Sunday 19 December 2010

Battle of the Finals


Over the past two weekends we've seen the culmination of three stalwart Reality TV series' - The X Factor, Strictly Come Dancing and The Apprentice. In all three we found out which contest came out top - but which finale show was the overall winner?

You now have two options - 1) read this live, with series highlights, best bit, lots of long dramatic pauses and plenty of filler, or 2) read this in Sky+ and skip through the crap to find out what I really think.

Well done, you've picked the right option, because my first point against these results shows is the length of time they take for the big reveal. I mean, 2 hours Mr Cowell? The skeptics among us may think that the intention of this is to cram as many ad breaks in as possible - but I'm sure it's actually to showcase as much talent as possible. Exemplified by Chloe Mafia descending from the studio roof.

That's two hours of my life that I'm never getting back. Two very loud hours. If someone said to me that they were going to make me sit for two hours and listen to wailing, (sorry Matt Cardle, but it did get a bit Coldplay on helium at times), screaming, chanting and that Michael Jackson guy singing, I'd be telling them that they'd got the wrong person and I honestly didn't have the information they were after.

At least Strictly gave us a bit of a break to collect ourselves. But, ironically enough, this worked against the show. Annoying as it may be, X Factor built to a distinct crescendo, with tension mounting throughout. Strictly, quite frankly, fell flat.

This has arguably been one of the most entertaining series to date, not least due to contributions from The Widdy. But the standard has been so high throughout, that the finale failed to match expectations.

This year's show dances left a lot to be desired and, due to the change in format from previous years, the couples weren't using these 'all or nothing' dances to win, but win a place in the final two to repeat a dance they had already danced well. Doesn't seem very logical. (Quite why you would be, but if you're reading this Moira Ross, lets see you revert back to the original format next year please. Thanks). Fair enough, the best dancers won - but there was no excitement to it, no "Wow" moments of the past.

Testament to sticking to a format that works is The Apprentice. Even in the final, the episode followed not only the same format as the series as a whole, but the general format of previous years too. Tension comes from the usual clever editing and the ups and downs of the candidates attempts to win, rather than emotional interviews concerning 'how much this would me to me and my family and my dead dog Bertie'.

Fair enough, there's the usual boardroom spiel, but instead of the cliched shallow sentiments of SyCo, you feel like your getting some straight talking honesty from Lord Sug. And the rest of the show is light hearted and entertaining in a way that the other two aren't. It's a joy, rather than a mentally draining toil to watch. There's no mention of a "journey", no montages and best bits, just an hour of quality TV. While you can can skip through most of X Factor & Strictly and get a feel for the outcome, you'd lose so much by fast forwarding this one. Out of these three, it's the one I'm going to miss most.

Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed all three series' and was swept up in the finals, but this year, the resounding Winner is (go put the kettle on, order some more Christmas presents from Amazon, watch the last speck of paint in your newly decorated lounge dry)...The Apprentice

Tuesday 30 November 2010

The Morgana Show

Tonight saw the launch of new comedy talent Morgana Robinson's self titled show. Because Channel 4 have, in my opinion, had a string of successes with their comedy outings recently (The Inbetweeners, The Increasingly Poor Decisions of Todd Margaret) and only showcased them on their companion channels - E4 and More4 - the new show they've saved for the main channel ought to be something pretty special.


It wasn't.

I was a bit skeptical from the minute I saw the first advert of a seemingly mentally ill teenager dancing in front of the camera (see picture). It wasn't much bettered by a follow up advert starring a drunk has-been making a fools of herself. But I decided to give it a go anyway - like with music, often the singles realeased aren't the strongest tracks on the album.

As expected though, the rest of the show followed in the same footsteps. The characters we are introduced to are just recycled ideas from other more successful shows, and none of them really managed to make me laugh. The only one which stood out was the aforementioned 'Gilbert TV' skecth which I actually just thought was pretty sick. Despite the fact that it isn't very funny it just seems to laugh off the bear bating and anonymous bullying of vulnerable people on things like YouTube.

'But what about Andy & Lou from Little Britain?' you say? Well that wasn't Lucas & Walliams taking the piss out of a disables person, the comedy came from the way Andy manipulated and tormented Lou. The equivalent would have been Lou kicking Andy in his legs and laughing.

