Thanks for everyone's comments on this thread; we've picked up a few excellent series from it. Am absolutely loving Detectorists - so well written, love most of the actors/characters, so beautifully shot, so understated and low key but funny. Also, I didn't know there had been a new series of the Syndicate, so we downloaded that. V useful for finding out about new stuff we might not be aware of and stuff we might have missed
Someone needs to abolish this bloke. Never done anything except be a politician.
I fucking hate what they are trying to do to the BBC. It's a large organization and certainly has it's faults but the quality and variety of programming it produces blows any other TV network in the world out of the water. I know the big glossy HBO and AMC drama's get a lot of the headlines, but inbetween that the utter rubbish that the US networks produce is beyond the pale sometimes.
I could quite happily fill all my TV viewing with just stuff on the BBC iPlayer and have all my cravings for drama, comedy, documentaries and mindless trash filled with well written, well acted and well produced offerings.
Someone needs to abolish this bloke. Never done anything except be a politician.
I fucking hate what they are trying to do to the BBC. It's a large organization and certainly has it's faults but the quality and variety of programming it produces blows any other TV network in the world out of the water. I know the big glossy HBO and AMC drama's get a lot of the headlines, but inbetween that the utter rubbish that the US networks produce is beyond the pale sometimes.
I could quite happily fill all my TV viewing with just stuff on the BBC iPlayer and have all my cravings for drama, comedy, documentaries and mindless trash filled with well written, well acted and well produced offerings.
Both amc and HBO started out as really crappy second rate tv networks. HBO took a risk and got lucky in that the sopranos, a pilot that had been kicked away by the networks for years turned out to be the greatest tv series ever made. Amc were an awful channel until they some how got hold of mad men. The thing is they both backed risky projects. Unfortunately I can't see the BBC ever doing that because a, the people who work there are thick arrogant cunts and b, because of the nature of a publically owned institution. No one like those at HBO and amc that had the cajones to do what they did would ever be able to survive at the BBC. They'd be very quickly put in their place or leave.
Someone needs to abolish this bloke. Never done anything except be a politician.
I fucking hate what they are trying to do to the BBC. It's a large organization and certainly has it's faults but the quality and variety of programming it produces blows any other TV network in the world out of the water. I know the big glossy HBO and AMC drama's get a lot of the headlines, but inbetween that the utter rubbish that the US networks produce is beyond the pale sometimes.
I could quite happily fill all my TV viewing with just stuff on the BBC iPlayer and have all my cravings for drama, comedy, documentaries and mindless trash filled with well written, well acted and well produced offerings.
Both amc and HBO started out as really crappy second rate tv networks. HBO took a risk and got lucky in that the sopranos, a pilot that had been kicked away by the networks for years turned out to be the greatest tv series ever made. Amc were an awful channel until they some how got hold of mad men. The thing is they both backed risky projects. Unfortunately I can't see the BBC ever doing that because a, the people who work there are thick arrogant cunts and b, because of the nature of a publically owned institution. No one like those at HBO and amc that had the cajones to do what they did would ever be able to survive at the BBC. They'd be very quickly put in their place or leave.
I utterly disagree. You admit yourself that both the networks you mention "got lucky" KR. Who in British broadcasting takes risks? Going back years, remember when ITV dropped Men Behaving Badly after one series because they were not making enough money from it? The BBC, with it's remit, was able to take up what they saw as a promising idea and see where it went. The rest is history.
Aside from the drama, which I think most would agree, speaks for itself, let's just consider Comedy. Geoffrey Perkins and John Lloyd, Michael Mills and Paul Jackson - there's no way many of the programmes they were responsible for would have made the airwaves on prime time commercial TV, no way at all. Name me a decent comedy panel show on ITV? Channel 4 has a couple, buried away late at night, after the "point and laugh" slot.
