Abe Mikkel Posted May 9, 2017 Share Posted May 9, 2017 Wish they'd bring back Divided when the Chase is on a break. It was a quiz show presented by Andrew Castle were people worked together to build up a big cash prize but then argued over who go the biggest share, the longer they argued the quicker the money dwindled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Teedy Kay Posted May 9, 2017 Paid Members Share Posted May 9, 2017 It doesn't need actual Russian Dolls, they don't need to have names, no one is actually interested in the deliberation of which doll the contestant is picking and more importantly people genuinely watch quizzes to test their own general knowledge. I watched the first episode of this pap, and in 15 mins of a TV quiz there had been 2 questions. It's a slant on deal or no deal that is awful. This will not get a second run. If they cut the melodrama and general bullshit of it all, gave 4 contestants per episode 15 mins ish each, just had a simpler presentation, it could be half decent. But it drags and has you shouting 'GET ON WITH IT YOU DUMB CUNTS' all episode. Pointless' ratings will be going through the roof again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 9, 2017 Share Posted May 9, 2017 As they should be. Love a bit of Pointless. Though I don't normally stick around for the final if it's not a question I'm interested in, as that stage seems to lose whatever it is that keeps even the dryest of earlier rounds somewhat engaging. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members BomberPat Posted May 10, 2017 Paid Members Share Posted May 10, 2017 Watched the first two episodes of American Gods last night. I don't watch a lot of "proper" telly, and outside of Doctor Who it's been years since I really committed to watching a series of anything week-by-week, so it feels frustrating not being able to just binge watch this! It was astonishingly well shot and directed, though perhaps overdid the extreme close-ups, and Ian McShane is a delight throughout. I can only imagine it's horrendously confusing to anyone watching without having read the book, though - it was bad enough that it was me and a friend watching, both of us love the book but haven't read it in years, and were constantly turning to each other saying something like, "hang on, what's this bit?". Maybe a little too gratuitous for both of us - a little too much dicks and fannies for my tastes, and a little too much decapitation for her's - but mostly brilliant, looking forward to seeing how it shapes up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Chest Rockwell Posted May 10, 2017 Moderators Share Posted May 10, 2017 12 hours ago, Teedy Kay said: It doesn't need actual Russian Dolls, they don't need to have names, no one is actually interested in the deliberation of which doll the contestant is picking and more importantly people genuinely watch quizzes to test their own general knowledge. I watched the first episode of this pap, and in 15 mins of a TV quiz there had been 2 questions. It's a slant on deal or no deal that is awful. This will not get a second run. If they cut the melodrama and general bullshit of it all, gave 4 contestants per episode 15 mins ish each, just had a simpler presentation, it could be half decent. But it drags and has you shouting 'GET ON WITH IT YOU DUMB CUNTS' all episode. Pointless' ratings will be going through the roof again. The thing is you've hit the nail on the head with comparing it to deal or no deal. If someone pitched you that concept you'd laugh them out of the room, but it's hugely successful. It's fucking stupid as fuck, but people love it. So I wouldn't be so sure this is short-lived. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 10, 2017 Share Posted May 10, 2017 You know when you realise an actor's been in several of your favourite shows or films, and you decide to see if the pattern holds by looking up some of their other work? Well I now enjoy the thought of fans of both American Gods and Deadwood getting the drinks and snacks in to try out a few episodes of Killjoy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merzbow Posted May 10, 2017 Share Posted May 10, 2017 Isn't the lead actor from Hollyoaks too? He got shot up by the fit McQueen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members BomberPat Posted May 10, 2017 Paid Members Share Posted May 10, 2017 Yep, lead fella was in Hollyoaks. It's got Gillian Anderson and Crispin bloody Glover in it, too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merzbow Posted May 10, 2017 Share Posted May 10, 2017 Oh wow, I haven't seen episode 2 yet but Gillian is golden right now. Her turn in Hannibal deserves applauding and she made The fall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members gmoney Posted May 10, 2017 Paid Members Share Posted May 10, 2017 23 minutes ago, Uncle Zeb said: You know when you realise an actor's been in several of your favourite shows or films, and you decide to see if the pattern holds by looking up some of their other work? Well I now enjoy the thought of fans of both American Gods and Deadwood getting the drinks and snacks in to try out a few episodes of Killjoy. Was this the gritty remake of Lovejoy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 10, 2017 Share Posted May 10, 2017 God dammit, I even googled it before submitting. Don't know how that bloody happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr_Danger Posted May 10, 2017 Share Posted May 10, 2017 Lucky bastards, I wish I could unwatch Lovejoy to experience the sheer joy and shenanigans for first time again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Astro Hollywood Posted May 10, 2017 Moderators Share Posted May 10, 2017 I watched a load of Lovejoy when I was housesitting last summer. One of them had hijinx at a fair ground, where Phil Daniels ended up climbing a ferris wheel to get away from Lovejoy and was goaded into falling off, although he was unharmed. Lovely stuff, although you have to turn it off before the end credits kick in, or you'll be hit with a horrific feeling of 'school tomorrow :(' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Chest Rockwell Posted May 10, 2017 Moderators Share Posted May 10, 2017 How's the Sons of Anarchy going? I want an update on how awful you find it! Started Freaks and Geeks again for the first time since I saw it originally. You reminded me it was on there, and my wife had never seen it. It really is fantastic. Such great writing, well rounded characters and surprisingly consistently decent acting for a show with such a young cast. Martin Starr is still my MVP, as he was the first time around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members BomberPat Posted May 10, 2017 Paid Members Share Posted May 10, 2017 (edited) I've been rewatching Yes Minister as my background viewing on Netflix while I do housework or whatever, and it's bloody brilliant, maybe one of my favourite ever comedies. Really well scripted, perfectly acted, and gets just absurd enough without falling into being unbelievable. That said, having only ever really watched the odd episode at a time when I've caught them on TV before, and not in any real order, I'd never noticed how much the quality drops at series three. Real Flanderisation of characters - in the first two series you get the impression that Jim Hacker and Sir Humphrey have a reasonably amiable relationship despite everything, but in series three they're outright confrontational to each other, Hacker has turned from a bumbling but mostly good-hearted politician out of his depth into an inept, practically immoral careerist, and Sir Humphrey becomes obstructionist and corrupt for the sake of it. On top of that, there's one episode where they discover that Humphrey made a mistake costing the government millions of dollars some thirty years earlier, and Humphrey says; Quote The identity of the official whose alleged responsibility for this hypothetical oversight has been the subject of recent discussion is not shrouded in quite such impenetrable obscurity as certain previous disclosures may have led you to assume; but not to put too fine a point on it, the individual in question is, it may surprise you to learn, one whom your present interlocutor is in the habit of defining by means of the perpendicular pronoun. And, yes, part of Humphrey's whole character is that he speaks in indecipherable jargon, but it's always bureaucratic, obfuscatory stuff to conceal his intentions, and is rooted in the relationship between the civil service and the minister - here it's just "he speaks in big words", as if that's the joke. I'm probably the only person getting annoyed about the consistency of writing in a thirty year old sitcom, but there it is. Edited May 10, 2017 by BomberPat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts