Just a reminder - two more days to participate in the survey about how S7 will begin. The next survey (I hope to get it up within a few days) will be about how you think S7 will end. Starting in January I have what I think will be a fun series of surveys - I'll introduce what they are all about after Christmas to give you some time to think about your responses.
I think even the people who most disliked S6 could enjoy the episodes more with a rewatch. I remember when I was heavily invested in a television program many years ago and was not happy with how they were treating the two main characters during one season. Every week would end with wanting to throw something at the television as the credits rolled. But the season ended on a hopeful (but not completely settled) note and during the summer I rewatched the season and found SO much to like in the episodes that I hadn't noticed in the initial watch. Sometimes you are so tensed up about what is happening in the story arc that you can't see the gems that are scattered throughtout the series.
So, perhaps a small time investment (8 x 40 minutes over the next 2 years) would allow you the chance to find some gems - now that you know where they were headed. Just a suggestion....
I imagine we will be doing another re-watch in the countdown to the beginning of filming for S7, so by that time, if not before, I should be able to watch again!
Meanwhile, having recently subscribed to a "jazz/standards" station that plays "the great American songbook"" I think I am going to compile a list of great old standards and some newer ones for DM and Louisa.
I think even the people who most disliked S6 could enjoy the episodes more with a rewatch. I remember when I was heavily invested in a television program many years ago and was not happy with how they were treating the two main characters during one season. Every week would end with wanting to throw something at the television as the credits rolled. But the season ended on a hopeful (but not completely settled) note and during the summer I rewatched the season and found SO much to like in the episodes that I hadn't noticed in the initial watch. Sometimes you are so tensed up about what is happening in the story arc that you can't see the gems that are scattered throughtout the series.
So, perhaps a small time investment (8 x 40 minutes over the next 2 years) would allow you the chance to find some gems - now that you know where they were headed. Just a suggestion....
My neighbors were the ones that introduced me to Doc Martin. I became totally besotted, but they did not. However they still like it and love to discuss it so we are having DM nights where I show them S6. There were gems in the first 3 episodes. Of course E1....brilliant. E2...not so much, but the baby monitor error was a stroke of genius...talk about putting your foot in your mouth. E3...the aristocratic air of Robert Campbell in contrast to his actual appearance...the humane way that DM treated him at the surgery.....the way Louisa hinted that Martin should take Ruth out for her birthday and he picked up on it....Aunt Ruth confronting him about his blood phobia and his minimizing it. The whole hostage situation was well acted...the Robert Campbell character was well done and Dame Eileen did a good job too. When Martin broke in saying, "I'm worried about my aunt." Without hesitation. The scene with DM dressing his hand wound. It was pretty darn good DM.
Without all the tension, as Shop Girl said, you can pick up on other things that were very good.
My neighbors were the ones that introduced me to Doc Martin. I became totally besotted, but they did not. However they still like it and love to discuss it so we are having DM nights where I show them S6. There were gems in the first 3 episodes. Of course E1....brilliant. E2...not so much, but the baby monitor error was a stroke of genius...talk about putting your foot in your mouth. E3...the aristocratic air of Robert Campbell in contrast to his actual appearance...the humane way that DM treated him at the surgery.....the way Louisa hinted that Martin should take Ruth out for her birthday and he picked up on it....Aunt Ruth confronting him about his blood phobia and his minimizing it. The whole hostage situation was well acted...the Robert Campbell character was well done and Dame Eileen did a good job too. When Martin broke in saying, "I'm worried about my aunt." Without hesitation. The scene with DM dressing his hand wound. It was pretty darn good DM.
Without all the tension, as Shop Girl said, you can pick up on other things that were very good.
I equate it to any time you are too close to a situation. Sometimes you have to back away and look at it again with a little perspective.
Although I understand the desire to watch the show repeatedly to catch each nuance and gain perspective, I wonder if BP has actually nuanced the characters and if perspective is needed. The show attracted around 8 to 9 million viewers, and most likely watched it one time and took it for what they saw and heard. Only a small group of fans re-watch the show to analyze the characters' each thought and move. Did BP design the show as an intellectual exercise for a few or as simple entertainment for many? Does the show really contain all we believe it does?
Although I understand the desire to watch the show repeatedly to catch each nuance and gain perspective, I wonder if BP has actually nuanced the characters and if perspective is needed. The show attracted around 8 to 9 million viewers, and most likely watched it one time and took it for what they saw and heard. Only a small group of fans re-watch the show to analyze the characters' each thought and move. Did BP design the show as an intellectual exercise for a few or as simple entertainment for many? Does the show really contain all we believe it does?
Very interesting question, Bloodphobia. Certainly some of us lack perspective -- it's just a show, folks -- and I include myself in that category. And I agree that at least 90% of the audience just watched episodes one time and moved on.
I don't think, though, that it was primarily designed as simple entertainment for many. My guess is that they hoped to have a modest success, and attract a sufficient audience to go on for one or two seasons, and didn't particularly think they were designing for mass appeal. That would be Men Behaving Badly, or NCIS, or Friends, or any one of dozens of other formulaic shows that trade more in easy laughs and comfortable predictability. They have never gone that route, which means, I think, that they did want to create a rather sophisticated "entertainment." (Not that they are above using certain "tropes" --google "Doc Martin tropes" for a funny compilation of same.) They did NOT want their characters or their plots to be easy to understand or predict, so they created situations and characters of some complexity.
