The Great British Sitcom: Fawlty Towers

[Mel O'Drama]

Keep It In The Family has now run its course. The downside of there being only six episodes per year is that there simply isn't time for a series to experiment in the hope of finding a formula that works. Which is what's been happening

In fact the whole Fifth Series has been take up with making these changes. The first established Muriel's absence. The second had Dudley converting the loft into a studio. Then came the middle two episodes.

In the third episode, Duncan is moving house, so Dudley schemed to get a lift to Brighton in the moving van, mid-move. Cue scenes where the girls sunbath on the beach in cold, grey weather (though the script barely acknowledges this and we're expected to suspend disbelief and pretend it's really sunny, despite the crowds of gawping tourists in winter wear watching the scene being filmed). Cue a visit to Dudley's eccentric sister (Sheila Steafel) where Duncan tried on a Danger Mouse mask only to find it was being repaired with superglue and was stuck, meaning a trip to the police station in said mask when the moving van was stolen. This episode really highlighted how the series was struggling without Muriel's grounding. The girls and Duncan seem to behave however Dudley's insane-plan-of-the-week requires, seeming all the less intelligent for it. And there's no longer anything endearing about Dudley. Unleashed as he is, he's quite taxing.

The fourth episode saw a rare moment of direct continuity when the previous episode's escapades were mentioned at the beginning in order to set up Duncan moving in to the newly-created loft space. Quite why he needs to do this when it's established he already has a new home in Easthampstead isn't at all clear, leaving us, the audience, to fill in the gaps. For my own sanity I decided the stolen property included any appliance he might need to use to cook and heat his new place. And perhaps he also wanted to prove a point by inconveniencing Dudley partly for the sake of it.

The penultimate episode was a silly-but-passable one involving books of magic from Jacqui's bookshop, which Dudley bought hoping to make Duncan's plant grow healthy again.

Finally came the obligatory sitcom episode where they are putting on a performance of The Mikado for no reason. Indeed, not only is Dudley invested in this one, but Duncan is directing a performance of Oklahoma which appears to take place the very same night. There's no logic or truth to it, and it feels forced and interchangeable. We simply have to accept that this is suddenly the most important thing in everyone's lives. Susan and Jacqui compete over the part of Yum-Yum, with each prepared to screw over their co-stars (and family) by leaving to take the lead in Oklahoma should they not be successful, which really isn't a good look. But they get a chance to sing, which I'm sure the actresses appreciated.

This episode highlighted how limited the interactions are. Highgate may have a "village" but it's not a true English village in the sense of being small, rural and sparsely populated. Yet the auditions are being run by Jacqui's boss from the bookshop and Susan's boss/friend Hugo. And the production's cast ends up being the three Rushes. This kind of generic and clunky scenario relies on the good will of the audience to carry it through... which is a shame because the entire year has gradually pissed away any such feeling.

Don't get me wrong, the last episodes weren't unwatchable. They weren't painful in the way, say, the last episodes of On The Buses were. But I realise that as much as it was a pleasant little "fix" of an evening, my laughter stopped coming a good number of episodes before the series ended.

They had a one-off character appear as a moronic friend of Sara's in an episode, and eventually the character (named Monroe) kept popping up again and again to the point he became a regular cast member.

I wonder if he was analogous with KIITF's Hugo, who was in a recurring role as Susan/Sara's boss and friend (the relationship seemed to change as needed). He was the archetype that would later become known as the "Tim Nice But Dim" type, which - as here - is frequently amalgamated with (or closely related to) the "Hooray Henry". I found him likeable enough, but the episode where he tried to write punk rock music was a bit testing.

Incidentally, David Neville - who played Hugo - played a very similar character in the Fawlty Towers episode Basil The Rat (probably most memorably getting his dander up and threatening to give "grotty little man" Basil a bunch of fives). His screen girlfriend in that FT episode was played by Sabina Franklyn, with whom he shared most scenes in KIITF.

Then Muriel ended up having a late-in-life baby, which is always the kiss of death for an aging sitcom.

Oh dear. Yes.

Somehow, that makes Muriel UK's fate of simply disappearing to Australia seem not quite so bad.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

This week marks a rare foray into the world of the 21st Century British sitcom with Beautiful People:

I hadn't even heard of this one until five minutes before I started watching. I simply scrolled through iPlayer looking for a sitcom I hadn't watched before that didn't look too challenging, or too long. At just twelve episodes long, this fitted the bill.

The bright colours and the title font in the image above give off strong AbFab energy presumably intentionally since the series have the same producer. There's no mistaking they're going for "camp" here. The jazzy opening imagery of New York with the accompanying upbeat song give very Anglo-American vibes, as do the bookend scenes at the start and end of each energy with the older Simon, usually in the window at Barneys, but sometimes walking along a New York street.

