40 year anniversary??
- Thread starter cciaffone
- Start date
D
DJWCFC
Guest
nice to see someone in the media remembered the show, a nice article I thought
As said, a good article. Nice to see a modern article that has good things to say about the show. And a charming reflection on how good the show was in the 80s, when everyone tuned in.
But why do they also talk about this 'three men in a bath going down a hill'?
This wasn't quite how it was in Stop That Bath, and I don't think of that episode as being particularly memorable.
I think a lot of this 'three men in a bath going down a hill' image is just stereotypical, as hills and bath tubs have been used in other plots. I think even if Stop That Bath hadn't been made, people would still have this image.
And it's not a bad image is it?
But why do they also talk about this 'three men in a bath going down a hill'?
This wasn't quite how it was in Stop That Bath, and I don't think of that episode as being particularly memorable.
I think a lot of this 'three men in a bath going down a hill' image is just stereotypical, as hills and bath tubs have been used in other plots. I think even if Stop That Bath hadn't been made, people would still have this image.
And it's not a bad image is it?
Sarkus
Dedicated Member
Nice to see it mentioned, even if the description of the show is not something I'd agree with. I don't think the cast were interchangeable; they got away with changing the third man because the other two (Compo and Clegg) were consistent around that. Once Compo was gone I think we can all agree that the show was never going to be the same. That it lasted another 10 years without him is a testament to how beloved the world of the show as a whole had become, not a testament to viewers only caring about the formula.
Besides that, I tend to think of the show starting with the pilot, which means the 40th anniversary was on January 4th of this year. When I rewatch the series I start with "Of Funerals and Fish;" "Short Back and Palais Glide" is episode number two.
Besides that, I tend to think of the show starting with the pilot, which means the 40th anniversary was on January 4th of this year. When I rewatch the series I start with "Of Funerals and Fish;" "Short Back and Palais Glide" is episode number two.
Philosopher Clegg
Dedicated Member
I think that is true. The classic LOTSW years are the Compo, Clegg, Foggy/Blamire/Seymour and finally Truly years. It's questionable whether the series would have survived so long had Bill Owen and Peter Sallis left to do other things when it was at its peak. They could survive the changes with the third man because the actor who came in was perfect for the role. Arguably you couldn't do the same with Compo and not Clegg either. Compo and Clegg were the glue that held the series together for 27 years.
To look at this another way, Only Fools and Horses is another long running very successful British comedy, which survived the loss of the first Grandad. However, you could not do that series without DelBoy. You might just get away without Rodney, but even there the two go hand in hand. It's unthinkable for OFAH to be remade or carry on without Delboy and Rodney regardless of the quality of the supporting cast. Yet LOTSW did try to remake itself after most of its classic characters had gone with mixed success. This is very difficult to do as you have to live with the success of the past and the audience viewing figures suggested that most preferred the classic years and gradually switched off in the later series.
D
DJWCFC
Guest
To commemorate the 40th anniversary Danbury Mint have a Compo Steiff bear for sale, only problem is it's £200 so very expensive but at least there's something available to celebrate 40 years of our favourite show.
Philosopher Clegg
Dedicated Member
There's been many of these top 50 or 100 polls over the years, sometimes voted by the public sometimes not. The BBC did one back in 2004 where the public could vote, LOTSW came 14th.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sitcom/winner.shtml
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sitcom/top11to100.shtml
amos hames
Dedicated Member
Not biased at all I think we would all agree.call me biased but should be number 1 whatever poll
Thaught the article a bit condescending and typical of "CRITICS" it wasnt interlectualy upbeat but was a gentle funny,very, well acted ,written and directed.Looking at some of the so called good programes that the all knowing ones like they are not ordinary people.That the show survived so long is a tribute to everybody involved not the planners at the BBC ,Jay Hunt was determined to make a statement so as to enhance her cv,and this proved correct as she bogged off after doing a great deal of harm.ITV also did the same with he Royal, Heartbeat and Taggart and they have only just started getting back to were they were.It would be good if the BBC showed an episode just to celebrate the anniversary ,hope is there with the Open All Hours .
