Trailed with the 'monkey tennis' clip, the absolute Partridge nadir. Paul Jackson is a simpering fool.

"Monkey Tennis!" - even those words make me laugh until I collapse! Ahahahaha!

My God, I just thought - if and when Coogan goes on Desert Island Discs, do you think one of them would be a Tony Ferrino song?

>Trailed with the 'monkey tennis' clip, the absolute Partridge nadir. Paul Jackson is a simpering fool.

Wha?

>Trailed with the 'monkey tennis' clip, the absolute Partridge nadir. Paul Jackson is a simpering fool.
>

Call me a simpering fool too, but 'monkey tennis' made me laugh. Not as much as 'Ladyshapes, with Alan Partridge', but enough to be worth remembering.

I think it might have been irony. Paul Jackson a fool, Monkey Tennis *not* one of the funniest things in IAP. Pete Baynham's that, wasn't it?

We covered this in the COMMENT article - that whole scene with Tony Hayers representing the moment when everything went wrong with the character. Alan listing 'funny' programme ideas and Hayers sitting there shaking his head. And the idea of this being played as the sole Partridge clip is something I find very distressing. In fact, people's inability to see what was painfully and obviously wrong with IAP in general is still something that frightens me to this day.

JACKSON: Now, Stevevy baby, I understand you did a show called On the Hour or something once. But enough about that - just why WAS I'm Alan Partridge the best programme in the universe?
COOGAN: Well, what we were trying to do...

>In fact, people's inability to see what was painfully and obviously wrong with IAP in general is still something that frightens me to this day.
>

Different strokes for different folks. It was a comedy programme, it made me laugh long and loud. You had misgivings. That's your call. Whatever was wrong with it, and I can see how some could see it as a disappointment, it was several orders of magnitbetter than most of the dreck that you rightly lambast.

>JACKSON: Now, Stevevy baby, I understand you did a show called On the Hour or something once. But enough about that - just why WAS I'm Alan Partridge the best programme in the universe?
>COOGAN: Well, what we were trying to do...

Now, that would be scary. It was good, but not worthy of canonisation.

I take issue with this.

"In On The Hour, The Day Today, and Knowing Me Knowing You, the joke had rested on the fact that, despite Alan Partridge being awful, nobody actually said so..."

Because previously, Alan Partridge only appeared in a professional capacity. Those around him would generally refrain from comment out of decorum, though this did not prevent, for example, the ladies' tennis doubles team becoming enraged at him in OTH, the mocking laughter of the football team in the showers on TDT, Tony Hayers' thinly-veiled contempt in Knowing Me, Knowing Yule.

"The series reached its nadir when Partridge gave the Tony Hayers character a list of 'bad programme ideas', which was a accompanied by reaction shots of Hayers looking incredulous and appalled. You might as well have had 'HA HA, LOOK AT HIS BAD DRESS SENSE AND EMBARRASSING BEHAVIOUR - DO YOU UNDERSTAND?' emblazoned across the screen."

What about the Sports Casual insert on KMKY then?

"Even if you assume it was 'done behind Alan's back', the character would not have behaved the way he did in the show, certainly wouldn't have allowed the omnipotent cameras to film the scenes they did (the sex/chocolate mousse incident, for example) and no BBC post-production team would have allowed it to be broadcast with a laugh track..."

There was never any indication in IAP that the show was a documentary. At no point were documentary cameramen visible or referenced (apart from when he filmed that boating video). The series was fly-on-the-wall in the same way as any sitcom is fly-on-the-wall. Would you say that 'The Odd Couple' was a documentary? Your argument seems to be entirely based on a Spinal Tap-referencing comment from Coogan, though no indication is given that he was talking about IAP at the time.

I meant badminton of course.

>Alan listing 'funny' programme ideas and Hayers sitting there shaking his head.

Still funny. Some marvellous lines in that scene - Hayers mentions he has a (wine) cellar and Partridge responds with (approx.): "So have I. No wine in there though. Couple of old bikes, some smokeless fuel, a bag of old cement. Gone hard." Gone hard. That's comedy.

>In fact, people's inability to see what was painfully and obviously wrong with IAP in general is still something that frightens me to this day.

I know, we were all too busy laughing to register our displeasure at the betrayal of the character. Bit of a bugger that, isn't it?

You're not the only ones - in fact, I had this same debate before I ever discovered SOTCAA, with a work colleague who was a fan of the R4 series. He was completely nonplussed by the BBC2 version of KMKY too. Perhaps he spotted the seeds of Ferrinosity even then.

>We covered this in the COMMENT article - that whole scene with Tony Hayers representing the moment when everything went wrong with the character. Alan listing 'funny' programme ideas and Hayers sitting there shaking his head. And the idea of this being played as the sole Partridge clip is something I find very distressing. In fact, people's inability to see what was painfully and obviously wrong with IAP in general is still something that frightens me to this day.

