If Last of the Summer Wine were still running today...

W

wstol

Dedicated Member
I can't believe it's coming up for six years since the final series of LOTSW.

It was of course made seven years ago.

It only seems like a couple of years ago, yet it isn't, and a few sad deaths have since occured.

But if it was still being made, what would it be like?

I envisage Alvin and Hobbo would still be in, but who would have taken Entwistle's place?

I think Barry could have taken this part, a sort of next-generation Clegg, quite philosophical. And well known to viewers.

But then the trio wouldn't usually consist of anyone married (except Billy Hardcastle) and the sequences between Barry and Glenda may be compromised.

Truly would no longer be in the show - though I suspect his departure wouldn't be mentioned in the show - Roy Clarke doesn't always acknowledge characters leaving.

I think there is a chance Robert Fyfe would still be in the show, though I don't know how things with Pearl and Marina would be.

Possibly Ivy would be retired - cue the return of Crusher.

No Toby, but probably Morton would still be around. Same with the policemen. Same with Miss Davenport and probably Nelly. Possibly Auntie Wainwright - or Tom running the shop?

And some more brief cameos in each episode of Clegg.
 
Difficult one don't think it would have survived the suits at the BBC they only want modern humour ie swearing non jokes etc and the characters were all getting older with no real replacements coming through.Sadly comedy actors don't exist anymore but at least we can see the show on tv as we remember it .
 
I think is more like trainers and jeans running the BBC these days, the corporation were very good at bringing good quality comedy to our sets on a regular basis some years back, mixed with light entertainment and drama. These days they seem to make programs they would watch and never mind the viewers who pay for it, it is almost like having to buy a car but nothing about the car suits your needs, so you only drive it when forced by circumstances.

I can recall years ago people looked forward to what was on, they chatted about it at work the next day, if they could not watch it live they went out of the way to record it on their VHS machines, it was not to be missed. when the BBC binned LOSW that was a turning point for me, it seemed there was little left to look forward to on the TV, I was annoyed that the BBC took all the decent comedy and gave it to their parent company UKTV, I suppose it was a clever plan, on those channels they could get extra revenue from advertising, initially viewers would have to pay again to watch via a satellite subscription,so the viewers were paying again for shows they had already funded via the TV Licence, so lets fill the main BBC channels with modern rubbish and the public will pay even more to watch older quality shows, have you ever noticed that the BBC rarely repeat any of the older shows on any of their channels, I cannot recall them ever repeating LOSW.

So as I have mentioned before they don't get a penny out of me, why should they, they don't deserve it, they have been on my case several times for no longer having a TV licence, they point out that if I watch live TV without a licence I am breaking the law, I pointed out that large chunks of Europe watch it for free and asked them what are they doing about that they did not reply, they already know to stop that happening, the channels would have to be encrypted and viewers would have to pay to view, this would mean an end to the the licence fee and a lot less money coming in to fund their lifestyle.
 
I'm not so sure about BBC and old people.

Is it more likely the BBC just wanted to axe a series that had been going on a while, and was also the butt of many a joke about sitcoms today?

The series was on borrowed time, and was a bit of an embarrassment for the BBC for at least 10 years towards the end.

I think the BBC don't intentionally go out of their way in making shows only for younger people.

I think the show generally just ran out of steam, plots were stale and there was nothing CLEVER about the humour anymore.

If the show had had the sharpness and wit and fresh ideas which the early shows had it may have still been in demand.

But how can one expect a show to stay brilliant for 40 years?

THAT SAID, people DID still watch those later shows, and DID like them.

People liked the familiarity of it all, and it was nice to catch up on the gang, and be part of this cozy little village for half an hour a week.

It could be argued the show is like a soap, and could run forever. That would mean new actors replacing old actors.

If the BBC were concerned about age, they just had to let the show to keep running, and gradually introduce younger actors - which is of course what they were doing with the likes of Russ Abbot.

In any case, older people are a lot younger nowadays!!!
 
I feel that once Sallis (and to a smaller extent, Thornton) weren't able to contribute as much, the show needed to shift more. Perhaps this would have meant more emphasis on Cooper and Walsh. Afterall, it is debateable that Cooper's Rules was the strongest episode in the latter years.

So splitting time between the cops and the trio might have worked. Hobbo grew on me after a while and to match him with a younger team, they could have Barry part of the trio and brought in Bobby Ball permanently. In a similar previous thread, someone brought up the idea that Barry could have been forced into early retirement. This could have been a redundancy link to the early years of the show.

