News: ABC Announces Comedy series "At Home With Julia"

The ABC has today announced that they will be producing a new "narrative comedy" series entitled "At Home With Julia"... and yes, as the name suggests, it will revolve around our Prime Minister, Julia Gillard and her partner Tim Mathieson.

But here's the twist- it's actually a fictional show, and the parts will be played by Amanda Bishop (who is one of a few Gillard impersonators who was seen on Double Take in this high-larious parody) and Phil Lloyd (best known as Myles Barlow).

There will only be 4 episodes of the show, each of them 30 minutes long.

It will be written by Rick Kalowski, Amanda Bishop and Greg Quail and directed by Erin White. Rick Kalowski was one of the writers for Comedy Inc. - The Late Shift, so that will give you some sort of idea what the show will be like.

So, what do you make of this? Obviously this country has been crying out for some decent scripted-comedy for quite some time now, or really, any scripted comedy, but is this really the answer?

I understand, though, that there seems to be quite a lot of jokes to be mined out of Gillard's time in office, as well as her personal life, but do we need to be reminded of it all again?

I worry it will seem like a sketch in Double Take that is dragged out to 30 minutes.

And the fact that it is being filmed now (it will air later in the year) will cause some of the jokes to appear dated, won't it? I mean, that's one of the reasons that a show like this is usually more suited to a weekly sketch show.

But hopefully it will be able to overcome all of this with some sharp writing... and here's a taste of what the comedy will be like (from the ABC press release);

“They’re just like any other busy modern couple,” said executive producer / co-writer Rick
Kalowski (Comedy Inc.-The Late Shift). “Trying to balance their relationship with critical tasks
like introducing taxes no-one voted for.” 

Though the show’s about Julia and Tim’s private life in The Lodge, the team promises they’ve
been respectful. “As writers, we agreed the First Couple’s bedroom was off-limits,” said costar
/ co-writer Amanda Bishop. “That’s why we put all the sex scenes in Julia’s office”.

The show also busts many myths about the real couple. “A lot of people think Tim just hangs
‘round The Lodge all day doing nothing,” said co-star / co-writer Phil Lloyd. “Not true.
Sometimes he pops down the shops or goes for a bit of a drive.”

Most surprising has been Gillard’s support of the project, including use of real locations.
“There’s a Malaysian detention centre she keeps asking us to stay at, which is really nice,”
said director Erin White (Rush, Sundance-screened short Dugong).

ABC Head of Comedy Debbie Lee can’t wait. “We’ve long been concerned about generous
Government funding for the ABC. Hopefully At Home With Julia will put a stop to that.”

The ABC calls it a "Part rom-com, part guaranteed lawsuit" and will begin production this week in Sydney.

News: Spicks and Specks Finale Recording Tonight

After 7 seasons of Spicks and Specks, the final episode will be recorded tonight.

AU News: Misfits S2, Friday Night Lights S1, Miranda Coming to ABC2

A day after the Green Guide sung the praises of the "multichannels", the ABC2 have made a slew of announcements letting people know why these channels have enjoyed a surge in popularity.

TV News Wrap: Friday May 27

Not much in the way of news today... just some notable guest-casting coups;

• James Van Der Beek ("Dawson's Creek") is heading to Law and Order: SVU. He will also be appearing on the new TNT show Franklin and Bash.

• Martin Short and Alan Quinn will also pop up on Season 7 of the Showtime series Weeds.

• Star of Mad Men, Jon Hamm, will direct the first episode of the fifth season of the hit AMC show. Of course, you'll have to wait until March 2012 to see it though.

AUSTRALIAN NEWS

• You can watch Hamish and Andy's going away drinks party on the Herald Sun website from 6PM today. They will fly to the US to produce their show, Hamish and Andy's Gap Year for Channel Nine.

• I can't believe that there's even speculation that someone will replace Adam Hills on Spicks and Specks for a number of reasons. 1) Because the combination of Adam, Myf and Alan is the show, when one element is taken out, it ceases to be Spicks and Specks; 2) Even if they tried, there would almost certainly be backlash, whoever they chose to replace him and 3) ABC would not even consider it because of these reasons, at least not for a couple of years.

Angry Boys Review: Good, but not Hilarious - A Dangerous New Direction for Lilley?

At first, I didn't care if Angry Boys was going to be the funniest thing I had ever seen.

The fact is, we know that Chris Lilley can do funny. In fact, he can do it very well, HBO-standard well. He's shown us this by contributing two of the funniest Australian series to ever grace our screens.

Lilley could have easily served up Summer Heights High 2. Almost too easily, as it would be another certain hit, given the success of the first.

He even could have brought back Jonah, as by definition, he is an "Angry Boy".

