Stephen Fry is annoyed

[Jack Shaftoe]

From here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/jun/16/stephen-fry-doctor-who

Broadcaster Stephen Fry last night hit out at the "infantilism" of British TV and said that heavily promoted shows like Doctor Who, while being good programmes, were the equivalent of chicken nuggets.

He also spoke of the "absurdity" of some compliance rules, and said "fear" is everywhere in the television industry in this country.

Fry, who hosts QI, said that the programmes were "like a chicken nugget. Every now and again we all like it ... But if you are an adult you want something surprising, savoury, sharp, unusual, cosmopolitan, alien, challenging, complex, ambiguous, possibly even slightly disturbing and wrong.

"You want to try those things, because that's what being adult means."

Fry was delivering the Bafta Annual Television Lecture in central London.

During a question and answer session after his speech, Fry told the audience: "If I wanted to be angry ... I would say infantilism's the problem.

"The number of times I turn on the television and I think 'Gosh, children's television's gone on, that's a really good art documentary ... Oh my God, it's nine o'clock in the evening. This is for grown-ups?' It's just shocking.

"The only drama the BBC will boast about are Merlin and Doctor Who, which are fine, but they're children's programmes. They're not for adults.

"And they're very good children's programmes, don't get me wrong, they're wonderfully written ... but they are not for adults.

Fry said he was not arguing that all television should be pompous, academic or intellectual.

"But they ought to surprise and to astonish and to make us feel perhaps the possibility there is a world outside that we know nothing of to provoke us, to provoke in the best sense of the word, sometimes in the worst sense," he said.

"To surprise us, to outrage us."

Fry also highlighted what he felt was a lack of confidence among producers, although said the BBC would point to shows such as Gavin and Stacey and Little Britain.

He said: "These are very successful. But they are also unbelievably Balkanised.

"They are set into a particular demographic. This is what I mean by television not being the nation's fireplace. ..

"It's just all parcelled and I don't know that there's a solution to it."

Fry said that compliance issues and boxes that had to be ticked were what "everyone knows the public don't want".

He also said that the Sachsgate scandal involving Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand helped fuel a sense of "fear".

He mentioned a friend who was involved in making an episode of spy drama Spooks who was told a character had to wear a seatbelt in their car while saving London in the plot.

He also said it was mentioned the actor should pull over while talking on the phone, despite someone having been shot in an earlier scene.

Fry later said: "The temptation to scream 'F*** off' so loudly... there is no possible excuse, defence or claim that you can make that justifies such absurdity.

He was on about this in his podcast ages ago - is it that ridiculous that characters on Spooks have to pull over to use mobile phones in the car, or wear seatbelts? It strikes me as the sort of thing responsible secret agents would be told to do, to minimise civilian casualties, to be honest.

[Utter Shit]

The first bit sounds to me like Fry would like to try eating faeces.

[Mister Six]

He was on about this in his podcast ages ago - is it that ridiculous that characters on Spooks have to pull over to use mobile phones in the car, or wear seatbelts? It strikes me as the sort of thing responsible secret agents would be told to do, to minimise civilian casualties, to be honest.

Depends on the context, I think. If you're pulling over to talk to MI5 HQ while rushing to capture a suspect then it's fucking ridiculous. And showing them putting on a seatbelt after they've rushed to their car rather impedes the drama.

[rudi]

if you are an adult you want something surprising, savoury, sharp, unusual, cosmopolitan, alien, challenging, complex, ambiguous, possibly even slightly disturbing and wrong.

Like a man driving around the USA looking at things and saying "golly"?

Gosh, children's television's gone on, that's a really good art documentary ... Oh my God, it's nine o'clock in the evening.

That's Tennant's Super for you...

[Shoulders?-Stomach!]

I could show him chicken nuggets that are all those things and more.

[Danger Man]

Hmm...it's 9pm. I "want something surprising, savoury, sharp, unusual, cosmopolitan, alien, challenging, complex, ambiguous, possibly even slightly disturbing and wrong."

I think I'll watch....




(I suppose it satisfies the 'wrong' bit of Fry's demands)

[Ginyard]

What he really needs is some hentai.

[Jake Thingray]

I've always loved the dear fellow (met him the day before my 20th birthday and he said "meh-heh, congratulations, you've hit the big two". This confirms it.

[Neil]

Awesome sentiment, bravo etc.  Shame I can't watch QI due to Alan Davies' infantalism.

[Guy]

The cloying nature of Mr. Fry's recent TV output aside, he does have a point (a what's-wrong-with-your-thumb obvious one, but a point nonetheless).

