Frasier was one of my favorites, too. But, still, while there was plenty of embarrassment it wasn’t the ONLY thing the show was based on. Near as I could tell from “The Office”, that was what ALL the humor was based on.
Frasier and Niles were likable and sympathetic, and when they suffered their embarrassment it was because of clear human failings; typically pride. With David and Gavin from The Office, in was because they were such unredeemable tosspots. Watching Frasier, I could see them doing stupid things (inevitably leading to embarrassment) for clear reasons - think of “Les Freres Heureuse” - it was all about wanting to impress their peers and go for a little bit of “it’s our club so I get to decide who is and isn’t in allowed in!”. Those are pretty standard human motivations that most people can identify with. But on The Office any and all motivation seemed to be “Because he’s a clueless jerkoff asshole”.
I could understand that part. What I couldn’t understand were the characters or motivations or situations. My primary sensation from watching the original Office was confusion.
And I wanted to enjoy it. I like the American Office so I wanted to try the original. I like Monty Python and Hitchhiker’s Guide and Dr Who, so I know I can get British entertainment. But the Office simply didn’t work for me.
I agree there’s an element of truth, but truth is not a defense against being insulting.
I disagree, to be honest. He was an arse, but he was a redeemable one. I hate to ask, but have you seen it all - there’s only 12 regular episodes plus a two-part Christmas special. The Christmas special mines new depths of horror, but, well, you’ll see.
Nope. Saw the first two episodes and that was enough.
If I don’t like a show, I’ll stop watching it rather than posting to thread after thread about how terrible it is and how I don’t understand how anyone could keep watching such crap.
This point is very important. American TV networks want a property that will give them a 100-episode syndication opportunity, all ready to go within five years. They’re not interested in something that is brilliantly great for a total of 12 episodes in its lifetime or short bursts of six episodes intermittently produced over a 15-year period. It’s just not sufficiently profitable.
And, you always make more money on a show that you produce yourself than a show that you get in syndication from someone else.
I am an American and I found nothing about the characters, their motivations, or situations in the least bit confusing or inscrutable. English society is not all that different from ours. The only things that might require a guide are pop culture/commercial trivia like Hob-Nobs, but that kind of knowledge isn’t necessary to understand motivation.
It really isn’t. there are some highly embarrassing moments but the real theme is all about people being in the wrong, dead-end jobs. Unrequited love, not being comfortable in your skin, the minutia and frustrations of most of our daily lives.
The embarrassment is the least powerful thing on display but I realise that some people find it extremely uncomfortable.
Fact is, the writers are perfectly happy that not everyone likes it. By their own admission they could have made it more broadly acceptable but it wouldn’t have been what they wanted it to be. The story arc to “Extras” sums this up rather well.
Thankfully, the BBC gives writers like Gervais and Merchant the room to take on such projects.