Two new Paul Rose sitcoms.

[purlieu]

Haven't seen either of these mentioned here: Too Much Too Young and Now The Weather... they're only in the pilot stage now, but Too Much Too Young is rumoured to have Dylan Moran as the main role.  Which could be interesting.  And the Brass Eye reference is equally interesting...

It's something that I've had to think about a lot over the last year. Too Much Too Young was always designed to be a ratings-winning, prime-time, mainstream, BBC1 sitcom hit - the sort of show I watched when I was growing up. It's not niche, it's not particularly clever, it's not cool or edgy, and it's written with the express purpose of appealing to as many people as possible. Providing it gets past the pilot, the BBC want it to be a long running series, and step into the hole left by My Family.

But at the same time everyone involved is trying to do that in a way where we avoid the whole 'millions of people watch it, but nobody likes it' phenomenon. We're trying to make a popular show that's ok to like. A One Foot in the Grave, or a Porridge, or a Fawlty Towers. While I wouldn't for a second put myself in the same bracket as any of the geniuses responsible for those shows, we'd be foolish not to aim high. Nobody in their right mind would want to make the new Brittas Empire or Fresh Fields.

The Doctor Who revival has managed brilliantly to straddle the gap between mainstream popularity, and niche acceptance. Russell T Davies knew that, in the current climate, there was no point in pandering only to sci-fans; it wouldn't get past one series. Therefore, he devised a show that appealed to sci-fi fans, and people who - a few years ago - would've run a mile at the words "Doctor Who". It has given me confidence that there is a genuine family audience out there. Get the kids watching, and the parents will follow.

So, it can be done, but neither is it an exact science. Often when you try to please all the people you end up pleasing no-one.

That said, with Too Much Too Young, it's not like I'm working from the scientific formula for a hit show. I'm just writing what I want to see; something that gives me a warm feeling inside, and makes me feel good. Something unchallenging, but not crap. I'm deliberately not over-thinking the scripts, because I don't want them to feel contrived.

It's going to be filmed in front of a studio audience. But it's going to be filmed with mostly hand-held cameras, in an enclosed set - like the first series of I'm Alan Partridge (basically, the cast will be able to hear the audience, but not see them). The lead actor was the star of hit Channel 4 sitcom, but isn't generally known to BBC1 audiences. The kid characters are as important as the adult characters. There are traditional jokes, but there are also moments of out and out silliness.

I suppose I'm in a fortunate position whereby I've been able to exorcise some of my more niche preferences by simultaneously writing the Channel 4 sitcom pilot, Now The Weather. That said, even that is designed to be popular. It's a sitcom for a commercial channel, and if nobody watches then it's not going to get re-commissioned, and it hasn't served its purpose. Which is to generate revenue for Channel 4. But, nevertheless, it won't be quite as accessible as Too Much Too Young (the director is the same guy who worked on Brass Eye, for instance), because it isn't really designed to be. You're simply not going to get a family audience watching Channel 4.

http://biffovision.blogspot.com

[ffogems]

While I wouldn't for a second put myself in the same bracket as any of the geniuses

Self-deprecation will make you rubbish.

I'm deliberately not over-thinking the scripts, because I don't want them to feel contrived.

Embarrassing excuse to not have to think. Even the exemplars of high-quality  mainstream comedy he listed had complexity. Amazing just how many writers, producers and commissioners these days are looking for a reason to make depthless digestible drivel.

There are traditional jokes

You know where you stole them from then.

You're simply not going to get a family audience watching Channel 4.

Father Ted. Fuckin' Twat.

[The Boston Crab]

[cuss/]

[petercussing]

Someone here is disparaging towards Paul Rose shocker!

[sick as a pike]

You're simply not going to get a family audience watching Channel 4.

Father Ted. Fuckin' Twat.

To be fair to Paul (declaration of interest- I know him slightly) the Channel Four of Father Ted days is rather different to the C4 of now.  They are now very keen indeed to specifically target their key audience i.e. 18-24 year olds, not particularly families.

[Bert Thung]

I've never heard of this person. Should I have?

[neveragain]

No. From his CV, he appears to have mainly written for CITV.

[Marvin]

He has a big cult following for being the writer and creator of Digitiser on Teletext.

Oh and it may be CITV but his writing for My Parents Are Aliens is  great.

[thepuffpastryhangman]

...C4 of now.  They are now very keen indeed to specifically target their key audience i.e. 18-24 year olds...

Channel 4 News employed J Sno in a bid to woo the txt generation. Though, naturally, he's still Count Jonathan ffisherton-Snowdroopingdale from DeBlockburgh Manor and Country Estate.

[neveragain]

I'm still pissed off at him for lumping The Brittas Empire in with Fresh Fields, to be honest. Surely anyone with a knowledge of good writing who has watched it realises how the structure of most episodes are fantastically woven. And, aside from some of the support acting and effects (and a drop in quality with the last series), there's nothing wrong the show anyway.

Also he namechecks Porridge, Fawlty Towers and One Foot In The Grave as the type of sitcom he's trying to make. Well, I'm sure none of those set out with the idea of making something that's 'not particularly clever.. or edgy'. And if he's trying to be so family-friendly and traditional, why's he filming it IAP-style.

