UPDATE: I recently watched A Royal Flush episode again, the first time for a few years. If you have also done so over recent months then enjoy this frank review from Nathan Lloyd.
The end of the fifth series of Only Fools and Horses was ‘Who Wants to be a Millionaire?’ (1986). One of the more dramatic episodes, it almost ended the series with Del leaving Peckham for a chance of a lifetime partnership in Australia. If the next episode ‘A Royal Flush’ (1986) was indicative of the show’s quality after that episode, the proposed spin-off staring Rodney and Mickey Pearce, Hot Rod, sounds almost desirable. Thankfully, just as much as David Jason’s opting to remain in Only Fools and Horses was a welcome a relief, ‘A Royal Flush’ was just a misstep in the show’s then flawless history and the show would regain its wings a year later with ‘The Frog’s Legacy’ (1987); however this does not wash away the fact that ‘A Royal Flush’ was written, filmed, produced and aired. ‘A Royal Flush’ is the unloved child of Only Fools and Horses hated by its writer, John Sullivan and its two leads, David Jason and Nicholas Lyndhurst. It’s also the least repeated episode of the sitcom, shown only on GOLD around Christmas time. But why is it hated? The premise, while atypical for the series at the time, owes many opportunities for laughs. Rodney befriends Victoria, the daughter of the Duke of Maylebury, due to their mutual love of art and naturally enough Del smells money and encourages Rodney to propose to her before interfering.
First of all, the positives. Like every other episode, ‘A Royal Flush’ has some funny one-liners. My favourite has to be Rodney reading a book of peers and Del notices the title as ‘Burkes’ and asks him if it’s a teach yourself book. It also has some humorous scenes; the scene where Rodney fires a rifle at clay pigeons is sometimes classed as one of the funnier moments of the series as is his reaction when he sees the three-wheeled van appear suddenly at Maylebury’s estate. The appearance of June from ‘Happy Returns’ (1985) was also a welcome piece of continuity for the series, making the universe of Only Fools and Horses seem more complete. I also must digress that the moment when Rodney breaks his hand at the end of the episode is actually a moment I still laugh out loud at, but this may be due to me hating the episode so much I never watch it so I forget the little moments that are done right.
The character of Vicky is also well-written. It was an inspired choice by Sullivan to make the upper-class character bored of her status; it contrasts well with the Trotters and their apathy with being at the bottom of the social ladder, and this decision forces her to have good chemistry with Rodney. They’re both tired of their backgrounds and they share a symbiotic relationship: Rodney can learn about opera, game hunting and expand his knowledge of fine art, while Vicky can learn about women spitting, greasy spoons and market spiels. She is wonderfully portrayed by Sarah Duncan, and despite my opinions about the whole episode, I think Vicky is the woman most compatible with Rodney in the entire series, even beating Cassandra, and it is refreshing to see Rodney engaged in a romantic friendship as opposed to an intimate relationship as usual. Another thing that this episode excels at is adding another dimension to Rodney’s character. Previous to this episode, Rodney claimed that he was sensitive, yet this was seldom seen outside of him mourning the latest ex-girlfriend that wasn’t right for him. Here, however, we finally see a distraught Rodney, stripped of his pride in front of the highest company he would ever share. I like to think that the events of this episode are a by-product to the more mature Rodney that is seen from ‘The Frog’s Legacy’ onwards; he wouldn’t be able to trust Del as much as he had in the past in danger of him ending up in a similar situation. The final scene between Rodney and Vicky where Rodney suggests that he goes home and Vicky can’t finish her sentence that their time together was nice is one of the most heart-rendering scenes in the entire sitcom. The two had a perfectly good friendship that was razed to the ground by the tyrant that is Del in this episode.
