Steven Coogan autobiography

[TJ]

It's a bit like the situation with The Daleks - there'll always be people, not least the creators themselves, taking sides and belittling the other's contribution, which you can't really do for something created by committee.

Having done a lot of research over the years and spoken to all of those involved at various points, I think the most sensible thing to do is to treat 'Alan Partidge' as two separate characters (something that, I concede, Coogan may have clumsily been trying to do there). The chat show host fleshed out by, well, Marber mainly has little in common with the surreally sports-obsessed voiceoverman that Partridge originally was and that L&H wrote 90% of the original sketches for (there's paperwork to back this up - Coogan did do a couple himself, though it appears that despite what he says, 'through the chicaaaaane' was a scripted co-write; easy for these things to blur together in your mind though so he might easily be referring to another genuinely improvised bit).

Except... there's some minor elements of the eventual character that were introduced in those original sketches. Would he, for example, have been quite so quick to read any old shit put on a piece of paper in front of him if there wasn't the background in reading out football transfer news about 'The Real Ghostbusters Fridge Magnet' (as Lee & Herring a line as they come)?

[Ignatius_S]

It's like who created Spider-Man, Lee or Ditko? Lee had the idea, Ditko fleshed it out with what came to be the essentials. Both deserve the credit of creator/inventor, imo, but I can see how each think they did the more important part.

Mmm, think Jack Kirby had something to say about that...

But on the subject of Steve Ditko's contribution to Spider-Man, I would always have said the creation of that iconic costume and mask is one of his greatest accomplishments. Then I saw this last week....

There are claims that Kirby worked for that company with a further suggestion that was one of the items he designed for them. Although the first mask looks something like the Spiderman one, it was phased out and replaced by another. However, the costume doesn't look like anything like the Spiderman  one when put side by side (e.g. see http://hero-envy.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/1963-ben-cooper-spider-man-halloween.html – the whole thing is worth a read).

...
Except... there's some minor elements of the eventual character that were introduced in those original sketches. Would he, for example, have been quite so quick to read any old shit put on a piece of paper in front of him if there wasn't the background in reading out football transfer news about 'The Real Ghostbusters Fridge Magnet' (as Lee & Herring a line as they come)?

Personally, I would say yes – he's the type of presenter of highly dubious competency, very reliant on autocues etc. However, I would also say that when fleshing the character out, nothing was done that was drastically at odds with what had come first and I always felt they wanted some consistency – in any case, someone could go from TDT/OTH to Knowing Me, Knowing You and recognise Alan straight away. Quite often, when a character gets a spin-off or a second life etc., they'll change elements of that character, which doesn't always work (e.g. The Cleveland Show). However, in some cases like The Great Gildersleeve – and Partridge – they'll keep the character faithful to the original concept and the extra detail/changes worked brilliantly.

[Adlopa]

Quote from: Ignatius_S on Today at 05:23:43 pm

Quote from: Dr Rock on Today at 01:22:53 pm
It's like who created Spider-Man, Lee or Ditko? Lee had the idea, Ditko fleshed it out with what came to be the essentials. Both deserve the credit of creator/inventor, imo, but I can see how each think they did the more important part.

Mmm, think Jack Kirby had something to say about that...

Delurking just to push this thread a bit further off-topic with this great 1990 Jack Kirby interview I read the other day in which he pretty much calls Stan Lee a no-talent bum who never created anything.

Oh, and:

KIRBY: I created Spider-Man. We decided to give it to Steve Ditko. I drew the first Spider-Man cover. I created the character. I created the costume. I created all those books, but I couldn't do them all. We decided to give the book to Steve Ditko who was the right man for the job. He did a wonderful job on that.

[Beep Cleep Chimney]

There's a second interview video up. 

http://youtu.be/nkpBp9tlb2E

[emmett85]

Anyone listen to the two hour 4 extra show yesterday?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b06gx1tz

[Hey Kidz]

Any good?

[derek stitt]

Tis a memoir, not novel innit bruv

That's true, though for Jake Thingray, it'll be wanking material.

[emmett85]

Any good?

45 minutes in (of 3 hours, not 2), it's very good.

