Leaked: an internal memo to all writers working on "Merlin"

To all writers. This is how episodes will be structured:

1. Somebody does some magic. Doesn’t need to make sense.

2. Richard Wilson discovers that the magic thing is magic and expresses disbelief (note to writers: try to avoid using the phrase “I don’t believe it”).

3. Merlin makes a wild accusation about the magic. He gets in trouble.

4. At this point a CGI dragon with John Hurt’s voice may lecture Merlin about destiny, as long as he is unnecessarily enigmatic and mixes up his words like Yoda.

5. Arthur tries to defend Merlin’s actions and Anthony Stewart Head gives him a bollocking.

6. Arthur is forced to fight magic forces. With a sword.

7. Arthur defeats magic forces due to secret magic help from Merlin.

8. Arthur takes the credit for defeat of magic forces. Merlin grins knowingly.

9. All of the characters who for the duration of the episode have demonstrated only loathing for each other suddenly get all emotional and say nice things instead; important that these nice things are acknowledged with knowingly dismissive responses, e.g. “now get on with your work”, “eat your dinner and shut up”, “polish my armour”.

Not entirely surprising

I have already waxed lyrical about The Sarah Jane Adventures so need not reiterate what classy children’s entertainment it continues to be. But I will point out three things that are really pissing me off:

1. The “sonic lipstick”. Perrrlease. If this had been a one-liner it might have been just about acceptable, but Woolworths has clearly been on the phone to the BBC and now Sarah Jane is walking around brandishing it like a glowing phallic revolver. She ought to be above that kind of thing.

2. The incidental music. Murray Gold is the compositional equivalent of a man holding up signs saying “laugh!”, “cry”, and “be afraid, be very afraid…” – and it’s bloody awful music.

3. Yes, WE GET IT: the universe is an amazing place. You can stop telling us. The last five minutes of today’s episode went something like this:

Sarah Jane: …and the more you live in it, the more you’ll realise what a surprising place the universe can be.

Luke: It’s surprising alright.

New girl: (with an enigmatic smile) Yes. It is surprising, isn’t it.

Clyde: (grinning) Oh, it’s more surprising that you realise!

They all laugh. The new girl’s parents turn up.

Parents: New girl! Where have you been?

New girl: I was just being, you know, surprised by the universe.

The others share a knowing smile.

Parents: Well come home, it’s dinner!

Clyde: Dinner? Wow! The universe really is surprising!

Luke: More than you can imagine!

They all walk away, leaving Sarah Jane the last word.

Sarah Jane: Yes. The universe really is surprising. Really surprising.

…which was all the more irritating after a scene between Sarah Jane and the new girl in the same episode in which they said EXACTLY THE SAME THING!!!

Not all TV is olid!

Thank God for The Sarah Jane Adventures; in spite of Russell T. Davies’ lazy style-over-substance Doctor Who stories and dismal spin-off series Torchwood, he has created something genuinely wonderful.

Leave aside the trademark Russell T. need to remind the viewer how amazing space is at the start of every other episode. Leave aside the slightly embarrassing merchandise. What you are left with is a well-constructed, well-written series, with more adult stories than most of its “adult” counterparts, and Elizabeth Sladen looking damn sexy and wearing fabulous costumes.

I loved the first series and am delighted by its return, which is immediately on form. After the disastrous finale to Doctor Who this year and indeed its disastrous handling of the Sontarans, it’s great to see them handled properly – and given a proper cliffhanger! And a dodgy model of a satelite dish – just like real Doctor Who! And even a Hitchhikers’ in joke! And some of those kids could teach Catherine Tate a thing or two about subtlety…

Another rant with a televisual bent

One of my bugbears has long been bad improvised comedy – and this is where having a shared blog comes into its own, because James Senior certainly has all the same opinions as me on this subject. We were both treated to an expensive display of tedious dicking around on stage in Edinburgh this year, also known as Paul Merton’s Impro Chums, which is exactly the kind of thing that makes discerning artists think improv is basically shit. Yeah, Merton said some funny things, but his chums were mostly there for him to walk over for comic effect, and the only chum with any of the give and take needed to create genuinely good improvised sketches was Richard Vranch (sadly, due to his generosity as a performer he was on stage rather less than the others).

