Pointless Views - Spring 2010 series
DVDfever
Posts: 18,535 Forum Member
✭✭
Anyone else watch this?
The only interesting thing was the old guy who said modern science programmes were all show and less science, and that the BBC have dumbed down.
JV was given a clipboard to read some comments from, rather than print them up onscreen. And then there was a clip of Sophie Dahl and her breasts, dangerously close to a spoonful of whipped cream. :eek:
Available on the Iplayer until a week after the series ends in June:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00s05k2/Points_of_View_2009_2010_Episode_11
The only interesting thing was the old guy who said modern science programmes were all show and less science, and that the BBC have dumbed down.
JV was given a clipboard to read some comments from, rather than print them up onscreen. And then there was a clip of Sophie Dahl and her breasts, dangerously close to a spoonful of whipped cream. :eek:
Available on the Iplayer until a week after the series ends in June:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00s05k2/Points_of_View_2009_2010_Episode_11
0
Comments
Didn't mention the question of the financial implications once. Which was the point many people raised.
But what could you expect?
The reply to the conflict of interest question was the same one they used last series when someone complained about “Saatchi’s Best of British.” having a similar search for talent show.
One day they'll actually change something someone has complained about.
Of course there's "financial implications"
The BBC are subsidising ALW's advertising and promotional budget.
Just because the 11 week series attracts a lot of viewers, is no reason to do it free. He should make a financial contribution to the production costs, he's a multi-millionaire.
Likewise the BBC should never have paid Camelot for the "privilege" of showing the winning lottery numbers.
The BBC, "Daft with money" (ours!)
This may be true, but; "wouldn't it be wonderful if a totally unknown with no experience at all, had a "good chance" of getting the part?"
Such an event would really help the ratings, wouldn't it?
All I can say, is there are always one or two "no hopers" every time this "show" is repeated each year.
The one that went tonight was flat on a couple of the high notes.
Also I couldn't understand them wearing those vintage teen-age dresses if some like her, approached a song like "Ethel Merman."
Seemed ridiculous to me.
"Blah blah blah!"
Which is basically what they think of the emails they get in.
Would it? I don't think the public care much. I think they'll be more interested in the talent, likeability and looks of contestants rather than whether they have experience or not.
I can imagine the following taking place.
---
JP: Do you accept that background music on people's TVs makes speech difficult to understand?
BBC: The background music enhances the programme.
JP: But you have not answered the question. Do you accept that background music on people's TVs makes speech difficult to understand?
BBC: It sounds perfect in our £5000 sound studio.
JP: I can see that you have again failed to answer the question. Do you accept that background music on people's TVs makes speech difficult to understand?
BBC: From our laboratory headphones which have been tuned by a postgraduate in sound engineering we can hear perfectly.
JP: You have again avoided answering the question. Do you accept that background music on people's TVs makes speech difficult to understand?
BBC: Everyone we asked loves background music.
JP: It's a simple yes or no answer. Do you accept that background music on people's TVs makes speech difficult to understand?
BBC: I have no problems on my television (which was sorted out by a sound engineer).
I based it on "Did you threaten to overrule him?"
A "suit's" on-programme response (not an engineer) was several years ago. "The problem is mainly because some people are watching on duff equipment or have defective hearing."
The resident POV clown didn't ask him if that was the case, why are these problems selective, as most of the complaints are only about individul programmes?
Programme makers have always been a rule to themselves as the problem occurs time and time again, but only with particular programmes.
Many years ago a host on the BBC's POV board told us a video had been made six months previously and sent to all programme makers advising them on background music levels.
But still the problem continued.
I suggested that they'd probabably added background music to the video which had drowned out the advice.
They did make one nature documentary where the music could be removed by the use of the "red button." Then gleefully came back to tell us only 1% of the viewers had used that facility. "So nearly everyone wanted it."
This was a nonsensce as if they'd made the choice that you had to use the red button to include the music, the actual percentage of who wanted the music, would probabably been the same.
PMSL! This is it, too
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uwlsd8RAoqI
It gets into the meat of it from 1:40 onwards.
Spot-on. Further proof that the BBC just lie to suit their own agenda. Makes them no better than politicians.
I've always considered that apart from when it's too loud, if you start noticing the background music it's because the action on the screen is not holding your attention.
This effect is entirely the opposite one to the reason why the programme makers added the music in the first place.
Then it went on to read out the results and scores from the other matches played that day. At this point, all of a sudden, you were assailed by mindless drumming which was so distracting and so irritating that I cut the whole thing off and brought my listening to a premature end. I simply couldn't endure it.
Who in their right mind would think anybody interested in the tennis would want some manic drumming in their ear in order to listen to the results? I don't believe that there is a single tennis follower out there looking for or wanting this.
Drumming over tennis results?!? Makes me wanna go out a buy a gun.
Must have been a big shock to the system. Hope you are over it.
Well for any golfers amongst us, just wait until Thursday through to Sunday.
During the Masters coverage, when they show clips of earlier play, or last year's action it'll have musical accompaniment.
Even the naffin' leader board when it is shown, will be accompanied by background music.
As any golfer would tell you and they are mostly those who will be watching, such distractions are really irritating. We're used to an environment where there's no unnecessary distractions.
Mobile phones are banned in most golf clubs (you might be able to use one in the car park) and if yours happens to even just ring on the course before being turned off, you might still get "a letter."
And that is why you posted the above. I take it that's what you meant about Pointless Views.
They now do the same with tennis and snooker clips of the day's play or of historic matches...I expect others could add to the list.
It's as if they cannot believe that anyone could be interested in the sport itself without extraneous sensations and diversions. The people who are watching ARE interested in the sport and find it absorbing all by itself.
I did it because I knew you'd be posting
(Just saw oulandy got there first on that one, hehe)