I don't know whether they ever imagined that there would be a dedicated cadre of fans analyzing every nuance, in fact, I think probably they didn't. But it wasn't designed superficially -- every aspect of it is thought out and meticulously, painstakingly implemented. Characters have "back stories" and e.g., set designs are so artfully done that you have to believe that someone is attempting to convey a lot subliminally, in well placed details. Did they "intend' for people to analyze what they were doing? No, I don't think so. Does it repay analysis? Yes, to me, in the same way that other works of art repay analysis. My chief interest (besides getting hooked on the love story, but that could happen for me with any decently produced soap opera) is in how they put together these many details to produce an entertainment of this quality. So my answer is, they intended and insisted on producing a show of high quality, one where every detail feeds into the overall impression that the viewer takes away, and in succeeding in that, they created something that repays careful attention.
Okay, some of my best friends are doctors and therapists - and I'm interested in their take as fans, too. But, IMO one of the things wrong with S6 is in order to make sense of it we we increasingly need to turn to medical doctors and therapists, and analyzing our own bouts with depression. Where did the spark and sparkle go? I don't care how true to life S6 is if it's not entertaining. It's clear I'm in the minority with this opinion and most of you love-love-loved S6. Still, I feel compelled to occasionally speak up.
You are in the minority here cos it's a self-selecting sample. I gave up about four episodes from the end and probably won't be back. Although I wish everybody well so far as I'm concerned this story ended with S5.
They have never gone that route, which means, I think, that they did want to create a rather sophisticated "entertainment." (Not that they are above using certain "tropes" --google "Doc Martin tropes" for a funny compilation of same.) They did NOT want their characters or their plots to be easy to understand or predict, so they created situations and characters of some complexity.
I don't know whether they ever imagined that there would be a dedicated cadre of fans analyzing every nuance, in fact, I think probably they didn't. But it wasn't designed superficially -- every aspect of it is thought out and meticulously, painstakingly implemented. Characters have "back stories" and e.g., set designs are so artfully done that you have to believe that someone is attempting to convey a lot subliminally, in well placed details. Did they "intend' for people to analyze what they were doing? No, I don't think so. Does it repay analysis? Yes, to me, in the same way that other works of art repay analysis. My chief interest (besides getting hooked on the love story, but that could happen for me with any decently produced soap opera) is in how they put together these many details to produce an entertainment of this quality. So my answer is, they intended and insisted on producing a show of high quality, one where every detail feeds into the overall impression that the viewer takes away, and in succeeding in that, they created something that repays careful attention.
The more series DM adds, the more I think that was BP's thinking, to generate analysis, to get the viewer to "see it" rather than "watch it". This forum has grown to an extent that many on here, giving such great posts, makes you stop, think and look away and savor the thoughts, and to either agree and disagree. Both are welcome. I like to believe that many of you who have been active in the past but have taken to the sidelines are still visiting to see what the latest discussion is.
I am not trying to be argumentative, but I don't think the back stories of most characters have been well-developed beyond Martin. What is Louisa's back story beyond we have met her mother and father. Where did she go to college, when did she start teaching in Portwenn, why doesn't she have any female friends (beyond the manufactured Isobel Brown as the bridesmaid), how long did she date Danny Steel, were they ever really engaged, did she ever have any other men in her life beyond Danny and Martin, what was she like as a child -- good student? sat in back of class and stayed quiet? Any relatives other than mum and dad. BP has never even explained what Louisa's real problems are than our presumed insecurity cause by her mother abandoning her. There are bits and pieces of lives that are revealed from season to season -- Penhale has a brother and an ex-wife and had a father who first abandoned him and then with he talked frequently (they can't even keep the "back story" consistent). Aunt Ruth is an extremely important character as of S. 6 and we know only that she was a psychiatrist for the criminally insane, is writing a book, likes chess, middle child, and over-shares. Well BP did not over-share any of her background, including much of her relationship with Christopher, Margaret (they didn't like each other and MAY have known each other from school) or Joan. The list of what we don't know about characters' back stories -- even Martin's -- is long.
I don't think every aspect is well thought out and painstakingly implemented. The show often feels a little slapdash to me, particularly with its inconsistencies.
I love the show, love the characters, and I think BP has done an excellent job, but it is not as profound as we may think.
I am not trying to be argumentative, but I don't think the back stories of most characters have been well-developed beyond Martin. What is Louisa's back story beyond we have met her mother and father. Where did she go to college, when did she start teaching in Portwenn, why doesn't she have any female friends (beyond the manufactured Isobel Brown as the bridesmaid), how long did she date Danny Steel, were they ever really engaged, did she ever have any other men in her life beyond Danny and Martin, what was she like as a child -- good student? sat in back of class and stayed quiet? Any relatives other than mum and dad. BP has never even explained what Louisa's real problems are than our presumed insecurity cause by her mother abandoning her. There are bits and pieces of lives that are revealed from season to season -- Penhale has a brother and an ex-wife and had a father who first abandoned him and then with he talked frequently (they can't even keep the "back story" consistent). Aunt Ruth is an extremely important character as of S. 6 and we know only that she was a psychiatrist for the criminally insane, is writing a book, likes chess, middle child, and over-shares. Well BP did not over-share any of her background, including much of her relationship with Christopher, Margaret (they didn't like each other and MAY have known each other from school) or Joan. The list of what we don't know about characters' back stories -- even Martin's -- is long.
