Your worst ever TV dramas - and why

[Seymour Clufley]

Offsetting Channel 4's effort, I thought we could have a thread specifically about bad drama - what it is, what makes a drama bad, examples of it, and our own experiences.

I'll start off. No doubt some of you will have heard of a 1973-1976 anthology show called Thriller. I discovered it around September last year on Amazon. As a fan of 1970s drama in general (especially Blake's 7, Doctor Who, Nigel Kneale's Beasts and Brideshead Revisited) who often enjoys low-budget stuff (because it makes them try harder with scripts, acting etc.), I thought Thriller looked like my cup of tea.

Well, fuck, was I wrong. I received the huge boxset for Christmas and have since then been ploughing through the 43 episodes whenever I've felt up to it. I realised very quickly that in fact this was not "one of the greatest dramas Britain has made" or "a masterpiece", but a dreadful piece of shit. The reviews on Amazon and IMDb would have you believe this is a beacon of how telly drama should be done. Well...

1. Token American actors in every single episode (it was being sold to America)

2. Non-existent characterisation. The characters are completely interchangeable and there is nothing interesting about any of them.

3. Uninspired storylines. Rarely does Brian Clemens push the boat out and surprise you. Usually, the ending is clear by about halfway through.

4. Absurd behaviour by characters to facilitate the plot.

5. Extremely same-y from episode to episode.

6. General laziness in direction, acting and especially writing.

7. Total banality. There is nothing to an episode of Thriller except what you see onscreen. Absolutely depthless.

**----------------------------------------------------------------**

I can't think of any other bad dramas off the cuff, although obviously Torchwood, the new Robin Hood and, to a lesser extent, the new Doctor Who all go without saying for me. However I've hammered on about them so I won't start again.

What are your nominations?

[Jemble Fred]

1. 24
2. Lost

Tried with both â€" the former... I can't possibly imagine anything more boring than Keifer Sutherland getting involved in some kind of American conspiracy IN REAL FUCKING TIME. I mean, that's the definiton of dull, surely? But then I'm not a fan of action thrillers generally.
The latter â€" my god, I tried, I really did. But not one likeable character and, in most cases, not one believable accent. Seems that the show has few fans left at this late stage, so I guess I saved myself a lot of time.

I'm not much of a fan of US Dramas full-stop, to be honest â€" most of them I either just haven't got into, so I'd just leave well alone without actual criticism (Sopranos, Desperate Housewives, Grey's Anatomy etc), but the ones I like tend to have a strong British connection â€" House, and, best of all, Rome â€" American money & production quality, but superb British cast.

3. Torchwood â€" I lasted two or three episodes â€" the one with the evacuee and the time anomalies was perhaps the most obviously flawed piece of screenwriting I have ever encountered.

[Santa's Boyfriend]

Lost is a great idea and the first two or three episodes were absolutely fantastic.  However if you want to make a great drama you really need to ADVANCE THE FUCKING STORYLINE AND GIVE US SOME ANSWERS ONCE IN A WHILE.  They could easily have cut at least half of the first series out and it would have been a better story.  

I gave up about 3 episodes into the second series when I realised they weren't going to bother with any answers any time soon and were probably going to drag out that whole "push the button" thing for the whole series and then decide to stop pushing it at the end of the series and leave that as a cliffhanger for series 3.  (Was I right by the way?)  Also stop going into their fucking backstories!  It was interesting for a while, but it really should have stopped with series 1.

I would be interested in seeing a fan edit of Lost to edit it all into a decent series with all the guff taken out, but for me they fucking blew it when they realised they had an audience and decided they needed to extend their run.

[Uncle TechTip]

'Beginning, middle & end' stories generally do not work on US TV. The desire to keep a ratings hit alive goes against that idea. Thus all US dramas must be of the self-contained kind, with different stories happening episode-to-episode. Or those that try to weave an overall story arc have to call it a day when that story starts to expire. (West Wing)

Otherwise you end up with the kind of mess that Lost is, more "beginning, middle, filler, filler, filler, filler, filler, end" than anything else, no wonder people are switching off in droves. Or you have to something very regimental like 24, with its definite 24 episodes and proper story arc. This worked well in the first two series but repeating the same trick 6 times with increasingly unbelieveable incidents in each stretches the patience of the casual viewer.

[Jack Shaftoe]

I sort of quite liked 24 at first, but the increaded 'torture excusathon' that it's becoming has completely put me off.

