2016 RTE Drama: Rebellion - no spoilers please (mod warning in post #1)

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

jmcc wrote: »

And coming up on Marty In The Morning, more from the Red Priest. [1]

The point that you seem to be missing is that many of the people complaining about it are those who have had to pay for the thing through the damned licence fee.

Regards...jmcc
[1] Vivaldi's nickname was not due to wearing a red cape like Superman.

There's a list about a mile long of things worse than Rebellion that RTÉ waste our license fee on. Ray D'Arcy, Brendan O'Connor, Brendan O'Carroll, Winning Streak, Gay Byrne, Republic of Telly, Miriam O'Callaghan, Operation Transformation, Fair City, Love/Hate, all of their religious content, Nicky Byrne, Ryan Tubridy etc. etc. etc.

Strazdas

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Much of the Irish media are a joke to be honest, particularly when it comes to reviewing films, books, TV and the like.

Chick lit authors, Brendan O'Carroll and so on are darlings of the Irish media, while genuinely talented people are over-looked or ignored.

Like a number of posters here, I thought Rebellion was decent. Its main flaws lay in the fact it tried to please everyone and ended up pleasing no-one. It tried to cover too many characters, both real and fictional, and inevitably some people will say certain characters weren't covered enough.

Its faults lay in the ambitions of RTE rather than the writer, who possibly should have turned down the commission based on what RTE were offering.

I also think RTE should have looked for additional sources of funding. Why not a co-production with the BBC or some other channel?

6 million is a pittance when it comes to a major drama.

I've heard that the UK channels were somewhat 'reluctant' to get involved given the fact that it was based around the events of the Rising, perhaps fearing that such a show might be a hot potato as far as their own audience were concerned. That doesn't mean it might not get a UK screening though.

maudgonner

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

Do you know for certain that RTÉ approached him with a very specific brief rather than them just asking him to write something? Either way I suppose they had final say on it so you could blame them.

The thing that bugs me is that his last program for them, Charlie, didn't go down all that well and yet they trusted him with their flagship drama for 1916. That's typical of RTÉ, once you're in the door you're set up for life. They could/should have been prepping for this for years. An open tender process for scripts maybe, or at least spread the net a little wider.

I think I remember reading somewhere that there were three proposals considered for this commission and RTE decided to go with this one.

If that's the case then I think it's likely that the production company would have gone to RTE with (at the very least) an outline of the scripts. The writer would already have been in place - he's already got a relationship with the production company because he wrote scripts for Single-Handed, which they made. Definitely, by the time they applied for the BAI funding they would have to have the scripts written and key crew in place.

I don't know how detailed a brief RTE gave the companies who pitched for the commission though, it would be interesting to see what guidance they gave. In general, production companies will have a lot of development work done on a project before they go near a broadcaster with it, with no idea whether the broadcaster will like the idea or not.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

maudgonner wrote: »

I don't know how detailed a brief RTE gave the companies who pitched for the commission though, it would be interesting to see what guidance they gave. In general, production companies will have a lot of development work done on a project before they go near a broadcaster with it, with no idea whether the broadcaster will like the idea or not.

Yeah, I know that if you're an aspiring screen writer you're better off approaching production companies rather than TV stations. They generally do most of the legwork and then pitch it to the stations. Sharon Horgan's recent comedy series Catastrophe, for example, was originally pitched to BBC who said it was more of a Channel 4 show, so off they went to them.

It would be interesting to know what the process was here though. Were the programs TV3 and TG4 are doing the ones that RTÉ rejected? Did they initiate their own process for their programs? What were the rejected ones by RTÉ and who was involved etc.

The Rape of Lucretia

jmcc wrote: »

And coming up on Marty In The Morning, more from the Red Priest. [1]

The point that you seem to be missing is that many of the people complaining about it are those who have had to pay for the thing through the damned licence fee.

Regards...jmcc
[1] Vivaldi's nickname was not due to wearing a red cape like Superman.

Then you could call an upper middlingly successful series like this, middling value for you money. There is no need to bash it as if it had no good qualities, no one at all enjoyed it, and was money completely wasted.


Vivaldi was centuries before the events in the series btw (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonio_Vivaldi).
Which does raise the point of the soundtrack for Rebellion if thats what you are getting at. I will agree that is had nothing to offer at all. And all the great TV series invariably have music of worth.
The highpoint in War and Peace Ep 3 was the waltz scene which was really top notch musically.

maudgonner

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

Yeah, I know that if you're an aspiring screen writer you're better off approaching production companies rather than TV stations. They generally do most of the legwork and then pitch it to the stations. Sharon Horgan's recent comedy series Catastrophe, for example, was originally pitched to BBC who said it was more of a Channel 4 show, so off they went to them.

