10 O’Clock Live ch4 (uk)
- Thread starter Captain Shaw
- Start date
Personally I thought it was good, though you're right there were sections that let it down a little, and the cutting between the presenters and the audience quite so often wasn't necessary.
Though given it's a live show with an audience you can forgive it for being a little bit iffy at times. It perhaps needs to find its feet a little, and given they have another 15 episodes or so to get it right I'm sure they'll be tweaking as they go.
Charlie Brooker and David Mitchell were both good, I like Jimmy Carr so I had no problem with him here. Lauren Laverne I had no problem with but it was the WNN thing that was the low point of the show.
Though given it's a live show with an audience you can forgive it for being a little bit iffy at times. It perhaps needs to find its feet a little, and given they have another 15 episodes or so to get it right I'm sure they'll be tweaking as they go.
Charlie Brooker and David Mitchell were both good, I like Jimmy Carr so I had no problem with him here. Lauren Laverne I had no problem with but it was the WNN thing that was the low point of the show.
I thought that bit was so bad, I had to turn the sound down. Too much padding in general. I think they should sack Laverne and Surly, sorry, Carr, and shorten the whole thing to 30 minutes.
I don't know, it's got a full weeks news to cover an hour should be all right. I didn't think it was bad apart from that one section. Some parts were brilliant, such as David Mitchell's panel discussion and the interview with the MP.
Brooker and Mitchell are almost always brilliant in anything they do. Laverne and Carr look a lot like spare parts. Laverne, at least, isn't too annoying. Carr is certainly one ugly middle-aged bloke too many.
It was a good first stab at the format.
Mitchell was excellent as ever, although I thought the Bankers debate should have been given more time.
Brooker seemed to be quite uncomfortable when he was live. Maybe he might work better concentrating of pre-filmed segments.
Carr is Carr. I think he'd probably work better as an anchor for the show, possibly doing a news round-up at the top of the show.
I seem to remember there being four presenters advertised, but I can't recall anyone else making a substantive contribution to the show.
Mitchell was excellent as ever, although I thought the Bankers debate should have been given more time.
Brooker seemed to be quite uncomfortable when he was live. Maybe he might work better concentrating of pre-filmed segments.
Carr is Carr. I think he'd probably work better as an anchor for the show, possibly doing a news round-up at the top of the show.
I seem to remember there being four presenters advertised, but I can't recall anyone else making a substantive contribution to the show.
Maybe it's just because I actually like Jimmy Carr's comedy but I didn't see anything wrong apart from a little live uncomfortableness from them all round.
I thoroughly enjoyed it, i thought they did quite well for it being live.
Sure, it's a matter of personal preference -- I just happen not to like his style of comedy. I think perhaps they could have done with having a journalist or ex-politician in the team. What's Lemsip Opik up to nowadays? Mind you, he's yet another ugly, middle-aged bloke.
^The point seems to be it's just every day people's point of view on the news though, so that might be a bit pointless.
You have a point there.
I read somewhere it's supposed to be Britain's answer to The Daily Show; it clearly wasn't that but it was funny and I was entertained by it.
That's a rumour going round because Channel 4 have decided not to show The Daily Show any more, and there's a been a group of people saying "Oh you think they've done it to stop comparisons to their more rubbish version?".
Well, if their goal was recreating the Daily Show than they were doomed to fail either way.
I think it's just pissed off Daily Show fans trying to find a reason other then the ratings have dropped very low and it takes up a lot of slots running 5 nights a week in prime time.
I liked it.
But they need to get Laverne to do more - she did sod all last night. Mitchell and Brooker were predictably the stars - the Islamophobia and Jeremy Hunt rants being the best bit.
Just a shame they didn't rip into David Willetts - we were cheering for it and it never happened.
But they need to get Laverne to do more - she did sod all last night. Mitchell and Brooker were predictably the stars - the Islamophobia and Jeremy Hunt rants being the best bit.
Just a shame they didn't rip into David Willetts - we were cheering for it and it never happened.
I thought the interview was one of the best parts of the show although I didn't really know (or care) about anything they talked about.
I think I'll be tuning in mostly for the Brooker segments (assuming someone doesn't do the right thing and just put them up on youtube).
I reckon it will improve over the next few weeks and hit its stride about week 5.
Caught up with it last night. I liked it, and can see its promise.
Mitchell was as outstanding and outspoken as ever. His Local TV rant was terrific, if something of an easy target. He seems to have settled in with the programme very well as the show's premier soapbox polemicist (read: mad ranter).
Brooker (who seems to resemble an unkempt Ricky Gervais with Donald Trump's hair more and more each day) was also fine, but I agree that he came across as quiet and somewhat sidelined during the live discussion segments - his YHBW-like pre-filmed segments seem to be what he is best at, and his Palin segment showed all his good trademarks and wit.
Carr does what he does best: one-liners with the latest news. No complaints there.
Laverne I agree needs something different to do - I think she was most out of sorts on the show. I suspected at the end that shw would fit in better as the comic foil to balance the three personalities around her, tying them together and keeping them in check, or chairing studio discussions between the special guests, than attempt anything humorous. It might even help the show overall run more smoothly if one person took charge.
It's week 1 of 15, and while having its rough edges (it's clear that everyone is still finding their feet) everyone will settle into their roles soon, as soon as they know their strengths and weaknesses. It's enjoyable and promising stuff.
Mitchell was as outstanding and outspoken as ever. His Local TV rant was terrific, if something of an easy target. He seems to have settled in with the programme very well as the show's premier soapbox polemicist (read: mad ranter).
Brooker (who seems to resemble an unkempt Ricky Gervais with Donald Trump's hair more and more each day) was also fine, but I agree that he came across as quiet and somewhat sidelined during the live discussion segments - his YHBW-like pre-filmed segments seem to be what he is best at, and his Palin segment showed all his good trademarks and wit.
Carr does what he does best: one-liners with the latest news. No complaints there.
Laverne I agree needs something different to do - I think she was most out of sorts on the show. I suspected at the end that shw would fit in better as the comic foil to balance the three personalities around her, tying them together and keeping them in check, or chairing studio discussions between the special guests, than attempt anything humorous. It might even help the show overall run more smoothly if one person took charge.
It's week 1 of 15, and while having its rough edges (it's clear that everyone is still finding their feet) everyone will settle into their roles soon, as soon as they know their strengths and weaknesses. It's enjoyable and promising stuff.