|
Post by Steve Austin on Jul 6, 2016 10:34:30 GMT
The BBC have announced that this is returning for a one off special this year to coincide with their celebrations for the 60th anniversary of Hancocks Half Hour airing.
I did like this series although it was probably right to stop when it did but this was always ripe for a reprise. I would like to see how Gary coped without being able to step back to the future. Did Pheobe find it strange that suddenly he was no longer able to get his hands things that no-one else seemed to, having to deal with food rationing like everyone else for example.
What happened to Ron, Yvonne etc.
I'm looking forward to this but hope that they don't screw it up.
Other classic shows set to return include Are You Being Served?, Steptoe and Son, Till Death Us Do Part, Porridge, Keeping Up Appearances and Up Pompeii! but I'm not sure how those will fare bearing in mind that the stars of those shows are long gone, except maybe for KUA. At least the cast for GS are still with us. Wonder who will play Phoebe and Yvonne?
What are your thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by Gene Hunt on Jul 6, 2016 11:01:59 GMT
Other classic shows set to return include Are You Being Served?, Steptoe and Son, Till Death Us Do Part, Porridge....... What are your thoughts? No no no no NO! Is TV in such a state that they now have to resort to this. Have they not learnt anything about remaking such classics? Abhorrent idea. Goodnight Sweetheart could work well though.... Gene.
|
|
|
Post by Brown Granada on Jul 6, 2016 13:05:42 GMT
Noooooo. Porridge cannot be Porridge without Ronnie Barker.
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Pringle on Jul 6, 2016 15:32:11 GMT
Sounds like the worst idea ever but thankfully it seems that they're just remaking selected 'lost' episodes from surviving scripts as part of a season celebrating classic sitcoms. I think this trend of looking backwards started when Michael Sheen played Kenneth Williams in a BBC drama of his life, there followed several others on the BBC & ITV on the Carry On gang, Tommy Cooper, Tony Hancock, Frankie Howerd, Hattie Jacques & others. Personally I can't stand any of them as they take liberties with the truth & dwell on the salacious aspects of these people's lives. I also think these 'let's all laugh at how bad 70's tv was' shows have helped to further distort things. If the BBC considered their license paying audience they'd understand that the best way to celebrate their tv output of the past would be to create a channel dedicated to showing it uncut & untarnished, not harping on about 'putting it in context' for modern audiences. www.telegraph.co.uk/news/bbc/12189427/Alf-Garnett-returns-to-the-BBC-as-corporation-announces-remakes-of-seven-classic-sitcoms.html
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Pringle on Jul 6, 2016 22:06:39 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Sam Tyler on Jul 8, 2016 23:38:44 GMT
My 18 year old daughter has been watching the re-runs of GS and really enjoying them. The idea though of a special fills me with dread though. After 23 years all the cast have aged accordingly so that would see them out of the end of the war and into the swinging sixties - or will the producers try to have us believe that the last couple of years of the war and rationing caused them to age prematurely?
Sam.
|
|
|
Post by Athene Noctua on Jul 9, 2016 7:38:56 GMT
My 18 year old daughter has been watching the re-runs of GS and really enjoying them. The idea though of a special fills me with dread though. After 23 years all the cast have aged accordingly so that would see them out of the end of the war and into the swinging sixties - or will the producers try to have us believe that the last couple of years of the war and rationing caused them to age prematurely? Sam. I agree with your point about the timeshift; it doesn't quite work does it? When you change the fundamentals of the show, it takes away the whole point of it. I did enjoy the show originally, and the re-runs, and thought it was lovely when Ian Lavender pops up in a guest role (won't spoil it for those who haven't seen it). His mate Ron was always a good foil for the storyline; he needed one character to believe him to keep the link between the past and present.
|
|