Plugging these names into the Baby Name Wizard’s NameVoyager (warning: addictive!) shows that:
Dawn was a very popular name for babies in the '60s and '70s, but quickly fell out of favor after that. So it’d be age appropriate for the character on the show, but it definitely sounds dated. Pamela has been more popular, but spiked in the '50s and '60s and fell from popularity after that.
Gareth has not been a top-1000 name in the U.S. in any decade since 1900, so it would definitely strike people as unusual.
As for the show, well, I love the original and this is definitely not as good. I don’t think it’s embarrassing, but if the next couple of episodes aren’t better I’ll probably skip it. It’s basically a timing thing – they haven’t figured out how to smooth out the impact commercial breaks have on the show’s flow. That said, I’m not irate at the thought of a remake – doesn’t hurt the original, which I have on DVD for frequent revisits.
That’s the part that bothered me the most; he seemed to be doing a “Tim” impression. (The thing where he just looks into the camera in sheer disbelief and then goes into “well, back to work.”)
Which was not as funny as Tim.
(I only saw the original about 2 weeks ago, and loved it. Loved every second of it.)
My shallow take - the American version is superior. I don’t like the humor on either version, but this cast is a jillion times easier on the eyes. I like how Dwight is “Hollywood ugly”. His face may be grotesque, but his skin is still as smooth as a porcelain baby.
I’ve never seen the “original” series, so I have nothing to compare it to.
However, after a few minutes the one thing I felt was lacking was a laugh track so at least I’d know what I was supposed to find funny. And I generally love anything approaching comedy.
Maybe it’s just too highbrow for me, but I won’t be watching again.
On the Territorial Army, Just so you get the idea/joke: The TA in England has always been seen as a sort of grown up version of the Boy Scouts - they get to run around in Wales, play with guns, dress up as soldiers etc etc. However there was never any danger of them doing any real fighting (this was true when the show was made).
So the sort of chaps who join the TA are often quite like Gareth, rather odd, rather hung up on their masculinity and would be the sort of person who would own guns if the law allowed. Lots of guns. Lots and lots of guns.
Since the show was filmed the TA has been called up and sent to Iraq - which would rather frighten Gareth I think.
I’m intrigued what they will do with the Finchy character as he is a grotesque figure even by the standards of British TV. I’m also intrigued to see if they have the guts to run the “balck mans cock” joke part.
Are they going to remake the Christmas special? It makes the whole thing even better.
I wouldn’t call it highbrow/lowbrow, necessarily. Just that if you’re the sort of viewer who needs a laugh track, this isn’t the style of comedy that will appeal to you.
There were a couple of moments in the show that were kind of “slow burn” funny - I’m watching it, and a smile starts to creep onto my face, then a chuckle, then I’m laughing out loud. To me, that’s good comedy.
Though I’m a hater based on my love of the original vs. the first episode, I think that there’s some GREAT potential for race relations and political correctness-based humor in this one. That one scene where Steve busts out with something to the effect of “Ain’t nobody gonna hurt my chillun!” in that Aunt Jemima voice tot he horror of the black guy in the office was hilarious - one of the few moments that I laughed out loud instead of just disappointedly shaking my head. I get the impression that they’re going to use more stuff in this direction, since they can’t really do the sort of “Benny Hill” type humor - the playful sexual harrassment (“At some point, everyone’s woken up at the crack of Dawn”, “Would you like to receive some swollen goods?” etc.).
Just watched the second Episode, correct me if I’m wrong but it is an original isn’t it. If so there is some good potential. There were some real uncomfortable funny moments like his insistance on doing the Chris Rock Routeen and his idea of a team building excersise was just horrible.
It had a few laugh out loud moments. anyone else watch it?
The meeting with Mr. Brown borrowed elements from one of the British first season episodes, where Brent kept trying to wrest control away from the visiting consultant in order to remain the center of attention. But most of last night’s episode was original material. Also, no matter how bad Brent seemed, nobody ever complained about him to his superiors, and he seemed to do whatever he wanted without reprisals. Apparently Michael Scott is not that well-off.
So far, I’m really enjoying it, and I’ll keep tuning back in. Although I own the entire box set of the British series, I’ve only seen the first season so far.
Didn’t see the original and didn’t catch the pilot, so last night’s episode was my first exposure.
And maybe my last. Nothing good there. Just Steve Carrell acting like an ass (and overacting like an ass) along with a bunch of extras with pained looks on their faces.
Last night was my first exposure to The Office (British or American), and I thought it had potential. Steve Carrell was waaaaaay too over the top (I suspect his British counterpart is a little more subtle?), but when that weirdish employee said he was sexually attracted to two races, white and indian, and then they had a closeup of the Indian woman, I almost spit out my drink it was so funny. If I’m going to continue watching the show, I’d like to see less Carrell, or at least have his character toned down, but I’ll be tuning in a few more times to see how it goes.
Can someone help me out with the premise of the show? I find it odd that a paper company would have so many distribution offices that they would have one in a place as small as Scranton. I assumed that a small English town could have such an office because England is so relatively small that you could put a distribution center nearly anywhere and be within a half day’s delivery anywhere in England. But Scranton? And then there’s another office nearby that is going to be merged. How could they even end up with two distribution centers in small towns so close to each other in the first place?
At the risk of stereotyping (kikki kikki kikki), I think the idea is that British people are more likely to be passive about an irritating and offensive boss, while American employees are more confrontational and likely to Do Something About Him. Or at least not be so oblique about it (a la Oscar).
Scranton’s not that small. About 75,000. We’re within a 2-2.5 hours of both Philly and NYC, we have an “international” airport, Interstate 81 and the PA Turnpike Northeast Extension are right there (pointing out my office window), indoor plumbing, and electricity.
Our labor force is cheap, compared to larger cities. Come to town, offer $8.50/hr to start, and watch people fall all over each other to get that job.
How it could have any more than ZERO effect on how or why one would enjoy this show is beyond me.
If you really need it to get that the show is a satirical somtimes silly look at office culture, and not a documentary about the paper industry in America, then, try this : two paper companies that cut trees near Scranton co-existed for a long time, and they both had distribution centers there for many years. Through a merger in 2003, they became one. Since 2003, they have been streamlining their operations and realized that the two distribution centers in close proximity had to merge in order to remain viable in the uber-competitive paper distribution market. Inevitably, this will lead to the loss of some jobs.
