# C4: 10 O'Clock Live



## paolo (Jan 10, 2011)

Anyone seen the trailers? I think it looks promising. Charlie Brooker, David Mitchell, Jimmy Carr & Lauren Laverne.

One hour of live topical comedy every week. Sounds ambitious, but apparently will be similar format to the C4 alternative election coverage, which I really enjoyed.

http://www.comedy.co.uk/guide/tv/10_oclock_live/

Starts 20th Jan.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 10, 2011)

Is this trying to be like the 11 O Clock Show?


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Jan 10, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> Is this trying to be like the 11 O Clock Show?


 
I don't think anyone would want to make a show like that. Even the people making the 11 O Clock show at the time didn't want to be making the 11 O Clock show.


----------



## paolo (Jan 10, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> Is this trying to be like the 11 O Clock Show?


 


paolo999 said:


> Anyone seen the trailers? I think it looks promising. Charlie Brooker, David Mitchell, Jimmy Carr & Lauren Laverne.
> 
> One hour of live topical comedy every week. Sounds ambitious, but apparently will be similar format to the *C4 alternative election coverage*, which I really enjoyed.
> 
> ...



See bolded.


----------



## Augie March (Jan 10, 2011)

That alternative election night show was rather shit though. I hold little hope for this if it follows the same format.


----------



## Gingerman (Jan 10, 2011)

Augie March said:


> That alternative election night show was rather shit though. I hold little hope for this if it follows the same format.


 Rich Hall was great on it


----------



## Balbi (Jan 11, 2011)

Lauren Laverne and Jimmy Carr? Rather grate my scrotum and fry it.


----------



## paolo (Jan 11, 2011)

Balbi said:


> Lauren Laverne and Jimmy Carr? Rather grate my scrotum and fry it.


 
I'm going to give it a try, for Mitchell and Brooker.

Enjoy your meal.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Jan 12, 2011)

Could be the new Not the nine o'clock news. But I doubt it.


----------



## krtek a houby (Jan 12, 2011)

DrRingDing said:


> Is this trying to be like the 11 O Clock Show?


 
More like TWTWIW. I hopes.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Jan 12, 2011)

jer said:


> More like TWTWIW. I hopes.


 
That Was The Week It Was?


----------



## paolo (Jan 12, 2011)

goldenecitrone said:


> Could be the new Not the nine o'clock news. But I doubt it.


 
That was a sketch show, this is live topical comedy.


----------



## AKA pseudonym (Jan 12, 2011)

Whole load of egos in a live show... hmmm could be car crash viewing...


----------



## Santino (Jan 12, 2011)

I hope it's good but I am not hopeful. Is it an hour long? That's a lot of time to fill.


----------



## killer b (Jan 12, 2011)

on the strength of the election night thing, i predict this is going to be turd.


----------



## krtek a houby (Jan 12, 2011)

goldenecitrone said:


> That Was The Week It Was?


 
Yup. Might be horribly worng, but it's too easy a target to diss. Let's see.


----------



## gabi (Jan 12, 2011)

The election night thing was so bad I kept watching, from between my fingers. Total carcrash. I knew laverne and Carr were cunts but I lost all respect for brooker and Mitchell that night. What the fuck has connie huq done to him?


----------



## 8den (Jan 12, 2011)

When I complained to M4 that they cancelled the Daily Show, they offered this to me by way of a substitute, Jimmy Carr is no John Stewart.


----------



## krtek a houby (Jan 12, 2011)

gabi said:


> The election night thing was so bad I kept watching, from between my fingers. Total carcrash. I knew laverne and Carr were cunts but I lost all respect for brooker and Mitchell that night.* What the fuck has connie huq done to him?*


 
Yoko and Beatles misogyny yawn


----------



## TopCat (Jan 12, 2011)

Brooker is almost washed up.


----------



## krtek a houby (Jan 12, 2011)

TopCat said:


> Brooker is almost washed up.


 
Yeah. Always the way when someone raises profile beyond internet adoration. Or marries an Asian gal.

LOL, you brits and your haties, always cracks me up


----------



## TopCat (Jan 12, 2011)

I could not give a fuck who he is a lover of. Its his views articulated out of his gob that have sullied his brand.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 12, 2011)

jer said:


> Yeah. Always the way when someone raises profile beyond internet adoration. Or marries an Asian gal.
> 
> LOL, you brits and your haties, always cracks me up


Not more anti british bigotry jer? That's sad.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 12, 2011)

ATOMIC SUPLEX said:


> I don't think anyone would want to make a show like that. Even the people making the 11 O Clock show at the time didn't want to be making the 11 O Clock show.


 
Didn't you work on that? Or am I misremembering?


----------



## krtek a houby (Jan 12, 2011)

TopCat said:


> Not more anti british bigotry jer? That's sad.


 
Sez the poster encouraging ern's racism. Come on, TC. Poor show.

Brooker is as good as ever, why do you think he's not? Seriously?


----------



## TopCat (Jan 12, 2011)

jer said:


> Sez the poster encouraging ern's racism. Come on, TC. Poor show.
> 
> Brooker is as good as ever, why do you think he's not? Seriously?


 
Because of what he said recently on his Christmas Wipe.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 12, 2011)

jer said:


> Sez the poster encouraging ern's racism. Come on, TC. Poor show.
> 
> Brooker is as good as ever, why do you think he's not? Seriously?


 
Because of what he said recently on his Christmas Wipe.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 12, 2011)

So much so I said it twice.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 12, 2011)

I was steaming when I watched that and don't recall offensive stuff. As I say, I was steaming so I may have missed something


----------



## TopCat (Jan 12, 2011)

He asserted that the students had scored a huge own goal by smashing stuff up,fighting the police, attacking the "royal" couple thus distracting the world from the success of a large A to B peaceful march. That the aggro put the protests and the underlying reasons on the front page of the worlds press did not distract him from this Brendan Barbar style disingenuous bullshit. For a person who has always been regarded as being particularly incisive, it was a jump the shark moment.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 12, 2011)

I've always thought he was a bit of a twat, tbf. Obsessing about irrelevant shit mostly, like the reactionary element in Private Eye.


----------



## DrRingDing (Jan 12, 2011)

Brooker and his disgruntled ranty character loses weight considering he's married to the Huq.


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Jan 13, 2011)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Didn't you work on that? Or am I misremembering?


 
I worked in the same office at the time but on something else. I think they all knew ali g was carrying the show though there were a few delusional types.


----------



## editor (Jan 13, 2011)

Brooker lost all credibility when he married the kind of vacuous, celeb-awed, trash, trite TV-creating presenter that he made a career out of rubbishing. Laverne is just awful, Carr unbearable and although Mitchell has his moments, he's spreading himself very thin these days and the humour is suffering accordingly.


----------



## editor (Jan 13, 2011)

jer said:


> Yeah. Always the way when someone raises profile beyond internet adoration. Or marries an Asian gal.


What's her ethnicity got to do with anything?


----------



## kyser_soze (Jan 13, 2011)

'Brooker washed up in eyes of Urban because he said something they disagree with whereas up until now they've by and large agreed with his ranting.' is what I'm seeing a lot of here.

And yes, of course marrying someone destroys their credibility. Absolutely. Because everyone here knows Connie Huq intimately.


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Jan 13, 2011)

I don't really see him any differently after getting involved with the Huqster. I didn't really rate him all that much before though apart from some of his wipes.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 13, 2011)

What is Lauren Laverne?  Seriously, I don't understand her.  Is she supposed to be a comedian?  Presenter?  She doesn't really seem to be anything.  I don't understand her presence in this show at all.


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Jan 13, 2011)

kabbes said:


> What is Lauren Laverne?  Seriously, I don't understand her.  Is she supposed to be a comedian?  Presenter?  She doesn't really seem to be anything.  I don't understand her presence in this show at all.


 
Shes a young lady.


----------



## skyscraper101 (Jan 13, 2011)

ATOMIC SUPLEX said:


> I don't really see him any differently after getting involved with the Huqster.



^ This. I don't think it changes him at all.

2010 Wipe was pretty funny. But I don't have great expectations for this show given the similarities of the election night format. _You Have Been Watching_ wasn't all that great either. In fact I don't think he does studio audience stuff all that well.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 13, 2011)

I loved 2010 wipe.  Although he did rather drop the ball in referring to "the violence", he also showed the media getting distracted by concentrating on the wrong thing.  And the rest of the show was brilliant.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 13, 2011)

ATOMIC SUPLEX said:


> Shes a young lady.


 
I rather feared this was the conclusion.

They should have had Victoria Coren instead.  I totally love Victoria Coren.


----------



## krtek a houby (Jan 13, 2011)

ATOMIC SUPLEX said:


> Shes a young lady.


 
She's got her finger on the pulse of popular culture


----------



## Santino (Jan 13, 2011)

kabbes said:


> I rather feared this was the conclusion.
> 
> They should have had Victoria Coren instead.  I totally love Victoria Coren.


 
Victoria Coren is just a Lauren Laverne for people who watch Only Connect.


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Jan 13, 2011)

skyscraper101 said:


> ^ This. I don't think it changes him at all..


 
Indeed, you can fancy pretty ladies and still be a curmudgeon. In real life shes obviously not a heavy weight thinker (though she did aspire to move her carrier in a more serious direction), but she is not nasty and takes the jobs that she is offered. I can't see how this is a 'sell out' on Brookers part.


----------



## Santino (Jan 13, 2011)

He's mellowed a bit since his angry early work. Perhaps partly because he is now settled and happy, but perhaps also because he has made a lot of telly and knows how hard it can be to produce something even faintly watchable.


----------



## krtek a houby (Jan 13, 2011)

Santino said:


> He's mellowed a bit since his angry early work. Perhaps partly because he is now settled and happy, but perhaps also because he has made a lot of telly and knows how hard it can be to produce something even faintly watchable.


 
Most angry young men mellow. Love helps.


----------



## London_Calling (Jan 13, 2011)

kabbes said:


> What is Lauren Laverne?  Seriously, I don't understand her.  Is she supposed to be a comedian?  Presenter?  She doesn't really seem to be anything.  I don't understand her presence in this show at all.


 
She represents the Snatch quotient - you'll find it's an Add-In in Excel 2007. A kind of north-eastern working class module.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 13, 2011)

Santino said:


> Victoria Coren is just a Lauren Laverne for people who watch Only Connect.


 
Some highlights about Victoria Coren, taken from Wikipedia:

* Her books include Love 16 and Once More, with Feeling, about her attempt (with co-author Charlie Skelton) to make the best hard-core porn movie ever. This came off the back of their jobs reviewing porn films for the Erotic Review—a job which led them to believe that most of what they were watching was terrible and that they could make better films themselves.

* In December 2008, Coren revealed that she had instigated a hoax in order to trap a group who turned up to memorial services for people they had never actually met. She created the fictitious and recently deceased Sir William Ormerod, and placed an advertisement in the main British newspapers for his memorial service "followed by a drinks reception".[3] Coren reported that the group duly applied for tickets claiming to have known the late Sir William.[4]

* Coren was the first woman to win an event on the European Poker Tour, as well as being the first player to win both a televised professional tournament (EPT London 2006) and a televised celebrity tournament (Celebrity Poker Club 2005).  

* As of 2008, her total live (poker) tournament winnings exceeds $1,200,000. 

She's a genuine eccentric polymath.  So what has Laverne done that gets near any of that?


----------



## Santino (Jan 13, 2011)

She was in Kenickie.


----------



## London_Calling (Jan 13, 2011)

That great rarity among DJ's, she's a musician who's been in a half-decent band.


----------



## gabi (Jan 13, 2011)

There's plenty on 6music who've been in decent bands. Who can also back that up by not being annoying name-dropping shitwallahs like her.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 13, 2011)

London_Calling said:


> That great rarity among DJ's, she's a musician who's been in a half-decent band.


 
And that qualifies her to be in a satirical comedy show?


----------



## London_Calling (Jan 13, 2011)

I don't know - what does qualify you? Cambridge Footlights circa 1965?


----------



## kabbes (Jan 13, 2011)

London_Calling said:


> I don't know - what does qualify you?


 
Being actually funny and having genuinely interesting ideas would be a good start.


----------



## London_Calling (Jan 13, 2011)

She is funny and is quite original, so that bodes well.


----------



## krtek a houby (Jan 13, 2011)

kabbes said:


> And that qualifies her to be in a satirical comedy show?


 
Let's give it a chance,first


----------



## gabi (Jan 13, 2011)

you have to be joking


----------



## kabbes (Jan 13, 2011)

London_Calling said:


> She is funny and is quite original, so that bodes well.


 
Well this is where I cam in.  Is she either of those things?  I really don't understand what she is at all.  She just stands there and says vapid things in a kind of mock-ironic accent with a lilt? at the end? that apparently makes things funny.  So we're supposed to believe, anyway.


----------



## gabi (Jan 13, 2011)

She's not bad looking. I think that qualifies you these days.


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Jan 13, 2011)

Has it been on yet?


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 13, 2011)

London_Calling said:


> That great rarity among DJ's, she's a musician who's been in *a half-decent band.*


 
highly debatable


----------



## Maggot (Jan 13, 2011)

ATOMIC SUPLEX said:


> Has it been on yet?


 
No.


Loving the way people are slagging this show off before it's started. 


I like all the presenters, apart from Carr obviously.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 13, 2011)

I'm hoping it's going to be good.  I was merely questioning the point of Lauren Laverne.  Not merely as part of this show but just, y'know, _generally_.


----------



## London_Calling (Jan 13, 2011)

didn't you like my working class module comment?


----------



## kyser_soze (Jan 13, 2011)

London_Calling said:


> didn't you like my working class module comment?


 
I saw it, I thought it was good.

I do agree with Kabbes that Victoria Coren would be a far better choice. I also suspect that, like me, Kabbes find Ms Coren somewhat alluring and that this is playing a role in his decision-making process (that she's also qute funny is helpful too)

Altho her presence would make the show look a bit like 'Guardian G2 & Observer Comedic Writers Show.'


----------



## Lord Camomile (Jan 13, 2011)

I fell for Victoria Coren when I saw her reduce Brooker to a simpering wreck on You Have Been Watching 

I have only ever tweeted once. It was to wish Coren a happy birthday and tell her I got her book, For Richer for Poorer, for my birthday, which happens to be on the same day (clearly it was meant to be). She tweeted me back wishing me a happy birthday, even though I used the word "contrafibularities", and I was foolishly happy.

