Showing posts with label Gameshows/Quizes. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Gameshows/Quizes. Show all posts

Review: THE MARRIAGE REF


A critical bomb in America, the Jerry Seinfeld-produced MARRIAGE REF has been remade for the UK and aired its first episode last Saturday. Dermot O'Leary hosts (well, ITV need to keep him sweet in-between X Factor marathons), but this format reveals he's just a safe pair of hands who can't thrive on a show that practically demands a comedian at the helm. He can teeter on his heels and nod his head as much as he likes, but with nobody to hug or call "buddy", O'Leary looked lost at sea.

For the uninitiated, The Marriage Ref sees a celebrity trio pass judgement on real-life marital tiffs. This is primetime ITV, so the arguments are trivial affairs like a wife who won't stop writing her husband to-do lists, or an elderly couple's disagreement over pickles. It would admittedly be a very different, edgier show if the marital strife involved serious issues like infidelity, illegitimate children, and bigamy, but The Marriage Ref goes too far the other way. It's impossible to care about each couple's inconsequential annoyances, and most aren't funny enough to entertain. The whole things ends up feeling incredibly petty and a weak idea to base a TV show on.

It does help that there's a tradition of comedy panel shows on UK TV, which this is a loose example of. Still, while the American show manages a star-studded lineup of refs (thanks to Seinfeld's rolodex), the UK version already looks like a bargain basement version. In the US they had Alec Baldwin, Eva Longoria, Tina Fey, Madonna, Ricky Gervais, Larry David, Donald Trump, Sarah Silverman, Bette Midler, and Demi Moore as marriage refs. For the British remake's big launch we had ubiquitous comedians Sarah Millican and Jimmy Carr and, wait for it, ex-Spice Girl Geri Halliwell. A woman who seemed genuinely puzzled when Carr started cracking jokes, as if nobody told her this was a lighthearted comedy show and her absurd role as "UN Ambassador" was genuinely required to sort out some quarrels.

So while the US version has A and B-list guests the audience may be intrigued to see pass comment on ordinary people's love lives, the UK version's just got some comedians to provide quips. And they're the kind of comedians you see all the time on shows such as this, and it's becoming a real pain watching them conveyor belt their way around TV. Carr was hosting 8 Out Of 10 Cats and Millican was a guest on King Of... just the night before. I'm not sure which version of The Marriage Ref is best. The UK's going more for the funnybone, which probably makes it more regularly amusing, but I think I'd like to hear what Madonna has to say more than Millican. That said, the US version's crippled by that horribly cheesy/dumb production style that infects every American show involving real people. So, surprisingly, the UK version's probably a mild improvement, despite lacking any major star-power. But that just means it resides in an outer circle of TV Hell.

Saturdays, ITV1, 9PM

Read more...

Review: AL MURRAY'S COMPETE FOR THE MEAT


The idea of a TV gameshow based on a pub quiz, hosted by Al Murray's comic creation the Pub Landlord, must have seemed like a great idea for digital channel Dave. Indeed, whenever Compete For The Meat was relying on Murray talking to members of the public (repartee the comedian's honed over 15 years playing to audiences across the UK), it was on much surer footing--even if Murray's interactions have become annoyingly, half-intentionally predictable.

Compete For The Meat started with a promising 15-minute introduction and set-up, with Murray chatting to the "front row" audience (mocking their names, ages and occupations), before applying the same ridicule to a celebrity "top table" comprised of ex-England goalie Peter Shilton, alleged funnygirl Olivia Lee and gnomic TV consumer activist Dominic Littlewood. From there, four pub team trios were introduced in a Blankety Blank-esque two-tier set, and Murray again poked fun at their gender, nationality and jobs. Three attractive lady retailers, an Aussie, a professional food taster, and a dog groomer inspired decent quips, at least.

So far, so repetitive? Oh yes, but I remember the days of Strike It Lucky/Rich, when a pre-scandal Michael Barrymore's interaction with contestants lasted half the show and was often the main reason to watch. That proved to be true with Compete The Meat, too, but with the insurmountable problem that Meat's quiz was tedious and surprisingly insubstantial considering it had to fill three-quarters of an hour. Questions were asked in a chosen topic, answers were jotted down, papers were collected, scores totted up by ex-Blue Peter presenter/babe Zöe Salmon (who's her agent?), and the lowest-scoring team duly eliminated. Rather confusingly, this meant the shopgirls were asked to stand in a "Sin Bin" skip and be replaced by three people from the audience (who, in this case, had to be referred to as "The Guv's Girls", despite two of them now being men!)

The format was weak and flawed, as you can tell. Compete For The Meat should have kept things simpler, perhaps cleaving close to what The Big Fat Quiz Of The Year does annually on Channel 4. I'm still perplexed by how this quiz only managed to deliver two quick rounds, before reaching the final--where each team leader just answered general knowledge questions solo. Perhaps Meat's two biggest mistakes was trying to keep things fresh by involving an embarrassingly stupid "pub game" towards the end, where two women had to play a miniature game of curling with food, "greasing" the runway with condiments. It was so unfunny, pointless and protracted that both women looked embarrassed to be taking part, and often didn't want to play the game by its own rules as drizzling gravy had zero effect on any outcome.

