I don’t think it was supposed to be a funny prank, I think we were meant to understand that Pam isn’t a natural prankster and hadn’t come up with a very clever idea.
That’s what I meant. I was under the assumption that it was perhaps a TV documentary. If it were a feature length film, then I would wonder why they wouldn’t have what they need by now. I’m aware that there can be feature length documentaries, (or even TV documentaries) that can take years and years to film. We have no idea what these people with camera’s are going for…
Or do we, and I’m not as big a fan as I let on?
If they hope to address the camera’s as much in the course of a non ‘talking-head’ scene as they have been, then that’s fine… so long as there are answers out there, (as I said before, I could see being used in some way as the ‘big payoff’ at the end of the series).
But If it’s just a device used to tell the story in a unique way, it’s just weird that Phyllis is cautioning Dwight about the crew “knowing” about his liaisons. Or Michael fixing the dials on they’re microphones. It’s calling attention to something that should be in the back of our minds, because, (as far as I know), there IS no explanation. It works because you almost feel like a character on the show, like when Jim gives the camera his signature “Jim look”. When the camera would tip off Jim that Pam was leaving Phyllis’ wedding with Roy, or when Jan used be very aware of the camera when Michael would reference their relationship, it all seemed like there was an ‘entity’ there that they all seemed to address and acknowledged in a way that’s a little different than they are now.
The only purpose Jim’s brother’s served was Pam’s standing up for taking the risk she had, even if she has doubts.
As far as the car camera’s, were they perhaps ‘Taxicab Confession’ style?
I’m not familiar with TC aside from clips. The cameras are definitely mounted outside. (As you would have in a standard film setup, the vehicle being “driven” is attached to a trailer-ish hookup which holds the cameras, lights, etc.) Not the stuck-up-near-the-rearview-mirror style.
I watched “Leatherheads” this week, and kept expecting John K’s character to mug for the camera. At times it seemed that he was having to make an effort not to.
Ah, that sounds like a no.
Idk. It’s been a while since I saw TCC.
Am I the only one that sees this as set up for the spin-off? Following Holly around the new branch. And does this mean that Toby is coming back?
Jim played basketball in college. It was stated in a previous episode where he dominated Roy on the court. And I think Jim said his brother only played JV football in high school. But other than that, I think we are supposed to assume that they are older and more successful.
Basically, their “prank” was totally lame but it made them think Pam was cool because she went along. When Pam told Jim what her idea was, he totally thought that would have been funnier. Although, it did seem like the “no money in art” comments made Pam think a bit.
Totally agree – the sub-plot was terrible. If the point was to show Jim support Pam, there were more interesting ways to do it. The brothers’ characters were uninteresting and the pranks were unfunny. It seems like it was only there to give Jim & Pam screen time.
I thought the reference was to Gordon Gecko.
The cameras in Taxicab Confessions are absolutely hidden lipstick cameras. They make a point of saying it at the end every time they have the people sign the contract. Why the hell would people be so ridiculously candid about the most awful things if they were driving around in taxicab with a bunch of huge fucking cameras attached to it. Frankly, I’m amazed that they actually sign the contracts, but I guess a lot of people like to have there 15 minutes of fame even if it means revealing their molestation as a child or the chain of events that caused them to be a one legged prostitute. I can only imagine what the stories were where people did not sign the waiver.
It totally was. What was especially funny about that was Ryan’s hard stare into the camera after he announced who his character was, like he’s a serious Wall Street power broker. Classic.
The joke was that Ryan, a failed hard-ass greed-is-good executive was going for halloween as a hard-ass greed-is-good executive.
The fact that someone else (Kelli or Kevin?) thought “Gordon Gecko” was a reference to the Geico Gecko just shows how clueless they were.
-Joe
I felt so old when my friend from next door asked me who Gordon Gecko was!
I’m old enough to know, but still had no idea.
I thought it was more of a “this girl is a moron” stare.
I can’t imagine that people actually say anything to the cabbies other than “dude, shut the fuck up and drive.” Maybe I’ve been in NY too long.
I think **ftg **was talking about the camera setup for The Office, not TC.
I don’t think that you can come up with a consistent logic for the camera thing – it’s just a flaw in the premise you have to go with. There are just too many situations where it’s obvious that they have far too many camera angles (any scene in a restaurant or public place), and the characters allow the crew way too much access to their private lives.
For the record, it doesn’t bother me. The conceit is a funny one, and they do a better job of addressing it than Arrested Development, where I think they forgot their faux-documentary premise about 95% of the time.
Huh? Since when did AD pretend to be a documentary where the characters could see the cameras?
-Joe
There was shot where Jan and Michael were sitting in a box car on a train, it was angled in such a way where you could see Jan slowly moving her legs up and down, while the two were trying to figure their way out of a problem. Thought it was a great shot!! Thing is, all the shots of them before they cut to that angle would have meant that one of the cameramen would have been in the frame… if memory serves me correctly. It’s just one of those things you have to suspend disbelief. I’m more concerned about the story.
When Jim said that Pam and he were about to meet his brothers, I automatically got a sinking feeling. You knew it wouldn’t be the same as meeting Pam’s mom/best friend. Now I’m left wondering what the hell kind of parents Jim has.
As far as AD is concerned, was it a flat-out documentary?? The technique they used resembled a documentary, but I didn’t think it was anything but the style in which the show was shot. I need to get that series on DVD. I can’t catch reruns on one of the Canadian channels I get anymore because they nixed it. 
It was understood on AD that there were cameras surrounding the characters. A joke that comes to mind is in the episode “Mr. F” when Bob Loblaw says that someone in the room might be wired and you see a boom mic drop down into the shot.
This wasn’t really consistent and didn’t make any sense, but nominally the characters were being filmed.
I never knew the characters on AD were supposed to be being filmed.