It would be interesting to know what the process was here though. Were the programs TV3 and TG4 are doing the ones that RTÉ rejected? Did they initiate their own process for their programs? What were the rejected ones by RTÉ and who was involved etc.

I don't know about the TV3 one. For TG4's, the production company already have a relationship with them (they have made a good few productions for TG4 in this vein) so I reckon there's a good chance they went straight to TG4 with it rather than RTE.

jmcc

maudgonner wrote: »

As for the media reaction to Rebellion, I think there's definitely a bit of bandwagon jumping going on. There were plenty of positive reports in the leadup to and immediate aftermath of the first ep. But when public reaction wasn't positive they seemed to go with that and then just went more and more negative. That's fairly typical of the media though, and not just when it comes to TV reviews!

The media reaction has been quite interesting. Remember that most of these people depend on the press releases and events from RTE. The fluffing of the series prior to its airing was typical of the dog and pony show that preceeds a new series. When the reception of a new programme goes badly, they have to jump on the bandwagon or be seen to be massively out touch. Using them as a barometer is not a good thing.

Regards...jmcc

jmcc

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Much of the Irish media are a joke to be honest, particularly when it comes to reviewing films, books, TV and the like.

Are you gullible enough to think that "reviews" are meant to review? They are meant to sell the things and gain advertising. The whole "review" business is a part of the PR engine for new books, new movies and TV programmes.

Regards...jmcc

The Rape of Lucretia

jmcc wrote: »

Are you gullible enough to think that "reviews" are meant to review? They are meant to sell the things and gain advertising. The whole "review" business is a part of the PR engine for new books, new movies and TV programmes.

Review do review. And are experts in their fields. They sell things and gain advertising through the quality of their reviews. PR Engine rather than review ? They people will not read them and they will not sell anything or gain advertising.

maudgonner

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Review do review. And are experts in their fields. They sell things and gain advertising through the quality of their reviews. PR Engine rather than review ? They people will not read them and they will not sell anything or gain advertising.

Maybe in the more reputable papers/review shows/sites. But a huge amount of media outlets don't have the time, budget or talent to do proper reviews and will basically just reword whatever press releases are sent into them. Especially before a series airs, they have very little to go on except what's fed to them by PR companies.

(And as for product reviews in magazines, it would make your skin crawl to know how dependent they are on the manufacturer's ad buy)

Strazdas

jmcc wrote: »

The media reaction has been quite interesting. Remember that most of these people depend on the press releases and events from RTE. The fluffing of the series prior to its airing was typical of the dog and pony show that preceeds a new series. When the reception of a new programme goes badly, they have to jump on the bandwagon or be seen to be massively out touch. Using them as a barometer is not a good thing.

Regards...jmcc

Rebellion may well have been over hyped by RTE. There was talk for many months that it would be one of the highlights of their 1916 coverage and the fact that €6m was being spent on it was repeated over and over again. I think people were expecting Strumpet City with bells on, some epic and lavish production that was going to blow everyone away. Instead they got a pretty regular mini series set 100 years ago and talk immediately turned to how "disappointing" the whole thing was.

Shurimgreat

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

There's a list about a mile long of things worse than Rebellion that RTÉ waste our license fee on. Ray D'Arcy, Brendan O'Connor, Brendan O'Carroll, Winning Streak, Gay Byrne, Republic of Telly, Miriam O'Callaghan, Operation Transformation, Fair City, Love/Hate, all of their religious content, Nicky Byrne, Ryan Tubridy etc. etc. etc.

So true. There's also the question of paying for non-Irish programs, ie British soaps, American crime dramas, films and the like. Its understandable RTE would want to broadcast the best TV regardless of where it was made though, but still, this would be a bigger place to question the spending of the licence fee.

It would be odd if RTE didn't make some drama about 1916 being the year that's in it. Criticising something because its "paid for by the licence fee" (RTE is also funded by advertisement and I think the BAI part funded Rebellion also) is not really a bona fide criticism.

Critics of Rebellion seem to be vague in the reasons why they dislike it. If you are going to criticise something, give specifics as to why you dislike it.

