PBS’ "Man in an Orange Shirt"

It's on the Buffalo PBS station at 10PM but I'll be in bed by then. Airing again Next Saturday at 10:30PM.

Some of us watched it last year.

Cool, R2, it's on PBS now, thus the question in the post.

My station has it on at 10 too. Have to protect the children from seeing men loving other men, heaven forbid. They might lose a few donations from their Lawrence Welk fans.

R4, the latter episode has some fairly rough fucking, if I remember correctly.

For some reason, the colour orange is nightmare inducing for me ... 😜

What a cute little movie. Very apropos for pride month. God - we are sooo lucky to be alive now as gay men. First time in modern history that we can be gay. Always good to remember - despite Cheeto, we live in a pretty good world for gay people.

I thought it was touching.

Rough fucking my make me donate a few $$$ to my local public TeeVee station. But probably not. The programming generally sucks.

Watching it, I kept being envious of the interiors. How much would that apartment with all the bookshelves go for? Even the grandson's basement digs looked kind of stylish. But what family, no matter how financially secure, would let that cottage property remain unused for decades?

The writer Patrick Gale based it on a true story in his family, if I recall correctly.

That's interesting

I didn't get the Vanessa Redgrave character. So she married a gay guy? Big whoop, so did I!

The second part was awful.

[quote]I didn't get the Vanessa Redgrave character. So she married a gay guy? Big whoop, so did I!

Vanessa's character was the elderly version of. the blond wife married to the gay man in the first episode. Her grandson was the son of the boy she had with her gay husband.

I agree, it was a bit confusing if you weren't paying close attention. I initially thought the series was going to be two separate stories with no connection at all.

The plot was a bit bare bones. The latter day relationship with the designer, in particular, could have been fleshed out more. The inference that a monogamous relationship is the only path to happiness is a bit tired. That said, for a gay story on PBS it was well done. I appreciate that they did it and I enjoyed it despite my quibbles..

[quote] The inference that a monogamous relationship is the only path to happiness is a bit tired.

Sure that is tired, but so is anonymous sleazy sex as inevitably being part of gay life. That's not always the case.

Just because the gay man in Part 2 wasn't out, he had to be sleazy and promiscuous?! Lots of gay men, and women, who took a while to come out, weren't exclusively having public sex and anonymous hookups. I get it, the character was portrayed as damaged, but we had no backstory as to why he was so deeply unhappy. He came from the upper middle class, had a good job and friends.

I was hoping this was an actual series, when I put it on, I thought the two episodes were actually part one and this would be a series.

Showtime's "Patrick Melrose" was excellent, unfortunately it was only a 5 part mini-series. It seems just when a series is picking up steam, it's the end of the series. Who is making these absurd decisions?

I was not pleased with the story telling. Just couldn't get into it. Maybe because it was on so late at night.

yummy!

[quote]Maybe because it was on so late at night.

Late? Isn't Masterpiece Theater aired at the same time in every state? Where I live it aired from 9PM-11PM. That's hardly "late at night".

Enjoyed it, despite the slut-shaming in Part Two. Anonymous, casual, recreational sex hookups = bad. Clingy, melodramatic , intensely emotionally overwrought relationships, full of drama = good. God, how I'd like to see some intelligent fictional portrayals of gay men who just like to fuck, with no apologies. Guess that's why we have porn to fall back on.

Where I live, Masterpiece is usually on at 8pm. Some of us do have to work.

Turgid it was.

Heavily lusting for actor Oliver. Beautiful chest.

Oliver Jackson-Cohen

The actor playing the artist/lover in the first half is in the current Broadway revival of Angels in America, playing Louis. Like everyone else in that production, he's excellent.

James McArdle, a Scot

[quote]Where I live, Masterpiece is usually on at 8pm. Some of us do have to work.

What an absurd statement, 8PM is hardly 'late' unless you need to be at work by 5-6AM! The only people I hear complain about going to sleep by 8PM are the early morning newscasters who are at their desks by 4AM. I personally don't require much sleep, I can go to sleep by 2AM, yet still be at work by 9AM. I swear some of you sound like you should be in a nursing home!

I guess this means you watch little TV or you have to DVR anything you are interested in? Most good TV shows start at 8PM and later.

James McArdle is 29 but looks much older than Julian Morris. But he was incredible in the role.

There were some inside jokes. When Vanessa's character said to her grandson's female friend, something like, "I could never be a liberal", she must have had fun saying that line. She probably laughed through it several times before getting it right.

@ R17 I think the authors meant to suggest that the grandmother's history of shame, emotional pain, guilt and anger relating to her marriage to a closeted man was absorbed (for lack of a better word) by her grandson and led him to a closeted and unhappy life of anonymous sexual encounters without real intimacy.

Both she and he achieve a breakthrough into a happier life when the truth is finally revealed and understood.

The listed timing on the American DVD is 112 minutes, versus 120 on the UK DVD.

Did PBS really cut 8 minutes out for even the DVD release (not broadcast)? I'd like some clarification, especially if rumpy-pump was cut.