If this Will & Grace element with camp adult Simon and his camp boyfriend was the tone of the entire series, I'd have checked out after an episode or two. Fortunately, these are only a means to an end and very brief, with most of the series told in flashback back in Reading. And this is where it gets good. The "looking" back element has hints of The Wonder Years, and there's also more than a dash of Adrian Mole to the series, both of which are very good things.

iPlayer describes the series thus:

From Berkshire to the big time. The true(ish) tales of a teen yearning for glamour while stuck in 90s suburbia. Fanciful, fabulous comedy with Layton Williams and Olivia Colman.

And Wikipedia has this to say:

Beautiful People is a British comedy drama television series based on the memoirs of Barneys creative director Simon Doonan. The series takes place in Reading, Berkshire, in 1997, where thirteen-year-old Simon Doonan... and his best friend Kylie dream of escaping their dreary suburban surroundings and moving to cosmopolitan London "to live amongst the beautiful people". The first episode aired on BBC Two on 2 October 2008 and recorded overnight ratings of 1.5 million viewers and positive critical reaction. Episodes are self-contained, but do follow a loose story arc throughout the course of each series. The second and final series finished airing on 18 December 2009.

The key selling point for me was Jonathan Harvey's name attached as the writer of this adaption. His film Beautiful Thing had a big impact on me when I first watched it last year, and there are a number of thematic similarities between the two projects. Once again it's set in the late Nineties (albeit Beautiful Thing was actually filmed then as well) and the key character is a young lad whose sexuality an interests make him different from most of his peers.

As it turns out, that's not the only common ground with that earlier project. This one has Tameka Empson and Meera Syal. Meera's role is quite different from her cameo in the film - here she plays the sassy blind aunt. As the hairdresser with attitude, Tameka is playing her usual type, which is no bad thing. As in the earlier film she wastes no opportunity to break out into song. Instead of Mama Cass, here she's delivered songs from And I Am Telling You to Waterloo. Sadly, the character has just dropped dead in the last episode I watched, but I have seen that this isn't the last we'll see of the actress, which is good news.

Olivia Coleman seems to be omnipresent in recent years and I confess I find it a little off-putting. I shouldn't have, because she's great fun here. As the gobby-but-supportive mother, Debbie, who is fond of the sauce. Certainly in terms of vocal inflections, she seems to be channelling Bev from Abigail's Party.

Sophie Ash as Simon's promiscuous sister gives great attitude (I probably keep re-using certain adjectives, but the fact is that most of the characters here - especially the women - are gobby, sassy and have attitude), and Aidan McArdle as their dad is also great... he's permanently harried and frazzled by the madhouse in which he lives, and is quite possibly the only sane member of the family. Brenda Fricker did a great turn as his once-solidly-Christian mother now filterless after too much ECT resulting from her depression (think Sophia Petrillo with an Irish accent and you're pretty much there).

Really, though, this series belongs to Luke Ward-Wilkinson as Simon and scene-stealer-and-he-knows-it Layton Williams as his wildly OTT friend Kylie (real name Kyle) who are brilliant together. Special mention, too, to Sarah Niles as Kylie's scowling mother Reba who regularly throws objects at the boys while calling them "batty boys" (this would never fly in 2025). One of the first episodes saw a hilarious catfight between Reba and Debbie.

The humour delves into the surreal with dream sequences and even the occasional musical interlude, but done in a way that's really funny and without going full-on Glee. The second episode had a terrific performance in the cul-de-sac to a bizarrely brilliant mashup of Tomorrow/Take That Look Off Your Face/Don't Rain On My Parade/Ease On Down The Road/Only Women Bleed.

The Nineties references really make this series, from the Macarena and 5,6,7,8 to events on Corrie and 'Enders, all with tongue firmly in cheek. Last night I watched an episode which centred around trying to obtain a coveted Posh Spice doll, with Simon agreeing to play football with his father only after he learns that Victoria Beckham is going to marry a footballer (how fitting that I watched this on the very day that footballer received his knighthood).

There are a few anachronisms in these references, such as 1997 Simon having a picture of Steps traitors H & Claire on his wall from circa 2002 (after they'd split from the group). However they're forgivable because of their spirit. In fact, one such anachronism (certainly by British viewing standards) gave me a little buzz as Debbie was trying to bribe Simon into playing football:

We'll let ya stay up late tonight an' watch Knots Landing: Return To The Cul-de-Sac. And I'll even plait your hair like Valene.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

The series one finale - How I Got My Globe - was notable for a fairly faithful reenactment of Dynasty's legendary lily pond fight, down to the dresses worn. Olivia Colman was Krystle to Frances Barber's Alexis.

