In my mind, that's not a million miles away from being scripted. If they've sat down, thrown around some ideas, improvised and improved the ideas until they're satisfied with the product , rehearsed then repeated and polished this over several takes, it's certainly not ad-libbed is it ?
What does it matter anyway ? My point was that it some people appeared to think it was just two guys sitting down for a meal and having an off-the-cuff conversation with the camera rolling. It doesn't detract from my enjoyment of the programme either way.
I don't think you know what a script is. Bear in mind that there are people in this thread who might work in TV production.
What does it matter anyway? It matters when people post statements which are false, but made out to be an obvious truth with no evidence.
They were certainly annoying at times. After the maniacal laughter last week, the PA's gushing oh wow, wow, wow, amazing, oh wow, reactions to what she was served grated.
Because they are only playing versions of themselves. Once the shoot finished every day, they (presumably) went back to being "normal" Steve Coogan and Rob Brydon.
It's the same as those complaining about them having a jolly, eating expensive meals and staying in 5 star hotels. We don't know how long was taken to shoot them having their meals, I doubt they could really enjoy them. They were staying in some beautiful places, but that was a perk of filming in such a wonderful location.
It's very clever how the lines were blurred. Even some of those praising the show appear to believe that Steve and Rob were just ad-lIbbing away effortlessly. It wasn't totally scripted, but a good deal of it was. We don't know how many takes it took to get things right. It was filmed just like any other comedy series, the unique thing about the programme is that it managed to convince a lot of people that it was something else entirely.
According to an interview with Brydon, they can end up eating each course up to three times in order to get enough material for the final cut. Not much fun, I think but perhaps it will mollify the Daily Telegraph readers, who seem to under the impression that the exercise is a free holiday at the licence-payer's expense.
The comments under the Telegraph review from its notoriously curmudgeonly readers are hilarious.:D
I was initially surprised by many of comments here, then remembered that for most DT readers, jeremy clarkson is the funniest man alive, and that any money not spent on blowing up caravans or insulting the local population is a waste of the licence fee or" tax as they should call it"
They were certainly annoying at times. After the maniacal laughter last week, the PA's gushing oh wow, wow, wow, amazing, oh wow, reactions to what she was served grated.
Yes.
Any new character in the show were there, not to bring new ideas or perspectives, but to simply fawn over Coogan's and Brydon's hilarious impressions.
The comments under the Telegraph review from its notoriously curmudgeonly readers are hilarious.:D
Yeah, there is a real arrogance in some of the comments, fortunately DS only has a handful of these loud mouths who have the logic of "I don't find it funny so it isn't".
This is a real Marmite series - I am one of those who think that Brydon and Coogan are capable of much better work than this. It was amusing in parts, but not enough for me.
Where was the plot? The climax with "Joe", Coogan's supposed son, arriving was just another non-event.
Not sure I got the last episode, if there was anything to get. I did feel sorry for the teenage son though, who was alternately ignored / taken up when conversation flagged. Coogan's attempts to include him couldn't withstand his temptation to banter with Brydon (Banter with Brydon, now there's a show ). In the end he took his son off onto a boat to go swimming, like the only way he could focus on someone else was to get physically away from Brydon. So Brydon was portrayed as less cuddly, with an almost sinister obsessive side to him, and Coogan was the 'regular bloke' trying to connect with his son.
I didn't find this as good as the first series but still mostly enjoyed it. There was one episode, the Rome one I think, which was pretty rubbish and very thin on laughs (and too many mentions of the poets) but the rest have been good. I completely understand why some people haven't liked it at all but for me it's a good and highly original mix of banter, characterization, impressions, subtle drama about middle-age ennui, and travelogue. It helps a lot if you already like Coogan and Brydon of course.
I expect they could get away with another series, although they'd have to keep the impressions fresh (although I will never tire of Hugh Grant )
Can anyone tell me who the "Irish gameshow host" was supposed to be? It's the only impression I didn't get.
Can anyone tell me who the "Irish gameshow host" was supposed to be? It's the only impression I didn't get.
I think it's meant to be Henry Kelly.
I really enjoyed the series, although I don't think it's quite as funny as the first one. They tried to cram too much into it, so you didn't really hear enough about the food or find out enough about the scenery. I'm always a sucker for a Godfather pastiche, though.
I really enjoyed the series, although I don't think it's quite as funny as the first one. They tried to cram too much into it, so you didn't really hear enough about the food or find out enough about the scenery. I'm always a sucker for a Godfather pastiche, though.
I did think it might be him, but wasn't sure, thanks.
I agree about the food not being as prominent in this series. I would have liked to have been told what they were eating and had more of their opinions on it, like in the first series.
