Jump to content
DVDVR Message Board

House of Cards


Fat Spanish Waiter

Recommended Posts

There is no metric in the world that you can use to say that the US Office is better than the UK.

I really don't want to go down this road at this point in my life. But here are the metrics to use: The UK Office doesn't explain why Brent has his position, there are more high-end episodes of the US Office then there are episodes of the UK version by a lot, the British version doesn't have anything nearly as great as The Dinner Date or a bunch of other episodes, there are so many more flushed out characters, the UK version has so many dropped scenes that don't go anywhere, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

There is no metric in the world that you can use to say that the US Office is better than the UK.

I really don't want to go down this road at this point in my life. But here are the metrics to use: The UK Office doesn't explain why Brent has his position, there are more high-end episodes of the US Office then there are episodes of the UK version by a lot, the British version doesn't have anything nearly as great as The Dinner Date or a bunch of other episodes, there are so many more flushed out characters, the UK version has so many dropped scenes that don't go anywhere, etc.

 

David Brent doesn't drive his fucking car into a lake because he was following his fucking GPS. You're done, bud. Sorry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Possibly but British comedy isn't as reliant on caricatures as yours is. I think 100 episodes in Brent would more likely just be repeating the same character traits already established ad nauseum. Certainly don't think Gervais would write him as inconsistently as Scott was. Remember when they had that great episode where you realize he was a genuinely talented sales guy promoted too far? Then like three years later they did a similar thing and he was just a buffoon again?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The UK Office didn't have 100 episodes in it anyways. So that point is moot right away.

 

I'm just about to finish this off. The show is now a bit full of itself. Yeah, it's about one man's rise to power using ruthless pragmatism, but man alive, there's very little about this show that's actually worthwhile. A whole bunch of empty dialogue, a lot of people in this show who are merely here for Frank to move around or move out of the way. Spacey's charisma and fourth wall breaking appeal is easy to get into, but the show to me just seems empty. I now want to see the UK version just to see the differences, if not only to see if FSW can get me dual citizenship considerations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find Claire more interesting than Frank at this point. Frank is what he is--a ruthless bastard who'll do anything to get what he wants.

 

Claire is different because you get the impression,particularly in the last few episodes, some of the "stone cold bitch" is an act. Yeah, she's not a nice person and never will be, but there's also something vaguely resembling a soul there. Her confrontation with her pregnant office worker was so over-the-top and silly ("I'm wiling to let your baby wither and die inside of you!") it felt like a woman pretending to be Lady Macbeth rather than one who really was.

 

The look on her face when she

heard about Zoe

was also pretty interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Possibly but British comedy isn't as reliant on caricatures as yours is. I think 100 episodes in Brent would more likely just be repeating the same character traits already established ad nauseum. Certainly don't think Gervais would write him as inconsistently as Scott was. Remember when they had that great episode where you realize he was a genuinely talented sales guy promoted too far? Then like three years later they did a similar thing and he was just a buffoon again?

I am pretty sure the rapidly diminishing returns of Ricky Gervais post-Office is a tip-off that by episode 100 David Brent would be wearing mock turtlenecks while harping about being an atheist. And there would be a mentally or physically handicapped person he would make fun of but pretend he wasn't. Because that's essentially all he is now.

Coogan on the other hand... That dude rules.

Also, this whole thing started because I was raving about the UK version is the so good, so the thing about American comedy and me isn't exactly winning you any debate points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Possibly but British comedy isn't as reliant on caricatures as yours is. I think 100 episodes in Brent would more likely just be repeating the same character traits already established ad nauseum. Certainly don't think Gervais would write him as inconsistently as Scott was. Remember when they had that great episode where you realize he was a genuinely talented sales guy promoted too far? Then like three years later they did a similar thing and he was just a buffoon again?

I am pretty sure the rapidly diminishing returns of Ricky Gervais post-Office is a tip-off that by episode 100 David Brent would be wearing mock turtlenecks while harping about being an atheist. And there would be a mentally or physically handicapped person he would make fun of but pretend he wasn't. Because that's essentially all he is now.

Coogan on the other hand... That dude rules.

Also, this whole thing started because I was raving about the UK version is the so good, so the thing about American comedy and me isn't exactly winning you any debate points.