And why were there celebrities involved? They weren't necessary. The points the celebs earned during the pub quiz could be distributed to the teams in the final round--so, understandably, in not wanting to pick a favourite and guarantee an easy victory, they spread their points out across every team to instead level the playing field. It was the honourable and sensible thing to do, but it effectively meant success in the previous rounds meant even less.

Overall, Compete For The Meat is a decent idea and a reasonable way to give Al Murray's Pub Landlord a new format to apply his brand of jingoistic idiocy (following stand-up, a Sky1 sitcom and ITV chat-show), but the mechanics of the format need serious attention and 20-minutes of fat carved away. The decision to have a frozen chicken mascot called "Mr Giblets" silently hovering in the aisles was notably stupid, and why not make the whole set resemble an actual pub?

This was mild enjoyment when Murray was chatting with real people, in what amounted to a "warm up" before the first advert break, but Compete For The Meat ironically fell apart when the meat of the quiz arrived on the plate.

Dave, Thursdays, 9PM.

Read more...

'SING IF YOU CAN'; watch if you dare


Do you remember Distraction, the Channel 4 gameshow hosted by Jimmy Carr, where contestants answered general knowledge questions while being distracted in painful ways? ITV have taken that basic concept and merged it with karaoke for new Saturday night series Sing If You Can, hosted by love-or-hate comedian Leigh Francis (as alter-ego Keith Lemon) and X Factor runner-up Stacy Solomon; a double-act almost as inept as Brits flops Sam Fox and Mick Fleetwood. Lemon's is even less amusing when his dependency on crudity's removed by the constraints of primetime on a mainstream channel, and Solomon's speaking voice is a mostly unintelligible hitching gasp between keywords.

The concept behind the show is painfully simple: two bargain-basement celebrity teams compete in a variety of games where they must sing-a-long to songs while being put-off by silly distractions. To that end, Jodi Prenger (ironically the winner of I'd Do Anything) sang while covered in snakes; a crinkled Brigitte Nielsen sang while strapped to a rotating wheel having knives thrown at her (they all missed, unfortunately); Pineapple Dance Studio's Andrew Stone and Strictly Come Dancing's Brendan Cole did a duet while being vibrated and gunged (it's more wholesome than it sounds); and, uh, the blonde one from defunct X Factor boyband G4 sang while, um, balloons were inflated and popped.

It's TV for idiots, as you expected it to be. Even the studio audience didn't seem to be enjoying themselves, whenever you caught their blank expressions in the darkened background, listlessly holding studio-made banners expressing their support for the has-been celebs. Even a careful edit to ensure some reaction shots of people laughing or gasping didn't manage to convince you everyone watching wouldn't rather be elsewhere. What exactly is the point to it all? Who cares if the celebrities fluffed the lyrics or stopped singing altogether? That happened occasionally and never seemed to matter too much. Is is a thrill for viewers to see snakes and balloons bursting? I'm not saying silly gameshows need to have a point to be worthwhile, but it sure does help. There's nothing exciting or compelling about watching celebrities (most of whom were trained singers) do karaoke in less-than-ideal conditions. The singing didn't matter and most of the distractions were restricted by what can be achieved in a TV studio. It's hard to imagine what the games will be in future weeks -- other than variations on distractions involving water, gunge, vibration, spinning, circus acts, scary animals, and loud bangs.

Vernon Kaye was originally supposed to present this show, but looks to have avoided a bullet after ITV replaced him at the last-minute. It seems likely ITV knew the show was a stinker (soon to air alongside the all-conquering Doctor Who), so thought adding Keith Lemon would at least make it appear edgier, crazier and a more intentionally frolicsome. It would certainly have been even more boring with Kaye treating it like The Generation Game, but Keith Lemon just brings a different set of problems to proceedings. Francis's track record with comedy ('Bo Selecta!, Celebrity Juice) is puerile and sexual in nature, so Sing If You Can instantly reduces him to peddling a sanitized version of his act. And he's nowhere near as lovable as people believe him to be, on account of the fact he looks and acts like a creepy, grownup, mustachioed Cabbage Patch Doll.

But the real insanity comes from some ITV dope deciding that Stacy Solomon should present television because the public love her. In other words: she was voted I'm A Celebrity Get Me Out Of Here's "Queen of the Jungle", so it's their duty to fill the airwaves with as much Solomon-starring material as possible, because her millions of votes equal loyal viewers. It's "Operation Kerry Katona" all over again -- a habit ITV need to kick, as they just make themselves look unpardonably naff and self-obsessed. I'm A Celebrity's Shaun Ryder even appeared as one of Sing's "judges" here (a pointless X Factor-ish element of the show), together with erstwhile popstar Coleen Nolan (cruel compensation for axing her from Loose Women?) and comedian Dave Gorman (who should have words with his agent.)

Stacy's a decent singer and a memorable personality (enormous horsey teeth and a speech pattern that sounds like she's constantly out of breath), but that doesn't mean she'll be a natural presenting a TV show. In fact, it's quite the opposite. Stacy could barely read the autocue and had zero chemistry with Lemon, so was mostly relegated to reminding viewers that the celebs are making arses out of themselves on behalf of, well, their showbiz profiles... but also Teenage Cancer Trust.