I might let off in the second half
The character of Del is the main problem with ‘A Royal Flush’. Simply put, he isn’t Del, he’s a cruel pastiche of the character that makes one doubt that the character seen in this episode was written by Sullivan, but by some over-zealous fan-fiction writer who had exaggerated every negative trait about Del: his greed and zest for money while suppressing his main attribute that he genuinely loves his family. The Del of ‘A Royal Flush’ will be termed hereafter as ‘Evil Del’ because evil is what he is throughout for reason that will be explained throughout this essay. While the Del of every other episode isn’t totally intelligent, he has common sense and tact; here he is a total buffoon that embarrasses not only his family, but his social class. To Sullivan’s credit, the episode needs a villain, someone to snatch Rodney’s dream away, but one would not expect it to be one of the show’s principal characters. Granted, this episode isn’t ‘To Hull and Back’ (1985) in which Slater is the villain of an international smuggling ring; it’s a personal episode, more to do with emotion, so may be Evil Del’s villainy in this episode is necessary. However, this tough love approach had been seen before in the show and had been portrayed better. In series 2’s ‘No Greater Love’ (1982), Rodney falls in love with the wife of a convict. Concerned for Rodney, Del tries to sabotage his relationship and succeeds. Del isn’t the antagonist of that episode because the audience is aware that nothing good would have come of the relationship and that Del was interfering in the best possible motives of protecting his brother from a criminal. In ‘A Royal Flush’, however, his defence of his actions that Special Branch would be checking on Rodney’s background is a rather presumptuous and tenuous one. A more dignified approach would have been may be having the Duke be dismissive of Rodney so Del protects him, and, in doing so, burning bridges with the upper class and maintains Rodney’s dignity. Instead, this version of Del is at odds with the established one. While he protected his brother in ‘No Greater Love’, he stoops as low as causing him emotional harm when he totally destroys his brother’s pride at the dinner party and physical harm to him when he twists his broken hand; while he was fighting off Rodney’s rival in ‘No Greater Love’, he was selling Rodney’s exile from Vicky to Maylebury to make money which leaves one to ponder whether this was Evil Del’s intention all along. In doing this, he has destroyed what could have been a fruitful friendship between two like-minded people just so he could earn a few thousand pounds. If this is indeed the case, Evil Del is actually more intelligent than the usual one and definitely more ruthless; he has lied, feigned stupidity and offended his way through several innocent people in order to achieve his own ends. While it is was written to be indicative of Del’s occasional mindless nature, his shaking Rodney’s broken hand could be seen as a victorious pose of Evil Del that well and truly supplants his defeat of Rodney. Del has had a fun evening in a country estate that has rendered him drunk; while Rodney may have been reeling from emotional scars caused by embarrassment. All of Del’s actions leave a bad taste in the mouth because they are so out of character. Derek Trotter is not Edmund Blackadder or Albert Steptoe, he has good qualities that are all but absent in this episode.
Speaking of Albert Steptoe, ‘A Royal Flush’ bears similarities to at least two episodes of Steptoe and Son. The opera scene is reminiscent of ‘Sunday for Seven Days’ (1964) where the Steptoes go to the cinema but Albert ruins the experience by making a nuisance of himself. The whole dinner party scene is similar to a scene in ‘Loathe Story’ (1972) where Harold relays to a psychiatrist how Albert ruined his engagement to an upper-middle class woman. The point is, while Only Fools and Horses can be seen as an ’80s equivalent to the ’60s Steptoe and Son, Rodney is not as pretentious as Harold nor is Derek as loathsome as Albert; yet, in this episode, they are just like they were written by Galton and Simpson. In the past, Del would call Rodney a ‘plonker’ and no one would think anything of it because it was obviously affectionate, but his actions in this episode, like Albert’s, seem to also stem from entrapping Rodney and appear vindictive and hateful. Perhaps he is reacting to Rodney’s attempt to tie him down to England in the previous episode, ‘Who Wants to be a Millionaire?’? It is also disconcerting to see Evil Del threatening violence to pretty much everyone who dissents against him; whether it be a potential customer in the market that doesn’t buy into his spiel or a furious opera goer who, quite rightly, castigates Evil Del for his obnoxious behaviour during the performance; Evil Del seems angrier than normal Del who seems to revel in the trouble that he is causing.