I genuinely hated the second episode of Torchwood more than anything I've ever seen. Doctor Who annoys me intensely, but there's a goodwill around it that makes me think 'well at least some people are enjoying it'. Torchwood though, clearly thinks it's the fucking dogs, whereas it is in fact taking an interesting premise ('The Who continuity without the Doctor, set in a modern british city') then spunking it (almost literally) against the wall.

[Joe Maplin]

Torchwood, the worst television programme ever made. Smug and idiotic, it really thinks its the fucking business doesn't it?

They take a fun person like Captain Jack and turn him into a pompous bore. A Parker character that sounds like Ronan Keating, a wonky mouthed rapist, gap toothed heroine and a Japanese woman that doesn't do anything. The best character is the woman that tried to kill them all, but naturally she shot herself in episode one.  That pterodactyl should swoop down and eat the bloody lot of them.

The Welsh woman having an affair with the rapist, then it not being mentioned for about four episodes, just sloppy and vile.

It doesn't work as pornography, science fiction or soap opera.;They're bound to have a threesome in it soon as the lead characters will have ran out of other lead characters to shag with.

[Mr. Analytical]

I'd also go with Torchwood.  It's certainly the worse piece of drama that I've watched in the last 5 years.

[Suttonpubcrawl]

People who hate Lost always seem to be so passionate about hating it. I don't really get it, what's so offensive about it? Jemble Fred's bizarre comment up there that  it "seems that the show has few fans left at this late stage" is just typical, people who hate Lost seem to love gloating about it being bad. Anyway, as far as I can tell it's not actually true that the show has few fans left. Among the people I know it seems to be more popular than ever. It can be very frustrating at times, for example all the endless boring flashbacks about Jack's fucking wife who is possibly the least interesting character ever to appear on a TV programme, but what programme doesn't have flaws? Overall I think it's still a brilliantly exciting and interesting show that really keeps you interested in what's actually going on and what will happen next.

The people who say it should have run for only one season are out of their minds. If an American programme runs for one season then it's usually considered a failure, and for a series with a big overall plot to run for several seasons is fairly common. I gather that they've talked about it running for 5 seasons, and although I could see how that could perhaps have been cut down to three or four, fitting it into two, let alone one would probably seem very squashed down.

[Jemble Fred]

People who hate Lost always seem to be so passionate about hating it.

No they don't. It's just lame, but not worth getting het up about.

I've been surrounded by Lost obsessives for about two years now, at work especially. They used to be incredibly boring about how great it was for the first season or so, now they're very boring about how transparently awful it is â€" not passionately though, dismissively. I just keep schtum.

[wherearethespoons]

1. 24
2. Lost

Ooh yeah. In total agreement about that. That is why Sky had me in hysterics over the Virgin thing. That was two of their reasons why people should stick with them.

Never been much of a fan for American television (particularly their comedy) but I must express a love for Monk and The Sopranos.

[rjd2]

Prison Break a truly awful programme, a show littered with rubbish plot twists, with no idea of plot pacing and featuring some of the most pointless actors I ever had the misfortune to see spouting inane dialogue episode after episode. I was watching Deadwood this week and it’s so depressing to think that intelligent television which has total respect for its audience gets cancelled but inane triple like Prison Break flourishes. Desperate Housewives, basically a dumbed down Sex and the City which really is saying something. Its also unbearably smug, I know theirs being a lot of sublime drama from the states recently but it worries that people who should know better will look back at this time and hold Prison Break and other vacuous shite in higher esteem than the likes of The Wire and Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip.
Oh just checked Studio 60 could be cancelled due to lack of viewers.
Fuck sake.

[SOTS]

I don't mind a crap drama, as long as it doesn't take itself seriously. However, there are quite a few that do, and are also terrible.

[Analrapist]

How about Metrosexuality, Channel 4's horribly self-concious bit of nonsense set in Notting Hill where apparently everyone's bisexual and tiresome things like homophobia and interesting plotlines don't exist? This would be the same Notting Hill I walked around during the carnival, having various lyrics about "batty boys" blasted at me. I believe it was broadcast in 2000, around the same time as the first series of Big Brother.

If you thought RTD and Torchwood was bad then you really need to check this out. I doubt it'll ever appear over at The Other Place, though.

[Seymour Clufley]

How about Metrosexuality, Channel 4's horribly self-concious bit of nonsense set in Notting Hill where apparently everyone's bisexual and tiresome things like homophobia and interesting plotlines don't exist? This would be the same Notting Hill I walked around during the carnival, having various lyrics about "batty boys" blasted at me. I believe it was broadcast in 2000, around the same time as the first series of Big Brother.

If you thought RTD and Torchwood was bad then you really need to check this out. I doubt it'll ever appear over at The Other Place, though.

Ah,

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0212216/

With a certain Noel Clarke in the lead role.

I'd have thought 2001 was too early for something like this. I didn't think the M phrase even existed until about 2004 but that's what you get for relying on the Guardian for your updates on the state of cuntishness.

[gatchamandave]

Hmmm...

Being  a  bit  of  a  fan,  there  are  few  things  worse  in  the  world  than  a  bad  Sherlock  Holmes  drama.

I  would  here  remind  the  gentlemen  of  the  jury  of  the  BBC  version  of  the  Hound  of  The  Baskervilles  starring  Richard  "  I  can  fuck  up  Moriarty  too"  Roxburgh  from  a  few  years  ago,  in  which  Holmes  shoots  up  in  a  station  WC.  Or  Rupert  Everett  in  The  Case  of  the  Silk  Stocking  ( IIRC)  from  the  next  year.  Lamentable  both,  I'm  sure  many  will  agree.

However  the  worst,  the  very  worst,  must  be  the  american  adaptation  of   The  Sign  of  the  Four  which  starred  Richard  Johnston  as  Dr Watson  and,  er,  Charlton  Heston  as  The  Great  Detective.  

First,  we  have  Watson  as  humpty  throughout  because  Holmes  will  keep  belittling  him-  which  demonstrates  the  willingness  of  the  Americans  to  leave  no  cliche  unturned.  But  fear  not,  dear  reader,  for  by  the  end  of  the  show,  Holmes  proclaims  how  much  he  needs,  respects  and -  errr,  good  Lord -  loves  Watson.

But  wait,  oh  fellow  fan,  isn't  this  the  story  in which  Watson  plights  his  troth  to  the  poor  Miss  Mary  Morston ?

Well,  yes,  usually...but  y'see  the  writers  of  this  particular  version  have  a novel  twist  undreamed  by  Conan  Doyle.  For  lo  and  behold  in  this  version  Mary  Morston

Spoiler alert

is  the  murderer

[close]

Twats.

[The Widow of Brid]

Wow. I won't rest happy until I've seen that now.

[Seymour Clufley]

The  Case  of  the  Silk  Stocking

I'm so glad you reminded me of that in this thread. What a piece of shite it was.

I thought Everett was dreadful in the role. Nothing interesting there at all. I know we're in the glorious age of character subtlety, but all he ever did was stare longingly into the distance like a golden retriever.

And equally shite were the attempts to shock you by having Edwardian aristocrats talking candidly about paedophilia (cos, like, they were just like us...)

Do you know about the adaptations starring Matt Frewer as Holmes? They seem to be widely regarded as the worst.

[Catalogue Trousers]

Seeing that Mrs Trousers is a major-league Holmes aficionado, I picked her up a video of some made-for-TV production a few years back (the production itself is somewhat older) starring...Christopher Lee as Holmes and...Patrick MacNee as Watson.

This will clearly be either the greatest thing ever or the biggest pile of crap ever. We've still not watched it yet. The state of Holmesian tension continues.

[peet]

What's everyone's least favourite pasta sauce?

[gatchamandave]

Seeing that Mrs Trousers is a major-league Holmes aficionado, I picked her up a video of some made-for-TV production a few years back (the production itself is somewhat older) starring...Christopher Lee as Holmes and...Patrick MacNee as Watson.

This will clearly be either the greatest thing ever or the biggest pile of crap ever. We've still not watched it yet. The state of Holmesian tension continues.

Macnee  is  also  the  good  Doctor  in  Sherlock  Holmes  in  New  York in  which  Holmes  is  essayed  by  Roger  Moore,  which  is  nearly  as  bad  as  the  gawd-awful  Matt  Frewer  ones (  yup,  they're  as  bad  as  everyone  says ).  If  I  recall  correctly,  though,  the  Chris  Lee  one  is  a  German  production ?  

Could  be  quite  good.

Speaking  of  abominations  -  who  here  has  seen  the  original  Casino  Royale  in  which  Barry  Nelson  gives  us  a crew-cut  " Jimmy "  Bond  baled  out  of  trouble  by,  oh  blimey  it  hurts  to  type  this,  Clarence ( sic )  Leiter ?  

Here's  our  man



Notice  the  fine  cut  of  his  jacket  -  two  sizes  too  big  for  him.  

Peter  Lorre  plays  Le  Chiffre  but  sadly  gives  a  performance  slightly  less  lively  than  the  one  he  gives  in  Voyage  to  the  Bottom  of  the  Sea,  whilst  the  writers,  in a  fine  hint  of  what  is  to  come,  ditch  Fleming's  plot  after  about  20  minutes  -  the  game itself  taking  four  hands  of  cards  to  sort  out  everything.  Worth  seeing.  Once.

