[Straker]

David Mitchell reminds me so much of Clive Anderson in this kind of format. No bad thing either.

[Straker]

[richardkeys]Phwoar! I’d like her to thoroughly thumb through my briefs![/richardkeys]

[Ginger Nut]

This legal chap is an absolute buffoon isn't he.

He's terrified to let anyone else make a point isn't he.

[Cyberschizoid]

Love this show!!!!

[miss buzzybee]

Can't get into this,dozed off twice in the hour turned over to QT

[xkatieloux]

Hmm, I'm not sure that ranting comes to Lauren Laverne as easily as it does to Charlie Brooker and David Mitchell.

But overall its improved leaps and bounds from last week.

[doom&gloom]

This is even more smug and biased than last week "a show that echos to the sound of Guardian readers agreeing with each other" was how one review put it.

Although not previously a fan of his I think only Jimmy Carr has been innocent of smug leftwingery.

[Specktater]

Much better this week, I was so disappointed after last week - glad I gave it a second chance - had hoped for a little more nimrod and a lot less football dross, but I guess they've got to go with the 'popular' option.

etc: I meant a *lot* less

[Ginger Nut]

It's held my attention this week. I was bored after 10 minutes last week. The Skygate theme has been most amusing. Particularly the telestrator bit from Brooker.

[solarflare]

Is it just me or ar the adbreaks in this show weirdly spread?

[DuckSeason]

Well that was an extremely pointless ad break. The show finished 2 minutes later.

It was much better than last week, which I still liked anyway (that World News sketch was wisely scrapped), but the left wing bias can get quite irritating at times especially when a lot of the stuff starts to pander to the majority-student audience.

[BenFranklin]

Originally Posted by DuckSeason

It was much better than last week, which I still liked anyway (that World News sketch was wisely scrapped), but the left wing bias can get quite irritating at times especially when a lot of the stuff starts to pander to the majority-student audience.

but then they started positive stuff about control orders so that's not true at all

[yakutz]

Much better than last week, although I still don't see the point of Laverne.

[lynxmale]

Jimmy aced it with his opening gags.
The most interesting thing about Lauren Laverne is that she reminds me of Jana Cova. But the only fisting she'll do is to anything vaguely establishment.

[LostFool]

Originally Posted by doom&gloom

This is even more smug and biased than last week "a show that echos to the sound of Guardian readers agreeing with each other" was how one review put it.

Yes, that is the one problem with the show - it's very trendy lefty. I would be nice if there was a little more balance

[Randy]

Just watched for the first time tonight.. My God, Laverne is Crap. Brooker as ever is brilliant.

[rawr]

Agree about the left-wing bias. If I didn't like the presenters it'd annoy the hell out of me. As it is, I can just about overlook it. A bit more balance would be nice though.

[Quizmike]

Students - Hooray!
Bankers - Boo!!

Isn't panto season over?

[shedseven]

Enjoyed it again tonight. I think Laverne is simply employed to link into breaks and hand over to Messrs Brooker, Carr and Mitchell for the funny bits. Liked the Gray/Keys/Sky pisstakes and Brooker seems a bit underused to me - I would prefer a little less Carr and more Brooker but Mitchell again was quality. No-one does middle class ranting like he does! Didn't Mitchell and Brooker both write for The Guardian?

[lynxmale]

Originally Posted by Straker

David Mitchell reminds me so much of Clive Anderson in this kind of format. No bad thing either.

Not yet. As a sharp barrister, Clive knew how to press better. Campbell got too easy a ride and hogged the mic.

[Nate Seinfeld]

I enjoyed last week, but felt Laverne's role was a tad pointless - linking the three guy's stuff aside - but this week her funny bits were amusing and overall a good effort. Brooker was just spot on as he almost always is, Carr's monologue was funny, and Mitchell's material, especially the Olympics rant were enjoyable. 13 weeks left, and I think critics need to realise that it takes time for a show like this to fully hit it's stride.

People who keep comparing it to The Daily Show don't seem to realise that it, first of all, is a four times weekly show which is recorded and edited. Second of all, it began in 1996 and was hosted by Craig Kilborn for two years when it wasn't as politically focused. It also didn't seem to know what it was all about, which meant it was criticised heavily until Kilborn left for a bigger show and Stewart came in 12 years ago! 10 O'Clock Live knows what it's about and just needs the odd tweak. Well worth sticking with in my opinion

[xkatieloux]

Originally Posted by shedseven

Enjoyed it again tonight. I think Laverne is simply employed to link into breaks and hand over to Messrs Brooker, Carr and Mitchell for the funny bits. Liked the Gray/Keys/Sky pisstakes and Brooker seems a bit underused to me - I would prefer a little less Carr and more Brooker but Mitchell again was quality. No-one does middle class ranting like he does! Didn't Mitchell and Brooker both write for The Guardian?

They still do. Well, I think Mitchell's column is in the Observer but same thing really.

[lynxmale]

I don't know how much the cast is influenced by how they all get on, I wonder if it will remain the same. It's odd to find Jimmy with political material. We all know he doesn't care as long as the innuendo keeps rolling in. I'm sure Brigstocke would enjoy this, but he's far too much a partisan of the left.

[The_Red_Avenger]

Of course it's going to be left wing biased -have you seen what this co-alition is doing to the country? and who said it pandered to the Guardian readers? The Daily Mail? Well knock me down with a feather.

[odz1]

Originally Posted by miss buzzybee

Can't get into this,dozed off twice in the hour turned over to QT

Load of rubbish indeed!