Unfortunately, loose characterisation and awkward scenes aren’t the only flaws this episode possesses: it also suffers from being rushed. The tight schedule ended up with the crew finishing the editing on the day of its broadcast on Christmas 1986 so the episode lacks a studio audience. Unlike ‘To Hull and Back’ which didn’t have an audience because it is more like a caper film than an episode of a sitcom so it’s forgivable and perhaps preferred; ‘A Royal Flush’ however needs the reaction to dilute the discomfort of the opera and dinner party scenes. It is not to ‘tell us when to laugh’ as the practice is commonly misconstrued, but to maintain the comedic atmosphere and in a show like Only Fools and Horses, this is essential in setting and preserving the mood. On top of that, sound effects are missing. This is mostly prominent in the final scene (ironically my favourite scene in the episode) where the corridor outside the flat lacks the ambient noises one would hear from London. While a minor flaw, it is a perfect metaphor for the episode: it is a cold and nasty episode to watch, just like the unnatural silence that had hit the council estate the night where the Trotter brothers are arguing about their character derailment.
One of the strengths of Only Fools and Horses is that it showcases identifiable characters and, for the most part, uncanny situations. It isn’t a ‘gentle’ sitcom like As Time Goes By or Butterflies neither is it a dark comedy like One Foot in the Grave and Bottom; it fits firmly in the middle. While Only Fools and Horses sometimes explored the darker side of comedy, such as Del’s reaction to Cassandra’s miscarriage and the misplacement of Grandad’s hat at his funeral; it is generally an optimistic comedy; indeed, most of its catchphrases are optimistic: ‘This time next year, we’ll be millionaires!’ and ‘He who dares wins!’, so this episode, which would have been more at home in the dark universes of One Foot in the Grave and Bottom sticks out like a sore thumb from the rest of the episodes. Even the more reviled trilogy of the early 2000s was somewhat easier to watch and kept the characters consistent.
More interesting is the story behind the episode. While he did write the episode, John Sullivan was away in Paris shooting the third series of Just Good Friends when ‘A Royal Flush’ was filmed, so he was not on the set and could not write re-drafts for the episode. As stated, he hated the episode and it languished in obscurity for many years, no more prolific than the ‘unofficial’ episodes such as ‘Licensed to Drill’ and ‘Christmas Trees’ until finally released on VHS in 2000. In spite of the release and the fans lapping up the chance of seeing an Only Fools and Horses episode they possibly haven’t seen before, Sullivan still remained dissatisfied with the episode and when the story was finally released on DVD in 2004, it was heavily edited under Sullivan’s guidance. A whopping 18 minutes were cut from the original, such as cutting out the majority of the opera and dinner party scenes in order to minimise Evil Del’s faults. The biggest change however was the added laughter track, which, for reasons already specified, was a welcome addition. That being said, the original version was released on DVD along with ‘The Frog’s Legacy’ in 2005 as part 13 (the irony) of The Only Fools and Horses DVD Collection. To this day the DVD has appeared on eBay for higher prices than the official DVD and is sought after by hardcore Only Fools and Horses enthusiasts to see what the big fuss is.
Conclusion : A Royal Flush episode review
In conclusion, ‘A Royal Flush’, while not as bad as ‘If They Could See Us Now’ (2001), which was the first part of the show’s misguided revival, is the absolute nadir of the show’s original run; hated by its creators and the fans alike, it is a wonder that fan outcry is large for the BBC to release the unedited version of the show on retail DVD. ‘A Royal Flush’ is such a pessimistic episode that goes so far from the grain that it is uncomfortable, unpleasant and cringe-worthy to watch and it is not at all recommended for the casual Only Fools and Horses fan. If one does want to see ‘A Royal Flush’, I recommend the 2004 edit over the original because it is more like an episode of Only Fools and Horses; tracking down a copy of the original is time consuming, rare and, ultimately, disappointing. I like to pretend it doesn’t exist. To me, ‘The Frog’s Legacy’ follows ‘Who Wants to be a Millionaire?’ and ‘A Royal Flush’ was just a nightmare of Sullivan’s that showed him what would happen if the show was written by someone else.
A Royal Flush episode review, written by Only Fools and Horses fan Nathan Lloyd.
I don’t know why people often criticise “A Royal Flush” because I think it’s great.
Obviously, it’s not a classic episode and it isn’t the best episode but it’s certainly not the worst episode.
The worst ever “Only Fools” episode was “If They Could See Us Now” and not “A Royal Flush”.
