Adicionar um enredo no seu idiomaFive friends--Ollie, Chloe, Jas, DK, and Matt--attend Wooton College in Abingdon. Together they embark on sex-fueled misadventures as a final farewell to adolescence.Five friends--Ollie, Chloe, Jas, DK, and Matt--attend Wooton College in Abingdon. Together they embark on sex-fueled misadventures as a final farewell to adolescence.Five friends--Ollie, Chloe, Jas, DK, and Matt--attend Wooton College in Abingdon. Together they embark on sex-fueled misadventures as a final farewell to adolescence.
Explorar episódios
Avaliações em destaque
Most bad shows I can safely ignore. Some, though, generate such an astonishing reputation for awfulness that I can't help but do some minor investigations; in the case of 'Coming Of Age', I was left staggering away reaching for the mouthwash.
No disrespect to nineteen year-olds out there, but they aren't ready for proper jobs. I know this because much of one of my old jobs was spent dealing with problems caused by the nineteen year-old employees. I really feel sorry for the writer of this show, whose career has opened with a critical evisceration that he might have avoided had he been out to see the world for a bit before putting pen to paper. Successful it may be, and I don't doubt that his bank balance is looking a fair bit healthier than mine is a the moment, but in decades to come when people look back at the 2000s to snigger at how old and uncool everything was then it'll be shows like this that are first in the firing line. It's like a modern version of 'On The Buses' in that respect, only with added smarm and a mystical vision of the demographic it's aiming at.
There is nothing, literally nothing, in this show that doesn't come back to sex eventually. Take a look at the clips on Youtube - the ones put up by the BBC itself to promote the show - to see for yourself. Take a look at the episode titles ("I Suck Coppers") being one of the cleaner examples) for more information. And this is where the real problem comes: this is technically known as "adult humour", but the appeal seems to be limited to thirteen year-olds staying up past their bedtimes on a school night. Check out the comments on the aforementioned Youtube pages, the majority of which consist of "I tried that line on my teacher and got detention...", for evidence that the target audience and the actual audience don't always match up. I don't blame the audience for being too young to know how they're being talked down to. I don't blame the writer for being too young to know how to create characters, resulting in a show where everyone is based around a single defining characteristic ("the dizzy one", "the one who's even more obsessed with sex than everyone else", etc) and every line plays to that. I do blame - and here comes the root of my irritation - BBC Three.
BBC Three is, ostensibly, a channel for young people. It's problem is that it's run by a group of people who have no idea what young people are and whose market research doesn't appear to have involved any. This has resulted in a channel devoted to an entirely phoney vision of youth that doesn't exist outside its own programmes. No wonder "young people" are a notoriously difficult to attract for TV programmers, since the "young people" the programmers have in mind don't exist and never have. There are enough idiots out there to just about keep BBC Three in business (I'm thinking of the people who "won the chance" to record their own continuity announcements, saving the channel the trouble of having to pay people to do them like everyone else), but I'm technically young enough to be part of the target demographic too and I feel vaguely insulted to have this aimed at me.
It must have felt like Christmas at BBC Three when this script came along. Someone from their target demographic writing for their target demographic? Brilliant! The work does itself! Unfortunately though, as long as it keeps chasing imaginary audience figures who fit into neat little pretend pigeonholes, its output is going to continue to embarrass people. Not that they'll ever acknowledge this of course - I'm a statistical anomaly you see, so I can be safely ignored. The channel's idea of what its audience is appeared to malfunction in the face of the show's critical sandblasting and they commissioned another series anyway, so I suppose the kids'll be happy about that. If only the show was actually aimed at them.
No disrespect to nineteen year-olds out there, but they aren't ready for proper jobs. I know this because much of one of my old jobs was spent dealing with problems caused by the nineteen year-old employees. I really feel sorry for the writer of this show, whose career has opened with a critical evisceration that he might have avoided had he been out to see the world for a bit before putting pen to paper. Successful it may be, and I don't doubt that his bank balance is looking a fair bit healthier than mine is a the moment, but in decades to come when people look back at the 2000s to snigger at how old and uncool everything was then it'll be shows like this that are first in the firing line. It's like a modern version of 'On The Buses' in that respect, only with added smarm and a mystical vision of the demographic it's aiming at.
