Charlie (RTE1 Charlie Haughey Drama)

Happyman42

At the end of this episode all we got was a hammy, badly done political biopic. Someone needs to explain to the mandarins of RTE what a good script editor does. The whole thing was designed by somebody who googled what people looked like back then. The wigs where awful, the fashion just looked like a bad fancy dress party and some of the cinematography was awful, (the spinning around in the chair, the scene with the shotgun...cringe!) Only expecting it to get worse as the content gets meatier. And the palpable fear of having a go at representing Thatcher? What was that about?
What an awful waste.

daUbiq

Larbre34 wrote: »

If Amber set the bar high, why did I feel like I was doing the limbo to watch it?

Quite liked 'Charlie', although it is set up to take on too much in each episode, quite a bit of "meanwhile, back at the ranch" inserts needed.

And what has been mentioned above about Charlie and Bertie is true, however dodgy they were, the country would not have been bounced into spiteful and prohibitive ECB programmes if either of them had been in charge.Both had brazen balls and they would have been useful to the country in recent times.

Really? both ****esters, both corrupt and both self serving. Are you mad?

ezra_pound

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

I think it was Fitzgerald

No. Definitely not. The script contained a much paraphrased version of the beginning of his speech.

DublinWriter

Charlie big-baaaaaaaaaaaalls.

It was a dog's dinner. Bad lead acting, bad writing, bad wigs, overuse of dramatic incidental music to compensate for bad lead acting.

HeidiHeidi

Skid X wrote: »

I wasn't impressed by Aiden Gillen at all - Over the top and too much like an impersonation of his subject. It makes him look stilted, charmless and robotic. There are far better ways for an actor to capture the essence of an individual.

It was hit and miss for me. Tom Vaughan Lawlor was decent enough if slightly pantomime. Too many characters introduced at once, it was a lot to take in.

Hopefully it can develop, there were enjoyable parts but it seems like a misfire.

This sums it up for me. I'm very disappointed with it, but won't be able to resist tuning in again next time!

I was sorry they didn't (presumably couldn't) use the real Abbeville - it was such a ubiquitous sight from back then that it was quite a jolt when he appeared in front of some other house.

It may have been how it actually DID happen at the time, I don't know - but all the fancy phone system that Doherty got cheap from Special Branch, and the crossed lines, and a light-bulb slowly dawning above Charlie's head seems like a terribly clunky way of introducing the phone-tapping scandal.

I'm fascinated by how they transformed a decades-long disused factory into all those Lenister House interior scenes!

If TVL as Mara was pantomime, I'm not sure where that leaves the actress playing Terry Keane.... cringe-making.

I was around (if quite young) for that period, and would recognise most of the characters - eventually - but oh my goodness my head was spinning trying to figure out who was who. Someone who wasn't well up on the period would surely be absolutely lost trying to follow it? Even though it growed and growed from one 90-minute episode to three, it still strikes me as trying to cram far too much into a short space.

All of the above notwithstanding, I'll be back next Sunday though

ETA - the one thing that LOADS of posters have quibbled about is the background music - I never even noticed it!!!

Skid X

Skid X wrote: »

I wasn't impressed by Aiden Gillen at all - Over the top and too much like an impersonation of his subject. It makes him look stilted, charmless and robotic. There are far better ways for an actor to capture the essence of an individual.

It was hit and miss for me. Tom Vaughan Lawlor was decent enough if slightly pantomime. Too many characters introduced at once, it was a lot to take in.

Hopefully it can develop, there were enjoyable parts but it seems like a misfire.

That's exactly what I thought. All over the place. It seems to presume that the viewers are familiar with the events of the time. If I hadn't lived in those times I wouldn't have had a clue of what exactly was going on from last night's episode. Even at that I was a bit lost.

Riskymove

HeidiHeidi wrote: »

I'm fascinated by how they transformed a decades-long disused factory into all those Lenister House interior scenes!

huh?

They used the Custom House in Dublin for most of it

Happyman42

HeidiHeidi wrote: »

I was around (if quite young) for that period, and would recognise most of the characters - eventually - but oh my goodness my head was spinning trying to figure out who was who. Someone who wasn't well up on the period would surely be absolutely lost trying to follow it?

It was factual, based on real people. I don't see why they couldn't have used stylish unobtrusive titles identifying people. Far too much mimicking going on that got in the way.

HeidiHeidi

Riskymove wrote: »

huh?

They used the Custom House in Dublin for most of it

Did they???

