A Day In May

[Stratman]

As most of us know, the episode in question received thirty nominations for worst episode ever, which tops the WEE list.

My question is, what made you dislike the episode? Was it the out of the blue Martin story? Or the Niles/Daphne story? For me, it was the Niles/Daphne story. What about everyone else?

[Sizzle]

I've enjoyed every episode of Frasier I've watched, to an extent, but on a relative basis this was certainly one of the "worst" episodes I've seen, though still pretty enjoyable.

I think you'll find that on a subconscious level, this episode wouldn't be fancied much due to the fact that there is very little interaction between Martin/Frasier/Niles and Daphne/Roz(Was she even there?[:]?[/:]). Few episodes are structured this way, and I feel this factor is significant in the negative perception of this show.

On a conscious level, personally, I just think the plots were trivial and/or unexciting. I didn't have a problem with the Martin Krane storyline, but obviously the troubles dealt with by Frasier/Niles aren't the most serious they've encountered, whether they were amusing or not, and I think these factors gave the episode a feel of "insignificance" in the scheme of the Frasier Krane story.

Hey, I don't think it was "bad" viewing, but it pales in comparison to the vast majority of Frasier episodes.

[Mr Blue Sky]

Well as you know, ADIM wasn't top of my list! [:]:-}[/:] It's a good question all the same. I think the episode was just one of the dullest in the show's history. I didn't mind the Niles/Daphne segment too much. It was fairly lifeless but it did contain one good moment when Daphne pondered how she would use her 'irrational demand' over the coming years!

The Frasier/Lana scene was also pretty strained but for me was the funniest of the 3 segments. I enjoyed the manically depressed Philip, and most of the laughs came at his expense. I think the final 'Martin' segment is what fans remember the most about this episode. It was one of those really weird "what the hell was that?" moments, which thankfully were few and far between during Frasier's run. It's hard to know what the writers were trying to achieve with this segment. They were obviously trying to show how Martin's shooting had affected the perpetrator's mother. Why??? We had no emotional involvement with her character, so I fail to see how her perspective matters. This was not the first time that the writers forgot Frasier was supposed to be a comedy during season 8. There's nothing wrong with 'dramedy', as long as it's not overdone or heavy handed, which unfortunately this was.

[Stratman]

Definitely not. It wasn't bad viewing, but it certainly wasn't the Shakespear of 'Frasier'. I actually just watched it again a few hours ago.

I think the episode was structured as the title suggests. Roz substory was probably just meeting her contractual agreements. She was only in it for about two minutes.

The funniest scenes for me were Frasier and Lana's. Every time that old lady talks to Frasier as if he were handicapped, I piss myself.



Post Edited (08-09-05 17:32)

[Sizzle]

Beer Necessity,
I don't think the Martin segment focused on the mother, per se. Her grief was simply used to illustrate Martins moral conflict - On one hand, the man shot him, on the other hand, he does appear repentant and the mother is clearly anguished - When Martin stands up and says he has "no comment" I interpret this as the eventual admission that he is torn between his peace of mind and that of the mother.
When the decision is made, to keep the man in jail, Martin, a man of unquestionable moral fiber, is uncertain whether to be grateful or sympathetic.

I agree the segment was rather random - But I do think it served a purpose, and that was to make us empathize with Martin, understand that he deals with very serious issues, and that his ethics are so profound that he questions his hatred for the man that shot him.

In cases like this it's always nice to get the writers "intention", but I think discussing interpretations of the shows more ambiguous moments is fun[:]:-)[/:]

[Jocelyn]

Sizzle wrote:

Roz(Was she even there?[:]?[/:])

She appears a couple of times very briefly. Once at the beginning and then again near the end. I think she borrows Frasier's car and Alice is sick in it or something like that. I can't quite remember and I only watched the episode last week, which is saying something.

[Ali 75]

Everyone has already said what was bad about it. I do agree with Strat about the old couple talking to Frasier, but that was the only highlight of the episode - still at least it had a highlight, unlike 'Frasier Has Spokane' - (why am I thinking of 'Hot Ticket' and 'Silent Echo' here[:]:-}[/:]).

