Nathan Barley - The Nation Decides

[Neil]

Apropos of nothing, the trailers have been removed from the official website. Maybe they'll be super-special features on the DVD and they don't want to cut into their sales!

Has anyone got them downloaded then?  I never bothered but we should archive the site before it vanishes.

[Radish]

By no means was it actively bad, it was just...listless.

[Ambient Sheep]

Another thing: has anyone noticed the disparity between the character breakdowns and what we actually see on screen?

Ahhh....so Rufus and Ned are the graphic designers of the rag?  NOW I understand why they never seemed to offer to write anything.  So only Jonatton and Dan write anything?

Disclaimer: I still haven't gathered the strength to watch the last three episodes yet, so this is only based on the first three.

I didn't realise poor fool was the supplier of that info.  Given that, I'm glad that he seems to have been de-Burchilled.

[NobodyGetsOutAlive]

Ahhh....so Rufus and Ned are the graphic designers of the rag? NOW I understand why they never seemed to offer to write anything.

Ah right, so we were presumably meant to get that  based on the fact that they knocked up that photoshopped Preacherman photo then and nothing else. Unless I missed something*


*I really must stop saying this in relation to NB. I haven't missed anything, it just wasn't that well-written.

[Ambient Sheep]

Ah right, so we were presumably meant to get that  based on the fact that they knocked up that photoshopped Preacherman photo then and nothing else. Unless I missed something...

Can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not - I guess not, given your last sentence and footnote.

This is the problem exactly...not enough is explained for our poor sub-genius brains to comprehend it all.

[NobodyGetsOutAlive]

Can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not - I guess not, given your last sentence and footnote.

Yeah, I'm really not!

[rupert pupkin]

I went for 'OK' - I thought a couple of the episodes were very good (Geek Pie definitely stands out) but it was disappointing on the whole.

[Emergency Lalla Ward Ten]

Here's a thought. How do you think Nathan Barley would have been received (on this board, by the public, and by critics) if it had been transmitted 5, 10 or 15 years ago?

I get the idea that, circa 1990, it would have been given a very rough ride by pretty much everyone (and with far fewer apologists reading stuff into it), but that, circa 2000, reaction would be much more positive because, hey, it's a weird Morris project which mentions blowjobs and says fuck. I wonder if, in 2005, we're gradually going back to our 1990 sensibility, where we're more reflective and questioning about stuff we're told is good.

I mean, I've been reading this board for a while, and I *suspect* that as recently as three years ago there would be a lot more 'It's genius, you don't understand' postings. Is that because certain types of people no longer post, or is it representative of a change in the way people in general view comedy? Have we finally stopped viewing new comedy shows as gift horses and started to get back a bit of our healthy cynicism?

This is probably a futile line of enquiry, because a Nathan Barley made in 1990 would be a totally different show. But it's something I was wondering about. Is there a 'Won't get fooled again' attitude in the air? Has the internet (among other things) brought an end to us suffering bad comedy gladly? Have we stopped looking up to comedians as near-unconditional figures of admiration?

[Rats]

I remember reading "morris isn't as clever as he thinks he is" and it's the first time it's rung true. I just dismissed it because he was very very funny and it didn't really come into it. I never saw him as trying to be clever just for the sake of it. With Nathan Barley, the comedy has been flattened into a dull lifeless backing track and we're just left with this bizare posturing over the top. Wether it's ironic or not, it's definitely not funny. I think if this was made at any stage of his career, it would still get the same reaction. Even jam was better than this. Morris used to just let all his minions hang themselves with the likes of green wing and marc wooten exsisting and stuff. They did a much better job. I'm guessing it's meant to be clever, I felt like I was being invited to smirk wryly at the whole thing round a dinner table. Was it purposfully morris-lite? I'm trying to care.

[lazyhour]

ELW10, did you not notice my question earlier?  I was wondering where you got the episode titles from, and if they are official titles.  I hadn't realised that the eps were titled before, you see.

[Rats]

I remember someone involved in the show had posted the titles saying they were like just working titles, giving the episodes names so the crew could refer to an episode without going "episode 3, you know, the one with the haircut" I assume.

[Brainwrong]

(There was this great song on MTV2 last night, but after it finished the word 'IDIOT' flashed up on the screen in a trendy MTV bitesize way - my smile disappeared and i have since becoming very, very ill.)

