Tip jar

If you like CaB and wish to support it, you can use PayPal or KoFi. Thank you, and I hope you continue to enjoy the site - Neil.

Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.com

Support CaB

Recent

Welcome to Cook'd and Bomb'd. Please login or sign up.

March 28, 2024, 08:28:00 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Give Nathan Barley a more appropriate rating on lovefilm.com

Started by The Plaque Goblin, October 14, 2005, 10:24:20 PM

Previous topic - Next topic
Quote from: "Johnny Yesno"
Quote from: "Paul's Boutique"I've been reading the reviews on Amazon some have a distinct whiff of viral marketing.

I know, those virals get everywhere. Look at these from Amazon
The reason I thought the NB review might be a viral was because the piece was both well written and uniformly positive. Now I enjoyed NB in parts, but it seems impossible for an intelligent, informed Morris fan to review NB without pointing out its numerous flaws. Instead we get guff like:

"One can't help but sympathise with the plights of the characters also, giving the show a sense of heart and emotion that was missing in past Chris Morris offerings. The show somehow manages to be more accessible than Jam, more down-to-earth than Brasseye and The Day Today whilst retaining all the relevant social satire and hilarity. Well reccommended."

In short, it sounds like it was written by a friend of Morris or someone who worked on the show. I may be completely wrong – it would seem a bit blatant. "Morris is a GENIOUS!!! LOL" would perhaps be more inconspicuous.

Emergency Lalla Ward Ten

It's not that Linehan wouldn't slag off Spoons, Extras or Nathan Barley - it's the fact that he hasn't.

Which isn't meant to be taken literally, and I'm not singling out Linehan or anything. My point is: comedians only ever slag off safe tagets (like Bo'Selecta); when it comes to 'credible' shows, however, they keep very fucking quiet. Remember how quiet Robin Ince was when Nighty Night got slammed?

For as long as media-favourite shows escape criticism like this, comedy will always be fucked. People should stop jumping in glee just because Viz say they hate Jimmy Carr or Richard Herring says he hates Balls of Steel, as if either  of these are somehow 'brave statements'.

alan strang

Quote from: "Emergency Lalla Ward Ten"Remember how quiet Robin Ince was when Nighty Night got slammed?

And how he still won't nail his balls to an actual opinion on Nathan Barley.

Quote from: "phantom_power"so you think inventing things without proof or evidence is a good way of making a point then?

Nobody's 'inventing things' though - some people just have a far better grasp of the nature of current media attitudes and their attendant cliques than yourself.

Some people understand that there are certain unwritten rules within those media cliques not to publically criticise the output of anyone who's actually part of it (with reasons ranging from not wishing to slag off the work of a mate to making sure they remain part of the set-up and continue to get offered work).

Some people understand that since Bo Selecta is considered safely 'outside that clique' then it's perfectly safe for Linehan (et al) to be seen to slag it off. Leigh Frances isn't making a cameo in Extras; he isn't script-editing Nathan Barley; he's not writing spunk gags for Spoons (which itself is ironic because I'd say he'd fit right in on all three counts).

Peking O

One of my better drunken ideas (still not acted upon) was to start up a magazine called Shit Month. It would be a monthly rag full of only bad reviews - music, comedy, TV, films, etc. all written by people with a genuine loathing of things.

It's a bit of a nonstarter because I don't think we'd get any advertising in it (I mean, why would you advertise in something when your product, if mentioned at all, would be getting mercilessly slayed?). Also, it would have to be a short-lived thing, maybe five or six issues and then that's it, because the appeal would soon wear off.

Emergency Lalla Ward Ten

I'd still rather bad reviews were part of the normal content of magazines, though, and seen as neither better or worse than positive ones. In other words, I wish reviews were genuinely unpredictable. I wish we had a climate where it was seen as OK to dismiss a commonly-applauded thing (or vice versa) without being accused of showing off or 'different for the sake of it'.

Also, it would have the problem of devaluing bad reviews. People would say 'Yes, but that review was in Shit Month - they hate everything...' (Which is already what idiotic people say about Cooks & Bombd.)

Peking O

Yeah, it's a pretty flawed idea, it would be fun to write it though. Music magazines seem to be full of middling this-is-slightly-better-than-average reviews these days. Four stars (out of five) all round. Someone somewhere is terrified of having the next NME What's the Story (Morning Glory) review on their hands, or at least that's how it seems.

Emergency Lalla Ward Ten

What about a mag that only gave 'excellent' or shit' reviews - no middle ground? Based on the principle that mediocrity itself is bad rather than good. So long as the reviews were detailed and explained the reasoning, that'd be a great read.

I reckon you'd get advertisers in Shit Month anyway - so long as it had readers, I doubt they'd care. All publicity is good publicity and all that.