Interesting to highlight issues with compliance, hopefully that's not one of those things that will osmose into being done 'the way they do it in America'. The ridiculously abritrary pettiness of Standards & Practices seems luridly documented in commentaries and featurettes about Stateside comedy shows.

I saw a particularly terrifying example on the Police Squad DVD, where some notes from the censors were scanned an included as an extra. It gets to the point where even the vaguest suggestions of jokes get ruthlessly sanitised to appease any fears of an imaginary upset. On adult telly. And this was in 1980.

[NoSleep]

Awesome sentiment, bravo etc.  Shame I can't watch QI due to Alan Davies' infantalism.

The cloying nature of Mr. Fry's recent TV output aside, he does have a point (a what's-wrong-with-your-thumb obvious one, but a point nonetheless).

Surely his point of view here is as an insider who has to deal with these issues?

[QDRPHNC]

This is what I mean by television not being the nation's fireplace.

I don't understand why every family in Britain huddling around their television every night is something to aspire to. Surely all the qualities that Stephen Fry says are missing in today's programming, should be found by living, rather than television. Isn't it preferable to go outside with your kids in the evening, after work and school? How about teaching them how to paint a picture? Take a photograph? Play an instrument? Take them to a Victorian folly?

Sorry for being that person.

[Guy]

Surely his point of view here is as an insider who has to deal with these issues?

Hmm?

People were pointing to Kingdom, his travelogues, Davies etc. to poke fun back at his televisual contributions in response, which is fine, but I didn't think it should undermine the shitty stuff about telly he's pertinently underlined. That's why I put that.

[MojoJojo]

I don't understand why every family in Britain huddling around their television every night is something to aspire to. Surely all the qualities that Stephen Fry says are missing in today's programming, should be found by living, rather than television. Isn't it preferable to go outside with your kids in the evening, after work and school? How about teaching them how to paint a picture? Take a photograph? Play an instrument? Take them to a Victorian folly?

Sorry for being that person.

I think he's saying it shouldn't be a fireplace.

[Lookalike Mark Chapman]

Surely all the qualities that Stephen Fry says are missing in today's programming, should be found by living, rather than television.

As he was giving the Bafta Annual Television Lecture it seems unlikely he would have concentrated on something other than television.

The cloying nature of Mr. Fry's recent TV output aside, he does have a point

He sure does, and I don't think his own output undermines that. He acknowledges the place for all types of programming. Whatever you think of QI, Kingdom or even the America series, I think he is still capable of brilliance, particularly in his own focussed documentaries like those about AIDS, depression, and the recent Wagner documentary (which really didn't avoid the uncomfortable, 'adult' stuff). Anything he can put a bit of passion behind, really - I saw a thing on Sky Arts recently, a recording of a conversation from the Hay Festival this year. Without the grating presence of Alan Davies or Rob Brydon, without a restraining format, without the temptation or opportunity to phone it in, Fry was allowed to shape the conversation to his interests, and surely one of his gifts is his easy ability to make his own interests interesting to others. It was therefore a great bit of telly. I could listen to him for hours, and not just because of his chocolatey voice. The qualities he's calling for - he seems to be mainly talking about serious drama - aren't really in areas I would ever associate with Stephen Fry, but that doesn't mean he shouldn't be allowed to comment on them.

[Jemble Fred]

If that's how you feel, I thoroughly recommend his recent Carpool with Robert Llewelyn – loads of wonderful stories I'd never heard before.

I seem to be recommending Carpool on average twice a week at the moment. Must stop that.

[Second Burner]

Very disappointing for someone of his stature. Who narrates Harry Potter books.

[placeholder]

Awesome sentiment, bravo etc.  Shame I can't watch QI due to Alan Davies' infantalism.

He only gets like that when he's had too much pop.

[Jemble Fred]

My brain keeps reading that for some reason as 'Alan Davies' infanticide'. Well, that would be one way to keep him out of the show.

[Small Man Big Horse]

I completely agree with the sentiment, like everyone else, but this bit wound me up:

"The only drama the BBC will boast about are Merlin and Doctor Who, which are fine, but they're children's programmes. They're not for adults.

"And they're very good children's programmes, don't get me wrong, they're wonderfully written ... but they are not for adults.

Now I don't know about Merlin due to never having watched more than about 5 minutes of it, but I hate it when people dismiss Doctor Who as a children's show. At the very least it's a family show, and often deals with themes and ideas that normal mainstream drama hardly ever touch upon, and has often explored pretty dark territories too. So to say it's not for adults, well, that's just idiocy, and I'm genuinely surprised Fry made such a comment. All I can guess is that maybe he's still bitter that they rejected his script...

