#i made sure lucy and tim had the same number of frames in each one but it seems that the longer it plays the more out of sync it gets :

[sj9112]

Henry Yates: A Rebuttal

Sorry to get a bit wordy here, but I desperately needed to get this off my chest:

https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2019/may/27/how-not-going-out-heroes-went-from-cat-fight-chemistry-to-child-saddled-losers

I’m not a person who usually responds to stuff like this because opinions are just opinions and everyone has one. But I was frankly offended by the way I, as a viewer, was characterized by this piece and I cannot let such glib ignorance go unchallenged. Honestly, this makes me very, very angry. The writer displays such a complete and fundamental misunderstanding of the programme and what makes it watchable that it truly blows my mind. I understand that some things are not to everyone’s taste, but did we even watch the same show? A few points that I specifically would like to address:

1)      The idea that Lee’s hand was “forced” into settling the will-they-or-won’t-they tension, thus destroying the show. He’s getting on in years, FFS. Do you honestly think you’d still enjoy watching the show if you had to watch a 50-year-old man lusting after his landlady? Ew. That tension HAD to be resolved – you cannot sustain it indefinitely. NO SHOW CAN.

2)      Secondly, do not presume to speak on behalf of all viewers of the show, Mr. Henry Yates. I for one DO give a damn about Lee and Lucy’s relationship after they got together, perhaps too much (though I will never apologize for Lee and Lucy being my OTP), and I KNOW that I am not the only one. I am also not a sad, lazy, and bored middle-aged parent resigned to watching the show every week. The episodes are, in fact, the highlight of my week, and I always throw them on to cheer myself up. I’m also an American, so I make time at 4 pm local time to brew myself a cuppa and tune into my satellite to watch these episodes as they’re broadcast – I go out of my way to watch this show live in a way that no other programme can motivate me to do. Perhaps keep your insulting generalizations of an audience you know NOTHING about to yourself, “kind sir.”

3)      I also think that it is highly insulting to Lee Mack to wrongly assume that he is being forced “at gunpoint” to co-write these scripts as if he no longer cares and that attaching his name to the scripts is a badge of shame. You do know that this show is his passion project, yes? And that he devotes 10 months out of every year working hard on this show in between all of his other commitments? That this show is the thing he is most proud of in his career? And he has every right to be – look at recent episodes like Escape Room or Parachute, how smartly constructed those plots were. While some moves and lines can be anticipated, the writing takes clever and delightful turns that never fail to amuse me (and perhaps others, though I don’t presume to speak for all viewers UNLIKE SOME PEOPLE). I personally can see the care that so many people put into every shot of these episodes. Small details in the set design, the colour-coordination in the costuming, the actors’ choreography, and the blocking/framing of each scene all work very closely together to emphasize the characters, their traits, and the episode’s story. The live episode was a bloody marvel and a lot of effort was put forth by cast and crew alike – they didn’t make it easy on themselves and they acquitted themselves more than admirably! It takes a very passionate team to complete a project like that! There is not an ounce of fat on these scripts, either; every line, look, and gesture serves a purpose for the episode’s plot. The writing is tightly constructed in a manner that I can only marvel at and envy. Take Holiday Share, for example; a little throwaway line in act one ends up becoming the crux of the rising action in act three. As an English literary scholar, I find the scripts fascinating to study (and have written more than a few academic term papers about them in my undergraduate career). YOU, Mr. Yates, may not be impressed with them, but surely the fact that I, in my own capacity, find much to admire within them surely counts for something? It’s almost as if different people can assign different values to the same art! Shocking, I know!

4)      It seems you object most to the “groaners” and the frequent trotting-out of Bobby Ball’s shtick. Go back and watch the earlier series, the one-liners and zingers have always been there, especially when Tim Vine was on the show. They’re a staple of the show, always have been. I’m sorry they’ve ceased to work with you, but they haven’t suddenly “appeared” to torment you in the later series. And while Bobby Ball may not appeal to you, perhaps you ought to take a step back and wonder if it’s broad humour in general that you’re opposed to, because this show’s humour is quite broad (and, guess what, it always has been). If you don’t like that, fine, but don’t pretend that the show hasn’t always been like this. Go back to the earlier series and you will not find it to be as nuanced as you seem to think it was – in fact, it was worse. Especially in the first and second series: the scripts were weaker, Lee and Tim nearly turned to the camera/studio audience after every punchline, and the chemistry between the core cast had not even begun to be built (or, in the case of series one, it was lacking completely). Lee himself has said that the show did not start to find its stride until series 3, and you can track the progression of the show over time – Lee’s writing got sharper, the cast formed dynamic working relationships which only improved with familiarity (I thought Memory from this series was a striking example of how well Lee and Sally play off of each other in a way that wouldn’t have been possible in the show’s earlier years), and the characters have truly come into their own. I am being 100% honest when I say that I have found each successive series an improvement upon the last and that makes me truly excited for what the show will produce next.

5)      I always find it infuriating when people laud Lee’s work on WILTY while slagging off NGO and/or his standup with the same breath. You’re not a fan of Lee’s work, then; you’re a fan of WILTY. Lee undoubtedly demonstrates a quick-witted brilliance on Would I Lie to You?, but his talents do not end there. While it is by no means a requirement to like or appreciate absolutely everything an entertainer does, I find it hard to separate the little quips and “groaners” of Lee’s that light up the WILTY stage from the same quips and “groaners” he’s carefully honed and tested for his scripts or his routines. The humour is the same; the environment is different, but it’s still the same. Maybe that doesn’t work for you in a sitcom or on the stage, and that’s fine; but don’t call yourself a fan of Lee’s work when you think his accomplishments begin and end with a show that he literally rolls up to and expends minimal effort into and that he holds no merit outside of it.

6)      This goes back to point number 2 a bit, but I do feel as though I need to explain why this piece offended me so deeply. I do not wish to go into the traumatic circumstances that led me to begin watching Not Going Out in the first place, nor the pervading circumstances that keep me so attached to the show. Let it suffice to say that, while I can appreciate what they’re trying to do, I just can’t engage with comedy dramas or more darker comedy programmes because it’s all a little hashtag #tooreal in my actual life. Not Going Out provides a much-needed bit of escapism from my real life that I can’t really get from other programmes. It’s one of the precious few shows I can turn on and feel like I’m experiencing joy again. Not Going Out is a simple show, a light-hearted show, and a fun show; it doesn’t need to be anything more, but everyone does what they need to do so well. I can appreciate all of the details in each episode as I watch it repeatedly on a loop, sometimes 2-3 times a day, to help myself feel better (and the iPlayer doesn’t even work in my country). Far from the bored, passive viewer you paint me to be, I cling to this show like it’s a lifeline. Which it is, for me. This programme has done so much to help me in times of mental and physical distress, and I love it so, so, much for that.

7)      Now, sir, since you have made so many gross presumptions about myself and how I feel as a viewer of Not Going Out, I will do the same for you: come on, now. The only reason you think Lee’s brilliant on WILTY and that NGO used to be great is because he won a BAFTA for WILTY and NGO won a Rose D’Or in 2007, isn’t it?

I’m sorry, sir, that you have ceased to find amusement watching Not Going Out, but I, for one, have been enthusiastically attached to this latest series and am as far from tired of it as I possibly could be. I’d suggest you leave the viewing to us, switch off your telly, and attempt to remove your head from your own arse – it surely must be beginning to smell in there.

#Lee Mack #not going out #ngo #the guardian #henry yates #op ed #sorry not sorry #i love this show #all right i'll get off my soap box now