I don't think every aspect is well thought out and painstakingly implemented. The show often feels a little slapdash to me, particularly with its inconsistencies.
I love the show, love the characters, and I think BP has done an excellent job, but it is not as profound as we may think.
Certainly there is a sense that characterization changes as plot requirements change -- no better example than Louisa. As they probably didn't have any idea when they began that they would be writing 6 series, it's not surprising that they didn't anticipate everything they might want to do with the story line and the ways that characters might have to change over time. And there are odd little ways that BP doesn't care at all about continuity or consistency -- the varying sizes and appearances of JH, e.g.
Shakespeare or Chekov or Ibsen it surely isn't. And I don't think it makes any pretense at profundity -- I can imagine Martin Clunes laughing his head off at the very idea.
But I think that, within the conventions of the genre (if dramedy can be said to be a genre) it does a much better job than most of giving the audience things to think about and try to figure out. It seems to me, at least, there there is a guiding principle of "less is more" -- never have exposition when a look or a cryptic
sentence will do.
We don't have to be entirely privy to the back-story of the characters. It's just necessary that we have a sense that the writer knows enough about the characters to write plausible scenes for them, and someone has to be keeping track of those back-stories. I think we've heard Caroline Catz say that she now knows her character better than some of the writers, and she feels somewhat responsible for setting them straight soometimes (or words to that effect).
For those of you who find DM's reactions unbelievable in s6 in relation to how he is feeling this is a story of a guy who developed tinnitus and anxiety. It gives an insight into how some guys see themselves in relation to work etc.
In Jan. of 2008 my wife and I had our only child. I didn’t get married until a little later than most, and didn’t become a parent until 2008. It was a monumental change for me…everything became very VERY real in terms of responsibilities. I had been self-employed for several years, which was stressful enough, but the thought of a child being totally dependent on me was a huge shock to my system. It scared me to death. Don’t get me wrong, I welcomed it and love being a parent, but it was a big change. Secondly in late 2008 I had an opportunity to sell my business. It was a good time to let it go, because my wife wanted to be a stay at home mother, and I could sense the impending financial collapse that ultimately did happen here in America, so I sold it. But it was hard because my identity had been wrapped up in building that business for 11 years…it was very, very hard to let that go. About a year after I sold the business I began having these emotional upheavals. I would get really sad and depressed for no reason, started to cry a lot, engaged in a whole lot of self-evaluation and reflection about the direction of my life, and regrets from the past etc…I just kind of wrote it off to the winter blues or a mid-life crisis or something and that I would get past it. About that same time I contracted a severe sinus infection that went into my left ear and completely blocked it up. I went to the doctor and they gave me a couple of prescriptions for the congestion and infection. Once the infection and congestion cleared I could hear this very low hiss…it was very low but it was there. I began to get worried, because as a former musician you hear about all the Rock Stars with Tinnitus and how horrific a condition it is. Two days later I woke up about 2am and it felt like a train whistle was going off in my left ear…it scared me to death. I frantically paced around the house trying not to completely lose control of myself. Long story short, I experienced my first real panic attack. I couldn’t breathe, couldn’t sleep, huge rushes of adrenaline flowed through me…it was horrific. For several hours I sat in my son’s room, clutching a bible and praying this would end. When my wife woke up and saw the shape I was in, she actually started to hide the firearms in the house because she was afraid I was going to commit suicide….those were very dark days.
For the first couple of months I was a WRECK, a complete wreck. I couldn’t fathom how I was going to live this way and retain any sanity. How was I gonna be a father or a husband when I can’t stop crying and obsessing about this sound in my ear? I would constantly monitor it by sticking my finger in my ear to see how loud it was…was it still there etc….I was in a constant state of high alert. I could barely hold it together at work, and often times had to excuse myself to go to the restroom and just let the fear envelop me, and just pray that this would somehow go away.
I am not trying to be argumentative, but I don't think the back stories of most characters have been well-developed beyond Martin. What is Louisa's back story beyond we have met her mother and father. Where did she go to college, when did she start teaching in Portwenn, why doesn't she have any female friends (beyond the manufactured Isobel Brown as the bridesmaid), how long did she date Danny Steel, were they ever really engaged, did she ever have any other men in her life beyond Danny and Martin, what was she like as a child -- good student? sat in back of class and stayed quiet? Any relatives other than mum and dad. BP has never even explained what Louisa's real problems are than our presumed insecurity cause by her mother abandoning her. There are bits and pieces of lives that are revealed from season to season -- Penhale has a brother and an ex-wife and had a father who first abandoned him and then with he talked frequently (they can't even keep the "back story" consistent). Aunt Ruth is an extremely important character as of S. 6 and we know only that she was a psychiatrist for the criminally insane, is writing a book, likes chess, middle child, and over-shares. Well BP did not over-share any of her background, including much of her relationship with Christopher, Margaret (they didn't like each other and MAY have known each other from school) or Joan. The list of what we don't know about characters' back stories -- even Martin's -- is long.