And I only like the original uncut 1986 “A Royal Flush” and I hate the cut version from 2004 with the laughter track, it’s terrible.
And the worst thing they ever done with “Only Fools” was when they edited “Miami Twice” and placed it onto VHS & DVD.
I can’t stand to watch it.
They should have put it onto VHS & DVD how it was broadcast in 2 parts and with part 2 with no laughter track.
The laughter on Part 2 is fake and in some places is too loud and irritating and is louder than the dialogue.
I do hope that “Miami Twice” will get a Blu-ray release one day but how it was broadcast in 2 parts and uncut and no edits or laughter on part 2.
I love the original transmissions of both “A Royal Flush” and “Miami Twice” but can’t stand the edited versions.
“A Royal Flush” is a proper “Only Fools” episode (the 1986 uncut) but “If They Could See Us Now” isn’t.
After “Time On Our Hands” they should have gone straight onto “Strangers On The Shore” because the 2002 and 2003 episodes are alright just not 2001.
But of course, everyone’s opinions are different and that’s fair enough and if we were all the same, we would be boring so bonnet de douche my son!
I know quite a few people who’s favourite episode is “A Royal Flush” it’s a great episode, not great enough to watch as often as “Hull & Back” and “Jolly Boys’ Outing” and “Heroes and Villains” but still a great “Only Fools” episode :)
Yeah it’s bad, though I’m not sure I would declare it the absolute worst. The plot is a bit of a stretch, but still much more believable than some of the later specials (*cough* Mafia boss doppelganger *cough*), and there are some funny moments. Probably the highlight of the episode is Del bringing his own gun for the clay shooting. “Iggy Higgins robs banks!” XD
However, it is a tough watch, and no surprise that the cast, crew and BBC have effectively buried it in the vault. I have the uncut DVD version and at 76 mins it really drags. The opera scene in particular just goes on and on with only one funny moment – when Del realises he recognises the tune and starts whistling along. The major mistake of the episode is that he comes across to the viewing audience exactly as he does to the opera-goers – crude, boorish and annoying.
It just smacks of being an unpolished first draft, though I can’t imagine hacking it down to an hour improves it much. Jason’s performance is just ‘off’, and Lyndhurst isn’t given anything to do except gradually sink into despair, which he does in a way that’s just a bit too genuine. It doesn’t help that almost all the episodes around it are regarded as classics, so its comparative lack of quality stands out all the more. And of course it builds to a climax which seems uncommonly mean-spirited for OFAH (the same problem the first comeback special had). I’ve seen war documentaries less bleak than that final scene. The total lack of audience and background noise make it seem like Del and Rodney have been condemned to the void at the end of the universe.
I think the port/rum had a lot to do with the dining scene. Wasn’t it Albert that told them not to give him to much. The more he drank the more of an arsehole he became. I didn’t dislike that episode but I didn’t love it. I felt sorry for Rodney. But apart from this episode we all still love del!
I’m quite familiar with the uncut version and wish I had held onto it. I used to quite like this episode. I agree that it shows a really unpleasant side to Del but let’s face it he has many horrible facets to his personality for example in how many episodes does he knowingly rip off his friends and exploit people ?
Of course, this episode goes a step further and shows Del humiliating his brother Rodney and we know above all else that family means everything to Del so it rubs us up the wrong way. It seems at odds with the rest of the OFAH, or does it ? Rememnber that in ‘And the winner is ..’ Del is perfectly happy to let Rodney suffer on holiday just so that he can have a good time.
I would say that the Del in this episode is an exaggeration of the bad side of Del and this is actually explained by the fact that we have never seen Del this blind drunk before. He has a financial motive from the very beginning which is right on character but gets so drunk and carried away that he totally overdoes it. He never intended to humiliate Rodney at the outset.
For these reason I wish they had not edited this down as for me it does little to paper over the problems that everyone had with the full version. The laughter track is also does little to enhance the episode, we are so used to hearing a live audience that is becomes noticeably fake.
Overall I think this episode has a place in the OFAH legacy, there’s nothing wrong with seeing Del ‘warts and alll’ – I so much prefer it to the post millionaire episodes that came towards the end.