[23 Daves]

Actually, I believe (on the evidence I've seen) that "Nathan Barley" is much better than "jam".  This is why I've had such strong issues about people talking about Morris' 'decline'.  In my opinion, if there was a decline at all it really started when "jam" was first broadcast - a bunch of old material with very self-conscious television effects over the top, some pretentious, pompous posturing (no proper credits, daft jerky camera effects which were supposed to 'atmospheric' or 'alienating') and a perfectly good script taken off the radio (where it belonged) and on to television, where it didn't have anything like the same power.

"Nathan Barley" was at least fresh, did provide the odd perfectly natural piece of slapstick or bitter humour, and there was less baggage around the whole thing.  That said, it wasn't great, it won't be the best comedy on television this year, etc. etc.  I can't help but be a little disappointed, but by the same token i do see it as being a slight upwards curve in Morris' output - and let's face it, it was also far better than "My Wrongs".  My gut feeling is it could have been far, far worse, and that's what I was preparing myself for when I was stuck in Canada and heard you lot ranting endlessly about what a load of shit it was.

Where the character inconsistencies are concerned, I have to say that I still don't totally see every else's arguments.  Dan is mentally ill, after all.  And the continuity errors which are supposedly 'jarring' aren't that far from the norm.  I've just had a comedy bonanza with a mate this weekend, watching shitloads of old stuff on DVD and video, and I've seen some howling continuity errors on "Fifteen Storeys High" (the wallpaper is off the wall one episode, then back on exactly the same the next, Vince says he doesn't smoke in one episode, then there's a flashback of him smoking right at the end of episode six) and also the old fave "Ever Decreasing Circles".  You lot have heightened my awareness, but the trouble is I now don't just see them in "Nathan Barley", they're bloody everywhere.  Bastards!

My personal theory is that "Nathan Barley" will be hopelessly re-assessed in three or four years' time and given some undeserved status as a "work of genius" to over-compensate for the fact that it's been so badly dismissed when it was first broadcast (and not just by you lot).  Of course, actually it's just quite good.  It's sharply observed in places, quite savage, and periodically very amusing.  It's not a broadcasting disaster.  Well, it is as a supposedly commercial Friday night sit-com, but as a piece of work, it's solid enough to stand up.  It wasn't half an hour every Friday of talking dogs, that's for sure, and for that I can only be grateful.

[Big Jack McBastard]

A reasonable idea marred by the fact that none of the characters were particularly likable or deep enough to make me give a shit.

Most of the episodes left me numb with one or two eliciting a chuckle.

Sadly it continued Morris' fall from grace, when he's physically involved with a program it seems to improve, when he writes his ideas comes out differently, from people who may 'get it', but can't execute those ideas as well as he has proven he can in the past.

Sadly, disappointing overall.

It pains me to say it for a second time but;  'I hope he does better with what he does next'.

#sigh#

[ApexJazz]

Well, I have just finished watching the last two episodes of Barley. Considering all that has preceded, it was as "big" a finale as one could probably expect. My reactions have grown increasingly cold while watching the series, so I glanced at the earlier episodes to see if I was being too harsh, and it still strikes me to be an unfocused, distant, and strangely dispassionate program.

Maybe it was just the excitement and good-will that a new Chris Morris work inspires, I found the first episode extremely interesting. I was very open to accepting the show on its own terms, even to it not being a comedy.  I originally thought that Julian Barratt was a dramatic revelation. I know The Boosh is a code word around here for "nadir of british comedy", but I found the radio show to be light and breezy fantasy fun (especially Rich Fulcher). With my recent viewing of the mostly unwatchable television version (which coincided with my seeing the early episodes of Barley) I discovered that Julian Barratt's straight acting wasn't much of a stretch since there is nothing inherently funny about him.  More amazing that his boosh-brother Noel Fielding seems identical in manner to the actor who is portraying Nathan Barley.  
The character of Barley in the early scenes almost suggest an imagined Clare Quilty-like taunter born out of Aschroft's rage.  In the later shows, the 'dynamic' between Barley and Aschroft seems rooted in little more than a generation gap discomfort.
All of the Idiots are marked for the audience thru their acting style (as if they were auditioning for the Comedie-Francaise). Some could argue that it was a reductionist gesture that comforts the audience into feeling that they are not like the Idiots...on the up side I figured it would guarantee some laughs. For some unexplainable reason, the DJ record spinner (his sole purpose seems to be disturbing claire's sleep and to allow music in the background) is spared the Idiot sign-post to his head.
By the end of the first episode I was anxious to see more. The extremely effective editing between music, the credits and Ashcroft's giving in to the Idiot's game gave the feeling that the show was poised to explode into something, that Morris really is going in a direction.  Having seen the entire series, I realize now that  the editing scheme was only an affectation.
Viewers are apt to forgive a first episode to be merely a set-up for the rest of the series, but it doesn't bode well when the second show is the exact same set-up. Nothing has moved along at the end of the second, the same scenes being repeated making the same points.
The rest of the episodes lumber onwards, more like a sitcom, with unlikely public embarrassments, all done in a hybrid manner, unwilling to go balls-out with comedy action. And yes, there is the influence of The Office showing through, most insistently in the form of slightly gap-mouthed "Brent-is-doing-something-stupid" reaction shots the characters are constantly giving each other.  Now, I love The Office...but I would prefer if Morris didn't.
Striking moments do pop up from time to time, scenes that seem to raise the dramatic stakes: Aschrofts' begging in the job interview not to be "sent" back to the idiots, his decline into gambling on the Russian self mutilation website, a hip-hop botched session of sex, the public mantle of preacherman, the flirtings of conflict with aschcroft's boss, a dead cat ....but these sequences are left to float without any true narrative meaning. Nothing builds. Nothing gels.