I don't think every aspect is well thought out and painstakingly implemented. The show often feels a little slapdash to me, particularly with its inconsistencies.
I love the show, love the characters, and I think BP has done an excellent job, but it is not as profound as we may think.
Certainly there is a sense that characterization changes as plot requirements change -- no better example than Louisa. As they probably didn't have any idea when they began that they would be writing 6 series, it's not surprising that they didn't anticipate everything they might want to do with the story line and the ways that characters might have to change over time. And there are odd little ways that BP doesn't care at all about continuity or consistency -- the varying sizes and appearances of JH, e.g.
Shakespeare or Chekov or Ibsen it surely isn't. And I don't think it makes any pretense at profundity -- I can imagine Martin Clunes laughing his head off at the very idea.
But I think that, within the conventions of the genre (if dramedy can be said to be a genre) it does a much better job than most of giving the audience things to think about and try to figure out. It seems to me, at least, there there is a guiding principle of "less is more" -- never have exposition when a look or a cryptic
sentence will do.
We don't have to be entirely privy to the back-story of the characters. It's just necessary that we have a sense that the writer knows enough about the characters to write plausible scenes for them, and someone has to be keeping track of those back-stories. I think we've heard Caroline Catz say that she now knows her character better than some of the writers, and she feels somewhat responsible for setting them straight soometimes (or words to that effect).
Good post, NewPark.
I think Caroline Catz has been put in an insideous position of having to adapt her character's character (sometimes uncharacteristically :D:D) for the plotline concerning DM.
I think the fact that they only produce 8 episodes every two year also makes a difference to how much info they can convey and also the importance of some little bit of backstory that they dropped in about Penhale in s2 that they need to change in s5. Maybe they think well, no one is going to remember that...
In a book where the final product is completely before you you can be justifiably annoyed at inconsistencies or plotlines where the murderer suddenly appears on p203. Where a show is evolving over time I am prepared to give them a little leeway.
For those of you who find DM's reactions unbelievable in s6 in relation to how he is feeling this is a story of a guy who developed tinnitus and anxiety. It gives an insight into how some guys see themselves in relation to work etc.
In Jan. of 2008 my wife and I had our only child. I didn’t get married until a little later than most, and didn’t become a parent until 2008. It was a monumental change for me…everything became very VERY real in terms of responsibilities. I had been self-employed for several years, which was stressful enough, but the thought of a child being totally dependent on me was a huge shock to my system. It scared me to death. Don’t get me wrong, I welcomed it and love being a parent, but it was a big change. Secondly in late 2008 I had an opportunity to sell my business. It was a good time to let it go, because my wife wanted to be a stay at home mother, and I could sense the impending financial collapse that ultimately did happen here in America, so I sold it. But it was hard because my identity had been wrapped up in building that business for 11 years…it was very, very hard to let that go. About a year after I sold the business I began having these emotional upheavals. I would get really sad and depressed for no reason, started to cry a lot, engaged in a whole lot of self-evaluation and reflection about the direction of my life, and regrets from the past etc…I just kind of wrote it off to the winter blues or a mid-life crisis or something and that I would get past it. About that same time I contracted a severe sinus infection that went into my left ear and completely blocked it up. I went to the doctor and they gave me a couple of prescriptions for the congestion and infection. Once the infection and congestion cleared I could hear this very low hiss…it was very low but it was there. I began to get worried, because as a former musician you hear about all the Rock Stars with Tinnitus and how horrific a condition it is. Two days later I woke up about 2am and it felt like a train whistle was going off in my left ear…it scared me to death. I frantically paced around the house trying not to completely lose control of myself. Long story short, I experienced my first real panic attack. I couldn’t breathe, couldn’t sleep, huge rushes of adrenaline flowed through me…it was horrific. For several hours I sat in my son’s room, clutching a bible and praying this would end. When my wife woke up and saw the shape I was in, she actually started to hide the firearms in the house because she was afraid I was going to commit suicide….those were very dark days.
For the first couple of months I was a WRECK, a complete wreck. I couldn’t fathom how I was going to live this way and retain any sanity. How was I gonna be a father or a husband when I can’t stop crying and obsessing about this sound in my ear? I would constantly monitor it by sticking my finger in my ear to see how loud it was…was it still there etc….I was in a constant state of high alert. I could barely hold it together at work, and often times had to excuse myself to go to the restroom and just let the fear envelop me, and just pray that this would somehow go away.
Very interesting, cc.cookie, from several points of view. I happen to have this issue myself, and for some reason never reacted to it. But I have reflected from time to time that I could see how, if you let it, it would drive a person almost round the bend.
Okay, I am confused. Is it "characters have 'back stories'" or "we don't have to be entirely privy to the back story of the character." Is it "every aspect of it is thought out and meticulously, painstakingly implemented" or "BP doesn't care at all about continuity or consistency."
Either way, like the story but what is BP really doing?
Okay, I am confused. Is it "characters have 'back stories'" or "we don't have to be entirely privy to the back story of the character." Is it "every aspect of it is thought out and meticulously, painstakingly implemented" or "BP doesn't care at all about continuity or consistency."
