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

Strazdas

Rebellion was the most watched programme on RTE1 in January according to the official TAM website (and this takes into account timeshift views too). I think this can put to bed the idea that the show was some sort of massive flop as certain critics would like us to believe.

http://www.tamireland.ie/tv/top-programmes

Keplar240B

Bizarre thread is bizarre

Strazdas

Keplar240B wrote: »

Bizarre thread is bizarre

What's "bizarre" about the thread?

The Rape of Lucretia

http://www.tamireland.ie/tv/top-programmes


"RTE score major success with Easter 16 rising drama"

"Big draw on January Sunday nights 'Rebellion' tops viewing figures"

"Irish public tunes in en masse to big budget Rising drama"

"RTE hits the target with well judged drama based on Easter Rising"

Strazdas

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

http://www.tamireland.ie/tv/top-programmes


"RTE score major success with Easter 16 rising drama"

"Big draw on January Sunday nights 'Rebellion' tops viewing figures"

"Irish public tunes in en masse to big budget Rising drama"

"RTE hits the target with well judged drama based on Easter Rising"

I didn't realise Rebellion was actually topping the Irish TV ratings the first two weeks it was on air. Certainly it was a little disappointing that they dropped some of their audience for the last couple of episodes but the press were rather cheeky in describing it as a "flop" and basing that comment on it's ratings (if they based it on the reaction of TV critics or social media, that would have been fair enough).

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Strazdas wrote: »

I didn't realise Rebellion was actually topping the Irish TV ratings the first two weeks it was on air. Certainly it was a little disappointing that they dropped some of their audience for the last couple of episodes but the press were rather cheeky in describing it as a "flop" and basing that comment on it's ratings (if they based it on the reaction of TV critics or social media, that would have been fair enough).

RTÉ always tops the Irish viewing figures even with relatively low numbers. The Rugby World Cup was the only non RTÉ thing on the top 20 last year and outside of sport and Christmas specials you're looking at a figure of between 500-600k being considered a success. So for Rebellion to have been way above that on debut and still in or around it by the time it finished is a really good performance.

Shurimgreat

Some of the TV critics are laughable. Read this "review" from Pat Stacey.

http://www.independent.ie/entertainment/television/tv-reviews/bridget-eamon-is-witless-rubbish-no-matter-what-channel-its-on-pat-stacey-34436629.html

This guy has made it clear he hates all homemade dramas and programs aside from current affairs and only watches RTE for the "quality imports". Its tabloid rubbish at its worst and hard to take him seriously. No matter what RTE produces in house, he will hate it.

Utopia Parkway

Strazdas wrote: »

Rebellion was the most watched programme on RTE1 in January according to the official TAM website (and this takes into account timeshift views too). I think this can put to bed the idea that the show was some sort of massive flop as certain critics would like us to believe.

http://www.tamireland.ie/tv/top-programmes

Well it was a critical flop anyway I think it's fair to say. I think it was always going to get a decent viewership as it was highly advertised beforehand. Not many RTE shows get national billboard campaigns.

Strazdas

Utopia Parkway wrote: »

Well it was a critical flop anyway I think it's fair to say. I think it was always going to get a decent viewership as it was highly advertised beforehand. Not many RTE shows get national billboard campaigns.

Fair comments but the press did try to make out the entire series was a flop, even ratings wise. It clearly wasn't an outstanding triumph but it was far from a dud. Bearing in mind too that this was always intended to be a recurring series, I think the press could have been a bit more restrained.

JohnFalstaff

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Some of the TV critics are laughable. Read this "review" from Pat Stacey.

http://www.independent.ie/entertainment/television/tv-reviews/bridget-eamon-is-witless-rubbish-no-matter-what-channel-its-on-pat-stacey-34436629.html

This guy has made it clear he hates all homemade dramas and programs aside from current affairs and only watches RTE for the "quality American imports". Its tabloid rubbish at its worst and hard to take him seriously. No matter what RTE puts on, he will hate it.

I find Pat Stacey to be one of the better TV reviewers in Irish media. His columns are generally more insightful than their equivalent in the Irish Times where the TV reviews are usually just recaps. I'd tend to agree with a lot of what he says in that column you linked.

