One of my three favourite comedies (the other two being Fawlty Towers and Seinfeld), I watched this show from the beginning, back when it first aired in the mid-90s. It was my love of this show which made me despise Friends - and its wooden comedy in the first couple of seasons - for so many years. I kept asking how can Friends be so popular yet so unbelievably Inferior to Game On? Well, the answer I guess is never that straightforward, and I did come to love Friends eventually after sitting down and watching the whole thing with my wife. It really highlights the difference between American and British comedy shows. With the British stuff, you usually get one or two writers who create a show based on a season / series of six episodes, and they write it all. If it becomes a hit, you might get a couple more series but even most of the all-time greats often only have a dozen or two episodes in total which usually equates to no more than a single season of an established American comedy show. American stuff usually also has just one or two creators who may write the first short season or a few episodes and then the episodes often get farmed out to other writers or get written by committee, which allows for a much more 'fleshed out' show with far more episodes, more characterisation, more everything. I still know why I despised early Friends but it's clear that the actors eventually gelled and the sheer number of episodes and writing talent ended up creating what I don't mind admitting became a great show . But the British style I think is maybe more pure.
Regarding the controversial "two Matts", I think what a lot of people don't seem to get is that the creators eventually changed the Matt character to fit better with the replacement actor (Neil Stuke). There are so many scenes in the second and third series which would never have been written to be played by the first Matt actor (Ben Chaplin). The first Matt was dark, moody and broody, darkly troubled. And yet also the coolest character ever! He was a bully, and a b*****d, far more than he was when played by Neil Stuke. You probably should hate him but you love him. Chaplin played this part to perfection. Really, there's not a whole lot going on in the first season but it's the subtle actions of the darkly troubled comic character which are so perfect. Just a slight movement or one word from Chaplin can be literally just about the funniest thing ever!
The Matt played by Neil Stuke was almost slapstick by comparison, more animated, far more pathetic. The writing had more going on, too. Both actors played their DIFFERENT Matt characters perfectly. The show had so many re-runs on the likes of UK Gold and Dave and I think a lot of people ended up getting into this show from catching a random episode on one of those channels. I think if you started off watching the second or third season, you'll have trouble adapting to the first Matt, because he's probably less lovable and basically does less and less happens to him. But if you watched it from the beginning, going to series two with Neil Stuke, you miss Chaplin's utterly believable performance of a darkly troubled character and you'll no doubt find it all a bit daft. Stick with it and eventually it finds its rhythm.
Hasn't aged in my opinion and stands up with the best. Just wish there had been more episodes. Third series and the First series in particular (IMO) are a match for the perfection of Fawlty Towers!
Regarding the controversial "two Matts", I think what a lot of people don't seem to get is that the creators eventually changed the Matt character to fit better with the replacement actor (Neil Stuke). There are so many scenes in the second and third series which would never have been written to be played by the first Matt actor (Ben Chaplin). The first Matt was dark, moody and broody, darkly troubled. And yet also the coolest character ever! He was a bully, and a b*****d, far more than he was when played by Neil Stuke. You probably should hate him but you love him. Chaplin played this part to perfection. Really, there's not a whole lot going on in the first season but it's the subtle actions of the darkly troubled comic character which are so perfect. Just a slight movement or one word from Chaplin can be literally just about the funniest thing ever!
The Matt played by Neil Stuke was almost slapstick by comparison, more animated, far more pathetic. The writing had more going on, too. Both actors played their DIFFERENT Matt characters perfectly. The show had so many re-runs on the likes of UK Gold and Dave and I think a lot of people ended up getting into this show from catching a random episode on one of those channels. I think if you started off watching the second or third season, you'll have trouble adapting to the first Matt, because he's probably less lovable and basically does less and less happens to him. But if you watched it from the beginning, going to series two with Neil Stuke, you miss Chaplin's utterly believable performance of a darkly troubled character and you'll no doubt find it all a bit daft. Stick with it and eventually it finds its rhythm.
Hasn't aged in my opinion and stands up with the best. Just wish there had been more episodes. Third series and the First series in particular (IMO) are a match for the perfection of Fawlty Towers!