HBO Flight of the Conchords Show - Season Two - Ep 6

**Joined:** Sat Apr 19, 2008 6:48 pm **Posts:** 35

Regarding the furniture continuity problem, I wonder if after they had all the eps finished they decided this episode was weak and placed it where it would do the least damage to the momentum of the series -- right after one of the best eps, and opposite the Oscars?

I can't believe that people who are anal enough to keep Bret in the same socks all season would unintentionally farg up something as basic as the total loss of all props in the apartment. Then again, Big J had only to ask to get his wallet back from Keitha, so maybe they just took Bret down from the door and walked over to reclaim their stuff.

**Joined:** Fri Sep 14, 2007 5:02 pm **Posts:** 26

ASmallTurnip wrote:

Bad Atom wrote:

So the sudden reappearance of all the furniture was never explained, and on top of that, Murray can afford to rent a recording studio and stage a benefit too? I know money-related situations on TV are rarely realistic, but four episodes ago a $2.79 cup broke the bank.

Your insistence on internal narrative logic is bringing me dowwwwwn, man. :wink:

The Conchords are like Kiwi Wile E. Coyotes, subject only to cartoon physics. They may plunge head-first off a towering cliff, but they just pop right back up again, ready for their next adventure. You want gritty realism, then I recommend The Wire. Or Bambi.

Indeed. Dave falling out the window and in hospital with broken everything woudln't be seen again for a long time.

I did notice some continuity though.. they got their biscuits that were ordered in episode 2 when they were poor in episode 5.. well Brett and Murray did

**Posted:** Thu Feb 26, 2009 6:03 pm

HELLO

Just a reminder that this is a comedy. A lightweight, fun, entertaining 30 minute show that has never explained away small inconsisiencies and never will. They are not here to solve the worlds problems nor their own. If they did either, it wouldn't be fun anymore.

This show has been rife with continuity issues from the beginning. Example= 1st ep/1st season- Murray's office- poster appears and disapears behind the guys. That's a gaff. Not explaining what happens in between two different episodes in not relevant. Besides, there is no "normal" timeline on this show. Episode 5 could have taken place months before episode 6, or like the 1st season, months after.

As for "body snarking", everyone here is guilty. If a guy comments that he doesn't find a girl attractive, let him. Lord knows, us girls do the same. He didn't tear her apart, he just didn't find her attractive.

Just relax, make some popcorn and enjoy the freakin show. All this picking the show apart and tearing it down is crazy talk. It is what it is. Put it on a pedestal and you will just dissapoint yourself.

**Joined:** Sat Apr 19, 2008 6:48 pm **Posts:** 35

You can't compare small production gaffes like flickering posters with huge events like having all the stuff is stolen out of the apartment in one ep, and miraculously restored in the next.

To be honest, if they had come back to season 2 and never addressed Murray's Crazy Doggz days, I would have been fine with it, and it would have set the bar for major plotline continuity very low. But they wrote a whole episode about getting Murray back on board, so it feels strange for them to not address the furniture at all. Yes, it's just a comedy, but the reason it's a successful one is that they have kept the world feeling consistent, and have been good about setting up gags and seeing them through to payoff, even over multiple episodes -- the socks, the hair helmet, the biscuits, Sally, etc. The reappearing furniture feels like a misstep, or more accurately, a missed opportunity.

**Posted:** Thu Feb 26, 2009 7:02 pm

My bad...went overboard about the furniture conspriacy thing. Sorry about that. :worry:

Let's now move on....

**Posted:** Thu Feb 26, 2009 7:03 pm

Zap wrote:

I can't believe that people who are anal enough to keep Bret in the same socks all season would unintentionally farg up something as basic as the total loss of all props in the apartment.

Actually, I think that might be partially Bret's doing. He seems very attached to particular pieces of clothing (stripey sweater, yellow Trachtenberg Family t-shirt, cruddy, used-to-be-white plimsolls) in real life, and wears them constantly.

**Posted:** Thu Feb 26, 2009 7:08 pm

bibliaddict wrote:

Zap wrote:

I can't believe that people who are anal enough to keep Bret in the same socks all season would unintentionally farg up something as basic as the total loss of all props in the apartment.

Actually, I think that might be partially Bret's doing. He seems very attached to particular pieces of clothing (stripey sweater, yellow Trachtenberg Family t-shirt, cruddy, used-to-be-white plimsolls) in real life, and wears them constantly.

Exactly. I love that he wears the same socks. In the first episode this season, I noticed it because he only had one shoe at the time.
I like that the show is like a "What's wrong with this picture". My favorite is from the first season, Mugged episode, when they show Murray from behind and he had been hit with the paint ball gun.
:prayer:

brilliant!

