Nathan Barley comes to TV

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (1030 of them)
TVGoHome was on the telly AND it was a book

Alienus Quam Reproba (blueski), Monday, 14 February 2005 17:22 (twenty-one years ago)

It looks like Brooker forgot to pay his website hosting bills.

Pashmina (Pashmina), Monday, 14 February 2005 17:23 (twenty-one years ago)

Oh, broken link.

http://pzat.meep.org/cunt/

Momus (Momus), Monday, 14 February 2005 17:23 (twenty-one years ago)

must have completely passed me by.

cozen (Cozen), Monday, 14 February 2005 17:24 (twenty-one years ago)

Maybe you're too young. It was very big in 1999.

Momus (Momus), Monday, 14 February 2005 17:25 (twenty-one years ago)

the tvgohome site was working as of last week, maybe they took it down on purpose?

cutty (mcutt), Monday, 14 February 2005 17:26 (twenty-one years ago)

actually, going along with something else momus said above, the one bit i did find funny was the whole 'it's the best thing i've ever read', 'what was the second best thing you've ever read?' conversation but only because i thought the bloke had answered 'Heidi'

koogs (koogs), Monday, 14 February 2005 17:59 (twenty-one years ago)

According to Bex is way better.

jel -- (jel), Monday, 14 February 2005 18:01 (twenty-one years ago)

That Heidi line would have been much funnier coming from Brent, which it easily could have. That was another problem I had with it - almost all the acting was rub.

Steve I thought the BoC track was something off MHTRTC - I'd know it if I heard it again.

Matt DC (Matt DC), Monday, 14 February 2005 18:10 (twenty-one years ago)

the acting was fine, tho some were better than others.

how did the guy at SugarApe (he looks 'senior' i.e. around the same age as Dan if not older) find out about the 'southern French' thing so quickly do you suppose? given the only way was for WoS bloke to tell him about it? it was mildly amusing but totally unlikely.

i keep thinking back to the bit where he joins in the CMB game in the pub and how much i like it, almost as if i liked the fact that he was enjoying the game, this almost being heart-warming, that here's where rather than revealing himself to be a fellow Idiot he reveals himself to be a fellow...human? not sure, but it seems like a fun variant on RockPaperScissors i.e. harmless fun. what was interesting was when the receptionist girl (why is she the coolest person in the programme? is she completely together and smarter than everyone else? then why is she 'just' the receptionist etc.? age old device but intriguing in this context) told him off for doing this he immediately stopped. so it seems Dan is saved yet stifled by the girl and what appears to be an unrequited crush on her. also intriguing.

i'm surprised how much i enjoyed it based on these thoughts.

has there been this kind of discussion with According To Bex?

Alienus Quam Reproba (blueski), Monday, 14 February 2005 18:24 (twenty-one years ago)

If only she wore a trucker hat.

jel -- (jel), Monday, 14 February 2005 18:31 (twenty-one years ago)

also, one of the conundrums of the writing of mark s' B's above: if you want to write on the actual cutting edge (yeah yeah who knows where that is) you've got to argue into yourself and into your writing anti-A stances, qualities, and quality => what I mean: dan ashcroft roundly throughout the program dismisses these ppl as idiots but yet continually throughout doesn't show any insight or novelty himself (the weekend on sunday episode being exemplary) (but it's a bit more complicated than tht cs that whole ep is bound up w. class (contra-)distinctions). what I am saying, in precis: if dan ashcroft isn't an idiot too, then how to prove it? or: the idiots are stoopid, dan ashcroft stupid? < /caffeine>

cozen (Cozen), Monday, 14 February 2005 18:48 (twenty-one years ago)

no, it made no sense to me either.

cozen (Cozen), Monday, 14 February 2005 18:55 (twenty-one years ago)

sorry tht sounds elitist: because it is: those are the concerns of B not me: I don't care either way.

cozen (Cozen), Monday, 14 February 2005 19:19 (twenty-one years ago)

Not to barge in and be all north american about it, but is there anywhere online that caters to my Nathan Barley curiosity? Anything by Chris Morris usually seems to be stopped at the border, but I'm really wanting to watch this whole Barley thing and the uk torrent sites seem to be shutting me out.

mike h. (mike h.), Monday, 14 February 2005 19:51 (twenty-one years ago)

tvtorrents.ws has it, I believe.