Hadn't heard that, I thought I read that all (or some anyway) of the interior scenes were done in the John Player factory - I thought those stone stairs and arched windows looked a bit unlikely

Madd Finn

HeidiHeidi wrote: »

oh my goodness my head was spinning trying to figure out who was who. Someone who wasn't well up on the period would surely be absolutely lost trying to follow it? Even though it growed and growed from one 90-minute episode to three, it still strikes me as trying to cram far too much into a short space.

Totally agree. The hard part of producing a good script is deciding what to leave out. The answer here seemed to be "nothing". Every bit part player has to get his or her moment in front of the camera. That's for documentaries.

A good drama might have taken just a small aspect of Charlie's life and built the script around that to allow us a better image of the character of the man. IF all you want to see is every item of his career faithfully mentioned and noted for the record, there's any number of worthy documentaries. Or books.

Big disappointment.

LynnGrace

HeidiHeidi wrote: »

This sums it up for me. I'm very disappointed with it, but won't be able to resist tuning in again next time!

If TVL as Mara was pantomime, I'm not sure where that leaves the actress playing Terry Keane.... cringe-making.

I was around (if quite young) for that period, and would recognise most of the characters - eventually - but oh my goodness my head was spinning trying to figure out who was who. Someone who wasn't well up on the period would surely be absolutely lost trying to follow it?
All of the above notwithstanding, I'll be back next Sunday though

Agreed.
Another here who was a youngster in the GUBU era, and have also read a lot about it, over the years. I recognised some of the characters straight off, but some I was left wondering who they were meant to be.
Agree re the scenes with Terry Keane, cringe, in my opinion, and I also thought the scene with Haughey spinning around in the chair was daft looking.

I was disappointed, I probably will tune in again to see if it improves.

henryporter

Had to turn it off after 40 minutes - the acting was shocking, the dialogue very poor (depending too much on Haughey soundbites), the narrative was all over the place - if this were to be sold abroad, very few would have a clue what was going on as there seemed to be a dependency that the viewer had to fill in the gaps from recollection.

Terrible TV - typical RTE killing the golden 'Love/Hate' goose by pulling in all the actors for a really bad ham up.

At least paying the water charges you get water, pay the TV licence charge and you get drivel.

Needless to say I'll be doing something else instead of wasting my time next Sunday night. It seems that GUBU could actually be applied as a term to describe the travesty of a show.

Madd Finn

CountyHurler wrote: »

Just heard there that it's being reviewed by Des Peelo, Mary O'Rourke and some other person on the Sean O'Rourke Show at 10am on Radio 1.... Interested to hear what mammy thought of the portrayal of Brian Lenihan... :pac:

That Lenihan was her brother actually. The younger one was her nephew.

HeidiHeidi

Madd Finn wrote: »

That Lenihan was her brother actually. The younger one was her nephew.

I think the "mammy" reference is to MO'R's nickname - Mammy O'Rourke.

I didn't hear all of that review on the radio, but MO'R sounded quite cheerful when I did tune in - I thought she'd have gone ballistic at the portrayal of Lenihan as a basically thick sleeveen, trying to be in everyone's gang, and gibbering in the face of Haughey's wrath. I don't remember him particularly well, but I certainly don't remember him as that.

The_Captain

Some of the criticism the show is getting is ridiculous

I enjoyed the show, thought it was very interesting.

The only real failing with it is that there was too many characters introduced without being explained who they were.

A namebar or something wouldn't go amiss.

Riskymove

HeidiHeidi wrote: »

I didn't hear all of that review on the radio, but MO'R sounded quite cheerful when I did tune in - I thought she'd have gone ballistic at the portrayal of Lenihan as a basically thick sleeveen, trying to be in everyone's gang, and gibbering in the face of Haughey's wrath. I don't remember him particularly well, but I certainly don't remember him as that.

she wasn't all that happy but didn't go OTT

http://www.thejournal.ie/mary-orourke-brian-lenihan-1864974-Jan2015/

chopper6

Absolute garbage..apalling acting and ridiculous accents..one character had a hybrid Cork/Louth brogue ffs

RTE right back on form with it's dreadfull fare..Love/Hate was a once-off.

K-9

NIMAN wrote: »

I don't know the PJ Mara guy, but if he spoke and had Nidges mannerisms, then TVL has got him down to a tee.

I think he is quite close, the wit is there and the eyes and mannerisms, though Nidge does come out now and again! For me he is stealing the show in a Sir Humphrey/House of Cards type way. The "Infrastructure and jobs" line while Haughey was preparing his speech was very Malcolm Tucker.