The only redeeming feature is her impressions; they are very well observed and benefit from being timely. The Cheryl/Dannii tarot sketch worked well with the current X Factor hype and Lady Gaga on her sit down mower received a chuckle. And, the only bit that truly made me laugh was the Fearne Cotton sketch - but she's pretty much a parody of herself anyway so it isn't exactly hard to do that right.

She may be very talented in terms of impressions, but the sketches and her own creations simply aren't funny. If this is the best she's got then lets be thankful that C4 have only invested in 5 episodes. This one just isn't for me.

The Morgana Show can be seen on Channel 4 on Tuesdays @ 10.35PM

Tuesday 16 November 2010

Misfits

E4 has been criticised in the past for not delivering enough original programming (and to be fair, quite deservedly; "Accidentally on Purpose" anyone?). The fact is that when they try/commit the funds the channel has developed some good quality programmes, namely Skins and The Inbetweeners (which holds the top spot in the channel's most watched programmes). And Misfits falls into this category.

Don't get me wrong, it's a ridiculous premise; Asbo teens get super powers (catch up on series 1 here), but set that aside, suspend your disbelief and watch it for what it is and at its core lies quite a good, and more importantly very funny teen drama.

Because of the wooly premise the first series was slightly dodgy and didn't quite hit the mark, it felt like it hadn't quite been given the care and attention it deserved. However, it was good enough to warrant watching the new series opener, which seems to have found its stride. Taking a leaf out of Smallville's "meteor freaks" book we had an intelligent plot about a girl, also affected by the storm, with the ability to shape shift, who terrorised our heroes before they finish her off.

But unlike the heavy, serious "weight of the world on our shoulders" teen shows like Smallville, Misfits is far more tongue in cheek and light hearted about everything. The characters find the idea of a shape shifter a bit daft, as they should. And the writers know the premise is a bit thin, but embrace it and pack the show with good self referential humour (such as offing their third probation worker!)

Misfits obviously owes a lot to Smallville, Heroes (especially the comic book style marketing) and E4's own drama Skins, but doesn't ever try to be a carbon copy. It's gritty cinematography and visual style gives it an identity and sets it apart from other programmes on the channel.

Sadly, it's still plagued by unrealistic dialogue, particularly when Kelly hears their thoughts), which again suggests a slight lack of care and attention. However, it makes up for this with some fantastic one liners - "A man can't enjoy a quick shuffle in his own coffin?"! The writers aren't afraid to stick in some risky, occasionally slightly sick content, they just need to deliver it better.

They have however set up an intriguing mystery and series arc in the "man in black" which will make any viewer continue to watch to find out who he is. Let's just hope its some intelligent plot involving Curtis going back in time to save his future self (wibbly wobbly timey wimey) instead of some disappointing crappy villain.

Sunday 7 November 2010

The Trip

Don't you just love the tension, hype, flashing lights, loud music and screaming audience of X Factor? No, me neither. It's ok though, because the repeat of Michael Winterbottom's The Trip starring Steve Coogan and Rob Brydon provides a quiet, quirky antidote to this after a busy Sunday night schedule.

The Trip follows the semi-autobiographic characters of Coogan, recently dumped food writer and critic, and Brydon, who has been invited along as a replacement companion on the restaurant tour.

Comedy lovers, foodies and appreciators of the beautiful north alike will appreciate this little gem. It's not big budget, its not deep and meaningful, it just is. And that's what I like about it. It's a keen observation of human nature and the first episode promises a series full of intelligent humour and comic oneupmanship from the pair.

Decorated and prolific director Winterbottom brings a fantastic documentary feel to it, and some inspired improvisation from Coogan & Brydon provide genuine heartfelt moments as the pair bicker and banter. Despite a lack of plot and forward momentum, there is a lot to enjoy about the first episode.

There's no frills in this programme, and barely any changes of setting either. For 2/3rds of the pilot we watched the pair try to outdo one another at the dinner table. Some viewers might find this dull, others a bit bland, I find it quaint and extremely watchable.

