What the hell was that,,,,they dropped Brookers bit:mad:,,,,,thats the best bit about the show. If they dropped it just for Rich Hall then that is ciminal:mad:
Its hardly worth watching without Brookers weekly rant
I don't think Rich Hall was bad, he just went on a bit too long, and pure stand up isn't something that fits well with the rest of the show. After all, Jimmy Carr is a professional stand up, and even he never does it on 10 O'clock Live. If they were going to dabble with that kind of thing you'd think they'd just get him to do it instead.
Having said that Hall did have some funny bits. I did like his comment about rednecks with guns and how their assault rifle was the only thing worth breaking into their house for in the first place. He spent way too long with the Hugh Grant thing though.
As for Brooker I'm disappointed too. But like I said, it might have been his own idea. The format of the show is fairly fluid from week to week anyway, so if he decided he didn't have anything particularly strong to go with this week, the producers may have decided the simplest solution was to just drop the whole segment.
I don't mind them trying new things with the format, but NOT at the expense of Charlie Brooker FFS! We've already lost "Listen to Mitchell", if the Brooker segment goes as well then the show really loses something.
One fewer round-table discussion would've been my answer to fitting Hall in, but in the event the stand-up didn't really impress nor add to the show so the decision came off a bit worse than it needed to be.
It'll be interesting to see how they balance the segments going forward if they continue to occasionally experiment like that (which is a good thing in general, just not at the expense of Brooker!).
I enjoyed the debate immensely last night - both Abbott and Goldsmith came off very well and made good points. Mitchell is starting to really excel in that role in the show.
What the hell was that,,,,they dropped Brookers bit:mad:,,,,,thats the best bit about the show. If they dropped it just for Rich Hall then that is ciminal:mad:
Its hardly worth watching without Brookers weekly rant
Sad to say but after 2-point-whatever-it-is-decimal-point series I've given up on it. Missed last night's. Even for a live show, it's just too weak and uneven.
From Wikpedia:
ANTAGONISM. In chemistry, a phenomenon wherein two or more agents in combination have an overall effect that is less than the sum of their individual effects.
Unless someone tweets the show or the performers I guess we'll never know why Brooker didn't do his bit.
Maybe they did have a good enough subject for this week.
Perhaps they did just want to shake it up a bit and have a standup bit for one week.
Possibly he was busy doing other things and didn't have the time to write and rehearse his segment.
Hope it wasn't left out to make room for Rich Hall. :mad:
Indeed it was. It was okay in parts but a bit lazy in others and I've seen him far better at other times. At least he didn't do that redneck singer again! :yawn:
As for Brooker I'm disappointed too. But like I said, it might have been his own idea. The format of the show is fairly fluid from week to week anyway, so if he decided he didn't have anything particularly strong to go with this week, the producers may have decided the simplest solution was to just drop the whole segment.
I think this is the case. Anyone asked Brooker what happened? He rarely replies anyway, so I doubt you'll find out.
I don't think Rich Hall was bad, he just went on a bit too long, and pure stand up isn't something that fits well with the rest of the show.
In general I've found his act variable. He can be good, or quite bad. On this occasion he didn't really win the audience over. For me it didn't help that he seemed to blame gun crime on video games and movies. (We have the same video-game culture and movies as America, but we don't have the same gun crime. There's no correlation, let alone causation. Attacking politicians for not banning video games didn't sit well with me.)
I've watched this programme a fair few times now and every week, without fail, David Mitchell's "Question Time" discussion kills the programme stone dead, but they've still not learned the lesson.
I've watched this programme a fair few times now and every week, without fail, David Mitchell's "Question Time" discussion kills the programme stone dead, but they've still not learned the lesson.
What's wrong with it? It just takes a different direction. After that, there's only the brief newspaper bit at the end, anyway.
this is a terrible programme. Thinks it's irreverent satire but it's just facile, insincere, with no substance. World events deserve a bit of sincerity and depth. But what do you expect from a bunch of mainstream entertainers and a woman who does, I don't know what. Lazy programming that's a pale shadow of what it should be.
Comments
Its hardly worth watching without Brookers weekly rant
Ouch. What did he ever do to you? He's hardly going to turn down television work if it's on offer is he? None of the others do.
Having said that Hall did have some funny bits. I did like his comment about rednecks with guns and how their assault rifle was the only thing worth breaking into their house for in the first place. He spent way too long with the Hugh Grant thing though.
As for Brooker I'm disappointed too. But like I said, it might have been his own idea. The format of the show is fairly fluid from week to week anyway, so if he decided he didn't have anything particularly strong to go with this week, the producers may have decided the simplest solution was to just drop the whole segment.
One fewer round-table discussion would've been my answer to fitting Hall in, but in the event the stand-up didn't really impress nor add to the show so the decision came off a bit worse than it needed to be.
It'll be interesting to see how they balance the segments going forward if they continue to occasionally experiment like that (which is a good thing in general, just not at the expense of Brooker!).
I enjoyed the debate immensely last night - both Abbott and Goldsmith came off very well and made good points. Mitchell is starting to really excel in that role in the show.
Agreed. I watch for the same reason.:)
From Wikpedia:
ANTAGONISM. In chemistry, a phenomenon wherein two or more agents in combination have an overall effect that is less than the sum of their individual effects.
Maybe they did have a good enough subject for this week.
Perhaps they did just want to shake it up a bit and have a standup bit for one week.
Possibly he was busy doing other things and didn't have the time to write and rehearse his segment.
Indeed it was. It was okay in parts but a bit lazy in others and I've seen him far better at other times. At least he didn't do that redneck singer again! :yawn:
I think this is the case. Anyone asked Brooker what happened? He rarely replies anyway, so I doubt you'll find out.
Mo Szyslak from The Simpsons was based on him allegedly.
It's not think week. It's been bumped back to 10:30 because of the nightly Dates season on C4.
What's wrong with it? It just takes a different direction. After that, there's only the brief newspaper bit at the end, anyway.
I don't remember him saying that, but it's always been on at 10pm before this coming week, which is the last in the series.
And I'm amazed it keeps coming back.
Baddiel should be good value for money.
Yeh, I think I'd watch a whole programme of that.