I don't have a full sense of it yet because I ended up dozing through most of
it, but the thing that mainly struck me was that, if Tomlinson is indeed a
"comedy superstar," it just shows me how debased both the word "superstar" has
become and how my general distaste for standup is justified. My goodness; could
there be more of a non-entity at the lectern here? Hardwick, whom I generally
like (sorry, Kevin!) at least had energy and personality beyond "the prize is
my father's approval" (how many times did she use that joke? At least three
that I heard in my semi-conscious state).
A show like this needs someone with a potential edge. Tomlinson has all the
edge of a bowling ball. I'm not surprised that Colbert's people have sanded off
any possible snags. Despite his distaste for TFG, Colbert feels like a guy who
wants to make nice with everyone.
As bland as it is right now, I'd take it over any of the British game shows. I
find those to be too smug, smarmy, self-congratulatory, and "aren't we clever?"
for my tastes. (The recent furor over importing Jeopardy was ludicrous to me.
Imagine being threatened by Jeopardy or saying "it's too hard to understand the
rules.")
Any future viewings of @M will be strictly dependent on the panelists.
And 60 minutes is way too long. If they have to fill an hour, do two 30s.
--Dave Sikula
On Wednesday, January 17, 2024 at 08:39:43 AM PST, Adam Bowie
<[email protected]> wrote:
I've watched a few minutes of this, but I'm not sure I can stomach the entire
thing. What I would point out about the various British comedy panel shows -
and we have a lot of them - is that there are a few things in making them good:
.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"TVorNotTV" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/92227678.108739.1705546559967%40mail.yahoo.com.
