Quote: Chappers @ 4th March 2019, 10:38 PMI understand the character and what they're trying to do but really the laughs were few and far between.
Agree
I was trying to laugh but didn't get as many opportunities as I was hoping for
The last five minutes were more like the old AP, so I will give it one more look next week; but am very disappointed in it overall - where's the laughs?
I don't wish to alarm fellow BCG members but it appears we might have slipped into some sort of parallel universe.
This morning's Independent gives last night's episode (Episode 2) a 5-star review and describes it as "exquisitely crafted comedy".
This morning's Telegraph gives last night's episode (Episode 2) a 5-star review and describes it as "another precision-engineered pastiche".
Seriously folks, something sinister is going on here.
Why, only an uncultured buffoon would be unable to see the Emperor is wearing new clothes. Of course, I haven't watched it yet, but I already know it is an exquisitely sublime riposte to all burdensome banalities of breakfast TV. Anyone who can't see this is a masterpiece is a fool.
I started watching episode 2 yesterday and turned off halfway through, bored. Then I watched Fleabag - like the contrast between night and day.
Quote: beaky @ 5th March 2019, 9:33 AMI started watching episode 2 yesterday and turned off halfway through, bored. Then I watched Fleabag - like the contrast between night and day.
Loved the second episode, plenty of hilarious moments I felt. Where as Fleabag, I really can't see the obsession with that show.
Do you think it's because it's taking the piss out of TV/Media and the (journos) don't want it to look like they don't get the joke? Or are they so young they didn't ever get to see the vastly superior original??
It genuinley bemuses me.
Quote: Lazzard @ 5th March 2019, 10:08 AMDo you think it's because it's taking the piss out of TV/Media and the (journos) don't want it to look like they don't get the joke? Or are they so young they didn't ever get to see the vastly superior original??
It genuinley bemuses me.
My sentiments exactly.
Quote: jsg @ 3rd March 2019, 10:53 PMIt got a lot of 5 star reviews, and most people really liked it. If that weren't the case you'd have a point
This is a case, yet again, of reviewers being far out of step with the public. It appears to have ended up being a show solely for the bubble.
I think it does improve with a second viewing though.
The unnoticed audience accident was funny if a little Hammy in its execution.
Quote: Steve Sunshine @ 6th March 2019, 12:12 AMI think it does improve with a second viewing though.
I found that as well, with both episodes so far. It's a bit too rich, and deceptively fast-paced, to notice everything first time
Apparently, Episode one attracted 3.4 million viewers.
Episode two attracted barely 2 million.
The sad thing is that so many people wanted this to be good and they gave it more chances than most and it still fell on its arse.
The reason? AP fans know their character far too well to settle for this , most could have extrapolated a script from his hey day and come up with better one themselves.
Its a very strange feeling when you watch a show and you don't want to pan it and are left feeling you personally could have done more to 'Help ' it.
AP deserves better than this.
Quote: Teddy Paddalack @ 6th March 2019, 9:19 AMThe sad thing is that so many people wanted this to be good and they gave it more chances than most and it still fell on its arse.
The reason? AP fans know their character far too well to settle for this , most could have extrapolated a script from his hey day and come up with better one themselves.
Its a very strange feeling when you watch a show and you don't want to pan it and are left feeling you personally could have done more to 'Help ' it.
AP deserves better than this.
Couldn't have put it better. Were we all expecting too much?...............Nah, it simply wasn't funny - end of.
Don't think the girl is bringing much to the party either.
Maybe the difference is in the setting. Alan in a Travel Lodge was more himself, more relatable. It was a three dimensional performance. In this he and his co-presenters are two dimensional, stilted. Too much of the comedy is about presenting , something the critics may find easier to relate to, but not so for Joe public.