[ApexJazz]

The source of Ashcroft's plight and depression becomes so nebulous that one can't help to stop taking it serious. The character's inertia and Julian Barratt's one-note furrowed-brow performance creates a dramatic blackhole that severely cripples the show. Along the way, a line or two bounces around with a shadow of wit, sometimes the surrounding scenery with the actors creates an odd urban beauty, an item in the background can tickle one's sense of the contemporary. Small pleasures as one waits patiently for the show to "happen".  
The most memorable episode turns out to be when Barley is trying to have it off with a coke-head. It is the most controlled episode of the series, one of the few that has more than an outline of a story. As Barley tries to cajole sex out of a model that is later believed to be thirteen, there is a pleasurable despicableness threatening a bit of life into the show.  But after a series of illogical cop-outs kills it, comes the realization that this is merely Morris hitting the same fail-safe buttons of controversy he had done with the brass eye special.  In the end, the episode was just about Barley having it off with a coke-head. Disappointingly, it exposes his take on pedophilia to be banal, and worse, opportunistic.
The ultimate failure of the program is that it gives no reason to care about the milieu itself. Would anyone come away from the program finding the people depicted worthy of concern? Is society being tainted by the world of sub-philistine art, media wanna-be's, fashion junkies, internet slop sties, consumerist press-release magazines, and their poseur audiences? Probably so, but the program never "hits home"...never once does Morris show how these people fit into the "bigger picture". Indeed one would conclude they don't; the show feels like it is taking place in a self-contained three block geographic location.  (if dan ashcroft hates the land of the Idiots so much, why doesn't he just cross the street?) And are there no Idiots in the oh-so-worthy "higher arts"?

I am deeply sympathetic to how Morris' international reputation and the esteem his previous works garnered can be a weight on him. The anxiety of every new work needing to shock or impress, something that will get people hyped up and the media buzzing. Anything less would be considered failure...and the pressure shows.
Maybe there is a touch of Morris' personal travail with Ashcroft becoming a preacherman to the idiots he deplores. Sadly, Morris does not take up the challenge to develop this concept of alty-arty celeb notoriety with the insights he could probably bring; itz just another strain of time-filler that gets brought up and discarded (or possibly Morris doesn't want to alienate). With Morris' work being so stimulating and varied, one can see how people bring conflicting expectations to Barley: some may want the dark JAMness, or the playful rip-roaring of his early years, some may expect hard hitting satire, a tangible Brasseye-like masterpiece, some may want him to "save british television comedy", or just want a hearty chuckle.  Leading up to broadcast, I read some delusional newspaper articles that portrayed Barley as being some sort of scathing satire, which it obviously isn't.  It not only lacks bile, but also any blood or teeth.
I must be honest and say that I miss Chris Morris as a performer, but I respect the fact that Morris wants to branch out and not do more Jam or Brasseye. And it is undeniable that this show is really stepping into something he hasn't done before. But Nathan Barley is such a flimsy product.  Years in the gestation process, and yet it is so lacking in density and purpose. If one hadn't known it was a Chris Morris program, it could have been discounted as a channel four comedy lab abortion. The only recognizable trait is Morris' oppressive visual style.
....And that is me wringed dry of Nathan Barley thoughts. I certainly hope that Mr. Morris stops pretending to be Stanley Kubrick and bounces back quickly with something new. Or will people be waiting five years for him to produce a Nathan Barley Special?

[Neil]

Bah, why can't I write like that?  Really enjoyed reading your thoughts on thoe show ApexJazz.