I agree that today there is less of an element of risk, but that is because they have been hamstrung by the mouthy antis, who have a political axe to grind rather than a cultural one. Anyway with the new "Charter to fail" that the government have come up with in order to appease their commercial partners/backers, ironically we could be seeing a new dawn. Except of course if it backfires and intended failures become success's...
Someone needs to abolish this bloke. Never done anything except be a politician.
I fucking hate what they are trying to do to the BBC. It's a large organization and certainly has it's faults but the quality and variety of programming it produces blows any other TV network in the world out of the water. I know the big glossy HBO and AMC drama's get a lot of the headlines, but inbetween that the utter rubbish that the US networks produce is beyond the pale sometimes.
I could quite happily fill all my TV viewing with just stuff on the BBC iPlayer and have all my cravings for drama, comedy, documentaries and mindless trash filled with well written, well acted and well produced offerings.
Both amc and HBO started out as really crappy second rate tv networks. HBO took a risk and got lucky in that the sopranos, a pilot that had been kicked away by the networks for years turned out to be the greatest tv series ever made. Amc were an awful channel until they some how got hold of mad men. The thing is they both backed risky projects. Unfortunately I can't see the BBC ever doing that because a, the people who work there are thick arrogant cunts and b, because of the nature of a publically owned institution. No one like those at HBO and amc that had the cajones to do what they did would ever be able to survive at the BBC. They'd be very quickly put in their place or leave.
That was quite a good read until your point a, then I just thought "what a thick, arrogant cunt".
Really surprised at you @kentaddick . Where did you get such a view of all those who work at the BBC? Being a witness to how the BBC has been bullied over what they thought was a relatively straightforward documentary about the Olympic Stadium carve-up, I can assure you that the people concerned are as far from your description as I could imagine. Now, if you had applied your description to John Whittingdale, you'd have been on solid ground, with plenty of evidence re the Charter Review. For example this Freedom of Information request :-)
Really surprised at you @kentaddick . Where did you get such a view of all those who work at the BBC? Being a witness to how the BBC has been bullied over what they thought was a relatively straightforward documentary about the Olympic Stadium carve-up, I can assure you that the people concerned are as far from your description as I could imagine. Now, if you had applied your description to John Whittingdale, you'd have been on solid ground, with plenty of evidence re the Charter Review. For example this Freedom of Information request :-)
I've worked on BBC productions, the way they treat production companies is a disgrace. I've worked with a lot of ex BBC people and they all have the same air of arrogance about them (albeit they're of the older generation). The BBC may be bullied, but they bully a lot of much smaller companies just because "they're the BBC".
Someone needs to abolish this bloke. Never done anything except be a politician.
I fucking hate what they are trying to do to the BBC. It's a large organization and certainly has it's faults but the quality and variety of programming it produces blows any other TV network in the world out of the water. I know the big glossy HBO and AMC drama's get a lot of the headlines, but inbetween that the utter rubbish that the US networks produce is beyond the pale sometimes.
I could quite happily fill all my TV viewing with just stuff on the BBC iPlayer and have all my cravings for drama, comedy, documentaries and mindless trash filled with well written, well acted and well produced offerings.
Both amc and HBO started out as really crappy second rate tv networks. HBO took a risk and got lucky in that the sopranos, a pilot that had been kicked away by the networks for years turned out to be the greatest tv series ever made. Amc were an awful channel until they some how got hold of mad men. The thing is they both backed risky projects. Unfortunately I can't see the BBC ever doing that because a, the people who work there are thick arrogant cunts and b, because of the nature of a publically owned institution. No one like those at HBO and amc that had the cajones to do what they did would ever be able to survive at the BBC. They'd be very quickly put in their place or leave.
I utterly disagree. You admit yourself that both the networks you mention "got lucky" KR. Who in British broadcasting takes risks? Going back years, remember when ITV dropped Men Behaving Badly after one series because they were not making enough money from it? The BBC, with it's remit, was able to take up what they saw as a promising idea and see where it went. The rest is history.
