Talk:The Armstrongs: Difference between revisions
m Maintain {{WPBS}} and vital articles: 2 WikiProject templates. Keep majority rating "Start" in {{WPBS}}. Remove 2 same ratings as {{WPBS}} in {{WikiProject BBC}}, {{WikiProject Television}}. Tag: |
|||
| (7 intermediate revisions by 7 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=Start|listas=Armstrongs, The|1= |
|||
{{WikiProject BBC|importance=Low}} |
|||
{{WikiProject Television|british-television=yes|british-television-importance=|importance=}} |
|||
}} |
|||
==Untitled== |
|||
Surely this is a fake? |
Surely this is a fake? |
||
| Line 48: | Line 54: | ||
Ooh, all this sleuthing is fun. Looking on their website, on the Contact Us section, there's a guy called Luke McCook, described as conservatory designer. He looks remarkably like one of the not very impressive sales force. So my theory is, real company but everything else scripted [[User:82.69.28.55|82.69.28.55]] 23:43, 28 January 2007 (UTC) |
Ooh, all this sleuthing is fun. Looking on their website, on the Contact Us section, there's a guy called Luke McCook, described as conservatory designer. He looks remarkably like one of the not very impressive sales force. So my theory is, real company but everything else scripted [[User:82.69.28.55|82.69.28.55]] 23:43, 28 January 2007 (UTC) |
||
--- |
|||
For the record the Armstrongs are real..We knew Business Associates of them, what you see is real. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/82.36.215.64|82.36.215.64]] ([[User talk:82.36.215.64|talk]]) 15:52, 6 August 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
== I hate the Armstrongs == |
|||
You just can't make up some of the crap that these two half dead wankers spout out. They make David Brent look like Mother Theresa. |
|||
did we sack you??...probably. You sound like some prat we would have employed in the first place |
|||
Latest revision as of 12:42, 9 February 2024
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Untitled
[edit]Surely this is a fake?
You do realise that it is a spoof program? If you are not convinced, look at the official website. But it's pretty subtle, and quite accurate about working in that sort of job
(edit: I just plonked this comment at the top, should have put it here. Sorry)
[Matt Black]
Are you saying the people are actors but company is real, or that the whole thing is fake? Everything about the company seems real - the website you've listed is a .tv domain which is seperate to the day-to-day business side of U-fit which all looks real to me. The .tv looks like an off-shoot that was created once the TV series was realised to be popular - so they're making money off it.
The www.u-fit.co.uk domain was first registered in 1999 by 'Armstrong Industries' - I doubt the BBC thought that far ahead in creating a spoof company and documentary about it!
I've also seen general forums & noticeboards based about Coventry and users talk about the company and staff in a style that suggests they know either the company or the staff featured on the program.
A local Coventry newspaper (The Telegraph) also have regular features with the gang and apparently John now has a regular column in the paper.
Also here's their brochure which is listed on a general conservatories website.
[waldopepper]
Ok, the company is real - company number Armstrong Industries Limited, company number 03187368 was incorporated in 17/04/1996, but until 31/12/1996 was called Door Direct Limitied.
But my gut feeling is that they are too much of a pastiche of the sort of small businesspeople that are the subjects of the program. They are too awful, too close to the bone, for one. And also the way in which the narrative unfolds is too neat, even to be explained by the sort of narrative editing that is very much a part of reality tv. There is too much 'storyline' that happens. For example, they hire a Zimbabwean motivational guru called Basil - with hillarious consequences! Or, all the sales force leave at once. It is all too neat and too interesting to be real life, which is as a rule pretty dull.
My theory is that the creators may well have formed a sort of persistant alternative identity that they use and probably used before they came on TV (most comedians on the telly did stand-up for a long time before). This isn't that unusual - Johnny Vegas, Avid Merrion et al. Surely it isn't beyond their wit to fool a local newspaper, or indeed create a fake forum and website; and incorporating a company could well be par for the course if you are a self-employed comic, so you can claim tax etc.
I think this is just the next evolution of ultra-realistic comedy genre, call it post-The Office (or post-office!), and an interesting social experiment in creating reality. But am prepared to be persuaded. Perhaps the article should just say that there is 'controversy' until we have definative evidence, and the genre should just read 'drama/documentary'?
[Matt Black]
I agree that this program should be classed as a drama/documentary until any concrete proof that it is a fake is discovered. It does seem far too funny to be real but I have just spent a couple of hours browsing around and I haven't anything to make me believe it isn't. What I did find was that michael handel, their new recruit, really is an othello grand master [1]. Checking the waybackmachine shows that page existed in 2002 (with the same content) and a google search for othello championship michael throws up the name Michael Handel all over the place.
Tamlyn 03:14, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
Ooh, all this sleuthing is fun. Looking on their website, on the Contact Us section, there's a guy called Luke McCook, described as conservatory designer. He looks remarkably like one of the not very impressive sales force. So my theory is, real company but everything else scripted 82.69.28.55 23:43, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
---
For the record the Armstrongs are real..We knew Business Associates of them, what you see is real. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.36.215.64 (talk) 15:52, 6 August 2008 (UTC)