Either way, like the story but what is BP really doing?
You know I really think it is both! In relation to DM MC has an incredible grasp of exactly how he should be seen to behave and he has the power to ensure that he can do whatever he wants with the character and plotlines surrounding him. This is DMs show.
Carolyn Catz has a fair bit of say in her character but the writers twist her reactions to be a foil for DMs. I think from her character down to the extras they give lesser importance to consistency of character and backstory.
Okay, I am confused. Is it "characters have 'back stories'" or "we don't have to be entirely privy to the back story of the character." Is it "every aspect of it is thought out and meticulously, painstakingly implemented" or "BP doesn't care at all about continuity or consistency."
Either way, like the story but what is BP really doing?
Okay -- I think the writers and producers tell themselves stories about the character -- flesh them out in their minds, to some degree at least, before they start. They may not bring all those aspects into play, and they don't have to tell us about them explicitly, but I think they do know who the character is, and what might have happened to him along the way to make him the person they're writing about.
Then, things happen along the way. The story line lengthens, how you think about the character, or how you need him/her to be changes over time. For example, did they know that Bert had a thing with Jennifer years ago before he was married? No, of course not. Also, I have heard writers say that their characters begin to take on a life of their own -- that now they have a different sense of them as persons and what they would or would not do, or have done. So -- back stories in the sense that writers know who their characters are, but they don't necessarily share with us all the details that make that character real to them. That's where they start, with the character, and it goes on from there.
As for details -- I can't look at that set, that wardrobe, those camera angles, the acting nuances, without thinking that someone has thought all these things out, to make them fit together. They care about those things -- it's evident, to me at least. As I said, it's what make the show interesting to me. Some things they care about less -- if some continuity has to be sacrificed -- i.e., a new aunt has to be invented -- to fill a plot need, that comes first. Some continuity lapses are of course accidental, but most are carefully weighed, it seems to me.
I should add that sometimes the things they think about, or the details they insert, are inside jokes. Which is what I think having Mummy read "Fifty shades of grey" probably was, e.g. It's fun to figure those out, too.
And then sometimes, I think they just say, it's just a show, we can't have one baby actor, we have to have several; deal with it.
I don't think they're slapdash or careless, or whatever. I think they try very hard to do certain things, and sometimes they fail. Less than most shows. And my fun is in trying to figure out why they do things as they do, even if they sometimes do them imperfectly. Your mileage may vary.
Okay -- I think the writers and producers tell themselves stories about the character -- flesh them out in their minds, to some degree at least, before they start. They may not bring all those aspects into play, and they don't have to tell us about them explicitly, but I think they do know who the character is, and what might have happened to him along the way to make him the person they're writing about.
I should add that sometimes the things they think about, or the details they insert, are inside jokes. Which is what I think having Mummy read "Fifty shades of grey" probably was, e.g. It's fun to figure those out, too.
And then sometimes, I think they just say, it's just a show, we can't have one baby actor, we have to have several; deal with it.
I don't think they're slapdash or careless, or whatever. I think they try very hard to do certain things, and sometimes they fail. Less than most shows. And my fun is in trying to figure out why they do things as they do, even if they sometimes do them imperfectly. Your mileage may vary.
And when they have something like the different babies that they can't do anything about they go out of their way to feature each baby so that they have their own little moment on screen. I think that shows that they really care about the actors and the crew and the show.
I think everyone who watches it gets something different from DM and I think that the understanding of the human condition, our foibles, anxieties and desires are very well drawn out in the writing of the initial characters and plot lines and they have been pretty faithfully continued by subsequent writers. They are not perfect, the producers, the writers and the characters which , for me, makes the show a little more accessible. Until s6 of course!! :):)
Very interesting, cc.cookie, from several points of view. I happen to have this issue myself, and for some reason never reacted to it. But I have reflected from time to time that I could see how, if you let it, it would drive a person almost round the bend.
Interesting how different people react to the same thing. My dh has it and he basically does what the dr on tinnitus.org suggest without even knowing about it. This next bit comes from the tinnitus.org site: this type of thinking applies to LG too.
You need to learn the real mechanism of tinnitus and hyperacusis. The knowledge and information is quite different from old classical views still prevalent in text books, and still being taught in some medical schools. If you have a good understanding, now, of the Jastreboff model, you will appreciate that tinnitus is in fact a natural phenomenon rather than a disease. If you don't believe this, then go back and read it again. In a high proportion of tinnitus sufferers, tinnitus becomes a problem because of the belief that a there is nothing that can be done about it. As your beliefs about this changes do, and it takes on a much more benign picture, so habituation is able to start. The story of the new neighbour illustrates this principle very well.
Imagine a new neighbour has moved next door. You exhibit mild interest to start with, but your anxiety increases very soon when you observe small packages being delivered to the front door on a regular basis by different individuals who quickly depart. You guess that you neighbour is perhaps a drugs dealer, and the prospect of spending many years next door to such criminal activity fills you with great alarm. You are constantly looking through the window monitoring the activities next door, and experiencing much anxiety and depression, by constantly thinking of the inevitable and desperate outcome for yourself and your young family of living next door to such a person. Some time later you learn quite by chance, that your neighbour is involved in collecting food parcels for the homeless. The realization that you have wrongly assessed the situation results in a sudden change of attitude. You loose your dislike for your neighbour, and stop monitoring his activities. You even feel foolish at your inappropriate initial assessment, realising you are all too likely to think the worst of people.