At only 30 minutes you don't have to invest that much time, energy or emotion into this, you can just sit back let it wash over you. It's like sitting on a park bench and watching an old couple squabble; it's genuine, which isn't a word that describes many programmes on TV these days.

Give it a go, what do you stand to lose.

The Trip airs Monday evenings @ 10.00PM and is repeated Sundays at the same time.

Sunday 31 October 2010

A Comedy of Errors

The news that The Inbetweeners will return for two TV specials (and presumably end after that) is great, but got me thinking - why does British comedy just never last?

Think about the American comedy stalwarts such as Seinfeld, Friends & Frasier, the latter two were on our screens for over a decade each and churned out 236 and 264 episodes respectively, whereas excellent new british comedy such as Gavin & Stacey and The Inbetweeners have both only maaged three series and haven't broken the 20 episode mark.

And this got me wondering why? Is it bad writing, are we just not funny/clever enough to keep thinking up new material? Or do we not create formats which are sustainable and do we not invest the money that is needed to make sure they are?

So often we hear writers say "we just don't think these characters can be taken further". And that was the case with Gavin & Stacey; the titular characters ran out of steam after the first series and Smithy & Nessa - the series' true heroes - began to get stale by the final series too. Nessa getting married and having a baby began to normalise her too much, and we lost that weird and wonderful sense of mystery.

It also fell into the usual trap of having to build drama and emotional impact. Though this can often work really well - think Cold Feet - the Nessa marriage storyline spoilt her character. She ceased to be funny and quirky, and ended up being heavy and slightly depressing.

Much as this show is brilliantly funny in terms of characterisation, the story arcs didn't leave it much room to maneuvre: marriage, baby, marriage. The format essentially sets itself up for a fall from the off by not allowing the characters to be able to grow much further. Corden & Jones said they never expected the success, and never expected to write a second or third series. And maybe that's part of the problem; writers don't try to build longevity into their scripts in case more series' aren't commissioned.

It's right that these kinds of shows want to end on a high - and there is no better example of why a show should bow out early than My Family, which ceased to be funny a long time ago. It's just a shame that the 'high' couldn't come 8 series' down the line, rather than 3.

In my opinion My Family stopped being funny after Kris Marshall lef at the end of S4t. While in a drama the idea that any character is expendable is great, it keeps us guessing whether someone will make it into the next series, in a comedy suddenly the whole dynamic is changed - imagine Friends without Chandler. Lose one character, and you lose an integral aspect of the humour.

When the cast of Friends were teetering on the decision to leave suddenly the cash started to come out, and the actors were reportedly earning £1m per episode of the final season (granted this is a bit ridiculous, but they realised how important keeping all 6 actors meant). With regards to My Family, did the BBC just not have the money, or not think it worthwhile investing some extra spendsies to keep Kris Marshall that little bit longer?

And this all becomes a little bit worrying given the current financial outlook for the BBC. If they can't spare the extra funds to develop something a bit different (like they did with Gavin & Stacey which rose from the murky depths of BBC3 and ended up on prime time BBC1) then are we just going to see the same old copper/inspector/courtroom drama starring Martin Clunes/James Nesbitt/Robson Green?

Tuesday 26 October 2010

The Million Pound Drop

Answer some questions, win some money, that's how quiz game shows work, right? Wrong! Last year The Million Pound Drop subverted this tired format, giving us a simple, exciting new twist on a stale genre.

For those who haven't seen it, contestants are given £1 Million, choose a category then gamble their cash on the correct answer. If they get it wrong, it plummets into the vault below. Simple, but brilliant.

The brilliant, but sadistic aspect of this gameshow is the fact that contestants could potentially place all their cash on one answer and get it wrong, or even split the money over two or three answers, still potentially losing £500,000 in one fell swoop. And we can just sit at home and go "well I'd still have £1,000,000 if I were there".

But the beauty of the internet allows us to put our money where our mouth is and play along at home. This then provides another dynamic, as Davina reads out statistics of viewers' choices, reinforcing the live nature, and subsequently the very real fact that contestants are throwing money away in front of our very eyes.

However, Davina, usually the queen of live TV having been the face of Big Brother for the past 10 years, also reminds us that it's live as she stumbles over her words. But we can forgive her on the grounds that she's so into it, so nervous and excited for the players that it's quite endearing.

