Cant Cope Wont Cope

There wasn't much talking. Like the actors didn't like have to learn much script.

Did anyone spot that the arty one is Barry McGuigans daughter so from Monaghan rather than like the people's republic

TCDStudent1 wrote: »

There was also no explanation as to how Seana Kerslake's character knew that was her boss's brother.

Not gonna watch it again, but I'm pretty sure she didn't ,until she was told by her boss in the pub toilets.

TCDStudent1 wrote: »

she did not look surprised at all.

All those acting classes didn't go to waste so!!



Anyway, I have no intention of watching it back either!


Judging by this thread I' d say we're in the majority there...... like!

Just watched the two episodes with the missus. It's fairly weak. There is potential there, the idea is good but it's let down badly by the acting. The two girls are not convincing and the overuse of the word 'like' gets more and more annoying the more you watch. Probably won't bother with it again.

It wasn't the worst thing that I've ever seen, but judging by social media it was somewhere between Only Fools and Horses and The Office in terms of quality! If you didn't like it there was some sort of token reason.

I had a big diatribe stored up on this should the need arise, but I'll keep it to a couple of short points.

1. This show has "commissioned by a mate who also has an agenda" written all over it. The all women cast (in the main), and the female writers etc reek of a mild strike for the sisterhood. Fair enough....but at least make it good.
2. As was mentioned earlier, comedy drama suggests something that is meant to be funny but isn't.

It seems to be a Sex and the City clone about 15 years after people stopped caring. It looks to appeal to 1. women 2. culchies, but most importantly 3. culchie women....aged between 18 and 35. Outside of that it's not going to get much traction, within it it will likely be very popular.

It's not an outrank terrible show. Not as good as say, Pure Mule, better than I dunno, The Cassidys. If there's nothing else on next week I'll give it a viewing.

They mention going to Jacobs. Is there such a place in Dublin?

tommyboy2222 wrote: »

I was listening to the tv reviewer on with Moncrieff during the week and although both of them agreed the show was poor he said he felt under pressure to recommend it to people as it was written by a young woman and was about young women. This is the new normal where tv shows are not rated on merit but on how pc the makers are. You can disregard all the Twitter idiots as well

This PC liberal nonsense should not spread to the world of television as we the viewers who pay a licence fee to RTE should be catered for by being entertained & informed on the screen to the best of RTE's own ability. But oh no; we all know that is no longer working here. In Ireland that responsibility seems to tell us that there is a market for crap & stale TV from these types in Ireland from anyone who would fit their PC Liberal boxes perfectly.

One thing is for sure though; It will make me & others wanting to forget about RTE unless they want to improve their output.

We have enough trashy tabloid TV out on the screen from commercial broadcasters already who trying to make a profit & nothing else. PSBs here should try to make more of an effort in attempting to gain new viewers from other commercial broadcasters like Sky, FOX, MTV & others to gain a bit of positive reputation for trying to make something good in their work. Love/Hate was one example that was good for RTE; Red Rock & The Tudors were good outings for TV3 & so on.

Even another new TV series or two that will be good on merit will at least be something to look forward to if these guys get their act together. The only things that holds our own PSBs back is their own output is too parochial to be attractive to both viewers & advertisers. This parochial output needs to be restrained a little to give ourselves in making good stuff more often.

Topcat32 wrote: »

The writer obviously doesn't really have much of a notion about what goes on in the funds industry, quirky girls bouncing up and down seems more likely in a tech office and who would invite their slightly spaced out friend to a client evening.

Veers from insightfull and realistic scenes to totally unbeliveable scenarios but overall it is pretty engaging and tonights episode was a big improvement on last week.

Yes, that annoyed me also. They also seemed to make it a combination of a front and back office. Casual phone conversation to an American client to make an investment in an unspecified fund......I don't know where to start on that one!

homerun_homer wrote: »

So is Amy Huberman's boss badly written, badly acted or both? I think it is both. Her drunk acting was woeful, it would have fitted right in on that sketch show she did with Domhnall Gleeson a few years back but it didn't fit in in this episode. Funny cause I was listening to Emily Blunt talking to Anton Savage and they noted that drunk people try to have more focus to counter balance the alcohol, so that's how it should be played on screen instead of wobbling around. I'm linking instead of trying to find the full reference.

The show is still all over the shop. So far they've not portrayed Aisling as very likeable. I presume she's supposed to be, right? If she's supposed to epitomise a modern Irish girl then she's just coming across as lacking class.

Some things I thought silly/odd. Did Suesy Street restaurant really sign up to letting them use them in the show, only for Aisling to pull a corn plaster from her dessert? The boss handing them each a few notes to take out the American clients when she herself was going out with them was a bit daft. Companies just open a tab on a night out, not hand individual workers cash like that.

I dont think she is supposed to be likeable. My take on it is that she is the 'unlikeable' one in the friendship. She deleted Ferg's text because she knew Danielle would go, she prevented the taxi man from talking to Danielle about her course, she ignored her mother's mails & calls (and so far we have given no explanation as to why she did that). To me, they are certainly not trying to portray her as likeable. Danielle is being portrayed as more likeable - the scene with the young girl looked to be there for the specific purpose of making her more likeable.

I know nothing about the Funds industry, but my guess is you would need some kind of a brain to work in it. This show doesn't seem to think so. The team of 3 is made up of a girl who blurts out "She is an alcoholic", a guy who seems to think it makes sense to sleep with a girl while his GF is upstairs (why not go Aislings place?!) and a girl that they are trying very hard to portray as some kind of simpleton.

The storyline with Ferg seems a bit off too. It looked like it was going down the path of him being annoyed at Dannielle for not helping him. It even made a point of him not answering his phone after 2 rings - then suddenly we see him with a broken arm and everything is hunky dory.

I like the concept of the show but it has lost it's way very quickly.

I watched it week 1.
Week 2 I totally forgot as I watched Crimecall.
Week 3 I will likely forget again.

Terrible terrible muck. Binge drinking... promiscuity all being promoted and glamourised.

Very disappointing to see our licence money paying for **** like this being made and making it onto our TVs.

I have watched the first three episodes...and I think its utter rubbish...its supposed to be a comedy but I for one havn't found it even slightly funny, pitiful maybe !!

TCDStudent1 wrote: »

The 1 scene that I thought was slightly funny was when the guys stole the ladder!

The guy rang the girl who bailed on him multiple times but would he call the gardai two streets over? Nah, he goes and breaks his arm.