Aside from the drama, which I think most would agree, speaks for itself, let's just consider Comedy. Geoffrey Perkins and John Lloyd, Michael Mills and Paul Jackson - there's no way many of the programmes they were responsible for would have made the airwaves on prime time commercial TV, no way at all. Name me a decent comedy panel show on ITV? Channel 4 has a couple, buried away late at night, after the "point and laugh" slot.
I agree that today there is less of an element of risk, but that is because they have been hamstrung by the mouthy antis, who have a political axe to grind rather than a cultural one. Anyway with the new "Charter to fail" that the government have come up with in order to appease their commercial partners/backers, ironically we could be seeing a new dawn. Except of course if it backfires and intended failures become success's...
They got lucky, but like all good luck, it was made from calculated risks and both companies made a very clear decision to go that way.The sopranos was unique at the time, but mad men was a wise decision, as the pilot was phenomenal and HBO bizarrely snubbed it. I recommend reading "difficult men" by Brett Martin about the second golden age of tv.
What I said essentially agreed with the post earlier, the BBC will never make quality programming in the vein of amc and HBO because of the nature of it being a public corporation and the suits involved. But they can still have a decent go. The corporation would need to make a very clear and risky leap into making unique programming that could potentially upset licence fee payers. I don't think that will happen.
Fair enough @kentaddick , you have some practical experience. Well here is mine, re the Olympic doc.
That is an external production company job. Sankha Guha,, his production company ZuluTango TV. Interestingly, his original commission was to do a touchy-feely doc about the wonderful legacy and West Ham moving in. When he started to sniff out a completely different story, a far more difficult one, and pitched it to the thick arrogant cunts (Hereinafter TAC) they said..yes, go for it. His only difficulty was getting air time with Dan Roan to anchor it. Originally slated just for BBC London, when the TACs realised it was a hot one they blasted it over the News Channel to get it national and ran several late repeats.
And then the grief started. The LLDC launched what Dan Roan has told me was one of the most hostile complaints he'd ever been on the end of. People were worried for their jobs . Their complaint included a defamatory lie about Steve and I, and I offered to go on the offensive with a counter-complaint. But the TACs were worried about their processes being adhered to (according to the Charter), and the political pressure overall from the likes of Whittingdale. Anyway finally last night by coincidence I got the news that they have rejected the complaint - (and I'm free to go after the LLDC, but that's for another thread).
Now of course that's just one case, and you may say it is different for documentaries. And I am sure that people in big companies bully suppliers from small companies. Heaven knows, I know that. But I've become aware of the huge pressure they have to work with daily at the BBC, and actually out here with Czech TV you see strange echoes of the same pressure.
The BBC does some things well but I do wish that it would be a bit more proactive about telling us proles what to think. It should consider trying to push more social and political messages across it's programming or we'll all end up acting like savages.
Someone needs to abolish this bloke. Never done anything except be a politician.
Staying off topic, but too true. During one spell of boundary changes I was unfortunate enough to have him as an MP. Even wrote to him with a complaint. He wrote back, but completely missed the point. Useless waste of space.
Really surprised at you @kentaddick . Where did you get such a view of all those who work at the BBC? Being a witness to how the BBC has been bullied over what they thought was a relatively straightforward documentary about the Olympic Stadium carve-up, I can assure you that the people concerned are as far from your description as I could imagine. Now, if you had applied your description to John Whittingdale, you'd have been on solid ground, with plenty of evidence re the Charter Review. For example this Freedom of Information request :-)
I've worked on BBC productions, the way they treat production companies is a disgrace. I've worked with a lot of ex BBC people and they all have the same air of arrogance about them (albeit they're of the older generation). The BBC may be bullied, but they bully a lot of much smaller companies just because "they're the BBC".
Someone needs to abolish this bloke. Never done anything except be a politician.
