I was surprised to see that Countdown's ratings had dropped so much and wondered what had happened so I watched yesterday's episode on 4OD. I hadn't watched in a long time and this was the first time that I'd seen it hosted by Nick Hewer. In my opinion, he is the main problem with the show these days. He's awkward, stern, unnatural, and a duck out of water in presenting a show like this. It really made uncomfortable viewing.
The other thing that needs to change is Susie Dent's origin of words (or whatever it was called) slot. It was dull and uninteresting and only served to pad out the show a bit. Again, she's not a natural presenter so there's no need to build up her part.
Rachel Riley was really good but is clearly awkward around Nick Hewer. That 50 Shades of Grey conversation was cringeworthy.
Maybe they should give the number points to the player solving using the fewest numbers, if they both get it.
I'm not sure that's always going to be meaningful, and would make it too hard (usually it's difficult enough to make the target using any set of numbers without worrying about how many).
A better reward for skill, if you want to distinguish between equally valid answers, would be for whoever finishes first to get the points (as sometimes one gets it in a few seconds, the other struggles to do it in 30).
I was surprised to see that Countdown's ratings had dropped so much and wondered what had happened so I watched yesterday's episode on 4OD. I hadn't watched in a long time and this was the first time that I'd seen it hosted by Nick Hewer. In my opinion, he is the main problem with the show these days. He's awkward, stern, unnatural, and a duck out of water in presenting a show like this. It really made uncomfortable viewing.
The other thing that needs to change is Susie Dent's origin of words (or whatever it was called) slot. It was dull and uninteresting and only served to pad out the show a bit. Again, she's not a natural presenter so there's no need to build up her part.
Rachel Riley was really good but is clearly awkward around Nick Hewer. That 50 Shades of Grey conversation was cringeworthy.
Not sure you should draw conclusions from one episode. Go back a few posts on this thread to see RR definitely not being awkward around NH. In fact, their chemistry has really grown recently. Anyway, most people watch to compete in the words and numbers rounds not to watch the hosts.
Not sure you should draw conclusions from one episode. Go back a few posts on this thread to see RR definitely not being awkward around NH. In fact, their chemistry has really grown recently. Anyway, most people watch to compete in the words and numbers rounds not to watch the hosts.
I agree. I suspect the earlier transmission time could have some bearing and irregular absences in the schedules due to racing coverage.
Not sure you should draw conclusions from one episode. Go back a few posts on this thread to see RR definitely not being awkward around NH. In fact, their chemistry has really grown recently. Anyway, most people watch to compete in the words and numbers rounds not to watch the hosts.
So the host isn't important then? Interesting. Would the earlier posts show that Nick Hewer was a good host or is the general consenus that he's not very good?
I was only posting my opinion/thoughts on why there is an issue with this programme which is shedding viewers to a point where it could risk being cancelled. Viewing figures of less than half a million viewers for a programme that used to regularly be in the top 10 Channel 4 programmes must be worrying for the regular viewers. Yes, viewing habits have changed (as has it's timeslot) and there are more channel choices but to see it limping along is a real shame.
So the host isn't important then? Interesting. Would the earlier posts show that Nick Hewer was a good host or is the general consenus that he's not very good?
I was only posting my opinion/thoughts on why there is an issue with this programme which is shedding viewers to a point where it could risk being cancelled. Viewing figures of less than half a million viewers for a programme that used to regularly be in the top 10 Channel 4 programmes must be worrying for the regular viewers. Yes, viewing habits have changed (as has it's timeslot) and there are more channel choices but to see it limping along is a real shame.
Yes it is a shame that it isn't doing as well as it used to. I think the host is "important" and can add to (or subtract from) the overall enjoyment but that for a show like Countdown I think most viewers would watch anyway. Actually NH, whilst not very good technically as a host, has improved enormously so if you think he is bad now just as well you didn't watch when he started!
Actually NH, whilst not very good technically as a host, has improved enormously so if you think he is bad now just as well you didn't watch when he started!
I dread to think what he was like in the beginning
Nick was dreadful at the start, yes, but he'd never presented a TV show before. I couldn't watch for several months, and was worried for the show. But I tuned in for the special Championship series last year, and was pleasantly surprised at how he'd come along. He is still no Jeff for me, but certainly passable, and settled. He seems to be perfectly happy to be there, too, which is kind of important. I hope he stays for as long as he can - it doesn't need more upheaval.
There is very little fluff to Countdown once the game starts, which makes it all the more appealing. I skip Dictionary Corner mostly, but find Susie's segment interesting.
As for the show's ratings, yes, it is a real shame, but it's worth noting that over the past 18 months or so, they have actually gone up slightly, or at least held steady, where other shows, such as DOND, have dropped precipitously, almost to the same levels as Countdown.
C4 would certainly be mad to get rid of it right now as it is still a pleasant, watchable (and obviously cheap) game. If anything, they should push it later as it may even outrate DOND.
Nick was dreadful at the start, yes, but he'd never presented a TV show before. I couldn't watch for several months, and was worried for the show. But I tuned in for the special Championship series last year, and was pleasantly surprised at how he'd come along. He is still no Jeff for me, but certainly passable, and settled. He seems to be perfectly happy to be there, too, which is kind of important. I hope he stays for as long as he can - it doesn't need more upheaval.