Not quite sure she'd work on this show though, she seems to get quite anxious with recorded TV so live TV may just make her explode.

Personally I'm wary of the show but curious enough to give it a watch. I only flicked onto the election coverage a couple of times, kept getting Laverne or Carr, neither of whom I have a problem with but neither of whom I wanted to listen talk about politics.

This has to be one of the most poorly constructed posts I've ever made on urban


----------



## kabbes (Jan 13, 2011)

Victoria Coren probably wouldn't be any good on the 10 o'clock show but she'd still be the best thing on it.

I only have two crushes.  Alexandra Tolstoy and Victoria Coren.  Maybe the 10 o'clock show should have them both?


----------



## kabbes (Jan 13, 2011)

Lord Camomile said:


> I fell for Victoria Coren when I saw her reduce Brooker to a simpering wreck on You Have Been Watching


I didn't "get her" at first on Only Connect.  She seemed to out-Whitely Richard Whitely and I actually found her a bit irritating.  But after a few shows, I started finding her hilarious.  Then she was on Have I Got News For You and the aforementioned YHBW and suddenly I was smitten.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Jan 13, 2011)

Yeah, my best friend watches Only Connect and she just doesn't understand my affections. Sadly there's only one clip of the YHBW episode (the first one she did) on YouTube and it's her talking about porn. That's, y'know, fine, but possibly not going to help me with my friend.


----------



## kyser_soze (Jan 13, 2011)

As with the fragrant Hadley Freeman, I developed my crush on VC via reading her Obs & Graun columns and her byline pic. I then read 'Once More With Feeling' and loved her a little bit more.


----------



## paolo (Jan 13, 2011)

kyser_soze said:


> I saw it, I thought it was good.
> 
> I do agree with Kabbes that Victoria Coren would be a far better choice. I also suspect that, like me, Kabbes find Ms Coren somewhat alluring and that this is playing a role in his decision-making process (that she's also qute funny is helpful too)
> 
> Altho her presence would make the show look a bit like 'Guardian G2 & Observer Comedic Writers Show.'


 
All of the above.


----------



## editor (Jan 13, 2011)

I predict a feast of middle class smugness.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 13, 2011)

editor said:


> I predict a feast of middle class smugness.


 
That's my favourite type of feast.


----------



## editor (Jan 13, 2011)

kabbes said:


> That's my favourite type of feast.


Get ready to gorge!


----------



## 8den (Jan 13, 2011)

Maggot said:


> No.
> 
> 
> Loving the way people are slagging this show off before it's started.
> ...


 

No I'm hating the way I'm being deprived of the Daily Show, and being offered 15 minutes of Brooker, Carr, Laverene and Mitchell each a week by way of compensation. 

The Daily Show at it's best can simply demolish politicians and their rhetoric. The Republican Filibuster of the 9/11 first responder bill in senate, and how they simply played clips of the senators coating themselves in the 2nd glory of the firefighters and then the denial of healthcare to them was savage political polemicist at it's best. Or the simple phrase "chuck roll 212" and how he used it to demolish stock pundits on CNN and how they stoked the fires of irresponsible financial advise in the lead up to crash. 

And yeah some of the interviews are craven showbiz smuck, but then I don't watch them, but I tell you this, when they have authors on, I listen, I've found fascinating books that way. 

And whatever you say, Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, aren't going to be interested in a interview with Jimmy Carr, and I would not be interested in the car crash that would follow.

So I'll give this show a chance, just dont sell it to me as the equal to the daily show.


----------



## kyser_soze (Jan 13, 2011)

You can still watch it via bittorent you know? eztv.it has it, and the Colbert Show, up every night.


----------



## 8den (Jan 13, 2011)

kyser_soze said:


> You can still watch it via bittorent you know? eztv.it has it, and the Colbert Show, up every night.


 
Yeah someone sorted me out on another thread. It's just I found the More4 argument really shit, firstly they compared it to "friends" on E4 which fucking bang out of order, and then they offered this Jimmy Carr crap as a sop. Fuck that shit.


----------



## kyser_soze (Jan 13, 2011)

So they've got shot cos they can't afford it anymore?


----------



## paolo (Jan 13, 2011)

The binning of the daily show is indeed crap.

I don't think they commissioned this new thing as a replacement, more that they've now decided to mention it as a fob-off on the Daily Show issue.


----------



## 8den (Jan 13, 2011)

kyser_soze said:


> So they've got shot cos they can't afford it anymore?


 
I can imagine buying the daily show is cheaper than making Carr, Lavarene, Mitchell and Brooker do a hr long live show.


----------



## kyser_soze (Jan 13, 2011)

Ah yes, but that's on C4, the main station. More4 looks like it gets a budget of about 10p+ some 'old money' stolen from a runner's granny these days.


----------



## Maurice Picarda (Jan 20, 2011)

*David Mitchell, Charlie Brooker, Jimmy Carr and a token woman*

It could be quite good, this. Could equally be shit. The huge PR effort that 4 has put behind it might point in either direction. 

Still, it coincides with a board shutdown so they've clearly bought off the venal mods because they regard the U75 demographic as their key audience. So in fairness we should all watch the thing.


----------



## nick h. (Jan 20, 2011)

The trailers are so lame. It looks like a 10 years too late piss poor watered down imitation of Brass Eye.


----------



## ebay sex moomin (Jan 20, 2011)

I'll watch anything with David Mitchell or Charlie Brooker on it, to be honest.

It's probably going to be patchy this, but hopefully enough good stuff to make it worth sticking with.


----------



## elbows (Jan 20, 2011)

Were the roots of this project the Channel 4 alternative election night show?


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 20, 2011)

ebay sex moomin said:


> I'll watch anything with David Mitchell or Charlie Brooker on it, to be honest.


 
...and this is why we find ourselves where we are today.


----------



## killer b (Jan 20, 2011)

This is going to be so shit.


----------



## Maggot (Jan 20, 2011)

ATOMIC SUPLEX said:


> Has it been on yet?


 
It's on tonight.


----------



## miss minnie (Jan 20, 2011)

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/threads/341299-C4-10-O-Clock-Live


----------



## Maurice Picarda (Jan 20, 2011)

miss minnie said:


> http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/threads/341299-C4-10-O-Clock-Live



Oh, sorry. I forgot to enable pogofish on my browser. Merge alert!


----------



## brianx (Jan 20, 2011)

Lauren is no token woman. She'd kick all their arses.


----------



## IC3D (Jan 20, 2011)

5mins in shit so far


----------



## brianx (Jan 20, 2011)

This is so bad. I'm waiting for a scene of the kind "I'm 16 years old, I can join the army, I can get married but why can't I drink in pubs?"


----------



## la ressistance (Jan 20, 2011)

this is dire.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jan 20, 2011)

wow, that tory cunt was a useless piece of shit even by tory standards.


----------



## Belushi (Jan 20, 2011)

I cant believe I switched on the tv especially to watch this.


----------



## marty21 (Jan 20, 2011)

not laughing much


----------



## elbows (Jan 20, 2011)

The Jimmy Carr bits are like a not-so-funny version of the Daily Show.


----------



## Throbbing Angel (Jan 20, 2011)

forgot this was on

worth watching or not?


----------



## AKA pseudonym (Jan 20, 2011)

reckon the studio audience are on mdma or well stoned.. how they laugh wildly is beyond me.. a few smirks maybe, but nothing ground breaking


----------



## Maurice Picarda (Jan 20, 2011)

Abominable.


----------



## Belushi (Jan 20, 2011)

Jesus....


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jan 20, 2011)

killer b said:


> This is going to be so shit.


 It's not bad.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jan 20, 2011)

This Sudan section might be the worst thing I've ever seen.


----------



## killer b (Jan 20, 2011)

Are you on crack?

(Edit: @sleaterkinney)


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jan 20, 2011)

'kin hell, lighten up people.


----------



## dylans (Jan 20, 2011)

Its shit. 22 minutes in and I've turned it off


----------



## IC3D (Jan 20, 2011)

sleaterkinney said:


> It's not bad.


 
Exit that way>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


----------



## goldenecitrone (Jan 20, 2011)

Not long till Question Time, just hold on a bit longer.


----------



## AKA pseudonym (Jan 20, 2011)

jaysus Carr getting roasted by a climate change denier..

reckon there will be better laughs on Question time..


----------



## strung out (Jan 20, 2011)

yeah, not great.


----------



## Crispy (Jan 20, 2011)

Merged


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jan 20, 2011)

Had to mute it during David Mitchell - he's too ranty and needs his sidekick.


----------



## Belushi (Jan 20, 2011)

Dire. I've turned over to watch Question Time.


----------



## mancboy (Jan 20, 2011)

I stupidly thought this show might contain AT LEAST a bit of useful debate and analysis 

Wasted opportunity. It's all nyerr nyerr cheap crowd pleasing.


----------



## Superdupastupor (Jan 20, 2011)

AKA pseudonym said:


> reckon the studio audience are on mdma or well stoned.. how they laugh wildly is beyond me.. a few smirks maybe, but nothing ground breaking


 
That. Or are they on a laugh based comission?


----------



## miss minnie (Jan 20, 2011)

FFS, somebody please turn off the autocue and the fancy lighting, chuck the scripts away and just let the four of them sit around on sofas for an hour talking shit.  It would be so much better.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 20, 2011)

racist


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jan 20, 2011)

mancboy said:


> I stupidly thought this show might contain AT LEAST a bit of useful debate and analysis
> 
> Wasted opportunity. It's all nyerr nyerr cheap crowd pleasing.


Why?. They have a load of comedians on it. Question time is that way >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


----------



## AKA pseudonym (Jan 20, 2011)

Shouting and swearwords doesnt make it any funnier...


----------



## mancboy (Jan 20, 2011)

sleaterkinney said:


> Why?. They have a load of comedians on it. Question time is that way >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


 
Check out Jon Stewart's analysis of the reaction to the Tucson shootings though... However fucking annoying he can be, it's proof that comedians (and their writing teams) can employ intelligence, investigative rigour and an in-depth take on a situation and still be funny.

Check out Charlie Brooker's (however fucking annoying he can be, too) analysis of the way 24 hour rolling news works, or the coverage of the Haiti quake or school shootings.

It can be done, and it can be funny.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jan 20, 2011)

mancboy said:


> Check out Jon Stewart's analysis of the reaction to the Tucson shootings though... However fucking annoying he can be, it's proof that comedians (and their writing teams) can employ intelligence, investigative rigour and an in-depth take on a situation and still be funny.
> 
> Check out Charlie Brooker's (however fucking annoying he can be, too) analysis of the way 24 hour rolling news works, or the coverage of the Haiti quake or school shootings.
> 
> It can be done, and it can be funny.


 
I don't expect the news to be funny. I'm looking at it in a sort of Day Today sort of way. That said David Mitchell has a pol on - but he's just a slimy fuck... some things never change


----------



## spanglechick (Jan 20, 2011)

it's been awful... but the second Brooker piece (on Tunisia) was pure ranty joy, and Mitchell's last interview on tuition fees was in-depth enough to be worth doing, which the first one (on banker bonuses) wasn't. It was entirely pointless, in fact.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Jan 20, 2011)

big dogs cock


----------



## Maggot (Jan 20, 2011)

Enjoyed Brooker and Mitchell, they are always good value. Laverne was ok but didn't like Carr's pieces - get rid of him and you've got a winner.


----------



## gabi (Jan 20, 2011)

Lol. Saw a few mins. Even worse than predicted. I think it's the canned laughter feel that has destroyed brookers recent shows. His humour is dry and should be let to be so without some clapham chumps' fake laughs. 

Question time is priceless on the other hand.


----------



## Melinda (Jan 20, 2011)

I stopped watching. I cannot believe that the Daily Show has been cancelled for this shit. 

Who after watching C4 'alternative' election coverage would put the same team in charge of a 15 week show?

Argh. Wtf are C4 up to?


----------



## gabi (Jan 20, 2011)

Heads should roll


----------



## paolo (Jan 20, 2011)

Maggot said:


> Enjoyed Brooker and Mitchell, they are always good value. Laverne was ok but didn't like Carr's pieces - get rid of him and you've got a winner.


 
Carr looked like he'd stumbled into the wrong programme.

Brooker is better in the "I am a sad middle aged angry pedant sat at home in my hollow life" setting. It's something viewers relate to more. I'm sure they do. I mean, I *know* this. His solo material was still good though.

Mitchell was excellent, for me. His "Local Television" monologue drew the biggest laughs in our house. I could listen to that kind of ranting all day.

And how did they manage to not say *anything* about police-shagging-spygate? Lawyers? What?

All in all, a mixed bag. Not as shit as the truly awful Come Fly With Me (is anything?), but could do better.

I'll give it a try again next week.


----------



## discokermit (Jan 21, 2011)

proper shit. made me laugh only because it was so embarrassing and they were so out of their depth politically.


----------



## gabi (Jan 21, 2011)

I think it's supposed to run for quite a long time. Surely gotta be cancelled before long though. Putting it up against question time, interesting strategy.


----------



## twentythreedom (Jan 21, 2011)

disappointed. shame, cos they all have their moments. none tonight, sadly. will reserve judgement until i see the next episode or two.. but so far, not so good.


----------



## gabi (Jan 21, 2011)

I'd love to see brookers take of it on screenwipe


----------



## pk (Jan 21, 2011)

ATOMIC SUPLEX said:


> I worked in the same office at the time but on something else. I think they all knew ali g was carrying the show though there were a few delusional types.


 
Ooh I dunno... always had a soft spot for Daisy Donovan. Actually it wasn't always soft...


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Jan 21, 2011)

gabi said:


> I'd love to see brookers take of it on screenwipe


With a tissue in your hand?


----------



## paolo (Jan 21, 2011)

discokermit said:


> and they were so out of their depth politically.



Yeah... Paxman, Day, probably were shitting themselves.


----------



## editor (Jan 21, 2011)

So it it going to be worth my while watching a load of rich celebrities trying to be funny and topical on whatever the Channel 4 tv catch up service is called or not?


----------



## AKA pseudonym (Jan 21, 2011)

but curiosity is gonna make ya!!! like most of us here....