I feel Enwistle and Alvin were too limited in the later years. WSTOL mentioned that the plots became stale and the humor wasn't clver anymore. However, Clarke still produced gems like Coopers Rules and Good Night Sweet Ferret. So with Cooper, Walsh, Hobbo, Lenny, and Barry, I think Clarke could have done a lot.
 
Boomers is a great example of where the BBC have not lost faith in using mature actors in a show , it stars people who have been in "the business" and have a pedigree in acting for a very long time , with a career crafted over many years . Philip Jackson was of course in LOTSW in 1976 , his CV like the rest spans many years and many diverse Productions . I imagine that Russ Abbot's CV , in terms of this show , is by far the shortest .

These people have learnt their craft the hard way and are all accomplished for good reason . There is a plethora of talent who could have acted in the show but it is all down to Roy Clarke and whether he can write interesting enough scripts to keep the show going . The BBC personnel who had the final say obviously decided that he did not , as was stated in previous threads the viewing figures were very reasonable [certainly when you compare what is happening at the moment with their alleged flagship and cash cow Top Gear] so it can only really be the perception of those with the clout that Roy Clarke's scripts had run out of steam and so they so sadly cancelled our beloved show .
 
captain clutterbuck said:
Boomers is a great example of where the BBC have not lost faith in using mature actors in a show , it stars people who have been in "the business" and have a pedigree in acting for a very long time , with a career crafted over many years . Philip Jackson was of course in LOTSW in 1976 , his CV like the rest spans many years and many diverse Productions . I imagine that Russ Abbot's CV , in terms of this show , is by far the shortest .

These people have learnt their craft the hard way and are all accomplished for good reason . There is a plethora of talent who could have acted in the show but it is all down to Roy Clarke and whether he can write interesting enough scripts to keep the show going . The BBC personnel who had the final say obviously decided that he did not , as was stated in previous threads the viewing figures were very reasonable [certainly when you compare what is happening at the moment with their alleged flagship and cash cow Top Gear] so it can only really be the perception of those with the clout that Roy Clarke's scripts had run out of steam and so they so sadly cancelled our beloved show .
Click to expand...

Was it that the writing ran out of steam or the lack of strong characters in the Hobbo years?
 
I am not sure how much leeway there was in the script to allow the stars to stamp their own personality on their part . Boomers has six stars all are strong actors with a wealth of experience. In addition to the cast who featured in the last episode of our beloved show I believe there were enough actors and actresses "of an age" who could have starred in the show had it been retained [ Derek Jacobi and Sir Ian McKellen for example who have appeared in the comedy Vicious] .

In my own personal view I believe Roy Clarke was running short of ideas . The Howard /Marina escapades became very stale and had long outgrown the scenario warranting a place in the show[ was it like a comfortable pair of old slippers or a band playing their well known hits and fans would have been in uproar if it wasn't included] . If he wanted to maintain it but freshen it up then I cannot understand why Roy Clarke did not introduce a more regular "rival" for Marina's affections.

I guess we will really never know the full facts of why the BBC cancelled the show [there are some which get commissioned now and it beggars believe how they made and shown not only that they often get multiple renewals]
 
I am not sure who or why , there is one being advertised called THE REBEL .Anyone got any ideas on it??The :confused:"trailers" seem to infer it could be full of swearing? :confused::o o:
 
Simon Callow is the star he is supposed to be a rebel against everything, given his age I guess he is a mature rebel, a Victor Meldrew type with more four letter words taking revenge on things he does not like . Based on the Rebel cartoon by Simon Birch from Private Eye.
 
Is there a lot of swearing in it then? It makes you wonder why someone of Simon Callow's acting background needs to be in something with a lot of swearing.

Anyone remember Chance in a Million with Simon Callow?
 
It is yet to air but trailer has bleeps in it so imagine there must be some . I remember Chance in a Million also starred a young Brenda Blethyn now star of many films and the cop series Vera.
 
Could it be the bleeps actually feature in the programme itself instead of the swearing?

(I'm not totally anti-swearing, but I really don't see the sense in littering tv shows with it.)
 
lets hope its bleeps ,it's not big and it's not clever to swear but it is so commonly used now it has sadly found a place in a lot of people's everyday language .
 
There are times when swearing in moderation CAN enhance certain comedy, but very often now it's there for the sake of it. It can spoil what could be a show that all or some of the family can enjoy.

It's shocking to see families in real life using bad language all the time - I'm sure most families weren't always that bad.
 
It is very funny to have swearing replaced with bleeps.

Just look at those Jeremy Beadle programmes, where members of the public had pranks played on them.

And look at The Two Ronnies Swearbox sketch - wouldn't be funny if they actually swore - the funny noises replacing each particular swear word was far funnier.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top