He doesn't have much time for a lot of the stuff RTE produces but it's unfair to say he hates all homemade dramas. He's given good reviews to lots of the dramas that TG4 have produced in recent years:

http://www.independent.ie/entertainment/television/tv-reviews/an-bronntanas-tg4s-cracking-new-thriller-as-gaeilge-30686695.html

http://www.herald.ie/entertainment/tv-radio/why-you-need-to-watch-new-irish-western-an-klondike-31510299.html

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Utopia Parkway wrote: »

Well it was a critical flop anyway I think it's fair to say. I think it was always going to get a decent viewership as it was highly advertised beforehand. Not many RTE shows get national billboard campaigns.

Ratings success is probably of more interest to RTÉ and more important in terms of looking at doing a second series. Critics hating it could make it tricky when trying to launch a second series though.

Looking at TV as a whole there are plenty of critically acclaimed series that get canned after one series because nobody is watching.

Also I think you can stick 1916 on anything for the next couple of months and people will lap it up. Would be interesting to see if they could maintain the interest when it's 2017 and nobody cares any more.

Doesn't seem a clear cut decision either way. On a second series that is.

Strazdas

JohnFalstaff wrote: »

I find Pat Stacey to be one of the better TV reviewers in Irish media. His columns are generally more insightful than their equivalent in the Irish Times where the TV reviews are usually just recaps. I'd tend to agree with a lot of what he says in that column you linked.

He doesn't have much time for a lot of the stuff RTE produces but it's unfair to say he hates all homemade dramas. He's given good reviews to lots of the dramas that TG4 have produced in recent years:

http://www.independent.ie/entertainment/television/tv-reviews/an-bronntanas-tg4s-cracking-new-thriller-as-gaeilge-30686695.html

http://www.herald.ie/entertainment/tv-radio/why-you-need-to-watch-new-irish-western-an-klondike-31510299.html

He can be a bit hit and miss in his reviews. I remember he totally bigged up ITV's Jekyll and Hyde during the autumn which turned out to be a ratings disaster for them and dropped to 1m viewers in December.

ScumLord

Strazdas wrote: »

Rebellion was the most watched programme on RTE1 in January according to the official TAM website (and this takes into account timeshift views too). I think this can put to bed the idea that the show was some sort of massive flop as certain critics would like us to believe.

http://www.tamireland.ie/tv/top-programmes

The thing RTE has in it's favour though is that their the state broadcaster and people will feel somewhat obliged to watch some of their bigger content out of national interest. Rebellion was supposed to be Ireland's take on one of it's most important historical events. People are going to watch it just to be part of that experience.

It doesn't mean they liked it though.

I think it was alright, and that mainly it just wasn't my kind of show. Looking at the comments on some of the streaming sites that pirated it out across the world, it was well received by those that watched it.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

ScumLord wrote: »

The thing RTE has in it's favour though is that their the state broadcaster and people will feel somewhat obliged to watch some of their bigger content out of national interest. Rebellion was supposed to be Ireland's take on one of it's most important historical events. People are going to watch it just to be part of that experience.

It doesn't mean they liked it though.

Doesn't matter if they liked it though. Not really. This is why I find this trend of "hate watching" TV shows just to live tweet scorn or mock something. At the end of the day it adds to the ratings and that's what advertisers look at. They don't care whether the people watching are enjoying what they're seeing or not.

Strazdas

ScumLord wrote: »

The thing RTE has in it's favour though is that their the state broadcaster and people will feel somewhat obliged to watch some of their bigger content out of national interest. Rebellion was supposed to be Ireland's take on one of it's most important historical events. People are going to watch it just to be part of that experience.

It doesn't mean they liked it though.

I think it was alright, and that mainly it just wasn't my kind of show. Looking at the comments on some of the streaming sites that pirated it out across the world, it was well received by those that watched it.

I see it has a rating of 6.8 on IMDB which sounds fair enough. Definitely not 'outstanding' or 'superb' but a long way from being a flop or disaster either. In other words, a perfectly watchable historical TV drama series.

I can't help thinking the advance hype for the series and talk of €6m meant that the Irish critics were potentially sharpening their knives. I don't know what they were expecting, but whatever they got in the end, they didn't like.

HeidiHeidi

One of the contestants on Mastermind this evening had the Easter rising as his specialist subject.

Have to say, having watched Rebellion helped me no end in being able to answer nearly all of his questions

Strazdas

HeidiHeidi wrote: »

One of the contestants on Mastermind this evening had the Easter rising as his specialist subject.