I hated the Martin scenes, very badly thought out, far too rushed and much too 'out of the blue' to serve any purpose whatsoever.

[Mr Blue Sky]

I actually think Sizzle's made some very intelligent and thought-provoking comments about ADIM Ali, even though I'm more inclined to agree with you. I think for that segment to be a serious comment on Martin's morals the audience was still required to have some emotional involvement with the shootist's mother, which we didn't. Ultimately I didn't care about her feelings, so Martin's 'moral conflict' wasn't something I felt engaged with.

It's an interesting discussion point though, but be warned - it's a dangerous thing trying to second guess the 'intentions' of the S8/9/10 writing staff. It's been known for them to appear on this board and give us all a stern dressing down for daring to venture our opinions on such matters...

[Stratman]

Sizzle wrote:

> Beer Necessity,
> I don't think the Martin segment focused on the mother, per se.
> Her grief was simply used to illustrate Martins moral conflict
> - On one hand, the man shot him, on the other hand, he does
> appear repentant and the mother is clearly anguished - When
> Martin stands up and says he has "no comment" I interpret this
> as the eventual admission that he is torn between his peace of
> mind and that of the mother.
> When the decision is made, to keep the man in jail, Martin, a
> man of unquestionable moral fiber, is uncertain whether to be
> grateful or sympathetic.
>
> I agree the segment was rather random - But I do think it
> served a purpose, and that was to make us empathize with
> Martin, understand that he deals with very serious issues, and
> that his ethics are so profound that he questions his hatred
> for the man that shot him.
>
> In cases like this it's always nice to get the writers
> "intention", but I think discussing interpretations of the
> shows more ambiguous moments is fun[:]:-)[/:]

That's exactly how I interpreted the scene. Maybe the writers felt the audience could relate to the mother's grief, even without an emotional connection. I felt sorry for Martin, but I also felt sad for the mother. I guess everybody takes things differently.

[dorianblue]

Great points Sizzle.

Yup, I agree - the mother ISN'T the focus of the Martin subplot. When parole is denied the camera doesn't focus on the mother, but rather on Martin as he hears the mother sobbing behind him. JM's expression is great - he portrays Martin as squirming in guilt and feeling pissed off, all at once.

It didn't serve much purpose but it was affecting all the same. It was definitely out of the blue but they probably had been thinking about it as a plotline for a while, and in the end just shunted it into a random ep as a subplot. Perhaps JM wanted a bit more to do?



Post Edited (09-09-05 15:04)

[Mr Blue Sky]

Quote from DB:- "Perhaps JM wanted a bit more to do?"

I think that's more like it, DB. John Mahoney had threatened to quit after season 8 but stayed on when the cast were offered a massive pay deal to film another 3 seasons. He apparently wanted a storyline covering the effects of ageing, and in particular a disease very close to his (and DHP's) heart - Alzheimer’s. The writers decided against this and I think Martin's sub-plot in ADIM was by way of an 'artistic concession' made to John Mahoney. It's presence is very hard to explain otherwise, as the segment was not followed up in subsequent episodes (thank god!)

Incidentally, I don't blame JM for wanting more to do or wanting more serious storylines for his character. An actor of his ability must have been mightily bored during much of Season 8 and I'm not surprised he considered quitting.

[Stratman]

It is my belief that this plot was out of the blue because Martin was extremely uncomfortable with the whole situation. He never told anyone about it, and when Niles asked where he was, he lied and hung up.

It is my belief that this plot came up when it did to make the point that a dispicable act is never forgotten, no matter how many years go by.

[Mr Blue Sky]

Well, as you said earlier - I guess everybody takes things differently.

[Mr Blue Sky]

Stratman, I don't want this comment to interpreted as sarcastic (especially given our history) but are you saying that the writers had some 'grand plan' to introduce that Martin segment at that specific point in the show's run?