The end was appropriately sentimental and felt quite final. Perhaps a second series wasn't guaranteed at this point.

I've read about some of the changes for Series Two and while I'm not sorry to lose the New York segments, I also hope this doesn't mean an increase of screen time for adult Simon.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

Series Two of Beautiful People has come to a close, wrapping the series up.

While I was glad to lose the ill-fitting New York based bookends, I'd say the first series overall was better than the second, though there's not that much in it (and I might be being swayed by young Simon's terrible hairdo in the second). I certainly thought the Series Two opening titles captured what the series is about better than the generic New York street scenery of the first.

Tameka Empson playing Johoyo instead of Tameka was a bit of a worry at first, but her bad grasp of English ("cutty cutty bom-boms" standing in for "scissors" for example) set her aside, and I felt she put more of herself into the role as the series went along, which is always a good thing.

As far as Simon goes, I felt there was less naivety in Series Two than in the previous year. All part of growing up, I suppose, but it was slightly less endearing.

Ashlene's pregnancy was a key running thread, with the baby born (of course) in the finale. The "who's the daddy" reveal was slightly daft but good fun with Debbie slapping the kid twice (for knocking up her daughter and for making her a grandmother) before the coup de grace: a punch out for bullying Simon.

As far as Simon's final arc, well... it did feel rather like Jonathan Harvey repurposed his Beautiful Thing script (which is strange considering it's based on an unrelated memoir) with Simon falling for the boy who reluctantly joins in with bullying him before they click and talk things over. Simon coming out to Debbie in a letter was really nice. But I was less fussed with the final song and dance.

It was slightly jarring to see older Simon interacting with Debbie for the bookends, and the lack of distance reinforced that Samuel Barnett doesn't look all that much like an older Luke Ward-Wilkinson. I thought the series ending - with older Simon telling Debbie he was marrying said bully - disappointing. For a series that celebrated unconventionality, closing with such a heteronormative cliche didn't do it for me. Also, Simon only split from his previous partner at the beginning of Series Two, and hasn't mentioned seeing anyone else. Perhaps some of it can be put down to the series ending somewhat prematurely, but it felt rushed and not very well planned-in.

Still, this was a nice little series and I'm glad I watched. It was even more of a treat because I'd never heard of it until nine days ago.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

Ghosts is getting a big screen version.

The series had a definitive and satisfying ending so I have mixed feelings, but if this is a story set earlier on in the series I'll be up for watching it. I suppose the alternative would be a big-screen retelling of the "origin" story and then either a new story or "greatest hits" from the series, which I suppose would be OK as well.

 

[Crimson]

So, I should probably poke around some British TV shows. I mean, worse case I'm on the hook for, what?, 30 episodes of a long running Brit show?

And here I am, in a thread I've never so much as peeked in. I started with what I presume is regarded as the greatest of British sitcoms: FAWLTY TOWERS.

I have mixed opinions of Cleese's other work. Nothing I have seen of Monty Python has ever resonated with me; that famed dead parrot sketch is awkwardly unfunny to me. On the other hand, A FISH CALLED WANDA is possibly my favorite comedy film. My reaction to the first episode of FAWLTY was muted positive. I found the episode funny, but hardly hilarious. That wouldn't normally concern me. Some of my favorite American shows don't hit their groove until well into the first season or beyond; but when an entire series is only 12 episodes, there's not much luxury of a slow build.

Experiencing something with a legendary reputation can inevitably be disappointing. It's like when someone watches CITIZEN KANE and expect a life altering experience from the "greatest" movie; when, in fact, it's just a well crafted, influential film. I can't speak for British TV, but FAWLTY would have been revolutionary for American TV in the mid-70s. There hadn't been anything like it. But now, 50 years later, I can see the influence of FAWLTY in dozens of shows since. That undercuts its impact on watching the show itself.

What cast the show in a better light for me was jumping over to Youtube and watching the first two American remakes: the unsold pilot CHATEAU SNAVELY and the short-lived AMANDA'S. Despite the presence of old pros Harvey Korman and Betty White, SNAVELY was awful -- FAWLTY TOWERS by way of MAMA'S FAMILY. AMANDA'S, with Bea Arthur, was marginally better, but not much more than a mediocre Maude-running-a-hotel with a weak supporting cast. (I wonder if White and Arthur ever chatted about their failed FAWLTY versions while co-starring on THE GOLDEN GIRLS?)