Thanks Connie for HIGNFY MC is still looking quite slim which is emphasized more due to his "no tan" look. He certainly has got great timing though for that show, he makes a good host. Like the glasses too, he wears them well.
So sorry to hear about Peter O'Toole another great actor who MC admired, he once imitated him on a radio show and he was spot on...
Okay -- I think the writers and producers tell themselves stories about the character -- flesh them out in their minds, to some degree at least, before they start. They may not bring all those aspects into play, and they don't have to tell us about them explicitly, but I think they do know who the character is, and what might have happened to him along the way to make him the person they're writing about.
Then, things happen along the way. The story line lengthens, how you think about the character, or how you need him/her to be changes over time. For example, did they know that Bert had a thing with Jennifer years ago before he was married? No, of course not. Also, I have heard writers say that their characters begin to take on a life of their own -- that now they have a different sense of them as persons and what they would or would not do, or have done. So -- back stories in the sense that writers know who their characters are, but they don't necessarily share with us all the details that make that character real to them. That's where they start, with the character, and it goes on from there.
As for details -- I can't look at that set, that wardrobe, those camera angles, the acting nuances, without thinking that someone has thought all these things out, to make them fit together. They care about those things -- it's evident, to me at least. As I said, it's what make the show interesting to me. Some things they care about less -- if some continuity has to be sacrificed -- i.e., a new aunt has to be invented -- to fill a plot need, that comes first. Some continuity lapses are of course accidental, but most are carefully weighed, it seems to me.
I should add that sometimes the things they think about, or the details they insert, are inside jokes. Which is what I think having Mummy read "Fifty shades of grey" probably was, e.g. It's fun to figure those out, too.
And then sometimes, I think they just say, it's just a show, we can't have one baby actor, we have to have several; deal with it.
I don't think they're slapdash or careless, or whatever. I think they try very hard to do certain things, and sometimes they fail. Less than most shows. And my fun is in trying to figure out why they do things as they do, even if they sometimes do them imperfectly. Your mileage may vary.
Thank you for saying what I think so clearly, NewPark!
Comments
http://portwennonline.com/SurveyCurrent.html
Yes. I'll upload it this evening.
Here's a sample of his earlier appearances to tide you over.
http://touch.dailymotion.com/video/x10f8t3_martin-clunes-have-i-got-news-for-you-highlights_people
I imagine we will be doing another re-watch in the countdown to the beginning of filming for S7, so by that time, if not before, I should be able to watch again!
Meanwhile, having recently subscribed to a "jazz/standards" station that plays "the great American songbook"" I think I am going to compile a list of great old standards and some newer ones for DM and Louisa.
My neighbors were the ones that introduced me to Doc Martin. I became totally besotted, but they did not. However they still like it and love to discuss it so we are having DM nights where I show them S6. There were gems in the first 3 episodes. Of course E1....brilliant. E2...not so much, but the baby monitor error was a stroke of genius...talk about putting your foot in your mouth. E3...the aristocratic air of Robert Campbell in contrast to his actual appearance...the humane way that DM treated him at the surgery.....the way Louisa hinted that Martin should take Ruth out for her birthday and he picked up on it....Aunt Ruth confronting him about his blood phobia and his minimizing it. The whole hostage situation was well acted...the Robert Campbell character was well done and Dame Eileen did a good job too. When Martin broke in saying, "I'm worried about my aunt." Without hesitation. The scene with DM dressing his hand wound. It was pretty darn good DM.
Without all the tension, as Shop Girl said, you can pick up on other things that were very good.
I equate it to any time you are too close to a situation. Sometimes you have to back away and look at it again with a little perspective.
Think "forest" and "trees"...
and a weird little clip from the movie http://youtu.be/fft1qhiiQ-s
http://www.broadwayworld.com/westend/article/Samantha-Bond-and-John-Marquez-Join-DIRTY-ROTTEN-SCOUNDRELS-Full-Cast-Announced-20131213
News: DVD Reviews:
http://www.nj.com/entertainment/index.ssf/2013/12/gene_autry.html
News: TV station with Ian and Joe quotations:
http://www.post-gazette.com/ae/tv-radio/2013/12/13/Doc-Martin-returns-for-5th-season-on-WQED/stories/201312130068
Here's the new one:
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/k3sAjNUdu9AJPM52Pv6
Very interesting question, Bloodphobia. Certainly some of us lack perspective -- it's just a show, folks -- and I include myself in that category. And I agree that at least 90% of the audience just watched episodes one time and moved on.
I don't think, though, that it was primarily designed as simple entertainment for many. My guess is that they hoped to have a modest success, and attract a sufficient audience to go on for one or two seasons, and didn't particularly think they were designing for mass appeal. That would be Men Behaving Badly, or NCIS, or Friends, or any one of dozens of other formulaic shows that trade more in easy laughs and comfortable predictability. They have never gone that route, which means, I think, that they did want to create a rather sophisticated "entertainment." (Not that they are above using certain "tropes" --google "Doc Martin tropes" for a funny compilation of same.) They did NOT want their characters or their plots to be easy to understand or predict, so they created situations and characters of some complexity.
