Jeremy Thrope: Sexual Deviant! Featuring Hugh Grant

[BlodwynPig]

To be fair, the Telegraph and the Guardian went with the same headline.

[Alberon]

Good final part. Hugh Grant was fantastic as always, often doing so much by just sitting hunched in the dock motionless with a face like stone. Watching the documentary after on BBC 4 that was made in expectation of a guilty verdict I was struck by how good a job Ben Whishaw was doing as Norman Scott.

And if you want a easy link to watch Peter Cook's evisceration of the judge in the trial just follow this link.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kyos-M48B8U

When I first saw this I knew virtually nothing of the Thorpe case, so it's good to watch it with a full understanding of the allegations which, obviously, just adds to the humour in the sketch.

It's mad that 40 years later this is still causing ructions. Gwent Police's fucking up of the recent investigations is just plain shocking.

[Harry Badger]

I almost squealed with delight when Entirely a Matter For You came on at the end.

[metaltax]

Bit of an odd almost-blink-and-you'd-miss-it turn from Patrick Marber.

[DrGreggles]

Bit of an odd almost-blink-and-you'd-miss-it turn from Patrick Marber.

False nose or nose job?

[Kelvin]

I was late to this, as I only watched the first two episodes yesterday, on the basis of this thread. I agree it was great, and that Grant was a real stand out. RTD really does have it in him to write excellent television.

[Steven]

Loved the bit where Thorpy invited Scott back to his flat and Scott clocked the Manga in his VHS collection.

[Ghughesarch]

I spent all night chasing after some bloke who turned out to be mad. Like, really mad. He had every TV appearance of Jo Grimond on tape.
Then he tried to have me killed.

[poodlefaker]

There was a lot that I hated in this: the editing, the jaunty music, the jaunty captions, the jaunty title - as if they were trying to make a very grim story as "funny" as possible. At times I was expecting Reece Shearsmith or Steve Pemberton to appear. But the performances were excellent, and not overdone or played for laughs - perhaps it was originally intended to be more serious, but jauntied up later.

[Alberon]

I dunno. The failed gunman (or The Unprofessional Hitman as that old BBC documentary labelled him) was played as high farce in nearly every single appearance from the bar fight to the ridiculous fee demand from the newspaper.

[gilbertharding]

The entire story had large chunks which were almost pure farce though - although the knowledge that it was largely true ensured the laughter died on the lips: much of it was watched with the jaw hanging open in amazement.

eg - the bit where he emerges from the courtroom triumphant, with cheering crowds. I thought 'No - that can't have happened: he's been found not guilty, which no-one can believe means he's innocent'. But no: actually happened.

I thought the dog corpse, along with the police 'interview' where the nice constable banged Norman's head against the wall, were pretty effective counterpoints to the laughs...

Only slightly heavy handed bits for me were the clanging references to Clement Freud and Cyril Smith.

If I were the producer, I'd have made sure to have a montage at the end of other famous Liberal politicians - Chris Huhne, Mark Oaten, Lord Rennard, Mike Hancock...

[George Oscar Bluth II]

What did we think of the bit right at the end when Thorpe is talking to his barrister about why he was so embroiled with Scott, and we saw that montage of him picking up rent boys and being beaten up and stuff...

I wasn't sure if it was asking us to have sympathy for Thorpe or for the closeted gay men of the 60s and 70s who didn't end up engaging in farcical assassination plots and for whom that sort of thing was a regular hazard.

[gilbertharding]

I'm also confused about Norman Scott's fixation on his NI card.

Surely all you need is the number. If you need the card, I'm knackered - I mislaid mine, probably in a house move about 20 years ago.

Do I need to start harassing my MP (who is, incidentally, the Minister for Loneliness)?

[Kelvin]

What did we think of the bit right at the end when Thorpe is talking to his barrister about why he was so embroiled with Scott, and we saw that montage of him picking up rent boys and being beaten up and stuff...

I wasn't sure if it was asking us to have sympathy for Thorpe or for the closeted gay men of the 60s and 70s who didn't end up engaging in farcical assassination plots and for whom that sort of thing was a regular hazard.

I actually found that, and several other moments, quite uncomfortable. Literally every gay charachter was either vain and preening, sexually predatory, violent or corrupt. But I accept that's the story, and the individuals involved, and I'm not sure what the alternative would be.

I'm also confused about Norman Scott's fixation on his NI card.

Surely all you need is the number. If you need the card, I'm knackered - I mislaid mine, probably in a house move about 20 years ago.

Do I need to start harassing my MP (who is, incidentally, the Minister for Loneliness)?

I think he was just using it as an excuse to blame Thorpe for his problems, hence why he always got defensive about replacing the card himself. He had convinced himself Thorpe owed him a NI card, and was unable or unwilling to move past it.

[gilbertharding]

What did we think of the bit right at the end when Thorpe is talking to his barrister about why he was so embroiled with Scott, and we saw that montage of him picking up rent boys and being beaten up and stuff...

I wasn't sure if it was asking us to have sympathy for Thorpe or for the closeted gay men of the 60s and 70s who didn't end up engaging in farcical assassination plots and for whom that sort of thing was a regular hazard.

Kinda both, I thought - one of the things I liked most about the series was the way it swung between having sympathy for all the different parties at various points.

I mean, before you knew how it panned out, Scott was harassing (and potentially) blackmailing Thorpe. If homosexuality hadn't been illegal and/or taboo, Thorpe could have won a restraining order against him...

And Scott - victim of a powerful sexual predator, becomes his own worst enemy, arguably.

[gilbertharding]

I actually found that, and several other moments, quite uncomfortable. Literally every gay character was either vain and preening, sexually predatory, violent or corrupt. But I accept that's the story, and the individuals involved, and I'm not sure what the alternative would be.

Fixed that for you.

[Harry Badger]

This just keeps on giving. Jeremy Vine just announced that they think Andrew Newton had phoned into the show incognito a few years back to talk about cleaning products.

[Norton Canes]

What did we think of the bit right at the end when Thorpe is talking to his barrister about why he was so embroiled with Scott, and we saw that montage of him picking up rent boys and being beaten up and stuff...

I wasn't sure if it was asking us to have sympathy for Thorpe or for the closeted gay men of the 60s and 70s who didn't end up engaging in farcical assassination plots and for whom that sort of thing was a regular hazard

I just took it at face value - an explanation of why Thorpe valued Scott above all others. Also it was a reminder, I guess, that even the privileged weren't unaffected by the dangers of casual affairs.

There was a lot that I hated in this: the editing, the jaunty music, the jaunty captions, the jaunty title - as if they were trying to make a very grim story as "funny" as possible. At times I was expecting Reece Shearsmith or Steve Pemberton to appear. But the performances were excellent, and not overdone or played for laughs - perhaps it was originally intended to be more serious, but jauntied up later

Considering who tonally jarring the different elements of the story were I thought RTD did a fantastic job of making the whole thing so coherent. And there were so many other important aspects that didn't make the cut - Harold Wilson's claims of South African interference, for instance, that were mentioned in the Panorama programme.

[Harry Badger]

Harold Wilson's claims of South African interference, for instance, that were mentioned in the Panorama programme.

Wilson had earlier got a pre-MP Jack Straw to get Scott's social security details as a guarantee that Thorpe wouldn't go into coalition with the Tories. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2002/oct/07/uk.politicalnews By the time he was talking about it being a BOSS fit-up, he had gone a bit mad, as accounts from Penrose and Courtier will attest.

Stephen Frears and Alex Jennings were on the Today programme at about 8.25 this morning discussing, among other things, the element of humour in the film.

[Kelvin]

Fixed that for you.

That's not really, true, though. The pub landlady and Scott's girlfriend weren't like that. They were both wholly sympathetic characters.

I do understand it's a drama about gay characters, and you can't (and shouldn't) avoid highlighting negative qualities in your characters, simply because they're gay. It just made me slightly uncomfortable from time to time. I accept there isn't really a good way around it. 

[gilbertharding]

OK - not everyone. All the politicians, lawyers, hit men, mothers, policemen... but not the two women who tried to help.

Also, from seeing Norman Scott now, and in the '79 Panorama, I thought Wishaw actually did him a massive disservice by portraying him as such a 'screaming fairy' (in the parlance of the time) - the real Scott didn't come across like that at all. Seeing him riding that horse over the jumps... proper brave.

[gilbertharding]

Re Wislon 'going a bit mad', I took down my copy of the excellent Francis Wheen book "Strange Days Indeed" the other week - to see how many chapters he devoted to the Thorpe Scandal: None. He's just a footnote in the chapters about Wilson's paranoid delusions (and, of course, actual justified paranoia).

[Norton Canes]

Assuming there aren't any better candidates between now and decision time I'd love to see Grant and Wishaw sharing the BAFTA award for Best Actor. I know Thorpe was the lead role but they seemed pretty close in performance quality and screen time.

[Neomod]

Very enjoyable. I found it similar in tone to another Frears film, Prick Up Your Ears.

[Mr_Simnock]

Just watched the last one and that brilliantly wraps up a fantastic TV drama.

Assuming there aren't any better candidates between now and decision time I'd love to see Grant and Wishaw sharing the BAFTA award for Best Actor.

cant see anything touching those performances, not for a long time. I think this show will go down as one of THE very best the BBC has ever put out, I think it's that good.

[George Oscar Bluth II]

That's not really, true, though. The pub landlady and Scott's girlfriend weren't like that. They were both wholly sympathetic characters.

I do understand it's a drama about gay characters, and you can't (and shouldn't) avoid highlighting negative qualities in your characters, simply because they're gay. It just made me slightly uncomfortable from time to time. I accept there isn't really a good way around it.

I totally see this. I guess the problem of portraying gay characters at times when being gay was either illegal or deeply frowned upon is that there will always be elements of lying, subterfuge and duplicity to their characters.

Scott is the most sympathetic character in it because he's the most open about who he is.

[ajsmith2]

Did the scene at Scott's wedding in 1969 where the father of the bride used his speech to insult and disown Scott for being gay actually happen? Seemed a bit over the top that he would come out with all that during the ceremony.

[Norton Canes]

Did the scene at Scott's wedding in 1969 where the father of the bride used his speech to insult and disown Scott for being gay actually happen? Seemed a bit over the top that he would come out with all that during the ceremony

I'll have to have a look at the relevant chapter in John Preston's book tonight. A quick Google found this from the Telegraph, though:

"Her father so disapproved of the marriage that he pronounced it "doomed" in his wedding speech. Scott's only Christmas present from his mother-in-law was a coffee-mug bearing the straightforward legend 'Strychnine'."

[Norton Canes]

Meanwhile: what Russell did next...

Award-winning writer Russell T Davies is confirmed to write a new BBC One drama, Years and Years, which follows the lives of a single family over 15 years in a Britain rocked by unstable political, economic and technological advances

Years and Years follows the Lyons, a busy Manchester family. Daniel's getting married to Ralph.  Stephen and Celeste worry about their kids.  Rosie's chasing a new fella.  Edith hasn't been home for years.  All presided over by Gran, the imperial Muriel.  But when their lives all converge on one crucial night in 2019, the story accelerates into the future, following the lives and loves of the Lyons over the next 15 years.

And what a world! Everything we fear, and everything we hope for, happening around this tight-knit family.  Society gets hotter, faster, madder, with the turmoil of politics, technology and distant wars affecting the Lyons in their day-to-day lives. Britain withdraws from Europe, America becomes a lone wolf, China asserts itself, and a new world begins to form. But someone's taking advantage, as MP Vivienne Rook begins her rise to power – that new breed of politician, an entertainer, a rebel, a trickster and a terror, leading us into an unknown future. Set against this, the Lyons have to navigate their everyday hopes and fears, knowing that one ordinary family could never change the world. Or could they?

[Ignatius_S]

Did the scene at Scott's wedding in 1969 where the father of the bride used his speech to insult and disown Scott for being gay actually happen? Seemed a bit over the top that he would come out with all that during the ceremony.

I've only seen the first episode, so haven't seen that scene but it sounds very different than in the book.

In the book, Myers' family don't come off very badly, I felt – it's a little vague, but it's stated that Scott made a poor first impression and that didn't change. Going from memory, but I think they decided that Scott was a sponger. IIRC, the book says Myers had a history of bad relationships and suspect that coloured their reaction to Scott.

In the wider of context of the book, my feeling is that her family hadn't made a mistake in their misgivings about Scott – particularly what happened with so mnay relationships, particularly Gwen Parry-Jones. (Don't know how that was treated in the series).