Oh yes, the charity tie-in. In what soon turned into a Comic Relief appeal night, Sing If You Can spent an inordinate amount of time plugging Teenage Cancer Trust (along with Argos), and even played a five-minute VT about the charity's work towards the end. It's a worthy cause, don't get me wrong, but it was used almost as an excuse for the awfulness of the show. A calculated attempt to make viewers feel bad for hating a show that's just meant to be an hour of jovial silliness that's giving a potential £20,000 to a good cause. Well, by all means donate to Teenage Cancer Trust, but you don't need to watch Sing If You Can to do your bit in that regard.

16 April 2011, ITV1, 7.20PM

Read more...

'DREW CAREY'S IMPROV-A-GANZA'; whose format is it, anyway?


Improvise your way over to Obsessed With Film, where I've reviewed the first episode of DREW CAREY'S IMPROV-A-GANZA, a brand new improvised comedy show that reunites many stars from the American remake of Whose Line Is It Anyway?

Atrocious title aside, this improvised comedy gameshow is a worthier successor to Whose Line Is It Anyway's crown than BBC2's recent Fast & Loose, primarily because it's the same basic show with only minor differences. A svelte Drew Carey (host of Whose Line's US remake) ostensibly takes charge, supported by a bunch of all-star improvisers: Whose Line veterans Ryan Stiles, Colin Mochrie, Greg Proops, Chip Esten, Jeff David and Brad Sherwood, teamed with Jonathan Magnum and Sean Masterson from Drew Carey's Green Screen (a short-lived post-Whose Line improv show), and joined by Kathy Kinney and MADtv's Heather Anne Campbell.

The series was shot at the MGM Grand in Las Vegas, giving Improv-A-Ganza the unshakeable feel of Whose Line Is It Anyway: Live In Vegas. It's pretty much the same format, just with a more impressive stage and trivial tweaking. The biggest change is the lack of a "host" to coordinate everything. Despite Drew Carey's name being in the title, the performers themselves marshal each game, venturing out into the audience to select volunteers to bring up on stage to get involved. The feel of a "live show" is increased by noticing most of the audience are drinking alcohol, and in the first episode Colin Mochrie gets more than he bargained for when he chooses a drunken woman to assist with a game, and the tipsy lady's inebriation ends up being the funniest part of the episode. Continue reading...

Read more...

'FAST & LOOSE' 1.2


I was distinctly unimpressed with BBC2's new improv comedy show last week, and most of you agreed with my assessment it was too slow and, unforgivably, too rehearsed. But I know these shows take awhile to find their feet (the first few series of Whose Line Is It Anyway? were weak, too), so I tuned in for the second episode, hoping for an improvement, and I got it.

That's not to say Fast & Loose is still anywhere near a good show, but episode 2 was certainly funnier and felt more spontaneous. It was especially good to see Wayne Brady in the lineup of performers (a familiar face from Whose Line), as he managed to bring a few moments of spark to proceedings. The games were also much better and, crucially, had the smell of being genuinely impulsive – such as "Forward/Reverse", where a scene is performed but the action is randomly reversed or fast-forwarded, or "Double Speak", where the performers were coupled into oversized T-shirts and had to be interviewed as one entity, with each duo having to talk simultaneously. Both games were funny ideas, even if what was being performed wasn't particularly clever or memorable. The key thing is they felt improvised, by virtue of the fact they were performed so clumsily.

But the problems from week 1 remain: most of the games drag on far too long ("Weak Links" ran an incredible 8-minutes), and there was the unwelcome return of "Interpretive Dance" with David Armand (a ludicrous 4-minute long game.) The only saving grace there was that Armand's chosen song, Wet Wet Wet's "Love Is All Around", was more conducive to humorous mime than last week's "Careless Whisper". And the utter lack of audience input is still a ridiculous oversight that denies the show interaction and a sense of legitimacy that usually fuels improv shows.

And on a technical level, I hate the lack of screen legends to remind audiences of key things in a game (as I still forget what roles performers have been assigned for "Weak Links", say), presenter Hugh Dennis sits at a desk that's too distant from the performers, who themselves have to sit on those awkward two tier benches. I'm glad Fast & Loose has problems that are so easily fixed; but it's astonishing the format got this far without anyone realizing its blindingly obvious faults.

What did you think of Fast & Loose this week?

Fridays, BBC2, 10PM

Read more...

'FAST & LOOSE'


I was a huge fan of Channel 4's Whose Line Is It Anyway? throughout the '90s and, indeed, into the '00s with the inferior but fun US remake, that wisely retained the fantastic Colin Mochrie and Ryan Stiles. It was a collection of simple improvisational games (many of which you could attempt at home), involving songs, bizarre props, one-liners, and audience involvement. Since its demise, nothing has ever truly replaced it on television, although Whose Line's creators bolted a few improv elements into panel show Mock The Week, and in so doing created its most popular round ("Scenes We'd Like To See", where the comedians take it in turns to enact various comic scenarios presented to them.)

