Quote: Nat Wicks @ March 11 2011, 3:04 PM GMTYes, massive pro democracy demonstrations are precisely the same as wage and benefit strikes.
www.cityam.com/news-and-analysis/egypt-strikes-force-holiday
10 O'Clock Live - Series 1 Page 27
Spark that set off the powderkeg.
Let's keep this thread on the show, not the topics it touches on...
People are still knocking 10 O'Clock Live, but I think it's rather enjoyable. Maybe a bit long... some autocue gags from Carr, followed by Brooker, followed by Mitchell's rant, and some round table discussion would be just about right.
The above sentence misses out Lauren Laverne you'll note - her bits really aren't working. Too late to replace her with a female comic who has comedy timing, so best if she stuck to the camera links I think, which she does do well.
Quote: zooo @ March 10 2011, 11:23 PM GMTI rather liked Jimmy spinning randomly on the rope.
Yeah, they didn't really rehearse that properly... but it made for a funnier sketch as a result.
What's the point of this being live? Other channels have done some very topical recorded shows (HIGNFY, Mock the Week etc etc.) - and since they're not really using any online media and the one presenter with live experience is mostly doing recorded sketches, why bother?
With the exception of spinning Jimmy, very few of the mistakes/blunders have been funny - and I found myself actually getting annoyed by DM getting tongue-tied in his "rant" this week, which was interrupting a very cleverly written and funny point. And Charlie Brooker not knowing what to do with his ironing board once the joke had got the laugh was offputting too.
Quote: Nat Wicks @ March 11 2011, 12:38 PM GMTI thought that segment was just pointless.
It was a pathetic token half-hearted attempt to attack the Labour party. Admittedly a little difficult to do given that they've not just a lack of discernable policies but no clear basic stance either, but it wouldn't exactly be hard to attack their rhetoric regarding the defecit and its cause and origins.
Really underwrote all of the problems with this show.
Quote: Aaron @ March 13 2011, 1:18 AM GMTIt was a pathetic token half-hearted attempt to attack the Labour party. Admittedly a little difficult to do given that they've not just a lack of discernable policies but no clear basic stance either, but it wouldn't exactly be hard to attack their rhetoric regarding the defecit and its cause and origins. Really underwrote all of the problems with this show.
I get the impression you think they should devote the entire 60 minutes of each show to attacking Labour. And that attacking the coalition government, especially the Tory bit of it, is somehow wrong.
Quote: GGdown @ March 5 2011, 4:42 PM GMTI can't help wondering why they don't have a bit more audience interaction - they put the hash-tags and Facebook links up at the start and have an audience full of potential wit. And then proceed to do nothing with it. Would give Laverne something else to do as well, she'd be used to that kind of thing from radio.
All we can tell about the audience is that they're too loud. Any audience may have potential wit, after all...
Quote: chipolata @ March 13 2011, 7:43 AM GMTI get the impression you think they should devote the entire 60 minutes of each show to attacking Labour. And that attacking the coalition government, especially the Tory bit of it, is somehow wrong.
No, not at all. Not at all. Attacking the Government of the day is naturally what should take up the greatest proportion of any show like this: but they need to do it with some real wit, understanding, and from a real solid stance of their own. 10 O'Clock Live has not found its voice or its basic stance yet, and is just taking easy pot-shots at the face-value appearance of Government policy, eliciting a cheer and howl of appreciation from the assembled audience. There's no substance to what they're doing so far, no real insight, nothing cutting or even particularly interesting.
I'm all for attacking the Government of the day, but any moron can point out the headline problems with the latest policy or statement. 10 O'Clock Live positioned itself as doing more than that - and it hasn't.
Dear English people....
I am an Australian and if that's not bad enough, I have Australian television shows on my TV. Our television is cheap, unfunny and afraid of saying anything that may perhaps upset and or offend one single person in the audience and in more cases than not it's an American franchise because the industry won't take any chances on something untested.
10 O'Clock Live is a fantastic show that I love to watch even if the week's topic is English politics, beacuse it's done well.
You are lucky to have actual personalities on your screens, ours are full of people who just look the part but have no presence.
Keep it up Channel 4.
This Aussie loves you!
What are you talking about? You guys have Ben Elton's Live from....
Oh wait...
Quote: squizznut @ March 16 2011, 12:06 PM GMTDear English people....
I am an Australian and if that's not bad enough, I have Australian television shows on my TV. Our television is cheap, unfunny and afraid of saying anything that may perhaps upset and or offend one single person in the audience and in more cases than not it's an American franchise because the industry won't take any chances on something untested.
10 O'Clock Live is a fantastic show that I love to watch even if the week's topic is English politics, beacuse it's done well.
You are lucky to have actual personalities on your screens, ours are full of people who just look the part but have no presence.Keep it up Channel 4.
This Aussie loves you!
Yeah but we're English, we'd hate free blowjobs and money if given to us, especially if the person giving them was nice, we f**king hate nice people!
Quote: chipolata @ March 13 2011, 7:43 AM GMTI get the impression you think they should devote the entire 60 minutes of each show to attacking Labour. And that attacking the coalition government, especially the Tory bit of it, is somehow wrong.
I wished they didn't attack the idea of being funny. It needs to get a team that isn't shoved together, it should have comedians known for their on the spot delivery, as opposed to 'panel' and 'presenter' comedians.
Quote: Robert Pimblott @ March 20 2011, 10:26 PM GMTYeah but we're English, we'd hate free blowjobs and money if given to us, especially if the person giving them was nice, we f**king hate nice people!
I wished they didn't attack the idea of being funny. It needs to get a team that isn't shoved together, it should have comedians known for their on the spot delivery, as opposed to 'panel' and 'presenter' comedians.
I'm confused as why you think comedians who can't present a show would be better at presenting a show...
Quote: Tim Azure @ March 21 2011, 8:04 AM GMTI'm confused as why you think comedians who can't present a show would be better at presenting a show...
The idea is that on the spot comedians can deal with live situations as opposed to comedians that are used to set up taped projects e.g. Lauren Laverne's terrible delivery because she's nervous. Live is never touched nowadays and there is no new breed to suit. Jimmy Carr's good but the rest faulter almost non-stop.
It's curious how rigid and unbending they've been with the format of this show. So much so that each edition follows exactly the same running order of items. Maybe if it had been a bit more flexible, and mixed things up a bit more, it wouldn't have shed half its viewers.
Agreed. They've swapped the ordering of a couple of things (such as the Mitchell-chaired round-table panel discussion being at the end of the last couple of shows), but one really would have thought they'd play around with it a bit more. That's half of the strength of having a weekly live show; they're totally missing the few opportunities they've given themselves.