However, he hasn't. He has assembled a cast of "new" characters, barring the the two Sims brothers, who were first seen on We Can Be Heroes.

However what I was looking for was not whether the show was funny, but if it stood by itself as a unique and original show. This is because despite how funny the first two series were, there were strong similarities.

And as much as these aforementioned things were all ticks in my book, the question remained whether he would trot out the same Lilley formula.

That is: "controversial" jokes, cringe-worthy situations and often juvenile-style humour.

The other questions hovered over the new characters: would the Japanese mother resemble Ricky Wong's parents too closely (or just an "Asian" stereotype in general)? Did the "black rapper" represent Lilley's stooping to broader comedy?

Unfortunately, in the first episode, we only received answers to some of these questions as we were only presented with the two Sims brothers and their grandmother, prison warden Gran.

First of all, I will start out by saying that my casual assumption that Lilley could churn out another funny series was incorrect as so far, Angry Boys is not as funny as its two predecessors, nor do I think it will be.

Suddenly it became about not whether Lilley had created something new and fresh, but just whether he had at least made a funny show. And I don't know if he delivered in that respect.

The two Dunt boys showed that they don't have that much more to offer in terms of comedy- especially since it feels like we've seen it before in We Can Be Heroes. We also saw boys behaving badly done to perfection in Summer Heights High in the form of Jonah.

And if you were to place the two (or three) characters of Jonah and the Dunt boys next to each other, it would be hard to differentiate between the two. Both are foul-mouthed teenagers... And that's about as far as it goes. However, Jonah's character was inherently more hilarious as we could see he was a student who was struggling academically, yet used swearing, bullying and breakdancing to paper over the cracks.

Viewers enjoy laughing at this situation as we are laughing "at" his bullyboy antics which he uses to escape his hell that is schoolwork. Hence Lilley's combination of funny antics with an underlying hint of pathos proved a winner.

But when it is transposed to the Dunt boys, we are asked to laugh "with" them as they perform burnouts, flip the bird and... Swear. They aren't performing these actions because they have an underlying insecurity, they are simply boys behaving badly. And while some (well, probably more than some) will find them funny, it isn't substantial enough in the first episode.

This was why Lilley decided to supply a boost of pathos... However, to me, explaining that the ear drum transplant didn't work was a cop out, after their story was seemingly resolved in We Can Be Heroes. I don't mind so much the idea, but when their story is resurrected in order for Lilley to swear nonstop again, it doesn't really cut it. It's also a classic bet-hedging: if critics don't end up laughing at the jokes, at least they will fall into the trap of complimenting the heartfelt elements of the story. Well, not I certainly haven't.

Gran, however is a strong character, who would go down as a famous strong female character if she wasn't played by a bloke. Her racist remarks seemed plausible for an old-school character such as her, however if the media decides, they could easily stir up a huge s-storm over.

However, even though it isn't as funny, it is clear that there is a stronger narrative arc, and stronger ties between the characters- something that was pretty much nonexistent in the previous series.

Time will tell whether viewers will respond to this as well- they probably will but if Lilley still wants to label his shows comedies, I would say the first episode strayed very heavily into dramedy down. If you watched it again, you could pretty much draw a line down the middle of the episode and observe these two conflicting sides to Lilley's apparent new style.

To be fair to Lilley, it would be worth waiting for the exposition of the rest of the characters to make a true judgement.

At the end of the day, Lilley needs to remember the reason why his shows are so popular: they are funny. Though he won praise for his portrayal of Jonah, in the way that he made the audience feel sympathy for him in the end, this should not become the centerpiece of the show.

Overall, it was good, but not great, with the highlight being the new character Gran (cue another Lilley creation: Gran's Gotchas), so hopefully the rest of the new characters inject similar new life into the show.

Renewal and Cancellation Wrap: Tuesday

A couple of interesting renewals today, and some not so interesting ones, but not entirely unexpected.

RENEWALS

ABC has renewed The Bachelor for a SIXTEENTH SEASON. But it gets worse...

ABC has also renewed The Bachelorette for a SEVENTH SEASON.

The UK version of Being Human has also been renewed for a FOURTH SEASON, with the US version still tracking along in its first season.

CANCELLATIONS

Still in the UK, sci-fi series Outcasts has been cancelled after its FIRST SEASON.

UH OH

And while not entirely cancelled, No Ordinary Family is heading south rapidly, with news that Julie Benz has booked a role in a new supernatural medical drama on CBS, no less. This in conjunction with her co-lead, Michael Chiklis similarly starring in another pilot, means that either they know something that we don't yet, or they are predicting the worst (or they could just be hedging their bets).

However, you have to ask yourself about how the show must be tracking if the leads are sniffing around elsewhere.

