TV: Thank God You're Here - Season 1, Episode 4

This week, Paul Merton's improvisational sketch show finally hit its stride. So far it's been a sporadically amusing affair, with most of the guests (who are thrust into a sketch they know nothing about and must make it as funny as the can) struggling to get many good laughs. Even the host himself, a master of improvisation on Have I Got News For You, frequently flounders in the one sketch he does every week.

But not so this week, with all six sketches and the two sets of linking clips managing their fair share of decent humour. It was also quite nice to see most of the guests messing with the regular cast members, throwing them the odd line or direction that had them struggling to keep up for a change.

Obviously the quality of this show will always hinge on the guests and what they can do, meaning that there's never any guarantee of a consistent standard. Thus far they seem to have struck a good balance with guests and given them mostly strong enough starting points that those with enough ability can do with it what they will. Hopefully they can keep it up -- and keep people watching -- because it's fast becoming one of my favourite comedy shows.

Film: January Round-up

Here's a little round-up of all the new films I saw this January, with links to the full review over at 100 Films.

The Simpsons Movie
"it made me laugh, and often; at least as much as any other recent comedy, if not more so. That makes it a success in my book."

Dark City
"probably the most underrated film I've ever seen. It is, to my mind, absolutely brilliant."

Easy Riders, Raging Bulls
"short on great insight, but does provide an overview of what went on in this period -- that is, the story of how Hollywood made the transition from the old studio system to the era of the blockbuster"

Churchill: The Hollywood Years
"most of the best bits are of sketch length, and so wind up spread out among the padding."

The Mirror Crack'd
"the direction is flat and lacks suspense, half the cast phone in their performances, and Angela Lansbury, lumbered with a sprained ankle and premature aging, seems to be in a dry run for Murder, She Wrote."

Keep an eye on the regular 100 Films in a Year blog for full length reviews of all the films that are new to me as I see them.

TV: The Riches - Season 1, Episode 10

This is Your Brain on Drugs by Ellen Herman

When The Riches began, I was a bit surprised. You see, I was expecting a fairly light comedy-drama sort of show -- "family of con artists steal the American Dream by pretending to be rich lawyers" rather suggests that to me. Instead I found a pilot filled with random death, drug addiction, arranged marriages, and other generally serious and rather depressing plot points. Heavy. The rest of the series lightened up a bit, thank God, and has managed to be a good mix of the serious and the comedic, the episodic and the ongoing.

Episode 10, however, is pretty much all-out comedy. And it's hilarious, which is what's inspired me to write about it for the first time. Following the events of the last episode, in which Wayne turned down a partnership from his boss (sort of) and Dahlia was left a bag of meth by her ex-cellmate (called Chunky K), a pissed off Wayne takes "a shitload of meth" out of spite, and heads off on a journey that includes trying to get a job from a guy he fired, kidnapping a senile old woman, and confessing to a priest who's having an existential quandary. It's absolutely as barking as it sounds, if not more so. It's also incredibly fast-paced, racing from one crazy situation to the next as Dahlia's attempts to remotely control Wayne, whilst also taking care of the real estate agents he should be dealing with, spiral out of control. And, as I believe I said, it's hilariously funny.

The Riches grew on me very quickly, after the pilot that, while well written and performed, was not what I was after. I can't say I've fallen for it as much as that other darkly comic US drama, Dexter (coming to ITV1 soon -- watch it), but I'm glad it's been re-commissioned. Meanwhile, I've still got three episodes of the first season to go...

TV: Thank God You're Here - Season 1, Episode 2

Paul Merton's new improvisational sketch show seems to have turned up with no fanfare, until this week when adverts have started cropping up all over the place. I presume it's filmed in the week leading to transmission, then, as the only clips in the trailer were from last week's episode. Which was a shame, because the fact that likes of Ben Miller (who seems to be bloody everywhere at the minute) and Fern Britton were among the first guests helped persuade me to watch. But no, that was last week's.

Nonetheless, the concept is a good strong one. Essentially, four celebrities each walk into a comedy sketch with absolutely no knowledge about it, bar the costume they've been put in, then have to improvise their way through it. It seems such a simple idea that you wonder why no one's done it before (or maybe they have, before my time). You might also assume that it's all a big act and written for them, but judging by the mixed quality of the performances and the genuine struggle on their faces at times, I'd guess it's done for real. (Of course, in the current atmosphere of distrust surrounding TV, it would be a brave producer who put a scripted show on the air claiming it was improvised!)