Lazyhour, Tuesday, 15 February 2005 01:04 (twenty-one years ago)

And hello, I'm new! I found episode 1 to be interesting and relatively absorbing. Not high on laughs, but I could sense plenty of potential. I just hope they don't mine the exact same seam in the exact same way for five more weeks... Gripping developments, please, chaps!

Lazyhour, Tuesday, 15 February 2005 01:08 (twenty-one years ago)

.. huh. Dan's descent into hell by his own hand. Nathan barely seems to be in the episode at all, and when he does it's like some overgrown child. It's not what I was expecting.

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Friday, 18 February 2005 23:10 (twenty-one years ago)

Chris Morris does "funny music" well. Best bit of Episode 2, improving generally, still not "well plastic".

why must we cut onions? (Lynskey), Friday, 18 February 2005 23:14 (twenty-one years ago)

now I'm not so sure.

cozen (Cozen), Friday, 18 February 2005 23:15 (twenty-one years ago)

Why do all the characters spend their entire time listening to DM and Jemini?

Dom Passantino (Dom Passantino), Friday, 18 February 2005 23:21 (twenty-one years ago)

First half of tonight's was a bit lame - trundling along the same towpath as last week's - but the second half was some kinda laff riot. Well abject.

Michael Jones (MichaelJ), Saturday, 19 February 2005 00:18 (twenty-one years ago)

I FOUND THAT ESSENCE RARE ITS WHAT I LIVE FOR


What is up with the song choices for this?

Hari A$hur$t (Toaster), Saturday, 19 February 2005 00:47 (twenty-one years ago)

Afterwards, I watched episode 1, which I'd taped but not seen.

Don't tell anyone, but Momus is generally OTM throughout the thread.

rather gentle example of him refusing to make his assistant coffee

And not-so-gentle example of him demanding credit for the animation.

(when he laughs at the end of this scene, he's the spitting image of Ricky T)

why didn't Dan's sister walk horrified out of Trashbat Towers after seeing poor Pingu electrocuted is what i'm wondering

Because she's a more interesting character if she has a weakness for one of Nathan's more acceptable evils, and because he (and the assistant) are standing there and because she's beholden to him. And because otherwise she'd just be a copy of the receptionist.

You don't actually see her face in that scene past the initial reaction shot.

An interesting thing not so far mentioned is that the first episode is completely neutral as regards whether Nathan is helping Claire because he fancies her, or because she's Dan's sister, or just because she is "creative" and he's overprovisioned. Apart from - the splitsecond in Place where it becomes clear that he's lying about his offer.

In intonation and general facial features, Jonnaton Yeah? reminds me of Armando Ianucci. Himself and the guy with the afro + the lines make me laugh most of the time.

I assumed that watching the first episode would make it clear what the noise maker was doing in Dan & Claire's flat. I was wrong.

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Saturday, 19 February 2005 00:48 (twenty-one years ago)

The quick zoom editing annoys the fuck out of me.

Is there an actual attempt to get us disgusted at ourselves by becoming emotionally involved in the tramp races? Are we supposed (if it wasn't sped-up to fuck) to share Dan's focus on how many teeth are pulled?

The Nathan Barley question: Does he produce rubbish because of his priveledged background, and its effect on his relationship to his life and the world (basivally: a giant toybox), or because he's just no fucking good?

Dear god, that "you're playing rubbish!" "what?" exchange was terrible.

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Saturday, 19 February 2005 01:09 (twenty-one years ago)

This just in: I say 'fuck' a lot.

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Saturday, 19 February 2005 01:10 (twenty-one years ago)

I haven't seen the second ep yet (if anyone's got bandwidth and is hosting a torrent, mail me at momus at t-online.de), but I wanted to note one thing that annoyed me about the first one. The way women are used as nothing more than an embodiment of superego, projections of male self-loathing. There's no characterisation of the female characters at all, because they're not satirised. That might sound contradictory; satire is, after all, seen as an exaggeration of something, a way to stereotype it. But actually I think that's just a stereotype of what satire does. In fact, satire is a somewhat complex liminal zone where realistic ambiguities and ambivalences are permitted, where you can say something without really meaning it, where you can try things out. That makes the satirised male characters rather complex. The female characters, because they're off-limits to satire, are off-limits to complexity too. This is a nice example of how designating someone a 'good object' is not always doing them a favour, and how idealisation of women can also be a form of misogyny. Especially when women are made mere stooges for male self-doubt.