Modern Family here for the Long Haul

Don't expect to be saying goodbye to Modern Family anytime soon.

It has just hit a season and series-high 13.16 million for its Valentine's Day episode in the US, smashing its previous record of 12.67 in its second season premiere.

This is its 13th episode of its second season (its 36th all up).

However, while Modern Family is going from strength-to-strength ratings-wise, critically, it has not been as successful as its first season, with the plot-lines of the various families becoming less intertwined than the first season.

Not that ABC (US) will care about that, of course, with Modern Family arguably propelling Cougar Town into its second season off the back of its great ratings.

This has also proved true for the recent debut of Mr. Sunshine starring Matthew Perry and Allison Janney, with its pilot netting a cool 10.524 million viewers (Cougar Town has been temporarily taken off air to accommodate it) despite luke warm to good reviews before it premiered.

There was no surprise when it was renewed for its third season on January 10th, 2011, and its hard to see it going anywhere anytime soon- something Channel Ten in Australia would be ecstatic about.

In Australia, Modern Family airs on Sunday nights, with the 11th episode, "Slow Down Your Neighbours" the latest to air.

Q and A: still with added Twitter

It's hard to imagine anyone who is still a fan of the Twitter feed on the bottom of Q and A's screen.

I have to admit, when it was announced that people would finally have their "thoughts", now known as "tweets" immortalised as your favourite/least favourite commentator commentated on Q and A, I could not have been more excited.

Yes, it sounded good in theory- people at home shown that their opinion is worthwhile too. Contrary to popular belief, you do not have to have a degree in Social Commentary to get a gig on Q and A. But it helps, of course.

It also symbolised ABC moving with the times, recognising that Twitter is now not only an essential part of everyday life, but of any thriving democracy.

However, it soon became apparent that this was an awful idea. Not only because in execution, it failed: repeats on ABCNews24 frequently had tweets obscured by the scrolling news bar (admittedly, I watched the ABC1 broadcast last night so they may have rectified it) and producers tended to put to air inane mumblings about panelists'
appearance, etc. Which not only did a disservice to the myriad tweeters one thousand times more erudite with brilliant insights and remarks, but also Twitter itself. The uninitiated would see those tweets and it would only reinforce the notion of Twitter being a waste of time and space, rather than a
hub of entertaining and educational interplay (most of the time).

Not to deride any tweeter who throws off a casual tweet without a four syllable word with no reference to Bob Hawke and no hashtag-based pun which happens to be screened. God help me, if you need any example of inane, look no further than this
blog. And every tweeter fires off more than a couple of casual tweets. I just believe that producer should choose more substantial tweets, if any, to
make a debate more robust.

In addition, the overuse of various ABC personalities' tweets is not only blatant self-promotion, but unfair on the people who don't have a prime time TV show. Surely it goes
without saying that since average joes can't get on to the panel, they should at least have first dibs on the tweet-space.

However, just say they were to display all the most intelligent and hilarious tweets whizzing around every Monday night- and isn't there a shiteload- would that justify the tweety bar?

Well, probably still no. If one wants to read tweets, they will have their iPhone resting in their lap of a Monday evening. If they don't, they probably don't want the interjections of others being thrust in their face.

And for those in the former group who do follow the #qanda feed on Twitter, if they do not have a problem with the tweets on screen, surely then it has become a competition as to who can jostle their way to the front of the mob. Sure, it could encourage people to think deeper, to come up with wittier lines than the next person- but not while some inane tweets are still screened.

Who knows, if ABC producers showed a bit more discretion in selecting tweets, I may change my mind, yet it still remains a pointless and annoying exercise.

Just a note: This is not a sour grapes piece. I have dabbled in some #qanda tweeting myself and a) Am aware that my tweets are nowhere near as oozing in political knowledge and laced with biting humor as many others so I do not expect to be on screen and b) I do not want to (notice a distinct lack of personal details on this very blog? Oh, you didn't pay much attention? OK).

Also I am aware that 344 other people are currently writing the exact same blog post in the form of a 140 character tweet more expertly - just needed my own personal catharsis.




Image source: ABC

How Long will the Negus Project Last?

Yes, I am well aware it is not in fact called the "Negus Project", but that is in fact what many people will see it as. An attempt by Channel Ten to reinvent the way news is brought to you of an evening. More significantly, it is an attempt to make lightning strike twice after the relative success of the 7pm Project.

As any average new show starting out in Australia, it was met with considerable derision when 7pm first premiered. And why not? It was easy enough to criticise virtually any aspect of the show; Dave Hughes is a comedian, not a newsreader/commentator (and not even a funny one at that), Charlie Pickering taps his pen on the desk too much, Carrie Bickmore is annoying, etc.