Philosopher Clegg
Dedicated Member
Thaught the article a bit condescending and typical of "CRITICS" it wasnt interlectualy upbeat but was a gentle funny,very, well acted ,written and directed.Looking at some of the so called good programes that the all knowing ones like they are not ordinary people.That the show survived so long is a tribute to everybody involved not the planners at the BBC ,Jay Hunt was determined to make a statement so as to enhance her cv,and this proved correct as she bogged off after doing a great deal of harm.ITV also did the same with he Royal, Heartbeat and Taggart and they have only just started getting back to were they were.It would be good if the BBC showed an episode just to celebrate the anniversary ,hope is there with the Open All Hours .
Alan Bell does have a go at Jay Hunt and the BBC management for not given the new look LOTSW a chance, but he did put a lot of faith in Russ Abbot's Hobbo character to save the series. I can honestly say that if LOTSW was starting out today with the last trio, and minus Peter Sallis, I probably wouldn't watch it. I did think that Hobbo was truly awful. Interesting that most of the talk on this forum tends to be about the glory years, hardly anyone talks about Hobbo or the final few series. What does that tell us?
barmpot
LOTSW Fanatic
There are those on this forum who quite like the Hobbo era, and it might have matured if allowed to develop.
The programme only really became popular after about series five, so it might have worked.
Hobbo was less believable than Foggy, who 'enhanced' his military service, probably had been in Malaysia or similar, but quite Walter Mitty in his recollections. Blamire was the one whose problem was he felt above the town of his youth but had no choice. Seymour was really all too aware of the failings of his school but saw it all through a rose tinted backwards view. Hobbo was over the top, and to be fair by the last series his character had calmed down.
However it was not my most favoured part of the 295 episodes; as were some of the second Foggy ones which lacked a certain je ne sait quoi in my opinion (the ones around the time when Smiler became Norah's lodger).
The programme only really became popular after about series five, so it might have worked.
Hobbo was less believable than Foggy, who 'enhanced' his military service, probably had been in Malaysia or similar, but quite Walter Mitty in his recollections. Blamire was the one whose problem was he felt above the town of his youth but had no choice. Seymour was really all too aware of the failings of his school but saw it all through a rose tinted backwards view. Hobbo was over the top, and to be fair by the last series his character had calmed down.
However it was not my most favoured part of the 295 episodes; as were some of the second Foggy ones which lacked a certain je ne sait quoi in my opinion (the ones around the time when Smiler became Norah's lodger).
Philosopher Clegg
Dedicated Member
I think the main problem with Hobbo was that he wasn't believable at all. The other fantasist tall men could at least fall back on the fact that their history gave a degree of credibility to what they were claiming, although the likes of Foggy, Blamire and Seymour exaggerated it. Hobbo wasn't a spy was he? He was a milkman. This suggests that the character was borderline mentally ill, delusional and paranoid. At times it made for uncomfortable viewing as you wondered why in heavens name would he think he was a spy?
barmpot
LOTSW Fanatic
Point I was trying to make - however not sure it indicates any border line psychiatric state in my view, just distinctly odd. But then again I have plenty of add neighbours and characters around here!
The spy references just confused me - thought my hearing had gone!
Philosopher Clegg
Dedicated Member
Point I was trying to make - however not sure it indicates any border line psychiatric state in my view, just distinctly odd. But then again I have plenty of add neighbours and characters around here!
The spy references just confused me - thought my hearing had gone!
I felt Hobbo as a character wasn't as well written as those that had gone before. I've mentioned before that it would have made more sense to write him as a retiring civil servant who perhaps worked for the MOD, Foreign Office or even one of the security services, after all, they all need pen pushers. This would have given him some Foggy type justification for his fantasy. Also, Russ Abbot can act quite well, but in LOTSW it looked like he was recreating one of his Madhouse characters. Not sure what was going on there, but every time I saw him I always thought here comes Basildon Bond (for anyone that doesn't know look it up on YouTube).
The final trio as a unit also didn't help. Entwistle moved us away from the traditional wandering trio that were usually unemployed or forced idle. Entwistle ran his own business, where did he find the time to go wandering? It didn't make sense.
I liked Alvin, but he was woefully underused in the final series as they gave the show over to Hobbo's antics. I think there was a feeling, from reading Bell's comments on the series ending, that he thought Abbot as Hobbo could save the series given time. Not sure he was right on that one.