Talk

Advanced search

Little Britain apology

(104 Posts)
sunlightflower Sun 14-Jun-20 07:35:44

David Walliams and Matt Lucas have apologised for playing characters of different races in Little Britain. Walliams also apologised in 2017 for playing a transvestite.

But they haven't apologised for mocking disabled people, women, the working class... Is that all ok then?

Am I being unreasonable to think this just doesn't make sense? I'm not sure where I draw the line on what is and isn't acceptable in comedy and I'm not saying the right approach is to censor everything. But why are some groups fair game and others aren't?

OP’s posts: |
YeahWhatevver Sun 14-Jun-20 07:42:11

Isn't it the case that Little Britain mocked a huge cross section of the county.

Seems a little disingenuous to pick out just one or two when in fact there's not really been a singling out of any particular group by the show.

AlwaysCheddar Sun 14-Jun-20 07:45:08

Little Britain took the piss out of everything. Shame though they only a acknowledge one aspect.

Scott72 Sun 14-Jun-20 07:47:46

They shouldn't apologize because I don't think they really did anything wrong.

Plus, apologizing doesn't achieve anything as their critics will only keep asking for more and more apologies.

DrDetriment Sun 14-Jun-20 07:50:25

They did nothing wrong. Everyone was fair game to them and people either found it funny or not. The self flagellation and policing of comedy has to stop.

OnlyFoolsnMothers Sun 14-Jun-20 07:52:46

I wish they hadn’t apologised and instead pointed out they mocked EVERYONE.

pinkstripeycat Sun 14-Jun-20 07:55:33

Brits have always been known for taking the pee out of everyone including themselves so I think that’s where a lot of our comedy comes from. It doesn’t always mean comedians are being sexist, homophobic, racist etc.

Hazelnutlatteplease Sun 14-Jun-20 07:57:07

Totally agree

theonlywayisapple Sun 14-Jun-20 08:01:13

Hope the makers of White Chicks comes out and apologises. That should be removed as well

Scott72 Sun 14-Jun-20 08:01:34

I mean, you should apologize if you have actually done something wrong , but then just give a single sincere apology and move on. Apologizing if you haven't done anything wrong, or excessive apologizing if you have, is counter-productive.

Livelovebehappy Sun 14-Jun-20 08:05:33

Maybe start some ‘peaceful’ protests, shout loud? That seems the way to get things done these days.

Dyrne Sun 14-Jun-20 08:07:25

I preferred Matt Walsh’s reflection a few years ago that most of their comedy was Nasty, and he definitely wouldn’t do any of it now.

I always found it a horrible show, their portrayal of obese people, women and disabled people were just as vile as their portrayal of black people. I think the only sketch in which it was any sort of “social commentary” was the Fat fighters one, where we are clearly meant to find the leader a terrible person and laugh at them.

The fact that they are only apologising for the portrayal of black people means they aren’t actually remorseful and are just jumping on the bandwagon. It’s like the Bo’Selecta stuff - they portrayed celebrities of all races in the same way, and yet it’s only black people who get the over the top apology.

MouthBreathingRage Sun 14-Jun-20 08:11:35

I always had issues with the Bubbles character, and later her 'black' version. It was one bad joke that they ran with, it was all utterly unnecessary and disgustingly crass.

However, the entire show itself wasn't just one ball of offence. As others said, they took the mick out of everyone equally, albeit with gross exaggeration. We've all known a Vicky Pollard, or at least I have coming from a W/C family. Marjorie Dawes, I wish they could bring back that character as an MLM sales person. The personality they wrote for MD was spot on.

As for mocking the disabled, if you are referring to Andy, the 'mocking' there is actually directed at Lou the carer. His character, whilst very caring, has the assumption Andy isn't as able as he is and Andy evidently takes full advantage. It's not suggesting all disabled people are 'pretending', it's just about their particular relationship.

SiaPR Sun 14-Jun-20 08:13:28

Yeah, I think the apology makes it worse really. We are sorry for black face but not for woman face. Etc

MockersGuidedByTheScience Sun 14-Jun-20 08:13:47

I think Andy and Lou are very problematic. Anti-disability hate crime is a new idea. The abuse of anyone with an orange badge for not being 'really' disabled is a thing.

