New posts

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mel O&#039;Drama" data-source="post: 352919" data-attributes="member: 23">Home To Roost wrapped up on O'Dramavision last night, appropriately with an episode where Matthew once again left the nest to go to college. This often seems to be the case by the end of a sitcom's run, but I really do feel it was time to end (rare is the sitcom I want to go on and on and on). It certainly hadn't worn out its welcome, but neither did it leave me wanting more. In order to continue, it was necessary for the series to change and move slightly away from the specific "father and son struggling to live together" premise. This felt less restrictive, opening up more comedic options in the latter episodes as the situations became broader and broader, but as a result it also felt a little more generic. Many of the situations in the last two series feels more like a moveable feast which could be transferred to or from any old sitcom. In short, the series had somewhat lost the original USP which made it feel special and drew me as a viewer into the series. The relationship between Henry and Matthew remained essential to the series, but while much of the changes in their dynamic changed through their growth, this was less clear because of the more forced changes in the series: first the loss of Enid and then - just as she clicked with me - the disappearance of Fiona. Both of these were perhaps another reason for the move away from the titular "home" and into hotels, workplaces, abandoned railway stations and, finally, college dorms, each of which made a change but felt less cosy and specific. It seems interesting for a sitcom that the final episode not only included a character who was strongly implied to be gay, but also explicitly discussed attitudes towards  homosexuality with reference to Matthew's gay uncle. Matthew was shown to be more liberal-minded than Henry, but only up to a point (there's a scene early-ish in the episode where Matthew literally refuses to turn his back on his roommate as Matthew walks away, the suggestion being that he fears being sexually assaulted if he leaves his bottom undefended). Regardless, it seems a bold subject matter given it came at a time when AIDS-hysteria-related-homophobia was rife and Thatcher was still PM. Perhaps it represents something of a watermark, and it's perhaps telling that by the end of the year it aired Thatcher's era was over.Similarly, an episode earlier in the final series has broached the topic of faith when Peter Butterworth's son came to stay, his being a member of the cloth disturbing confirmed atheist Matthew. Again, I can't think of other likeable lead sitcom characters of the time who would be out and proud atheists. If not a bold choice, it's certainly not the safe option, and I think that's to be admired.</blockquote>

Verification: Who played JR Ewing?