So it was with a great deal of anticipation that I sat down to watch BBC2's Fast & Loose on Friday night, which is essentially Whose Line for a new generation, with Mock's team captain Hugh Dennis taking over the Clive Anderson role as ringmaster. Fast & Loose has more of a team sensibility than Whose Line ever did, with six performers huddled together off-stage on benches, ready to improvise whatever's thrown their way. Unfortunately, while I'm sure a few of the games were genuinely improvised, Fast & Loose carried a distinct aroma of falseness. And if an improv show doesn't feel improvised, that kills a great deal of the comedy for me. It's a remarkable skill to be able to think on your feet to a professional standard, particularly with the proviso everything you say is funny, but the trick is drained of life if you suspect the performers are aware of what's coming, or have rehearsed lines up their sleeves.

Unfortunately, Fast & Loose was crammed with too many moments where you didn't believe the performers were totally off-script. Remember Whose Line, when people would regularly fluff their words, find themselves upstaged by someone more skilled, burst into laughter themselves, or squirm under the pressure of having to come up with a gag or song at the drop of a hat? There was none of that here, and consequently no real sense of out-on-a-limb danger. One round, called "Interpretive Dance", even revolved around a guest called David Armand dancing to "Careless Whisper" (in the manner of playing Charades-to-the-lyrics), while two people had to guess what song he was performing, being unable to hear the track. It could have been a masterful display of improvisation, but Armand was actually demonstrating the stand-up routine he's been performing for years already. Here he is doing much the same thing for Natalie Imbruglia's "Torn". It casts doubt on his "Careless Whisper" performance being real improv, doesn't it?

I'm sure a few of the games were genuinely improvised, of course. I'm guessing the ones that were particularly unfunny. But, too often, the responses the performers gave sounded rehearsed, or too polished to be impromptu gags. One round required them to dance and, when the music stopped, deliver a cheesy chat-up line straight into camera. Each performer had a bizarre ability to know it was their turn to deliver their zinger down the lens, don't you think? Almost as if there was a set order of play. And if that's true, then it stands to reason they knew that game was on the agenda, and could therefore have prepared some jokes. You can Google "bad chat-up lines" and find many variations on what they came up with.

One surefire way to make things look genuinely improvised, and a key feature of Whose Line Is It Anyway?, is to involve the studio audience. Get members of the public to suggest topics or ideas that will fuel most of the games. That way we can be relatively sure the performers are being truly spontaneous. But audience interaction was something Fast & Loose noticeably excluded, which again lends credence to my belief the performers knew what Hugh Dennis would be asking them to do throughout the show.

The only bright spark of comedy came in the final game, "Sideways Scene" (see photo above), which saw three performers act out a scene while lying on a giant red canvas that, when viewed from above, looked like a regular horizontal room with a door frame and wooden chair as furnishings. The three performers would therefore have to crawl around on the ground, aware that their actions in our bird's-eye-view would look like they're awkwardly levitating half the time. The downside is that the visual fun of the game outweighed the comedy being performed, but it was nevertheless an imaginative, original idea that made me laugh.

Sadly, that was the only moment where Fast & Loose came into its own. While I don't think the producers rigged every game, I can't shake the feeling the majority of this show wasn't improvised. The performances were too slick, the jokes too robust, and moments that were supposedly off-piste (like Greg Davies approaching a camera to poke fun at Dennis) just looked rehearsed. Everyone seemed to have too much awareness of where their cameras were, which again made everything feel very staged. They should have treated the show like theatre and performed for the audience.

It's a pity, because there's no shame in having a show that feels loose because the performers aren't so on-the-ball with the improv, so long as it all feels like real ad-libbing. That's what we've come to see. If the producers come out to ensure us that Fast & Loose is 100% made up on the spot, then fine -- but the show is doing a poor job translating that fact to the TV screen. The way to relieve skepticism is very simple because Whose Line perfected this genre 20 years ago: get the audience involved in the creative process. If someone shouts out "spaghetti western" and the performers immediately transform a romantic dinner scene into a cowboy shootout, that proves quickly and easily that everyone's thinking on their feet

And really, what's the excuse not to involve the audience?

Aside

  • The show really needed to include on-screen legends, reminding us who or what the performers are pretending to be in a few of the games. If your attention slipped, or you left the room for a few seconds, you'd come back and be at a complete loss trying to understand what was going on for many of the games -- particularly the "Weak Links" quiz and "Come Dining" round. Again, a lesson that should have been learned from Whose Line. Oh, and the show's music cues were cheap and ghastly.
TRANSMISSION: 14 January 2011, BBC2, 10PM

Read more...

'MOCK THE WEEK' 9.1


I'm not going to review or "open thread" Mock The Week all series, as I'm not sure there's anything left to say. The show, now in its fifth year and ninth series, is still dogged by problems; some of which it's always had but continues to live with like benign tumours, others more recent and increasingly problematic.