[Banana Woofwoof]

Very well said, ApexJazz. Thank you for articulating the whole...I don't know, listlessness and flimsiness of it.   Which I obviously can't since I just used "flimsiness" in a sentence.  And I think the only way Morris will bounce back quickly with something new is if there is no series two.  Here's hoping.

[alan strang]

Nice one, ApexJazz.

[Bungus]

I dont agree with all your points ApexJazz. But i really do commend you on your analysis . Like others here i can only dream that i might be able express myself so eloquantly .

Still much better than reading about joke counts etc... And for the record i liked it.

"its not easy being trapped in this world of indesipherable speech" (and spelling).

[Key]

Ahhh....so Rufus and Ned are the graphic designers of the rag? NOW I understand why they never seemed to offer to write anything.

Ah right, so we were presumably meant to get that  based on the fact that they knocked up that photoshopped Preacherman photo then and nothing else. Unless I missed something

They did the Trevor Brown parody of Mandy in Episode 5 as well.

[Ambient Sheep]

Ah right, so we were presumably meant to get that  based on the fact that they knocked up that photoshopped Preacherman photo then and nothing else. Unless I missed something

They did the Trevor Brown parody of Mandy in Episode 5 as well.

A bit late to establish their characters by then (as even is Episode 2 for the Preacherman photo), isn't it?  (not saying you disagree)

[shykitten]

I certainly hope that Mr. Morris stops pretending to be Stanley Kubrick and bounces back quickly with something new.

yes, a project nearly four years in the planning under great secrecy for a mediocre outcome - that's technically a Kubrick.

[Almost Yearly]

Nah.


If I'd got as far as episode 3, I'm sure I'd have been turning off at the break in favour of a wank. I caught a particular episode of that Mighty Boosh and enjoyed it far far more. It's a funny old game.

[Jon_Norton]

What the show desperately needed was a Script Editor with the power to send back or rewritw stuff that was not good enough. But that was never going to happen as long as the 2 writers were also Director and "Executive Producer". So instead we got their mates in as "Script Associates", and I'd really like to know how far they ever went in the criticism of the stuff offered to them.

The ideal script editor would have been Lise Mayer or Jenny Lecoat. No, really. Because they have experience of doing "alternative" things back in the 80s, and observing the Nathan Barleys of those days filling up the seats at the Comedy Store, and then also chiselling away for years at conventional, proper TV drama/sitcom. They would have actually added value.

[Jon_Norton]

Yeah, it's like morris's version of "extricate" but he's shaking off the dolts by making something rubbish so they lose interest. Genius, who's winning? I've no idea but I've just put scrabbled egg in my coffee.

I think the correct Fall-album-comparison would be with Slates, which really was done "to get rid of the students".

Extricate is lovely stuff.

[Rats]

but but but but but, from the linear notes

"hopefully `EXTRICATE`s simplicity will confound all bores, imitators and anxiety mongers./EXTRICATE!"

[Blumf]

A quick search of the forums seems to suggest that nobody's done the obvious thing and compared NB to the 'Shoreditch Twat' one-off/pilot thing that C4 did a few years back.

I only watched it when it was broadcast all those years ago, so my memory is hazy, but I seem to remember the jokes being a lot more on target that NB. Certainly, it wasn't comedy gold (I think it got a rather luke warm reception here IIRC), but it seemed a lot more biting than Morris and Brookers project and had a lot more content (although I doubt that could have been kept up for a 6 episode run).

Above all, it was made at the time when the whole dot-com bubble hadn't burst and micro-scooters were still being pushed about. In other words, it was more relevant then, something NB and it's 3 year development lag can't be today.

[slim]

A quick search of the forums seems to suggest that nobody's done the obvious thing and compared NB to the 'Shoreditch Twat' one-off/pilot thing that C4 did a few years back.

Somebody definitely did; I've read the comparison before. Although it was probably discussed prior to airing.

[Jon_Norton]

A quick search of the forums seems to suggest that nobody's done the obvious thing and compared NB to the 'Shoreditch Twat' one-off/pilot thing that C4 did a few years back.

Somebody definitely did; I've read the comparison before. Although it was probably discussed prior to airing.

No, what it was was that the Guardian Guide feature before the series started included a piece of crap by the editor of ST waffling about how it was out of date, unlike his project, which didn't get commissioned... etc.

ST was completely dismal, and didn't deserve to get a Comedy Lab. In  contrast, Nathan Barley was mostly dismal and didn't deserve to get further than a Comedy Lab. Totally different shows.