The new series is all over the place
The 2nd series just aint funny, series 1 was hilarious ive probaly laughed a handfull of times in the new series it just aint funny, it seems to rushed
shareSeems like some people are disappointed with series 2- Once an idea has been done once it is never going to be as fresh or as funny again, even with a sprinkling of new characters and a new location. The name "Nighty Night" is supposed to express the cloying sense of middle-class British politeness which grips many of the characters; Don, Cath, Terry (in series 1,) Sue etc- or so said Julia Davis. To me, it is also a bit sinister when you consider the very dark and tragic events caused by Jill's selfish and murdering ways.
This very dark comedy gains its power from the fact that all of the characters are pretty pathetic and powerless - except for Jill who does whatever she wants and gets away with it- although her fate at the end of the second series remains to be seen as new husband Glenn begins to realize that he has been framed, in spite of having lost a large amount of brain material. The scenes where Jill is trying desperately to impregnate herself with Don's sperm are hilarious, as is the scene at the end of the episode where Glenn is spewing up toads, condoms and bicycle parts after almost drowning in another of Jill's attempts on his life.
Although Nighty Night has a very unrealistic basis in some ways, the exaggerated politeness and sexual repression of Cath, the mid-life crisis of Don and the ridiculous self-centred bullshyte merchant at The Trees centre really ring a bell with my own experiences.
All power to Julia Davis, I say. This is a great achievement; well-written and stylish, very modern. It looks as if it was as much fun to make as it is to watch. British comedy has moved on from The Parrot Sketch, thank God. I'm so pleased that there is a second series; it may be a little tired after the brilliant first one but it is great to see these characters on the screen again. If you think the second series is not funny then I don't see how you could have thought that much of the first.
[deleted]
exactly how i feel
shareAll power to Julia Davis, I say. This is a great achievement; well-written and stylish, very modern. It looks as if it was as much fun to make as it is to watch. British comedy has moved on from The Parrot Sketch, thank God. I'm so pleased that there is a second series; it may be a little tired after the brilliant first one but it is great to see these characters on the screen again. If you think the second series is not funny then I don't see how you could have thought that much of the first.
Well said.
I must say, I am a massive fan of Series One, and I will be the first to admit that I was rather disappointed with the first couple of episodes of series 2 - however: only just now having found the time to see the third, I must say I found it rather funnier than the two before it.
I only hope it continues; I would add that nothing in this current series matches the first couple of episodes in series one - the first of all still being the best.
I generally found that with the first series, each episode got slightly less effective and less funny than the one before - with the possible exception of episode V where Terry had his funeral.
I think I am guilty of expecting too much from this current run. It isn't as funny, it is a bit all over the place, and it is something of a let down. However, I did find certain bits to chuckle at in episode III; just not as much as before.
Still: it is good to see Jill and co back on our screens, and though it falls far short of the first series, it's still miles ahead of anything else
If you keep asking me I'll melt away in the summer air®
AGREED. i loved the first season and have seen each eppisode many many times. once i finnally got my hands on season 2 i sat down and watched it all at once. it's a very funny, very crude, and very smart i think.
shareI can somewhat understand the criticism of the second series, but I still thing it's great.
Personally, I think the first series is brilliant because it has the perfect setting for such a character as Jill and fits the humour really well. It's also got a great supporting cast; the seemingly subtle, everday types all slotted around the monstrous Jill.
However, I don't think the second series is all that bad. Granted, there's a lot more simplistic, overt moments and a lot more slapstick and visual humour than in the first series. But the sharp dialogue is still there, it's just overshadowed somewhat by the more OTT gags and a group of characters that aren't as subtle as the ones in the first series. People like Jacques and Bluebird are capable of saying things equally as bizarre as Jill and many of Glenn's antics rival Jill's. Also, other returning characters like Sue and Linda are far more bizarre than in the first series and more than once, rival Jill's behaviour which takes away from the idea of the first series where it's Jill who is the bizarre and malicious one who is exploiting and running rings round a rather pleasant bunch of people.
I still like the second series, but I think the difference of style is really evident between the two series'. I did struggle to appreciate the first two episodes, and the second series only really returned to form when things settled down; when Jill and Linda began working at the Trees and forced their way into Cath's new life, when Sue returned and started living with Cath etc...
I do think there were a few times in the first two episodes though that remained true to the first series though (the lengthy scene with Jill and Linda at Sue's house in episode one for example).
Obviously if there was to be another series (however unlikely this is) it'll likely mean another big shift in setting and probably style, although i do actually like the sound of the idea that Julia and Mark joke about (setting the third series in Spain. I think such a setting would really suit Jill's character, lol)
[deleted]