Quote: Tim Walker @ August 28 2010, 11:43 AM BST

Just a reminder that 'The King Is Dead' (starring Simon Bird, Katy Wix & Nick Mohammed) starts this coming Thursday on BBC Three at 10.30pm (repeated Fridays at 9.30pm)...

https://www.comedy.co.uk/tv/the_king_is_dead/

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00tn8v0

This is a comedy panel show which aims to be a little different. The two episodes I saw at a screening a few months ago were pretty darn funny, I thought. Anyway, why not give it a try, you never know...?

View original

Are you The Tim Walker photographer?
If so I love love love you work.
If not then sorry.

On the King is dead I have'nt seen it yet but may give the repeats a try.

He not THAT photographer, but he does take photographs with his upskirt cam.

Laughed a few times as I have the other weeks, but it still feels a bit strange.

I like it. It's a perfect fit for BBC Three in the same way that We Need Answers is perfect for BBC Four.

I haven't watched it yet but I did like Tims jokes

Bleurgh... I am sorry but I really don't like it. I find it awkward, extremely rehearsed and just awful awful awful! Never watching it again (I tried twice).

It's all in the way it's presented. Really it's very well written.. they just don't pull it off.

Also, this week's grilling was the least grilling grill that ever did grill.

Isn't that the problem though - that the programme is too scripted. We all know that panel games are not entirely improvised, but there is no spark of spontaneity here at all. It is just actors hurling pre-written insults at z-list celebs.

I don't agree- I think it's that the hosts can't make it look spontaneous. I don't think it would be any better if they were left to their own devices.

The presenters are all talented, I doubt anyone could do much more with the format.

In any panel game the presenter's script is pre-written, and it always comes across a bit clunky, but this does not matter as it represents only a proportion of the humour; the rest comes from the interaction of host and guests, and of the guests among themselves.

Here though the presenters' script is everything, there is no real interaction.

I think some of the criticisms being levelled here (too scripted, etc) could probably be equally levelled at Shooting Stars.

Is the difference only that the hosts here haven't quite found their form yet?

It'd probably work better with less hostage. I can't think of (m)any succesful panel shows with 3. Also, giving your Inbetweeners chap lead chair smacks of lazy unimaginative opportunism. "Oo, that E4 sitcom has done well amongst the 12 to 24 demographic, let's put one of its stars in charge."

Quote: Kevin Murphy @ September 20 2010, 1:24 AM BST

I think some of the criticisms being levelled here (too scripted, etc) could probably be equally levelled at Shooting Stars.

Is the difference only that the hosts here haven't quite found their form yet?

View original

I was going to say that exact same thing, but didn't want to incase I was wrong! Thanks Kevin

It's true. My opinions invariably carry the weight of Fact.

I dared to look at the show again and turned over after a few limp jokes. I'm not a fan of Shooting Stars either, so maybe it's not meant for me anyway.