Marcus Brigstocke is no doubt a lovely man and a wonderful son but this Stars In Their Eyes imitation of The Daily Show is just embarrasing. Does anyone know whether it's a conscious attempt to ape a successful American format?
The Late Edition
I've always quite liked it.
You sure it didn't come before The Daily Show, Cinnamon?
(If it did, then that's awfully impolite.)
It didn't, though I was possibly more passionate about it in the middle of the night. At around eleven o'clock any poor joke feels like a personal slight. I should have more perspective; why attack poor Marcus Brigstocke when Alex Zane is still listed as a comedian?
The BBC4 website had all but convinced me to sky+ this - this thread is making me wonder. I used to be indecisive, now I'm not so sure.
Has anyone got some input on this show, having stuck with it?
Thanks in advance
Its very very average. If you like the Daily Show (I used to but its just got too repetitive and boring) then you'll probably like this but for me it doesn't have any teeth. Yes he goes on about the 'evil Tories' and 'Daily Mail middle class' but not with the same anger that he does on the Now Show. Also the interviews are a bit preachy.
If you want a genuinely good satirical late night show (and you don't mind it being American) then look up Real Time with Bill Maher on YouTube although its cancelled at the moment because of the Writers Strike.
I just can't take Brigstocke seriously, complaining about, as Adam points out, "the 'evil Tories' and 'Daily Mail middle class'", when a) failing to counter the argument with criticism and such of the other parties, and more importantly b) that's blatantly his personal background and upbringing.
Reminds me of that scene in Family Guy where Lois gets chased by the mob from the synagogue for being a "self-hating Jew".
The Daily Mail supported Oswald Mosley and have been keen to follow in the steps of his jackboots...
I agree that Marcus Brigstocke's idea of satire is just saying "Prescott's fat, arf, arf."
Quote: Cinnamon @ November 8, 2007, 2:35 PMThe Daily Mail supported Oswald Mosley and have been keen to follow in the steps of his jackboots...
Yeah, but we can't judge the present editorial stance of the paper by that of the past, can we? 
No, but we can judge them on sensationalist drivel, scientific illiteracy, attempts to curb free speech while still moaning about political correctness and keeping Richard Littlejohn on a sanity support machine.
Even on a literary level it's a step below Biff And Chip's Big Adventure.
The day the Daily Mail reminds us they led the campaign to get those racist white men brought to justice for killing Stephen Lawrence is probabaly not the best time to criticise the Daily Mail's sensationalist drivel.
Quote: Cinnamon @ November 8, 2007, 2:41 PM... and keeping Richard Littlejohn on a sanity support machine.
Anyway, didn't The Sun once claim to have found a WWII bomber in a crater on the moon?
It's no wonder they're reminding us, they must be very proud of their one reputable story. Besides, calling for murderering scum to be brought to justice isn't a sensationalist story, claiming that evolving viruses are just a medical conspiracy to prove Darwinism is a sensationalist story.
Credit where credit's due though, that's a good campaign.
Quote: Aaron @ November 8, 2007, 3:03 PM
Anyway, didn't The Sun once claim to have found a WWII bomber in a crater on the moon?
That's not a newspaper, that's a parody of The Mirror.
Quote: Cinnamon @ November 8, 2007, 3:05 PMIt's no wonder they're reminding us, they must be very proud of their one reputable story. Besides, calling for murderering scum to be brought to justice isn't a sensationalist story, claiming that evolving viruses are just a medical conspiracy to prove Darwinism is a sensationalist story.
I've never read the Daily Mail. It sounds like a laugh.
You are right though Cinnamon I just loved the delicious irony 
It is a bit like saying, 'fair play to George Bush, he's killed thousands but there's a bloke in Arizona who gets brilliant government benefits.'