----------



## binka (Jan 21, 2011)

it was pretty rubbish the only half decent thing was david mitchell's soapbox being transplanted into the show. the rest of it was a bit embarassing tbh. considering its supposed to be satire the fact lauren laverne didnt know ed balls was already in the shadow cabinet doesnt bode well. if you like the sort of cutting edge satire you get on have i got news for you or mock the week you'll probably enjoy this. on the whole it was quite boring. cant believe they think this is an adequate replacement for the daily show - they would at least have been better off ripping off tds format.


----------



## twentythreedom (Jan 21, 2011)

just tried watching it again..i give it 2/10.. i will give this show another chance cos sometimes stuff like this is slow to get going. but so far - load of cack.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Jan 21, 2011)

very mediocre

the bit on education was good  and brookers bit on tunisia wasn't bad... 

actually  the enviromentalist guy had some intresting stuff  but they should have just given him his own little section and not stuck him with carr  who just fucking couldn't interview him


----------



## Gingerman (Jan 21, 2011)

If you taped it,you'll be fast-forwarding through a lot of it.


----------



## ernestolynch (Jan 21, 2011)

Debate and useful analysis


----------



## magneze (Jan 21, 2011)

Switched off after half an hour. It's too long.


----------



## AverageJoe (Jan 21, 2011)

pk said:


> Ooh I dunno... always had a soft spot for Daisy Donovan. Actually it wasn't always soft...


 
She sat next to me in Fujiyama in Brixton once. She is beautiful and I went all silly and giggly whilst trying to be cool and aloof


----------



## joustmaster (Jan 21, 2011)

I enjoyed it


----------



## tarannau (Jan 21, 2011)

It was alright. Some good bits - some decent ranting on political issues - and some truly cringeworthy bits, including Carr's 'holiday in Tunisia' sketch. But there's rarely been a show of its type that's been anything other than patchy. It may have some legs - I'll continue to give it a go and see if it settles down into something more coherent.


----------



## Limejuice (Jan 21, 2011)

The person who really did a fucking brilliant job was the studio warm-up.

An opening shrieking frenzy of delirium. An entire, long, physically draining hour howling at ranty pish.

Never have so many been entertained by so little for so long. 

So unless party bags were being handed out by the Medellin Cartel, my Man of the Match Award goes to the warm-up.

With luck, next week the 'talent' will swap places with him/her.

Oh, and if Lauren Laverne has nothing better to do, maybe they can give her a satirical ditty to sing like Millicent Martin did on the original TW3.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jan 21, 2011)

Bit of a mixed bag but this is the sort of show that needs time to find it's feet...


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Jan 21, 2011)

Melinda said:


> I stopped watching. I cannot believe that the Daily Show has been cancelled for this shit.


 
Has it? The bloody idiots.


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Jan 21, 2011)

sleaterkinney said:


> I don't expect the news to be funny. I'm looking at it in a sort of Day Today sort of way. That said David Mitchell has a pol on - but he's just a slimy fuck... some things never change


 
The day today is a parody of the ridiculousness of news broadcasting, this is supposed to be comedy based on real news. To make fun of it you need to have a very firm grasp. Taking politicians and spin doctors to task is funny.


----------



## kyser_soze (Jan 21, 2011)

About as good as Friday Night Live from way back in C4s 'hayday'. Brooker & Mitchell (as someone above said, his rant about local TV was aces) were good, Carr not so, didn't really see the point of Laverne. Will give it another shot next wekk tho.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 21, 2011)

Laverne was exactly as pointless as it appeared she was going to be.  She mostly seemed to be there to interrupt the others just as they got into a comedy riff.

It was alright.  Hopefully it will get better.  I agree with the general consensus regarding what worked and didn't work.  I'd say that it went Mitchell>Brooker >>>>>>>Carr>>>Laverne.


----------



## Santino (Jan 21, 2011)

Too long, as predicted by ME.


----------



## pennimania (Jan 21, 2011)

I started dozing off when watching it


----------



## gabi (Jan 21, 2011)

Astonishingly it's got a good review in the guardian and the majority of comments are positive too..

they've even singled out Carr's cringetastic tunisian sketch for special praise. i mustve been watching a different show.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/tv-and-radio/2011/jan/20/10-o-clock-live-review


----------



## Santino (Jan 21, 2011)

The comments from the media will be skewed by the knowledge of how hard it would have been to even make such a programme, let alone make it entertaining. We the viewers are unhampered by such empathy.


----------



## strung out (Jan 21, 2011)

should've got konnie instead of laverne


----------



## andy2002 (Jan 21, 2011)

Mitchell was the best thing about it - in the David Willetts interview he had Jon Stewart's 'angry but polite' schtick down pat.


----------



## killer b (Jan 21, 2011)

i enjoyed mitchell's rant on local news, but thought his interviews were totally unfocussed. he didn't land any punches.

anyway, i'm feeling a bit more charitable having slept on it - i think it could end up improving, although the set is horrible, laverne is pointless and charlie is a bit rubbish live.


----------



## magneze (Jan 21, 2011)

Santino said:


> Too long, as predicted by ME.


Yep, there wasn't an hour of material.

Seems that everyone can point to a few good bits. 30 minutes of good bits would be brilliant. Kill off the filler.


----------



## Santino (Jan 21, 2011)

Also, kill off the obsession with trying to write ultra-topical jokes. Report the news in a funny way, don't use the news as an excuse for shit jokes.


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Jan 21, 2011)

I only saw it as I finished work early. Won't be troubling the sky box next week.

How many jokes about Johnson's wife's noshing the help? He was a NL minister for five years, and that's the best they could do? So fucking right on.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 21, 2011)

Maybe they'd be better off with Danny Baker style rambler involved rather than people delivering punch lines?


----------



## 8ball (Jan 21, 2011)

killer b said:


> i enjoyed mitchell's rant on local news, but thought his interviews were totally unfocussed. he didn't land any punches.



I only saw the interview about changes to student funding towards the end and he didn't even land a gentle caress - it was a sad sight.


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 21, 2011)

Brooker and Huq got married in Vegas. Never a recipe for a successful and long marriage.


----------



## andy2002 (Jan 21, 2011)

nino_savatte said:


> Brooker and Huq got married in Vegas. Never a recipe for a successful and long marriage.


 
So did me and my missus and we're doing all right.


----------



## nino_savatte (Jan 21, 2011)

andy2002 said:


> So did me and my missus and we're doing all right.


 
There are exceptions to the rule. Very few, I might add.


----------



## Chz (Jan 21, 2011)

I'm willing to give it a second chance once they've found their feet (I mean, it can't go on being that bad with Brooker and Mitchell in it - can it?), but as it stands right now it's unmitigated shite.


----------



## Kanda (Jan 21, 2011)

nino_savatte said:


> Brooker and Huq got married in Vegas. Never a recipe for a successful and long marriage.


 
There's a difference between just randomly getting married in Vegas on a whim and actually planning to go there and get married after being in a relationship for some time.

I'm guessing you're going on about the former.


----------



## moonsi til (Jan 21, 2011)

ATOMIC SUPLEX said:


> Indeed, you can fancy pretty ladies and still be a curmudgeon. In real life shes obviously not a heavy weight thinker (though she did aspire to move her carrier in a more serious direction), but she is not nasty and takes the jobs that she is offered. I can't see how this is a 'sell out' on Brookers part.


 
Where does the 'obviously' come from? Konnie went to Cambridge university reading economics and passed with a 2.1.


----------



## 8den (Jan 21, 2011)

gabi said:
			
		

> Astonishingly it's got a good review in the guardian and the majority of comments are positive too..
> 
> they've even singled out Carr's cringetastic tunisian sketch for special praise. i mustve been watching a different show.
> 
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/tv-and-rad...ck-live-review



The Guardian gave David Mitchell and Charlie Brooker a good review? 

Astonishing.


----------



## 8den (Jan 21, 2011)

Atomic Suplex said:
			
		

> Has it? The bloody idiots.



A few weeks ago I bitched to more 4 about them cancelling the Daily Show, and the nice producer in C4 countered The 10'Clock show by the C4 as a alternative home grown satirical news show. 

I counted that Jimmy Carr is a pretty poor replacement for Jon Stewart.


----------



## D'wards (Jan 21, 2011)

Very middle class hair all round


----------



## magneze (Jan 21, 2011)

Speaking of hair, did anyone else wonder what Brooker had done to his? It looked weird.


----------



## Santino (Jan 21, 2011)

Konnie makes him go to expensive hairdressers now.


----------



## Santino (Jan 21, 2011)

To have his hair dressed.


----------



## 8den (Jan 21, 2011)

Also he was regularly doing his weird thing with his mouth, his lips pulled up towards his eyes like a upside down scowl. 

You'd swear the miserable bastard was smiling for some reason or other.


----------



## kyser_soze (Jan 21, 2011)

8den said:


> The Guardian gave David Mitchell and Charlie Brooker a good review?
> 
> Astonishing.


 
Here's a bad one by a 'Oliver Laughland', who is writing from a yoof POV - so probably means it's Rushbridger's kid, or that moron who wrote that gap year diary in CiF a year ago...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jan/21/10-o-clock-live-show


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 21, 2011)

i think it needs time to grow. 
we need something like this.
the daily show was all about american politiics. we need something to rip apart uk politics too.


----------



## 8den (Jan 21, 2011)

What about piece about whether Sarah Palin was shaggable, or Tunsia, or Lauren Lavarine's World News Tonight? 

utter fail.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 21, 2011)

the tunisia bit was just plain racist HIGNFY bollocks


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jan 21, 2011)

The Daily Show is fucking awful. Jon Stewart has got to be smuggest, most annoying man on the planet - and with shit politics to boot. I didn't see all of 10 O'Clock live, but the material I saw ranged from dreadful (Lavarine) to pretty bad (Carr) to quite amusing (Brooker and Mitchell).


----------



## IC3D (Jan 21, 2011)

Orang Utan said:


> i think it needs time to grow.
> we need something like this.
> the daily show was all about american politiics. we need something to rip apart uk politics too.


 
In which case would of been better to shorten it with one guy in the studio and another roving reporter. Its too complicated surely to have a group chat work I think.


----------



## gabi (Jan 21, 2011)

A Mitchell only version of the daily show would be acceptable


----------



## Melinda (Jan 21, 2011)

Standing up and calling a minister a cunt is not ripping apart politics. Its cheap and embarrassing. Jimmy Carr's Tunisia sketch completely missed the point of the uprising.

The Daily Show is sharp, nuanced and actually does a complicated job. It isnt officially journalism but it is about critical analysis of news events and their coverage- so it has to be correct and have journalistic integrity. If not, everything they do can be dismissed out of hand.  

If you are speaking truth to a savvy audience - you cant get away with just ranting, it needs a more reasoned dissection. No one in the coalition would have broken a sweat watching that. 

On top of all that it needs to be funny and presented innovatively-  that takes a large and talented writing team.  

Michael Steele depicted as the disgruntled diner from the Muppets?  All day! 
David Mitchell shouting cunt? No thanks.

The whole thing needs to be smarter, funnier and tighter.


----------



## nick h. (Jan 21, 2011)

The Tunisia thing made me ashamed to be British, in just the same way that Little Britain does. It was cheap, dumbed down, xenophobic drivel, pandering to Mail readers.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 21, 2011)

What was the content of the Tunisia thing?


----------



## Orang Utan (Jan 21, 2011)

loony a-rab nation full of donkeys and backwards peasants revolting


----------



## discokermit (Jan 21, 2011)

Orang Utan said:


> we need something like this.


 not if it's this shit.


----------



## Gingerman (Jan 21, 2011)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00y4csg
This looks more like it from Brooker


----------



## Santino (Jan 27, 2011)

It was _slightly_ better this week.


----------



## boing! (Jan 28, 2011)

Melinda said:


> Standing up and calling a minister a cunt is not ripping apart politics. Its cheap and embarrassing. Jimmy Carr's Tunisia sketch completely missed the point of the uprising.
> 
> The Daily Show is sharp, nuanced and actually does a complicated job. It isnt officially journalism but it is about critical analysis of news events and their coverage- so it has to be correct and have journalistic integrity. If not, everything they do can be dismissed out of hand.
> 
> ...


 
Exactly this. 

The program manages to neither achieve decent political discussion or be funny. Generally I like Charlie Brooker, but stick him in front of an audience and the whole thing takes on a rather unpleasant self righteous, self congratulatory tone. Laughing at someone swearing isn't really the height of political satire and it means that the politicians they have on get an easy ride.


----------



## marty21 (Jan 28, 2011)

Santino said:


> It was _slightly_ better this week.


 
yep, I agree -


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Jan 28, 2011)

marty21 said:


> yep, I agree -


not as good as if you were on there in your pants - +


----------



## The Boy (Jan 28, 2011)

Thought it was an improvement on last weeks.  Still a bit rubbish, mind.  Feels a bit rushed, and I still have no idea what Lauren Laverne is there for.  They need to get rid of the bits with them sat around the table 'discussing the issue raised' by the previous piece and, well, get rid of a lot of it tbh.  The piece about Serco could have been interesting but it didn't seem as if they knew what they wanted it to be.

Doesn't seem to be anything else on the telly that clashed so will probably end up watching again next week.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Jan 28, 2011)

wow that was almost actually really good

the problem they have is  all the segments are too short... and quite a few of the comedy ones  are shit  ... especially any of the one frontted by carr   have the interview with the expert be longer  and  perhaps  the  bit  with the three guests  be longer too... 

cut some of the comedy  like the bit at the end  the  recap of the week at the beginning  and  the slightly sketch show bit with carr

brookers bits are nice but too short to have much impact

the politician interview are  kinda interesting  but  you never get any good info out of it   

the


----------



## kabbes (Jan 28, 2011)

Better this week but still has a way to go.

Definite signs of potential.  Mitchell is good.


----------



## tarannau (Jan 28, 2011)

Lauren Laverne is shit mind. Wooden set dressing.


----------



## Limejuice (Jan 28, 2011)

Better than the first effort. The studio work was slicker - no feedback on mikes, better camera work.

Brooker and Carr did pretty well, I thought. 

Lauren Laverne still a bit spare. Lame piece on Serco as they try to give her some content, but she can't handle ranty humour. The words didn't sound like hers. Difficult not to conclude she was drafted in as window dressing and C4's trying desperately to prove it's better than Grey and Keys.

