I'm not sure when the sixth series of QI will start, but I'm guessing it will be early October.
For those wanting a sneak-peak of the forthcoming series, they can do by having a quick what of these clips, as filmed by Alan Davies on his mobile phone.
I think a correction should be noted in the Guide for Episode Six of Series F of QI. On the very first question, Stephen Fry awards the audience five points, but somehow the QI Elves did not remind him of this when the final scores were to be announced, because he declared Sean Lock the winner with -16. The correct winner of the show, therefore, was the audience.
Quote: Will Heigh @ February 10 2009, 7:40 PM GMTI think a correction should be noted in the Guide for Episode Six of Series F of QI. On the very first question, Stephen Fry awards the audience five points, but somehow the QI Elves did not remind him of this when the final scores were to be announced, because he declared Sean Lock the winner with -16. The correct winner of the show, therefore, was the audience.
I noticed that. I mentioned that on the QI forums. From what was mentioned, there was an unbroadcast question in which the audience lost all their points.
I noticed that one too. As far as I'm concerned, if it's not broadcast, it doesn't count!
I agree. I'll mention it to the show's elves and see what we get. Perhaps it will lead to them broadcasting everything for a change, rather than us having to wait for the series' DVDs to come out so we can see the whole show.
I'd rather shows like QI continued to be edited... every panel show has lulls and the full hour plus would likely be too long for many viewers.
Mock The Week has actually got it right in terms of the scoring: never mention the points so people don't get confused why things don't add up. Here's what Andy Parsons admitted in an interview not long ago when asked about the scoring:
It's amazing how excited people get. It's completely made up. Basically, they record it, both sides win every round and then they decide in the edit which team actually wins. I have no idea how they decide that and it doesn't make logical sense. You find yourself winning and losing in an editing suite, which we tend not to care about but people at home write in: "I can't believe how they won that round, there was no sense in it."
That doesn't match my experiences, but I'm sure it does take place!
Quote: Mark @ February 11 2009, 12:04 PM GMTMock The Week has actually got it right in terms of the scoring: never mention the points so people don't get confused why things don't add up. Here's what Andy Parsons admitted in an interview not long ago when asked about the scoring:
I don't think so Mark. Personally, I think the best scoring system is the one on I'm Sorry I Haven't a Clue: none whatsoever.
Perhaps it's the inner nerd in me but QI recently seems to be neglecting the quite interesting aspect and instead descends each week into a bout of rude word calling and stupidity. Which would be fine if that was the format of the show, I just expect a bit more is all...
Standards are low folks, very low. It's like a playground swearing contest these days.
FRY: Good evening, good evening, good evening!
JUPITUS: Knobs!
DAVIES: Willy bum.
BRAND: Tampons.
FRY: Acrotomophilia!
BRAND: Vagina......
JUPITUS: Cock!
DAVIES: Silly titty plop.
BAILEY: Badgers weenie! Squirrel's nadger! Otter's prick!
You are not the only one who is thinking that. See the QI forum.
Personally, I don't see any change. There are still people who are trying to be interesting - although sometimes they can be a bit too interesting (look at Pam Ayres). You need to get the balance right.
As long as no one's talking over Stephen Fry, I'm happy.
*gives pointed looks to certain regular contestants*
Quote: Ian Wolf @ February 16 2009, 7:38 PM GMTsometimes they can be a bit too interesting (look at Pam Ayres).
Not sure I follow?
Quote: zooo @ February 16 2009, 7:53 PM GMTAs long as no one's talking over Stephen Fry, I'm happy.
*gives pointed looks to certain regular contestants*
Who be them?
Quote: Aaron @ February 16 2009, 8:44 PM GMTNot sure I follow?
Well there have been certain guest you keep trying to give as much information as much possible instead of trying to be funny. Pam Ayres was one (I mention her because I went to that recording), and so were Rory McGrath, Jonathan Ross and Gyles Brandreth.
Rory McGrath defo does that! And erm... John Sessions I think?
Quote: Aaron @ February 16 2009, 8:44 PM GMTWho be them?
Well, Phill Jupitus does it quite often, but he's not all bad.
Quote: Ian Wolf @ February 16 2009, 7:38 PM GMTYou are not the only one who is thinking that. See the QI forum.
Also the letters column of the latest Radio Times. I can't be bothered watching any more - for every nugget of amusement there will be several boring diversions into areas the show didn't reach as often when it was on "edgier" BBC2.