As you'd expect, the sketches are bit of a mixed bag. Australian comedian Hamish Blake made a good job of a tennis player trying to get into Heaven, while as a shopaholic housewife Sally Lindsay barely got through the scene. Michael McIntyre was forced to resort to being confused and useless as his character, a technique which got him by with a few laughs and no real effort. Clive Anderson was deemed the best of the bunch though, for his World War Two RAF commander... and also playing a giant beefburger in a final ensemble scene. The final scene -- featuring all four guests as fast food restaurant employees -- made for a decidedly lacklustre finale.

Also disappointing was the sketch attempted by host Paul Merton. Under the same rules as everyone else, he played an irresponsible butler. I expected much from Merton, as his improvisation on Have I Got News For You is so good and he's one of the few people to have managed a whole minute on Just a Minute, but he struggled to get through this one. But that's the problem with the show's format: whether it's any good relies on the performers' abilities to improvise, which will always make it inconsistent, not just from week to week but from sketch to sketch. They weren't always aided by the scripted parts of their scenes either, which all too often seemed to get in the way more than help.

All that said, it was still fairly amusing and quite entertaining. Knowing the setup means the audience's empathic sympathy for the guests helps gloss over any lack of comedic ability in favour of a "well they tried; it's not easy" reaction, making it easier to forgive weak sketches than it would be on a fully scripted show. It's also nice to see something funny on ITV again -- you wait years for something to make you laugh on ITV and then two come along at once! Ain't it always the way.

TV: Moving Wallpaper & Echo Beach - Season 1, Episode 3

The more it goes on, the more convinced I am that Echo Beach exists solely to support and pay off Moving Wallpaper. Take this week's beach buggy -- the "Buggle" -- for instance. It turns up first in Moving Wallpaper as a "prop for this week's episode", where it's used to comic effect in another scene of Jonathan Pope's hilarious ineptitude as a human being. When it turns up in Echo Beach, some of the characters drive around in it for a few minutes (in a bit of poorly sped-up footage) for no reason. At all. It's there for the sake of Moving Wallpaper, and because it needs an excuse to be in Moving Wallpaper it's also in Echo Beach.

The same can be said for various other things -- including several lines of dialogue, or Susie Amy's character (if you just watched Echo Beach her slow involvement might seem to be mysterious, but paired with Moving Wallpaper her begging is clear -- and unless Echo Beach pulls out a "why she's so mysterious" twist, the Moving Wallpaper gag will remain the only reason for it). And the acting and writing of Echo Beach is generally pretty dismal too. I can't be certain if that's deliberate, as it's clearly a spoof just tied in with the sitcom it follows, or just because everyone involved is a bit rubbish. Still, as the only reason to watch it is for those Moving Wallpaper pay-offs, does it really matter?

As for Moving Wallpaper itself... well, that's just great. While it may lack a great deal of originality (beyond the obvious ties to its sister show), it still manages amusing characters, situations and dialogue. It's certainly the funniest thing ITV have produced for a long time. Or the most intentionally funny thing, anyway. Even the impression that it's a vague collection of subplots with no primary storyline does little to dent the amusement value of it. Ben Miller is infinitely more at home as Pope than he is in Primeval, and the rest of the cast make a fair job of their largely formulaic characters (incidentally, the guy playing the young male writer (I have no idea of any of the other characters' names) seems to play the same role in everything I've seen him in. I wonder if he minds being so typecast?)

Providing it can keep it up, I hope Moving Wallpaper survives to further seasons. I could well stand to lose Echo Beach, however... but then, one wouldn't be quite the same without the other.

Film: Annie Hall (1977)

I only saw Annie Hall for the first time two months ago. Most times I wouldn't watch a film again so soon, preferring to watch new stuff when possible, but I really need to for an essay I'm currently writing. So, here it is (again): Woody Allen's breakthrough movie, and that incredibly rare thing, an Oscar-winning comedy.

I have a slightly different perspective on it this time round, for two reasons. Firstly, back when I first saw this the only other Allen film I'd seen was Match Point, a brilliant thriller but totally unlike most of his other work. Now I've seen a further four films, giving me a much broader view of his oeuvre. Secondly, I'm watching it very much with my essay in mind, which is all about the analysis of urban rhythms. I'll try not to let anything too pretentious seep into this review.