There is very little fluff to Countdown once the game starts, which makes it all the more appealing. I skip Dictionary Corner mostly, but find Susie's segment interesting.
As for the show's ratings, yes, it is a real shame, but it's worth noting that over the past 18 months or so, they have actually gone up slightly, or at least held steady, where other shows, such as DOND, have dropped precipitously, almost to the same levels as Countdown.
C4 would certainly be mad to get rid of it right now as it is still a pleasant, watchable (and obviously cheap) game. If anything, they should push it later as it may even outrate DOND.
I can't stand game shows that attempt to use fake dramatic pauses to increase tension or employ tedious recaps, it a complete waste of time. But, if they weren't used, it would mean the shows would be over in ten minutes.
Jeff Stelling was an able successor to "Twice Knightly," it took a few years and we lost a few along the way, but I agree, the hosts are secondary to the primary purpose of the show and that is for the audience to compete with the contestants, Suzie and Rachel.
Nick Hewer is an incredibly intelligent man and I think that he had been advised to "dumb" himself down a bit and not try to compete with the corner, or the contestants and this I think frustrated him at the beginning, until he realised why.
I'm sorry to say I just can't warm to Rachel, she is just too smug for my liking. Not too keen on Nick either really; he looks uncomfortable in the role but I don't have such an aversion to him as I do Rachel!
I stopped watching when Rachel stopped wearing skin tight thigh length dresses and started wearing sensible clothes. What spoilsport came up with that? >:(
Certainly showed off her best asset, rear of the year.
Has Rachel ever won it? Perfect optical illusion dress today, designed to dazzle and confuse any prudes into thinking they were actually still in the middle of their crossword puzzle!
Comments
The other thing that needs to change is Susie Dent's origin of words (or whatever it was called) slot. It was dull and uninteresting and only served to pad out the show a bit. Again, she's not a natural presenter so there's no need to build up her part.
Rachel Riley was really good but is clearly awkward around Nick Hewer. That 50 Shades of Grey conversation was cringeworthy.
I'm not sure that's always going to be meaningful, and would make it too hard (usually it's difficult enough to make the target using any set of numbers without worrying about how many).
A better reward for skill, if you want to distinguish between equally valid answers, would be for whoever finishes first to get the points (as sometimes one gets it in a few seconds, the other struggles to do it in 30).
Not sure you should draw conclusions from one episode. Go back a few posts on this thread to see RR definitely not being awkward around NH. In fact, their chemistry has really grown recently. Anyway, most people watch to compete in the words and numbers rounds not to watch the hosts.
I agree. I suspect the earlier transmission time could have some bearing and irregular absences in the schedules due to racing coverage.
So the host isn't important then? Interesting. Would the earlier posts show that Nick Hewer was a good host or is the general consenus that he's not very good?
I was only posting my opinion/thoughts on why there is an issue with this programme which is shedding viewers to a point where it could risk being cancelled. Viewing figures of less than half a million viewers for a programme that used to regularly be in the top 10 Channel 4 programmes must be worrying for the regular viewers. Yes, viewing habits have changed (as has it's timeslot) and there are more channel choices but to see it limping along is a real shame.
Yes it is a shame that it isn't doing as well as it used to. I think the host is "important" and can add to (or subtract from) the overall enjoyment but that for a show like Countdown I think most viewers would watch anyway. Actually NH, whilst not very good technically as a host, has improved enormously so if you think he is bad now just as well you didn't watch when he started!
I dread to think what he was like in the beginning
There is very little fluff to Countdown once the game starts, which makes it all the more appealing. I skip Dictionary Corner mostly, but find Susie's segment interesting.
As for the show's ratings, yes, it is a real shame, but it's worth noting that over the past 18 months or so, they have actually gone up slightly, or at least held steady, where other shows, such as DOND, have dropped precipitously, almost to the same levels as Countdown.
C4 would certainly be mad to get rid of it right now as it is still a pleasant, watchable (and obviously cheap) game. If anything, they should push it later as it may even outrate DOND.
Did the contestants deliberately do a contrived round-the-houses method using all six numbers, just to show off?
No but someone did 9 - 6 = 3 and then +100
I can't stand game shows that attempt to use fake dramatic pauses to increase tension or employ tedious recaps, it a complete waste of time. But, if they weren't used, it would mean the shows would be over in ten minutes.
Jeff Stelling was an able successor to "Twice Knightly," it took a few years and we lost a few along the way, but I agree, the hosts are secondary to the primary purpose of the show and that is for the audience to compete with the contestants, Suzie and Rachel.
Nick Hewer is an incredibly intelligent man and I think that he had been advised to "dumb" himself down a bit and not try to compete with the corner, or the contestants and this I think frustrated him at the beginning, until he realised why.
He does seem surprisingly ignorant of terms such as 'todger', or is that feigned?
Don't be silly,
OK maybe "mumsy" would have been a better word.
Rachel on today's show.
PHWOOOAAARRR
Certainly showed off her best asset, rear of the year.
Has Rachel ever won it? Perfect optical illusion dress today, designed to dazzle and confuse any prudes into thinking they were actually still in the middle of their crossword puzzle!