Have to say, having watched Rebellion helped me no end in being able to answer nearly all of his questions

But Rebellion is "revisionist nonsense" according to the Twitterati : you should have gotten every single answer wrong

Madd Finn

mick malones mauser wrote: »

[/U][/B]


This effort claimed to have focussed on women and yet it airbrushed Elizabeth O'Farrell out.
Various other notable women like Margaret Skinnider,........were either completely ignored or given a token mention.
Instead we were presented with 3 absurd female caricatures.

Actually I think the Frances O'Flaherty character was clearly based on Skinnider. From the cold-blooded killer countenance to the Irish Citizen Army role plus the whole gender-fluid vibe, I think she was clearly meant to be her.

Don't you think?

Strazdas

Madd Finn wrote: »

Actually I think the Frances O'Flaherty character was clearly based on Skinnider. From the cold-blooded killer countenance to the Irish Citizen Army role plus the whole gender-fluid vibe, I think she was clearly meant to be her.

Don't you think?

She seems a very 'colourful' character according to this article in today's Irish Times. Looks like she came very close to be the only female rebel to be killed in action while fighting the British forces.

http://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/people/margaret-skinnider-my-disappointment-at-not-going-back-to-bomb-the-shelbourne-hotel-1.2587147

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

I was watching the 7 Women documentary on RTE last week and there was one women, can't remember which one, who had written a letter in the 20's to the author of a biography about Markievicz. She was pretty annoyed at him about the book but one of the lines in her letter stood out to me because I'm 99% sure they had Elizabeth say it in the last episode when George was offering to get her off the charges if she said she's been led astray by Jimmy. It was something along the lines of "why must everything a woman does be because of love for a man". Something to that effect.

It certainly seems they lifted quite a bit from real life characters to create the fictional one. Combining a few traits from different people to create one new person.

Madd Finn

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

It certainly seems they lifted quite a bit from real life characters to create the fictional one. Combining a few traits from different people to create one new person.

And in a DRAMA that's a perfectly valid thing to do. And a very common device.

Neil Jordan did it in his Michael Collins movie, combining the character of Emmet Dalton with another one whose name escapes me. Just to give an example pertinent to the subject matter at hand.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Madd Finn wrote: »

And in a DRAMA that's a perfectly valid thing to do. And a very common device.

Neil Jordan did it in his Michael Collins movie, combining the character of Emmet Dalton with another one whose name escapes me. Just to give an example pertinent to the subject matter at hand.

Yeah. I'm not complaining about it. Just pointing out that since the show itself aired and all these documentaries have aired more recently it sheds a slightly different light on some of the fictional characters.

I can't help wondering if maybe they should have held Rebellion back until now or even the actual anniversary in April. Would people have received it differently? At the time it was clear that a lot of people had a fairly poor knowledge of what actually happened around the Rising.

Strazdas

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

Yeah. I'm not complaining about it. Just pointing out that since the show itself aired and all these documentaries have aired more recently it sheds a slightly different light on some of the fictional characters.

I can't help wondering if maybe they should have held Rebellion back until now or even the actual anniversary in April. Would people have received it differently? At the time it was clear that a lot of people had a fairly poor knowledge of what actually happened around the Rising.

Very good point. A lot of criticism of the show came from people who were claiming it was revisionist or distorted, but the numerous documentaries have shown how complex the situation was. I do think a lot of the criticism was over the top, it was a decent enough TV drama series (it seems viewers were expecting some sort of sweeping epic that would completely blow them away.....but even the first series of Love Hate got a very muted and low key response).

TerrorFirmer

To be fair it's silly to suggest that peoples dislike of the show largely stems from a lack of understanding of the historical context. I found it largely wooden and very poorly scripted - this forms the bulk of complaints about the show that I've heard.

Historical liberties I have no issue with, and I presume the vast majority of viewers wouldn't be that fussed either. It simply was just a very average production that had a lot of promise but failed to deliver. It was like a big budget Fair City half the time. I'm sure people had historical gripes, but they would be the small minority - I've yet to have a discussion with anyone who expressed historical inaccuracy as the backbone to their criticism.

Whether they released it when they did, last weekend, or next year, that wouldn't change my opinion of the show in the slightest.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

^ I didn't say it was the only reason people didn't like it. We discussed all the failings it had while it was airing.

What I'm saying is that looking at various social media sites while it was on revealed just how poor a lot of people's knowledge was on this matter. A lot of people had either no idea at all beyond some guys took over the GPO and got executed while a lot of other people had a lot of knowledge but had a very one sided view.