Watching those two failed American versions put the original in much sharper context and I find myself looking forward to watching more. With only 12 episodes, I will probably watch them at a leisurely pace.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

And here I am, in a thread I've never so much as peeked in. I started with what I presume is regarded as the greatest of British sitcoms: FAWLTY TOWERS.

Oh, now this is an exciting development (for me, at least). Welcome to the dark side, Crimson.

Nothing I have seen of Monty Python has ever resonated with me; that famed dead parrot sketch is awkwardly unfunny to me.

I watched some of the series when I was a teenager, really wanting to like it, but came away feeling it wasn't for me. Perhaps I'll give it another chance one day. A couple of the big screen versions seem better, so I might start there.

On the other hand, A FISH CALLED WANDA is possibly my favorite comedy film.

Believe it or not I watched this for the first time just a month ago. I loved it.

You possibly know this, but Cleese's daughter in the film ("Oh, do shut up, Portia") is played by the daughter of Cleese and Connie Booth who plays Fawlty's Polly the waitress. Cleese and Booth were married at the time they wrote and filmed the first six episodes of Fawlty, and divorced when they shot the second series a few years later.

My reaction to the first episode of FAWLTY was muted positive. I found the episode funny, but hardly hilarious. That wouldn't normally concern me. Some of my favorite American shows don't hit their groove until well into the first season or beyond; but when an entire series is only 12 episodes, there's not much luxury of a slow build.

Given the slower pacing of the era, the adjustment into British sitcom land with its regional references and the fact that the first episode isn't peak Fawlty I'd have fully expected a muted response. I'm pleasantly surprised you enjoyed it as much as you did.

A Touch Of Class is a pilot episode and while there's no particularly noticeable overhaul between episodes I still feel there's a certain sparkle missing from that opening episode compared with most others. I'd say the series fully hits its stride by the second half of Series One.

I don't know what awareness you have of the series, but it's more broadly remembered for several OTT moments, invariably shown in highlights or clips that are lacking context. Just as a heads up, these moments aren't wall-to-wall, with episodes invariably beginning with relative calm before building in tension and confusion as the minutes go by.

And as a little tip: keep your eye on the "Fawlty Towers" sign in the opening credits. You may spot a change or two.

SNAVELY was awful -- FAWLTY TOWERS by way of MAMA'S FAMILY. AMANDA'S, with Bea Arthur, was marginally better, but not much more than a mediocre Maude-running-a-hotel with a weak supporting cast.

I've taken a peek at both and I'd agree. As far as I could tell, Amanda's took only the basic setup with mostly new stories and writing, while the Snavely pilot used a couple of Fawlty episodes (The Hotel Inspectors and The Germans) as its basis. The problem is these aren't scripts that can be taken apart then randomly stitched back together in a different order and still work, and Snavely is proof positive in this regard. Shifting between two stories and compressing them means it loses focus, tension and attention to detail. Having watched the adaption so recently, you'll be well-placed to see how the remake compares to the original when you get to those episodes, so I'd be interested to know your thoughts.

(I wonder if White and Arthur ever chatted about their failed FAWLTY versions while co-starring on THE GOLDEN GIRLS?)

It would certainly have been fun to be a fly on the wall for that. Come to that, given the (alleged) tension between them, it could have been fun to be a fly on the wall for any of their chats.

 

[Crimson]

Believe it or not I watched this for the first time just a month ago. I loved it.

I'm surprised it's escaped your attention for so long. I pop into the movie thread only sporadically, but don't be surprised if you get a very delayed response to your review.

the adjustment into British sitcom land with its regional references

One of my big concerns with approaching British TV -- references, slang and even accents that I don't understand. There was nothing in the first episode at least that I didn't understand.

With only one episode under my belt, my biggest apprehension is that this will be a sitcom whose comedy comes from characters yelling at each other. From THE HONEMOONERS to MAUDE and beyond, characters excessively yelling grates on my nerves pretty fast. Even ABFAB, after two stellar seasons, devolved into three harpies shrieking at each other.

I don't know what awareness you have of the series

I knew it existed. I don't think I had seen so much as a clip of the show prior to watching the first episode. I was tempted to read through your thoughts, but decided to watch the show fresh and unbiased. If I had disliked the first episode, I probably wouldn't have even commented.

The problem is these aren't scripts that can be taken apart then randomly stitched back together in a different order and still work, and Snavely is proof positive in this regard.

Yes, it was 30 minutes of "stuff happening". I agree with Daniel's comment in the other thread; Harvey Korman could have played a good "Basil", but would have needed a much better script and direction. Lacking either, he played too broadly and went OTT too soon with nowhere to build. Nothing indicates the indifference of the project as much as Betty White, such an incisive comedic actress, showing no sense of character. She was just there.