There is nothing, literally nothing, in this show that doesn't come back to sex eventually. Take a look at the clips on Youtube - the ones put up by the BBC itself to promote the show - to see for yourself. Take a look at the episode titles ("I Suck Coppers") being one of the cleaner examples) for more information. And this is where the real problem comes: this is technically known as "adult humour", but the appeal seems to be limited to thirteen year-olds staying up past their bedtimes on a school night. Check out the comments on the aforementioned Youtube pages, the majority of which consist of "I tried that line on my teacher and got detention...", for evidence that the target audience and the actual audience don't always match up. I don't blame the audience for being too young to know how they're being talked down to. I don't blame the writer for being too young to know how to create characters, resulting in a show where everyone is based around a single defining characteristic ("the dizzy one", "the one who's even more obsessed with sex than everyone else", etc) and every line plays to that. I do blame - and here comes the root of my irritation - BBC Three.
BBC Three is, ostensibly, a channel for young people. It's problem is that it's run by a group of people who have no idea what young people are and whose market research doesn't appear to have involved any. This has resulted in a channel devoted to an entirely phoney vision of youth that doesn't exist outside its own programmes. No wonder "young people" are a notoriously difficult to attract for TV programmers, since the "young people" the programmers have in mind don't exist and never have. There are enough idiots out there to just about keep BBC Three in business (I'm thinking of the people who "won the chance" to record their own continuity announcements, saving the channel the trouble of having to pay people to do them like everyone else), but I'm technically young enough to be part of the target demographic too and I feel vaguely insulted to have this aimed at me.
It must have felt like Christmas at BBC Three when this script came along. Someone from their target demographic writing for their target demographic? Brilliant! The work does itself! Unfortunately though, as long as it keeps chasing imaginary audience figures who fit into neat little pretend pigeonholes, its output is going to continue to embarrass people. Not that they'll ever acknowledge this of course - I'm a statistical anomaly you see, so I can be safely ignored. The channel's idea of what its audience is appeared to malfunction in the face of the show's critical sandblasting and they commissioned another series anyway, so I suppose the kids'll be happy about that. If only the show was actually aimed at them.
1Aruu
Coming of Age has very few redeeming factors about it, one being the surprisingly intriguing advert showing the main cast performing euphemisms for masturbating. For example one girl was shown flicking jellybeans to represent 'flicking the bean', and one of the boys was shown spanking a monkey with a table tennis paddle, for 'spanking the monkey'. Unfortunately the writers used up all their creative juices in that alone, and left the series bone dry.
The acting is poor, and the jokes are boring, bland and extremely predictable. The characters are one dimensional, something akin to how the cast of 'Two Pints of Larger' after the series had ran out of decent ideas; not a good look for a brand new show. The show runs on toilet humour, mentions to bodily functions and genitalia are supposed to bring in the majority of the laughter.
If you're a big fan of Two Pints of Larger, or a thirteen year old who giggles at 'naughty words', then this show might be for you. It had the potential to be half way decent but falls very short of the mark.
The acting is poor, and the jokes are boring, bland and extremely predictable. The characters are one dimensional, something akin to how the cast of 'Two Pints of Larger' after the series had ran out of decent ideas; not a good look for a brand new show. The show runs on toilet humour, mentions to bodily functions and genitalia are supposed to bring in the majority of the laughter.
If you're a big fan of Two Pints of Larger, or a thirteen year old who giggles at 'naughty words', then this show might be for you. It had the potential to be half way decent but falls very short of the mark.
I heard about this gem on a worst programme list and was absolutely delighted to find that my instinct to give it a try led me to a hilarious and fresh comedy from BBC 3.
Every episode has it's moments but sprinkled throughout the three seasons are moments of pant pissing hilarity.
I implore everyone to check it out because it's one of the best televisual discoveries I've made.
Every episode has it's moments but sprinkled throughout the three seasons are moments of pant pissing hilarity.
I implore everyone to check it out because it's one of the best televisual discoveries I've made.
How this ever got made is beyond me. It is not at all funny. The humour is below the level even of a teenage boy who'd laugh at the mere mention of anything to do with sex. It's simply pathetic and childish jokes that almost make me feel embarrassed for the writer, knowing that someone has written this thinking they're funny. If the writer was trying to be controversial, then he's even failed there, it's not funny, it's not offensive (except to human intelligence) it's just bad...so very very bad. And just to add to the misery the acting is awful, if there is a single redeeming feature of this show i haven't found it.
