Options

Trivial things that annoy you about TV

1252628303188

Comments

  • Options
    furtivecatfurtivecat Posts: 129
    Forum Member
    Debrajoan wrote: »
    Two things that I find to be minor irritants on TV.
    One is where a thirty something couple get all amorous, and eventually end up in the bedroom undressing, or undressing one another.
    Scene changes to next morning, they're either still in bed, or just getting out of it, the woman is wearing a bra AND knickers, and/or the man is wearing boxers.
    I have absolutely no desire to see either of them displaying their "bits", but surely in reality they'd both be naked after an amorous night.
    It would be simple to show the woman still in bed, laying on her front, obviously no bra, or either of them from the back putting on a long tee shirt or robe, at least that would be more true to life.
    In what universe do a couple, intent on banging their partner's brains out, leave their clothes on to do it?
    And the women always have perfect make up after said banging and/or sleeping.:p

    Another thing that annoys me is that no one ever eats wholemeal bread even characters who are supposedly rather cosmopolitan. Ironically the only time I've noticed they have was in an old repeat of Only Fools and Horses with Rodney eating a wholemeal sandwich!
  • Options
    degsyhufcdegsyhufc Posts: 59,251
    Forum Member
    bluefb wrote: »
    They satirised this on 'Ross Noble: Freewheeling' the other day, producing a mock property show where every aspect of the house was accompanied by a themed pop song (e.g. Stairway to Heaven as they walked upstairs). Made me realise how ubiquitous this lazy technique has become.
    Also showed how easy it is to produce that type of show. They got some minger from the jobcenter and made her into a half decent presenter in half a day.
  • Options
    EStaffs90EStaffs90 Posts: 13,722
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    How nobody ever seems to have a password/code on their computer/laptop/smartphone/tablet. (I can't vouch for others, but that's one of the first things I do when I get a new one of any of those.)
  • Options
    culttvfanculttvfan Posts: 2,800
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    That annoying thing some bad sports reporters do, especially that ugly bald bloke on the BBC, when they do a piece to camera with their back turned to the sporting event they're reporting on, often at its climax. It gives the impression that the event isn't worth watching.
  • Options
    kitchenpersonkitchenperson Posts: 478
    Forum Member
    Debrajoan wrote: »
    One is where a thirty something couple get all amorous, and eventually end up in the bedroom undressing, or undressing one another.
    Scene changes to next morning, they're either still in bed, or just getting out of it, the woman is wearing a bra AND knickers, and/or the man is wearing boxers.
    I have absolutely no desire to see either of them displaying their "bits", but surely in reality they'd both be naked after an amorous night.
    The woman almost always keeps her bra on during sex too. Just like in real life.
  • Options
    IJoinedInMayIJoinedInMay Posts: 26,324
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Emily Maitlis' reports on Newsnight. Too avant garde for my liking.

    Allegra Straton's reports on Newsnight. They don't tell even Joe Bloggs like me anything I don't already know, and suggestions such as the one that Labour and the SNP might form a coalition are treated like the climax of an exciting TV show than the dry political move it would be.
  • Options
    kitchenpersonkitchenperson Posts: 478
    Forum Member
    May have been mentioned already, but the ludicrously extended pause between the words "and the winner is...." and "Sandra" (etc). It seems to be gettting worse.
  • Options
    silversoxsilversox Posts: 5,204
    Forum Member
    silversox wrote: »
    Background music to absolutely bl**dy everything. Last night, One born every Minute with bl**dy background music to accompany all the screaming and wailing.

    Was watching a programme today about restoring old cars and they were actually playing the theme from Rawhide when it showed them cutting a length of leather for the seats!! :D
  • Options
    kitchenpersonkitchenperson Posts: 478
    Forum Member
    Pointless "dramatic reconstructions" in historical dramas. God, they annoy me. Clearly the programme makers don't believe that their audience are going to be bright enough to listen to the narration and understand what happened, so instead we have to see some berk of an actor in a frock coat and tri cornered hat, fannying around in a ship's cabin with a map and a compass to SHOW you just how it was. FFS!
  • Options
    owen10owen10 Posts: 128,444
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭
    The people on these forums that complain about about a certain TV show that it is really bad but still watch it
  • Options
    HiMyNameIsHiMyNameIs Posts: 1,785
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    When news reporters interview people who don't speak English, howvever they nod along and look as if they're listening intently to their every word even though they have no idea what they're saying!
  • Options
    kitchenpersonkitchenperson Posts: 478
    Forum Member
    Trailers for American programmes being shown in the UK, where the announcer puts on an American accent. Why?
  • Options
    ellesworthellesworth Posts: 919
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Impressionists who constantly do impressions no matter what show they're on.

    If David Beckham is being interviewed by Graham Norton, he wouldn't just start kicking balls about the place. He would just sit down and talk. Actors sit down and talk. Musicians don't sing their answers, artists don't paint or sculpt. Why do impressionists have to do crappy impressions all the bloody time?!

    Especially when they only seem to do one core impression and vary it a little to "do" someone else. Alistair McGowan I'm looking at you!
  • Options
    cris182cris182 Posts: 9,595
    Forum Member
    Impressionists who constantly do impressions no matter what show they're on.