I frankly don’t know where to begin so I’ll just say that I agree with everyone who thought this episode was appalling and did not fit into the series whatsoever. It was an embarrassment.
I can’t explain why I watched it to the end tonight except to say that I hoped for something redeeming to happen. As it was, it was like watching The Evil Captain Kirk from Star Trek.
Thanks Elvis. Certainly an Only Fools and Horses episode that stands out. for reasons that arent popular.
I’ve been watching OFAH episodes in chronological order for the past few weeks, and I just made it through this particular episode. My takeaway is this; This is totally classic Del Boy in this episode.
Throughout the first five series, I’ve been constantly saying to myself, over and over, “How is this one of the most beloved characters in British sitcom history??” Derrick Trotter is not a lovable rogue…he’s a selfish, narcissistic megalomaniac, an unscrupulous, manipulative and exploitative sociopath, and one of the most cruel fictional characters in television history. He’s not a protagonist, but rather an antagonist, to the point where it’s not charming or endearing or even pithy. To be frank, I hate the series 1-5 Del Boy.
Now, having seen some later episodes, he’s nowhere near as bad once he settles down with Raquel and becomes a father. But the Derrick Trotter seen in Royal Flush should be hanging from a gibbet in the Tower of London, but to me this is simply the culmination of his behavior throughout the early years of the series.
I’ve just watched a video of the cut scenes on Dailymotion (the first time in a long while that I’ve seen them as it’s ages since I saw the full version of the episode)and I have to largely agree with Nathan’s review. Although I don’t necessarily agree with Sullivan editing it down, I can see why he did it.
The fact is, despite some good lines that could have done with being left in, the vast majority of what’s cut simply isn’t funny. Del is totally out of character, his ‘performance’ in the opera scene is complete idiocy, his behaviour at the dinner table just nasty. Rodney is nearly in tears at the end of the opera scene (a fact that Sullivan made less obvious in the edit) and is a wreck by the time Del’s finished with him in the dinner scene. It’s not right at all, it just doesn’t sit with how Del behaves in other episodes, and to have the character of Rodney end up destroyed by Del’s behaviour doesn’t sit right either. Also, the fact that there is no laughter track/live audience (not a bad thing in itself) actually emphasises how unfunny and harsh most of it is.
I have to say I was not in favour of the edited version being the default version for broadcasts and DVD releases, but having now watched the deleted parts again I can understand why it was done. The edited version does mitigate quite a bit of the nastiness of the original version, with the addition of the laughter track and much of Del’s excesses (as well as Rodney’s reaction to these excesses) removed. This makes it watchable but it is still far from a classic episode and the behaviour of Del is not ‘right’ for virtually the entire episode.
I live in the US and just got Britbox, so I am watching most of the “Only Fools and Horses” programs for the first time, as I didn’t watch them when I lived in the UK.
I love the series and find it hilarious but was perplexed and also angry when watching “Royal Flush” so I googled it and found this article.
I totally agree with the comments and I think that not only is it not funny, it is also a very crude depiction of the English working class – I noted that there were no jokes at the expense of the upper classes in it, all of whom were shown to be reasonable.
Not only is this script not true to the previous character of Del, it is not true to the real people his character is based upon; even though the majority don’t ever go to see an opera, I cannot believe any of them would behave the way Del & his girlfriend were shown in this episode. That Sullivan wasn’t around during filming makes it clearer how this got filmed as it is without someone asking for partial rewrites.
I agree totally with this review. The original uncut version is just awful. Del does come across as evil and nasty throughout. I remember watching it as a kid when it came on at Christmas, and couldn’t believe what I was watching.
From beginning to end, it doesn’t let up once, making Del one of the nastiest TV sitcom characters ever, and not in a good way like Blackadder or Basil Fawlty.
The opera scene is very embarrassing, but the dinner table scene just turns Del into a downright pig, and at the end of the episode he doesn’t redeem himself, but instead tries to physically hurt Rodney, after destroying him throughout the entire episode. It just doesn’t make any sense, because Del at his worst in other episodes usually had good intent underneath, and usually redeems himself. Here he doesn’t.
I can see why Sullivan wanted to edit this, and why he tried to disown it. The faults are glaringly obvious, even the edited version.