If I were to criticise one thing about the programme it would be the scene setting at the beginning. Do we really need to be told about the money's "journey from a secret vault"? Are we really expected to believe it? If it were me I'd also ditch the security guards at the bottom who re-pack the money after it falls. I'd be inclined to leave it there, making the contestants stand above it, knowing they've thrown it away - how sadistic.

All in all though, this is a really good piece of event telly. The short run keeps it fresh and the fact that it's live maintains the drama. Similarly, the fact that it's live means that we really feel like we're going along with the contestants, willing them to make the right choices. (And holding auditions for contestants ensures that we aren't watching dull duds squander 25k bundles.) All we need now is for someone to get 8 answers correct and win that Million quid. But that just wouldn't be as fun to watch!

Wednesday 20 October 2010

The Apprentice


The Apprentice! The most unrealistic business interview is back. And as usual we have the same set of seemingly incompetent idiots who wouldn't be able to organise the proverbial piss up. (A potential task next year Lord Sugar?).

My dad is yelling "stop complaining and do some work!" getting increasingly more angry with this year's candidates - we probably all are - but then again, if they all just went about it in the right way, made a profit and didn't bitch, it would just be dull!

I've often wondered why they give these candidates, who are probably already on quite a hefty salary, the chance to bumble through the tasks making mistakes that we as the general public would probably do right. But I guess that's just it; it's rewarding to see these arrogant trash talking idiots fail miserably! It's cringeworthy, but brilliant.

It is, after all, an entertainment programme. Have we ever seen an "Apprentice, what the winner did next" show? No, because people aren't bothered about the job they eventually do, they're more bothered about how they will, or won't, handle the tasks each week. The fun lies in trying to figure out which group will fail and who will get fired.

There isn't a better example of how to lead an audience on a twisting path in a reality TV series. The editing is extremely clever - building one team up to success before swiftly cutting them down, offsetting the triumphs of one team with the failings of another, and intercutting all this with some fantastic facial expressions from Nick & Karen.

The clever editing flows throughout the entire series, giving screen time to the bolshy ones and leading us down the garden path about the front runners before giving them the off in the boardroom, allowing the quieter, better ones to come through later on in the series. This keeps it fresh, and keeps the audience on its toes, guessing week on week about who the eventual winner may be.

And all this is wonderfully scored with original music by Dru Masters, to intensify the drama in the boardroom, accompanied by some very clever choices of other pieces from films such as Wall-E & Harry Potter. The intelligent score, as with the editing, leads the viewer to make an opinion of a candidate, whether it be bumbling and daft, or sincere and controlled.

All this goes together to make a dream case study for any media studies student, but also an incredibly entertaining programme that makes us feel that all of us would be capable of earning Lord Sugar's three figure salary. If only...

Watch The Apprentice every Wednesday @ 9.00PM on BBC1, followed directly by You're Fired on BBC2

Monday 18 October 2010

Single Father

David Tennant's highly anticipated return to our TV screens aired last week - and I missed it because I was on holiday. But, thanks to the wonders of digital TV I've been able to catch up!

After a busy, messy first half hour full of exposition and back story - the first episode finally kicks into gear and we eventaully get to see what the series' title promised: how Tennant copes as a single father.

But was this slow start really necessary? We needed to understand the relationship of the family, and Suranne Jones' Sarah, but it felt like the flashback technique was only used to allow a dramatic opening sequence where Rita is knocked down. Subsequently the pacing gets slightly confused as do the viewers emotions. There were simply too many characters to introduce in such a short space of time.

However, as the episode progresses and things begin to settle, the characters are given time to develop at a more natural pace and it suddenly becomes much easier to watch and far more compelling. And we begin to see Tennant's full range as an actor.

Not that he was never pushed in his tenure as The Doctor, but the role was so iconic, and became so enormous towards the end that it was hard to see him as the actor rather than the character. This role however, is so much more paired back, more raw and natural that it allows us to see another dynamic to his acting ability.

And he is supported by a strong cast too. They say never work with animals or children but the supporting cast of young actors keeps this series fresh and grounded. And special mention should be given to Chris Hegarty (Paul) who perfectly portrays the mature before his years young man of the house - the relationship between Hegarty & Tennant is compelling and quite moving.