Lucky both projects failed, else we might never have gotten GOLDEN GIRLS.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

There was nothing in the first episode at least that I didn't understand.

That's promising. If the first was OK I don't think you'll have any trouble with the remaining episodes.

With only one episode under my belt, my biggest apprehension is that this will be a sitcom whose comedy comes from characters yelling at each other. From THE HONEMOONERS to MAUDE and beyond, characters excessively yelling grates on my nerves pretty fast.

I'd love to offer you some reassurance in this regard, but the closest I can give is that it's far from wall to wall shouting. When it comes to this particular central character, though, the safest suggestion I can make is: gird your loins. If I were recommending a British sitcom that has the shouting dialled down, Fawlty would be close to the bottom of the list.

(On the bright side, if you can tolerate Fawlty, you're probably safe with most other British sitcoms, since most are more audibly restrained).

I knew it existed. I don't think I had seen so much as a clip of the show prior to watching the first episode. I was tempted to read through your thoughts, but decided to watch the show fresh and unbiased.

That's a great starting point. It's a treat to be unspoilt about a series that's so universally known.

Yes, it was 30 minutes of "stuff happening". I agree with Daniel's comment in the other thread; Harvey Korman could have played a good "Basil", but would have needed a much better script and direction. Lacking either, he played too broadly and went OTT too soon with nowhere to build.

Exactly this. Korman's Henry's unpleasantness felt very surface whereas with Cleese's portrayal it can easily be read that there's an underlying anguish and desperation. He genuinely hates the life in which he finds himself and quietly blames everyone else, from his wife to his staff to his guests, for keeping him from the grandiosity he feels he should have.

Nothing indicates the indifference of the project as much as Betty White, such an incisive comedic actress, showing no sense of character. She was just there.

Yes, and this impacted on the setup overall. Prunella Scales's Sybill balanced being genuinely efficient and cleaning up Basil's messes while still being lazy and shrewish. The latter was mostly missing from the "Gladys" version, who was a more generic sitcom wife, weary of her husband's antics, but also providing support for him. This gave Henry far less reason to be bitter and to act out, which made his behaviour seem even more idiosyncratic.

 

[Crimson]

I'd love to offer you some reassurance in this regard, but the closest I can give is that it's far from wall to wall shouting. When it comes to this particular central character, though, the safest suggestion I can make is: gird your loins.

Loins will be girded.

Even in the worst yelling case, with only 12 episodes I'm not too worried about it. I lasted into the third season of MAUDE before the yelling broke my nerves and even then it was the shrill accent of Mrs. Naugatuck that killed it for me. As long as that British accent, whatever it is, isn't on FAWTLY, I think I'll be fine. If the first episode is an indication, yelling at the crescendo of mounting lunacy seems comedically appropriate; it's yelling out of the gate and continuously that I find frazzling.

Korman's Henry's unpleasantness felt very surface

I think this is was an inevitability of any adaptation. American sitcoms are seldom built around genuinely unpleasant characters. American sitcoms rely heavily on cozy familiarity. It's not really until the late 70s that unpleasant characters start to show up, and only in supporting roles. I gather Archie was considerably softened from his British counterpart. (Did Maude have a British counterpart?) This might seem to be a cultural difference between Britain and the US, but I think it's more practical. Spending 12 episodes with a miserable misanthrope is one thing; spending 150 episodes with a miserable misanthrope is quite another.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

Even in the worst yelling case, with only 12 episodes I'm not too worried about it.

That's good. I know we've spoken about shouting in sitcoms before, and as soon as you mentioned it I started thinking you might end up checking out before the third episode (which would have been fine, of course. Sitcoms are there to be enjoyed and I wouldn't like to think of you suffering through one that you're not enjoying).

As long as that British accent, whatever it is, isn't on FAWTLY, I think I'll be fine.

(Did Maude have a British counterpart?)

Only in passing, and never in her own show. The AITF episode Cousin Maude's Visit was based on the Till Death Us Do Part episode Aunt Maud. Here Maud (no 'e') was the sister of the lead character's wife rather than her cousin. I believe the characterisation was quite different, and the character more antagonistic and spiteful (even I would probably draw the line at watching a series based on this character).

At the time I watched TDUDP, the episode was missing, but it's since shown up and can be found on the world's favourite video streaming site. I haven't watched but did previously listen to an audio recording of the episode, and you may not want to seek it out given there's more than a touch of the Mrs Naugatucks to British Maud.

This might seem to be a cultural difference between Britain and the US, but I think it's more practical. Spending 12 episodes with a miserable misanthrope is one thing; spending 150 episodes with a miserable misanthrope is quite another.