It is apodeictic that the programme which hammered the last nails into the coffin of improvised comedy (from which Merton and chums had somehow managed to escape) was the infamous Whose Line is it Anyway? – but equally, I remember that as far back as my school days people would talk reverently about “the early days” before it got a bit rubbish. It ran for ten series, after all, it must have been good once, surely?

Thanks to 4oD (that’s Channel 4’s on-demand service for lay people) you can now go and check those glory days out, and episode 3 of the first series is particularly exciting because it has the line-up of Stephen Fry, Peter Cooke, John Sessions and Josie Lawrence, all of them extremely talented men. Apart from Josie Lawrence who is not a man and is of questionable talent from what I’ve seen (though do prove me wrong if she’s been especially brilliant in something at any time).

The episode is a revelation: it’s dismal. I mean, the whole programme is obviously about as ill-concieved as it could be – the way the performers lounge on conference seats at the back of the stage and saunter forward for each skit in a kind of apathetic, mock-reluctant way… or the way Clive Anderson really seems to have no idea what is going on and certainly has failed to explain the games to the actors before and during the show… or the games themselves, in many cases – but leaving that aside, surely the brilliance of Cooke, Fry and Sessions combined can only be heart-stoppingly hilarious?

Uh-uh. Watch it if you don’t believe me. Fry comes out with the occasional prepared jokes (“my name’s Richard, but I’m more of a Dick”), when Cooke is left alone to talk in character there is more than a shadow of his early greatness in evidence, and Sessions, as always, gives virtuosic displays of verbal dexterity. Even Josie Lawrence comes up with a funny costume. But this is not a Stephen Fry monologue, or Peter Cooke sitting on a bench extemporising, or the John Sessions show (though he clearly thinks it is): the performers are given situations to act, stories to tell, things to achieve, and they singularly fail every time, as if doing a funny voice and remembering the scene you’re in are totally incompossible. They take long pauses while they try to think of something funny to say; when they think of something funny to say that fits neither the scene or the character they are playing they go ahead and say it anyway; they fail to end sketches, talking long after Clive Anderson’s impotent buzzer has heralded the end of what they’re doing (usually way too early or way too late). Similarly they talk over each other like it’s a big upstaging contest, and don’t listen to what else has been said in each scene as if they’re all acting in individual soundproof boxes.

Put succinctly, all they’re doing is lazily showing off, and whilst it yields the occasional chuckle when somebody does say something funny, the rest of it is car-crash television of the worst order. Indeed, it even redeems Paul Merton and his chums a little, because with one notable exception (that’s you, Andy Smart) they did at least seem to know what they were doing and attempt to hold scenes together a bit. (Nor did they broadcast it on national television, though they did charge me fifteen quid for it.)

There are plenty of books written about good improvisation – obviously it’s a bit late to push any of them towards the Whose Line team, but in any case it’s not rocket science – did nobody think to explain the games to the actors, or to practice them a bit? Is teamwork such a bizarre concept for someone who likes to ad-lib?

Before anybody accuses me of being a snob about my own “field of performance” (as the UK comedy guide Chortle once did) – damn right I’m a snob about it, and that’s not even remotely to suggest that any of the shows I have been involved in have neared the kind of brilliance I believe is possible in improv, it’s just to say that there’s no excuse for lazy, shoddy improvisation, especially the kind that costs £15. A student of mine was showing an interest in the subject the other day and I showed him one of the brief video clips on the Uncertainty Division website; again, far from perfect, but he thought it was scripted. It’s hard to imagine somebody making the same mistake about the antics of Messrs Fry, Cooke, Sessions and the other one.

"Merlin" may have been dull, but at least I wasn't yelling at the screen

I saw two pieces of televisual recrement yesterday which pissed me off beyond belief: first off was Tony Blair on The Daily Show, which saw the former Prime Minister doing what he always did best, i.e. saying absolutely bugger all but in a way bound to make people love him a little bit more. Jon Stewart was at his most accommodating, gushing all over Blair about how nice it was to meet a world leader willing to talk to him, without realising that he might as well have been talking to a grinning cardboard cut-out of Blair accompanied by a mix-tape of Blair’s most repeated excuses for his actions in the Middle East.