If I have a criticism, it's the score - not because it was poor, but because it was Murray Gold. Gold is a fantastic composer and has brought Doctor Who to life with his music over the past 5 series', but similarities between these two scores become a bit jarring. Some of the emotional cues echo those of the Tenth Doctor's, even to the untrained ear, and therefore take us out of this new world.

All in all as a first episode it didn't grip me. I might even go so far as to say that if I wasn't such a huge Who fan, I wouldn't have watched it all the way through. But I feel like it has a lot more to give. Now that the backstory is out of the way we can actually focus on the idea of the show I hope it can really entice me.

Having said that, with so many character arcs to focus on, will it just remain as messy as it started, with no one quite getting as much attention as they deserved?

TBC...

The final part of Single Father airs Sunday @ 9.00PM on BBC1

Sunday 17 October 2010

The Secret Millionaire

With the glitz and glamour of Strictly and the over hyped, over produced X Factor dominating our Saturday and Sunday nights, the return of The Secret Millionaire provides a welcome break, which presents a true emotional journey.

As always, the show has made me smile and well up simultaneously. I don't know if it's the fact that this first episode is set in a place I have lived for four years, and in turn dealt with things I have experienced for myself, but I was incredibly moved by the stories told this week.

The brilliance about The Secret Millionaire is that it gives you the chance to see how the other half live, both halves. Not only do we get an insight into the lives of a millionaire, watching them cope with a situation far removed from the norm, and in most cases facing some of the demons from their past, but we are also forced to confront some of the issues we may choose to ignore in our own lives.

But the real stars of this show are the amazing, selfless individuals and organisations that the Millionaires go to visit. To see the work that they do puts things into perspective, but to see just how much the donations they are given mean to them is truly touching. This is feel good television at some of its best.

The only addition I would make to this programme is an opportunity for us viewers to make their contribution; the organisations and volunteers featured tonight were right on my doorstep and I didn't even know they existed. I think C4 would do well give us the chance to give something ourselves, and help continue the work that the Millionaires have helped to fund. (The fact that the Talbot House website appears to have crashed suggests an influx of people wanting to find out more about Bernie & the charity).

This show fantastically exhibits and rewards the work of so many unsung heroes and how the work they do effects the lives of so many others. The X Factor contestants talk about it being a life changing experience - they should give this programme a watch and find out what a life changing experience actually entails.

The Secret Millionaire is on Sundays @ 9.00PM, Channel 4.

Wednesday 6 October 2010

Grand Designs

Isn't Channel 4 +1 brilliant? I was spoilt for choice this evening by New Apprentice, and one of my stalwart favourites, Grand Designs. But, thanks to the beauty of hour later scheduling I could watch both. (More on Lord Sugar's new gang to come later).

Now, I could watch Grand Designs over and over again, and I do regularly on More4, but it's always great when a new series comes along. What's nice though, is that each new series is familiar and comfortable; as Kevin might say, the old and the new sit well next to one another.

The format of the show has barely changed, if at all, since it first aired in 1999, which is testament to how good it actually is. Whereas some programmes feel the need to shake up the format to keep the viewer interested (imagine two Grand Designers going head to head to complete on time, and put as much value onto their house. No thanks.), Grand Designs has stuck to the format which works.

But why hasn't this format become stale yet, after all, it's just people building houses. Well, it's because while each episode follows a similar format, a completely different story is told each week; no two projects are exactly alike. They might seem similar, but will be approached in completely different ways, keeping it fresh and watchable.

Similarly the mix of designs from week to week means that it doesn't get stale within the series. From an uber modern eco house one week, to a barn conversion steeped in history the next, each episode offers something different from the last, and the viewer learns something different from each project, whether it be a new building technique or how to read a dilapidated building to figure out its original use.

And I believe the the fantastic Mr McLoud is part of what keeps it interesting. His charm, wit and cynicism always provide entertainment, and his poetic summation at the end of each episode often leaves you feeling quite warm inside.

Grand Designs isn't about rich people building their dream houses (in fact, often the most modest of projects make for the most interesting episodes), it's about the story they have to tell whilst doing so. The viewer goes through the peaks and troughs they do and we are invited to be part of their lives as they live the project. And lets face it, it's always interesting to have a nosey at what they come up with!