Mitchell is still gabbling frantically when interviewing, which is a pisser since he's both funny and clever. It's like he lacks confidence or something. Trying too hard to be bold and incisive and being schooled by Campbell in how to control an interview. That round the table bear-pit roast on terrorism is embarrassingly limp. They should just take the hate-figure du jour and lock them in a cage with starving gerbils.

Still not sure whether a studio audience the size of Wembley and cranked up on class A's is the ideal format for a supposedly snappy show. Way too much extreme audience hilarity at poor material. Too much waiting for the laughter to die down. Obviously the warm-up comic and the drugs dealers deserve a BAFTA.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jan 28, 2011)

It's heading in the right direction, give it a few more weeks to settle down I reckon.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 28, 2011)

tarannau said:


> Lauren Laverne is shit mind. Wooden set dressing.


 
Absolutely.


----------



## gabi (Jan 28, 2011)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> It's heading in the right direction, give it a few more weeks to settle down I reckon.


 
I didnt see last night's effort but i really cant see how the format can possibly work. theres no appetite for something like this. particularly not when question time's on the other side.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Jan 28, 2011)

Limejuice said:


> They should just take the hate-figure du jour and lock them in a cage with starving gerbils.


I think saw that on Bravo 2.

Was alright.


----------



## miss minnie (Jan 28, 2011)

gabi said:


> I didnt see last night's effort but i really cant see how the format can possibly work. theres no appetite for something like this. particularly not when question time's on the other side.


Its a very American format imo, I would prefer to watch either stand up or sketches or chat show or panel discussion rather than the whole lot thrown together at an ADHD pace but maybe that's just me.

Actually I'd rather watch a great new series of Drop The Dead Donkey.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 28, 2011)

Laverne is the only experienced presenter among them, so I can see why they chose her for a live show.  I think she'll settle into it.

I'm torn as to whether Brooker or Mitchell seem the least comfortable with the format.  Carr seems pretty unfazeable.


----------



## bouncer_the_dog (Jan 28, 2011)

This prog is utter shit


----------



## Gingerman (Jan 28, 2011)

Carr seems outa place,would rather if it was only Brooker and Mitchell and no studio audience


----------



## magneze (Jan 28, 2011)

This weeks was a massive improvement. Watched it all the way through and enjoyed it. I still reckon it's a bit too long though..


----------



## discokermit (Jan 28, 2011)

laverne is the only one who doesn't ooze smugness out of every pore.


----------



## London_Calling (Jan 28, 2011)

There's def a gap in the market. Maybe the experiment will evolve.


----------



## 8den (Jan 29, 2011)

Grudgingly.....It's alrigh'.....

Actually Mitchell is on about the Olympics, and it's pretty funny. 

I don't like the round table with all four of them reviewing the show half way through. 

Oh and stop having Laverene chair these little things


----------



## T & P (Jan 29, 2011)

Tonight's ep is certainly better than last week's. Then again that wouldn't be difficult to achieve.

Should they rename it 11.20 pm Live though?


----------



## lizzieloo (Jan 29, 2011)

discokermit said:


> laverne is the only one who doesn't ooze smugness out of every pore.



But, but but she's just decoration. Don't you know that?


----------



## weltweit (Jan 29, 2011)

I just don't like Charlie Brooker ... 

He seems to think he is like Ben Elton when Ben did a little bit of politics .. but it just comes out as hate hate rather than amusing... 

I thoght Carr was pretty cool, he is quick witted ... 

The interview with Alistair Cambell was weak, cambell handled Mitchell pretty easily, at the end there was a round of loud applause and I didn't think it was for Mitchell. (shame)


----------



## weltweit (Jan 29, 2011)

The trouble with Laverne is just that she is not funny. 

I don't understand why she is in it tbh....


----------



## lizzieloo (Jan 29, 2011)

weltweit said:


> The trouble with Laverne is just that she is not funny.
> 
> I don't understand why she is in it tbh....





weltweit said:


> I thoght Carr was pretty cool, he is quick witted ...



Say no more


----------



## 8den (Jan 29, 2011)

T & P said:


> Should they rename it 11.20 pm Live though?


 
It was a repeat from yesterday.


----------



## weltweit (Jan 29, 2011)

lizzieloo said:


> Say no more


 
Well the whole programme I don't really get.. 

It is like a few of them got together and said what about doing a cross between, Have I Got News For you, with a bit of Not The Nine OClock News, some Alexi Sayle and with a bit of Ben Elton thrown in and try to be a bit edgy and riske with it ..    (personally I bet it was Brooker's idea) 

But then they made this shiite ..


----------



## 8den (Jan 29, 2011)

If it had more musical numbers, and was a bit more biting the hand that feeds it, it'd be "that was the weak that was".


----------



## weltweit (Jan 29, 2011)

8den said:


> If it had more musical numbers, and was a bit more biting the hand that feeds it, it'd be "that was the weak that was".


 
I never saw "that was the weak that was" ... 

But it worried me that this show kind of looked like a derivative.. it didn't seem to have the touch of something original.


----------



## 8den (Jan 29, 2011)

weltweit said:


> I never saw "that was the weak that was" ...
> 
> But it worried me that this show kind of looked like a derivative.. it didn't seem to have the touch of something original.


 
Sorry that was the week that was. 

It ran from 1962 to 1963, featured David Frost.



The was the week that was



> The programme broke new ground in lampooning the establishment. Its broadcast coincided with coverage of the politically-charged Profumo affair, and John Profumo, the politician at the centre of the affair, became one of the targets for derision. "TW3...did its research, thought its arguments through and seemed unafraid of anything or anyone...Every hypocrisy was highlighted and each contradiction was held up for sardonic inspection. No target was deemed out of bounds: royalty was reviewed by republicans; rival religions were subjected to no-nonsense 'consumer reports'; pompous priests were symbolically defrocked; corrupt businessmen, closet bigots and chronic plagiarists were exposed; and topical ideologies were treated to swingeing critiques. No one was spared"



Its not exactly that was the week that was it's not nearly as ground breaking.


----------



## discokermit (Jan 30, 2011)

tw3 had frost and some cracking writers though.


----------



## gabi (Feb 3, 2011)

Oh dear. This is terrible. Between the fingers stuff. I want to smash all four of their smug faces.


----------



## killer b (Feb 3, 2011)

indeed. i thought i'd give it another go, seeing as people said it improved last week. 

the mitchell spot just then was really shit... even the studio audience hated it.


----------



## killer b (Feb 3, 2011)

also, is brooker's hair getting worse? he's starting to resemble michael fabricant.


----------



## killer b (Feb 3, 2011)

omg. 

actually, that bit worked...


----------



## AKA pseudonym (Feb 3, 2011)

Thank feck Shameless USA is on RTE


----------



## gabi (Feb 3, 2011)

I've given up. Settlin in for newsnight. Can't believe the yoko effect on brooker.


----------



## Santino (Feb 3, 2011)

Who's on Question Time tonight?


----------



## killer b (Feb 3, 2011)

who cares? i'll still be watching it...


----------



## killer b (Feb 3, 2011)

fuck me. how many cunts can they fit round one table?


----------



## killer b (Feb 3, 2011)

maybe not actually. mad mel's on.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Feb 3, 2011)

Santino said:


> Who's on Question Time tonight?


 
Vile people.


----------



## Melinda (Feb 3, 2011)

killer b said:


> fuck me. how many cunts can they fit round one table?


----------



## miss minnie (Feb 3, 2011)

Charlie Brooker's hair should have a show of it's own.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Feb 3, 2011)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Vile people.


 
The audience are pretty decent though. Not falling for all the neo-liberal shit this week.


----------



## OneStrike (Feb 3, 2011)

Ichanged over for QT, but I did enjoy Mitchell trouncing Harry Cole while I was watching.


----------



## Limejuice (Feb 4, 2011)

Be honest. How many of you watched the fake autocue breakdown and immediately thought, "Yes!"?

I think they know we think it's shit, and are playing up to tweak our schadenfreude. 

My review:

Overall, it's not getting better. In a sense it's lost something because the camera misdirection and feedback on the studio audio of the first show gave it a genuine live-and-just-thrown-together feel.

Laverne: as solid as an admiralty desk, and about as funny. This week they did a cut to pre-recorded material which, despite the best editing in the world, looked awkward and stagey, detracting from the excellent point about libraries.

Carr: still swivel-eyed and desperate. Blames the audience when, despite them climbing the ceiling on class A's, a lame gag fails to ignite the volcano of delerium incited by the warm-up man and his army of dealers.

Brooker: there's something awful about the hair and the teeth. Content-wise, he's still back there with Ben Elton who thought using a swear-word was comedy genius. Lacks rhythm and variety in his delivery. Somewhat good, but he only has one gear and after a while all you can hear is the engine revving. 

Mitchell: the most disappointing. This man has more brains than Stephen Fry but keeps looking like a babbling schoolboy faced with a naked lady. He cannot interview. He gabbles, interrupts, jemmies in poor quips when none are needed. The round table roast is a mess. Full stop. Too many political directions, too much contrast in comedy versus gravity. One again a politician absolutely schooled him in the art of interviewing. He ended up, again, looking like a kid interviewing his headteacher for the school magazine.

When I looked at the credits, I was amazed at how many writers there were. You probably need that many, all hammering away at the last minute. To some extent, you forgive the parson's egg results, because it is topical. But the actual performances are poor. The pacing is raw and unsubtle, and like college productions up and down the land, when the ideas run out just use the word "cunt".

Disappointed.


----------



## killer b (Feb 4, 2011)

Harry cole was hideous. I had to turn over during that section, literally everyone round that table made me itch to sharpen my knives.

Still, if they're having to source guests from obscure political websites already, can we expect our invitation soon?


----------



## gabi (Feb 4, 2011)

Surely it can't run for much longer? what are the ratings like?


----------



## kyser_soze (Feb 4, 2011)

discokermit said:


> tw3 had frost and some cracking writers though.


 
It also had the advantage of being first mover on the 'Satirical & Outrageous TV Show; category, when you could get an easy laugh by saying the Queen wasn't very good at draughts, or make some hilarious joke about Harold Macmillan that was, at the time, deeply subversive but nowadays you hear kids saying in playground (not about Supermac obv).


----------



## kyser_soze (Feb 4, 2011)

gabi said:


> Surely it can't run for much longer? what are the ratings like?


 
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/jan/28/ten-oclock-live-ratings

Be interesting to see if there's a further drop off following last night.

Even so, a million people at 10pm on C4 on a Thursday isn't a bad score.


----------



## kabbes (Feb 4, 2011)

It frustrates me because it really should be good.  

Laverne just _isn't at all funny_.  She's one of those people that says something triumphantly and waits for a laugh that never comes.  She also interrupts Brooker or Mitchell to do it, so double-fail.

But they're all a bit shit, for some reason.  The studio audience definitely doesn't help.  Mitchell has potential -- let him interview for a year and I reckon he would be great at it.  But I'm not sure I can cope with a year.


----------



## Santino (Feb 4, 2011)

They should have practised on the radio first. For three or four years.


----------



## killer b (Feb 4, 2011)

They're all in over their heads really aren't they? Brooker doesn't do live, carr doesn't do politics, mitchell's a rubbish interviewer and laverne can't do comedy. And the format's awful.


----------



## kabbes (Feb 4, 2011)

Santino said:


> They should have practised on the radio first. For three or four years.


 
Yeah, probably.  But they're all too big for that.


----------



## gabi (Feb 4, 2011)

what amazes me is that they did actually road-test this on election night. and based on that decided to commission a whole series of the same..

i want whatever drugs the commissioning folk at C4 were on on election night if they thought that was a success


----------



## Limejuice (Feb 4, 2011)

gabi said:


> i want whatever drugs the commissioning folk at C4 were on on election night if they thought that was a success


Probably the same drugs they feed the 10 O' Clock Live audiences about 10 minutes before the live show. This programme deserves an award for the best use of stimulants in a studio audience.


----------



## 8den (Feb 4, 2011)

Limejuice said:


> Probably the same drugs they feed the 10 O' Clock Live audiences about 10 minutes before the live show. This programme deserves an award for the best use of stimulants in a studio audience.



Whats amazing is they were all so incredibly quiet during the Campbell interview. Wooping it up and laughing at all other sections, fucking still as a wake for the interview.

They must have had PAs going through the audience with fucking cattle prods.


----------



## Limejuice (Feb 4, 2011)

8den said:


> They must have had PAs going through the audience with fucking cattle prods.


See, there's another brilliant occupation my careers teacher neglected to tell me about.


----------



## Melinda (Feb 4, 2011)

Do I gather last night's efforts were up to the usual standards?


----------



## Melinda (Feb 4, 2011)

I enjoyed your review Limejuice. Spot on observations.


----------



## gabi (Feb 4, 2011)

I really dont know what kind of idiot they're aiming it at.. if you're interested current events why would you watch those people and their weird audience rather than question time?


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Feb 4, 2011)

i mildly enjoy it

it's not  fantastic  but  jesus fuck it's still better than  huge swathes of televisual programming


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Feb 4, 2011)

it's light entertainment  but  with just a little  debate and and news... it's silly comedy but  not  totally vapid  comedy

it's like Mark Thomas light.. enjoy political satire  but don't enjoy waking up at night in a cold sweat?  try the new 10 o'clock live! it still makes fun of polititians  but it won't make you stop drinking coke


----------



## Pseudopsycho (Feb 4, 2011)

Shippou-Sensei said:


> it's light entertainment  but  with just a little  debate and and news... it's silly comedy but  not  totally vapid  comedy
> 
> it's like Mark Thomas light.. enjoy political satire  but don't enjoy waking up at night in a cold sweat?  try the new 10 o'clock live! it still makes fun of polititians  but it won't make you stop drinking coke


 
just remembered that documentary and had a major guilt wobble


----------



## Melinda (Feb 4, 2011)

Shippy, if you are going to taint Mark Thomas by mentioning him in the company of these people, why not drag in Mark Steele and Doug Stanhope too. 
Actually Id watch that^^^ show. 

No one in the 10 Oclock team is an experienced presenter- its crying out for an anchor. 
They're in over their heads and floundering.