Like him or loathe him, the departure of Frankie Boyle two series ago has left MTW feeling toothless, with less of a "must see" feel about it; I remain unconvinced Russell Howard's anything beyond a competent stand-up who ticks the BBC's "yoof" box; middle-of-the-road Andy Parsons can't believe his luck he's employed in something so popular; and Hugh Dennis might as well not turn up these days (although it's fun seeing him sit there twiddling his thumbs, gazing around at times). Surrounded by quick-thinking stand-ups, Dennis clearly only thrives with a Radio 4 script in his hand. Dara O'Briain is now the best comedian on the show, but as host he can't do much except occasionally interject for a brief spell.

And the hybrid panel show/improv format's still an issue. The "stand-up round" is tailored to people's on-stage routines, so often have only passing relevance to the day's news. And in this opening episode only three of the six players even participated, instead of the usual four. Maybe Russell Howard, like Frankie Boyle, is beginning to feel the strain of coming up with fresh material every week, particularly now he has his own show on BBC3 to write for? Other rounds look increasingly daft, particularly the one where the teams just make up funny phrases that fit the acronym of a tabloid headline. Surely something so immature and easy is beneath professional comedians.

I guess it's just becoming more obvious that MTW's relevance as satire is tenuous. It's little more than a bun fight between comedians, taking many hours to film, whittled down to a half-hour of highlights with little breathing room. But I guess people expecting incisive satire don't watch MTW for that, just people who like stand-up and read The Sun enough to recognize a few of the topics being joked about.

The whole show's as unbalanced as its guest's seating arrangements (two for Hugh's team, one for Andy and Russell); the irregular female players (Diane Morgan this week) barely get a word in edgeways, but blossom when given an opportunity with no chance of interruption (mainly during the standup round); and while there are still some gags that hit their marks (and the "Scenes We'd Like To See" finale still deserves its own show), I think Mock The Week's past its best and is now easy schedule-filler for Dave as repeats.

17 JUNE 2010: BBC2, 10PM

Read more...

THE BUBBLE 1.3 [Open Thread]


This will be the last time I chime in on The Bubble, until it perhaps alters its format or otherwise improves. I still think the potential behind quizzing celebs on news stories they've been cocooned from is being squandered; the game reduced to guessing which ridiculous news report/tabloid clipping is too ridiculous to be true, or so ridiculous it must be true. My dark side longs for a well-timed celebrity death to at least inspire a "guess who died?"-style bit of irreverence one week, but that's in the hands of fate and The Bubble's producers.

The Bubble's too timorous to tackle such things, I feel -- so "gorilla found on Mars" and "chickens murder fox" stories are the order of the day. After three episodes, I find it amusing enough to pass the time (mainly because of David Mitchell's celebrated wit), but the game itself doesn't involve me until the final quick-fire round. So, that's me done reviewing it here, although I hope it comes back for another series, provided they find a way to tackle more relevant mainstream news. I don't expect them to wisecrack about Jamie Bulger's now-adult killer being sent back to jail after breaking the conditions of his release (as happened this week), but The Bubble has got to show its teeth somehow.

What's your final verdict?

5 MARCH 2010: BBC2, 10PM

Read more...

Push The Button


Ant n' Dec are back with a brand new Saturday night show on ITV, which is rather regrettably a "big deal" in this day and age. I'm not against them as a light entertainment double-act, actually. I think they're good fun, down-to-earth, have good chemistry, and interact with people very naturally. As presenters, they're by far the best reason to watch I'm A Celebrity Get Me Out Of Here, and they're perfect as hosts of Britain's Got Talent. But I've never managed to sit through more than 15-minutes of their popular Saturday Night Takeaway series because it's just so rambling and the advert breaks too regular for me. Anyway, now they're back with family gameshow Push The Button, which is obviously going to be dismissed as The Generation Game with a "stop the clock" element attached...

Two competing families take the roles of contestants, each given an initial prize fund of £100,000 to try and hang onto. Individual members of each family go head-to-head in various madcap games, during which their £100k fortune falls until they push the titular button. In this opener, we had a conveyor belt of strangely-shaped parcels that had to be pushed through identical holes in a wall (like that game toddlers play), a round where people had to count the teeth in a giant bobblehead of Simon Cowell (I'm serious), a competitive yodelling round (stay with me...), and a finale where the families had to assemble a tiered wedding cake.

It was hilarious fun for all the family... or so ITV hope everyone thinks. For me, there's just something distancing about watching adults fool around like children, and it's especially tiresome as a spectator. There needs to be a certain level of embarassment for me to enjoy watching strangers play silly games (see the aforementioned Generation Game, which was enjoyably cringe-making), and there wasn't much of that here. Still, a part of me's glad Push The Button has chosen to focus on regular people -- perhaps a sign, along with Total Wipeout, that the vogue for celebrity-based gameshows is coming to an end. Did you hear me, All-Star Family Fortunes? The downside is that it's tougher to spin a physical gameshow with "real" people into gold, and Push The Button didn't manage it, despite the valiant efforts of Ant n' Dec.

Also, I'm not sure if it's a good idea to select families that aren't exactly shy and retiring. For me, it's funnier to see mild-mannered people taken out of their comfort zones and asked to do ridiculous things for cash, whereas both families on Push The Button were outrageous extroverts who couldn't believe their luck to be on primetime TV. I'm sure they all had a great time (it looked like they did), but watching overzealous people try and assemble cakes doesn't strike me as a worthwhile way to spend an hour.