[Crabwalk]

I bought the paperback version at Edinburgh airport today.

I opened it on the plane to find that the first 40 pages are from 'The Mountain Shadow' by Gregory David Roberts.

This printing error will presumably lead to all copies being pulped. But reading on, the similarities with 'Bouncing Back' don't end there; there's a fair amount of 'needless to say...' moments in there. It's been a good, if erratic, read so far. Due to the error my version starts several chapters in, but already there're been good titbits on Alpha Pap (including his account of why Brendan Gleeson bailed, Iannucci's displeasure with the direction the script took and why Julia Davis was replaced) and some nice insights into The Trip's gestation and his relationship with Brydon (who he seems to hold in very high esteem).

The structure seems very jumpy and Coogan's mind races all over the place from one sentence to the next. You can see why he always writes with partners. But he's very open and sincere in that way reformed hedonists can often be post-rehab and therapy, and it's made for fascinating reading so far.

I'm looking forward to reading on, then getting a replacement copy and finding out what's covered in the first 40 pages...

[BritishHobo]

Fuck, Brendan Gleeson was it? In the film's commentary they refuse to give a name (merely saying that you'd likely find it if you googled hard enough), and Liam Neeson was a popular theory here, IIRC. What does he say about that/Iannucci's thoughts on the script? I know there was a lot of trouble with him re-writing scenes right up until the last minute (and that's supposedly why Gleeson left, having been promised by Coogan that there'd be a much more concrete script, which didn't materialise), but I didn't know Armando wasn't happy with it.

[Crabwalk]

Yes, it was the first time I'd heard it confirmed that it was Gleason who pulled out. Coogan had promised him that he'd improve the script but hadn't, leaving Gleason feeling 'let down'. Coogan says he doesn't blame Gleason at all.

Sounds like the production really was a shambles early on, with Coogan having no senior partner to lean on as Iannucci was shooting Veep and unwilling to step in even when Coogan asked him for help as they weren't getting anything usable during the first few days of shooting.

Sounds like the Gibbons saved things by pure graft on set (with them almost quitting too), although what they were coming up with wasn't  doing it for Armando, who pretty much washed his hands of the production, saying it 'wasn't his sense of humour', which was very interesting to read.

It's also interesting to read about the original plot ideas Coogan and Baynham pitched, which I won't spoil here, but raise questions about cross-fertilisation with Four Lions, which goes unacknowledged.

[BritishHobo]

Blimey. Cheers for the info; I might pick it up just for that section. By all accounts it was a mess of a production, but I didn't realise it was quite that bad.

I wonder if they'll approach production of the sequel very differently as a result. With Iannucci no longer on Veep, he may play a bigger role, and it sounds like Coogan and the Gibbonses wouldn't be overly keen to have a repeat of how the first one went.  The biggest problem, as far as I could glean from the commentary, was that Coogan wanted to keep the script as loose as possible for as long as possible, so jokes could be tossed out or written in no matter how far they were into production. That'd work with something like Monty Python, but obviously they still wanted a stable and down-to-earth narrative, and those two aims don't line up very well.

[DrunkCountry]

Vaguely related. It was a toss up between this thread or kick-starting a long dormant MMM s02 thread. My brother-in-law was on the radio again this afternoon, so I got an AP MMM reference in a text read out via a character I've been texting this show on spuriously for the past couple of years.

https://audioboom.com/boos/3694059-nicola-in-whitchurch-blast-from-the-past

[Repeater]

Good patter

[holyzombiejesus]

I had a quick browse in WH Smiths and read that when he did that The Day Today The Pool sketch, Chris Morris told him he should give up comedy as he would never do anything that funny again. Coogan concurs.

[SimonJT]

A brilliant 1h30 chat between Coogan and Iannucci here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKmYLm23pTE&feature=youtu.be - really funny, and with some inyeresting insights into their writing process. You learn too that

Spoiler alert

They started planning a 2nd series of The Day Today back in the 90s. Imagine!

[close]

The last half an hour is a Q&A, with one question designed to infuriate this forum, and delivered in such a way as to do so perfectly.