----------



## Pseudopsycho (Feb 4, 2011)

Santino said:


> They should have practised on the radio first. For three or four years.


 
then had a weird slot on one of the smaller digital channels for a few more years and then to prime time main channel?

aka The BBC method


----------



## joustmaster (Feb 4, 2011)

I like that people are posting abut it being rubbish, but still watching it.

I enjoyed it, mind


----------



## ExtraRefined (Feb 5, 2011)

killer b said:


> Harry cole was hideous. I had to turn over during that section, literally everyone round that table made me itch to sharpen my knives.
> 
> Still, if they're having to source guests from obscure political websites already, can we expect our invitation soon?


 
I think the left wing lunatic fringe is already pretty well represented by half the presenting team.


----------



## nino_savatte (Feb 5, 2011)

ExtraRefined said:


> I think the left wing lunatic fringe is already pretty well represented by half the presenting team.



Explain.


----------



## Melinda (Feb 5, 2011)

[


----------



## ebay sex moomin (Feb 5, 2011)

ExtraRefined said:


> I think the left wing lunatic fringe is already pretty well represented by half the presenting team.


 I think the lunatic fringe is represented by Charlie Brooker's hair


----------



## Melinda (Feb 5, 2011)

*applauds*


----------



## Santino (Feb 6, 2011)

ebay sex moomin said:


> I think the lunatic fringe is represented by Charlie Brooker's hair


----------



## Santino (Feb 7, 2011)

Make your views known!

http://surveys.survation.com/s3/10OClockshow1


----------



## Gingerman (Feb 19, 2011)

Quality stuff from Brooker regarding Berlusconi on last Thurs prog


----------



## kyser_soze (Feb 23, 2011)

I laughed considerably more at last week's 'Celebrity Juice' than I have at all the '10 O'Clock Live's to date.


----------



## London_Calling (Feb 23, 2011)

Can't bear to see Brooker slowly morph into Donald Trump.


----------



## kyser_soze (Feb 23, 2011)

Brooker is actually sporting real, live hair tho.


----------



## London_Calling (Feb 23, 2011)

On his chest, maybe.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Feb 23, 2011)

I suppose this was a really unfortunate time for this show to be broadcast. I imagine they were hoping for lighter news that it was easy to joke and be satirical about, gaffs by MPs and scandals etc. All the stuff happening in North Africa/Middle East/Banking crimes/whatever only really highlights how toothless a program like this is.


----------



## bouncer_the_dog (Feb 25, 2011)

Thats why the program doesn't work - overly biased, ill informed gaurdianista hand wringing is hard to get laughs from at the best of times.. add in the brit comedy penchant for sneering sarcasm and you will not get the Daily Show.


----------



## Santino (Feb 25, 2011)

I laughed out loud once yesterday when they put a David-Mitchell-in-Peep-Show voiceover on footage of Ed Miliband.


----------



## kyser_soze (Feb 25, 2011)

5 mins of this and I turned over to Celebrity Juice, only to be hugely dissappointed that Gok was standing in for the lovely Holly Willoughby.

Still laughed more in the 45 mins CJ was on tho.


----------



## Melinda (Feb 25, 2011)

So its not improved yet then?

Has Laverne found something to do?


----------



## rekil (Feb 25, 2011)

All I've seen of this is Brooker doing a toilet joke. I would've switched off if that wasn't already the last bit of the show.


----------



## weltweit (Feb 26, 2011)

I just watched it tonight .. 

It seems better than when I last saw it. 

Before I thought Brooker was crap but his likening Cameron and Milliband to Apprentice teams was inspired.


----------



## joustmaster (Feb 26, 2011)

i think its finding its feet.


----------



## nino_savatte (Feb 27, 2011)

This programme is definitely borrowed from the _TW3_ format but Laverne is no Millicent Martin nor is she Eleanor Bron. She's pretty useless tbh. I don't think much of Carr either. Oh and who is their equivalent of Bernard Levin?


----------



## killer b (Mar 3, 2011)

joustmaster said:


> i think its finding its feet.


this is such a lie.


----------



## DrRingDing (Mar 3, 2011)

David Mitchell is out of his depth trying to be critical and ending up almost apologetic.


----------



## killer b (Mar 3, 2011)

Mitchell's rant was quality. Brooker had a few good jabs, and the product placement news raised a few cheap laughs. Otherwise dire.


----------



## killer b (Mar 3, 2011)

Ah. I thought it was about to finish. Not sure if I can cope with another 20 minutes.


----------



## joustmaster (Mar 4, 2011)

killer b said:


> this is such a lie.


what, i think its not finding its feet?


----------



## kabbes (Mar 4, 2011)

I think it is slowly, slowly improving.


----------



## magneze (Mar 4, 2011)

I like it.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 4, 2011)

Lauren Laverne, however, still does to the flow of comedy what a massive cinder block placed on the rails would do to the 7:45 to Waterloo.


----------



## joustmaster (Mar 4, 2011)

she's like a shit continuity announcer


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 4, 2011)

Robert Winston was shit last night. All too happy to let the debate play out in terms of 'patient choice' and similar bollocks with no mention of the fact that all this reform amounts to is an excuse to privatise as much NHS provision as possible. Mitchell's opening salvo was good though, 'we have the most efficient and cost effective health service in the world, why are you dismantling it?'

Overall the show just makes me wish that Marcus Brigstocke's far superior Late Edition would return.


----------



## Gingerman (Mar 4, 2011)

Quality Apple rant from Brooker


----------



## kyser_soze (Mar 8, 2011)

So I watched Celeb Juice again (Holly's back! Way-hey!), but watched the latest version of 10OL on 4OD...better. I actually laughed at the jokes.

I agree with Mr Frank tho - Late Edition was better, sharper and funnier. Perhaps ditching Laverne and adding Mr Brigstock might be an idea...


----------



## Dillinger4 (Mar 8, 2011)

kyser_soze said:


> So I watched Celeb Juice again (Holly's back! Way-hey!), but watched the latest version of 10OL on 4OD...better. I actually laughed at the jokes.
> 
> I agree with Mr Frank tho - Late Edition was better, sharper and funnier. Perhaps ditching Laverne and adding Mr Brigstock might be an idea...



A program like this has to have a women in it, somewhere.


----------



## kyser_soze (Mar 8, 2011)

They should get Lucy Porter then.


----------



## sim667 (Mar 8, 2011)

kyser_soze said:


> They should get Lucy Porter then.


 
Dawn porter would be good....

No just cus im like madly in love with her or nuffink.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 8, 2011)

Victorial Coren.

And we're back to the start.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Mar 8, 2011)

kabbes said:


> Victoria Coren.
> 
> And we're back to the start.



I do like Victoria Coren.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 8, 2011)

We all do, Dilly.  We all do.


----------



## kyser_soze (Mar 8, 2011)

Indeed. Cute, intelligent and independently rich thanks to her poker winnings.


----------



## Will2403 (Mar 8, 2011)

Dillinger4 said:


> I do like Victoria Coren.


 
don't like her accent. too posh.

fwiw, i like the show and have done since the first one, you bunch of bloody whingebags! it could be better, sure, but its still a cracking show


----------



## Melinda (Mar 8, 2011)

Will2403 said:


> don't like her accent. too posh.
> 
> fwiw, i like the show and have done since the first one, you bunch of bloody whingebags! it could be better, sure, but its still a cracking show


Wrong and wronger!  

Will:

1. There is nothing wrong with having a posh accent!

2.  This is definitely not a cracking show!


----------



## Dillinger4 (Mar 8, 2011)

Will2403 said:


> don't like her accent. too posh.
> 
> fwiw, i like the show and have done since the first one, you bunch of bloody whingebags! it could be better, sure, but its still a cracking show


 
posh birds are always filth


----------



## sleaterkinney (Mar 8, 2011)

Dillinger4 said:


> posh birds are always filth


 
She has written a book about her trials in making a porn film called _Once More, With Feeling_


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Mar 8, 2011)

Victoria Coren is the only person ever to have hosted a Radio 4 comedy panel show where nobody laughed at her jokes - not the audience, not the panel members, nobody.


----------



## nino_savatte (Mar 9, 2011)

Victoria Coren used to do stand up in the early 90's.  She called herself plain old "Vicky" back then. Howzaboutthat?


----------



## kabbes (Mar 9, 2011)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Victoria Coren is the only person ever to have hosted a Radio 4 comedy panel show where nobody laughed at her jokes - not the audience, not the panel members, nobody.


 
The first few times I watched Only Connect, I didn't find her funny at all.  I actually found her a bit irritating.  And then one day I suddenly "got" her, and since then I've found her hilarious.


----------



## Santino (Mar 9, 2011)

kabbes said:


> The first few times I watched Only Connect, I didn't find her funny at all.  I actually found her a bit irritating.  And then one day I suddenly "got" her, and since then I've found her hilarious.


 
Stockholm Syndrome.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 9, 2011)

I wasn't aware that she had actually locked me up or anything.


----------



## Santino (Mar 9, 2011)

kabbes said:


> *I wasn't aware* that she had actually locked me up or anything.


 
Exactly, kabbes. Exactly.


----------



## London_Calling (Mar 9, 2011)

I vaguely remember spending a little time trying to work her out when she had a higher poker-playing/commentating  profile - is she somewhere between desperately dry and droll?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 9, 2011)

kyser_soze said:


> Indeed. Cute, intelligent and independently rich thanks to her poker winnings.


 
And all them murders she done.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 9, 2011)

London_Calling said:


> is she somewhere between desperately dry and droll?


 
No, that's Hampshire.


----------



## London_Calling (Mar 9, 2011)

boom tish


----------



## kabbes (Mar 9, 2011)

I feel that there was a better punchline available but time was against me.

I'll throw it out to the group -- where is the best place to describe as "between desperately dry and droll?"


----------



## Dillinger4 (Mar 9, 2011)

Hampshire


----------



## kabbes (Mar 9, 2011)

Now _that's_ comedy.


----------



## kyser_soze (Mar 9, 2011)

butchersapron said:


> And all them murders she done.


 
You're just adding to the mystique of _La Coren_ now.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 9, 2011)

La.


----------



## kyser_soze (Mar 9, 2011)

Yes, I realised that the instant I hit 'Submit'. Now I have to edit it.


----------



## Chz (Mar 9, 2011)

kabbes said:


> The first few times I watched Only Connect, I didn't find her funny at all.  I actually found her a bit irritating.  And then one day I suddenly "got" her, and since then I've found her hilarious.


 I think it's more that she was incredibly stilted and uncomfortable hosting in front of the camera for the first series and a half or so. She's loosened up a bit and it's become more entertaining as a result. Even if it is a show for people who think University Challenge is for pussies. 

Still, the only time I laughed out loud was when she said that people had complained that their Greek letters were too highbrow, so they've now replaced them with Egyptian hieroglyphs.  She doesn't quite float my boat, but she had a very cute smirk at that one.


----------



## Ponyutd (Mar 9, 2011)

No we all don't. She's a calling station.


----------



## Ponyutd (Mar 9, 2011)

Sorry about that. I had replied to this (below) thinking it was the last reply.



kabbes said:


> We all do, Dilly.  We all do.


----------



## editor (Mar 10, 2011)

Watched it for the first time. Utter shit. 

The shouty and utterly inane soundbite 'debate' about Libya with the crowd whoopin' and applaudin' every mob rousing bullet point was the fucking pits.


----------



## 8den (Mar 10, 2011)

editor said:


> Watched it for the first time. Utter shit.
> 
> The shouty and utterly inane soundbite 'debate' about Libya with the crowd whoopin' and applaudin' every mob rousing bullet point was the fucking pits.


 
Charlie Brooker sounds like he's outrunning the applause and wolf whistles to drown out his punchlines.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 11, 2011)

That stop the war girl they had on last night was a dreadful simpleton. Refusing to admit that the situation in Libya was any different to Iraq pretty much undermined everything else she said.

Mitchell the highlight once again, but I really don't see the point in those shite 'debates' he does.


----------



## joustmaster (Mar 11, 2011)

8den said:


> Charlie Brooker sounds like he's outrunning the applause and wolf whistles to drown out his punchlines.


 
i like that he called the crowd sycophants


----------



## 8ball (Mar 11, 2011)

SpookyFrank said:


> Mitchell the highlight once again, but I really don't see the point in those shite 'debates' he does.


 
The debates _are_ shite, but they'd be worse with Laverne and C4 would be terrified of letting Brooker loose on the interviewees.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 11, 2011)

8ball said:


> The debates _are_ shite, but they'd be worse with Laverne and C4 would be terrified of letting Brooker loose on the interviewees.


 
I think they should bin the debates entirely, cut the show to half an hour, lose the crappy skits, sack all the presenters and just get Marcus Brigstocke to do the whole thing. With maybe a five minute slot for David Mitchell.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Mar 11, 2011)

Marcus Brigstocke is rubbish.


----------



## 8den (Mar 11, 2011)

SpookyFrank said:


> I think they should bin the debates entirely, cut the show to half an hour, lose the crappy skits, sack all the presenters and just get Marcus Brigstocke to do the whole thing. With maybe a five minute slot for David Mitchell.


 
i liked David Mitchell's rant about the BBC as a political football.


----------



## zoooo (Mar 11, 2011)

joustmaster said:


> i like that he called the crowd sycophants



I liked that bit. I would like more Brooker bits in the show. I think he'd do some amazing interviews - in the style of Matt Baker's 'How do you sleep at night.'


----------



## discokermit (Mar 11, 2011)

brooker is the worst one on the show.


----------



## DrRingDing (Mar 11, 2011)

Stopping David Mitchell 'interviewing' people would be a good start. Have someone write a rant once a day for him to deliver would be vastly superior.


----------



## zoooo (Mar 11, 2011)

discokermit said:


> brooker is the worst one on the show.


 
Worse than Lauren? Really?


----------



## mancboy (Mar 11, 2011)

There's no pleasing some people. Or indeed _anyone_, it seems


----------



## discokermit (Mar 11, 2011)

zoooo said:


> Worse than Lauren? Really?


 
yes. at least she presents stuff in a fairly professional way. brooker just reads a rubbish angry rant off an autocue (about gadaffi's clothes or some other such irrelevant shit) and looks completely gormless at any other time.