"I think the authors meant to suggest that the grandmother's history of shame, emotional pain, guilt and anger relating to her marriage to a closeted man was absorbed (for lack of a better word) by her grandson and led him to a closeted and unhappy life of anonymous sexual encounters without real intimacy."

Agree, but I didn't find it very convincing. It felt like a whole section of the story was missing: when/how did Michael (her gay husband) die? When/how did her son and daughter-in-law die, and what influence might they have had in the grandson's self-worth? Did the son learn his father was gay before he died? To me, leaving the whole psychological impact on the grandmother was way too simplistic. Plus the grandson was a very annoying character as written.

[quote] Did PBS really cut 8 minutes out for even the DVD release (not broadcast)? I'd like some clarification, especially if rumpy-pump was cut.

I can't believe there was that much "objectionable" content to cut. Gale said butt shots. Man in An Orange Shirt was part of BBC's Gay Britannia. Maybe there was DVD extra with an overview of the specials associated with that. I don't see how there is that much of a runtime discrepancy.

Why was anything cut? To get superfans, if this show has any, to buy two DVDs?

I agree that Adam was annoying. But he was supposed to be annoying, like all dick.com addicts when they're forced to step away from their phones. I have a friend who's just like him. I really don't even think of him as a friend anymore, we spend so little time together BECAUSE HE'S ALWAYS ON GRINDR OR SCRUFF.

Did they cut out some of the Julian Morris nudity & sex scenes?

Because Julian shows a lot of ass in the BBC original.

PBS must have cut most of the ass shots 'cause I didn't see any.

There was a brief clip of Julian's ass in a shower scene

There was a scene where Adam was fucking some trick.

R10 I own 5 acres in the Catskills with my brother and 2 sisters. The 5 acres borders the Nevasink river so it is considered a riverfront property. We inherited the property from an Aunt and Uncle who used it as a weekend getaway. Me, my brother and sisters have no interest in going there so the bungalows on the property for the last 20 years are slowly rotting away.

Odd that there would be such concern over banning buttocks now. Back in the seventies there was a buttocks display in 'Brideshead Revisited' when Sebastian and his friend were caught sunbathing in the nude.

r17, there were only five episodes of PATRICK MELROSE because St. Aubyn wrote only five novels about the character. Don't blame the producers or the network.

[quote][R17], there were only five episodes of PATRICK MELROSE because St. Aubyn wrote only five novels about the character. Don't blame the producers or the network.

The Patrick Melrose Showtime series surely did not cover the five St. Aubyn novels, which I understand, were basically autobiographical. There sure was enough material there for at least two or three series. Each episode surely didn't cover a full novel!

Besides Patrick, the series could have explored most of the main characters, given the viewers more of a background. How about answering why so many of these people, who basically had so much, seemed utterly miserable and damaged. We knew why Patrick was damaged, how about the rest of the characters, Nicholas was a horrible bitter man, why?

I would have loved to know more about the woman who was one of the mother's best friends, Anne, portrayed by Indira Varma. How about Patrick's friend Johnny Hall and Bridget, the social climber played by Holliday Grainger?

We knew little about Patrick's wife Mary who, IIRC, was actually his cousin. In one episode we saw Patrick talking and flirting with Mary, then, in the next episode, they are shown already married with two kids?!

Then you should read the novels and find out for yourself. They're short! And much of the books' pleasure is the prose, much of which could mot be easily translatable. (The book makes these dramatic leaps in time, too.)

I'm not arguing that the series was perfect, just that they're not Dickensian in scope. And I'm not sure I needed to spend more screen time with these miserable wretches.

R44, I enjoyed the series and simply wished it has been longer. Perhaps I don't want to read the books? Sometimes a screen adaptation is better than the book.

I enjoyed the acting, Cumberbatch was great and he's not even one of my fave actors. I simply wished the series delved more into the motivations of the so-called "miserable wretches".

Are you going to suggest that people who enjoy TV series based on books, should always read the books? I enjoyed American Gods and, no, I didn't read the book.

I did read Brideshead Revisted and lots of other books and plays which were turned into films and TV series. Yet, I don't think it's always necessary to do so, especially to get a better understanding of a film or TV series.

Cumberbatch, R45? What Cumberbatch?

No, you don't always need to read the novels. I haven't read The Handmaid's Tale; I understand that it's not much better than the series. It's just that the Melrose books are brilliantly written and considered modern classics, and the series is just very good TV. So what I'm trying to say is that if you find the series wanting, you might be richly rewarded by reading the books.

R40. Why don’t you sell it? We’re actually looking for a place like that.

[quote]Cumberbatch, [R45]? What Cumberbatch?

I was talking about Patrick Melrose on Showtime, a 5 part mini-series with Cumberbatch.

[quote]I was talking about Patrick Melrose on Showtime, a 5 part mini-series with Cumberbatch.

Which has what to do with MIAOS?

There's more conversation here as well

Oliver is stunning--a plain face that shows stoicism well and keeps him from being pretty, but a magnificient chest.