 1:12 AMI preferred it to the original
Now, have you watched Beane's of Boston?
Quote: Aaron @ 31st August 2016, 12:41 PMYes, you are living in the past. 5 million is astronomic for a modern comedy.
Well there's reports online about Pointless getting 6 or 7 million some weeks, so a remake getting 5 million isn't that much of a shock? Depends how you define "a modern comedy".
Quote: Paul Wimsett @ 3rd September 2016, 12:10 PMWell there's reports online about Pointless getting 6 or 7 million some weeks, so a remake getting 5 million isn't that much of a shock? Depends how you define "a modern comedy".
Pointless isn't a comedy.
As noted in our news report, out of 870 new comedy programmes broadcast on television, AYBS? was the 10th most watched of the year to date, and Porridge the 22nd. Those make them very successful comedy broadcasts indeed. What other genres that haven't been neglected - and so have established viewer bases - attract is pretty irrelevant.
This was simply 'okay', in my books. I hadn't expected much from it upon initially seeing the casting, so at least it beat my expectations.
I was pleasantly surprised by some of the references to the original series (the picture of Harold Bennett's Young Mr Grace; the mention of the '77 film) and I loved the set, which was spot on.
Most of the actors did a fine job with their roles. Roy Barraclough was excellent. I didn't like John Challis as Captain Peacock - his delivery was stilted and he looked to me to be reading his lines from somewhere off-screen. I liked Mathew Horne's character and thought he could make for a good antagonist should the show be commissioned for a full series.
What was lacking for me was a plot. Most 'Are You Being Served?' episodes followed some kind of storyline, however flimsy, and these were usually resolved by the end of the episode. Here, there didn't appear to be one over-arching storyline - presumably we'll see more of the 'old versus new' stuff if it returns for a full series.
Quote: Cicero84 @ 3rd September 2016, 12:36 PMI was pleasantly surprised by some of the references to the original series (the mention of the '77 film)
I didn't notice that! What was it?
Quote: Cicero84 @ 3rd September 2016, 12:36 PMWhat was lacking for me was a plot. Most 'Are You Being Served?' episodes followed some kind of storyline, however flimsy, and these were usually resolved by the end of the episode.
I would have to disagree there. I thought it was thoroughly in keeping with the original show, having only the paper-thinnest of plots around which the action was strung. I completed a rewatch of the entire original series a bit earlier this year, and some of it there really is no discernible story at all, beyond "they come to work".
Quote: Aaron @ 3rd September 2016, 12:46 PMthere really is no discernible story at all, beyond "they come to work".