[Dark Sky]

1. 24
2. Lost

Tried with both â€" the former... I can't possibly imagine anything more boring than Keifer Sutherland getting involved in some kind of American conspiracy IN REAL FUCKING TIME.

What really annoys me is that it isn't even in real time!!!!

Actually I've never watched an episode.

I tried watching Lost, but it was the most clichéd load of excruciatingly dull and hackneyed mess of boring nonsense that I did eventually give up.  I did stick with it for fourteen episodes because people I know who love all told me I had to "stick with it until episode fourteen, then you'll LOVE it!!!!", and I did, but I didn't, and now I think that anyone who likes Lost is probably really lousy in bed and will die young.

At least Torchwood was a bit of fun and was entertaining.

About a year ago I finally got around to buying some Six Feet Under on deev, and blow me but if it isn't wonderful.  Now why did I avoid Six Feet Under when it first started, and yet succumbed to watching Lost?  Foolish boy.

[Backstage With Slowdive]

Well, I got the Thriller box last September and worked through it all. Although I'd agree there is some tat in there I'd say there's a good core of quality.

My brother saw some of it with me (one of the weaker ones, unfortunately) and he's had no interest in the thing ever since. I keep meaning to draw up a list of "The Good Bits" for his benefit, so I might post that on here when it's ready).

Two that I remember: "The Double Kill" and "The Eyes Have It". And also both the Dinsdale Landen ones.

[Seymour Clufley]

And also both the Dinsdale Landen ones.

Yes, Dinsdale Landen is a treat. But as a mark of how bad the writing is, don't you think he was playing exactly the same role in both of them? As in, it weren't for him, the characters would have no character.

Nevertheless, an enjoyable actor and sadly missed.

[Famous Mortimer]

The reason I dislike "Lost" now is the way it never reveals anything. You think the answer to a puzzling question is almost upon us, but all that happens is 20 more questions spring up. It's like one step forward, six steps back, to the point where I feel we actually understand less than we did at the beginning of the show.

The first series I loved, because the quality of the writing and the characters was enough to power through it. But it got much worse in series 2, to the point I abandoned it about 10 episodes in. I wanted some happiness for some of the characters and the misery was just piled higher and higher upon them. Now, I'm watching a bit of series 3 on Sky and it seems they're tying themselves in knots trying desperately to maintain some continuity with what they laid out in the early episodes. I wanted it so much to be good- a clever show about something out of the ordinary, but it just fails.

"Prison Break" is a great example of how not to fall into those traps, I thought. Hugely clever, almost perfectly acted by the cast, relationships you totally believe in and a satisfying story arc. Horses for courses, I suppose.

[Backstage With Slowdive]

And also both the Dinsdale Landen ones.

Yes, Dinsdale Landen is a treat. But as a mark of how bad the writing is, don't you think he was playing exactly the same role in both of them?

Um... he was playing the same role. Matthew Earp the detective. Check your discs again.

That's the sole example of a recurrent character in the series, btw.

[Small Man Big Horse]

That NYLON thing springs to mind, I only ever watched about 30 minutes of it, but it just seemed so badly written, full of beautiful people whining a lot.

Not a tv show, but I once saw an am-dram Sherlock Holmes play where Holmes ended up being the murderer. The audience of about 10 all looked aghast as they exited.

[Seymour Clufley]

Um... he was playing the same role. Matthew Earp the detective.

Oh, er... shit. Egg on my face. IMDB affirms you.

Honestly, I was sure he'd given a different name in the second episode.

[Backstage With Slowdive]

In both stories he does a comment about how odd it is that an Englishman would have the surname famous from the gunfight at the OK Corral, if I remember.

Yes, there is an awful lot of sub-Amicus cobblers in Thriller. But there are also some real gems, and some nice work by good performers.

[Pepotamo1985]

Ugly Betty. Perhaps a trifle premature, but having sat through 4 episodes of this interminable banal-o-rama, I have little recourse. The scripts are dull and uninspired, the acting scales the talent gamut  from bearable to appalling, the plots mediocre. Not a single character is in any way relatable, nor likeable. This is perhaps attributable to the the writing team, seemingly in a state of confusion as to whether the show is a comedy, a drama, a thriller, a satire, a social commentary or a lighthearted flapdoodle. In the event, it succeeds at being none of the above.

At its best, it's achingly dull. At its worst, it's a sphincter tighteningly annoying bunch of toss.

[Cack Hen]

Two words: As. If.