[Sony Walkman Prophecies]

Had a watch of the video. I thought they both came across as incredibly peculiar and abrasive. Every question was taken as a personal affront (particularly the one about canned laughter), and chat itself felt somewhere between a family intervention and a DVD commentary.

I know fame - particularly TV-fame - can send people a bit weird, but there's something seriously awry when you make a full-time buffoon like Tom Cruise look normal by comparison.

I think I'll leave the autobiography and stick to my Bit Torrent rip of I Partridge. At least Alan, in his more self-reflective moments, knows he's ridiculous and out of step with human society.

[Ambient Sheep]

It's a bit like the situation with The Daleks - there'll always be people, not least the creators themselves, taking sides and belittling the other's contribution, which you can't really do for something created by committee...

Something that occurs to me, reading that and thinking about poor old Ray Cusick, is who should take the credit for Alan Partridge's LOOK? 

Steve Coogan?  Chris Morris?  Armando Iannucci?  Andrew Gillman?  Lisa Cavalli-Green?[nb]Hair & makeup designer, according to IMDb.[/nb]  Marcia Stanton and/or Lindsey McLean[nb]Costume designers, according to IMDb.[/nb]  Someone else?

I guess the Pringle sweater was an obvious enough choice (although somebody had to make it), but the pudding-bowl haircut etc... presumably that would be LCG's input?  Or not?  Were LCG, MS and/or LML told "He's a 70s/80s-style naff sports anchor, get on with it", or was there more specific direction given and, if so, by whom?

Haven't read his bio (yet), maybe it talks about this aspect in there.

[Jobey]

A brilliant 1h30 chat between Coogan and Iannucci here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKmYLm23pTE&feature=youtu.be - really funny, and with some inyeresting insights into their writing process. You learn too that

Spoiler alert

They started planning a 2nd series of The Day Today back in the 90s. Imagine!

[close]

The last half an hour is a Q&A, with one question designed to infuriate this forum, and delivered in such a way as to do so perfectly.

I was there that night. I went to the mic and waited to ask 'What is Owen Wilson's nose like up close?'
After seeing how Coogan answered some of these questions, I am glad I pussied out.

[Don_Preston]

Should've asked which variety of McKorkindale's Vinegar they preferred.

[iamcoop]

Had a watch of the video. I thought they both came across as incredibly peculiar and abrasive. Every question was taken as a personal affront (particularly the one about canned laughter), and chat itself felt somewhere between a family intervention and a DVD commentary.

I noticed this too, and whilst I know Coogan can be very tetchy in interviews Iannucci always seems to come across and warm and open to questions so I can only conclude it was Coogan that instilled that weird atmosphere of barely concealed hostility.

I know he says he's at peace with Partridge now and will happily talk about the character but I suspect this is completely false and he's now saying that a) in hope it will stop people asking about Partridge or b) he's aware he comes across as a bit of a miserable fucker and is just playing the game now. I suspect the latter as he's clearly an intelligent and very self aware man.

There was a certain amount of open disdain thrown at some of the audience members during the Q&A that would have made me pretty pissed off had I paid the £20 or whatever it was to attend.

A very, very strange interview that if anything has put me off buying the book.

[Mango Chimes]

There was a certain amount of open disdain thrown at some of the audience members during the Q&A that would have made me pretty pissed off had I paid the £20 or whatever it was to attend.

What?  At any Q&A, you're lucky if the majority of 'questions' aren't from awful wanks who take the opportunity to spout off a soliloquy of their grand and impressive opinions.  Then you'll get a few asking things which have already been answered in the chat that immediately preceded the Q&A.  Q&As are awful.  People are shit at them.  The only disdain I recall from this was justified.

"Steve, Armando, it's all very well you talking about Steve's work in this chat about Steve's autobiography, but where's the much more important Chris Morris who is better, huh?"  That was a rude question.  I think Steve was very polite, considering, and Armando played the good host by stepping in and swiping it away by focusing on the weird tautological bit he was asked.