The first scene with Mara in the back and Haughey in the front is made up but the dialogue would be correct. Mara is supposed to have said that Haughey was the worst fecking judge of character he ever new, which is important considering the amount of heaves against Charlie, it shows how important PJ was to him and how reliant he was on him. Mara was the real Machiavelli in all of it.

Overall, it suffered from what I knew was going to be a huge problem, you can't just gloss over the 60's, the "rising star" in Justice, the Minister of Finance who gave the bus pass during the Lemass boom times, the countrys first ever economic good times, the failed leadership contest, Lynch winning and most of all, made for TV drama that was the Arms Trial. As I think Moran who was a Minister at the time described the scene at Dublin Airport when the guns were being shipped in, it's like fecking cowboys and indians over there!

That's without going into his lifestyle in the 60's on a Ministerial wage, Abbeyville which was his first mansion and the deal to sell it, TACA, Blayney, Donogh O'Malley and even not showing the rubber "chicken and chips circuit" that was the staple menu in 1970's rural Ireland eateries! They mention it often enough but it might pass over the heads of younger generations!

I think 4 1 hour dramas might have been a better idea.

Once it settled down and stopped explaining and naming everybody, it was quite good. Gillen does Haughey well in the cabinet scenes and with Mara, he's definitely better at the personal scenes (with the exception of those bedroom scenes with Terry).

He doesn't convey how charismatic and statesman like he was, although that might well have come later. I met him twice when a kid when he was in Donegal for a by election and that was a stand out memory of him. I'd expect more of that and the enmity between him and Fitzgerald in the next episode.

As said before, the guy who does Doherty is the spit of him, the sideburns does it and it hinted at stuff to come with the phone call about sorting out a drink driving case, and the numerous knowing glances about the phones! The bit about the archaic phone system is true, apparently you could over hear conversations because it was so archaic and out dated. The system gets replaced and..............

I do think they are doing a decent job at showing what a huge task Haughey faced, the Unions, a divided cabinet, the economy out of control, he had good intentions with the proposed cuts to spending, but it's doubtful he would have had the will to see them through anyway!

There's potential there, a lot will depend on how well Doherty and O'Malley are portrayed and the performances. If it's anything like Lenihan and McSharry, it's doomed! I think the phone conversation with No.13 was McSharry, it was big talk at the time that he had money problems and was facing bankruptcy, plus getting the support of a Minister just to get nominated was crucial. Colley and his supporters assumed that because nearly all the ministers backed him he had it in the bag, whereas the truth was Haughey had most of the huge amount of backbenchers from the landslide 1977 Lynch election win and all he needed was a minister to dot the i's and cross the t's.

It tried to get the brutality and vindictiveness of Fitzgerald and his political opponents in the Dail before the vote on Haughey becoming Taoiseach. Haughey sat alone (why I don't know) with his mother watching from the gallery. Even Bruce Arnold wrote on how vicious the attacks were.

Anyway, there was enough there to keep me watching and the potential to be gripping TV, god knows, there's plenty of material and drama to recreate!

HeidiHeidi

The_Captain wrote: »

Some of the criticism the show is getting is ridiculous

Out of interest, which bits?

(Genuine question)

Happyman42

Riskymove wrote: »

she wasn't all that happy but didn't go OTT

http://www.thejournal.ie/mary-orourke-brian-lenihan-1864974-Jan2015/

Probably has more to do with the fact that she doesn't want to allow the hard questions about what BL actually took part in.
She is quite happy to go on with the airbrushed historical reminiscences that RTE routinely indulge in.

ivytwine

Happyman42 wrote: »

At the end of this episode all we got was a hammy, badly done political biopic. Someone needs to explain to the mandarins of RTE what a good script editor does. The whole thing was designed by somebody who googled what people looked like back then. The wigs where awful, the fashion just looked like a bad fancy dress party and some of the cinematography was awful, (the spinning around in the chair, the scene with the shotgun...cringe!) Only expecting it to get worse as the content gets meatier. And the palpable fear of having a go at representing Thatcher? What was that about?
What an awful waste.

The Thatcher thing was where they lost me. I daresay they thought casting her would have been too difficult.

The script was very stagey, full of info dumps. I know they don't have a massive budget but as has been pointed out elsewhere a good script doesn't cost extra.

Riskymove

ivytwine wrote: »

The Thatcher thing was where they lost me. I daresay they thought casting her would have been too difficult.

No Garrett either? Is Dick Spring cast?

Pee Flynn? Ben Dunne?

It'll be an interesting run to 1991 without them onscreen!