Which is a very good reason. British sitcoms that have exceeded 100 episodes can be counted on one hand, and even the ones that span the equivalent of an American season or two do that over a number of years.

 

[Crimson]

Onto episode 2, which I watched twice. Not because I loved it so much I immediately watched it again, but because my reaction initially was indifference. I laughed a few times but otherwise it didn't connect much. Given the comment about the show not hitting its groove until the second half of the season, this didn't concern me . One thing struck me though: I wasn't actually sure what had happened. I wasn't even entirely clear why the doors disappeared, which was a pretty key plot point. That's on me. I have a bad habit of not so much watching TV as listening to it while I multi-task. That's fine for an episode I've seen 20 times already, less so for a show whose comedy is driven by its narrative. On second view -- actually paying attention! -- I can say that I thoroughly enjoyed the episode. I might just go back and rewatch episode one before moving on.

I admit I gasped a bit at the casual use of "dago" directed at Manuel. American shows of the 70s weren't adverse to use of light slurs, but never so casually or directly. Archie Bunker might vaguely refer to a group as "dagos" but never straight to one's face. Other shows might use a slur to make a point about bigotry, but this was just there, neither funny nor purposeful. I hardly found it offensive, just oddly pointless.

On a far better note, the intricacies of the plot and the escalating comedy were joyful to watch. After 40 years of knowing John Cleese almost exclusively as Archie Leach, Basil Fawlty is the character I have embraced the least. Neither his misanthropy nor his temper bother me, I just find it hard to see past Cleese's AFCW character that I am overly familar with. I also find myself slightly wishing this was Mr. & Mrs. Leach running a hotel, even if that would be a vastly different show. Sybil Fawlty, played by an actress I have zero familiarity with, has been the star of the show for me; somehow both abrasive and appealing. So far at least she fits no American sitcom archetype.

Bickering couples are a staple in American sitcoms but there is almost always a "Baby, you're the greatest ..." under the bitterness. Basil and Sybil seem to genuinely dislike one another. I expect that will not be undermined or explained, which is fine my me. I am curious if the show will indicate which of the two is the catalyst for the unhappy marriage. Basil would be the obvious choice but given how fearful he appears to be of his wife and how quickly she turns waspish, I'm not so sure.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

On second view -- actually paying attention! -- I can say that I thoroughly enjoyed the episode. I might just go back and rewatch episode one before moving on.

Your commitment to the cause is commendable. Not just rewatching but doing so with such focus. Whatever your ultimate verdict of the series, nobody can say you haven't given it every chance. I'm so glad it paid off for you and made for such an enjoyable experience.

I admit I gasped a bit at the casual use of "dago" directed at Manuel. American shows of the 70s weren't adverse to use of light slurs, but never so casually or directly. Archie Bunker might vaguely refer to a group as "dagos" but never straight to one's face.

Sadly, there's no shortage of examples of such casual racism in British sitcoms of the era. It's a reflection not just of what was acceptable on TV but also in society, where such comments were largely unchallenged and were more prevalent as a result. It probably won't surprise you if I say this isn't the only such example in this series (with one episode in particular proving particularly problematic when it came to making the series available to stream).

Epithet aside, I think that scene of Manuel attempting to take charge of reception is such a moment for the character. The imitation of Basil; the inevitable communication problems with the "orally" men and Basil on the phone; Basil successfully getting Manuel physically assaulted when he is not there to do it himself. The line "Which one is man with beard?" never fails to make me laugh out loud, and the proud smile on Manuel's face after he calls the builder "a hideous orangutan" (clearly having no idea what he's just said) sells the payoff perfectly .

The character could have been such a cheap, ugly stereotype in the wrong hands, but Andrew Sachs - in addition to nailing the Spanish accent with attention to detail - brings a childlike kind of innocence and likability that does wonders with Manuel and elevates him from simply being "the one who can't understand English".

On a far better note, the intricacies of the plot and the escalating comedy were joyful to watch.

It's made my morning to read this. Really.

After 40 years of knowing John Cleese almost exclusively as Archie Leach, Basil Fawlty is the character I have embraced the least.

It's so refreshing to read your reason for this.

Sybil Fawlty, played by an actress I have zero familiarity with, has been the star of the show for me; somehow both abrasive and appealing. So far at least she fits no American sitcom archetype.

Whenever I've rewatched the series in recent decades, I've increasingly found myself appreciating Prunella Scales's performance as Sybil*.

From what I've seen, Prunella was a lovely, humble actress. Sybil is undoubtedly the role for which she is best known by most, but she has done some nice dramatic work as well. She died last October, having been diagnosed with vascular dementia a dozen years earlier. According to her sons, she was watching Fawlty Towers the day before she died, and on the day her death was announced, the BBC showed the episode you've just watched (The Builders) as a tribute to her.