The Rape of Lucretia

I didnt like it because it was on RTE, and Montrose is a redoubt of the socialist workers party.
Or something.

brooke 2

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

And a lot of people posting here enjoyed and thought the series, while it had some weaknesses, overall had merit and was enjoyable. Some like it some didnt.
Chaqun à...

It is curious though that the strongest reaction seems to be from those who didnt, and that not only did they not like it, but have an issue with and that others did. Its almost as if they would be disappointed if the programme were good and universally praised.

Apart from the second episode, I quite enjoyed it. I thought it was a good representation of life at the time. It illustrated how complex the whole rebellion was for Dublin people. I particularly enjoyed reading all the comments about it on here and elsewhere. Some events I had not heard about before, such as the humiliation of Tom Clarke by Percival Lee-Wilson. I had to
check up on it as the scene angered me. It was interesting to discover that Michael Collins had
him killed some time later. The policeman's wife, a Catholic, was heartbroken at her husband's death. Some years later when she was in Edinburgh, she bought a painting of The Arrest
of Jesus. She gave it to a priest friend of hers who lived in a Jesuit community in Leeson Street. It hung on the wall for many years until
someone asked the curator from the National Gallery to have a look at it. That was when they discovered it was a Caravaggio! Amazing!!
That is one of the reasons I enjoyed Rebellion.
It set me off on so many other journeys!!

recipio

brooke 2 wrote: »

Apart from the second episode, I quite enjoyed it. I thought it was a good representation of life at the time. It illustrated how complex the whole rebellion was for Dublin people. I particularly enjoyed reading all the comments about it on here and elsewhere. Some events I had not heard about before, such as the humiliation of Tom Clarke by Percival Lee-Wilson. I had to
check up on it as the scene angered me. It was interesting to discover that Michael Collins had
him killed some time later. The policeman's wife, a Catholic, was heartbroken at her husband's death. Some years later when she was in Edinburgh, she bought a painting of The Arrest
of Jesus. She gave it to a priest friend of hers who lived in a Jesuit community in Leeson Street. It hung on the wall for many years until
someone asked the curator from the National Gallery to have a look at it. That was when they discovered it was a Caravaggio! Amazing!!
That is one of the reasons I enjoyed Rebellion.
It set me off on so many other journeys!!

Interesting. She was a true Christian.
The director was Finnish and I think he brought some objectivity to the programme. The contrast between the Protestant professional class and the largely Catholic slum class was well made.
I'm old enough to remember the original 'Insurrection' in 1966 ( boring ) and this at least was a watchable adult drama.

Strazdas

Pat Stacey in the Herald last night continued to bash Rebellion describing it as "awful" and adding that he thought the characters, scripts and battle scenes were woeful.

He's perfectly entitled to his opinion as a critic of course but then he trotted out the stat that it had lost 20% of it's viewers over it's entire run. As I've mentioned before though, War And Peace on BBC1 shipped 25% of it's audience between Episode 1 and 3 and that is something that has been hailed by the UK press as "breathtaking", "spellbinding", "triumphant"and "perfection". There does seem to be something about the bandwagon in the bashing of Rebellion.

The Rape of Lucretia

By no stretch is it 'awful'. Thats simply sloppy and biased 'journalism'. You can criticise flaws, but it it had merit, entertained, informed, and raised the profile of the anniversary of an event. Middling is fair. Good, might be argued by some. Excellent, I dont thing anyone will try to argue. Poor, possibly, but I think that is only from those who expect something from it that it did not set out to be. 'Awful' tells me the journo isnt really reviewing it, but is lazily rehashing a few other views he has come accross and setting out to give a simplistic thumbs up/ thumbs down view rather than really review it.

As we have seen here too, those criticising it, are doing so very strongly, and then betraying their view as worthless by throwing in red herrings that reveal their biased non-review standpoint: opportunity missed, cost to much, RTE is junk, its a load of left wing pinkos for the last 40 years, its all about women, there wasnt enough war, this or that historical character wasnt portrayed in line with my political views, it didnt show this, it should have shown that scene. Garbage reviewing sooner than a garbage series from many.

Strazdas

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

By no stretch is it 'awful'. Thats simply sloppy and biased 'journalism'. You can criticise flaws, but it it had merit, entertained, informed, and raised the profile of the anniversary of an event. Middling is fair. Good, might be argued by some. Excellent, I dont thing anyone will try to argue. Poor, possibly, but I think that is only from those who expect something from it that it did not set out to be. 'Awful' tells me the journo isnt really reviewing it, but is lazily rehashing a few other views he has come accross and setting out to give a simplistic thumbs up/ thumbs down view rather than really review it.