[Jemble Fred]

All I can guess is that maybe he's still bitter that they rejected his script...

I thought he never had time to write a word of it, and so turned them down?

He's entirely right anyway, it is a children's show, albeit a quality one, and one that the whole family can enjoy. The whole family can also enjoy Pixar movies, or Horrible Histories, or Phillip Pullman books, but they're still aimed at children.

The fact that you consider calling something 'a children's show' (when it is) dismissing it is quite sad, really.

[Small Man Big Horse]

Yeah, I thought someone would pick up on that. And to be fair, I shouldn't have been so dismissive an entire genre of tv. I very rarely watch it personally, but I imagine there's some great stuff being made (as well as the cunty Horrid Henry). That all said, I still don't think Who is a children's programme.

As for Fry's script, I'm pretty sure he wrote it and they claimed it would be too expensive / need a rewrite, but I'm not 100% sure - I'll go and find out and report back asap!

Edit: From Wiki:

Due to budgetary constraints, the episode was moved to Series 3 and replaced by Fear Her.

The story was subsequently abandoned, as Fry did not have spare time for the rewriting necessary to replace Rose with Martha. Fry said, "They asked me to do a series and I tried, but I just ran out of time, and so I wrote a pathetic letter of "I'm sorry I can't do this" to Russell Davies."

Whether that's the truth or not is of course open to question - after all it's only just been revealed that RTD's supposed plan to always have Ecclestone regenerate at the end of the first series was a load of balls.

[Shoulders?-Stomach!]

I hate it when people dismiss Doctor Who as a children's show

Because you're an adult and people saying that embarrasses you?

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with it. Something can be a children's show and still be watched and loved by adults. Just curious as to why that would arouse irritation, almost as if you think it being called a children's show lessens it somehow.

[Small Man Big Horse]

Not at all, Up is one of my all time favourite movies and I love it to pieces, yet is clearly a children's film. It's a good question though - I just feel that whilst kids enjoy it on a certain level (as they may well do with many other mainstream works), Who has a lot of darker themes and idea's going on that they don't really understand (admittedly this is only going by the reaction my Godchildren who are 4 and 5 have) that make it more of a family show than a children's show at the very least.

I mean, you wouldn't call Eastender's a children's show, and that is far more simplistic when it comes to dealing with similar concepts (eg. dealing with dangerous situations / loss of loved ones, etc, etc.)

[thepuffpastryhangman]

3nu

He's entirely right anyway, it is a children's show,

That's a bit forward, have you actually even asked Stewart Lee yet?

Fry's right this time but from what I saw of America it was little better than what I saw of Jamie Oliver's trip round there.

I daren't say Fry's sexuality procludes him from giving many points to the family viewing aspect of shows, it's clearly something else. But maybe he can't imagine himself with (his own) children sharing Doctor Who so that part of the experience is less valuable to him.

Stuff being for everyone is a highly desirable quality in itself.

Universal appeal having cunts.

[biggytitbo]

Stephen Fry is annoying more like.

Doctor Who isn't a children's show, its a family show and there's a difference. The BBC trumpet it so loudly because it essentially reinvented family drama TV and many since have followed. Fry should know this since he almost write for the programme.

Whilst there's a lot I agree with him in his rant, he also yet again shows those traits of been totally out of touch with normal people, letting down that facade to reveal the rarefied, extremely privileged multi millionaire he actually is, rather than the sat next to Sid Waddle man of the people he often likes to seem.

while he dismissed those who hold the BBC to account for the way it spends the licence fee - "who think we have the right to expect executives to travel coach class" - as "bordering on the pathologically cruel".

The BBC cannot please all of the people all of the time, nor should it, Fry argued. "If you get a bad olive in a tin of olives, even a whole bad tin of olives, you throw it away but you don't make that much of a fuss about it. "

[thepuffpastryhangman]

Yes, he should've moaned about it being a family show.

[mobias]

I've still got a lot of admiration for Fry even though he has come out with a few things recently that I disagree with. However although I agree with what he says in that article I don't see how he can reconcile any of what he says by having Alan fucking Davis ruining QI week after week. The show would be a real jewel in the crown of the BBC if it wasn't for that twat.

[Lee Van Cleef]

I do sometimes wonder why crappy kids programmes like Merlin and Doctor Who seem to be so popular. But it passes.

[Neil]

I always google words when I'm unsure of the correct meaning and/or spelling.  In this instance, I couldn't as I was out and on my phone, so the end result is that I seem to have accused Alan Davies of ruining QI by fucking nappies.  I stand by that - I saw him sat next to Phill Jupitus on there once, so that right there is a nob in close proximity to a big pile of shit.