I don't know whether they ever imagined that there would be a dedicated cadre of fans analyzing every nuance, in fact, I think probably they didn't. But it wasn't designed superficially -- every aspect of it is thought out and meticulously, painstakingly implemented. Characters have "back stories" and e.g., set designs are so artfully done that you have to believe that someone is attempting to convey a lot subliminally, in well placed details. Did they "intend' for people to analyze what they were doing? No, I don't think so. Does it repay analysis? Yes, to me, in the same way that other works of art repay analysis. My chief interest (besides getting hooked on the love story, but that could happen for me with any decently produced soap opera) is in how they put together these many details to produce an entertainment of this quality. So my answer is, they intended and insisted on producing a show of high quality, one where every detail feeds into the overall impression that the viewer takes away, and in succeeding in that, they created something that repays careful attention.
You are in the minority here cos it's a self-selecting sample. I gave up about four episodes from the end and probably won't be back. Although I wish everybody well so far as I'm concerned this story ended with S5.
The more series DM adds, the more I think that was BP's thinking, to generate analysis, to get the viewer to "see it" rather than "watch it". This forum has grown to an extent that many on here, giving such great posts, makes you stop, think and look away and savor the thoughts, and to either agree and disagree. Both are welcome. I like to believe that many of you who have been active in the past but have taken to the sidelines are still visiting to see what the latest discussion is.
I don't think every aspect is well thought out and painstakingly implemented. The show often feels a little slapdash to me, particularly with its inconsistencies.
I love the show, love the characters, and I think BP has done an excellent job, but it is not as profound as we may think.
Certainly there is a sense that characterization changes as plot requirements change -- no better example than Louisa. As they probably didn't have any idea when they began that they would be writing 6 series, it's not surprising that they didn't anticipate everything they might want to do with the story line and the ways that characters might have to change over time. And there are odd little ways that BP doesn't care at all about continuity or consistency -- the varying sizes and appearances of JH, e.g.
Shakespeare or Chekov or Ibsen it surely isn't. And I don't think it makes any pretense at profundity -- I can imagine Martin Clunes laughing his head off at the very idea.
But I think that, within the conventions of the genre (if dramedy can be said to be a genre) it does a much better job than most of giving the audience things to think about and try to figure out. It seems to me, at least, there there is a guiding principle of "less is more" -- never have exposition when a look or a cryptic
sentence will do.
We don't have to be entirely privy to the back-story of the characters. It's just necessary that we have a sense that the writer knows enough about the characters to write plausible scenes for them, and someone has to be keeping track of those back-stories. I think we've heard Caroline Catz say that she now knows her character better than some of the writers, and she feels somewhat responsible for setting them straight soometimes (or words to that effect).
He eventually resolved his issues with councelling and Cognative Behavioural Therapy.
If you want to read the whole thing go to:
http://tinnitussuccess.com/from-tinnitus-anxiety-to-peace/
In Jan. of 2008 my wife and I had our only child. I didn’t get married until a little later than most, and didn’t become a parent until 2008. It was a monumental change for me…everything became very VERY real in terms of responsibilities. I had been self-employed for several years, which was stressful enough, but the thought of a child being totally dependent on me was a huge shock to my system. It scared me to death. Don’t get me wrong, I welcomed it and love being a parent, but it was a big change. Secondly in late 2008 I had an opportunity to sell my business. It was a good time to let it go, because my wife wanted to be a stay at home mother, and I could sense the impending financial collapse that ultimately did happen here in America, so I sold it. But it was hard because my identity had been wrapped up in building that business for 11 years…it was very, very hard to let that go. About a year after I sold the business I began having these emotional upheavals. I would get really sad and depressed for no reason, started to cry a lot, engaged in a whole lot of self-evaluation and reflection about the direction of my life, and regrets from the past etc…I just kind of wrote it off to the winter blues or a mid-life crisis or something and that I would get past it. About that same time I contracted a severe sinus infection that went into my left ear and completely blocked it up. I went to the doctor and they gave me a couple of prescriptions for the congestion and infection. Once the infection and congestion cleared I could hear this very low hiss…it was very low but it was there. I began to get worried, because as a former musician you hear about all the Rock Stars with Tinnitus and how horrific a condition it is. Two days later I woke up about 2am and it felt like a train whistle was going off in my left ear…it scared me to death. I frantically paced around the house trying not to completely lose control of myself. Long story short, I experienced my first real panic attack. I couldn’t breathe, couldn’t sleep, huge rushes of adrenaline flowed through me…it was horrific. For several hours I sat in my son’s room, clutching a bible and praying this would end. When my wife woke up and saw the shape I was in, she actually started to hide the firearms in the house because she was afraid I was going to commit suicide….those were very dark days.
For the first couple of months I was a WRECK, a complete wreck. I couldn’t fathom how I was going to live this way and retain any sanity. How was I gonna be a father or a husband when I can’t stop crying and obsessing about this sound in my ear? I would constantly monitor it by sticking my finger in my ear to see how loud it was…was it still there etc….I was in a constant state of high alert. I could barely hold it together at work, and often times had to excuse myself to go to the restroom and just let the fear envelop me, and just pray that this would somehow go away.