Being better educated on the issue wouldn't have fixed the issues with script and plotting and character development etc. etc. but for the people who complained about factual inaccuracies and things being unrealistic and real characters being portrayed badly and other such things perhaps showing it at the end of all the factual programing would have made some difference.

Strazdas

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

To be fair it's silly to suggest that peoples dislike of the show largely stems from a lack of understanding of the historical context. I found it largely wooden and very poorly scripted - this forms the bulk of complaints about the show that I've heard.

Historical liberties I have no issue with, and I presume the vast majority of viewers wouldn't be that fussed either. It simply was just a very average production that had a lot of promise but failed to deliver. It was like a big budget Fair City half the time. I'm sure people had historical gripes, but they would be the small minority - I've yet to have a discussion with anyone who expressed historical inaccuracy as the backbone to their criticism.

Whether they released it when they did, last weekend, or next year, that wouldn't change my opinion of the show in the slightest.

I thought it was in and around the same level of RTE's other programmes about the Rising. For sure, it was flawed and they got things wrong but it was a perfectly watchable historical TV drama series. I'm not entirely sure what people were expecting....it seems they thought it would be an epic melodrama and the defining depiction on the Rising on TV (when I had no such expectations myself, if anything it was a bit better than I had anticipated).

BuilderPlumber

Just finally caught up and watched this series. I would give it a 6 or 7 out of 10. As with Clean Break I felt the whole thing was left down by an obvious showing of restraint. That Love/Hate feel was absent from both these dramas. Imagine a version of Love/Hate where a bang goes off and we do not see the violence of gangland? That's what Rebellion was like. For some reason, they were afraid to show the executions directly and it was a long way from the no holds barred approach of Love/Hate with scenes like what happened to Fran, what Nidge did to Tommy's head, what Tommy/Darren did to Git's head, what Noelie did to Fran's teeth, what Lizzie did to that motorist's head and how Lizzie herself ended up, etc.

While rebellion (and Clean Break) were not anything near as good as Love/Hate, they were still watchable. Rebellion was something to watch and while it suffered from the same old restraints and shying away from violence that has plagued many RTE dramas apart from Love/Hate, it was certainly nothing as poor as The Big Bow Wow or Trouble in Paradise for example.

Might watch it again but cannot see myself revisiting this series often in the future. Another thing that should have been done is a series that has Pearse, Connolly, etc. as the main characters.

Lt Dan

BuilderPlumber wrote: »

Just finally caught up and watched this series. I would give it a 6 or 7 out of 10. As with Clean Break I felt the whole thing was left down by an obvious showing of restraint. That Love/Hate feel was absent from both these dramas. Imagine a version of Love/Hate where a bang goes off and we do not see the violence of gangland? That's what Rebellion was like. For some reason, they were afraid to show the executions directly and it was a long way from the no holds barred approach of Love/Hate with scenes like what happened to Fran, what Nidge did to Tommy's head, what Tommy/Darren did to Git's head, what Noelie did to Fran's teeth, what Lizzie did to that motorist's head and how Lizzie herself ended up, etc.

While rebellion (and Clean Break) were not anything near as good as Love/Hate, they were still watchable. Rebellion was something to watch and while it suffered from the same old restraints and shying away from violence that has plagued many RTE dramas apart from Love/Hate, it was certainly nothing as poor as The Big Bow Wow or Trouble in Paradise for example.

Might watch it again but cannot see myself revisiting this series often in the future. Another thing that should have been done is a series that has Pearse, Connolly, etc. as the main characters.

The sight of Connolly being strapped to a chair might have set the emotions and a lot of Anti English feeling (if it is not already there). Also, Eamonn Ceannt, I believe held a crucifix will being executed. Perhaps it was best that was left out. The show already unintentionally portrayed (probably) the religious men who prayed in the GPO as something like the current day ISIS/Islamic fundamentalists (Again, I'd say even the atheists back then might have had an auld pray if they were on their way to die, like the men in WW1. After all, no point making enemies on your way to your death bed)

I think people could have used their imagination about a scene that has been shown many times before in other films and tv documentaries. They (the script writers) and director, clearly had no intention of "glorifying" or romanticizing the "blood sacrifices"

We all saw the massive back lash from a minority (many of whom admitted that they had not seen the film ie Ruth Dudley Edwards) about scenes in Wind That Shakes The Barley, which were actually based on true events . So RTE might have wanted to keep things safe.