As we have seen here too, those criticising it, are doing so very strongly, and then betraying their view as worthless by throwing in red herrings that reveal their biased non-review standpoint: opportunity missed, cost to much, RTE is junk, its a load of left wing pinkos for the last 40 years, its all about women, there wasnt enough war, this or that historical character wasnt portrayed in line with my political views, it didnt show this, it should have shown that scene. Garbage reviewing sooner than a garbage series from many.

Couldn't agree more. If reviewers were saying it was a decent enough effort but flawed in some places and that they weren't happy with two or three of the characters / actors, that would be very fair commentary. Instead we see words like "awful", "risible", "bad" and "boring" tossed around by many of the media hacks to describe the entire series of Rebellion. As you say, it smacks of very lazy and cheap journalism.

I've no idea either what sort of a fictional drama series set against a contentious event like the Rising could have made them happy (perhaps the only thing that would have pleased them would have been five hours of the TG4 docudramas about Pearse, Connolly etc made with a bigger budget and more special effects this time).

Shurimgreat

A "risible" program in my view would be one you'd watch for 5 minutes and then turn over. The fact is most people who started watching the first episode watched it the whole way through and while they mightn't be invested strongly in the characters, were invested in the overall plot and how things might turn out. As has been said, it was far from risible, but clearly not outstanding. There were too many loose ends and unresolved issues at the end which is normal when you are given 5 episodes to cover the huge events of the 1916 Rising as well as stories of the fictional and historical characters. I'd have no objection personally to another series or two as I doubt a lot of people would. A prequel about what lead the characters to join or not join the Rebellion and a sequel as to how they ended up. Rebellion had potential, but there's only so much you can do in 5 episodes.

I feel like this could have been a lot better, it looks like quite a lot of money was spent on it, and the subject matter and time of its release is too important for it to be just mediocre.
I found the first couple of episodes a bit forced, the sets and extras were very blatant and lacked subtlety. While some acting was very good, the likes of Harry, some was very bad, the soldiers wife for example extremely bland and poorly cast.
I didn't find myself really drawn into any of the drama at all which I was craving. I feel like the story should have been centred around more important characters from a historical standpoint and this may have given it a bit more punch and drama, as opposed to just touching on names here and there we all know from the history

Overall something that could have been great turned out to be a bit of a dud. It wasn't awful by any means, but just frustratingly mediocre.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Deleted User wrote: »

I feel like this could have been a lot better, it looks like quite a lot of money was spent on it, and the subject matter and time of its release is too important for it to be just mediocre.
.

Interesting thing to say given so many seem to have taken it personally that their license fee was spent on it. You at least seem to think it looks like it was expensive as opposed to the rest of them who seem to be questioning where the money went.

Strazdas

Shurimgreat wrote: »

A "risible" program in my view would be one you'd watch for 5 minutes and then turn over. The fact is most people who started watching the first episode watched it the whole way through and while they mightn't be invested strongly in the characters, were invested in the overall plot and how things might turn out. As has been said, it was far from risible, but clearly not outstanding. There were too many loose ends and unresolved issues at the end which is normal when you are given 5 episodes to cover the huge events of the 1916 Rising as well as stories of the fictional and historical characters. I'd have no objection personally to another series or two as I doubt a lot of people would. A prequel about what lead the characters to join or not join the Rebellion and a sequel as to how they ended up. Rebellion had potential, but there's only so much you can do in 5 episodes.

I imagine a lot of the teething problems could be ironed out in a second series (and it sounds like it was always intended to be a recurring series). I've no doubt the writers have been taking a lot of the (constructive) criticism on board and can see where they've made errors in the script, general screenplay and characterisation. It would / will be a big help to them that they don't have to factor in the Rising in the next series, they can concentrate much more on characterisation (maybe too they could extend the next series to six episodes).

The Black Oil

I've no idea how involved RTE were or not. Did they sit on script meetings, did they send over some 'network notes', or did they just provide a budget and crew? I haven't researched it. I read no PR pieces in advance and I've read no newspaper columns about it. I enjoyed this show. I'm not going to say it was first rate. It wasn't. Maybe parts were like a slightly stale packet of ingredients at the back of your cupboard. Combined with other elements, not so great, but still somewhat digestible. I thought the finale episode quite sombre. Overall, I'd say it lacked any distinctive direction, I couldn't name most of the characters and it didn't have much bracing tension, but I'd be lying if I said I felt it was as bad of some of ye are making out.

jmcc wrote: »

The media hacks are always behind the curve when it comes to reviewing programmes and few people even bother reading their wibbling now. The people discussing this series on Social Media are driving the issue and it does seem that the series is considered to be badly written, ahistorical, a waste of money and opportunity. The people on Social Media whom you seem to want to ignore are the audience. They are people who watched it. They are people who paid for it.