On a final note, with regards to story telling, the episode from this series entitled "Woodbridge: The Modest Home" was truly moving. Grand Designs should be highly commended for the way they paid tribute to Nat, who passed away before this project could get underway. Not only did his widow Lucie help bring his design to life and leave a lasting legacy to her husband, the show has helped immortalise him and his dream of creating the perfect family home.

The word "journey" is thrown around a lot these days by those on reality tv series, but shows like the X Factor could learn a lot about emotional story telling from this particular episode.

Click to find out more about this episode, and how you can donate money to charity.

Grand Designs airs every Wednesday at 9.00PM on Channel 4

#SevenDays

We're onto episode three now and Chanell 4's new interactive reality documentary TV series is starting to really take shape. As the "characters" start to watch themselves and read what other say about them the show is beginning to get interesting.

It's fascinating to see them reacting to what people on the internet have said about themselves, and the way they have been perceived on TV. It's the one thing that Big Brother lacked - the only way we could show any opinion was through the eviction vote, but here we can watch and directly communicate with the characters.

Shame the "characters" are such vacuous idiots. No, I take that back. Moktar & Javan have some interesting things to say, but they aren't given nearly as much screen time as some of people being followed.

Screen time after all seems to be controlled by the amount that we tweet; give us more of who we've commented on because that's who we're interested in, right? But the thing is viewers are tweeting about and giving attention to the ones that piss us off most, and thus the circle continues.

But that's the problem with Channel 4 reality TV. They seem to believe that we want to watch annoying, vacuous, weird, irritating, argumentative, arrogant (have I made my point?) people - that's why the last few series of Big Bro turned from social experiment to hour long freak shows.

Perhaps I'm just being a grumpy northerner, but I don't find the lives of Notting Hill yuppies all that interesting. Given the economic crisis that the country is recovering from I don't much enjoy watching a bunch of rich people complain about how crap their life is. Perhaps a more interesting dynamic would be to contrast the lives of different people across the country, or certainly visit different areas in (potential) future series'.

The idea behind this show is really fascinating, but I don't think it's quite worked out the way C4 planned. The website asks us to "Tell Ben what to do next" via different interactive mediums, but instead people just seem to be bitching about his arrogance & sexuality, and the same goes for other characters. Instead of advising them on aspects of their life, people just seem to be criticising it. It offers an interesting insight into the psychological phenomenon of anonymity and the bating crowd; people are more likely to do something negative, such as commit a crime or encourage someone else to do something wrong, if they aren't going to be found out.

Despite some complaints, for some reason, I don't switch off, and that's because the idea of the show is intriguing. C4 have managed to come up with another addictive format that could reshape the way we view reality TV in the future.

Tuesday 5 October 2010

This is England '86

I loved This is England (2006). It has to be on my top films of all time. So of course I was intrigued to hear that Shane Meadows planned to further develop the story. He stated that "When I finished This Is England I had a wealth of material and unused ideas that I felt very keen to take further"1

All sounds like a brilliant idea; continue to develop the fantastic characters we know and love from the film, build upon its successes and put the finishing touches to an already very accomplished narrative. But somehow this four part series left me feeling cold.

While some elements of the script and production were great, the overall series lacked a certain something that the film had, but it's not easy to pinpoint exactly what that was. I want to explore some of the pros and cons of This is England '86...

Reasons why This is England '86 just wasn't up to scratch

Shaun.
The film dealt with naive Shaun's desire to fit in and find a father figure, with Woody & Combo going head to head to take this role. As an audience we really began to care for the outcome of this little lad, urging him to make the right decision. The problem in '86 was that there simply wasn't enough of him; Shaun's story took a back seat - somehow an adolescent, more mature Shaun, who can't be influenced as much just didn't really work. There was so much more of his story to be told, particularly his relationship with Woody, but this was sadly neglected.

Humour
Much of the humour from the film came from the dialogue between Woody's gang; the comedy being drawn from the group dynamic and the way they interacted. But the comedy from '86 was a little too obvious. Gadget became a scapegoat to introduce comedy situations and set pieces to bulk out the script, rather than the humour being developed naturally.