To be honest, I'm not sure how much difference the first perspective shift makes. First time round I was aware how much this exemplified the cliches of an Allen movie, and while he can clearly manage a lot more than those (and do so very well), I still wouldn't care to say for sure if this is the originator of the cliches or just a prime example. It doesn't really matter anyway: what's important is that Annie Hall is both very funny (always a noteworthy feat for a comedy on repeated viewing) and also very insightful -- not in a preachy-therefore-dull way, importantly, but it is (for want of a better way of expressing it) a comedy set in the real world.

Allen manages to balance the drama of the main storyline (the relationship between his character, Alvy Singer, and the titular Annie Hall) with the jokes, so that both feel natural together. The flashbacks, monologues to camera, animated interlude, and various other third-wall-breaking techniques are very self conscious, but then so is all of Allen's filmmaking -- he's essentially playing himself in something that is, to at least some degree, autobiographical. This may be what enables the film to feel so real and so impossibly funny at the same time ("impossible" because it's the sort of humour we all wish we were capable of on the spot, but know we'd only think of later, at best).

One thing disappointing me this time is the quality of the transfer. Allen isn't big on the additional benefits of DVD, in a way several other older filmmakers aren't -- he's of the school of "the film speaks for itself", so there are no extras on his films (beyond trailers) and certainly no commentary. (I rather suspect this will change at some point after his death, as it has with directors such as Kubrick, with inevitable re-issues on whatever format is around then providing some retrospective things. But that's another issue.) But, obviously, the transfer is part of the film, and here it seems bizarrely blurred at the top & bottom (not always noticeable, but I keep spotting it) and with a fair number of glaring faults here and there. Ultimately it doesn't ruin the film, as some truly dreadful transfers can, but it was distracting enough for me to mention it.

TV: Moving Wallpaper & Echo Beach - Season 1, Episode 1

British readers can't fail to have missed the hype surrounding these, ITV1's big new event TV. If you have, let me summarise: Moving Wallpaper is a comedy (I think everyone expected it to be a drama, but there's no doubt it's a comedy) about the making of a new soap for ITV1; Echo Beach is the aforementioned soap. Events on each show impact on the other. Innovative! Well, it is from the makers of Spooks, Hustle and Life On Mars... yet they were all on BBC One and this is on ITV... well, that says something straight away...

Several reviewers have wondered about the potential success of Moving Wallpaper, for two reasons. One, TV programmes about TV never fare that well. This I can agree with, and, as the lead in to Echo Beach, it could have a knock-on effect. However, the primetime scheduling, heavy advertising, innovative idea, and the fact that it is actually quite funny, might be enough to combat this. Secondly, that you need to watch Echo Beach to get it. Based on the evidence of this opening pair of episodes, that's bollocks. Yes, Moving Wallpaper references in to Echo Beach in a way that the latter show doesn't, but here's the key:

If you just watch Echo Beach, it'll seem to be a pretty shitty, derivative soap. If you watch both shows, you'll realise that Echo Beach is actually a great big spoof of the genre, where everyone's in on the joke. (I hope it is and they are anyway, cos if not...) For example, in Moving Wallpaper there's a reference to producer Jonathan Pope having spent all of the design budget on his office, so the key set of the club/diner/surf house/whatever will now have to be a derelict building... and then, in Echo Beach, it's derelict. Another example: there's a small girl they need to cry in episode one, but she won't... so Pope tells her that her parents have died -- hey presto, waterworks. She turns up in Echo Beach for no apparent reason. The soap services the the sitcom, not the other way round.

I feel a great big clue to this lies in the scheduling. They're on at 9PM, for one thing -- not a soap slot. And they're usually on Friday night, which is quite definitively Comedy Night for pretty much all stations (with the obvious exception of BBC Two and their horridly over-done Thursdays Are Funny campaign). And then, to top it off, they're paired with Al Murray's Happy Hour, which is even more obviously a comedy. And just to compound things, this Thursday-shown opener was paired with Katy Brand's Best Bits, just to remove any doubt that what you're watching is a spoof.

I'll be curious to see the reaction to these shows, though I don't tend to read things like Heat or go trawling forums so maybe I'll never know. But I rather suspect that the soap is just serious enough to fool most people, but not good enough to keep them around; and, as we've established, TV shows and TV shows never do well. It won't be the greatest loss if this flops, but it will be a shame that such a good idea has been thrown away. My greatest fear, though, is that Wallpaper will flop, Beach will be a hit, and we'll be left with another shitty soap filling our schedules...

