--- In randallandhopkirkdeceased@yahoogroups.com, "Caroline"
<caroline@...> wrote:
>
> > I was just doing a tidy up of my Randall and Hopkirk site, when I
> > noticed how many episodes are rated as average or below.
>
> > The 60s series is a programme I enjoy very much, but I'd never
> argue
> > it's especially great television. Of them all, I had eleven
> episodes
> > marked as average, and three below-par... that's over half the
> series.
>
> > Are others like me, that you can regard the series as fluff, but
> > enjoyable fluff?
>
> I do not disagree at all with what you are saying...I am not at all
> afraid to admit that a significant part of the R&H(D) franchise's
> charm is the cheese factor. It is more prevalent in the original
> series, thanks to not only the writing in parts, but also the
effects
> at times. I say 'at times', because apart from the usual strings
> attached to items and all, I find the effects to not be nearly as
bad
> as some general reviews I read claimed they were. Considering how
> primitive special efx were back then, I think they did a dynamite
job
> with what Marty's ghost can do...and I'd go as far as saying that I
> like the take on Marty's abilities, and really, the concept of the
> character better in the original than the remake. But, that's a
> whole 'nother post.
>
> But going back to the writing...the more I've watched of the
original
> series AND ESPECIALLY the more interviews and articles I have read,
> the more convinced I've become that the series would not be nearly
as
> good as it turned out if it were not for the cast who portrayed the
> main characters. If it was someone other than Mike Pratt or Kenneth
> Cope or even Annette Andre in their respective roles, the series
just
> would not have worked as well as it somehow did, and still be
fondly
> remembered and enjoyed by people like us. Truly a case of the
actors
> taking diamonds in the rough and smoothing them out, at least most
of
> the time (there were still plenty of flaws...*cough*the Foster
> Brothers (and really a great chunk of that episode), among
> others*cough*). That said, both Pratt and Cope are easily among the
> most underrated British cult actors ever, in my not-so humble
> opinion, for it takes a bit of talent to make the very best of at-
> times highly iffy writing like what the series got for a good chunk
> of its episodes, particularly the overall plots.
>
> Caroline
>
> Epitaph: A Randall and Hopkirk (Deceased) Network -
> http://www.vivadieci.net/other/randh/
>


Thanks for the thoughts, Caroline (and welcome to the list!). What
really started me thinking on this is that I saw the episode with Ray
Brooks pretending to be Marty the other day and I was shocked at how
sloppy it all was. There were some HUGE continuity mistakes (not just
stuff for Anoraks, but things like Brooks getting up from the couch
not once but twice!!) and the direction seemed to be very much a case
of "just place the camera anywhere and shoot".

It was actually a worse programme than I remembered, technically, but
it still got by on pure charm.