Push the button, I want to get off.

27 FEBRUARY 2010: ITV1, 8PM

Read more...

THE BUBBLE 1.2 [Open Thread]


There's fun to be had in this new comedy gameshow, where three celebrities are quizzed on the week's news after being denied access to the media, but it's a pity so little of it derives from the actual game in question. The Bubble has yet to make good on the promise of its high-concept, basically. Rather than try to guess the correct news report/press clipping, the game the celebs are really playing can be more accurately described as "deduce which of the following is most likely to have been faked by a television comedy show", while the majority of this episode's highlights was unrelated to the central game: a few anecdotes (such as host David Mitchell's rant about keeping a particularly hardy tropical fish), footage from Taiwanese news of a CGI reenactement of Gordon Brown punching his staff, and the pre-show events inside "The Bubble" itself -- where contestants Jon Richardson and Ed Byrne related the pain of being locked away with feminist author Germaine Greer, to play XBOX and argue over Scrabble.

It's a worry when the best element of a satirical gameshow appears to be the preparation behind-the-scenes. It's kind of like discovering that rehearsal footage of a West End musical is far more entertaining than the show being performed each night. Right now, there doesn't seem to be much belief that The Bubble's game is compelling or funny enough to entertain, so Mitchell and his guests often wander off-topic. The actual show itself only really buzzes to life during the climactic "true or false?" round, mainly because Mitchell has no option but to be focused and its quickfire nature elicits some pace. So, after two episodes, I'm laughing... just not at the right bits.

But what was your verdict on The Bubble's second episode?

26 FEBRUARY 2010: BBC2, 10PM

Read more...

THE BUBBLE 1.1


It was only a matter of time before David Mitchell was given his own comedy quiz show, as he's proven to be the perfect panel show guest (QI, 8 Out Of 10 Cats), a great team captain (Would I Lie To You?) and decent guest-host (Have I Got News For You?) already. The Bubble finds Mitchell as master of ceremonies, but it's perhaps more enticing as a concept than it proved to be in execution. Three celebrities are put into the titular "bubble" with no access to a television, the internet or their mobile phones. Wouldn't "Under A Rock" have been a better title? After fours days, the celebs (Reginald D. Hunter, Victoria Coren and Frank Skinner in this opener), are brought to the studio and have to answer questions posed by Mitchell about current events they missed, essentially having to guess which news stories, TV reports and headlines are true and which are false.

Like I said, it sounds like a great idea, but there were a number of problems that prevented The Bubble totally living up to expectations. For one thing, most of the news stories were so obscure or regionally-focused that you didn't really need to have been denied access to TV and tabloids to play the game. This was likely intentional so that audiences could play along at home (to an extent), which I can understand, but it still felt like it limited the fun. And is four days enough time to keep the celebs media blind? Admittedly, The Bubble's format means it must be relatively expensive to book guests, who have to essentially give up the majority of their week to participate, so perhaps a full week living together just isn't practical.

A lot of The Bubble's success rests on a variable utterly beyond its control, too: what happens in the world. I'm sure there'll be occasional episodes where something monumental happens while the contestants are locked away (a major crime, a natural disaster, a famous death, birth or marriage, etc), and those episodes will certainly be more enjoyable to watch. That said, it'll be interesting to see how The Bubble tries to elicit comedy from tragic news events like the Haiti earthquake, or if they'll just avoid what's genuinely been dominating the news. They'll probably just stick to fun "human interest" stories (like the cat with a can of Whiskers stuck on its head in this first episode), for fear of causing offence. The BBC have already had a sense of humour failure in refusing to create fake news stories to air on the show, which The Bubble amussingly managed to comment on.

But, y'know, I was expecting something a bit ballsier. I guess we'll have to see how things develop and how they tackle potentially "darker" episodes when the guests are blissfully unaware the Queen's been assassinated, the population of France were all wiped out in a plague, or Tony Blair was sent to jail for war crimes.

19 FEBRUARY 2010: BBC2, 10PM

Read more...

QI, 7.13 - "Gothic" [Open Thread]


Mistimed for Halloween, but well-timed as the thirteenth episode, QI continued its "G" series with a look at "Gothic". This was probably one of my favourite episodes in quite some time, not least because I'm saturnine enough to appreciate ghoulish trivia about gargoyles (they're actually water-spouts, the purely decorative ones are called "grotesques"), zombies (it would take about a month for one zombie to infect the entire world[*]), novelty coffins (a modern tradition in Ghana, apparently), etc. Plus, great comedy does tend to bubble up from the darker corners of the human experience. To that end, misanthrope Jack Dee and the cynicism of Jimmy Carr were employed well, and Sue Perkins proved (where Sandy Toksvig and Jo Brand have failed to this year) that, yes, women on panel shows can be funny! Spooky.

But what was your verdict?

19 FEBRUARY 2010: BBC1, 8.30PM

[*] Provided people don't fight back or hide from the increasing zombie hordes, one assumes...

Read more...

