Drifters review – Episodes One and Two – E4

Drifters E4Drifters is awful. Its jokes are terrible, it is filled with an annoying, childish vulgarity and, worst of all, it’s boring. Huge stretches of these first two episodes felt like dead air, with nothing interesting and nothing funny happening. There’s a fine line between worthwhile Inbetweeners comedy and crude Scary Movie comedy and Drifters falls firmly into the latter camp.

Episode one introduced the characters – Meg, Bunny and Laura. The second episode followed Meg on a disastrous date that felt like a rip-off Miranda but with lots of swear words because this is edgy, E4 TV.

The show is pointedly crude. Characters talk about ‘bukkake’ and repeatedly discuss dicks. It’s like Sex and the City but without the class. Or a hen party. A horrible, endless, innuendo-filled hen party. You get the impression that the writer thinks she is being revolutionary by showing women talking dirty. If you’re going to fill your show with crude humour though, you need to make it funny or it sounds like a bunch of 14-year-olds trying to sound like adults.

The plotting has no attempts at realism. At the start of the first episode a ridiculously handsome guy approached Meg out of the blue and asked for her number, despite the fact that she was dressed in a giant mobile phone costume at the time, because he apparently spotted her from his office window. That’s just fucking lazy. Drifters is like a sketch show, with telegraphed punchlines, cartoonish characters and broad performances. While these things are okay in sketch shows, with their pace and creativity and piled-on jokes, in a sitcom such artificiality feels cheap.

The show in general is very lazy. The ‘funny’ reveal at the end of the second episode was that the girls had gate-crashed a funeral. In order to make this work, the funeral was held at night, had its own bouncer, was next to a club, was attended by happy people, and the girls didn’t recognise any of the funeral décor – none of which was shown to the audience either obviously. For this joke to work, the characters would need to have realistically crashed a funeral. Set-ups matter. A good joke has a strong set-up; a bad joke a weak one. Drifters builds all its jokes on unbelievable bullshit.

The core characters in the show aren’t likeable. One is a vulgar idiot and another is a posh idiot. Only Meg has any appeal and even she is a pretty awful person. Compare this to the characters in another Inbetweeners influenced show, ITV2’s Plebs. One character in that show – a vulgar idiot – is likeable because he has a false bravado that barely masks a vulnerability in his character. Another stupid character is likeable because his idiocy is taken to extremes; like Baldrick in Blackadder, he is a harmless fool without malice or pretensions. If, as in Drifters, these characters were just 2D idiots then their awfulness becomes their only trait and they lose any appeal.

Drifters is a lazy mishmash of other more successful shows. It’s a programme without likeable characters or a properly realised world. It’s lazy, low, bottom of the barrel comedy.

Advertisements

14 thoughts on “Drifters review – Episodes One and Two – E4

  1. I think the reviewer is right it’s so bbbbbboooooorrrrriiiinnnngggg and I hate the characters they’re just annoying you don’t feel for them at all if anything bad happens to them your’e almost happy.

  2. I agree, this show is absolute *rap, who the hell wrote this tripe, what has happened to british comedy? . One exception Sarah Millican television programme….so far. PS “Man Down” Come on C4 is this your best , was this show made because you lost a bet. While I here… Ricky Gervais, Jimmy Carr, Phill Jupitus ..Johnny Vegas (search google for J.V Funny.. see the the suggestions) absolutely no talent, annoying,lucky *uckers.they must be cheap otherwise they would not be on TV .

    • can agree with you on jupitus and vegas, but ricky gervais and jimmy carr are 14 kinds of awesome.
      this show is shit though, one episode and im done.

  3. I would actually get more laughs watching time team, its sad people like you that makes these channels keep churning out shite like this.

  4. Seriously?? Watched the first episode-will not be watching any more. Primarily, It’s not well-written and crucially,for a comedy, it’s just not funny. The ‘comedic’ scenarios & exchanges persistently fell short of the mark & they were just dull. It’s not a sharp edged comedy if the script isn’t well enough executed to allow the humour to cut through the uncomfortable,near the knuckle situations. The paedophiliac teacher storyline was creepy,humourless and,given recent headlines,poorly judged,offensive & in plain bad taste. We must be in desperate need if this is the best that current writers have to offer!

  5. its woeful, but strangely watchable.

    nothing comes close to Bad Adults for crap comedy.

    Thank F**K for Fresh Meat. Without that our screens are void of any decent comedy

  6. : MAKES ME FEEL SAD THAT OUT OF ALL THE TALENTED COMEDIC WOMEN IN THE WORLD, THIS TRIPE GETS COMISSIONED AND WE LOOK LIKE WE JUST ARENT A FUNNY SEX. TRAGIC. TO RESTORE FAITH IN FEMALE DRIVEN COMEDY SEE VICTORIA WOOD, JO BRAND & JULIE WALTERS. OH AND WHAT’S WRONG TIME TEAM LIKE?…

    • What a ridiculous sexist thing to say. So you believe three women aren’t funny, and they represent two billion others? Would you say the same if there were three unfunny men on tv? Because there are a damn site more than three unfunny men in this world.

Leave a Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s