Momus (Momus), Saturday, 19 February 2005 03:44 (twenty-one years ago)

(Let's see, Morris and Brooker went to all-male, all-white public schools. Therefore of course the black female character is an embodiment of their collective guilty conscience. But not, alas, much more.)

Momus (Momus), Saturday, 19 February 2005 04:16 (twenty-one years ago)

(torrent on uknova.com)

zappi (joni), Saturday, 19 February 2005 04:45 (twenty-one years ago)

Yeah, but they're not letting anyone new join up. Kicked away the ladders.

Momus (Momus), Saturday, 19 February 2005 05:17 (twenty-one years ago)

The second episode made Dan Ashcroft even less sympathetic/more pathetic, annoying [even more than Barley, SugarApes etc], and made Claire the main entry-point/sympathetic charecter. So we're not sposed to be cheering on the main charecter (Dan) anymore then? Okay. Wierd prog.

David Merryweather (DavidM), Saturday, 19 February 2005 10:41 (twenty-one years ago)

I'm loving this thread far more than the show - proof that Nathan Barley's better in print than visual?

The 8-Mile sequence was a bit fun though. Loved that line about "tending the garden", or whatever it was. I was high on honey and lemon and St John's Wort.

Deerninja B4rim4, Plus-Tech Whizz Kid (Barima), Saturday, 19 February 2005 11:33 (twenty-one years ago)

Nathan Barley might be a cunt, but I was impressed that his ringtone was the theme from The Prisoner.

caitlin (caitlin), Saturday, 19 February 2005 11:40 (twenty-one years ago)

I missed it cos I was in the pub and I don't have a uknova account.

Jarlr'mai (jarlrmai), Saturday, 19 February 2005 12:32 (twenty-one years ago)

if you are in the UK, there is a repeat late tonight.

Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Saturday, 19 February 2005 12:59 (twenty-one years ago)

I don't understand. If The Idiots are supposed to be so easy to distract with bright shiny things, why do they still give a shit about an article Dan Ashcroft wrote several weeks ago? Also, why couldn't anyone come up with a better collective title for them than The Idiots? It's an insult a small child would use. Is that the point?

My main problem with this programme is that they're all cunts (I'm not sure Chris Morris or Charlie Brooker knows how to write anyone that isn't), which is fine if that's the statement you're making, but I think that in order to sustain a sitcom over a whole series, you need at least some measure of sympathy for at least one of the main characters, and I can't see how you can have any sympathy for any one of those guys. I've given this a two-episode chance now, I don't think I'll bother with the third.

accentmonkey (accentmonkey), Saturday, 19 February 2005 13:04 (twenty-one years ago)

Also, why couldn't anyone come up with a better collective title for them than The Idiots? It's an insult a small child would use. Is that the point?

(Barley voice over, reading from Ashcroft's terribly stilted and banal article) They use the word 'cool', it is their favourite word. The idiot doesn't think about what it is saying. Thinking is rubbish. And rubbish isn't cool. Stuff and shit is cool.

Barley aloud, admiringly Oh Ashcroft, Ashcroft!

Momus (Momus), Saturday, 19 February 2005 13:16 (twenty-one years ago)

the funniest thing about the second ep was dan's editor making his long horse face, whend dan was pleading about his title as 'the preacherman'.

cozen (Cozen), Saturday, 19 February 2005 13:18 (twenty-one years ago)

The trailers for this look great, especially the "15peter20" one.

Pashmina (Pashmina), Saturday, 19 February 2005 16:17 (twenty-one years ago)

http://www.sugarape.com

James Mitchell (James Mitchell), Saturday, 19 February 2005 16:48 (twenty-one years ago)

OMG LOOK AT THE CAPTIONS ON THE MAGAZINE

http://18hz.deid.net/sugarape/res/fountain.jpg

cutty (mcutt), Saturday, 19 February 2005 17:17 (twenty-one years ago)

Yeah, I noticed that.

James Mitchell (James Mitchell), Saturday, 19 February 2005 17:18 (twenty-one years ago)

Is that an official site linked to the show or a tribute site?

Momus (Momus), Saturday, 19 February 2005 18:43 (twenty-one years ago)

Barley's a bit more of a loud wideboy on this, isn't he, almost well-meaning at times, rather than the smug posho keeping up a constant facade of detached, amused intelligence as he was portrayed in TVGH.