??? One of the funniest sequences in one of the funniest series ever, to my mind. What was the change in AP's character between KMKY and IAP? Seemed pretty consistent to me.

Oh well, I'm sure all this came up when you first put up the article.

>We covered this in the COMMENT article -

"In On The Hour, The Day Today, and Knowing Me Knowing You, the joke had rested on the fact that, despite Alan Partridge being awful, nobody actually said so"

Not explicitly, apart from the guests - the James Harries spoofboy, the French testicle chef, the Chris Evans This Is Your Life bloke, the American superstar kids - not to mention the barely-suppressed contempt of his colleagues on the show. Glen Ponder didn't seem terribly happy by the end of KMKYWAP.

"The series reached its nadir when Partridge gave the Tony Hayers character a list of 'bad programme ideas'"

*ALL* of Alan Partridge's programme/feature ideas are bad - Alan's Big Pocket, KMAPKYAAP (hello Dave Gorman), the re-enaction of the Olympic race, blazer badge and tie combination packs.

Maybe it's 'cos I've worked in telly (and know the relationship between commissioners and producers), but I found the Hayers/restaurant/ideas sequence very, very funny indeed. Comedy of recognition and that.

>of this being played as the sole Partridge clip is something I find very distressing.

How long was the trail?

Cheerio

Bet he doesn't mention 'The Dead Good Show' either.

Well, since we're quoting from our original article...

"'So what?' you may say. 'It was funny. Did you see the one where he stole the traffic cone? Brilliant!' Hey, fine - if you enjoyed all that, we're not going to take that away from you. And you'll be pleased to know that, since you've made the show such an arsing success with your praise, from now on you personally will be used as an audience template for further series. Enjoy the next project called Steve Coogan Is Alan Partridge, set in a Pringle sweater factory run by Alan's bad-tempered Pakistani woman boss and watch the hilarious pratfalls that occur. Enjoy it all."

He did call OTH 'groundbreaking' a few times but no clips from it. Meh...

No mentions either of The Day Today (as far as I could gather but I was distracted for about 30 seconds somewhere in the middle), Coogan's Run, his cameo in Harry with Michael Elphick, and Tony Ferrino (good thing too, you might say, but low points should also be covered...), or that bit on Armando Iannucci on Radio 1 in 1993 when he was being interviewed as himself. Which was funnier than *anything* in I'm Alan Partridge. Even though I quite enjoyed IAP.

Jackson is getting oilier and oilier as this series goes on. Most of his questions were ghastly and cringing, but the booby prize goes to whoever edited the clips, specifically the "Bergerac Is John Nettles" bit. Fancy cutting out the "Depardieu" duel. Shame on them.

>"'So what?' you may say. 'It was funny. Did you see the one where he stole the traffic cone? Brilliant!' Hey, fine - if you enjoyed all that, we're not going to take that away from you.


To be honest, the image of you two sat there stony-faced and furrow-browed watching the entire series makes me giggle.

>>"'So what?' you may say. 'It was funny. Did you see the one where he stole the traffic cone? Brilliant!' Hey, fine - if you enjoyed all that, we're not going to take that away from you.
>
>
>To be honest, the image of you two sat there stony-faced and furrow-browed watching the entire series makes me giggle.

Indeed. Like when Sideshow Bob gets hit with the custard pie, he's got self-important dignity, and that's why it's funny, and that's why his brother didn't get the Krusty job, and that's why he had to blow up the dam. Anyway.

In On The Hour, there's a three part sports interview Alan does with three different sporting heroes, e.g. Seve Ballasteros (played by TV's popular Patrick Marber.)

In that sequence, every single character he interacts with acknowledges his misunderstanding of each sport, and takes him up on it, and points out what he has got wrong, and yet he remains oblivious. THAT is from whence the comedy derives. Your theory is wrong. I hereby claim my SOTCAA pension.

Did anyone else notice that Jackson said that 'On The Hour' was written by Iannucci and Morris, and Coogan didn't correct this? Is there some rewriting of history going on at the BBC so they can forget that they ever employed Lee and Herring?

And The Dead Good Show almost got a mention, when it was said that Coogan had worked with Caroline Aherne and John Thomson. Does anyone have this on tape, out of interest?

>To be honest, the image of you two sat there stony-faced and furrow-browed watching the entire series makes me giggle.

We watched it seperately in fact, both hoping it would be fantastic, both hoping that previous Coogan abberations had been flukes. To be honest we really didn't care much that was a bit rubbish at the time. It was the subsequent media crap stating its genius and importance that really galled.

>In On The Hour, there's a three part sports interview Alan does with three different sporting heroes, e.g. Seve Ballasteros (played by TV's popular Patrick Marber.)

Yes, we've heard that one. Good isn't it.