Autopsy Turvey

Quote from: "Emergency Lalla Ward Ten"I wish we had a climate where it was seen as OK to dismiss a commonly-applauded thing (or vice versa) without being accused of showing off or 'different for the sake of it'.

Yes, but a lot of the time when something popular gets slated, it is for the sake of it. Hence all those dreadful 'Most Overrated' lists, where Joy Division or Monty Python or whoever get torn apart solely because the writer/editor thinks that slaughtering a sacred cow is dangerous and edgy.

Indalian

Quote from: "alan strang"Adding to that democracy by expressing an alternate opinion.

Is this an opinion that you can switch on and off?

Emergency Lalla Ward Ten

Quote from: "Autopsy Turvey"

Yes, but a lot of the time when something popular gets slated, it is for the sake of it. Hence all those dreadful 'Most Overrated' lists, where Joy Division or Monty Python or whoever get torn apart solely because the writer/editor thinks that slaughtering a sacred cow is dangerous and edgy.

They only do this to long-established classics though, things that have gone past the critical point of no return. It's safe targets again - people can slag off The Beatles and not be considered unsporting or weird, because the Beatles' part in history is pretty much set in stone. It's acceptable maverickdom. But they never do it with current fads.

I did ask in Stereo Excursions the other week if anyone had ever read an article which argued (intelligently and at length) that Franz Ferdinand aren't all that good, and nobody could think of one. Which is strange. I bet once their popularity wains they'll be no end of 'Do You Want To? No We Don't!' articles though.

Melth

Quote from: "Emergency Lalla Ward Ten"I did ask in Stereo Excursions the other week if anyone had ever read an article which argued (intelligently and at length) that Franz Ferdinand aren't all that good, and nobody could think of one. Which is strange. I bet once their popularity wains they'll be no end of 'Do You Want To? No We Don't!' articles though.

Thing is, no-one has really written a substantial case in favour of Franz Ferdinand so it's quite difficult to produce counter-arguments. People seem just to say, 'it's quite nice', 'it's good to dance to', 'they look cool', etc with varying degrees of hyperbole attached. You can criticise the band's stylistic choices for being bland and derivative and suggest some bands that were doing the same thing in 1979 but I'm not sure that musically or lyrically that there's sufficient content to rail against. Most criticism seems to be directed at the press for spouting cliches about them

The Mumbler

Paul Morley gives the new album a slagging in Uncut, for what it's worth.

Melth

Just realised that this isn't a Stereo Excursions thread but I think the point stands and applies to a lot of comedy. It's surprisingly rare when a difference of opinion arises, that the two sides of the argument can actually find the idea that fundamentally separates them. I suppose we managed this with Nathan Barley, with those in favour at least making a heartfelt case that the lives of young media whores were worth parodying and the naysayers providing good counter-arguments. It's quite rare that a debate about comedy can proceed without the 'well, I laughed and that's all that matters' line being trotted out

alan strang

Quote from: "Indalian"
Quote from: "alan strang"Adding to that democracy by expressing an alternate opinion.

Is this an opinion that you can switch on and off?

No, don't be silly - are you insane?

Clinton Morgan


Johnny Yesno

Quote from: "alan strang"some people just have a far better grasp of the nature of current media attitudes and their attendant cliques than yourself.

Some people understand that there are certain unwritten rules within those media cliques not to publically criticise the output of anyone who's actually part of it...

Some people understand that since Bo Selecta is considered safely 'outside that clique' then it's perfectly safe for Linehan (et al) to be seen to slag it off.

Some people moan when other people use the "I just know" argument rather than supplying a dissertation "backing up their arguments".

TJ

Quote from: "Johnny Yesno"Some people moan when other people use the "I just know" argument rather than supplying a dissertation "backing up their arguments".

Well, in that case they should get one of those special machines I've been hearing so much about lately.

Indalian

Quote from: "alan strang"
Quote from: "Indalian"
Quote from: "alan strang"Adding to that democracy by expressing an alternate opinion.

Is this an opinion that you can switch on and off?

No, don't be silly - are you insane?

God I hope not. Just speculating as to what an alternate opinion is.

Neil

Um.  I was looking at the Amazon and IMDB entries for Barley yesterday, and rolling my eyes at the general 'GODLIKE GENIUS!' crap.  Well I've just been back for a closer look and noticed on both sites that some of the negative reviews seem to get disproportionate amounts of 'against' votes in order to bury them.