Momus, I'm sure I've seen a few different 'welcome to our newest user...' things on UkNova recently, are you sure it's not just that you have to keep checking back until the membership's dropped below 25,000? They've been kicking off people who never upload recently so it ought to drop fairly often.

Michael Philip Philip Philip Philip Annoyman v1.0 (Ferg), Saturday, 19 February 2005 18:47 (twenty-one years ago)

I'm pretty certain it's not official.

James Mitchell (James Mitchell), Saturday, 19 February 2005 19:25 (twenty-one years ago)

Yeah, I just managed to join UK Nova. Ta!

Momus (Momus), Saturday, 19 February 2005 19:41 (twenty-one years ago)

holy shit, no one has mentioned choose your beggar? tramp racing? teeth pulling?

the junkie singing songs to little kids?

cutty (mcutt), Saturday, 19 February 2005 19:42 (twenty-one years ago)

After two episodes Nathan Barley (the series) just seems toothless and unconvincing. Are the plot twists meant to be deliberately clunky and unbelievable? Having the bailiff come around take the camera or the internet connection be lost just as Dan's won the money is pathetic - these would be unconvincing on My Family or Joy of Bex. Similarly - has any article published in a style mag elevated the journalist into a 'preacher man' symbol of cool? Of course not, 'the idiots' would have bigger, although perhaps more pathetic, distractions to worry them. And say what you like about Barley, at least he gets things done - his party actually looked fun - Dan just lets things happen to him.

Things I did like: when Dan called his sis 'fat arms' during their argument - about the only thing that suggested real emotion; the junkie choir guy's song - XL or Rough Trade should sign him now.

Peep Show satirised this scene a lot better, and it wasn't even the main focus of that show. In Peep Show Jeremy and Super Hands' 'band' was more convincingly lame, and, especially, there was Super Hands getting addicted to crack to look cool ("Mmmm, this crack is so moreish".)

Raw Patrick (Raw Patrick), Saturday, 19 February 2005 19:48 (twenty-one years ago)

'you've gone to piddle' made me laugh. as did vince noir's Kid 606 style music. NB came out of that episode quite well, was doing vaguely creative things passably well, pity about that hat. episode seemed to be over quickly.

(wasn't the prisoner theme part of the mashup in the club? had all sorts of things in there that i remember from my youth. blancmange?)

koogs (koogs), Saturday, 19 February 2005 19:59 (twenty-one years ago)

After two episodes Nathan Barley (the series) just seems toothless and unconvincing. Are the plot twists meant to be deliberately clunky and unbelievable?

With respect, Mr Raw, convincing plot and real emotions is not the point of NB. Is it convincing that Dan Ashcroft has had Pete's Dragon out for seven years and owes £2492 and has to play Russian Tramp Racing to earn the money back? Of course it's not. But is it convincing that I went to my local video store on Avenue A on September 12th, 2001, only to be told that, even though they'd closed on 9/11, I still had to pay a fine? Would you believe that if you saw it in Nathan Barley? You probably wouldn't, it would just sound like typical farcical Brooker/Morris atrocity hokum. But it happened. It's 4 Real. Life has also lost the plot, which is why plot is irrelevant. What matters in satire is that we recognise our folly and laugh at ourselves. And, you know, writing for Vice magazine, do I recognise it when the Sugarape editor says to Dan "Stupid people think it's cool, smart people think it's a joke, also cool"? Yes, I do. Verifuckingsimilitude, right there, dude. I also think the hipster vocab is terrific, approaching Burgess and Orwell in its inventiveness:

"Hey you should come, dollsnatch, it's going to be totally fucking Mexico."

"Check this, m'niggas, online tramp racing from Russia, totally de-reg, yeah?"

"I'm going to sleep
Oh yeah, respect for that. Catch some susans.
Yeah, break a Chinaman, yeah?"

Lines like these aren't just funny and inventive, they tie hipsterism in to zones of disorder (Mexico, Russia, China), and that's been a crucial element to every subculture. The atrocity and poverty of these zones of disorder both offsets the privilege of the bourgeois kids who buy into them (by, for instance, gambling on tramp teeth-pulling) by making them seem worldly, and shows them up the moral abyss they live in. I'd put it to you that the verisimilitude of satire works at that kind of level, and not at the level of "Would he really have pulled out the plug just when he won all the money?"

Momus (Momus), Monday, 21 February 2005 02:51 (twenty-one years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.