I prefer to think this didn’t exist at all, and really wished it had never been made in the first place.
It’s quite an exaggeration to call Del evil and nasty throughout.
He was nothing more than a drunken fool at the dinner table.
Del makea his brother cry, ruins an opera performance deliberately, reunites with an ex with neither he nor his ex acknowledging how horribly their previous encounter was, with them having callously cheated on each other), wrecks his brother’s romance and THEN blackmails the girl’s father to break her and Rodney up. This unforgivable betrayal of your loving brother (who in some respects is more like your innocent son) is not evil? You must be a very cold person.
The whole Del trying to mix with the wealthy and out-stay his welcome scenario reminded me too much of ‘A Touch of Glass.’
The only thing I like about the episode are the scenes at the beginning with Rodney & Vicky in the market & café. I turn it off after that for the usual reasons.
Yeah – the uncut version is available on the number discs, those weekly only fools and horses magazines that came with a DVD every fortnight – that version of ‘a royal flush’ is uncut.
the BBC offical DVD release in the shops is the horrible chopped version with a laughter track.
on a side note, the uncut version is also available on VHS home video, the official video tape release of ‘a royal flush’ – all the scenes are intact.
I agree with the comments on here that it is a bad episode , the worst of the specials and I only,own it because I bought the DVD to complete the whole set . The premise is typical Del but it’s the way it’s done . I’m afraid it should be royally flushed down the khazi as Del would say….
I have both versions and I prefer the uncut original. I don’t think you should over analyse this episode, at the end of the day Del had way to much to drink, got totally pissed and as a result acted completely out of character.
A good article, Nathan,but, I think you are analysing too much about the characterization of Del. There are many other “Evil Del” moments in Only Fools roughly around this period- “Strained Relations”- Del says to Rodney, “I wish I’d had you put in care, then I could have been someone” (which is far nastier then anything in “A royal flush” and also just before this in “Tea for three” both the brothers are quite spiteful to each other. I always thought that a “Royal Flush” was one of the best Only Fools episodes-full of classic one liners and a great although unlikely plot. It is in my opinion, far better than some of the post ’91 fools- too many lacklustre efforts for such a high standard (never particually liked “Fatal Extraction”)but it’s all down to personal choice. Thw bottom line is that underneath it all, Del and Rodney care deeply for each other as shown in the thread running through the entire show’s history. The no.1 sitcom in history of course!
I prefer the full uncut version of ‘a royal flush’ I wasn’t keen on the 2004 edited version with a laughter track/laughing audience.
If anybody is thinking about getting ‘a royal flush’ on DVD/Video whatever – I would strongly suggest getting the uncut version, the 2004 hacked version was brutally chopped by about 20 mins of footage.
the uncut version is a little harder to find than the common cut one – but it’s worth it.
Hi Rob. Is the uncut version the one in the ofah official dvd / magazine collection as that’s the one I have?
Rob
Hi anyone know whos in the line up for this years convention? Come on Perry let us know ?
Sorry but i just can’t watch the edited version, it’s awful. Granted the original cut isn’t the best episode in the world either, one of my least favourites. To think this is sandwiched between To Hull and back and The frog’s legacy in terms of Xmas specials (2 of my all time favourite episodes) doesn’t really help.
The episode does have some good lines though….
“…..I see, and what is sirs pleasure?
Well birds and curry I suppose but I haven’t come here to chit chat”
As said, I always look back on this episode with a touch of regret about what might have been, but to pretend it doesn’t exist would be wrong
I enjoyed this write-up, until the author started to refer to Sir David Jason’s character as ‘Evil Del’. That is a ridiculous and over-the-top comment/nickname to make for Del Boy in this one special.
If we can just step away from what happened in the show, Del Boy, at the end of the day was basically like an excited kid at Christmas when he found out Rodney was seeing a lady of upper class. And yes, like every OFAH episode, Del also had the sight of money in his mind. SHOCK HORROR!