----------



## Melinda (Mar 11, 2011)

Charlie's Whoring continues. Has anyone heard his new R4 'panel game show' So Wrong It's Right?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00z5zy3/So_Wrong_Its_Right_Series_2_Episode_1/

Charlie is spreading himself very thin. But its approx 68% beter than the current 6.3 comedy slot gubbins on offer. The major irritant is Rufus Hound on the first show.


----------



## Chz (Mar 11, 2011)

SpookyFrank said:


> I think they should bin the debates entirely, cut the show to half an hour, lose the crappy skits, sack all the presenters and just get Marcus Brigstocke to do the whole thing. With maybe a five minute slot for David Mitchell.


 
I agree, but I am a big fan of Marcus. 

Brooker's Radio 4 show is on its second series. You missed how shit the first one was - this has been great by comparison.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 11, 2011)

I turn it over for Question Time, still.  Not sure if anyone's said that, haven't read all 12 pages I don't think.


----------



## nino_savatte (Mar 12, 2011)

Dillinger4 said:


> Marcus Brigstocke is rubbish.


 
Agreed. He's a smug, self-satisfied twat who only got where he is because of his connections.


----------



## Gingerman (Mar 12, 2011)

discokermit said:


> brooker is the worst one on the show.


 He's the only reason to watch it,was in fine form on last Thurdays ep


----------



## killer b (Mar 12, 2011)

brooker is shit live, and he knows it. tbh i think he jumped the shark around the time he got that stupid fucking haircut.


----------



## discokermit (Mar 12, 2011)

Gingerman said:


> He's the only reason to watch it,was in fine form on last Thurdays ep


 the first bit was eighty five percent utter shit,

prince andrew is fat! lol!

naughty word! lol!

mention knightrider! lol!

farts! lol!

big ironing board! lol!

paedo double entendres! lol!

handjob! lol!

tossing! lol!

the second bit was basically a slightly updated ancient gag (cameron/owl to which even he seemed embarrassed by the applause) and saying '_cunt_ryfile'.

absolutely woeful.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 13, 2011)

killer b said:


> brooker is shit live, and he knows it. tbh i think he jumped the shark around the time he got that stupid fucking haircut.


 
Getting married and being happy was clearly a shite career move for him.


----------



## discokermit (Mar 18, 2011)

this gets worse week after week.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Mar 18, 2011)

I am only surprised that people still watch it.


----------



## discokermit (Mar 18, 2011)

Dillinger4 said:


> I am only surprised that people still watch it.


 
i watch it out of spite. if they actually put on a good show i would probably be a bit disappointed.


----------



## kyser_soze (Mar 18, 2011)

Celebrity Juice wins again this week.


----------



## 8115 (Mar 18, 2011)

I watched 10 minutes of the first one, realised it was so shit that not even Charlie Brooker could rescue it and haven't watched it since.  Channel 4 really need to take it off air as quickly as possible and with a minimum of embarassment.  Which is a shame because a snappy intelligent news/ current affairs programme could really work for them.  I really like the Andrew Marr show on Sunday mornings.  If they'd used that as their template rather than The Tube or TFI Friday it could have been quite good.


----------



## El Sueno (Mar 18, 2011)

discokermit said:


> this gets worse week after week.


 
Jesus Christ, I didn't even make it through the whole of the first episode - and it's got _worse _you say? 

I dipped in a couple of weeks back and was lucky enough only to catch Brooker's desk piece and Mitchell's rant. Wasn't very funny, I figured that was as good as it got so I haven't watched again since.


----------



## gabi (Mar 18, 2011)

i flicked over for about 30 seconds of jimmy carr pretending to be berlusconi last night. it was even more horrific than anything on the first show. hilariously bad. career suicide for carr at least. and hopefully laverne. the other two will crawl from the wreckage as they're genuinely talented and must sit in the cab on the way home going what the fuck have i done.


----------



## magneze (Mar 18, 2011)

I like it and laughed quite a bit last night.


----------



## Balbi (Mar 18, 2011)

The Berlusconi thing was fucking painful, even with the accent 'joke' at the end. Mitchell's not a good interviewer by any stretch of the imagination. Brooker's reduced to a sort of amuse-bouche version of himself, but it's the one that noone wants to eat. Laverne keeps passing me by, and their current events knowledge is shocking really


----------



## discokermit (Mar 18, 2011)

El Sueno said:


> Jesus Christ, I didn't even make it through the whole of the first episode - and it's got _worse _you say?
> 
> I dipped in a couple of weeks back and was lucky enough only to catch Brooker's desk piece and Mitchell's rant. Wasn't very funny, I figured that was as good as it got so I haven't watched again since.


 
the second one was a bit better than the first, actually. it saddened me a bit as i though it could be improving but then it delighted me by getting progressively worse. 

last night's was awful. laverne, though not funny, at least seems professional. mitchell seems the most intelligent and aware of them but  generally draws back from putting any hard questions to interviewees and isn't very funny in this format. carr, who i find repulsive, is slightly funnier and because of his wonky eyes can actually read the autocue and look at the camera at the same time. brooker has been the worst, he lacks the intellectual depth of mitchell, the professionalism of laverne and the timing of carr. also his pieces lack any cutting edge, ranting at the autocue about prince andrew being fat, gadaffi being badly dressed and william hague holding in a fart. last night he just regurgitated stuff he has already done about the news, seemingly being offended at one point at learning what a unit of radioactivity was called.


----------



## Gingerman (Mar 18, 2011)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...Mitchells-double-act-with-Victoria-Coren.html
Jammy Barsteward


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 18, 2011)

I love all these people who are watching it every week posting about how awful it is. 

It can take ages for a show like this to find its groove.  It's certainly not done it yet but they're trying.   It's either this or the news.


----------



## El Sueno (Mar 19, 2011)

discokermit said:


> the second one was a bit better than the first, actually. *it saddened me a bit as i though it could be improving but then it delighted me by getting progressively worse. *
> 
> last night's was awful. laverne, though not funny, at least seems professional. mitchell seems the most intelligent and aware of them but  generally draws back from putting any hard questions to interviewees and isn't very funny in this format. carr, who i find repulsive, is slightly funnier and because of his wonky eyes can actually read the autocue and look at the camera at the same time. brooker has been the worst, he lacks the intellectual depth of mitchell, the professionalism of laverne and the timing of carr. also his pieces lack any cutting edge, ranting at the autocue about prince andrew being fat, gadaffi being badly dressed and william hague holding in a fart. last night he just regurgitated stuff he has already done about the news, seemingly being offended at one point at learning what a unit of radioactivity was called.


 
Brooker's been the most disappointing I reckon. Mitchell comes off best for just being witty but doesn't pick the show up by the scruff of the neck like he ought to, Jimmy just tells standard jokes so no insight there, Lauren's Lauren and Brooker just seems to be letting himself down in a format which painfully doesn't suit him. It's like the producers thought they had to get him on board because he's the go-to moaning critic right now. He seems to trot out an edited tabloid column every week as opposed to doing what he's good at and picking things apart in detail, illustrating his ideas creatively.


----------



## Yata (Mar 19, 2011)

I can see how someone with a well read, political background would scoff at this show- it's clearly not for the Question Time audience. It does have an audience though and it's not the worst show ever. There's a lot of shit in there that shouldnt be though, Jimmy Carr for a start, the last time I had it on they interrupted an interview for some random Jimmy Carr bit where he dresses up and isn't funny :/


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 19, 2011)

I don't think it's targeted at a middle aged savvy audience, seems to be more for a younger audience looking for lampoonery and basically a Daily Show type of thing.


----------



## Chz (Mar 20, 2011)

The Daily Show takes a Family Guy approach to humour, though. Cram at least 4 jokes a minute in, and no-one remembers the bad ones. 10 O'Clock Live doesn't have any flow to it though; it never really gets rolling and the gags (aside from Carr's bits - I don't particularly like him, but he's the only one at home in this format) don't really come fast enough.


----------



## killer b (Mar 20, 2011)

you reckon? carr looks supremely uncomfortable throughout imo. he's a fairly stiff performer anyway, but is much worse than usual on this.


----------



## 8den (Mar 20, 2011)

killer b said:


> you reckon? carr looks supremely uncomfortable throughout imo. he's a fairly stiff performer anyway, but is much worse than usual on this.


 
I loath Carr right down to his tailoring, it's like he walks into wardrobe with a DVD boxed of madmen.


----------



## discokermit (Mar 20, 2011)

8den said:


> I loath Carr right down to his tailoring, it's like he walks into wardrobe with a DVD boxed of madmen.


 
nothing wrong with that. the best thing about carr is his clothes.


----------



## Will2403 (Mar 20, 2011)

Chz said:


> The Daily Show takes a Family Guy approach to humour, though. Cram at least 4 jokes a minute in, and no-one remembers the bad ones.


 
Now The Daily Show really is shit. The jokes are shit. Jon Stewart is not funny.  He's just as much a corporate shill as the people he mocks.  The bit part players such as Oliver and Sam Bee are the only good things about it.  Stewart's interviewing is especially tedious, banal and always subservient and pandering even and often especially to those he should be ripping apart. 

Colbert on the other hand is epic.  So much more wit, creative intelligence and imagination.  

To compare the two highlights a useful case study about those who the mainstream welcomes into their fold and those they marginalise.


----------



## Will2403 (Mar 20, 2011)

Gingerman said:


> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...Mitchells-double-act-with-Victoria-Coren.html
> Jammy Barsteward


 
jeez. two of the most grating accents i have ever heard. but they are both interesting people and good writers.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 20, 2011)

Will2403 said:


> Now The Daily Show really is shit. The jokes are shit. Jon Stewart is not funny.  He's just as much a corporate shill as the people he mocks.  The bit part players such as Oliver and Sam Bee are the only good things about it.  Stewart's interviewing is especially tedious, banal and always subservient and pandering even and often especially to those he should be ripping apart.
> 
> Colbert on the other hand is epic.  So much more wit, creative intelligence and imagination.
> 
> To compare the two highlights a useful case study about those who the mainstream welcomes into their fold and those they marginalise.


I pretty much disagree with everything you're saying there.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 21, 2011)

Gingerman said:


> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...Mitchells-double-act-with-Victoria-Coren.html
> Jammy Barsteward


 
My goodness!

I think they possibly have both gone up in my estimation.


----------



## marty21 (Mar 21, 2011)

I think the show has improved after a dodgy start - I'm liking David Mitchell, he does amusing interviews, Jimmy Carr is a bit so so though.


----------



## Santino (Mar 21, 2011)

kabbes said:


> My goodness!
> 
> I think they possibly have both gone up in my estimation.


 


I would have gone gay for him.


----------



## kyser_soze (Mar 22, 2011)

The Daily Show, IMO, has more good jokes than bad ones, but Will's comments on the way Stewart carries out the book plugs is bang on - it's also a way to avoid having to write more than 10 minutes worth of actual jokes, since the interview usually takes up about 7 mins of a 21 minute show. 

Colbert report is better, but then there's a richer seam of material to mine - personally I reckon Brooke Alvarez (Suzanne Sena) on Onion News Network is actually _better_ at the r-wing, patriotic, ultra-competitive anchor - but then she was once an anchor on Faux News so she's got real form.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Mar 24, 2011)

You know what, I like this show. It's grown on me more each week. I like all four of the presenters and I like the fact that it's a rightwing free zone and rightwingers hate it.


----------



## killer b (Mar 24, 2011)

what about all those rightwingers they keep having on it?


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Mar 24, 2011)

they have them on, but they always bomb.


----------



## Melinda (Mar 24, 2011)

I caught a late night repeat of this and it has improved, well there is less 'horror' on the faces of the presenters. Though the round table still absolutely screams of wide eyed terror.

Brooker seems more comfortable and as much as it pains me to say it, Jimmy Carr is the best thing on it. He seems more willing to take risks. 

David Mitchell's interview sections and his contributions to the round table discussions are woeful, just staggeringly embarrassing. 

Lauren Laverne wants putting out of our misery.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 24, 2011)

It's what Jimmy Carr has been doing for years though -- delivering one-liners.  Even specifically in terms of topicality, it's pretty much _exactly_ what he did at the beginning of Eight Out Of Ten Cats.  So it's hardly a surprise that he's the most comfortable.

On another topic -- Jimmy Carr is really misunderstood, I think, and I say that as someone who doesn't really find his brand of one-liner humour funny (and so has no horse in the race).  I understand that off camera, he's actually one of the kindest, most generous and charitable people on the circuit.  His on-stage persona is a _construct _and it's one designed to mock the people who are like that as much as it is there to deliver gags.  Hating him for his persona is kind of like hating Alf Garnett or the Pub Landlord -- they're _designed_ to be hated and if you don't realise that then you're really missing the point.


----------



## killer b (Mar 24, 2011)

Jeff Robinson said:


> they have them on, but they always bomb.


 
tbf, so do the 'left'wingers. it's a facepalm clusterfuck from beginning to end, each week.


----------



## Melinda (Mar 24, 2011)

kabbes said:


> It's what Jimmy Carr has been doing for years though -- delivering one-liners.  Even specifically in terms of topicality, it's pretty much _exactly_ what he did at the beginning of Eight Out Of Ten Cats.  So it's hardly a surprise that he's the most comfortable.
> 
> On another topic -- Jimmy Carr is really misunderstood, I think, and I say that as someone who doesn't really find his brand of one-liner humour funny (and so has no horse in the race).  I understand that off camera, he's actually one of the kindest, most generous and charitable people on the circuit.  His on-stage persona is a _construct _and it's one designed to mock the people who are like that as much as it is there to deliver gags.  Hating him for his persona is kind of like hating Alf Garnett or the Pub Landlord -- they're _designed_ to be hated and if you don't realise that then you're really missing the point.


Cheers for pointing out that comedians sometimes take on personas. 
A real light bulb moment.  

What if people just dont find Jimmy Carr funny? Are they missing the point too?


----------



## kabbes (Mar 24, 2011)

Melinda said:


> Cheers for pointing out that comedians sometimes take on personas.
> A real light bulb moment.


How about the point that a lot of people don't seem to realise that fact?  Is that a lightbulb moment for you too?  



> What if people just dont find Jimmy Carr funny? Are they missing the point too?


Like me, you mean?

Want to ramp up the aggression any more?


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Mar 24, 2011)

killer b said:


> tbf, so do the 'left'wingers. it's a facepalm clusterfuck from beginning to end, each week.