**Posted:** Thu Feb 26, 2009 8:35 pm

i just luv the daft silliness of it all.

to watch an episode is to take a break from all that's serious in life and
spend 30 minutes smiling and laughing and enjoying good humor, great
writing and fantastic music/lyrics. you know when you're mad or upset,
you're supposed to stop, inhale, count to 10, exhale, blah, blah, blah?
i just go to my dvr and pop in one of my fave FoTC episodes.

problem gone
ardy happy
life is good!

**Joined:** Thu Mar 06, 2008 9:55 am **Posts:** 2445

Bad Atom wrote:

ASmallTurnip wrote:

Bad Atom wrote:

I was going to say that she normally looks very pretty on SNL but looked kind of plain on FOTC. She's not ugly by any means. I just think it was an odd choice considering the lengths the guys go to fighting over her.

Wow. I could debate this vast, universe-swallowing black hole of small-minded aesthetics with you. But I think, upon reflection, that I'd rather commit hara-kiri with a rusty poker. But you have fun! Knock yourself out, Atom.

Okay... It's just weird to take someone who is beautiful and make them seem less so for a show where the plot revolves around the guys fighting over her after meeting her 20 (or 23) seconds ago. It may be "small-minded aesthetics", but it's also convenient shorthand in a TV production. You want the audience to say, "I get why they're acting that way."

Oh I think the best part is that she's totally plain. I mean, I think that it ads to the hilarious patheticness of their characters.

**Joined:** Thu Mar 06, 2008 9:55 am **Posts:** 2445

SheWolf wrote:

Emafer wrote:

OK, just watched it. DYING! Freaking hilarious! When they're at the "benefit" and Jemaine put his arm around Brahbrah and then Bret goes to put his arm around her and Jemaine's like, "Get out Bret" I was totally cracking up. And I'm really glad that my dog's not "pepileptic" hahahahaha. "I love dogs with epilepsy" blahahahahahahaand

Then the song lyrics. "Somewhere there's a Golden Retriever who's having a seizure" OHMYGOD! I have tears rolling down my face that is some of the most genius hilarity EVER! "Somwhere there's a Labrador who's shaking on the floor" I'm laughing so hard the my head hurts. "Make a donation and save a shaky Dalmatian" hahahahahahaha

Those were some of my favorite moments as well ema. holy crud that was pure comedy gold baaaayyyybbeeee!

Great minds laugh alike

**Posted:** Thu Feb 26, 2009 9:53 pm

I totally agree, it is just a TV show after all, and there's no reason for everyone to get up in arms over these issues. Nothing that's come up here ruins the show for me. If it did, I probably wouldn't be posting here.

**Joined:** Sat Apr 19, 2008 6:48 pm **Posts:** 35

Uh, who's up in arms about it? I'm not losing sleep here, but I do find those sorts of details interesting to think about. One of the aspects I love most about the show is the lavished attention on tiny, barely-noticeable things. So yes, if I'm watching a show containing jokes so infinitesimal I need repeated viewings and a jeweler's loupe to appreciate them all, I'm going to wonder about larger inconsistencies. Isn't this part of discussing the episode?

I'm also interested in how Bret, Jemaine and James think about the show -- dorky, yes, but I really do wonder what they talk about in the writing room. Did they discuss whether to explicitly address the missing furniture and decide not to? I'm sorry (really!) if I've misinterpreted the nature of the episode threads. If it's all about the squee, then, um, gym shorts! Yay!

**Joined:** Fri Dec 12, 2008 3:35 am **Posts:** 5376

The gym shorts just crack me up. I can not get excited about them. Jemaine has a stellar butt, true - but those shorts are just silly. And I love how they are all loose on Bret but Jemane wears them tight. Hee hee! What a show-off.

Bad Atom, it's not that we wouldn't *notice* the incontinuity of them suddenly being in a nudist colony - it's just that we would have more important things to talk about. We'd get around to the incontinuity. Eventually. Probably.

Is "incontinuity" even a word? I keep wanting to say "incontinence" but I know that's not it.

I really have to stop reading this thread before I catch a glimpse of something important. You too, Turnip! What are we even doing here??

**Posted:** Fri Feb 27, 2009 3:22 am

The correct term would be "discontinuity". I'd know from hanging around too many Star Trek message boards. You want to talk about a dangerous place to post... :eeek:

**Joined:** Fri Dec 12, 2008 3:35 am **Posts:** 5376

Quote:

"discontinuity"

Yeah, that's it. :lol:

We should call it "disconcordity", wen we notice these bugs in the show. Hee hee! (Or, maybe not.)

What the Folk!

HBO Flight of the Conchords Show - Season Two - Ep 6

Who is online