>In that sequence, every single character he interacts with acknowledges his misunderstanding of each sport, and takes him up on it, and points out what he has got wrong, and yet he remains oblivious. THAT is from whence the comedy derives. Your theory is wrong. I hereby claim my SOTCAA pension.

You're just taking the bits of the article you understand out of context, Pete.

There's a huge difference between a well-written exchange of comedy manners - Alan's crass misunderstandings vs polite cautious correcting - and something that just looks like it's been written as a nice plebbed-down 'reminder' (to potential middle-ground 'new viewers') of why he's a comedy character and where you should laugh. Considering how careful the team had been with such writing before (this was after all the reason we were originally blown away by it) it just seemed like a cynical exercise.

Yes, all of Alan's programme ideas are supposed to be bad, but a simple 'check-off list' - backed with another character sort of shaking his head a bit - just comes across as '20 Reasons To Laugh At This Character' instead of something osmotic and natural. I might even go so far as to say that the writing team *became* Partridge at that point - it was tantamount to them 'having a bit of fun in the office' and making a list, as per Alan and his lesbian euphamisms. Or The 11 O'Clock Show and their lesbian euphamisms...

Other bits - I'd still maintain that IAP was meant to be at the very least a blurred-around-the-edges attempt at portraying a documentary style. I know this has come up before but there was that Clive Anderson appearence during which 'Alan' described it as such. Maybe they found that the easiest way of explaining it to the plebs...

But it's not just the 'documentary style' Coogan's claiming as his approach but the whole nature of comedy arising naturally through believable situations and dialogue rather than obvious cheap-shot laugh-lines and pratfalls. But as the Comment piece suggests, it's difficult to manage this if you're under pressure to deliver a 'successful comedy'.

There's a bit in the Edit News piece which mentions a whole section from IAP (Alan and his PA in a car at a loose end). We've been told this could easily have formed a whole show in itself and there was a tentative plan to do so (scuppered by Sarah Smith). We've not seen the sequence but it must surely be more watchable - and in line with Tap-style presentation - than what the scene was reduced to - Alan being hit in the face with a plastic fan while the audience squawks delightedly.

>Maybe it's 'cos I've worked in telly (and know the relationship between commissioners and producers), but I found the Hayers/restaurant/ideas sequence very, very funny indeed. Comedy of recognition and that.

Here's something extra for you all to mull over - from our 'Time Gentlemen Please' article (which we never bothered to link to):

"Both The Day Today and Knowing Me Knowing You mercilessly attacked a media industry gone mad.

Subsequently it seemed that, as the Iannucci clan sank further and further into the mire of that industry, they felt less need to attack its foibles (after all, they'd done pretty well out of it). The Partridge sitcom instead opted on making Alan a loser to laugh at, devoid of joy, devoid of the strength of character which epitomised his role in KMKY. Instead of outsiders laughing at industry wankers it suddenly became industry wankers laughing at one pathetic loser stripped of all his power. And we're not talking about the characters. We're talking about actual media people, perhaps relieved that they were no longer the target. The subtext here is really quite nasty and ties in with a dozen other SOTCAA-related arguments about blaming individuals instead of bad set-ups (see our pieces on Edinburgh Or Bust and the new 11 O'Clock Show) not to mention general theories about misdirected satire targeting personalities rather than situations.

Maybe we're reading too much into the sociological implications of IAP but it's got to be better than the syco-fans who simply laugh at 'his face'. And nothing else."

In short, "I'm Alan Partridge" tried to appeal to too many different types of audience at once. It wanted to keep the sort of people who had enjoyed On The Hour/The Day Today/KMKY, but at the same time open the character up to the sort of people who like what some might term 'pleb' comedy. They wanted the dual reaction of having people discuss the intricacies of the humour in the same way that they did the 'musical demonstration of an earthquake' in On The Hour, at the same time as having other people stand around in bus queues saying "I like it when he says the ladyboys" etc etc. Aside from being a horrendously patronising vision, it is also one that will work in some respects but is doomed to failure in others. I can't pretend that I didn't find some parts of it incredibly funny, but at the same time the overall presentation alienated me somewhat. Quite a lot, actually.

And Coogan obviously took that extended audience of IAP seriously. Check out that fucking awful Comedy Awards performance with Elton John. Coogan's going to have to do a lot to win me back now.

Ah, hush yeselves, y'grumpy buggers, and wish me happy 30th birthday.

Cheerio

Joe done:

Here's something extra for you all to mull over - from our 'Time Gentlemen Please' article (which we never bothered to link to)

Will this article see the light of day ever, then?

Happy birthday Steve.

>Will this article see the light of day ever, then?

No.

I'm somehow dreading that Coogan will pull a Tony Robinson and disappear only to pop up like a freshly flogged horse every Comic Relief from here to eternity in his be-pringled guise to recite his version of 'Turnip' and 'I have a cunning plan' to the sound of a 1000 Gary's from not really giving half a toss.