It felt very tagged-on to me, almost like a 'filler' segment added at the last moment. It may have also been a concession to JM. I just can't believe the S8 writing team had planned the segment for years or whatever (maybe you weren't suggesting this), as most of the writing staff that season were new to Frasier, or had come on board during S7.

[Stratman]

No, I don't think there was any grand plan. I was saying that even after nearly 8 years, Martin still couldn't forgive the gunman, which he was struggling with because of his relationship with the mother.

[Mr Blue Sky]

I see what you mean. [:]:-)[/:]

[Ali 75]

B.N, - when I said "everyone has already said what's bad about it", I meant in this thread before I commented, not in the past. Think you might have thought I was dismissing Sizzle's post - just wanted to clear that up[:];-)[/:].

I just thought the Martin scenes were too random and too rushed. It came from nowhere and was over almost before it began, if they wanted to give John more to do, or make this storyline more plausible they should have stretched it out more. To address something that changed Martin's life in about 5 mins wasn't a good move IMO. It surprises me that Frasier could knock out some wonderful 'dramedy' episodes at times, but get it so wrong with others.

[Mr Blue Sky]

Exactly. If that segment was the culmination of a few episodes build up then we would have had more emotionally invested in the secondary characters. For a scene like that to work it's vital to make the viewer care about the consequences for all the characters involved, which a five minute segment clearly wasn't able to do. The writers aimed too high on this occasion, IMO.

Perhaps the writers were caught between two stools. On the one hand they wanted to write a serious scene for JM to get his teeth into, but they also knew that Frasier was primarily a comedy show and realised they couldn't expand that particular segment without compromising the comedy element.

Btw, I'm bloody glad they didn't choose to 'delve deeper' into Martin's moral issues, S8 had precious few laughs as it is and that sort of in depth analysis should be kept for more drama based shows, IMO.

[Jocelyn]

Beer Necessity wrote:

If that segment was the culmination of a few episodes build up then we would have had more emotionally invested in the secondary characters. For a scene like that to work it's vital to make the viewer care about the consequences for all the characters involved

This was a mistake repeated in 'Frasier Has Spokane' where we were somehow supposed to care about Roz's relationship with Roger who (a) had all the personality of a dishcloth and (b) had previously appeared in only one (poor) episode which had aired so long before FHS that most viewers had probably forgotten who we was (if they ever cared in the first place). And like 'A Day In May', it was completely unredeemed by any laughs.

[Mr Blue Sky]

Great point there, Jocelyn.

[Bad Ambassador]

I've only seen this episode twice, I think - on original broadcast and again a couple of years on video. Completely unremarkable but I wouldn't class it as the worst ever. In fact, I like the general idea behind it - it's just a shame it wasn't a bit funnier...

[tenpercenter]

martins story arc is enough to carry this ep

[hansenkd]

I made a comment about my sadness regarding the low esteem in which this episode is generally held in the "Order of Excrement" thread.

I love it dearly and think it is a beautiful piece of unexpected "Frasier." Especially in comparison to the brash, not-very-good season finale that followed it directly on first airing in the states.

[nalyd renrut]

Quote from DB:- "Perhaps JM wanted a bit more to do?"

I think that's more like it, DB. John Mahoney had threatened to quit after season 8 but stayed on when the cast were offered a massive pay deal to film another 3 seasons. He apparently wanted a storyline covering the effects of ageing, and in particular a disease very close to his (and DHP's) heart - Alzheimer’s. The writers decided against this and I think Martin's sub-plot in ADIM was by way of an 'artistic concession' made to John Mahoney. It's presence is very hard to explain otherwise, as the segment was not followed up in subsequent episodes (thank god!)

Incidentally, I don't blame JM for wanting more to do or wanting more serious storylines for his character. An actor of his ability must have been mightily bored during much of Season 8 and I'm not surprised he considered quitting.

Is there somewhere I can read about this?

[tenpercenter]

a day in may is where this great refined cultured series takes a turn towards the domestic and boring realm of most other sitcoms