Coincidences
It seems a little coincidental that Trudy would go from working in a shoe shop, to a marriage parlour. In an attempt to get all our favourite characters back she has just ended up being slotted in wherever Meadows needed her. Trudy was spot on in the film ("shall we just, mum?"). She wasn't in '86.

After being beaten up Shaun turns up at the hospital where Meggy is being treated for his heart attack. Suddenly he's back amongst the clan and everything is fine. And we just happen to be introduced to Lol's parents at that same time. Not good.

Flip
Portrayed in the first episode as the "antagonist" of the series, he paled in comparision to the villainous Combo of the film. He just seemed to pop up to once again provide a bit of humour, but his character didn't serve much overall purpose (Got to be said though, "F*ck off with your ginger chips" was still one of the best lines). Perhaps he was just a veil to cover up for the true antagonist of this series who would come into full form later.

However, his bullying of Shaun, which worked in the first episode, could have been further developed to show Shaun's fragility, and act as a catalyst for Shaun re-finding support from Woody and the gang.

The Past
Given everything that happened to the group, would they still be as closely knit as they were? Would they have forgiven Meggy & Banjo for their involvement with Combo? It seemed like the dynamic of the group and the relationships of the characters simply reverted back to how they were at the start of the film, rather than finding a new dynamic. Perhaps this can easily be explained away by the three years which have passed since the events of the film, but the scars seem to have healed far too quickly; literally for a character like Milky.


Reasons why it was brilliant

Music
As with the film, the use of music was spot on. A mixture of tunes of the era and Ludovico Einaudi's poignant piano score to really hit home the emotion made the soundtrack one of the best aspects of this series.

Cast
Once again the acting, the acting was superb. The characters jump to life in the same way they did in the film. They're real and true, which is down to fantastic dialogue and some brilliant improv acting. Vicky McClure (Lol) and Johnny Harris (Mick) shone above the rest and put in truly spectacular performances.

Combo
His appearance was what we were all waiting for, and Meadows timed it wonderfully. Would he go on a revenge rampage, if so who would he go after? Meadows cleverly made us wait to see what was next for this troubled and layered character, and Graham once again put in a fantastic performance.

The way he arrives at Shaun's suggests he is still violent but his redemption in the fourth episode took something away from his actions in the film. We knew from they were dictated by his emotions, and his covering up for Lol's attack was an emotional and touching way to prove to us just how much he loved her. But was it a bit obvious? A bit of a cop out perhaps? Did his good deed simply make us forget about what he did to Milky and detract from the climax of the film?

Fearlessness
Meadows has already shown us that he isn't afraid to shock, with the brutal scene with Combo and Milky. And he takes it one step further with the graphic rape scene in '86. The only criticism is that, Trev didn't get enough screen time to give it quite the same emotional impact as the film.

But the real shocking blow was achieved with the attack on Lol. The tension that was built through a wonderfully paced, realistic and truly intense argument between Lol and Mick culminated in a shocking and emotional outcome.

Twitter was awry with people complaining it was sick, disturbing and upsetting, but Channel 4 rightly defended the show and Meadows "unflinching and honest approach to filmmaking".2 Meadows should be congratulated for the fearless way he deals with subject matter that other writers would shy away from.

Conclusion

It's impossible for me to draw a conclusion because of the wealth of mixed feelings this series gave me. It looks like the cons outweigh the pros, but while there may be more of the bad stuff, the good stuff was done excellently.

It seems to me that the overarching storyline was strong, but was padded out with some unnecessary filler and would have been better off in 2 or 3 parts. Better still it would have worked well as a standalone drama with completely different characters, rather than as a continuation of the This is England. After all, the ending of the film was so final that it didn't feel like it needed to be taken any further.

You can't deny that the certain elements were incredibly strong, but the glaring weakness in the story only acted to detract from what was a virtually faultless film.

You know what they say: sequals are seldom equal.

Welcome

TestCard
Tellybox

I bitch about TV programmes to my friends (who tend not to listen) so why not write my thoughts down for the whole internet to (not) read instead!

Enjoy reading through some of my thoughts about things that I have seen on TV.