I love this show for the most part but it does have it's problems.
The Philomena Cunk segements are a good idea, it gives the viewer a few minutes to turn off and go for a piss or make a quick cup of tea. Limmy was funny on episode one but appears to be recycling the same joke over and over again. It's still okay though, for now.
Quote: Renegade Carpark @ 24th January 2014, 3:20 PM GMTOkay, disregarding the pedantic discussion about comedy chronology for five whole seconds, I'm just pointing out that the Philomena bits were rather lazily dreamed up as a bit of filler and that I found the overall tone to be very similar to the Samantha Bee Daily Show reports, just as 10 O'Clock live feels very borrowed from the same show.
If like me (and Brooker), you're an avid fan and regularly watch The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, you can see where the tone, style and the jokes were lifted.
Sorry to burst your Screenwipe worshipping bubble, I know it's discomforting to hear that Charlie isn't the most super original Jesus of all time and I realise that my allegations show up a level of hypocrisy when Brooker slags off other TV programmes for ripping off formats, but it is what it is.
Sorry.
I do agree partially about Philomena's section. It does seem slightly out of step with the rest of the show. Only because it's basically a sketch and not a satire on anything that's happened. Still my favourite bit though.
I have seen a few episodes of The Daily Show I just didn't find it funny enough to become a regular viewer. I do think it's good that America has something on TV that can at least attempt to balance torrent of ill informed opinion disguised as news on Fox News. It's crazy that the U.S doesn't have laws to force TV news to remain impartial and balanced.
An enjoyable if somewhat unremarkable show this week. I think I've discovered the two key features that are affecting the show -
1) The Internet - by the time Brooker gets round to reviewing the news, all of the big headlines have already been torn apart, satirised and ranted over by an army of pundits, many of whom have more insightful or funny things to say about them. Presumably because they aren't tied by the BBC legal department, though more likely because they have a lot more free time than Brooker and can craft material.
2) Lacklustre delivery and absence of bite - back in the day when Brooker was a tortured nobody and media outsider, there was real venom in both what he said and how he said it. Now it's so laconic and noncommittal it almost seems like a 'whimsical' view of the week's news - yes, he's gone full Lenny Henry. The only time I witnessed the old Brooker this week was his report about the motorway Wetherspoons and the spokesman saying 'we're not encouraging people to drink, far from it' - then we got some of the bile and mocking that made us love the show way back when.
Philomena had some cracking lines in her report and the old fashioned table top Pac-Man made me giggle. But still not enough to save the show which has gone from a deadly laser beam to an anaemic pillow fight.
I didn't watch the early wipe series, so I have to ask
Did Charlie Brooker used to be a lot better/funnier than he is now?
I keep hearing how great he is, but his recent shows have been quite enjoyable in parts but nothing special.
And he doesn't come across as that funny.
Good stuff. Glad to see Limmy gone. The comparison between Ukraine and Game Of Thrones was fun.
Quote: Steve Sunshine @ 30th January 2014, 10:55 PM GMTDid Charlie Brooker used to be a lot better/funnier than he is now?
He was great because he was us. He would regularly lash out against the pompous and the hypocritical, a true satirist that attacked the smug and the powerful. Now he's selling television shows to the people he used to mock and got married to the type of eye candy presenter he would have ridiculed.
Some would say he's matured, whereas others would say he's sold out. Either way, he's not as funny as he used to be.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bXOPIbb8ZjA
bit of classic Brooker
He recently made a career choice to be less of a c*nt but that's what we loved about him in the first place. So now we're left with someone who is just a bit of a c*nt to people he's allowed to be a c*nt to. It's all a bit c*ntish if you ask me.
Often I find his gags don't seem to work, despite them being perfectly well-written. The just don't come across well in this format.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmBpwrPY570
more classic Brooker
I enjoyed this weeks episode. I don't really think Jake Yapp's bit works that well. But good on Charlie for bringing in someone new and giving them a try.
I think I'd prefer another series of 'How TV Ruined Your Life'.
Or a three part 'Worlds of Wonder with Philomena Cunk' series on BBC4 (perhaps with Joe Wilkinson playing a different 'expert' every week but playing them all exactly the same).
It's a good show, but I can't help but feel that saying-intelligent-stuff-about-the-media is far nmore satisfying than being-silly-and-arsing-about-with-no-specific-satirical- target (Although "here does your lap go?" made me giggle)
I just wish I could remember that great line from Philomena Cunk about controlling other people's thoughts, something along the lines of: 'Will computers be able to control our minds like Derren Brown?', 'No, they could never do that', 'Oh so like Paul McKenna then.'
If anyone knows, please feel free to post it up.
That was brilliant.
Quote: Renegade Carpark @ 2nd February 2014, 6:03 PM GMTI just wish I could remember that great line from Philomena Cunk about controlling other people's thoughts, something along the lines of: 'Will computers be able to control our minds like Derren Brown?', 'No, they could never do that', 'Oh so like Paul McKenna then.'
If anyone knows, please feel free to post it up.
It was "not as well as that", or soemthing very similar, which made Paul McKenna a hilarious answer.