And the canned laughter thing was taken as an insult because it is an insult.  Canned laughter is sticking fake laughs on jokes.  It'd be quite a sensitive thing to bring up if they had used it, and an offensive accusation to make as they hadn't.

(I think in this case, the poor guy asking the question just fucked up how to refer to the concept of laughter on a soundtrack.  But as professional TV reviewers still criticise programmes incorrectly for using canned laughter when they've actually got a studio audience, I think it's fair enough that Coogan got a bit narked and felt the need to clarify.)

[greenman]

Something that occurs to me, reading that and thinking about poor old Ray Cusick, is who should take the credit for Alan Partridge's LOOK? 

Steve Coogan?  Chris Morris?  Armando Iannucci?  Andrew Gillman?  Lisa Cavalli-Green?[nb]Hair & makeup designer, according to IMDb.[/nb]  Marcia Stanton and/or Lindsey McLean[nb]Costume designers, according to IMDb.[/nb]  Someone else?

I guess the Pringle sweater was an obvious enough choice (although somebody had to make it), but the pudding-bowl haircut etc... presumably that would be LCG's input?  Or not?  Were LCG, MS and/or LML told "He's a 70s/80s-style naff sports anchor, get on with it", or was there more specific direction given and, if so, by whom?

Haven't read his bio (yet), maybe it talks about this aspect in there.

The look of early Partridge wasn't I'd say that big an influence on what followed. as you say fairly standard dated sports presenter but without much of a hint at the young fogey look that would follow on NMNY and be expanded on in IAP.

As has been mentioned its very easy to see the same segments on OTH being covered by someone using a very different personality without a great deal of change to the writing.

[Uncle TechTip]

He talked about that on the Radio 4 Extra interview with Frank Cottrell Boyce. It was when they came to radio KMKY, and the realisation there would be an audience, the first time anyone saw Alan. Coogan said they all had the idea of Pringle sweaters and such, but he himself went out (almost last minute I think) and chose the first outfit - probably a suit.

That interview was the best of any I've heard recently, and there's been quite a few. It also included Knowing Knowing Me Knowing You, a behind the scenes episode that had passed me by and was very funny. I'm sure it's still on iPlayer.

[Bingo Fury]

Delurking just to push this thread a bit further off-topic with this great 1990 Jack Kirby interview I read the other day in which he pretty much calls Stan Lee a no-talent bum who never created anything.

Just want to say that this is a terrific interview, and would be interesting for those not even slightly into comics. I'm only up to page 3, and haven't got the time tonight to read any more, but it's a brilliant insight into pre-War New York and how it moulded Kirby's character. His recollections about the violence endemic in the Lower East Side and the way people actually looked up to crooked politicians are edging into GoodFellas territory.

[giveover]

He does come across very prickly and not so self-aware in the first few chapters. It surprised me as I thought he was classier than that.

Does anyone have an epub of the book they'd be willing to share? Please PM!

[Glebe]

Guardian thing was very interesting... I agree they reacted in a bit of an abrasive way with the audience at points, but it seems like they were just kidding around and giving the audience a bit of credit, rather then patronising them and being all nicey-nice.

No, I've changed my mind, they're cunts.

[popcorn]

Something that occurs to me, reading that and thinking about poor old Ray Cusick, is who should take the credit for Alan Partridge's LOOK? 

Speaking of Alan Partridge's look, I've recently completely rewritten the Partridge Wiki page, and it's in need of a photo of Coogan in character as Partridge. But we can't use official BBC materials without jumping through complicated legal hoops.

Does anyone have any good photos they themselves took of Partridge (eg at a book signing, live event, movie premier or whatever) they would be willing to donate to Wikipedia?

[popcorn]

That stuff about the Alpha Papa production is fascinating, thanks so much. I'll probably have to read the book now, worse luck.

I always felt that Alpha Papa got by mostly on goodwill for the character. It does feel very half-baked to me, and it worried me from the start that Iannucci didn't seem very involved.

[Crabwalk]

You should definitely read it. Coogan says that if he'd been allowed he would've pulled the entire production before they started filming, and it was the loneliest experience of his life.

Seems happy with the end result though (I think it's better than it had any right to be given the turmoil in which it was made).