 

Gervais peaked with his first project. That's probably the shittiest argument you could have made. There isn't an American comedy made that come close to The Office. Not a single one. There are very few UK comedies. How is anyone supposed to equal or top that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not a long list, but if the challenge is to name one, I nominate Curb Your Enthusiasm. Even with an off-year or two there's stuff I would put up against any show ever made.

Great shout, especially since Gervais credits Larry David as an inspiration. And at this point the 13 vs 100 argument is even harder because Curb has definitely got 13 great episodes. There's also down years. The last season was ropey I felt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The payoff to "The Producers" arc might be the greatest thing ever. Can we at least all agree on that?

And I realize this thead has gotten dreadfully off-topic, but we can't really talk about HoC in detail yet until everyone's reasonably caught up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The payoff to "The Producers" arc might be the greatest thing ever. Can we at least all agree on that?

And I realize this thead has gotten dreadfully off-topic, but we can't really talk about HoC in detail yet until everyone's reasonably caught up.

Agree on both. Just on episode 5 at the moment. It's like the world conspired to find things I need to do that aren't watching this show.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So it's clear that Molly Parker's character is going to be in the Russo role this year, the aspiring politician who gets their soul destroyed by Frank, and then probably gets killed for good measure. Big shoes to fill.

Anybody else have this problem when Claire is on screen where you can't stop staring at the hollow of Robin Wright's throat? It's like she's about 5cm away from having a full-on tracheostomy. If you haven't noticed it, I dare you to pay attention to it next time you watch an episode. Just know that you will never be able to look away.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only 1 episode into season two but....do these people live in a world without surveilance cameras?  Because to me that was the big plot hole of season 1 and it was repeated in this episode.  A person committing a major crime in a place that would no doubt have security cameras.  

 

Also cell phone records would still...I should probably just stop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't worry, they cover that in the next episode. There was exactly one security camera. And, of course, it was situated at such an angle as to

only capture the fall and not the man conspicuously dressed like every man attempting to dress inconspicuously while committing murder ever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Somebody needs to refresh my memory on something: Was Stamper supposed to kill the prostitute and instead he's running her off the books, or was playing hide-a-hooker the plan all along? I'm drawing a blank, and Google isn't being helpful. If it was the latter, that's just another way that whole thing was senseless.

Because if the hooker who won't be missed is the loose thread that could pull the whole thing apart, then obviously you kill HER discreetly, as opposed to killing a somewhat well-known reporter, to whom you are directly connected to, who has at least one other reporter friend working with her, in public. That's a no-brainer.

Well, really, if you're the type of person who's willing to kill to meet your ends, you don't even bother playing hide-a-hooker in the first place, you go straight to the fake-OD or rough-sex-gone-wrong page in your playbook, but whatever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lucas' misadventures with THE DEEP WEB are absolutely hilarious. What a goober. On a show where pretty much everyone aside from the Underwoods is to varying degrees dimly witted, he might be the dumbest of them all.

And while I totally believe Lucas would buy into the hacker-as-Bond-villain setup, and it's pretty funny in its own right, I think a better show would have had Heronymous Bot turn out to be a 16-year old Russian kid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

House of Cards UK is really fun, but ultimately it's 10 hours in total (and the Final Cut is patchy) so it's hard to make serious comparisons.

 

The biggest difference between the two characters is that Urquhart is a man of "the Establishment" - he is guided somewhat by self-interest, but there is a deeper sense that he feels he is the right person for the job of taking the country forward and governing it as it needs to be governed; he's pragmatic but not quite a pure pragmatist. Also, he's born rich and marries richer. In the end, he is essentially executed by the Establishment and this is something he basically accepts as all in the game. 

 

Underwood is much more self-made (or military-made perhaps) and clearly believes in very little indeed except his own will-to-power. In a sense, he's less rich a character than the original but

 

the question of what he does with the Presidency now he's got it could be an interesting one if they go on and on - though one suspects the focus will now be on him surviving as the Democrat Presidential nominee and from there facing off against the Republicans in 2016. I am not entirely sure they will go beyond that, and I suspect that he will die. Five seasons tops I suspect.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...