I am beginning to think that because it didn't have any sort of definitive ending. I don't think there will be another series, but maybe a few more specials. Who knows ???
I was also thinking the same thing, if the ending had been specially made for comic relief, then that would be ok but this just wasn't needed. I had doubts in the first half of the episode when they kept talking about tony Blair and sending him the letters, I had this huge fear he was going to 'pop-in' as a suprise guest that had been kept a secret...... I was so happy when I realised that he wasn't going to be in it, but then my happieness crashed with the final stunt. These type of things don;t have a place in comedy, OK so they may be able to be mentioned etc, but they just went too far with it.
In the Radio Times Christmas Issue, Richard Curtis said that they had already shot the Comic Relief episode, so maybe it will continue where this episode left off.
It was bizarre that until that charity appeal, things had been moving on funnily as usual. The oddballs all appeared in kilts offering to give Geraldine ababy and then the laughs stopped.
Apparently, next Christmas, he wants to do two more and end it with Geraldine getting married. Let's hope he reads our comments here and makes the last two episodes as hilarious as ever. He is definetely capable of it! I'd love to be given more now. Otherwise I'll always feel the show ended with a totally unsatisfactory last episode.
I'm quite shocked that the BBC thought this was an appropriate use of prime time TV under the guise of comedy. As previously mentioned, showing this episode within the Comic Relief framework would've been fine but as a standalone episode it was shocking. Given the focus on the work of relief agencies dealing with the Tsunami aftermath, I think it would've been more appropriate for the BBC to postpone it.
Why? Are you saying that children orphaned as a result of the HIV epidemic in Africa are less deserving of help than the victims of the tsunamis?
As to those people who say "this has no place in comedy" - my opinion is that if tonight's programme helps one single child in any way at all, then it's worthwhile.
I'm quite shocked that the BBC thought this was an appropriate use of prime time TV under the guise of comedy. As previously mentioned, showing this episode within the Comic Relief framework would've been fine but as a standalone episode it was shocking. Given the focus on the work of relief agencies dealing with the Tsunami aftermath, I think it would've been more appropriate for the BBC to postpone it.
Why? Are you saying that children orphaned as a result of the HIV epidemic in Africa are less deserving of help than the victims of the tsunamis?
As to those people who say "this has no place in comedy" - my opinion is that if tonight's programme helps one single child in any way at all, then it's worthwhile.
marksi, I actually think, now that the shock ending has been digested, you are right. The fact that the tsunami happened on Boxing Day is coincidence and as such we are all suffering from shock and overkill of graphic news pictures of tragic occurrences. The Africa situation is ongoing and does need to be highlighted. If the tsunami hadn't happened we may all have responded to the ending differently, however I think people can't be critiscised for being left angry at yet another appeal for money. The African people are just as desrving for our aid and help, but I tend to agree with the majority and feel that tonights screening was inappropriate and perhaps should have been shelved for a month. The world we live in is a sad, violent and catastrophic place and after one disaster comes another. There's only so much though, that we can do to help everyone. The politics of richard Curtis should not though, been allowed to dominate a prime time sitcom.
that said, if the asian disaster did not occur perhaps we would think that the ending of tonights episode was touching, poignant and powerful. that I think was the intention. The overall problem, unfortunately, was timing.
I am quite amazed at how they tackled this, completely took my breath away.... and well done to the BBC.
Fundraising has to be done with tact, essentially nowadays you lazy lot have to have it marketed to you like a sale in a shop. It's sad but it's true.
How many of you would have donated money to the old woman you passed in the street today who was collecting for the people of Africa?
How many of you would have given her your spare change amounting to probably no more than 50p if even that? There would be no way you'd give her 20 quid is there?
After watching tonights programme, how many of you were in shock and now considering donating a sum of money more than you would the woman in the street? I bet the majority.
Although the Vicar of Dibley is a comedy it's based around the workings of the church. They are heavily focused on helping others, especially in Africa. Obviously nobody could have predicted the recent events in Asia so the makers wouldn't have known about it. While your all tucked up nice and warm eating your Christmas Turkey and celebrating new year the BBC makers of this programme are reminding you that we're not all as fortunate.
I would like to congratulate the makers of this programme. Quite frankly it's opened my eyes to these situations. I will quite happily admit I rarely give to charitable causes to street go'ers or 'call now' numbers. Although recently with the influx of images of those suffering around the world it's only convinced me to donate more frequently and in larger amounts.
Again this is another situation raised on this forum which has shocked me that people are more willing to criticise the efforts and procedures rather than just helping and donating. We wouldn't donate unless we could see the suffering. We shouldn't have to - but the stuborness has shown otherwise.
I've thought about this for an hour or so now, and I'm even more annoyed at what was allowed to happen tonight.