For me, this show has single-handedly facilitated a complete loss of all faith and respect I had for the British Broadcasting Corporation.
Now I recognise some people will like this show. I also recognise some people will not like this show. However, the current IMDb rating of 3.8 and the almost ABSOLUTE lack of positive reviews from other sources lead me to believe that most people despise this show. And as well they should.
The only reason I can think for its recommission is that it enables the BBC to tick its 'young' box and think nothing else about the matter.
The main problem I have with the show is that the writer simply cannot writer. Simple as that. As Charlie Brooker would say; 'It's like watching a play written by a dog'.
There is no storyline to each episode. Full-stop. In a show professing to be a unique, young insight into college life it, in reality, shows us nothing at all. It could have enthralled us with the intricacies of college relationships, politics and all the agony that comes with college life (Inbetweeners, anyone?)! Instead, the most utilised set is a shed.....yes a shed.......where the characters' sit, exchange euphemisms for sex, and occasionally talk to a cardboard cut-out of Jeremy Clarkson, who is no doubt appalled at the use of his effigy in a show quite so diabolical.
The irony is that for a show about college life, hardly any scenes are shot in the college (Sheds are far more interesting you see). Invariably, in the few college shots there are I tend to find the extras wandering about in the background of far more interest and attraction than the principle cast (does anyone else find this?!). Perhaps for this reason the producers thought it best to shoot the core elements of each episode in a shed, eliminating all other more interesting stimuli so that we have to focus on the characters' forced, poorly delivered diatribe.
The characters are flat, undeveloped, devoid of any charm and seem to soley exist to give me something to hate and to effectively terminate the future careers' of the cast.
Coming of age has no redeeming features, not one. I take it as a personal insult to the license player and to the intelligence of young and old alike.
I'm 23. I was a student not so long ago. This does not show student life. It does not show comedy. I am simply lost for anymore words. I think I'll go weep in the corner now.
Be ashamed of yourself BBC
Now I recognise some people will like this show. I also recognise some people will not like this show. However, the current IMDb rating of 3.8 and the almost ABSOLUTE lack of positive reviews from other sources lead me to believe that most people despise this show. And as well they should.
The only reason I can think for its recommission is that it enables the BBC to tick its 'young' box and think nothing else about the matter.
The main problem I have with the show is that the writer simply cannot writer. Simple as that. As Charlie Brooker would say; 'It's like watching a play written by a dog'.
There is no storyline to each episode. Full-stop. In a show professing to be a unique, young insight into college life it, in reality, shows us nothing at all. It could have enthralled us with the intricacies of college relationships, politics and all the agony that comes with college life (Inbetweeners, anyone?)! Instead, the most utilised set is a shed.....yes a shed.......where the characters' sit, exchange euphemisms for sex, and occasionally talk to a cardboard cut-out of Jeremy Clarkson, who is no doubt appalled at the use of his effigy in a show quite so diabolical.
The irony is that for a show about college life, hardly any scenes are shot in the college (Sheds are far more interesting you see). Invariably, in the few college shots there are I tend to find the extras wandering about in the background of far more interest and attraction than the principle cast (does anyone else find this?!). Perhaps for this reason the producers thought it best to shoot the core elements of each episode in a shed, eliminating all other more interesting stimuli so that we have to focus on the characters' forced, poorly delivered diatribe.
The characters are flat, undeveloped, devoid of any charm and seem to soley exist to give me something to hate and to effectively terminate the future careers' of the cast.
Coming of age has no redeeming features, not one. I take it as a personal insult to the license player and to the intelligence of young and old alike.
I'm 23. I was a student not so long ago. This does not show student life. It does not show comedy. I am simply lost for anymore words. I think I'll go weep in the corner now.
Be ashamed of yourself BBC
Principais escolhas
Faça login para avaliar e ver a lista de recomendações personalizadas
Detalhes
- Data de lançamento
- País de origem
- Central de atendimento oficial
- Idioma
- Também conhecido como
- Взросление
- Locações de filme
- Empresa de produção
- Consulte mais créditos da empresa na IMDbPro
- Tempo de duração30 minutos
- Cor
Contribua para esta página
Sugerir uma alteração ou adicionar conteúdo ausente
Principal brecha
By what name was Coming of Age (2007) officially released in Canada in English?
Responda