Here are a few examples:

Quote from: "Amazon"
15 of 60 people found the following review helpful:
1 out of 5 stars A crushing dissapointment, September 22, 2005

7 of 9 people found the following review helpful:
5 out of 5 stars Chris Morris back on top form, September 29, 2005

Quote from: "IMDB"
14 out of 64 people found the following comment useful :-
It's well, er, rubbish, 21 February 2005

12 out of 17 people found the following comment useful :-
The Surreal Deal, 7 March 2005

Gypsum Fantastic

I'd noticed that. That first IMDB one is particularly ridiculous - fifty people said no? Plenty of annoying C&B bashing on the boards, too.

lazyhour

That is pretty lame, but I will just say that it's always been my experience that negative reviews on Amazon have a much lower "I found this review useful" rating.  Go and find a review slagging off a They Might Be Giants album, for example, and you'll see the same phenomenon as above.  Gushing fans in a bored internet surfing moment want to see what other people have said about their beloved cultural thingies.  When they see a negative review, nosir they don't like it.

I'm sure there's at least a wee bit of damage control going on here too, though, even if it's just misguided GOLDIKE GENUS Morris fans thinking they are helping out their hero.

Quote from: "lazyhour"I'm sure there's at least a wee bit of damage control going on here too, though, even if it's just misguided GOLDIKE GENUS Morris fans thinking they are helping out their hero.
Surely "GENIOUS" is the accepted spelling amongst Amazon reviewers?

Here's a few IMDB reviews guaranteed to raise the hackles of the discerning forumer:

QuoteAuthor: jdpage11 from United Kingdom

"Chris Morris has not, contrary to some people's opinion, failed at producing a truly inspired piece of work in his latest series "Nathan Barley". His talent for humour shines through all over the place, and the show is riddled with almost subliminal jokes. When I watched both of the two first episodes, I was laughing out loud. This certainly rivals "Brass Eye" and "The Day Today" and I would personally rate it above those two.

One thing I will say though is that the people who don't appreciate "Nathan Barley" clearly are the people who find "Friends" funny. There is a lack of the increasingly boring slapstick humour, instead the show is packed with amusing irony and stupid phrases - my favourite: "It's gonna be totally fukin Mexico." I think that Chris and Charlie are onto a winner and avidly await the next four episodes..."

QuoteAuthor: Dan Common from Chile

"Well, I thought this was just great. Starting as a light hearted satire then slowly, inexorably descending into darker and darker territory, right up until the very end...What's not to like about this series?...There are few conventional gags, but there are plenty of moments when I get a cold thrill down to the marrow that only comes from watching utter, deft genius on display.  A desperately funny series, perhaps misunderstood. I think people may have watched this with far too many preconceptions, about Morris, about sitcoms, and were very quick to judge after just watching the first episode. People may have been upset recognizing themselves unflatteringly represented here, or irked that they were wrong footed in the way the series developed. Morris is a dark, dark, dark writer. A very funny writer too, and far, far more intelligent than 99.9% of his audience. That he lets any of us peasants see his work is a miracle, and we should be thankful for whatever he gives us."

QuoteAuthor: maxrael from United Kingdom

"Chris Morris is back with new TV show called Nathan Barley, and of course it's absolutely wonderful... And of course yet again decidedly splits the Morris fan base...In the opinion of this humble reviewer Morris remains a genius satirist, one who doesn't see any value in repeating himself and continues to push and develop his art into new forms. It's a great shame more people didn't get it.

Bring on the DVD release and a second series...

I AM NOT THE PREACHER MAN"

Paaaaul


TJ

QuoteAuthor: jdpage11 from United Kingdom

"Chris Morris has not, contrary to some people's opinion, failed at producing a truly inspired piece of work in his latest series "Nathan Barley".

There's something weird about the wording of that as opposed to the sentiment - it sounds like something a fan would say, but doesn't sound like the way they would say it.

QuoteHis talent for humour shines through all over the place, and the show is riddled with almost subliminal jokes.

Too subliminal.

QuoteWhen I watched both of the two first episodes, I was laughing out loud. This certainly rivals "Brass Eye" and "The Day Today" and I would personally rate it above those two.

There's a definite hint of desperation and exaggeration there.

QuoteOne thing I will say though is that the people who don't appreciate "Nathan Barley" clearly are the people who find "Friends" funny.

Weirdly, we had this very same argument on here somewhere. What's wrong with liking "Friends"? Is there a law that prevents people from liking both it and Chris Morris at the same time?

QuoteThere is a lack of the increasingly boring slapstick humour

Go and watch "Mr Jolly Lives Next Door", "Mon Oncle" or "The Goodies" and then tell me you're bored.

Quoteinstead the show is packed with amusing irony and stupid phrases - my favourite: "It's gonna be totally fukin Mexico."

Bu... but... *why*?

If I say "well fucken Polly Brown and Pickettywitch, mate", will people fall about laughing?

QuoteI think that Chris and Charlie are onto a winner and avidly await the next four episodes..."