There already is a generic unnamed politician and an unnamed business man as well as "Number 13" being offered money over the phone

K-9

Deleted User wrote: »

Thing i do have to admire about Haughey is though, is that he tackled issues like the North head on where 'Inda' his ilk would go running shítless from. Yes he was an arrogant bástard, and his spent taxpayers money lavishly while people suffered, but we could do with a bit more of his tenacity and level of autocracy today. I can see the appeal in him by the Irish people. Before tonight i would have wrote him off as another FF sleveen but he had his good points even if his bad points outweighed them

The best worst is still to come, that episode will be as likeable as he'll get, they've only introduced Desmond, Gallagher and there's more to come of that, never mind the Lenihan stuff which the script is as subtle as a sledgehammer about so far. As the Geraldine Kennedy character mentioned a few times, your playing the green card, that's all the North was to him.

Strazdas wrote: »

His approach to the North was a bit too Republican and unrealistic though.....he kept on going about the area being occupied by the British and being "no longer viable as a political entity", when it's still there 35 years later in fact.

They released the cabinet papers from 1984 last week and Garret Fitzgerald was surprisingly impressive when dealing with Thatcher on the issue of the North.

Which is going to be another problem with the shortness of the series, it looks like they'll only give lip service to the opposition years, his politicial posturing over extradition, the New Ireland forum, abortion, divorce...........

ivytwine

Riskymove wrote: »

No Garrett either? Is Dick Spring cast?

Pee Flynn? Ben Dunne?

It'll be an interesting run to 1991 without them onscreen!

There already is a generic unnamed politician and an unnamed business man as well as "Number 13" being offered money over the phone

Oh and the other thing that annoyed me was the "The Irish Telegraph" (?!!) I was very small when the Irish Press closed but I know it was a huge deal to FF, silly little thing but it annoyed me!

Hearing and not seeing Garrett was ridic too.

Strazdas

inthehat wrote: »

That's exactly what I thought. All over the place. It seems to presume that the viewers are familiar with the events of the time. If I hadn't lived in those times I wouldn't have had a clue of what exactly was going on from last night's episode. Even at that I was a bit lost.

Yes, a bit of a clanger there. The producers seem to have overlooked the fact that anyone under the age of 35 / 40 wouldn't have a clue who most of the main players were.

Ipso

Larbre34 wrote: »

And what has been mentioned above about Charlie and Bertie is true, however dodgy they were, the country would not have been bounced into spiteful and prohibitive ECB programmes if either of them had been in charge.Both had brazen balls and they would have been useful to the country in recent times.

Cone on, it was less than ten years ago! What the hell will revisionism be like in 50 years from now?

The_Captain

K-9 wrote: »

The bit about the archaic phone system is true, apparently you could over hear conversations because it was so archaic and out dated. The system gets replaced and..............

Was that not the updated phone system that he could hear conversations on?

Neyite

I'm kind of glad I never watched Love Hate because I think its quite distracting seeing those actors in it. Plan to catch up on player if I can with Charlie.

amdublin wrote: »

Aw man I'm deffo over to the PI forum after this.

I feel so dirty

Oh, that's waaayyy beyond what PI can do for you.

Meathlass

I was born in 79 but have read a good bit about this period and enjoyed the drama. The first 20 mins I spent desperately trying to figure out who everyone was but then I got into it.

Interesting I watched it twice. Once with my parents who had desperate arguments in the ad breaks about who and what each character was who up to and the discussions went on until midnight about that era.

I happened to be in the room this morning when my 20 year old cousin (no interest in politics, Charlie to her is as far distant as Dev and Collins) was watching it. Because she didn't have the background knowledge she didn't waste any time figuring out who people were and was able to follow it easily enough as it was obvious which characters were with CH and against him. She didn't need to know the exact identify of each corrupt banker/business man to know that CJ was spending money he didn't have. The historical footage was interesting for her and her quips about how terrible the clothes were stopped when she saw the real clothes in the real footage and realized it was a fairly accurate representation.

Ok, lots of stuff went over her head - Doherty and the phones, rubber chicken circuit quip - but she probably got more out of it than lots of us who were holding it up to our own idea of what we wanted to see. As a straightforward drama she enjoyed it.

Plus I've given her my copy of 'The Boss' to read before next week :-)

Montallie

I was disappointed after all the hype (you'd think I'd have learned by now). I thought the characterisation on the whole (including the main character) was shallow, and we didn't learn anything we didn't already know from the media. While Charlie himself was reasonably well done, his speech was too fast and seemed to me to miss the threatening, reptilian quality of the man. I thought that Mara was portrayed more like an affable clown than the dangerous-to-cross guy of the newspapers.