Regards...jmcc

jmcc wrote: »

Surprised that RTE doesn't have a "Talk To RTE" section on Boards.ie. It would provide much useful feedback on its programming and would save on social media costs.

Regards...jmcc

Daftness.

What other broadcaster in the world offers such a facility outside of its own social media channels and an organisational complaint policy? I hate this mentality that fan feedback should inform the creative direction of any show or series. All that does is lead to one ugly thing - fan entitlement and there is quite enough of that going on with some US shows. Leaving aside that this particular series was bound up in history, if I worked in television I couldn't give two fups about the reaction of the internetz. All social media does in is lead to people piling on, sometimes for the sake of it. Don't even get me started on live commenting on an episode.

KingBrian2

brooke 2 wrote: »

Apart from the second episode, I quite enjoyed it. I thought it was a good representation of life at the time. It illustrated how complex the whole rebellion was for Dublin people. I particularly enjoyed reading all the comments about it on here and elsewhere. Some events I had not heard about before, such as the humiliation of Tom Clarke by Percival Lee-Wilson. I had to
check up on it as the scene angered me. It was interesting to discover that Michael Collins had
him killed some time later. The policeman's wife, a Catholic, was heartbroken at her husband's death. Some years later when she was in Edinburgh, she bought a painting of The Arrest
of Jesus. She gave it to a priest friend of hers who lived in a Jesuit community in Leeson Street. It hung on the wall for many years until
someone asked the curator from the National Gallery to have a look at it. That was when they discovered it was a Caravaggio! Amazing!!
That is one of the reasons I enjoyed Rebellion.
It set me off on so many other journeys!!

Yeah it was good on those little details. Your story is fascinating.

monkey9

I don't think it was a masterpiece by any means, but i enjoyed it. Great cast and some terrific performances.

monkey9

Is there going to be a second series? There's a lot they can do with it in terms of the lead up to and coverage of the Civil War.

Strazdas

brooke 2 wrote: »

Apart from the second episode, I quite enjoyed it. I thought it was a good representation of life at the time. It illustrated how complex the whole rebellion was for Dublin people. I particularly enjoyed reading all the comments about it on here and elsewhere. Some events I had not heard about before, such as the humiliation of Tom Clarke by Percival Lee-Wilson. I had to
check up on it as the scene angered me. It was interesting to discover that Michael Collins had
him killed some time later. The policeman's wife, a Catholic, was heartbroken at her husband's death. Some years later when she was in Edinburgh, she bought a painting of The Arrest
of Jesus. She gave it to a priest friend of hers who lived in a Jesuit community in Leeson Street. It hung on the wall for many years until
someone asked the curator from the National Gallery to have a look at it. That was when they discovered it was a Caravaggio! Amazing!!
That is one of the reasons I enjoyed Rebellion.
It set me off on so many other journeys!!

I thought that was one of the strongest scenes in the whole of Rebellion and I'll hazard a guess that most people in Ireland were unaware that such an incident had happened. I don't think we've ever heard anything about Rising leaders being ill treated or humiliated, only that they were tried and executed.

Another snippet about Mrs Lee-Wilson is that she became a well known paediatrician and a devout Catholic later in life.

Strazdas

monkey9 wrote: »

Is there going to be a second series? There's a lot they can do with it in terms of the lead up to and coverage of the Civil War.

It would appear so, yes. It was already stated even before the show started that there could even be three series in fact and RTE's managing director and Head of Drama both said last week they were happy with the show and would love to see a second series.

buckfasterer

Strazdas wrote: »

It would appear so, yes. It was already stated even before the show started that there could even be three series in fact and RTE's managing director and Head of Drama both said last week they were happy with the show and would love to see a second series.

They aren't going to say it was ****e now in fairness after spending as much as they did on it. Everyone knows RTE are in a world of their own though

The Rape of Lucretia

monkey9 wrote: »

Is there going to be a second series?

The success of the series, public acclaim, viewing figures, critics response, the praise for the all star cast, and social media approval all suggest a second series is a sure thing.