Talk:Strangers with Candy

Comedy Mid‑importance

	Comedy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

LGBTQ+ studies

This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies articles

Television Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Television Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Television portal This article is supported by American television task force (assessed as Low-importance).

The Quote Debate

Regarding the "I stole the TV"/"I stoled the TV" debate: The correct quote is "I stole the TV". Please listen to the opening sequence again -- turn the volume up if you have to. An independent confirmation of this is in the fourth question here: http://www.jerriblank.com/swcfaq.html.

Tell me about, though I can't hear her saying "the," but "a" instead. "The" doesn't make sense; it implies that there was some previous discussion about said TV and that there is, especially, only one TV that could be in question. Apparently, the person who does the Jerri Blank site has a personal connection with Amy Sedaris but on Question 4 it doesn't say how they know, there's no citation. Also, when they talk about it on the DVD commentary, about how it was a Sedaris ad-lib, I can hear "a" as well. Sexyactionnick 01:36, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just listened to the intro of the show, and it was clear to me that she says "I stole the TV." johnthacker83

I guess it will remain "the" for now...though it angers me in a grammatical context. Sexyactionnick 00:04, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Episode List

I started a List of Strangers with Candy episodes page. I based it on the List of Deadwood episodes page. It needs a lot of work. Peregrinefisher 22:07, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bitchin, its a good format. Television writers and directors rarely get their due, especially those that aren't creators or producers as well. In speaking of Strangers With Candy, everybody knows that it was the brainchild of Stephen Colbert and Paul Dinello then developed in tangent with Amy Sedaris and Mitch Rouse, but Peter Lauer directed 7 of the 10 episodes of the first season (and more in subsequent seasons). He doesn't even have a page. It is a mad world. Sexyactionnick 01:41, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jerri's Pets

Am I the only one who's noticed that in the first season, there was a recurring "pet" (a turtle, chicken, lobster, etc.) that would die by the end of the episode? --Tokachu 17:27, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, Shelly was the turtle, Sookie was the chicken, and I can't remember the names of the other pets. They make note of how they stopped doing pets on the DVD Commentary, but I don't remember them saying why. There are probably several reasons... Sexyactionnick 01:21, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Animals are hard to work with, and in some (if not all) cases require a specialist to be on set (an added expense)
Amy Sedaris was afraid of a lot of the animals, and did it out of professionalism mostly (hated the turtle and the snake especially)
The consistently changing pet joke was getting a little tired
It was taking up episode time. A lot of conventions in the series, especially her opening monologues, were eventually phased out due to the time it took; thirty seconds is a very long time in television.

Confusing sentence

In the character description of Guy Blank, this article states, "Jerri’s natural father in a stress-related coma.(Only in the film is he in a coma. Despite popular knowledge, Guy is awake during the series, but is never actually caught in movement as Dinello and Colbert say in one episode commentary)." The way it reads now, it seems to say that Guy is in the film, not the series. Being that this article is about the series, his character description should not start with a fact specific to the film. --Pdeq (talk) 17:24, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I changed Guy's description to "Jerri’s natural father, shown only in a motionless state during mid-action." It is the same as the opening link (though shortened) as his entry on Strangers with Candy characters#Guy Blank. -NatureBoyMD (talk) 18:02, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Production Value Changes

The production values, writing and directing all seemed to differ considerably between the first season and the second and third seasons. The first season seemed to have more consistent placement of supporting characters, storylines, locations and cinematography. The second and third seasons diminished the roles of supporting characters, seemed to have less professional camera work, and the plot lines seemed more inconsistent and scattered. In addition, the live action opening sequence of the first season was replaced with an amateurish seeming animated sequence in the last two seasons. Usually, most successful series show an improvement in production values. Does anyone else notice this discrepancy, and have an explanation for the dramatic differences? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.101.54.21 (talk) 02:00, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Are you...kidding me? --Darkestshining (talk) 05:39, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]