Extras

[Claw75]

Thought last nights' show was pure class - the best yet!  I was literally crying with laughter, to the point that I missed a few minutes of what was going on after the "I don't even know what a 'worrum' is" comment!

[Jon MW]

Thought last nights' show was pure class - the best yet!  I was literally crying with laughter, to the point that I missed a few minutes of what was going on after the "I don't even know what a 'worrum' is" comment!

for anyone saying that it's gone off the boil, this was the perfect reply.

[Trace]

I caught the end of last night's, first one I've ever seen and I'm sorry to say:


I just don't get it!!



Gimme Phoenix Nights anyday..

[Acidmouse]

Aye last nights was class.


In the toilet doing coke had me in stiches.

[BigTomatoes]

 feet up , for another classic

[tantrum]

Ricky Gervais--

[AndrewT]

Ricky Gervais--

No, I'm sorry, but tonight's episode was rubbish. Lazy and rubbish.

The 'he couldn't remember the make-up girl's name' bit went on for aaaaaaagggggggggeeeeeeees with no pay-off.

The whole play storyline was Gervais's old 'I'm not a poofter' schtick which may as well have been David Brent.

The Maggie (whose character seems to have regressed this series) and agent storyline was a build-up to a joke about poo.

After the first series had so many good bits, and managed to be both funny and touching at times, this second series is lazy, one-dimensional, stereotyped rubbish.

With crap jokes.

Gervais - do your funny dance or sod off.

[Jim-D]

The bit where he was asking the lady out and the drink exploded in his mouth  I was absolutely pissing myself, tears were streaming from my  eyes , and in writing this im still laughing to myself

[LukieD]

Ditto! I was in absolute stitches! Classic bit of tv

[tantrum]

No, I'm sorry, but tonight's episode was rubbish. Lazy and rubbish.

The 'he couldn't remember the make-up girl's name' bit went on for aaaaaaagggggggggeeeeeeees with no pay-off.

The whole play storyline was Gervais's old 'I'm not a poofter' schtick which may as well have been David Brent.

The Maggie (whose character seems to have regressed this series) and agent storyline was a build-up to a joke about poo.

After the first series had so many good bits, and managed to be both funny and touching at times, this second series is lazy, one-dimensional, stereotyped rubbish.

With crap jokes.

Gervais - do your funny dance or sod off.

Perhaps this series is not directed to the viewer like yourself, but that does not mean that the programme is not good.

After all, not always one needs candy laughs type moments to validate a good comedy programme.

[AndrewT]

Perhaps this series is not directed to the viewer like yourself, but that does not mean that the programme is not good.

A viewer like me? Someone who thought The Office was really funny? Someone who enjoyed the first series of Extras?

If it's not aimed at someone like me then who exactly should it be aimed at?

The sad truth, I think, is that Gervais is out of ideas. His Simpsons episode was utter rubbish. More effort seems to have gone into deciding which celebrites to have in Extras than went into the script.

He's David Brent - and it looks like that's all he'll ever be.

[Claw75]

I agree with Andrew - thought last night's episode was very poor, but it did have a hard act to follow after last week. 

[Jon MW]

The last episode was probably the weakest so far, which was especially unfortunate when last weeks was probably the best so far. But I don't think it's because he's out of ideas, I just think that it misfired slightly.

There is also a different emphasis to this series than the first. The first series was pure comedy, with the superstars providing the comedy and the regular cast just supporting them and linking the narrative between the different episodes. This series has a proper story arc for Andy with the guest superstars providing the support this time rather than the emphasis, I think this makes it more of a comedy-drama (but still mainly comedy) than the first series.

[tantrum]

Andy Milman made his break into BBC.  He wrote a sitcom that was compromised by big wigs at BBC (this is his interpretation so far).  He wants to regain his status as an actor, but he has never been an actor.  He aspiration is to be like Robert De Niro.  He is not very pleased that everyone thinks of him as low brow comedy sell out, who makes crap sitcom for the plebs.

The whole programme works on various levels of irony, and some of them are there to magnify the tragedy of the protagonist.  This becomes apparent at the end of the programme where Andy is unable to act out the story in the presence of his 'school friends'.

I think Gervais moved away from the first series, and it is possible that the second series won't satisfy many.  There is nothing wrong with liking or not liking the programme.  For me it works, for you perhaps it is disappointing, which proves that 'death of the author' concept is as valid as ever.

The text is open for interpretation, but the interpretation depends on the viewer's expectations, prior knowledge of the characters, his/her preferences.  It is very easy to say something is bad because you don't like it. Your arguments are valid in the same way as mine.

I think it is an interesting series to discuss whether the second series can be put into the comedy sitcom genre category.

Gervais is breaking few rules, and in a way, slightly departs from the comedy sitcom formula. The each segment can not be treated anymore as individual and self contained episodes.  The story arc is continuous, and Andy Millman's journey has to be seen in the whole concept of the story.  Whether Gervais can pull it off with all the characters being constant is another matter.  As to the argument that Andy Millman is like David Brent, I am not so sure it is quite true.  David Brent is unaware of his limitation as a human being, Andy Millman has some kind of awareness of his artistic and personal impotency. 

 I am inclined to admit therefore that 2nd series is not that funny anymore in a conventional sense of traditional sitcom.  There are no happy endings, Andy Millman is spirialling into murky world of being a total loser and there is no one to help him. 
I personally don't mind this shift in the structure, but on reflection can see how others can be put off by the second series.

[AndrewT]

A very nice post Tantrum.

I get how this series has more of a story arc, as opposed to the first series. My point is that it's not done well. I actually care less about Andy and Maggie than I did in the first series.

Remember, Gervais did 'story arc' in The Office, and did it brilliantly. The Tim and Dawn saga was one of the most fantastically cohesive story arcs in what was, let's face it, a sitcom. The scene where Tim finally asks Dawn out, and the scene where Brent pleads for his job were pathos of the level of Steptoe & Son. Steptoe & Son had very dark undercurrents, which led to great pathos, but the funny bits were also not only funny in their own right, but made funnier by the context they were in, as they often arose out of the situation.

In this series of Extras, the 'serious' bits are in one bucket, the 'funny' bits are in another, and they jar against each other. As Jim-D said, the one funny bit was the water fizzing up - a joke which is just a piece of slapstick (nothing wrong with slapstick) but it could almost have been airlifted in from another programme. Compare with the legendary 'funny dance' scene in The Office. Yes his dancing was funny, but the scene was enhanced by the subtext of Brent's character - the need to be liked, the desire to be in the spotlight, his jealousy of Neil. The fact it was Brent doing the dance was a factor in what made it great - the fizzing water could have been done by any of the other characters and it would have been just as funny because it was just a piece of slapstick.

Gervais did more with Les Dennis's character in one episode of the first series than he has with his own in two whole series.