Joe, I'm not really surprised you decided to not bother with the TGP article, I expected it all along for some reason. I think the reasons why are pretty obvious, but it still goes against the thought process behind a lot of SOTCAA's other criticisms. I'm sure it would of been an interesting read either way, if a volatile one for all involved. I guess I do feel remorse for having such a go at the show, but from my viewpoint it just stamped on the testicles of any hope I had of great new Lee & Herring-type show, but I guess it was never billed as such. I still feel it was a very plebbed down affair, etc etc blah blah woof woof, anyway, if you think the article isn't suitable for the site, then so be it. And I still think Lee and Herring are very talented writers despite my opinions on some of their current projects.

(grumpily) Happy birthday.

(perks up) In fact, have a birthday image to retire to bed with - Coogan dressed as Popeye trying to down the tin of spinach. (Ah - that's kind of presuming you've seen the video, though, as it wasn't broadcast. Ah well, you'll just have to imagine it. One of the funniest things he's done. And possibly the last...?)

>Joe, I'm not really surprised you decided to not bother with the TGP article, I expected it all along for some reason. I think the reasons why are pretty obvious, but it still goes against the thought process behind a lot of SOTCAA's other criticisms.

What obvious reasons are these?

>What obvious reasons are these?

That would be telling.

>There's a huge difference between a well-written exchange of comedy manners

e.g. when he goes to buy that house in IAP. And all the interaction (not really the right word) with Lynn is excellent.

>and something that just looks like it's been written as a nice plebbed-down 'reminder' (to potential middle-ground 'new viewers') of why he's a comedy character and where you should laugh.

Such as the last episode of the radio series of KMKY, where Rebecca Front phones in and gives us a neat list of all his transgressions (punching a child, taking cocaine, etc.) That was terribly unsubtle and not very funny.

So your 'A-list-of-20-reasons-to-laugh-is-not-in-itself-very-amusing' theory does work, as long as you feed it the right input. That's good, I AGREE WITH IT (as Alan once said.)

>There's a bit in the Edit News piece which mentions a whole section from IAP (Alan and his PA in a car at a loose end). We've been told this could easily have formed a whole show in itself and there was a tentative plan to do so (scuppered by Sarah Smith). We've not seen the sequence but it must surely be more watchable - and in line with Tap-style presentation - than what the scene was reduced to - Alan being hit in the face with a plastic fan while the audience squawks delightedly.

Yes, I wish they'd show that. It fits in with my own pet theory (which you may stroke if you promise to be gentle) i.e. that IAP is partly the result of Peter Baynham listening to The Shuttleworths on R4. That is 100% unsullied interaction, with no plot, no events, and is better than IAP, probably because of that "purity." See, I agree with your theory, but I don't think all of IAP can be uniformly tarred like some big fat road. Aimless conversations with Lynn are threaded through the show, and in a way you can view the whole series as basically one long aimless conversation with Lynn.

Also Baynham claims to have lived on his own for a while, eating nothing but crisps and pot noodles, so he is somewhat obsessed with exercising a particular demon - his self-image is that of a sad lonely Welshman (quite endearing really) and so he likes to write comedy about people with no big events happening in their directionless lives, as a sort of satire on the general media pressure on all of us to turn into Noel Gallagher with big tits.

In other words, the effect of that new writer was to utterly change the focus and intent of the show. This breaks all previous theories. Oh dear. But who said it had to be possible to compare IAP with KMKY or the proto-Alan from OTH? I mean, after all, back in OTH, Alan was mainly a vehicle for amusing race horse names.

The "hilarious events" in IAP all collapse down into failure, disappointment and bitty details, and collapse is very funny, e.g. when he tries to be a zombie for a big joke and then has to spend several minutes justifying all the details of his costume ("it's supposed to be a flap of skin") before declaring the problem to be "this country." I'm feeling pretty on the inside just remembering that bit.

The odd thing about IAP is that the "world" in which he is immersed never felt remotely real for a second. But that's how school feels on the first day, and so maybe that's how a hotel feels when your wife has just kicked you out - unreal, pointless, scary. Perhaps some recent tragic divorcee can help us out here? Come on, don't be shy! You've got to start rebuilding your life at some point!

I haven't actually read the original comment article (I just had a look for it but I can't find it. But that's okay, I enjoyed a quick read of many other fine articles.) But that's not the point - IAP made me laugh, very hard, four or five times per episode, and while I'm obviously interested in HOW that happens, and have many currrazy ideas, no theory is going to explain to me why I should stop laughing and convince me that I'm being cruelly tricked into enjoying myself. I'm the patient, you're the doctor, you're looking for the placebo effect - well, what if I like the placebo effect? I'm an idiot because I laugh at his face. How sweet to be an idiot, how sweet, etc.