If Summer Wine were still on today, how much would it have changed?

Philosopher Clegg~~ living up to his name. Good job, that man. Whatever real age number they are, they shall remain the same in my eyes and Ivy will always be an annoyed 55.
 
Philosopher Clegg said:
Age was always going to be an issue as time went by, there was always the chance of someone retiring, falling ill or passing away. Frank Thornton and Trevor Bannister passed away yet both looked like they were in good health in the final series.

It's actually remarkable that so many of them still look quite youthful and healthy for their age. You would never guess that Robert Fyfe is 89 and Brian Murphy is a youthful looking 80. But age and illness has caught up with some, Peter Sallis, Jane Freeman and Jean Alexander might struggle to appear now had the series gone on. Could there be a LOTSW without Sallis, the last of the old guard? I doubt it, especially as there hadn't been much of an attempt to come up with a new more youthful trio that could take it forward.

The final trio was a poor balance of these ages, Abbott 66, Murphy 80 and Kwouk 83. In that final series Kwouk was really beginning to look his age. The trouble is that there was never really a more up and coming middle age element to the series to move it forward once the old guard were gone. Russ Abbott was 66, Tom Owen 65 and even Mike Grady is 68, although again you wouldn't think that to look at him but any in their fifties?

Actually, someone mentioned Louis Emerick as being 61, both IMDb AND Wiki give that as his age. However Google suggest that he was born in 1960 which would make him 54. If he is 61 then he is a remarkably youthful and fit looking 61. A 54 or even 61 year old Emerick was the right age for a member of a new trio, at least if you are looking for another 10 years of the series.

This prompted me to think of a possible alternative. What about the two policemen? One or both could have been part of a new trio. First possibility could be Walsh being offered and taking early retirement. He'd be part of a new trio that would occasionally bump into Cooper and his new young but green partner. Alternatively, both of them get early retirement and are teamed up with a slightly dodgy third character, who they occasionally came into contact with when they were in the force. Bobby Ball's character might have fitted the bill.

There were possible alternative trios, even from within the existing cast, but Clarke and Bell seemed to stick with the cosiness of what was rather than making any radical change. That only came too late with the introduction of Hobbo, perhaps the most unbelievable character to ever appear. The milkman who thought he was James Bond.
Click to expand...

Thanks for making this post and it gives food for thought. It`s certainly interesting to think about the possibility of the policemen being included more. They are definitely two of my favourite characters from the later series. I think LOTSW though is one of those shows where Louis Emerick`s youthful looks could be seen as a negative by some people. :16: T

With the benefit of hindsight, I think if the show were going to have a chance of running a little bit longer that younger characters (actors in their 50s but perhaps made up to look a little older) could have been introduced earlier to support Clegg and Truly. If they had been integrated properly then maybe they could have become part of a new 3 more smoothly than Hobbo managed.

Several of the episodes from later series feel like The Simpsons `22 Short Films About Springfield` to me though. Lots of plot strands and characters that don`t really fit together.
 
I think a focus on Barry and Glenda would certainly work. Their delightful child-free marriage.

They could carefully establish some older characters ... the three men out walking IS the show. One would think there are some great actors now too old for feature films etc. who could shine.
 
Howlett said:
I think a focus on Barry and Glenda would certainly work. Their delightful child-free marriage.

They could carefully establish some older characters ... the three men out walking IS the show. One would think there are some great actors now too old for feature films etc. who could shine.
Click to expand...

Personally I`ve never been a big fan of these characters and think they actually were detrimental to the show as it went on.

To give an example, today I watched Merry Entwistle and Jackson Day (stupid considering the time of year I know) and, typically for a later episode, Barry and Glenda don`t interact with the other characters and don`t move the plot on at all. They don`t serve any narrative purpose in my opinion unfortunately.
 
Nicko12345 said:
Personally I`ve never been a big fan of these characters and think they actually were detrimental to the show as it went on.

To give an example, today I watched Merry Entwistle and Jackson Day (stupid considering the time of year I know) and, typically for a later episode, Barry and Glenda don`t interact with the other characters and don`t move the plot on at all. They don`t serve any narrative purpose in my opinion unfortunately.
Click to expand...


The same could be said of many of the coffee mornings or Nora and Ivy chatting in the cafe but for me they had some of the funniest lines.

I read somewhere that one episode was something like 2 minutes too short so they asked Roy to lengthen it a bit and he wrote out a 2 minute skit on a scrap of paper or napkin for Nora and Ivy to plonk in there somewhere.

Its good for shows to go off the main plot now and then it adds a touch of reality to it and makes it more attractive to other people.
 
Pearl said:
The same could be said of many of the coffee mornings or Nora and Ivy chatting in the cafe but for me they had some of the funniest lines.

I read somewhere that one episode was something like 2 minutes too short so they asked Roy to lengthen it a bit and he wrote out a 2 minute skit on a scrap of paper or napkin for Nora and Ivy to plonk in there somewhere.

Its good for shows to go off the main plot now and then it adds a touch of reality to it and makes it more attractive to other people.
Click to expand...

I can see what you are saying and certainly these auxiliary characters could have served a purpose if they had been used well (which they sometimes were over the years of course).

But in Merry Entwistle, for example, you have 19 regular characters appearing!?! Now, to me, that is far too many for a 30 minute comedy and it becomes more like a sketch show than a sitcom.

Compare this with series 3 and 4 when the three main men carried the show and even characters like Nora Batty were not seen in every episode.

If Barry and Glenda (plus Howard, Marina and several other characters) had been used more sparingly then and not in each episode then it would have benefited the show imo.
 
I completely agree with you on that, I think sometimes it did bob about too much with not enough emphasis on the main plot.

I think what happened was, writing for the same three ( More or less) characters for 37 years would have been nye on impossible without revisiting the same thymes more often than they already did.

I think the necessity to add extra characters was important to ensure the show continued to be popular.I think they did it in a good way adding them pretty much one by one or couple by couple that way giving us time to form a bond with them. For the most part I can't fault the formula but it was bond to become confusing and sketch like the more characters that were added.

I for one think there was no really need to add Russ Abott to the mix I think they could have found their "Third man" from the people already there. I'm sure that will set the cat amongst the ferrets :39::me:
 
From 1992 to the end, the show did gradually have too many secondary characters.

Originally it was a show about three old men.

In the second half of the show's run, it lost some of it's simplicity by introducing all these other characters. Most were good, some could be annoying or unfunny.

It was an attempt to keep the show fresh, though I think ultimately it did the exact opposite.

However, the good thing about all these characters repeatedly being in the show is that it probably helped the older main stars in that they had less to do, as their age would have made the physical stuff harder.

As a result of that, this probably meant it possible to have so many episodes in each series rather than just the usual six or seven.

That said, I prefer the ones with a small cast, less physical stuff and more dialogue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top