Yeah, there is a real arrogance in some of the comments, fortunately DS only has a handful of these loud mouths who have the logic of "I don't find it funny so it isn't".
I've actually found that it's the other way round. The arrogance has come from those that see this as the greatest production ever to hit the small screen and if you think otherwise then your intellect is below that of plankton's. It's the same as the W1A thread.
I completely understand why some people haven't liked it at all but for me it's a good and highly original mix of banter, characterization, impressions, subtle drama about middle-age ennui, and travelogue. It helps a lot if you already like Coogan and Brydon of course.
Thank you rachelgata. Someone has at last detailed why they think the programme is so good. I agree with quite a bit of what you say but still only find it a decent enough way to spend half an hour. I think a third series would be stretching it.
What was the point of Rob's character having a one night stand, and then asking the pregnant PA if she thought he should go in for another?
Same reason anybody asks anyone for an opinion really - for their opinion.
I mean, the character of Rob Bryden was clearly both racked with guilt, and tempted to go back for more, so he (stupidly) asked the opinion of someone who knows him, presumably hoping for either encouragement, or to be told off and warned off.
What I love about this thread, though, is that someone has managed to slip in some casual sexism and thinks it's okay. "The women actors were terrible" - what, all of them? Really? I didn't observe any actors in this who made me think "my god they're terrible". Everyone seemed really rather natural to me.
I really enjoyed the whole series and found the last episode an interesting playing with levels of reality (how "fictional" was the relationship between Steve and his son, for instance?)
But what I really wanted to know (and haven't been able to find out) is the name of the opera singer and the opera which is played when they are sailing along the coast. I'd really be grateful if anyone can help with this. I thought it was magical.
Comments
The first series sort-of worked despite the obvious scripting, it was the genuine moments that made it work not the transparent "plot" and nonsense.
But for this one there is very little that isn't scripted. And at least in series 1 you could sort of believe it.
The women actors were terrible.
I don't think you know what a script is. Bear in mind that there are people in this thread who might work in TV production.
What does it matter anyway? It matters when people post statements which are false, but made out to be an obvious truth with no evidence.
Utter rubbish. You don't know what a script is.
A script is a prepared statement.
You seem to have this idea it's the paper it's printed on...
According to an interview with Brydon, they can end up eating each course up to three times in order to get enough material for the final cut. Not much fun, I think but perhaps it will mollify the Daily Telegraph readers, who seem to under the impression that the exercise is a free holiday at the licence-payer's expense.
The comments under the Telegraph review from its notoriously curmudgeonly readers are hilarious.:D
Yes.
Any new character in the show were there, not to bring new ideas or perspectives, but to simply fawn over Coogan's and Brydon's hilarious impressions.
Yeah, there is a real arrogance in some of the comments, fortunately DS only has a handful of these loud mouths who have the logic of "I don't find it funny so it isn't".
Where was the plot? The climax with "Joe", Coogan's supposed son, arriving was just another non-event.
(is she actually pregnant?)
.
Oh well it's only telly!
I may not know what a script is, but I'm beginning to understand what a self-opinionated bore is like.
She certainly is;-)
I expect they could get away with another series, although they'd have to keep the impressions fresh (although I will never tire of Hugh Grant
Can anyone tell me who the "Irish gameshow host" was supposed to be? It's the only impression I didn't get.
I think it's meant to be Henry Kelly.
I really enjoyed the series, although I don't think it's quite as funny as the first one. They tried to cram too much into it, so you didn't really hear enough about the food or find out enough about the scenery. I'm always a sucker for a Godfather pastiche, though.
I did think it might be him, but wasn't sure, thanks.
I agree about the food not being as prominent in this series. I would have liked to have been told what they were eating and had more of their opinions on it, like in the first series.
Thank you rachelgata. Someone has at last detailed why they think the programme is so good. I agree with quite a bit of what you say but still only find it a decent enough way to spend half an hour. I think a third series would be stretching it.
Same reason anybody asks anyone for an opinion really - for their opinion.
I mean, the character of Rob Bryden was clearly both racked with guilt, and tempted to go back for more, so he (stupidly) asked the opinion of someone who knows him, presumably hoping for either encouragement, or to be told off and warned off.
What I love about this thread, though, is that someone has managed to slip in some casual sexism and thinks it's okay. "The women actors were terrible" - what, all of them? Really? I didn't observe any actors in this who made me think "my god they're terrible". Everyone seemed really rather natural to me.
Maybe some did find comedy in that episode but for me it was a let down for the end of the series.
But what I really wanted to know (and haven't been able to find out) is the name of the opera singer and the opera which is played when they are sailing along the coast. I'd really be grateful if anyone can help with this. I thought it was magical.