QI, 7.12 - "Gravity" [Open Thread]


Some episodes of QI are quite funny, others are quite interesting. The best episodes combine the two to become extremely entertaining, but I think "Gravity" will have to settle for quite interesting. Actually, make that very interesting. This was one of those episodes where the sheer wealth of astonishing trivia overshadowed the jokes because the guests were hanging on Stephen Fry's every word. Ordinarily, I'd grumble about them being paid to sit there as glorified members of the studio audience, but I actually don't blame them because I was similarly fascinated...

Regardless, it was a shame Rich Hall didn't make much of an impression here, as he's ordinarily good value as the laconic interjector, but my low expectations for QI newbie Barry Humphries were proven well founded. He's only ever funny in the guise of his alter-ego Dame Edna Everage (and even the hilarity of Edna's debatable), and his lacklustre performance here proved so. Humphries' garish clothes were the only thing memorable about him. So yes, we'll have to put this episode down as a something you'll fnd yourself enjoying mainly for non-comedic reasons. I'm still fascinated by the fact it takes 42-minutes to fall through the Earth's surface to any point on the planet (be it London to Australia, or London to Paris), and that the bullet from a gun fired while aimed parallel to the ground at arm's length will hit the ground at the same time you simply drop a bullet held at the same height.

The frustrating thing about QI is that it's increasingly difficult to impress people down the pub with the littleknown facts it throws up, as it's become so popular (and it repeated so often) that your source is always never in doubt.

But what was your verdict?

12 FEBRUARY 2010: BBC1, 8.30PM

Read more...

MOCK THE WEEK 8.3 [Open Thread]



Is there still an appetite for open threads about Mock The Week, or have we exhausted discussion? The guests this week were Stewart Francis (who clearly knows his brand of one-liner comedy isn't suited to panel shows, so spent most of the episode poking fun at his own incongruous presence), Andrew Maxwell (who was pretty decent, all said) and Andi Osho (who's funny, but didn't get a chance to shine to any great extent.) As an aside, this was the first episode of the series where Russell Howard's squinty grinning irritated me again, while Andy Parsons and Hugh Dennis have just become background noise now. As usual, my growing frustrations were put to rest by the always funny "Scenes We'd Like To See" final round, see below:



4 FEBRUARY 2010: BBC2, 10PM

Read more...

QI, 7.10 - "Greats" [Open Thread]



I don't have too much to say this week, because I think I've covered most of my feelings towards QI these days, and the guests who featured in this latest episode, "Greats". Jo Brand shoehorned in some gags about being fat or eating a lot[*], Sean Lock was okay but nowhere near as funny as he is on 8 Out Of 10 Cats, and David Mitchell remains the best at balancing genuine knowledge and sharp wit.

The topic of "Greats" threw up some fun trivia, though; everyone in Europe are related to all Europeans who existed in the 13th-century, that tortoises actually taste divine (so much so that early explorers regularly ate them rather than take them back to England for further study), and that most dictators we believe to be diminutive (Napoleon, Stalin) were actually of above-average height for their era. A decent episode, but I still find it gets bogged down at times, and the guests are now too familiar with the format to be tripped up with klaxons unintentionally. Incidentally, does anyone think QI XL (the edition shown on Saturdays with a 15-minute extension) is better then the abridged Friday show?

29 JANUARY 2010: BBC1, 8.30PM

[*] And when Jo Brand did step out of her comfort zone it was to make the astonishingly weak gag that David Mitchell's brothers are Phil and Grant Mitchell from EastEnders. A joke so amateur that David was forced to spin it off into something half-amusing (about fictional people being considered real) just to save Jo's utter embarrassment.

Read more...

MOCK THE WEEK 8.2 [Open Thread]



Do I detect a slightly more relaxed and free-handed atmosphere now Frankie Boyle's not around to dominate proceedings? Mock The Week still can't match 8 Out Of 10 Cats' jovial atmosphere, but it's certainly getting there. The guests all got a chance to shine, which was the main thing. Chris Addison (best known for his role in political satire The Thick Of It, but also a stand-up comedian) got a few big laughs (mainly with his suggestion that we counter a tidal wave created by the Chinese jumping simultaneously with a similar wave borne of the UK's obese children), and stand-up comedians Sarah Millican and John Bishop both made enough of an impression to prevent total domination by the regulars.

But I'm still disappointed MTW even has so many "regulars" – because what's wrong with the traditional two team captains format? It just feel unbalanced and, frankly, I've grown tired of Hugh Dennis and Andy Parsons' shtick. And it still irritates me when the stand-up round features topics designed to give the guests the opportunity to reuse their stand-up routines (I mean, "Language"? The broadness of "Politics"?), but otherwise this was a fun episode -- if still something you'll have forgotten about by ten o'clock.

28 JANUARY 2010: BBC2, 9PM

Read more...

QI, 7.9 - "Gallimaufrey" [Open Thread]



I missed Stephen Fry's explanation of what "gallimaufrey" means, but it's apparently "a motley assortment of things", which basically means this edition of QI wasn't constrained by a strict topic. It made me wonder: is QI's alphabetical adherence to topics in its best interest? I know it gives the show structure and order, but there must be times when the behind-the-scenes "elves" are tearing their hair out trying to think of compelling subjects/trivia with a vague connection to the year's particular letter. God help us when we get to "Q" or "X"...

