NE
Ummm.....
I think that's overstating it, but I can't deny that neither lead bear up to the comparison well. ... [snip]
I think I (kind of) said it first
Jesus. It actually getting worse. Why do the leads play EVERY line with a grin?
Ummm.....
The person they've got to play Sir Humphrey doesn't even seem to be taking it seriously.
I think that's overstating it, but I can't deny that neither lead bear up to the comparison well. ... [snip]
I think I (kind of) said it first
NE
I love my 'novelisations' of the original YM/YPM series. Not exactly the scripts, but a good take on the stories.
I may have said this before, but having seen the atrocious stage version that was doing the rounds 2 years or so back (written by the original writers), I should have known this wouldn't work.
Shame. I would have liked it to be a worthy successor.
I'd rather read the scripts, but that's probably not an option.
I love my 'novelisations' of the original YM/YPM series. Not exactly the scripts, but a good take on the stories.
I may have said this before, but having seen the atrocious stage version that was doing the rounds 2 years or so back (written by the original writers), I should have known this wouldn't work.
Shame. I would have liked it to be a worthy successor.
GS
Ummm.....
I think that's overstating it, but I can't deny that neither lead bear up to the comparison well. ... [snip]
I think I (kind of) said it first
Well yes, you did - although in my defence I took your initial comment at face value. I watched the documentary and the actor seemed to understand the grand heritage of the role and said he relished it.
But as it turns out, he's just not terribly good at the craft.
"He runs the emotional gamut from A to B", I think one might say.
Gavin Scott
Founding member
Jesus. It actually getting worse. Why do the leads play EVERY line with a grin?
Ummm.....
The person they've got to play Sir Humphrey doesn't even seem to be taking it seriously.
I think that's overstating it, but I can't deny that neither lead bear up to the comparison well. ... [snip]
I think I (kind of) said it first
Well yes, you did - although in my defence I took your initial comment at face value. I watched the documentary and the actor seemed to understand the grand heritage of the role and said he relished it.
But as it turns out, he's just not terribly good at the craft.
"He runs the emotional gamut from A to B", I think one might say.
:-(
A former member
Would a new writer have helped? Better still why did one of the original writers who is also director believe this is good telly?
GS
No.
I could nominate myself for Private Eye's 'pseud's corner' and demonstrate how the scripts conform to Aristotle's 7 golden rules of storytelling, but suffice to say that ALL of the elements are there and always have been.
The scripts have pace and wit. They're formulaic, in the sense that you always know that whether Hacker or Humphrey have an obstacle to overcome, they will only manage it by concession to the other - so its like an essay in pragmatism. No change there.
Its not the writing that lacks. It's the delivery.
Writers should write. Directors should direct. And casting directors should be sacked.
Gavin Scott
Founding member
Would a new writer have helped?
No.
I could nominate myself for Private Eye's 'pseud's corner' and demonstrate how the scripts conform to Aristotle's 7 golden rules of storytelling, but suffice to say that ALL of the elements are there and always have been.
The scripts have pace and wit. They're formulaic, in the sense that you always know that whether Hacker or Humphrey have an obstacle to overcome, they will only manage it by concession to the other - so its like an essay in pragmatism. No change there.
Its not the writing that lacks. It's the delivery.
Quote:
Better still why did one of the original writers who is also director believe this is good telly?
Writers should write. Directors should direct. And casting directors should be sacked.