Originally Posted by Domestiques:
“I thought it was excellent, it wasnt about representing anyone, its about a couple, well acted, it was old fashioned and I like that.”
Would it was that, that it was "representing anyone". But the fact is the comedy, its language and the actors' gestures kept on drawing attention to it was gay coupledom it on show - and then a
particular type of gay coupledom. So IMO it wasn't just "anyone" it was representing, depicting or whatever.
I hope this episode was used to set the scene for the next five weeks. What I was hoping to see what a simple take on modern life from the perspective of an aging gay couple in a relationship who have see it all (or even better, an aging couple w/o referencing their sexuality because we can see it for ourselves that they are gay). I didn't get that. Instead it was an overt self-referential "look at us, look at us. We are sooo gay" act that's very old hat

.
Originally Posted by trevgo:
“Complete and utter embarrassment. My other half insisted on having it on, and I warned him. I just knew.
Prehistoric style, completely over-the-top wooden performances (even for aged luvvies), pathetic sex-craved older woman character for De La Tour (yawn), "attractive" young guy who was anything but, terrible script. Not one shred of imagination.”
Didn't she already play a similar but younger version in
Rising Damp? Back then she was funny and her character not in any way "pathetic".
Originally Posted by Hassaan13:
“Ratings are in - 5.87 million viewers (24.4% share of the total TV audience).
While that was ITV's best sitcom launch in seven years, according to Twitter it lost over a million viewers over the half hour. It'll be interesting to see how it bodes next week.”
Thanks for the ratings info

. Hopefully, it will find its feet next week. I really would love to see why reviewers gave it such high praise. I barely chuckled