I agree that Del’s behaviour at the dinner table was a little out of order, but this was solely down to him being pissed. When you’re pissed, you tend to say silly things and behave in a way you normally wouldn’t. AND, I happen to believe it’s perfectly feasible that Del wanted Vicky’s family to be aware of Rodney’s dodgy past (Dope smoking at college) as I believe special branch WOULD find this out and potentially ‘get rid’ of Rodney. After all, Vicky herself advised Rodney that special branch keep an eye out for her if she is out late or doesn’t return to her home after a certain while.
It annoys me when fans slate this episode. It had many, many funny one-liners and in my opinion was well written. Yes, it was a little sad at the end but for Christ sakes – the one compliment that all fans and critics have paid tribute to, is Sullivan’s ability to make you laugh and cry. This episode was a prime example that comedy and doom could mix. It was a good episode and funnier and more enjoyable than the final trilogy in my opinion.
Which was your favourite episode out of the final 3 episodes? Just wondered
I must admit I liked royal flush I thought it was good episode. But I personally preferred frogs legacy dates and jolly boys outing their my favourite episodes. Classics
I guess I really enjoyed ‘If They Could See Us Now’ purely because it was the first episode out of the 3 and one that you kind of go ‘ahhh, I’m glad the show is back and alive’. But I guess for the actual all round funny story-line and jokes, then it’s ‘Strangers on the Shore’.
Overall, The Jolly Boys Outing is the greatest special they produced.
Yes jolly boys outing was just perfect wasn’t it! What a fantastic episode. Such a shame they never made the final episode about dels 65th birthday that they were planning on doing.
I still would like to see del boy rodders and trigger visit Boycie down at the farm just as a one off green green grass xmas special, think it would be so funny and nice to see them again. Jim John Sullivans son could come up with a great script I am sure.
I must admit – Del does indeed come across a bit nastier than usual in this episode, especially the comment towards the customer in the market at the beginning of the episode:
‘well you can run your wrist gently down the blade and find out’
Agreed Rob. “If they could see us now” Was a decent episode and I loved the one liners it had in it. It was not the best, but it was certainly up there. In my opinion though the perfect ending to this series was when they went off into the sunset as millionaires as the triple after it was “as not as good as” I don’t know weather it was because Albert had died or not, but it just didn’t feel right. The problem with royal flush though, it was a good story, they just mucked about with it too much, not having laughter, releasing it uncut, then the severally cut it an released that. John Sullivan not being there really notices as it feels like a rush job.
This episode came just under 3 months after Del had had his chance of a lifetime ruined by Rodney’s behaviour in ‘who wants to be a millionaire’.
Maybe Del had every right to still be a little bit bitter towards Rodney in this episode.
I know episodes stood alone in those days but maybe John Sullivan still had this in mind.
As for the final 3 episodes, this was a typical case of ‘after the Lord Mayor’s show’.
Who is this idiot who wrote this, clearly not a true OFAH fan and as far as I know the only one fan who “Hates” it, he should hang his head hating any episode and whats all this “evil del” rubbish, he was just drunk at a meal and as for the handshake, its clear he doesnt realize he shaking the broken hand.
I personally love this ep as I do all except the last 3 though I dont “hate” them, you have look far to much into what isnt there.
To quote del, Nathan you are a total wally
That’s not a nice thing to say at all – personally the episode is by far the worse that was ever shown – in fact it is the only one I personally do not own, why? because I don’t like it either and therefore have never bothered to purchase it.
Does that make me a “idiot” – should I “hang my head in shame” – …you are the only idiot that should “hang his head in shame”.
I notice your negative comment about ‘if they could see us now’ i watched that again the other night and thought after seeing it again it was a funny episode. Some classic moments! Trig arriving at flat ‘you put a bit of music on dave’ ? and the karaoke version ! lol how can you say this is a bad episode? Rodney as Russel crow hilarious. del boy saying this time next year we will be millionaires, Rodney response “this time last week we were millionaires”! I couldn’t stop laughing and think it isn’t as bad as people make out. I thought it was very funny, like when Rodney tells john ross to piss off thinking it mickey pearce, again had me in tears of laughter.
Just my opinion don’t know what everybody else thinks? I admit initially I agree time on our hands the best ending, but I think there are bits out of the new final 3 episodes which were superb, and I am glad that the 2001, 02 and 03 episodes were made.