TV: Cranford (2007)

Cranford was at the forefront of a spate of new costume drama on the BBC around New Year (which has so far also included a new (still running) Sense and Sensibility, and will progress with Lark Rise to Candleford this weekend). It'll be a tough one to beat, though. The critical reaction to this mini-series, starring Judi Dench and a host of other familiar faces, has been overwhelming positive; and, in a rare bit of luck possibly not seen since Doctor Who returned, it was overwhelmingly right.

It's hard to know where to begin with what's so great about Cranford, or where to end once started. Every performance is flawless, every character and scene beautifully written. Every character is so rich, you see; all torn between their desires and their duties in the way that only characters in period drama can be. And just when you begin to suspect that, maybe, one of them might be a tad one-note, something comes up to add to them. Even the supporting characters and the 'bad guys' have depth and complexity, so that, while you still may not like them, you can at least understand them.

There is comedy worthy of bigger laughs than most sitcoms manage these days, and absolutely heart-wrenching tragedy -- so skillfully juxtaposed that you can't help but be caught off-guard by one or the other, to impressive effect. In this respect it is ruthless, not shying away from killing off major characters or ruining their lives; yet it is never done lightly, no jaded fear that anyone could die so why even care (unlike in, say, 24 (an unusual comparison, I know)). It's rare to find a show that can pull of good comedy or good drama, so one that can do both (and at the drop of a hat) is an absolute Godsend.

I suppose Cranford won't -- or can't -- be for everyone: there are some who will always reject period drama; some who refuse to delight in the old-fashioned manners, duties and romances. It's their loss, here more than ever. I'm not a big fan of period drama myself -- don't get me wrong there: I happily watch them, I always enjoy them, but I mean that they're not the sort of thing I watch again, unlike thrillers, action, sci-fi, etc.

But I love Cranford. You'd be hard-pressed to beat it, in any genre.

TV: Jam & Jerusalem - Season 2, Episodes 1&2

(aka Clatterford in the US)

Jennifer Saunders' sitcom (a loose use of that term, in many ways) is back, with the same cast of crazy Devon villagers to amuse and occasionally baffle us. I'm glad to see its return: I enjoyed the first series a lot, but was rather worried it wouldn't be popular enough to manage a second.

Nothing fundamental seems to have changed, though I don't remember laughing quite as much at the first series. While many of the situations, incidents and characters are a bit larger than life or apparently unbelievable, there's a certain grounding (possibly Sue Johnston's wonderfully written & performed lead) that makes it all seem not so far removed from reality. Of course, having grown up in Wiltshire and now living in Devon, I can somewhat relate to the realities of the characters and their lives, whereas City Folk may view it as a bit barmy. Or possibly they think it's even more real than they do. It's hard to tell. (It also means I get a slight thrill every time they mention Exeter, where I currently reside -- once an episode so far!)

As the only bit of comedy (or indeed decent TV on the whole) left on a Friday night now, J&J is certainly the highlight of the evening. But it's also already one of my televisually highlights of the week -- something to look forward to at the end of all that hard, er, essay writing, for the next four weeks.

TV: The Big Fat Quiz of the Year / The Big Finish

Is it really that time again? Oh dear...

The end of the year brings endless quizzes and polls, in magazines, newspapers... and of course on TV. The two biggest ones (it seems to me) are The Big Fat Quiz of the Year, Channel 4's highly comedic effort, broadcast between Christmas and New Year, hosted by Jimmy Carr and boasting such panelists as Jonathan Ross, Rob Brydon, Noel Fielding and the ubiquitous Russell Brand. The other is the BBC's The Big Finish, broadcast on New Year's Eve itself, hosted by Graham Norton and featuring teams made up of reality show judges, soap actors, and sports people you've never heard of. And it's for charity.

The BBC's effort does sound immediately duller and probably more worthy. Well, except for the teams... But, of course, anything hosted by Graham Norton is far from a serious affair. The Big Finish may have a great deal less spontaneous humour or mad bantering between the teams, but it still has Norton's occasionally cruel comments and... well, it had the Zimmers, they were fun. Possibly the major problem is that, coming after Channel 4's effort, it inevitably covers much of the same ground; actually, an even bigger problem is its lack of interactivity: the teams have to buzz in most of the time, or answer immediately otherwise; whereas Channel 4's moved through rounds that allowed the viewer to play along.

Ultimately the two quizzes are for different audiences, but for someone watching both it would seem that the BBC version is more brainless late-evening entertainment, whereas the Channel 4 version, while descending into deeper levels of madness, is in some ways the more serious quiz.

At the end of the day, though, they weren't on at the same time, leaving such a direct comparison feeling almost futile. Oh well...