Anyway, Rebellion was about "da wimmen"

Lt Dan

Strazdas wrote: »

I thought it was in and around the same level of RTE's other programmes about the Rising. For sure, it was flawed and they got things wrong but it was a perfectly watchable historical TV drama series. I'm not entirely sure what people were expecting....it seems they thought it would be an epic melodrama and the defining depiction on the Rising on TV (when I had no such expectations myself, if anything it was a bit better than I had anticipated).

They could have at least been accurate.

They could have at least portrayed the women better, after all, that was the whole aim.

You would know that this was written by mostly men. Elizabeth became a background character near the end, yet, her character was a portrayal of many interesting women during that time. The Belfast girl's story became more interesting - You know, the waun was was engaged to the Barrister (whose father had a ship yard in the North) and kinda looked dotsy at the start but became a strong character when she was nursing the wounded and then said that she was going over to Europe for the remainder of the war. Francis' character was stronger and would have portrayed what kind of women of the Anti Treaty side (years later) would have been like. The implication that she was some kind of Albert Noobs or question marks over her sexuality like Character was unnecessary . The other girl was forgettable (not the actor's fault) She had a great basis to her story line but they just choked by making her looking like a bit of a tramp whose life or death decisions were based on "getting back on her man". Surely women are not as shallow as that? :P

The show made the women look like idiots at times . That is not accurate

The portrayal of De Valera was pathetic. His military record is not to be proud of in the context of results and it was always known by historians that he did break down and many men went to great lengths to keep that quiet out of loyality. His unit were actually one of the more successful with it's objectives - no thanks to him of course. But, the scene were he vomits, why did they just single him out? That could have been any other character. He didn't vomit. When you put that scene up and immediately shoot Collins as the affable great man , back slapping and already holding an air of leadership, a boy amongst men, there is only one clear message that the show intended to portray. Collins was a glorified goafer to Plunkett in the GPO and no more. Of course, it is more than what most of the population who later claimed to be associated with 1916 did.

Certainly watchable however, some of the acting was a bit meh, surprisingly as the cast on paper were excellent choices. Gleeson, surprisingly was poor at times. Yer man from Jimmy's Hall was outstanding. The guy who played Stephen, the Irish Parliamentary Man / Officer was a bit weak. Competent, but weak. Elizabeth's brother, while hammy, was very good and portrayed the opportunists in Ireland who were prepared to swing to either side to get by. It would be interesting how he is portrayed in a War of Independence version - probably would be killed , but by who?

BuilderPlumber

Lt Dan wrote: »

The sight of Connolly being strapped to a chair might have set the emotions and a lot of Anti English feeling (if it is not already there). Also, Eamonn Ceannt, I believe held a crucifix will being executed. Perhaps it was best that was left out. The show already unintentionally portrayed (probably) the religious men who prayed in the GPO as something like the current day ISIS/Islamic fundamentalists (Again, I'd say even the atheists back then might have had an auld pray if they were on their way to die, like the men in WW1. After all, no point making enemies on your way to your death bed)

I think people could have used their imagination about a scene that has been shown many times before in other films and tv documentaries. They (the script writers) and director, clearly had no intention of "glorifying" or romanticizing the "blood sacrifices"

We all saw the massive back lash from a minority (many of whom admitted that they had not seen the film ie Ruth Dudley Edwards) about scenes in Wind That Shakes The Barley, which were actually based on true events . So RTE might have wanted to keep things safe.

Anyway, Rebellion was about "da wimmen"

I know the subject matter was very controversial but still I feel that it could have been braver. The restraint also dominant in Clean Break proves that RTE drama has shied away from the gritty realism of Love/Hate to a more sanitised take on crime or war related dramas.

The anti-English brigade would of course use it as propaganda if the series was done Love/Hate-style and showed all. Others would come out and would condemn the violence (I wonder how many cats or street pigeons got killed!!). Yet the majority would accept it as a marvellous piece of drama. You could balance the executions with some violent treatment of RIC officers that was very common at the time. Another controversial issue of course is that the pro-republican movement did commit atrocities against pro-English people too!

Love/Hate was unafraid to portray controversial topics like dissident republicanism's twofaced involvement with the drugs trade and how guys like Nidge and Fran lived a normal family life side by side with a violent life of crime. Rebellion could have been awesome if it had done more to show the brutal realities of a violent warzone that suddenly overturned what seemed a peaceful city only a day before.