MovieChat Forums > Bottom (1998) Discussion > Poor quality of Series 3

Poor quality of Series 3

posted 12 years ago by mikebayly
16 replies | jump to latest

As an avid Bottom fan, I have always been hugely disappointed by the quality of Series 3. With the exception of ‘Dough’ which is actually very funny, the other five episodes have none of the charm, dialogue or subtlety which made Series 1 and 2 so successful. Instead, it’s a procession of over the top scenarios, recycled jokes, excessive slapstick and rambling soliloquy which just don’t work.

It’s no coincidence that the decline in standard occurred after Bottom first toured in 1993. Series 3 is more like a live show, relying on excess and shock factor to communicate it’s humour. My friend, who is also a Bottom addict, shares exactly the same view.

What do others think?

[–] Littlebitsofgaming 12 years ago

the other five episodes have none of the charm, dialogue or subtlety

Bottom had "subtlety"?
Have you been watching a highly edited version?

Jesus loves me, but I'm worried about the age gap.

[–] Trioxin_Zombie 12 years ago

I am a massive fan of the sitcom myself and I find that Series 3 is just as good as the first two series. Infact, I find that only one episode to be slightly boring in series three and that is the first episode "Hole" it was so so. I am going to make a thread after this stating my favourite episodes from each series.

I never found much interest in the stage shows though. I prefered it as a sitcom format. Just because you and your "mate" are big fans doesn't make it fact what you are stating. And lets face it you are stating it as if it is fact because you added that your mate thinks so as well. Which in your mind means... it must be true then.

"I want to kill everyone. Satan is good. Satan is our pal."

[–] APDallas 12 years ago

I always thought the third series had some of the best episodes of the whole show.

[–] wears-alan 11 years ago

I went to the stage shows. They were funny, but they don't seem as funny when you watch them on DVD. Guess it was a case of having to be there at the time.

You are entitled to my opinion, whether you want it or not!!

[–] The_Devonian 12 years ago

I think on the whole, the third series didn't quite match the quality of the first two, but it still had some great moments.

I think "Hole" is a great episode, mainly because it's a two-hander set in a single location, so (very courageously) relies entirely on the dialogue. I also like "Terror", mainly due to the "sprouts of evil", and "Dough", which is also a very good episode. The other three are merely average at best.

"There he is. Half Iago, half Fu Manchu, all bastard."

[–] jagheterjack00 12 years ago

I like series 3. But if I HAD to pick my least favorite series, then it would series 3.

[–] theauxphou 11 years ago

I don't think it was poor quality.

But what I did notice in series 3 is that in the first stage show in 1993, where they could be crazier and more zany in front of a live audience than they had been allowed to in the first two TV series, it released a side of the two of them that wasn't present when they were button-downed by television censors. This is evident in the final series in 1994; you will notice a change in Eddie's and Richie's character style, with the over-the-top antics and so forth. I thought it was brilliant.

My friend, who is also a Bottom addict, shares exactly the same view.

[–] poomousse 11 years ago

Nope, I agree that series 3 isn't up to the standard of the first 2. It does rely too heavily on slapstick and some of it fails to hit the mark. Its what kind of dogs the later stuff, including that film and a couple of the stage shows I went to. Which is not to say that it wasn't funny at all, because it times it still was...but to agree with the original post...Yes, Series 3 wasn't as good.

[–] gezzymac80 10 years ago

I still like Series 3 but I do prefer the first two though and I think the reason why people are criticising it is because a lot of the crew from S1 and 2 had gone and Ed Bye was no longer there, but even though I think Carnival is my favourite from that series and Richie and Eddie trying to negotiate with the SAS by asking for sandwiches and nibbles was a good laugh!

[–] thedazro 10 years ago

The title of the series is literally an arse medaphor. And I do not think there is any "subtlety" coming out of there.

Bottom runs better together than many other TV shows I've seen. It knows what it wants to be and it stayed consistently good for four years.

[–] SwordFish26 10 years ago

This has to be one of the biggest loads of rubbish I've ever heard. Terror and Dough were 10 times funnier than Contest, and the rest of series 3 held together just fine.

[–] BeOneOfUs 10 years ago

No way lol Series 3 is just as good as 1 and 2 IMO.

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] offyerswod 10 years ago

I love all 3 series

But i kind of agree ...The first two have something more about em....Maybe its the pacing

Also during the first 2 series the end freeze frames would usually result in either Ritchie or Eddie Thumping the other ( depending on who was acting the biggest arse through-out the episode )
The endings and freeze frames of series 3 at times seem rushed and usually just resulted in something happening to both of them.

But at the end of the day all three series are great....as is the First Live stage show

while Bottom Live 2 is alright
Hooligans island ...Just about passable although way off the original track

Bottom 4 Y fronts tour is Sh*t

Guest House Paradiso is even Sh**ter

Bottom 5 - Arse oddity is the lowest of the low ..unwatchable

[–] boshman 8 years ago

Hole is probably my least favourite but I would argue that the rest of S3 is easily on a par with S1 and 2 episodes.

Terror is probably my favourite ep. Just cash, no sweets, the cattle prod, Rik in tights and Eddie in a Banana. OP have you not seen it!?!?