    If David Beckham is being interviewed by Graham Norton, he wouldn't just start kicking balls about the place. He would just sit down and talk. Actors sit down and talk. Musicians don't sing their answers, artists don't paint or sculpt. Why do impressionists have to do crappy impressions all the bloody time?!

    It is probably because they are boring as hell and they know it, Plus you can't really talk about an impressionist for very long

    Host - Oh you do an impression of Tony Blair, How did you learn to do that?
    Impressionist - Practice

    Host - You have a new show out where you do voices, Tell us about it
    Impressionist - I do a variety of voices in sketches that aren't linked
  • Options
    IJoinedInMayIJoinedInMay Posts: 26,324
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Emily Maitlis' reports on Newsnight. Too avant garde for my liking.

    Allegra Straton's reports on Newsnight. They don't tell even Joe Bloggs like me anything I don't already know, and suggestions such as the one that Labour and the SNP might form a coalition are treated like the climax of an exciting TV show than the dry political move it would be.

    Speaking of Newsnight; the same old faces that appear on it. A special mention must go to Danny Finkelstein (he has a cool name though).
  • Options
    David_ArcherDavid_Archer Posts: 258
    Forum Member
    What annoys me? Carol Kirkwood calling Boring Bill "Billy"
    No one else does
    It's like a private thing they have
    Disgusting
  • Options
    EStaffs90EStaffs90 Posts: 13,722
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Trailers for American programmes being shown in the UK, where the announcer puts on an American accent. Why?

    On a similar note - commercials from a country where they speak English but with an accent different to ours, which is then dubbed into an English accent. It seems like they don't think we'll be able to understand English if it's spoken by somebody with, say, an American accent.
  • Options
    ftvftv Posts: 31,668
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Reporters driving and turning to the camera to speak for far longer than is safe
  • Options
    gwrbristolgwrbristol Posts: 978
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    The fact that the BBC have a huge building with many floors, lights on everywhere and only Ed Miliband and Evan Davies in it and no other soul. We could have Idents for the cost of running that building 😉
  • Options
    degsyhufcdegsyhufc Posts: 59,251
    Forum Member
    EStaffs90 wrote: »
    On a similar note - commercials from a country where they speak English but with an accent different to ours, which is then dubbed into an English accent. It seems like they don't think we'll be able to understand English if it's spoken by somebody with, say, an American accent.
    I guess you haven't seen/heard the paypal ads. Very weird accents.
  • Options
    TurbulenceTurbulence Posts: 4,819
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    The fact that British chat shows these days seem to revolve around the presenter's egos and whatever nonsense gimmicks and set pieces they have in store, rather than it being about the guests themselves. Bring back Parkinson!

    Also shrinking the screen with the credits on and opening up a one with clips of the next programme. Why they can't just let programmes finish like the good ol' days is beyond me. Even a quick voice over wouldn't be too bad without the screen thing.
  • Options
    TurbulenceTurbulence Posts: 4,819
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Pointless "dramatic reconstructions" in historical dramas. God, they annoy me. Clearly the programme makers don't believe that their audience are going to be bright enough to listen to the narration and understand what happened, so instead we have to see some berk of an actor in a frock coat and tri cornered hat, fannying around in a ship's cabin with a map and a compass to SHOW you just how it was. FFS!

    Agreed!

    On crime watch type programmes they are completely understandable, as it's important to give potential witnesses or people with information as vivid a picture as possible... but for historical documentaries it really shouldn't be necessary. It was much better when they just used to show the odd painting or drawing of a battle while the story was being told, and let the audience use their imagination to take them back.
  • Options
    degsyhufcdegsyhufc Posts: 59,251
    Forum Member
    silversox wrote: »
    Was watching a programme today about restoring old cars and they were actually playing the theme from Rawhide when it showed them cutting a length of leather for the seats!! :D
    Ross Noble did a thing in his new show last week on how to make a Property Show.
    Just get the presenter to say a line then walk off with a relevant song in the background.

    e.g. Lets have a look upstairs - and as she starts walking up Stairway to Heaven plays.

    It really showed how easy and checp these shows are to produce. They probably pay out more on royalties than the rest of the show put together.
  • Options
    meechyemoomeechyemoo Posts: 659
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Pointless "dramatic reconstructions" in historical dramas. God, they annoy me. Clearly the programme makers don't believe that their audience are going to be bright enough to listen to the narration and understand what happened, so instead we have to see some berk of an actor in a frock coat and tri cornered hat, fannying around in a ship's cabin with a map and a compass to SHOW you just how it was. FFS!

    Along with when describing a battle pre 1900 they have the 'rah rah rah' fighting sound with the sound and superimposed image of crackling flames.
  • Options
    boksboxboksbox Posts: 4,572
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    gwrbristol wrote: »
    The fact that the BBC have a huge building with many floors, lights on everywhere and only Ed Miliband and Evan Davies in it and no other soul. We could have Idents for the cost of running that building 😉

    Was it the BBC? Looked liked ITN at Greys Inn Road to me, outside the C4 News studio, if it is it'll be in the basement and there are lots of people in that building.
Sign In or Register to comment.