* The same applies to Andrew Sachs and Connie Booth as Manuel and Polly. John Cleese justly gets a lot of attention for his tour de force performance as Basil, but it's an ensemble and the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. Without being so impeccably cast across the board, none of it would work.

 

[Barbara Fan]

@Crimson - Enjoy Fawlty Towers - its a UK classic - off the time mid 1970s and early 80s - but its so well written, acted and with just 12 episodes each one has its own appeal and laugh out lines

Every character contributes to the show from the major, the 2 old ladies and the supporting cast.

There is nothing on UK TV now which is vaguely funny or makes me laugh, but i know FT inside out and could quote you the scripts
A touch of class, Gourmet night, Communication problems and the psychiatrist being my favs

John Cleese and Connie James wrote a classic and knew when to stop. Enjoy xx

 

[Crimson]

My reaction to the first episode of FAWLTY was muted positive.

Having now gone back to the first episode, I can drop "muted" from my reaction. With closer attention and additional context, the episode "clicked" much better the second time around. A sitcom needs at least two things to work: a great cast and a clear but flexible premise. A man who hates the public but works with the public is about as solid a comedic foundation as one could hope for. If British shows weren't so short by default, this is a premise that could have lasted for years. Little wonder American producers were determined enough to make an adaptation work that it was attempted three times.

On second watch, Basil's pretensions and frustrations add more depth to his surliness and temper. Still not likeable -- and surely not meant to be -- but understandable. I hadn't commented on Polly or Manuel previously as it wasn't entirely clear how they fully fit into the scheme of things in the first two episodes. Polly, at first, I assumed was the "nice" character, the relatable one, the voice of sanity. After the second episode, I'm less sure. She was awfully fast to place the blame on the missing doors on Manuel, even when it was at least as much her fault. I had also expected her to be exempt from Basil's bullying but that was disproved in the second episode. (Probably a relief. If he's only cruel to minorities, this might play out as a comedic metaphor for British imperialism.)

I haven't settled on how I feel about Manuel, except that he's been the funniest part of each episode. He might just be the last instance of a comic lineage that goes back at least as far as the great Silent film comics -- "non verbal", childlike, bumbling, and obvious to both the chaos he causes and the chaos inflicted on him. The swift motion of Basil lifting Manuel up to forcibly demonstrate "washing the windows" is one of the funniest bits of slapstick that I've seen.

I hadn't earlier mentioned one reason I have avoided British TV because it seemed rude; my casual observation was they looked cruddy, at least compared to Hollywood productions. Maybe some vintage British shows do look poor, or maybe I'm just used to seeing worn out copies aired endlessly on PBS. But it was a relief that FAWLTY is relatively on par visually with American TV of the era. Certainly not as crisply beautiful as MTM shot on film, but about on par with Normal Lear's videotaped shows. The two episodes of FAWLTY that I've watched did have a slightly odd "fish eye lens" quality to them, where the edges of the screen are blurred; might just be the copies I have of the show.

It's a reflection not just of what was acceptable on TV but also in society

If I have a half-baked perception of the differences between US and British TV of the era it's that British TV was rooted in reality -- even when ugly -- and American TV was more aspirational.

John Cleese and Connie James wrote a classic and knew when to stop.

In years gone by, I would have been very resentful about a show I enjoy having so few episodes; now, I appreciate when a show recognizes that it's best to leave the audience wanting more.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

Having now gone back to the first episode, I can drop "muted" from my reaction. With closer attention and additional context, the episode "clicked" much better the second time around.

Great. Your enjoyment of these episodes is already making me vicariously happy. I find it very rewatchable, and your revisits have underlined that there's gold to be mined from doing this.

A sitcom needs at least two things to work: a great cast and a clear but flexible premise. A man who hates the public but works with the public is about as solid a comedic foundation as one could hope for.

Spot on.

A little nugget for you: Basil is based on Torquay hotel owner Donald Sinclair. The Python team stayed at his place but were driven out by his rude eccentricities (except for Cleese and Booth who stayed to study him) which was the germ that became Fawlty.

On second watch, Basil's pretensions and frustrations add more depth to his surliness and temper.

Yes. I think his social aspirations are clear in the first episode (title and all). He categorises guests (or potential guests) into two categories, "his" type of guest (or the type he aspires to impress) and the "wrong" type of guest. There's a great deal of class snobbery behind almost initiative he comes up with to attract or repel certain demographics. I can see why Bea Arthur was chosen for the adaption because Basil is kind of like Maude - trying to cultivate situations and relationships that shine a light on them as being X type of person - but swapping out the middle class guilt for upper middle class aspiration.