 
Generally left leaning individuals get a fairly warm reception from what I have seen. Pricks like Farage get an altogether more frosty reception, which makes it far better than say Question Time in which quasi fascist demagogues are usually successful in whipping the sizable brown-shirted contingent in the audience into a hate filled frenzy.


----------



## Melinda (Mar 24, 2011)

kabbes said:


> How about the point that a lot of people don't seem to realise that fact?  Is that a lightbulb moment for you too?
> 
> Like me, you mean?
> 
> Want to ramp up the aggression any more?


First, you were completely patronising in your post - bordering on rude actually. I didnt appreciate it. 
I was surprised because those aren't qualities I associated with you. 

I wasnt aggressive, I was irritated at being spoken to in that manner. It was out of the blue and uncalled for.


----------



## strung out (Mar 24, 2011)

Melinda said:


> First, you were completely patronising in your post - bordering on rude actually. I didnt appreciate it.
> I was surprised because those aren't qualities I associated with you.
> 
> I wasnt aggressive, I was irritated at being spoken to in that manner. It was out of the blue and uncalled for.


 
what made you think he was talking to you?

he even used "on another topic" to prefix what he said


----------



## Melinda (Mar 24, 2011)

strung out said:


> what made you think he was talking to you?
> 
> he even used "on another topic" to prefix what he said


I didnt, as evidenced by my post. I didnt accuse him of patronising me directly.

It was the assumption that people would object to Jimmy Carr's persona as opposed to simply not finding him funny.


----------



## sim667 (Mar 24, 2011)

Melinda said:


> I didnt, as evidenced by my post. I didnt accuse him of patronising me directly.
> 
> It was the assumption that people would object to *Jimmy Carr's persona as opposed to simply not finding him funny*.


 
He is a cunt though.........

Just quite funny with it.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 24, 2011)

Melinda said:


> I didnt, as evidenced by my post. I didnt accuse him of patronising me directly.
> 
> It was the assumption that people would object to Jimmy Carr's persona as opposed to simply not finding him funny.


 
No, it was the suggestion that _some_ people would object to Jimmy Carr's persona.  I even explicitly said that I personally don't find him funny, ffs!  So obviously I know that some people just don't find him funny -- those people include me!

I wasn't talking to you, I was just indulging in idle chitchat that was inspired by what you said.  I wasn't speaking to YOU like anything at all.  It was just the kind of rambling free-association that makes for conversation.  And to this you responded with sarcasm and general unpleasantness.  Well fuck off, frankly.


----------



## Plumdaff (Mar 24, 2011)

kabbes said:


> On another topic -- Jimmy Carr is really misunderstood, I think, and I say that as someone who doesn't really find his brand of one-liner humour funny (and so has no horse in the race).  I understand that off camera, he's actually one of the kindest, most generous and charitable people on the circuit.


 
Don't know the man, but in a small way can vouch for this. Got me and my friend into Late and Live free at the Edinburgh Festival years ago - he was with another stand-up I knew from Uni at the bar beforehand, but didn't know us from Adam, and completely unprompted said he could sign people in free and did we want to go in the gig.

Struck me as very nice thing he didn't need to do.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 24, 2011)

Part of what prompted the comment from me was something I recently read in Stewart Lee's book -- apparently Jimmy Carr offered to put up the money to get one of Stewart Lee's early shows made into a DVD.  This was before Lee refound some recent success and nobody was interested in recording his act.  Stewart Lee made it plain that Carr was offering to do it in the certain knowledge that he would lose money on the recording but wanted to do it out of a belief that the show deserved laying down for posterity.  He then goes on to talk about Jimmy Carr as a person in pretty glowing terms, really.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 24, 2011)

sim667 said:


> He is a cunt though.........
> 
> Just quite funny with it.


 
His persona is a cunt.  His persona isn't him.  That's kind of the point I was making.


----------



## kyser_soze (Mar 24, 2011)

kabbes said:


> Part of what prompted the comment from me was something I recently read in Stewart Lee's book -- apparently Jimmy Carr offered to put up the money to get one of Stewart Lee's early shows made into a DVD.  This was before Lee refound some recent success and nobody was interested in recording his act.  Stewart Lee made it plain that Carr was offering to do it in the certain knowledge that he would lose money on the recording but wanted to do it out of a belief that the show deserved laying down for posterity.  He then goes on to talk about Jimmy Carr as a person in pretty glowing terms, really.


 
He seems to be thought of quite well by a lot of comedians from what I've read in various interviews etc, not least because his standup is one-liners, which apprently is 'proper comic craft' according to some bod I read.


----------



## Captain Hurrah (Mar 24, 2011)

Saw it last week.  Crap.  Although I thought it was funny when hardly anyone in the audience laughed at one of Laverne's gags.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 24, 2011)

They cheered at her Casey Heynes comment.


----------



## bouncer_the_dog (Mar 24, 2011)

The problem with trying to do a televised version of the Grauniad is that the source material is fundamentally unfunny...


----------



## zoooo (Mar 24, 2011)

It's not perfect, but I enjoy it now.
It's nice having Brooker on every week.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Mar 24, 2011)

turn it off


----------



## killer b (Mar 24, 2011)

my brother claimed the other day that brooker owns substantial stock in CeX, the 2nd hand computer games-cum-pawnbroker shop... anyone know owt about this?


----------



## zoooo (Mar 24, 2011)

Well, Wiki says he used to work at Cex, so it seems entirely possible.


----------



## killer b (Mar 24, 2011)

his mrs is a slum landlady as well, i understand.

it's not looking good for the brooker household, ctr.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Mar 24, 2011)

His real name is Charlton.


----------



## Kanda (Mar 24, 2011)

That Carr bit was a bit funny.


----------



## killer b (Mar 24, 2011)

peculiar or haha?


----------



## Kanda (Mar 24, 2011)

killer b said:


> his mrs is a slum landlady as well, i understand.
> 
> it's not looking good for the brooker household, ctr.


 
Like anyone will give a fuck ctr.... Did you really bother typing that.....?


----------



## killer b (Mar 24, 2011)

i did. i've got a load of washing up to avoid.


----------



## Kanda (Mar 24, 2011)

killer b said:


> i did. i've got a load of washing up to avoid.


 
Fair play


----------



## spanglechick (Mar 25, 2011)

kabbes said:


> I understand that off camera, he's actually one of the kindest, most generous and charitable people on the circuit.


 
Really? Not what I hear - certainly I have it on good authority that a certain well-loved, avuncular, cleverclogs-cum-panel-show-host can't bear him, because he demands all the questions in advance so his writers can write jokes for them.


----------



## spanglechick (Mar 25, 2011)

As for the show, I end up catching it most weeks on 4od - it's the sort of thing it's good to have on when i'm in the bath. It's ok. In the way that repeats on Dave are ok.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Mar 25, 2011)

.


----------



## spanglechick (Mar 25, 2011)

Oh, and I really like lauren laverne - although not, perhaps hitting her stride here.


----------



## Kanda (Mar 25, 2011)

I'd smash it


----------



## spanglechick (Mar 25, 2011)

Kanda said:


> I'd smash it


 
Hah - in your dreams... you're old enough to be her dad, no?

edit - ah, maybe not - she's older than I thought.


----------



## Kanda (Mar 25, 2011)

spanglechick said:


> Hah - in your dreams... you're old enough to be her dad, no?


 
Old enough to spank your arse for that comment!!


----------



## spanglechick (Mar 25, 2011)

Kanda said:


> Old enough to spank your arse for that comment!!


----------



## strung out (Mar 25, 2011)

i used to fancy lauren laverne back in the mid 90s! she ain't that old!


----------



## Dillinger4 (Mar 25, 2011)

strung out said:


> i used to fancy lauren laverne back in the mid 90s! she ain't that old!


 
I did as well. I even still listen to Kenickie very very occasionally.


----------



## wtfftw (Mar 25, 2011)

I'm guessing that she's 33.


----------



## strung out (Mar 25, 2011)

strung out said:


> i used to fancy lauren laverne back in the mid 90s! she ain't that old!


 
obv i meant "she ain't that young" in that post


----------



## wtfftw (Mar 25, 2011)

I've got my own little arsenal song to a kenickie song. It makes me laugh every time.


----------



## Kanda (Mar 25, 2011)

She's older than my g/f then... Shut it Spangles


----------



## wtfftw (Mar 25, 2011)

I'm not quite right. Wiki says 28th april 1978.


----------



## killer b (Mar 25, 2011)

i didn't mind kenickie, but she couldn't sing for toffee live, it seems...


----------



## wtfftw (Mar 25, 2011)

I quite liked the other blonde one.


----------



## strung out (Mar 25, 2011)

i'd do all of them, one after the other. first the guitarist, then the bassist, then the singer.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Mar 25, 2011)

strung out said:


> i'd do all of them, one after the other. first the guitarist, then the bassist, then the singer.


 
you are a wild stallion.


----------



## strung out (Mar 25, 2011)

maybe not the bassist actually


----------



## wtfftw (Mar 25, 2011)

Drummer?


----------



## strung out (Mar 25, 2011)

wtfftw said:


> Drummer?


 
not jonny x, no way


----------



## kabbes (Mar 25, 2011)

spanglechick said:


> Really? Not what I hear - certainly I have it on good authority that a certain well-loved, avuncular, cleverclogs-cum-panel-show-host can't bear him, because he demands all the questions in advance so his writers can write jokes for them.


 
Funny, because I hear that behind the scenes, _he_ can be a bit of a cunt.  Funny old world.


----------



## strung out (Mar 25, 2011)

everybody knows stephen fry is a nob in real life


----------



## kabbes (Mar 25, 2011)

Not to mention that putting some effort and research into your appearance on a comedy show so that you can actually be funny rather than sitting there just going, "Oh, fancy that" like most of the guests is hardly the actions of a cunt.  Fry only dislikes him for it because he wants to come across as the only clever one (as if HE knows this stuff without being told it in advance ).  This very dislike just ends up backfiring on Fry and showing him up as the nobbish one, not Carr.


----------



## zoooo (Mar 25, 2011)

Er, yes...

Fry's a nice bloke. Carr's a nice bloke. They just work in different ways.
All this 'I've heard', 'someone told me that', 'rumour says Fry is an arsehole' is such tiresome bollocks.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Mar 25, 2011)

I've heard they both hate you.


----------



## zoooo (Mar 25, 2011)

For example... 



kabbes said:


> Fry only dislikes him for it because he wants to come across as the only clever one (as if HE knows this stuff without being told it in advance ).


 
Fry has most of his stuff written on cards! I'm sure he's aware that we can all see them! It's so boring when people invent all this imaginary drama.


----------



## zoooo (Mar 25, 2011)

Dillinger4 said:


> I've heard they both hate you.



They so would.


----------



## spanglechick (Mar 25, 2011)

kabbes said:


> Not to mention that putting some effort and research into your appearance on a comedy show so that you can actually be funny rather than sitting there just going, "Oh, fancy that" like most of the guests is hardly the actions of a cunt.  Fry only dislikes him for it because he wants to come across as the only clever one (as if HE knows this stuff without being told it in advance ).  This very dislike just ends up backfiring on Fry and showing him up as the nobbish one, not Carr.


 
IDK. None of the other guests do it. You're invited onto these things for your ready wit - it's a bit of an unfair advantage to employ writers to come up with jokes for you in advance.


----------



## kyser_soze (Mar 25, 2011)

I wonder at that one, because there always seems to be a bit of an 'air' between Messrs Carr & Fry on the show, but they keep getting him back on the show (and I assume that Fry has some input into that).



> his mrs is a slum landlady as well, i understand.
> 
> it's not looking good for the brooker household, ctr.



Link? News report? Or just Huq hating?


----------



## killer b (Mar 25, 2011)

kyser_soze said:


> Link? News report? Or just Huq hating?


 
hyperbole. she does have a portfolio of student accomodation though, which she talked about in an interview in a magazine last year. if i can be arsed, i'll google it for you later.


----------



## kyser_soze (Mar 25, 2011)

Nah, it's a Friday. I just wondered if you were hatin' on the Huq.


----------



## discokermit (Mar 25, 2011)

i hate the huq.


----------



## joustmaster (Mar 25, 2011)

discokermit said:


> i hate the huq.


 
RACIST


----------



## killer b (Mar 25, 2011)

tbf, she does appear to be a bit of a cunt.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Mar 25, 2011)

no you


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Mar 25, 2011)

I hate Myleen Class. That fucking evil cunt first was on Gok Wanker's piece of crap "natural beauty" competition shite show and THEN fronted the eugenic Nazi "10 years younger" program. Hard to imagine how she could possibly be even more of a double standard having utterly cynical bitch really.


----------



## nino_savatte (Mar 25, 2011)

Jeff Robinson said:


> I hate Myleen Class. That fucking evil cunt first was on Gok Wanker's piece of crap "natural beauty" competition shite show and THEN fronted the eugenic Nazi "10 years younger" program. Hard to imagine how she could possibly be even more of a double standard having utterly cynical bitch really.


 
More like Myleene No Class.


----------



## nino_savatte (Mar 31, 2011)

Bad Penny's on it tonight, along with that shit Danny Finkelstein and Noreena Ouch, I mean Hertz.


----------



## magneze (Mar 31, 2011)

Finkelstein pwned.


----------



## nino_savatte (Mar 31, 2011)

Finkelstein loses it after Hertz mauls him


----------



## nino_savatte (Mar 31, 2011)

Great minds


----------



## kabbes (Mar 31, 2011)

Hertz was great.  Made Finkelstein look _way_ out of his depth.


----------



## malice (Mar 31, 2011)

kabbes said:


> Hertz was great.  Made Finkelstein look _way_ out of his depth.


 
And Laurie Penny (though that's not exactly hard) Hertz was great - was funny how after they brought her into the conversation, they stopped bothering with Laurie Penny


----------



## kabbes (Mar 31, 2011)

Yes, Laurie Penny was disappointingly poor at articulating her points.


----------



## spanglechick (Mar 31, 2011)

she was hysterically shit. Hertz rocked, though. And looked utterly fabulous!


----------



## gabi (Apr 1, 2011)

Oh dear. Caught another few mins of this. 

Oh dear. I have honestly never seen a worse programme. It's properly toe curling. 

I work with ex tv people who are also astonished it's got this far. And of them is ex channel 5.