I fucking hate what they are trying to do to the BBC. It's a large organization and certainly has it's faults but the quality and variety of programming it produces blows any other TV network in the world out of the water. I know the big glossy HBO and AMC drama's get a lot of the headlines, but inbetween that the utter rubbish that the US networks produce is beyond the pale sometimes.
I could quite happily fill all my TV viewing with just stuff on the BBC iPlayer and have all my cravings for drama, comedy, documentaries and mindless trash filled with well written, well acted and well produced offerings.
Both amc and HBO started out as really crappy second rate tv networks. HBO took a risk and got lucky in that the sopranos, a pilot that had been kicked away by the networks for years turned out to be the greatest tv series ever made. Amc were an awful channel until they some how got hold of mad men. The thing is they both backed risky projects. Unfortunately I can't see the BBC ever doing that because a, the people who work there are thick arrogant cunts and b, because of the nature of a publically owned institution. No one like those at HBO and amc that had the cajones to do what they did would ever be able to survive at the BBC. They'd be very quickly put in their place or leave.
I utterly disagree. You admit yourself that both the networks you mention "got lucky" KR. Who in British broadcasting takes risks? Going back years, remember when ITV dropped Men Behaving Badly after one series because they were not making enough money from it? The BBC, with it's remit, was able to take up what they saw as a promising idea and see where it went. The rest is history.
Aside from the drama, which I think most would agree, speaks for itself, let's just consider Comedy. Geoffrey Perkins and John Lloyd, Michael Mills and Paul Jackson - there's no way many of the programmes they were responsible for would have made the airwaves on prime time commercial TV, no way at all. Name me a decent comedy panel show on ITV? Channel 4 has a couple, buried away late at night, after the "point and laugh" slot.
I agree that today there is less of an element of risk, but that is because they have been hamstrung by the mouthy antis, who have a political axe to grind rather than a cultural one. Anyway with the new "Charter to fail" that the government have come up with in order to appease their commercial partners/backers, ironically we could be seeing a new dawn. Except of course if it backfires and intended failures become success's...
They got lucky, but like all good luck, it was made from calculated risks and both companies made a very clear decision to go that way.The sopranos was unique at the time, but mad men was a wise decision, as the pilot was phenomenal and HBO bizarrely snubbed it. I recommend reading "difficult men" by Brett Martin about the second golden age of tv.
What I said essentially agreed with the post earlier, the BBC will never make quality programming in the vein of amc and HBO because of the nature of it being a public corporation and the suits involved. But they can still have a decent go. The corporation would need to make a very clear and risky leap into making unique programming that could potentially upset licence fee payers. I don't think that will happen.
We will have to agree to disagree then KA - I thought I had demonstrated where they had already done exactly that.
Just watched the first two episodes of Follow the Money on BBC4, from DR, the Danish State TV which brought us The Killing and Borgen. Not sure it is up to the same gripping and complex standards, although still pretty decent.
Also, hope this isn't a spoiler for anyone but I thought the final episode of the Icelandic series Trapped was a little disappointing. I won't say any more now in case some regulars on here have still to finish it, but will be interested to know if others felt the same way.
Just watched the first two episodes of Follow the Money on BBC4, from DR, the Danish State TV which brought us The Killing and Borgen. Not sure it is up to the same gripping and complex standards, although still pretty decent.
Also, hope this isn't a spoiler for anyone but I thought the final episode of the Icelandic series Trapped was a little disappointing. I won't say any more now in case some regulars on here have still to finish it, but will be interested to know if others felt the same way.
On episode 3 at the moment so will let you know my thoughts once I've caught up.
Still struggling to summon up the energy to finish The Night Manager book - all the characters are so lacking in empathy. Until I can be arsed to finish the book, I won't be going near the TV series.
Last weeks episode of Vinyl was fun. My drug fuelled bender days are well behind me but I would have struggled to keep up with Richie Finestra in my prime.
Seen a preview of the first 2 eps of 11 22 63 - starting on Fox TV from Sunday.