Note use of 'Chris and Charlie'.

QuoteAuthor: Dan Common from Chile

"Well, I thought this was just great. Starting as a light hearted satire then slowly, inexorably descending into darker and darker territory, right up until the very end...What's not to like about this series?...There are few conventional gags, but there are plenty of moments when I get a cold thrill down to the marrow

Ee arth welcome in Barley Jam.

Quotethat only comes from watching utter, deft genius on display.  A desperately funny series, perhaps misunderstood. I think people may have watched this with far too many preconceptions, about Morris, about sitcoms, and were very quick to judge after just watching the first episode.

My only preconception was that it should entertain me.

QuotePeople may have been upset recognizing themselves unflatteringly represented here

Not me.

Quoteor irked that they were wrong footed in the way the series developed.

Oh yeah, that's the one. Same with the new series of "Doctor Who", how dare those bastards throw me off the scent with all that Bad Wolf rumourmongering. I'm so fucking angry that it was revealed to be Rose and The Daleks and so on. I would never, ever, ever expect a television series to take unanticipated plot twists.

QuoteMorris is a dark, dark, dark writer.

In a dark dark dark room in a dark dark dark house?

QuoteA very funny writer too, and far, far more intelligent than 99.9% of his audience.

I think even he'd be repulsed by that notion.

QuoteThat he lets any of us peasants see his work is a miracle, and we should be thankful for whatever he gives us."

Oh yes. An absolute miracle that someone who is dependent on television and radio work for their livelihood should actually allow something to be broadcast.

QuoteAuthor: maxrael from United Kingdom

"Chris Morris is back with new TV show called Nathan Barley, and of course it's absolutely wonderful... And of course yet again decidedly splits the Morris fan base...In the opinion of this humble reviewer Morris remains a genius satirist, one who doesn't see any value in repeating himself and continues to push and develop his art into new forms. It's a great shame more people didn't get it.

Bring on the DVD release and a second series...

I AM NOT THE PREACHER MAN"
[/quote]

He's not so bad actually. I don't particularly agree with what he says, but at least he hasn't been a tosser about it.

Morgan

Has anyone seen the rather so-so adverts for the DVD which have been appearing on billboards and things?

Johnny Yesno

Quote from: "Paul's Boutique"
QuoteAuthor: Dan Common from Chile

Morris is a dark, dark, dark writer. A very funny writer too, and far, far more intelligent than 99.9% of his audience. That he lets any of us peasants see his work is a miracle, and we should be thankful for whatever he gives us."


Sweet Jesus! That's appalling. Please don't think that those of us who stuck up for NB on here think like that.

Neil

Quote from: "Some tosser"One thing I will say though is that the people who don't appreciate "Nathan Barley" clearly are the people who find "Friends" funny.

Yeah, see, this really irked me at the time.  In the updates forum I expressed a liking for early Friends, although I've since rediscovered the older episodes, and genuinely think it's a great sitcom.  Anyway, I was told that, duh, no wonder I didn't like Nathan Barley!  How can people actually believe that liking one thing will automatically preclude you from liking another?  This gives some indication as to why they like Morris, the same people who screamed about us being "obscurists" obviouly get some kick out of belonging to what they imagine is an exclusive club.  It's pretty clear what this fuck-face means...'if you don't like Nathan Barley you don'tunderstand Nathan Barley.'   Bull-shit.  

And what is wrong with Friends anyway?  Although it does pillage from Seinfeld, there are no shortage of shows which go on to steal from Friends itself.  For example, there's that episode where  (in the pre-credits bit) everyone in the Coffee Shop starts humming an old TV theme tune.  That might be familiar to fans of The Office.  

And then there's Rufus and Ned in Barley itself, these two are clearly just Phoebe and Joey, but y'know, unfunny badly-acted versions.  That reading/Heidi thing in Barley is handled much better in a few episodes of Friends too.  There's also an episode where Ross and Rachel buy a cake for their childs first birthday, but when they get it home they discover it's shaped like a big cock and balls.  Charlie Brooker would never write something like that, would he?

QuoteThere is a lack of the increasingly boring slapstick humour

There's actually a fair bit of slapstick humour in Nathan Barley, and yes, much like the rest of Morris' work these days it is "increasingly boring".  Slapstick itself, though, can be great.

Little Hoover

Brooker even wrote a fairly defensive "screen burn" on Friends he was criticial at the same time. I mean for what it is and what it aims to be freinds actually does a good job,  and lot's of people would watch it as a sort of casuall fans because it has some good jokes and likeable characters.

alan strang

Didn't that bloke who ran the Let's All Have A Giggle About John's Not Mad / Joey Deacon website use the "anyone who doesn't enjoy a good laugh at this must be the sort of person who likes Friends" argument?