Vale Austin series 2

Isn’t it lovely when all the nice characters end up happy at the end of a TV series? And the bad characters get what they deserve? That was the heartwarming vibe the final episode of the second series of Austin was going for.

Not a funny vibe, sadly. But we expected that. And we’ve talked about that many times before.

So, instead of blethering on about why Austin isn’t funny again, in this blog, we’re going to pose one simple question with reference to Austin: shouldn’t Australian funding bodies – and Austin was funded by Screen Australia, Screen Canberra and Screen New South Wales – fund a mostly Australian show?

Sure, Austin was mainly set in Canberra and employed mostly Australian actors and crew. But with three out of four of the creators and most of the writers being British (including Kevin Cecil and Andy Reilly, who wrote for British comedies like Black Books and Little Britain), plus the top-billed stars being British comedians Ben Miller and Sally Phillips, whatever happened to this being a vehicle for Love on the Spectrum’s Michael Theo?

Seriously, Michael, call your agent, because those Brits in charge gave you less airtime than you should be getting in a sitcom named for the character you played!

Much of the time, it felt like the main theme of Austin wasn’t about a guy finding out who his real father is, or discovering he’s a talented writer, or getting the confidence to leave the home he grew up in, or even about him being autistic in the world. The main theme of Austin was a bickering British couple trying to make a children’s TV series despite one of them being cancelled for accidentally sharing far-right content on social media.

That’s what got most of the screen time, anyway. Those scenes where Austin got a girlfriend or Austin’s mum hooked up with a government minister were all pretty perfunctory and had very little depth, even for a show of this type. Were they worth the investment from three Australian funding bodies?

We get that funding bodies and the for-profit production companies that take their cash (Northern Pictures and ITV Studios, in the case of Austin) want to be able to sell their shows to other countries, and having two British comedians front and centre would presumably help with that. But, again, should Australian funding bodies be stumping up most of the cash to make shows which aren’t really telling Australian stories?

Britain has a television industry which makes high-quality shows famous throughout the world, including comedies. And they’re not funding shows about Australia; they’re funding shows about Britain. Featuring British characters, doing things in Britain. And while British television, like Australian television, seems to make fewer sitcoms these days, it’s not up to Australian television to give unemployed British comedians work. Although we seem to have done that a lot recently.

Australian funding bodies should focus on giving unemployed Australian comedians work on the comedies they fund. Australian comedians could make something at least as good as Austin without British help, and if it’s a good show, it might even sell overseas (hello Fisk). It’s time Australian funding bodies got better at funding local talent, and not funding further series of Austin would be a good start.