Polly, at first, I assumed was the "nice" character, the relatable one, the voice of sanity. After the second episode, I'm less sure. She was awfully fast to place the blame on the missing doors on Manuel, even when it was at least as much her fault.

Yes. I'll be interested to see your take on her role in the proceedings as the series goes along.

had also expected her to be exempt from Basil's bullying but that was disproved in the second episode.

One aspect that would never fly today is the threat of physical violence.

I haven't settled on how I feel about Manuel, except that he's been the funniest part of each episode.

Oh nice. Appreciating this, I think you're in for a treat.

I hadn't earlier mentioned one reason I have avoided British TV because it seemed rude; my casual observation was they looked cruddy, at least compared to Hollywood productions.

This is more than fair. TV budgets for many British series of the time were very modest compared with their American counterparts, with many shot cheaply and on videotape. There are numerous examples of hit TV series where chunks of episodes have been wiped because TV was considered a disposable medium.

I'm so used to Fawlty's aesthetic I'm somewhat lacking in objectivity around this, so it's good to know you find it holds up in this regard.

If I have a half-baked perception of the differences between US and British TV of the era it's that British TV was rooted in reality -- even when ugly -- and American TV was more aspirational.

I share that perception.

 

[Barbara Fan]

The character could have been such a cheap, ugly stereotype in the wrong hands, but Andrew Sachs - in addition to nailing the Spanish accent with attention to detail - brings a childlike kind of innocence and likability that does wonders with Manuel and elevates him from simply being "the one who can't understand English".

"I am from Barcelona" -
he played the part to perfection and the episode where he pours cream into Bernard Cribbins bag with great flourish, or Basil picks him up over his shoulder to "clean the windows" or when he tells Basil that he told Sybil- "I tell her you crazy to see girl" or "throw it away" or getting stuffed in the laundry basket, or Kurt trying to kiss him, all wee gems

RIP and Thanks Mr Sachs xx

 

[Mister Range]

Funniest Episode of Series 1 Fawlty Towers for me is The Wedding Party.Everything clicks in that one totally.Basil's embarrased semi fancying the French Guest and yet terrified when he think she comes to his and Sybil's Door at Night.Basil thinking the Wedding Party are all having it off with each other.And some of the Wedding Party thinking Basil and Manuel are Gay.So many confusions in one Episode frankly.And we hear Sybil's horrible laugh multiple times.

 

[Crimson]

My slow pace of watching episodes is no reflection on the show; I can just go days without turning on my TV, especially when the weather is nice.

The third episode, "The Wedding Party", is the best so far. I watched it twice over the span of a couple days. The episode started relatively the same as the first two, with Basil being openly contemptuous to a newly arrived guest. The episode then branched into a delightful number of parallel plots, all hinging on innuendo and overheard, misunderstood conversations. I can see now the clear influence the plotting of this show had on American series, from THREE'S COMPANY to FRASIER. My surprise if that FAWLTY is closer to the rowdy TC than the pretentious FRASIER. If I had any misconception about FAWLTY, it's that it was a 'highbrow' sitcom, a comedic Masterpiece Theatre.

Of the recurring characters, I've grown fond of Major Gowen; although I have a bit of foreknowledge that he's tied to what I assume is the worst of FAWLTY. This particular character type was a common British stereotype in mid-20th century Hollywood -- always an older Military man, affable and vague, who says "what?" a lot (pronounced as "wut"). Bernard Fox made a whole career out of this type, an actor so extravagantly English I'm not surprised to find out he wasn't English.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

The third episode, "The Wedding Party", is the best so far. I watched it twice over the span of a couple days.

So glad you're enjoying it more as you go along. The Wedding Party is a great episode.

The episode started relatively the same as the first two, with Basil being openly contemptuous to a newly arrived guest. The episode then branched into a delightful number of parallel plots, all hinging on innuendo and overheard, misunderstood conversations.

Yes. Basil's morality about promiscuity and sex outside of marriage was set up nicely. Seeing he's so overly-concerned with these matters really brings home the impact of those misunderstandings.

And all the while, he really has sex on the brain himself ("Hello.Fawlty Titties").

Of the recurring characters, I've grown fond of Major Gowen; although I have a bit of foreknowledge that he's tied to what I assume is the worst of FAWLTY. This particular character type was a common British stereotype in mid-20th century Hollywood -- always an older Military man, affable and vague, who says "what?" a lot (pronounced as "wut").

I always enjoy the Major. You're right to point out the character type, and that understanding will be helpful in contextualising the scene you have some foreknowledge of. In terms of his views, he leans into the "Colonel Blimp" archetype, albeit mostly less forceful.