This should, at least, have been flagged up as a special episode to help launch this new appeal. It should then have been screened on another day - not when settling down for a bit of entertainment at 9pm on New Years Day.
I'm concerned that the writer has been allowed to crowbar in such serious and moving subject matter to a what is supposed to be a light-hearted comedy show.
I feel preached at tonight, and feel that somehow they were trying to guilt trip people - and that loses goodwill in my book.
The subject is difficult, shocking, and moving, but then so are so many other causes. It was a very clumsilly handled stunt, and the context totally wrong.
I think it was clumsily done, it certainly did whack you though, not expected.
I have to agree with the comment that it was innappropriate with regards to the tsnami though. I went out last night and knocked on the door of a child who was being sexually abused and told him to stop being so petty minded and selfish when there were people who had had their houses destroyed in India. I mean who the hell do these bloody poverty stricken kids think they are taking attention away from this one off event with their long term suffering. It's just unbelieveable.
I'm quite shocked that the BBC thought this was an appropriate use of prime time TV under the guise of comedy. As previously mentioned, showing this episode within the Comic Relief framework would've been fine but as a standalone episode it was shocking. Given the focus on the work of relief agencies dealing with the Tsunami aftermath, I think it would've been more appropriate for the BBC to postpone it.
....you are right. The fact that the tsunami happened on Boxing Day is
coincidence
and as such we are all suffering from shock and overkill..
I've thought about this for an hour or so now, and I'm even more annoyed at what was allowed to happen tonight.
This should, at least, have been flagged up as a special episode to help launch this new appeal. It should then have been screened on another day - not when settling down for a bit of entertainment at 9pm on New Years Day.
I'm concerned that the writer has been allowed to crowbar in such serious and moving subject matter to a what is supposed to be a light-hearted comedy show.
I feel preached at tonight, and feel that somehow they were trying to guilt trip people - and that loses goodwill in my book.
The subject is difficult, shocking, and moving, but then so are so many other causes. It was a very clumsilly handled stunt, and the context totally wrong.
You've been upset because you felt a comedy programme (called The
Vicar
of Dibley) "preached" to you. How terrible for you. Good job you're not 8 and have lost both your parents to HIV. I repeat what I said before. If the programme helped ONE child in ANY way, then it's worth it. Or do you not agree?
I am quite amazed at how they tackled this, completely took my breath away.... and well done to the BBC.
Fundraising has to be done with tact, essentially nowadays you lazy lot have to have it marketed to you like a sale in a shop. It's sad but it's true.
How many of you would have donated money to the old woman you passed in the street today who was collecting for the people of Africa?
How many of you would have given her your spare change amounting to probably no more than 50p if even that? There would be no way you'd give her 20 quid is there?
After watching tonights programme, how many of you were in shock and now considering donating a sum of money more than you would the woman in the street? I bet the majority.
Although the Vicar of Dibley is a comedy it's based around the workings of the church. They are heavily focused on helping others, especially in Africa. Obviously nobody could have predicted the recent events in Asia so the makers wouldn't have known about it. While your all tucked up nice and warm eating your Christmas Turkey and celebrating new year the BBC makers of this programme are reminding you that we're not all as fortunate.
I would like to congratulate the makers of this programme. Quite frankly it's opened my eyes to these situations. I will quite happily admit I rarely give to charitable causes to street go'ers or 'call now' numbers. Although recently with the influx of images of those suffering around the world it's only convinced me to donate more frequently and in larger amounts.
Again this is another situation raised on this forum which has shocked me that people are more willing to criticise the efforts and procedures rather than just helping and donating. We wouldn't donate unless we could see the suffering. We shouldn't have to - but the stuborness has shown otherwise.
This will not make me give any more to charity than I already do. I read newspapers, watch the news etc. I think it's insulting to come on and preach and guilt trip people when they least expect it. There is a time and a place. Or as I said in my original post on this thread - it could have been wrapped in something more light-hearted at the end.
What next? Eastenders crowbarring in a video clip for some other equally deserving cause? The weather forecast including some slides with "Vote BNP" on them?
One problem I do have with this, or any charity appeal, is that it instantly demands your average viewer dips into their pockets to help out, when in fact if some of the highest earners in this country donated a day's wages, they could make a massive dent. The public has already out-donated the UK government in terms of the tsunami appeal. It always seems to be those who don't have as much money who end up shelling out.
Didn't see the episode in question, although my parents weren't too impressed with it either. It did coincide with the launch of an appeal today, and perhaps if it had been clearly marketed as such it may not have caused as much offence.
I'm in two minds about this - on the one hand I'm all for trying to bring political points into all genres, but on the other where does it end? Do we start making appeals for money half way through Scooby Doo?