The guests this week were again rather restrained. Hugh Dennis and Andy Hamilton are both intelligent people, which can help push the show onwards without it getting bogged down in too much toilet/sexual humour, but they can also make it feel a little plodding. Still, I always like it when the guests throw in their own "quite interesting" facts, such as Hugh's story about a communist state altering their highway code so "red" meant go and "green" meant stop, but forgetting to change all the traffic lights.

Phil Jupitus continues to have a very odd presence on this show, looking half-embarassed to be there, or unsure of himself in some strange way. Alan Davies was okay, but it always bugs me when he bludgeons a joke to death with repeated play -- this week, his impression of German car inventor Mr. Bentz writing his own driver's license. Funny once, not so funny the fourth time.

What was your verdict?

22 January 2010
BBC2, 8.30pm

Read more...

MOCK THE WEEK 8.1 [Open Thread]



Frankie Boyle's been lanced, Russell Howard's wearing specs, but it's otherwise business as usual for satirical news quiz Mock The Week; a fusion of Have I Got News For You? and Whose Line Is It Anyway?, with irrelevant scoring and a weird mix of rounds that go from sitdown quiz to standup performances. It's all a mere conduit for ribpoking of the week's news stories, and MTW is perhaps more consistent than its contemporaries because five four of the pannelists are regulars.

The downside of that consistency is that Hugh Dennis stopped being funny in the mid-'90s[*] and Andy Parsons has never been funny[**], leaving host Dara O'Briain and Russell Howard to shoulder most of the comic burden. And, like a great many modern panel shows, a lot of guests just become glorified audience members, desperate to shoehorn in paraphrased segments of their standup material. This week, Mark Watson coped well as a guest (he's a veteran of this format), Patrick Kielty had the confidence to soldier through any difficulties he encountered, and while Milton Jones sometimes struggled to recycle his material appropriately, he at least didn't just sit back and do nothing[***]. It helps that his stage persona is a spaced-out weirdo, so his weaker moments and slipups could be forgiven as part of his "act".

I'll leave you with a clip of Mock The Week's primary reason to watch, the excellent "Scenes We'd Like To See" round:



But what was your verdict? Did the show miss Frankie Boyle's contentious "gag grenades", or is the show better off without him?

21 January 2010
BBC2, 9pm


[*] Okay, admittedly Dennis is palatable on Radio 4's The Now Show, he puts in a good performance in Outnumbered, and he's good at the Scenes We'd Like To See round on MTW, but the '00s still largely consisted of him playing "Jed Cake" in Jack Dee's Happy Hour and a smug doctor in My Hero.

[**] Did you get his DVD for Christmas? Did you keep the receipt?

[***] In fact, similarly to fellow "oneliner comedian" Stewart Francis, he stole the standup round with his pithy jokes and wordplay.

Read more...

8 Out Of 10 Cats, 9.2 [Open Thread]



After the high of last week's hilarious opener, I thought this episode was very flat overall. None of Sean Lock's flights-of-fancy left the ground, Jason Manford seemed to struggle for material, and the choice of guests wasn't very good. I'm not a fan of young standup Jack Whitehall, and while I find Josie Long strangely beguiling (it's her grinning, just-rolled-out-of-bed cuteness), she wasn't very funny here.

Peter Jones from Dragons' Den was subdued to begin with, but he warmed up in the second part -- and in doing so gave comedy ammo to the others about his millionaire lifestyle anecdotes. Fay Ripley wasn't a total loss because she got involved, but this episode was definitely slack and its content has already melted from my memory. You know it's a weak episode when a clip from the US version of Wife Swap (an irritating fat kid being denied junk food by his "swapped" mom) proved to be the highlight. See below:



What was your verdict?


15 January 2010
Channel 4, 10pm

Read more...

QI, 7.8 – "Germany" [Open Thread]



The "G"-series topic this week was "Germany", with guests Jo Brand, Rob Brydon and Sean Lock joining regulars Alan Davies and "QImaster" Stephen Fry. As discussed last week, the juice of QI isn't as succulent as it once was, but you're always guaranteed some eyebrow-raising trivia and a few good moments of comedy banter. I'm frankly bemused Jo Brand still gets work (because she's like a comedy blackhole to me), and this episode wasn't helped by weaker than usual turns from Brydon and Lock.

Still, "Germany" was a topic that particularly interested me, as I used to live in Germany and once worked with a Germany lady living here in England, so cultural differences and Anglo-German relations is something I've discussed many times. It's certainly interesting subject matter for Brits, who have a strange relationship and perception of our European neighbours. In this edition of QI we learned that Germans don't care that England beat them in the 1966 World Cup, that they're unaware their countrymen have a reputation for rudely claiming sun loungers with beach towels while on holiday, and that they broadcast an old comedy sketch called "Dinner For One" every New Year's Eve (simulteneously, on every channel), which you can watch in its entirety below:



What was your verdict on this Germanic episode?

15 January 2010
BBC1, 8.30pm

Read more...

My Ping in TotalPing.com

  © Sexy Nude Celebrity