TV moments of 2004

Posted by: Kevin-W on 27 December 2004

We've had the albums/musical moments, so let's have some TV, eh?

I'd choose (in no particular order)

1. David Threlfall as Frank Gallagher in Paul Abbott's Shameless- an effete, hopeless drunk is somehow transformed into an everyman, a hero for our times even.

2.The Long Firm BBC drama at is very best.

3. Gavin Esler trying to get sense out of Mark E Smith on Newsnight the day John Peel passed away.

4. Peep Show Channel 4 provided this low-key gem, comedy of the year, beating even Green Wing. It certainly pissed all over Little Britain, which for its second series decided to present us with a series of catchphrases and little else (has this one run its course?).

5. The Smoking Room BBC3's new comedy series was a fantastically worthy runner-up. I had great expectations for Max And Paddy's Road To Nowhere but it was a bit disappointing, wasn't it?

6. Whicker's War The old smoothie served up a moving and engrossing two-parter on his experiences in Italy in the War. A real surprise...

7. That crap chef almost poisoning Gordon Ramsey with a rancid scallop on Ramsay's Kitchen Nightmares.

8. The BBC's coverage of the D-Day 60 celebrations. And to think some of you want to scrap the licence fee...

9. A superb documentary (can't remember the channel) on the Xmas Truce in 1914.

10. Watching any number of Govt. ministers and other New Labour muppets squirm on Question Time. Or maybe just the last-ever Frasier

Normally, I would have said that Rebecca Loos wanking a pig on The Farm was my TV moment of the year, but I never saw it, so I can't.

The end of Sex & The City, possibly the worst, most irritating TV show of all time was also cause for celebration.

Your choices?

Kevin

Posted on: 27 December 2004 by Tim Jones

Seinfeld finally coming out on DVD.

Tim

Posted on: 27 December 2004 by Deane F

quote:
Originally posted by Tim Jones:
Seinfeld finally coming out on DVD.

Tim

Tim

Did you mean to say "Seinfeld finally coming out, on DVD"?

Deane

Posted on: 28 December 2004 by rodwsmith

quote:
Funniest thing on TV was/is _QI_. Very informative too - did you know that red Amarties are one of the few things that are still coloured by crushed beetles, or that the Ancient Greeks made their dildos out of bread?

You obviously didn't listen hard enough: cochineal is made from "bugs", not "beetles". Mind you I can't remember what Fry said the difference was...

Good choices all...

Rod

Posted on: 29 December 2004 by BLT

"In direct contrast, and also on BBC 2, possibly the only truly memorable TV moment for me was The Power of Nightmares, a three-part documentary on the politics of fear(mongering) by our Western leaders. Very insightful/interesting, and, exceptionally rare for a TV program, intellectually stimulating too."

I'd go along with this, too. My other nomination would be "Status Anxiety" by that bloke with the French sounding name (which totally escapes me at the moment, despite having a couple of his books at home

)
"

Posted on: 29 December 2004 by 7V

quote:
Originally posted by J. A. Toon:
In direct contrast, and also on BBC 2, possibly the only truly memorable TV moment for me was _The Power of Nightmares_, a three-part documentary on the politics of fear(mongering) by our Western leaders. Very insightful/interesting, and, exceptionally rare for a TV program, intellectually stimulating too.

It should be mandatory viewing (and especially for all Americans who chose to vote Bush in (again).

I agree that the programme was interesting and stimulating. It was also, of course, propaganda with its own clear political agenda. I'm sure that many Americans who voted for Bush would see through that just as they saw through Michael Moore's worthy effort.

As a fictional drama, I liked the BBC's Spooks series.

Steve M

Posted on: 29 December 2004 by matthewr

7v said "It was also, of course, propaganda with its own clear political agenda. I'm sure that many Americans who voted for Bush would see through that just as they saw through Michael Moore's worthy effort"

It was a brilliant and very serious documentary and not remotely propaganda. One might disagree with Curtis's central thesis but it was well researched and argued and to compare it with Moore's obviously flawed polemic is just wrong.

Matthew

PS I'd go with Kevin;s list which is a pretty good one. Except I did see Rebecca with the pig.

Posted on: 29 December 2004 by Derek Wright

Bodies - on BBC3 and BBC2

Put targets in the NHS in the spotlight
along with a few other challenges

Derek

<< >>

Posted on: 29 December 2004 by 7V

quote:
Originally posted by matthewr:
It was a brilliant and very serious documentary and not remotely propaganda. One might disagree with Curtis's central thesis but it was well researched and argued and to compare it with Moore's obviously flawed polemic is just wrong.

It was well researched, well presented and serious.

I did disagree with Curtis' central thesis, mainly for the reason that 'fear' is widely used as a tactic by totalitarian regimes and isn't generally required in democracies. Contrary to Curtis' interesting interpretation of Leo Strauss' philosophy, there is no imminent danger of US or European societies breaking down just because the women wear bikinis, even without 'fear'.

As for 'not remotely propoganda', I assume you say this tongue-in-cheek, although it's difficult to tell on a chat forum. The brilliant use of lighting, shadow, full-face, profile, close-up and distance shots to separate the 'good guys' from the 'bad' and the clever use of spooky music are all well established propoganda tools.

Of course anyone making a political point in a documentary is making propaganda. This documentary was a well polished and quite effective example.

Steve M

Posted on: 29 December 2004 by matthewr

"Contrary to Curtis' interesting interpretation of Leo Strauss' philosophy, there is no imminent danger of US or European societies breaking down just because the women wear bikinis, even without 'fear'."

That wasn't what Curtis said at all though.

"The brilliant use of lighting, shadow, full-face, profile, close-up ..."

Are just effective tools of the filmaker used to make his point more forcefully, and in Curtis' case very much part of his style.

"Of course anyone making a political point in a documentary is making propaganda"

Well that's a very narrow definition and is rather avoiding the prejorative notions usually associated with 'progaganda' (a tactic widely used by totalitarian regimes and not normally required in documentaries).

He made a documentary about politics, presented his research and drew his conclusions. His research seemed sound, his case was well argued and he made some compelling points. He draws ambitious, not to say far-fetched, conclusions that can certainly be argued with. Buy to just dismiss this all as "propaganda" that people would easily "see through" seems not only unjustified but remarkably unfair. Indeed, it's just the sort of flippant dismissal that Curtis carefully avoids in his films.

Matthew

Posted on: 29 December 2004 by 7V

Matthew,

We're arguing over semantics here. When a political filmmaker uses those 'tools' to show some characters, viewpoints and events in a better light and others in a not such good light, I call it propaganda. Clearly you don't.

However, I certainly didn't 'just dismiss this all as "propaganda"'. On the contrary, I described the documentary as 'interesting and stimulating' and later as 'well researched, well presented and serious', in addition to being propaganda.

I think that we're arguing over the issue of whether or not we would describe the programme as 'propaganda' to skirt over the basic fact that we hold differing views on its subject matter.

We don't live in a dictatorship or totalitarian regime and we're allowed to hold differing views. It's fine. Perhaps we should leave it at that.

Steve M

Posted on: 29 December 2004 by Tim Jones

Deane -

Yes I did

Derek - There were some good things about 'Bodies', but I wouldn't take it as a portrayal of reality.

Tim