Then there were the inevitable changes as it was finding its feet, ie. the focus on fewer stories to allow more room for banter to fly, the apparent removal of James Mathieson and Ruby Rose (who were promoted as being core team members, but rarely made consecutive visits to the show- even once-a-month visits for Rose became rare).

This all led to viewer confusion, as well as an increased amount of target to level potshots at. Ratings took a nosedive rather quickly, with many shrugging it off as a confused mix of news and comedy... And if people wanted "comedy" they would turn to Two and a Half Men on Channel Nine, and if they wanted serious news they could turn to ABC News. Surely the whole gamut had been covered- there was no room for any newcomers.

But seemingly against the odds, it made a resurgence. Many people, even if they disliked the format, gained respect for Channel Ten for sticking with it, despite increasingly dire ratings. Here is a look at its first 17 weeks graphically.



As you can see, there was not much improvement at all, with its lowest weekly average coming in at 613,200. Yet the format was consistently tweaked in minor ways, including Charlie Pickering's hair transformation which seemed to symbolise a more serious skew.

Now, in the week before ratings begins, its figures are more than respectable, with Monday night's figure 901,000 trouncing Two and a Half Men on 801,000, and only trailing Home and Away and ABC News by around 100,000. Efforts like these are more than enough to keep it safe for a long, long time. Especially when you consider that Ten's only successful show in the 7pm slot pre-7pm was Masterchef and to an extent, the Biggest Loser. Other attempts to fill the void such as Yasmin's Getting Married and Taken Out were complete failures, to say the least. In comparison, 7pm's success has been the best thing to happen to Ten since Masterchef.

Now, comes the new newcomer, 6pm with George Negus, which premiered two weeks ago.  However, it is not as clear-cut as 7pm.

Many people will attempt to parallel the two shows.

Both news programs trying to appear to be "different" to every other offering.

Both are trying to place less of an influence on the tabloid style gossip mongering of shows such as Today Tonight and A Current Affair.

However, critics have been more reticent in slamming Negus. One, because he is a respected journalist with bucket-loads of presenting and reporting experience. Two, because it's a more conventional news program more similar in style to Dateline (which Negus previously fronted), and three, because he's George Negus.

Many have shown restraint in saying something to the effect of "Let it find its feet first".

However, it certainly isn't that hard to highlight its fairly average to terrible ratings.

It debuted with 605,000 viewers on a Monday.

Tuesday it had 505,000

Wednesday 443,000

Thursday 429,000

and Friday 439,000

In Week 2, the Monday show drew 540,000, with 487,000 tuning in for the Ten Evening News

Tuesday 443,000 - 471,000

Wednesday 465,000 - 413,000

Thursday 398,000 - 362,000

Friday 411,000 - 384,000

Now, while 7pm had low ratings in the beginning, it only stooped to the 500,000s a handful of times; mostly on a Friday... let alone the 400,000s.

However, if you afford it some leeway because it's in a 6pm timeslot- fine, 6pm slots tend to draw lower ratings than later in the night (less people home, etc.). However, Ten would be worried about the fact that the Simpsons, in the final week of ratings, in the same timeslot drew, from Monday to Friday;

446,000

446,000

482,000

495,000

515,000

This is almost the same as Negus' Week 2 ratings. However, for a show that would cost considerably more to put to air, you would need to see an improvement to at least 500,000 to 600,000 a night to make it worth their while. An even bigger factor is the element of having a good lead-in to the Ten Evening News, which, as you can see, almost loses viewers. And that would need to be at least 550,000 to merely match what Neighbours was pulling in the final week of ratings;

565,000

581,000

587,000

523,000

467,000

Possibly 6pm's ultimate failing will be its failure to stand out from the crowd. Now that 7pm has established itself it has become a show people can tune into to catch a snapshot of the days news, but also see the lighter side of things. It is also boasts a great rotating roster of experienced journalists such as Jennifer Byrne, Steve Price and Gorgi Coghlan.

Its Metro Whip-Around really hit the ground running and became one of the most successful segments on the show. It is now sure of itself and is significantly different from anything else on TV. Once again, Ten and Roving Enterprises need to be commended. While it isn't perfect (Dave Hughes still doesn't quite seem to be the right fit for a predominantly serious news-based show), it is now a fixture of many people's daily viewing schedules.

It would be hard to imagine Ten pulling Negus (hmm) before the end of the year, as the 7pm Project is the best of example of good things coming to those who wait. However, it will be hard to justify (not to mention the embarrassment involved) when or if ratings regularly languish in the 400,000s... or God forbid, the deadly 300,000s...

One really has to wonder if the $20m news shake-up will have been worth it.