The Office - Season One

got to love the price for a great show i can watch over and over again

Recently I started watching the office on T.V. At first it is hard to swallow, but a couple of espisodes in and your hooked! So I bought season 1 and thought it was pretty good. I will probably buy season 2 to continue. I travel a lot and it provides laugh out loud comedy on a repeatable basis.

As this is the first season - when the American version of the BBC sitcom was still using most of its material directly from their episodes - the show stumbles in trying to find its own voice and way. However, as the show progresses, you already begin to see deeper characterization of everyone - from the arrogant (but vulnerable) Micheal Scott to the everyman Jim Halpert.

The humor is a little drier than in sequential seasons, but this is still a great way to begin the series. Highly recommended for any fan, as well as pretty much anyone else who likes to laugh.

If you enjoy watching awkward situations play out in an office environment, this series is for you. Steve Carell's performance as the oblivious boss, Michael Scott, is extremely funny to watch. His total unawareness of how crude and inappropriate he is provides a comedic anchor for the rest of the cast to revolve around. This is especially true in the episode where Michael gets a basketball team together to play against a team from the warehouse, and Michael channels Archie Bunker's racial and sexual prejudices.

Season 2 is slightly better than this brief season, and has many more episodes to watch. That's why this can't get 5 stars, even though it might deserve it.

[...]

They've taken the premise but haven't taken it seriously.

For example, the American David and Gareth facsimiles are about a subtle as 'a bag of hammers.' I realize both actors have their respective followings (which as far as I can tell, is the ONLY reason they're there), and I won't deny they have some good moments... but they're as wrong as you can get for this material. Not only do you still feel like they're "acting," but they both tend to over-punctuate lines, reinforcing the fact that your watching a scripted show.

Which is nothing like the BBC version AT ALL. It felt so much like a documentary that it was hard to believe it was scripted. That was a large part of our involvement. *I wonder if one of the reasons the US version hasn't taken off, is because people who haven't seen the original, think the documentary part is just a gimmick they tacked on. They'd never guess how integral or insanely well played it was.

Oddly the further out to the periphery you go, the closer the actors come to nailing the natural feel of the original. In other words some of the actors who are NOT playing leads seemed to have gotten it right.

Only in America.

[*Don't believe the hype. Even with dvr numbers, it never even reaches 8M viewers. Four years ago that would have been enough to cancel, no questions asked. Networks are so desperate now (because of cable) they'll call ANYTHING a hit. And they f*ck with numbers all the time.]

The Dawn/Tim facsimiles also suffer in comparison. For example, we have no idea why NewDawn (Pam) had such an assy boyfriend to begin with. She seems well adjusted and way too thoughtful. They took out the complexity and texture from the character and basically missed the point.

In the original, Dawn's obvious insecurities, actually fueled the thread and resulted in some very ugly games. V2's Pam is predictably drawn -- pleasant, politically correct and nowhere near as interesting a mix of conflicts and conflicting qualities (though of all the leads, I think Fischer's acting style is the least self-conscious).

Tim was also a lot less by-rote than his alter Jim. Tim was a sweet, bright, witty guy, with a healthy dose of mischief. A self professed underachiever, but admirable in his honesty about his own short comings, which included looking like the Fisher Price boy. In v2, he's basically just 1st cousin to a traditional leading man. In both his appearance and the resonance of his performance.

Thus these two characters become more about a will-they-or-won't-they plot line, than about the inner demons that create their struggle and the unique particulars that define them. The part that makes us care begin with. In the BBC original will-they-or-won't-they was almost secondary.

I'm glad Gervais is earning off of this, but still... it doesn't seem right. They certainly could have hit closer to the mark if they felt compelled to do it. As it stands they removed much of what made it special. And possibly shot themselves in the ass in the process.

I'm not saying it's a bad show, but I suspect it's confusing for people who haven't seen the original. And bland for many who have.