If you watch the second half of the interview, you’ll notice that all Blair really says is that “of course it’s a very complicated situation” again and again but occasionally listing a few foreign places to lend his niddering responses the feeling of authenticity. Of course the audience love him because of his quaint British accent and the fact the he actually deigned to go on the show in the first place, but he couldn’t have had an easier ride – shame on Jon Stewart for wasting the opportunity.

As if that wasn’t bad enough, I then sat through Rick and Steve: the Happiest Gay Couple in All the World, which is an animated comedy about gay lego men and therefore seemed quite promising, but which it turns out is the most disgustingly homophobic thing I’ve seen since Paul Daniels. The first episode introduced us to gay couple Rick and Steve, one of them effete and girly and the other camp and horny, who liked eating quiche and were desperate to have a threesome. We also met their lesbian friends, one of them butch and manly, the other camp and boyish, who hated men and were desperate to have a baby. Oh, and even more hilariously, an older gay man with HIV (that famously laugh-out-loud-funny condition) who was wheelchair-bound (as if the virus on its own wasn’t funny enough!) and took lots of pills, along with his toyboy who was – wait for it – effete and girly. And quite camp.

And so the whole olid affair unfolded, in a story that involved more gay people of different stereotypical varieties and a proliferation of jokes about wanking, semen, cottaging, penises and debilitating viruses. It beggars belief that such a thing could possibly exist in the 21st century – if it was about any other minority it simply wouldn’t be on television. It’s impossible to come up with any kind of example without actually being offensive, but Abdul and Imraan: the Happiest Muslim Couple in All the World is the kind of level we’re looking at, and it would naturally be about bearded men who abused their wives and were determined to blow up a building. Yes – ouch. Yet somehow when it’s about homosexuals it gets on the telly.

What is it about gay people that’s different, then? I’ll tell you. It’s that they make this programme themselves. Yup, that’s right – Rick and Steve are the product of a gay television network, Logo, who were apparently keen to treat their LGBT viewers with a series which “satirized (sic) all aspects of gay life”.

All aspects of gay life??? So that’s wanking, threesomes and HIV, then? Oh, and quiche.

Right wing conservatives can put their feet up; there’s no need for them to perpetuate gay stereotypes and whip up homophobia, gay people are doing it perfectly well themselves.

Channelling my betters

The other day I dug up a sketch I’d written back in 2000 or so. I’m not 100% certain whether it ever saw the light of day; it’s possible that Tori and I performed it at some point. What’s notable about it is the bit I seem to have bolted onto the front before the sketch gets going. This is fairly high up on the list of sins of sketch writing, as it stops you figuring out what the hell’s going on in the crucial opening few seconds, but even more strange is that it doesn’t sound like my writing at all. If I’d read it in any other context I’d have sworn it was written by John Finnemore:

George Ah, Emily – I was wondering, could you pop in here for a moment?
Emily Certainly, George. Do I have time to put the cat out?
George I would imagine so, Emily. Why don’t you have a go, and I’ll tell you if you’re running out of time.

This occurred to me just now, while walking round Sainsbury’s failing to avoid buying discounted donuts, and it rang a bell. A few weeks ago I was with some friends in the pub, and one of them had to berate me for being macho. Which I’m not. It took me a fraction of second to realise that my uncharacteristic behaviour was pretty much just aping one of Aaron Sorkin’s characters from Studio 60 On The Sunset Strip.

If you notice my doing anything like this in the future, please tell me to stop. I do genuinely have a personality all my own, and it isn’t macho.

He probably has to put up with this kind of thing all the time

“We were wondering which of your characters you least want us to bring up!” I told Sir Derek, who chucked heartily.

“Probably the Master from Doctor Who!” he said.

“But…” I said, my mouth running away with me for such is the effect of cheap white wine, “we were all so disappointed when you regenerated!”

“I know,” he agreed, “I regenerated into John Simm.”

“Well, we all wish you hadn’t,” I informed him.

“Me too,” he nodded. “I’m hoping he’ll regenerate back into me.”

Heartening words indeed to a Doctor Who fan. And at at least I didn’t mention his role as a camp undertaker in Nanny McPhee.