Admittedly I am a big Stephen King fan, but it is bloody brilliant.
King is an utterly incredible storyteller (one of the best of his generation surely if not the best). Combine that with JJ Abrams getting the book on the TV and it is a recipe for success.
They replicate the early 60s to perfection. James Franco is superb as Jake Epping.
Seen a preview of the first 2 eps of 11 22 63 - starting on Fox TV from Sunday.
Admittedly I am a big Stephen King fan, but it is bloody brilliant.
King is an utterly incredible storyteller (one of the best of his generation surely if not the best). Combine that with JJ Abrams getting the book on the TV and it is a recipe for success.
They replicate the early 60s to perfection. James Franco is superb as Jake Epping.
Comments
Someone needs to abolish this bloke. Never done anything except be a politician.
I could quite happily fill all my TV viewing with just stuff on the BBC iPlayer and have all my cravings for drama, comedy, documentaries and mindless trash filled with well written, well acted and well produced offerings.
Aside from the drama, which I think most would agree, speaks for itself, let's just consider Comedy. Geoffrey Perkins and John Lloyd, Michael Mills and Paul Jackson - there's no way many of the programmes they were responsible for would have made the airwaves on prime time commercial TV, no way at all. Name me a decent comedy panel show on ITV? Channel 4 has a couple, buried away late at night, after the "point and laugh" slot.
I agree that today there is less of an element of risk, but that is because they have been hamstrung by the mouthy antis, who have a political axe to grind rather than a cultural one. Anyway with the new "Charter to fail" that the government have come up with in order to appease their commercial partners/backers, ironically we could be seeing a new dawn. Except of course if it backfires and intended failures become success's...
Good points made here: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/mar/06/bbc-report-niche-distinctiveness-david-mitchell
What I said essentially agreed with the post earlier, the BBC will never make quality programming in the vein of amc and HBO because of the nature of it being a public corporation and the suits involved. But they can still have a decent go. The corporation would need to make a very clear and risky leap into making unique programming that could potentially upset licence fee payers. I don't think that will happen.
That is an external production company job. Sankha Guha,, his production company ZuluTango TV. Interestingly, his original commission was to do a touchy-feely doc about the wonderful legacy and West Ham moving in. When he started to sniff out a completely different story, a far more difficult one, and pitched it to the thick arrogant cunts (Hereinafter TAC) they said..yes, go for it. His only difficulty was getting air time with Dan Roan to anchor it. Originally slated just for BBC London, when the TACs realised it was a hot one they blasted it over the News Channel to get it national and ran several late repeats.
And then the grief started. The LLDC launched what Dan Roan has told me was one of the most hostile complaints he'd ever been on the end of. People were worried for their jobs . Their complaint included a defamatory lie about Steve and I, and I offered to go on the offensive with a counter-complaint. But the TACs were worried about their processes being adhered to (according to the Charter), and the political pressure overall from the likes of Whittingdale. Anyway finally last night by coincidence I got the news that they have rejected the complaint - (and I'm free to go after the LLDC, but that's for another thread).
Now of course that's just one case, and you may say it is different for documentaries. And I am sure that people in big companies bully suppliers from small companies. Heaven knows, I know that. But I've become aware of the huge pressure they have to work with daily at the BBC, and actually out here with Czech TV you see strange echoes of the same pressure.
Fantastic hour of TV
Also, hope this isn't a spoiler for anyone but I thought the final episode of the Icelandic series Trapped was a little disappointing. I won't say any more now in case some regulars on here have still to finish it, but will be interested to know if others felt the same way.
Admittedly I am a big Stephen King fan, but it is bloody brilliant.
King is an utterly incredible storyteller (one of the best of his generation surely if not the best). Combine that with JJ Abrams getting the book on the TV and it is a recipe for success.
They replicate the early 60s to perfection. James Franco is superb as Jake Epping.