The headmaster's/Inventor's amnesia......

M

MoodyBlue

Dedicated Member
Firstly,I hope EVERYONE on Summerwineland had a joyous healthy happy Christmas !!!!...
Whilst testing his "latest invention"...the self propelled wheelbarrow the founder of the U.P.U. [don't call it "UP U" or Seymour will get Barry to "thrash you"] sped past Compo and Cleggy.
After cursing God for not giving him the breaks he so much deserves he turned to Wesley and exclaimed.." WHO ARE THESE PEOPLE ????".
Further on in series 9 he tells them that he was so glad to have gone to Grammar school,and openly admitted knowing them both from primary school ???...I think all those cold winters "HIGH ON THE NORTH YORKSHIRE MOORS" have addled "the professor's"...[Compo's words not mine] MASSIVE BRAIN.
 
Yeah, it's one of the shows inconsistencies. Not only did he say he went to grammar school with them later, its implied that that was the last time he knew them. But a few years later in "First of the Summer Wine" he's seeing them all the time as a young adult.

My guess? Roy Clarke initially thought it would be interesting to have the new "third man" be someone they didn't go to school with, which had been the case with Blamire and Foggy. So, he wrote "Uncle of the Bride" on that premise. Later he either decided that he wanted to go back to the childhood friend's scenario or the BBC with its endless audience testing told him the audience liked the trio to have that earlier connection, so he did that.

But think about this: if Seymour went to school with all of them then so did Edie, right? And yet I don't think there is every any reference to that and she doesn't appear in "First of the Summer Wine."
 
Could it be argued that Seymour simply didn't recognise Compo and Clegg in Uncle of the Bride?

Not convincingly, no.

As well as the above inconsistencies, it was a shame Blamire was not in FOTSW, as we know Blamire went to school with Compo and Clegg.

In some ways I try to imagine Seymour in FOTSW as Blamire, but it doesn't work.

I've mentioned this before, but in FOTSW, Sherbet is TOO MUCH LIKE Wesley, in character and looks - I am surprised they didn't make him Wesley.

I believe Sherbet's real surname was Hopkins.

In an early scene in FOTSW, there is a scene where Mr Scrimshaw calls him Sherbet, which just doesn't seem right to me. Later, he calls him Hopkins - which seems more believable.
 
I've just started to watch FOTSW, I'm guessing when it was made in the late 80's it was expected that it's audience would be predominately be that of the LOTSW. Therefore it's unsurprising that the characters largely mirror those that were in the series at that time hence why Blamire wasn't included.
 
It amuses me how we all can pick up on little or sometimes not so little errors in our show, I really don't think they expected the show to come under so much scrutiny, they might not of expected it to have such a following 49 years later, I amaze myself at times, when after watching a scene many many times, I spot something odd, I also believe when it was recorded to film, due to cost and time they could not afford to correct some of the errors, they had a very strict rota of what cast members where on set, so sometimes to put something right they did not have the people available to them.
Once the went digital more than one person could see what was being filmed, using a small wireless screen, so up to three people might be watching as it is filmed, so there was a better chance of spotting any filming errors
 
wstol said:
Could it be argued that Seymour simply didn't recognise Compo and Clegg in Uncle of the Bride?

Not convincingly, no.

As well as the above inconsistencies, it was a shame Blamire was not in FOTSW, as we know Blamire went to school with Compo and Clegg.

In some ways I try to imagine Seymour in FOTSW as Blamire, but it doesn't work.

I've mentioned this before, but in FOTSW, Sherbet is TOO MUCH LIKE Wesley, in character and looks - I am surprised they didn't make him Wesley.

I believe Sherbet's real surname was Hopkins.

In an early scene in FOTSW, there is a scene where Mr Scrimshaw calls him Sherbet, which just doesn't seem right to me. Later, he calls him Hopkins - which seems more believable.
Click to expand...

Wesley was referenced as having grown up with them in later seasons so his absence in FOTSW is another continuity issue. From what I've read, most people think Sherbet (or was it Sherbert? Wikipedia says it was) was destined to be a war casualty. However, there are some interesting interviews with FOTSW cast that suggest the show was more or less heading into an alternate reality version where a number of things may have been different. For example, we never saw Clegg's Edith in FOTSW and instead he's being pursued by Anita Pillsworth. There we supposedly 3rd series script summaries that would have kept the gang together at the beginning of the war, not separated. So who knows.

I find these little iconsistencies amusing, not a problem. Its fun to notice and talk about them though.
 
Roy Clarke is just not bothered about detail or a great deal of depth in his characters, that's not a criticism it's just not what his writing is about.
I've seen interviews with Steve Coogan where he said it was important to him that the Alan Partridge character was consistent and did not contradict his life story so it is more important to other authors. It's scary to think if Alan lasts until the end of this decade he'll have been running longer than LOTSW :eek:
 
Sarkus said:
Wesley was referenced as having grown up with them in later seasons so his absence in FOTSW is another continuity issue. From what I've read, most people think Sherbet (or was it Sherbert? Wikipedia says it was) was destined to be a war casualty. However, there are some interesting interviews with FOTSW cast that suggest the show was more or less heading into an alternate reality version where a number of things may have been different. For example, we never saw Clegg's Edith in FOTSW and instead he's being pursued by Anita Pillsworth. There we supposedly 3rd series script summaries that would have kept the gang together at the beginning of the war, not separated. So who knows.

I find these little iconsistencies amusing, not a problem. Its fun to notice and talk about them though.
Click to expand...
As far as I know, Sherbet being a casualty of war is just pure speculation.
 
wstol said:
As far as I know, Sherbet being a casualty of war is just pure speculation.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. However, as he was never referenced in LOTSW it tends to support the speculation. Of course, the same is true of several of the girls on the show so who knows. The actress who played Anita thought she was going to end up marrying Clegg, which would have been another consistency error from LOTSW, but Lena and Dilys join Sherbet as being unknown characters outside of FOTSW.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top