----------



## strung out (Apr 1, 2011)

did anyone else think jimmy carr's lockerbie joke was in pretty poor taste?


----------



## Dillinger4 (Apr 1, 2011)

turn it off


----------



## strung out (Apr 1, 2011)

i only watched 5 mins of it, i promise. i had doctor who on the other telly but had to nip out to make my tea


----------



## gabi (Apr 1, 2011)

It's car crash kinda stuff. I only check it out for the oh dear factor. Watching some utter dicks committin career suicide.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Apr 1, 2011)

gabi said:


> It's car crash kinda stuff. I only check it out for the oh dear factor. Watching some utter dicks committin career suicide.


 
That's nice. I read a book instead.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Apr 1, 2011)

gabi said:


> It's car crash kinda stuff. I only check it out for the oh dear factor. Watching some utter dicks committin career suicide.


 
You are exactly the demographic they are aiming for.


----------



## magneze (Apr 1, 2011)

I laughed out loud quite a few times last night. Once at Jimmy Carr too. However, I then flogged myself for 7 minutes.


----------



## gabi (Apr 1, 2011)

the 30 seconds i usually manage must be horribly mis-timed. the first time it was jimmy carr doing a mildly racist riff on tunisia as a tourist destination, the next time it was jimmy carr doing an astonishingly shit impersation of berlosconi and last night i switched over in time to see some deeply deeply unfunny shit about dicatators as action figures, complete with what was surely canned laughter.


----------



## mauvais (Apr 1, 2011)

Lots of good bits but I loved 'wonky-winged pissbird that shits on everyone' (Lib Dem logo)


----------



## kabbes (Apr 1, 2011)

gabi said:


> some deeply deeply unfunny shit about dicatators as action figures, complete with what was surely canned laughter.


 
By far and away the worst bit of it last night.  It seemed very out of place.  I think it was just a bit of filler to take us to the adverts. 

Certainly not what you should be judging the show by.  It's the interviews and opinion pieces that form the bulk of the programme -- a criticism about them (which would quite possibly be valid because they can be pretty poor) would be much more reasonable.


----------



## Spion (Apr 1, 2011)

strung out said:


> did anyone else think jimmy carr's lockerbie joke was in pretty poor taste?


That's what Jimmy Carr does.


----------



## Spion (Apr 1, 2011)

I watched the first half hour and thought it pretty good


----------



## kabbes (Apr 1, 2011)

Spion said:


> I watched the first half hour and thought it pretty good


 
Best so far, I think.  It's still a long way from being _good_, but it has definitely made progress.

Either way, it's a topical comedy show -- the only current UK one I can think of that doesn't take the form of a panel show -- and so it has found a place in my regular viewing, for good or for ill.


----------



## Santino (Apr 1, 2011)

I watch it in case it is good. It's like someone who works just hard enough not to get sacked.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 1, 2011)

Also, it's nice to hear people on the telly unequivocally call Osbourne, Clegg and Cameron a bunch of twats.


----------



## strung out (Apr 1, 2011)

kabbes said:


> Also, it's nice to hear people on the telly unequivocally call Osbourne, Clegg and Cameron a bunch of twats.


 
yeah, this is what impresses me most


----------



## girasol (Apr 1, 2011)

oh come on, Jimmy Carr as a copper   

I like it, has its ups and downs but what do you expect from a 1 hour (mostly) live show?


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 3, 2011)

This is genius 

Tory toffs should be criticised for their policies – not their backgrounds

Maybe David, there's a connection? Do you think?


----------



## editor (Apr 3, 2011)

I've had two goes at watching this and both times felt compelled to turn off the cavalcade of well-off smugness.


----------



## MellySingsDoom (Apr 3, 2011)

butchersapron said:


> This is genius
> 
> Tory toffs should be criticised for their policies – not their backgrounds
> 
> Maybe David, there's a connection? Do you think?



I read that today too c/o Ian Bone's blog - senor Bone was pretty derisive, as you can imagine, an it's easy to see why.


----------



## Psychonaut (Apr 4, 2011)

a lot of this has been really painful to watch but i saw an episode several weeks ago that i thought was really good! 

I had missed out on a nights and a halfs sleep however so idk whether it was a one off or whether via my sleep deprived state i had unwittingly entered into the mindset of their target demographic.


----------



## Fruitloop (Apr 4, 2011)

butchersapron said:


> This is genius
> 
> Tory toffs should be criticised for their policies – not their backgrounds
> 
> Maybe David, there's a connection? Do you think?



Terrible school-paper dross isn't it. Doesn't have anyone to run this shit by first..


----------



## D'wards (Apr 8, 2011)

Thought the bit with Prescott harranging that cunt of a NOTW journalist was good tonight - that fella was the textbook tabloid sleazy hack.

I bet that there will be a shit-raking story about Prescott in this weeks NOTW, as a kind of petty revenge


----------



## Gingerman (Apr 8, 2011)

D'wards said:


> Thought the bit with Prescott harranging that cunt of a NOTW journalist was good tonight - that fella was the textbook tabloid sleazy hack.
> 
> I bet that there will be a shit-raking story about Prescott in this weeks NOTW, as a kind of petty revenge


He really was an ignorant sleazy cunt was'nt he? Prezza made shit of him


----------



## kabbes (Apr 8, 2011)

I rather liked the whole of last night's episode.  I even laughed quite a lot at Jimmy Carr playing God.  Very silly.

I didn't even mind Lauren Laverne that much!


----------



## joustmaster (Apr 8, 2011)

jimmy's oil bit was a bit lacking


----------



## strung out (Apr 8, 2011)

i enjoyed last night too


----------



## magneze (Apr 9, 2011)

Just watched the last one. Prescott vs NOTW Journalist. Epic.


----------



## brianx (Apr 11, 2011)

Thanks for the heads up on this. I've just watched it and Prescott is a shit and a coward. All those years of sucking-up to Murdoch and News Corp until they ditched New Labour. Now he's in the house of lords he gets the balls to have a go at them. Fuck off Prescott you wanker. At least that journo had the guts to be honest which Prescott will never have. Two cheeks from the same arse.


----------



## Red Faction (Apr 14, 2011)

painful viewing
smug guardian reading comedians ranting against the conservative government
bringing guests on to share in the smugfest


----------



## trevhagl (Apr 14, 2011)

i think its quite good. I didn't like Jimmy Carr at first but once ya get past his posh voice he's very funny. 
typical of Urban to slag off one of the few half decent programmes on, and try to analyse it and pick faults. All 4 people on it are good i reckon.


----------



## xes (Apr 14, 2011)

I fucking loathe Jimmr Carr.

He is a slimey odious cunt. 

hence I will not watch anything with "him" in it.


----------



## krtek a houby (Apr 14, 2011)

I've watched a couple of eps. It's quite awkward viewing, isn't it? I mean, I like most of the bods on it but it just doesn't seem to work. And there's a lot of shouty stuff.

At least Frankie Boyle's not involved...


----------



## discokermit (Apr 14, 2011)

trevhagl said:


> typical of Urban to slag off one of the few half decent programmes on, and try to analyse it and pick faults. All 4 people on it are good i reckon.


maybe if you analysed and picked faults a bit more you wouldn't have voted lib dem trev.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 14, 2011)




----------



## Will2403 (Apr 15, 2011)

kabbes said:


> Also, it's nice to hear people on the telly unequivocally call Osbourne, Clegg and Cameron a bunch of twats.


 


girasol said:


> oh come on, Jimmy Carr as a copper
> 
> I like it, has its ups and downs but what do you expect from a 1 hour (mostly) live show?


 


trevhagl said:


> i think its quite good. I didn't like Jimmy Carr at first but once ya get past his posh voice he's very funny.
> typical of Urban to slag off one of the few half decent programmes on, and try to analyse it and pick faults. All 4 people on it are good i reckon.


 
agree with these thoughts


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Apr 15, 2011)

Watched a few and I'd say this show is generally crap with funny bits from that Peep Show guy. Charlie Brooker is fucking pointless on it, the guy can't ad lib to save his life...


----------



## andy2002 (Apr 15, 2011)

I've seen most of these and I'm not sure it's improved much since the first episode. It's repetitive, smug and quite boring. Brooker's out of his depth when he has to go off-script, Laverne's about as funny as cock cancer and Carr is just shit. Mitchell's been the only highlight, although I'm a bit fed-up of his schtick now, too. If it comes back, I hope they shorten the run, reduce it to 45 minutes tops, and get some new people in. Fuck, even some horrible Tory bastard might be a better bet after all the Guardian-reading, wet liberal angst on display.


----------



## Hulot (Apr 15, 2011)

> reduce it to 45 minutes tops



It is only about three-quarters of an hour long if you watch it from the on-demand service, without the adverts and such. When you do, though, it seems to drag on for longer in spite of the interviews always seeming to be curtailed whenever it looks as if something of worth might be revealed.


----------



## andy2002 (Apr 15, 2011)

Hulot said:


> It is only about three-quarters of an hour long if you watch it from the on-demand service, without the adverts and such. When you do, though, it seems to drag on for longer in spite of the interviews always seeming to be curtailed whenever it looks as if something of worth might be revealed.


 
I meant 45 minutes including adverts – so probably nearer 35 minutes of actual material then. The roundtable discussions don't work – either lengthen them and make them the centre-piece of the show or get rid entirely. Maybe cutting the number of people involved in them from three to two might help, too.


----------



## magneze (Apr 15, 2011)

Saw last nights from about 10:20. Excellent as ever.


----------



## editor (Apr 15, 2011)

Condense it down to about 15 minutes and it might be watchable.


----------



## xenon (Apr 15, 2011)

I think it would be more interesting if they dropped the sketches. Had more guests and longer debates. Mitchell's pretty good at trying to pin down someone to a particular point. I like Brooker's rants anyway. The The sketchy bits feel like padding though, preaching to the choir and whatnot. OH and the choir. The over enthusiastic wooping at everything DM says is a bit embarrassing. Still I suppose it was never gonna be News Night with gags.


----------



## Kanda (Apr 16, 2011)

Max Keisner (?) really was a fucking idiot on that.


----------



## andy2002 (Apr 16, 2011)

xenon said:


> I think it would be more interesting if they dropped the sketches. Had more guests and longer debates.


 
That would involve them trying to move the show 'upmarket' something I really can't see them doing.


----------



## xenon (Apr 16, 2011)

yeah probably not. It's primarily a satirical show after all. 

Max Keisner had lost it a bit. But TBH I find myself agreeing with his general centiment. His main point about there being no teeth to enforce any regulation got a bit lost in the rage though, true. I can't fucking stand James Max... Would have been better to hear more from the other guy.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Apr 16, 2011)

His shouting outrage made it easy for the other two to dismiss his pertinent points as conspiracy theory...


----------



## magneze (Apr 16, 2011)

Kid_Eternity said:


> His shouting outrage made it easy for the other two to dismiss his pertinent points as conspiracy theory...


Not sure about that. The ex Goldman Sachs bloke seemed to be mostly agreeing with him and backing him up.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Apr 16, 2011)

magneze said:


> Not sure about that. The ex Goldman Sachs bloke seemed to be mostly agreeing with him and backing him up.


 
Yep. I saw that bit. Agreed with almost everything he said, except the hanging bankers bit. He is one smug fucking prick though.


----------



## xenon (Apr 16, 2011)

Kid_Eternity said:


> His shouting outrage made it easy for the other two to dismiss his pertinent points as conspiracy theory...


 

That was James Max's retourt. Pity there wasn't a chance to answer it with pointing out how closely politix and banking are entwined. You don't have to be a foil hatter to see there's at least an unhealthy corrolation between the two.


----------



## yield (Apr 16, 2011)

Dillinger4 said:


> Yep. I saw that bit. Agreed with almost everything he said, except the hanging bankers bit. He is one smug fucking prick though.


 
My thoughts exactly. And it's been blocked in the UK or I'd link to it.


----------



## dynamicbaddog (Apr 21, 2011)

Should be a good one tonight, monarchy debate with my favourite political commentators , Owen Jones.

http://twitter.com/10oClockLive/status/61084028568219649


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Apr 21, 2011)

dynamicbaddog said:


> Should be a good one tonight, monarchy debate with my favourite political commentators , Owen Jones.
> 
> http://twitter.com/10oClockLive/status/61084028568219649


 
Ah might watch this...


----------



## Gingerman (Apr 22, 2011)

The American coverage of the Royal Wedding "Vomit Smiley",Lauren looked mighty fine in yesterdays ep


----------



## Will2403 (Apr 22, 2011)

agreed.

i believe that variety is the spice of life, but if every woman in the world was lauren laverne, i could probably handle it


----------



## butchersapron (May 5, 2011)

They've canceled this.


----------



## kabbes (May 5, 2011)

Really?  I think that's a shame -- the last few episodes were pretty good, I think.  It was starting to find its feet.  There pretty much no other non-panel-game satire at all on British television.  At least this was a potential training ground.


----------



## killer b (May 5, 2011)

has it definitely been cancelled? the only info i can find is a NS blog, and she just says there's been 'little chatter' about a second series...

wouldn't be suprised if it has gone, mind - it looked benchmarked for cancellation from the first show.


----------



## Santino (May 5, 2011)

I was expecting it to come back in a substantially re-vamped format. I suppose that smacks too much of admitting a mistake these days.


----------



## Santino (May 5, 2011)

There was nothing wrong with it that couldn't have been solved with some quite serious changes to the format and presenters.


----------



## butchersapron (May 5, 2011)

killer b said:


> has it definitely been cancelled? the only info i can find is a NS blog, and she just says there's been 'little chatter' about a second series...
> 
> wouldn't be suprised if it has gone, mind - it looked benchmarked for cancellation from the first show.


 
Actually, i think i may have misread the ending of the first series for the ending full stop.


----------



## kabbes (May 5, 2011)

Yeah, that article doesn't say it's cancelled.

I kind of agree with its points though.


----------



## xenon (May 6, 2011)

Charlie Brooker's rants and David Mitchel's questioning are the best bits for me. Mind you I'm missing out on the vvisuals.


----------



## doddles (Mar 14, 2012)

I pretty much turn the sound up for Mitchel and Brooker, then turn it down for Laverne. Then I just watch Laverne like I watch the ads - sometimes they have nice visuals, but the message is not worth the effort.


----------