OrangeCinnamon Sun 14-Jun-20 08:20:32

Yeah it was shit comedy then and is now...doesnt help anything at all by them apologising because people just clearly get upset
because only black people get an apology and how unfair is that ?

And then it becomes the nasty black person's fault for pointing out how shit their comedy is.

I hate all their characters , mostly Vicky Pollard .

Cam2020 Sun 14-Jun-20 08:22:45

Little Britain mocked everybody. Nobody was ever forced to watch it if they didn't like it.

OrangeCinnamon Sun 14-Jun-20 08:27:14

IMO the real problem here is that these two were given so much control over the comedy landscape of Britain. They just kept getting wheeled out again and again a bit like Harry Enfield and co back in the day...just lazy really . Diverse voices need to be given a chance to be heard. So shit superior comedy like this doesn't become normalised.

OrangeCinnamon Sun 14-Jun-20 08:27:37

Superior obs in " " there

Dyrne Sun 14-Jun-20 08:36:53

I remember a few years back when Jimmy Carr got slammed for a poor taste joke about Soldiers getting injured in Iraq. He basically just came back with “ALL my jokes are poor taste. If you find my jokes about rape funny but the joke about soldiers not, then you’re a hypocrite.”

Pumperthepumper Sun 14-Jun-20 08:39:41

Hypocrisy is such a lazy argument though isn’t it? Also it doesn’t even make sense - some things are more personal to people, nobody laughs at absolutely everything.

MouthBreathingRage Sun 14-Jun-20 08:49:25

I think Andy and Lou are very problematic.

I really get fed up of this word 'problematic'. It seems to be applied to everything and anything from past media that may not necessarily be offensive, just not politically correctly enough for today.

Why not explain what issues in particular they bring up, how the event itself has a negative and offensive effect.

As for Lou and Andy, it was evident that Andy was portrayed with some disabilities. The premises of the show is exaggeration, so over the course it shows Andy being able to physically do things beyond most able-bodied people's abilities. The 'joke' is that Lou is so focused on his job as a support worker, he only sees Andy as helpless.

Are other actors' portrayals of people with disabilities also problematic? Obviously Rain Man is considered a very poor example of representation, what about Ricky Gervais as 'nice but naive' Derek? Tom Hanks as Forrest Gump, another 'nice but simple' man, is this the only representation of non-NT people we are allowed to be shown in media? Is it right for NT or people who aren't physically disabled be playing those characters at all? It opens an even bigger can of worms really.

Dyrne Sun 14-Jun-20 08:52:17

I didn’t write that very well. My point was that Jimmy Carr at least acknowledged that ALL his comedy was potentially offensive to someone. With Little Britain only apologising for one part of a pretty all round offensive show it doesn’t really come across as a genuine apology.

Lucyccfc68 Sun 14-Jun-20 08:52:39

It’s the most inclusive programme ever made. It didn’t discriminate and took the piss out of everyone. It’s called comedy. If you don’t like that particular type of comedy or programme don’t watch. Can’t say I find it funny myself, but the apology is not very inclusive.

Pumperthepumper Sun 14-Jun-20 09:02:27

Are other actors' portrayals of people with disabilities also problematic? Obviously Rain Man is considered a very poor example of representation, what about Ricky Gervais as 'nice but naive' Derek? Tom Hanks as Forrest Gump, another 'nice but simple' man, is this the only representation of non-NT people we are allowed to be shown in media? Is it right for NT or people who aren't physically disabled be playing those characters at all? It opens an even bigger can of worms really.

I think this is a really interesting conversation that needs to happen. I’m not sure where I fall on it really - Ricky Gervais as Derek was shit, he played a gurning, stereotypical person with learning difficulties, which were never explored further than ‘he is good, he is kind, but look at his funny hair and face!’.

I haven’t seen Forest Gump for a long time so can’t remember the intricacies but as far as I’m aware, his learning difficulties were central to the plot and were explored in a fairly balanced way - he’s shown with flaws, he’s patronised, he comes out on top every so often, he fails occasionally - so being played by a NT actor isn’t so much an issue here. I’m more than happy to be corrected here if anyone disagrees.

But there definitely is a case for characters with disabilities being played by actors with disabilities, otherwise why include the disability?

Join the discussion

Registering is free, quick, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Get started »