Good post, NewPark.
I think Caroline Catz has been put in an insideous position of having to adapt her character's character (sometimes uncharacteristically
I think the fact that they only produce 8 episodes every two year also makes a difference to how much info they can convey and also the importance of some little bit of backstory that they dropped in about Penhale in s2 that they need to change in s5. Maybe they think well, no one is going to remember that...
In a book where the final product is completely before you you can be justifiably annoyed at inconsistencies or plotlines where the murderer suddenly appears on p203. Where a show is evolving over time I am prepared to give them a little leeway.
Very interesting, cc.cookie, from several points of view. I happen to have this issue myself, and for some reason never reacted to it. But I have reflected from time to time that I could see how, if you let it, it would drive a person almost round the bend.
Either way, like the story but what is BP really doing?
You know I really think it is both! In relation to DM MC has an incredible grasp of exactly how he should be seen to behave and he has the power to ensure that he can do whatever he wants with the character and plotlines surrounding him. This is DMs show.
Carolyn Catz has a fair bit of say in her character but the writers twist her reactions to be a foil for DMs. I think from her character down to the extras they give lesser importance to consistency of character and backstory.
Okay -- I think the writers and producers tell themselves stories about the character -- flesh them out in their minds, to some degree at least, before they start. They may not bring all those aspects into play, and they don't have to tell us about them explicitly, but I think they do know who the character is, and what might have happened to him along the way to make him the person they're writing about.
Then, things happen along the way. The story line lengthens, how you think about the character, or how you need him/her to be changes over time. For example, did they know that Bert had a thing with Jennifer years ago before he was married? No, of course not. Also, I have heard writers say that their characters begin to take on a life of their own -- that now they have a different sense of them as persons and what they would or would not do, or have done. So -- back stories in the sense that writers know who their characters are, but they don't necessarily share with us all the details that make that character real to them. That's where they start, with the character, and it goes on from there.
As for details -- I can't look at that set, that wardrobe, those camera angles, the acting nuances, without thinking that someone has thought all these things out, to make them fit together. They care about those things -- it's evident, to me at least. As I said, it's what make the show interesting to me. Some things they care about less -- if some continuity has to be sacrificed -- i.e., a new aunt has to be invented -- to fill a plot need, that comes first. Some continuity lapses are of course accidental, but most are carefully weighed, it seems to me.
I should add that sometimes the things they think about, or the details they insert, are inside jokes. Which is what I think having Mummy read "Fifty shades of grey" probably was, e.g. It's fun to figure those out, too.
And then sometimes, I think they just say, it's just a show, we can't have one baby actor, we have to have several; deal with it.
I don't think they're slapdash or careless, or whatever. I think they try very hard to do certain things, and sometimes they fail. Less than most shows. And my fun is in trying to figure out why they do things as they do, even if they sometimes do them imperfectly. Your mileage may vary.
And when they have something like the different babies that they can't do anything about they go out of their way to feature each baby so that they have their own little moment on screen. I think that shows that they really care about the actors and the crew and the show.
I think everyone who watches it gets something different from DM and I think that the understanding of the human condition, our foibles, anxieties and desires are very well drawn out in the writing of the initial characters and plot lines and they have been pretty faithfully continued by subsequent writers. They are not perfect, the producers, the writers and the characters which , for me, makes the show a little more accessible. Until s6 of course!!
Interesting how different people react to the same thing. My dh has it and he basically does what the dr on tinnitus.org suggest without even knowing about it. This next bit comes from the tinnitus.org site: this type of thinking applies to LG too.
You need to learn the real mechanism of tinnitus and hyperacusis. The knowledge and information is quite different from old classical views still prevalent in text books, and still being taught in some medical schools. If you have a good understanding, now, of the Jastreboff model, you will appreciate that tinnitus is in fact a natural phenomenon rather than a disease. If you don't believe this, then go back and read it again. In a high proportion of tinnitus sufferers, tinnitus becomes a problem because of the belief that a there is nothing that can be done about it. As your beliefs about this changes do, and it takes on a much more benign picture, so habituation is able to start. The story of the new neighbour illustrates this principle very well.
Imagine a new neighbour has moved next door. You exhibit mild interest to start with, but your anxiety increases very soon when you observe small packages being delivered to the front door on a regular basis by different individuals who quickly depart. You guess that you neighbour is perhaps a drugs dealer, and the prospect of spending many years next door to such criminal activity fills you with great alarm. You are constantly looking through the window monitoring the activities next door, and experiencing much anxiety and depression, by constantly thinking of the inevitable and desperate outcome for yourself and your young family of living next door to such a person. Some time later you learn quite by chance, that your neighbour is involved in collecting food parcels for the homeless. The realization that you have wrongly assessed the situation results in a sudden change of attitude. You loose your dislike for your neighbour, and stop monitoring his activities. You even feel foolish at your inappropriate initial assessment, realising you are all too likely to think the worst of people.
So sorry to hear about Peter O'Toole another great actor who MC admired, he once imitated him on a radio show and he was spot on...
Thank you for saying what I think so clearly, NewPark!