Yes, he says he's trying a bit harder with the Channel Four one and I've got nothing against programmes aimed towards the family either but I'm annoyed at the way he trivialises the act of thinking, almost discarding it as unnecessary. Why not try to make something popular but which still involves a bit of overthinking?

But I'm sure his Aliens are top-notch, I've heard many good things about it.

[purlieu]

You're simply not going to get a family audience watching Channel 4.

Father Ted. Fuckin' Twat.

I remember being the only kid in school allowed to watch Father Ted.  It's hardly Nighty Night, but I've never thought of it as a family sitcom either.

[23 Daves]

Ah, Paul Rose... I have to admit, I've read some of the scripts he had on his website of various projects (though they may not still be there) and laughed very hard indeed.  He seemed overflowing with brilliant and absurd ideas a couple of years ago, so I hope he can deliver them in a format that's acceptable to the various TV stations without losing his touch.

Victor Lewis Smith is a fan of his as well, if memory serves correctly.

[weirdbeard]

Is he still writting for EastEnders?

[DJ One Record]

I'm deliberately not over-thinking the scripts, because I don't want them to feel contrived.

Only, given all that "Make a popular program that's not shit but is unchallenging" demographic speak, that's exactly what he's doing.

I'm still pissed off at him for lumping The Brittas Empire in with Fresh Fields, to be honest.

Writers nowadays are bound by an oath that says they may not promote their own show without shamelessly slamming some long defunct sitcoms in the progress. Hell, even Paul Alexander couldn't promote Red Dwarf - a certified hit by the time he was interviewed retrospectively for the 7 and 8 DVDs - without making comments like "It's not Terry And June really, is it?" or "You know how Men Behaving Badly got a bit stuck?"

[Jack Shaftoe]

Hmm, not so much 'slamming' other shows as 'mentioning' them, surely?

[Mister Six]

Ah, Paul Rose... I have to admit, I've read some of the scripts he had on his website of various projects (though they may not still be there) and laughed very hard indeed.  He seemed overflowing with brilliant and absurd ideas a couple of years ago, so I hope he can deliver them in a format that's acceptable to the various TV stations without losing his touch.

Victor Lewis Smith is a fan of his as well, if memory serves correctly.

Rose's web stuff is great, but the Knife and Wife piot for Comedy Lab (2001?) was dire.

Let's hope it doesn't all go horribly wrong!

[The Boston Crab]

Does your name come from the following Paul Rose/Man Daddy joke?

What do you call a man with six tables on his back?

Mister Six!

I seem to remember asking you this before and it's from the Prisoner isn't it?

[mikeyg27]

While I wouldn't for a second put myself in the same bracket as any of the geniuses

Self-deprecation will make you rubbish.

To be fair, he says

While I wouldn't for a second put myself in the same bracket as any of the geniuses responsible for those shows, we'd be foolish not to aim high

[ffogems]

To be fair, he says

While I wouldn't for a second put myself in the same bracket as any of the geniuses responsible for those shows, we'd be foolish not to aim high

Yeah, but it's that feigned-deprecatory, arse-covering arrogance. It's saying - 'I don't want it to be shit, but I don't want it to be compared to high quality stuff either'. It's already resigning to the 'fact' that he won't be able to do anything better than those 'geniuses.' It reeks of insecurity and what he said is an unconscious acknowdgement of this, I think. The same tone is continued with his 'channel 4 don't do families' remark. It's all matter of fact resignation to inevitability, as though trends are firmly ossified without chance for change. As a largely unknown writer I suppose he can't have much affect on cultural trends, although he can at least aspire to change rather than submit to them.
Worse than his submission to how-it-is idioms are commissioners and producers- who are in a position to try different things- citing trends and tendencies as unchangeable 'fact', as though some distant deity has typed up this year's targets.
My problem with commissioners and producers citing the comedy climate as just the way it blows is that they're now making programmes for a demographic rather than creating one. After Little Britain, in an attempt to regroup the dispersing demographic, came Tittybangbang. After The Office had been tagged and sold, Ricky Gervais himself set about pandering to that tag for Extras with all his 'it just be a little show on the south side of scheduling', which of course it couldn't ever be.
I apologise for the major sidestep, but I think it's all related, particularly as I just had this image of Paul Rose and some suited commissioner exchanging insider axioms of how telly was made these days, despite them both being in a position to exact change.
My overall problem? Resignation and the consequent pandering to trends. It makes for mediocre telly.

edited for clarity and speeling.

[neveragain]

And in reply to Jack Shaftoe, saying 'Nobody in their right mind would want to make another Brittas Empire' is surely 'slamming' it by anyone's definition.

[DJ One Record]

Hmm, not so much 'slamming' other shows as 'mentioning' them, surely?

Fine. 'Mentioning' them in a derisive way.

I guess if you haven't seen the documentary in question those Alexander quotes don't really come across as particularly damning.

[Jack Shaftoe]

Well that's what I was wondering.

[The Duck Man]

Bit of a bump, but I was just wondering whether anyone could point me in the direction of Rose's web stuff?

[sick as a pike]

His home page, plus links to his cv and blog.

[The Duck Man]

Thank you, sir.