Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'Chloe again' on Tue Oct 3 23:30:27 BST 2000:

Some one please tell me when I can look from behind this cushion.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'Jeanette' on Tue Oct 3 23:44:40 BST 2000:

I think it's safe now.

Not only have they replaced everyone who was on it previously by other presenters who have been told to act just like the old ones, they had the cheek to have Gary Bushell on a stick. Nowhere near as good as a moon on a stick!

Makes Ricky Gervais look sophisticated, though.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By george on Wed Oct 4 00:00:45 BST 2000:

>
>Makes Ricky Gervais look sophisticated, though.

.....As I've said before, it's a nasty ploy by C4 to lower expectations, so that you think that Mr Git-face (or 11oCS)is great.

Fight it.

Repeat to yourself the following mantra:
*It's not funny, It's not funny, It's not funny, It's not funny, It's not funny, It's not funny,.....* Think of things that REALLY make you laugh, and take a long cold shower after watching cack shows like the above.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'Phil' on Wed Oct 4 00:11:14 BST 2000:

I gave it a chance. I mean, starting again from scratch they could have made a decent go at this, but no. If possible it was even more half-arsed than before.

If one could sum up the content and quality of this show, it would be that bit where the irritating greasy bloke said,

"And if you tried to ring any of those numbers, you have totally missed the point of the sketch and are in fact a mong."

When Ricky Grover came and on and did his "Bulla" routine, I swear I almost cried. Can the man do NOTHING ELSE?

Those Brass Eye repeats really can't come any faster.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By george on Wed Oct 4 00:15:04 BST 2000:

Better still, a clear-out of staff at C4 and Talkback can't come soon enough......

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'Jeanette' on Wed Oct 4 00:26:58 BST 2000:

Posted By 'Phil': "...
If one could sum up the content and quality of this show, it would be that bit where the irritating greasy bloke said,

"And if you tried to ring any of those numbers, you have totally missed the point of the sketch and are in fact a mong."
... "

What did we expect - the mong on a stick?

Well, just a relatively amusing late-night comedy show would have sufficed, which we obviously are not going to get.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'Gee' on Wed Oct 4 00:46:13 BST 2000:

I was glad they dropped the cheap swipes at pensioners. As a pensioner myself I found this very offensive. I thought the two young people they have now are very nice – especially that young bit in the leather trousers. However I didn’t like the way they implied that sleeping with prostitutes was mucky. If it weren’t for people like me many of the single young mums in my area would spend this winter coatless. It’s people like me that are actually putting something in their mouths. I don’t ask for credit and they don’t give it.

Gee is currently writing a short radio comedy which should find its way into the bin very soon.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'paul twist' on Wed Oct 4 01:08:54 BST 2000:

It couldn't have been any good, really. As has been pointed out before, the whole format is the problem. I must admit I found it less irritating than it used to be due to the lack of Iain Lee's smug face, but it was as unprofessional and unfunny as it's always been.

I wouldn't worry kids, this is sure to be the last series. Fans of the previous shows won't like it due to the lack of Lee/Donovan/Gervais/G, and people who tuned in tonight to see if it had improved aren't going to stick with it. It's hard to believe that they use so many writers yet still fall flat on their arses. Or maybe that's why they fail - too many cooks, etc., as they say. They can't really develop their own style (unless using the words "fuck" and "wank" and [almost] "cunt" constitutes a style these days).

Shame really, cos the little I've seen of Jon Holmes' (I think I got his name right) work seems quite amusing, albeit in a sub-Lee and Herring kind of way.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'Cwej' on Wed Oct 4 01:19:00 BST 2000:

Buller was on there ? Oh please , tell me he's not been tainted ...And the stle wankers are there too , hoe far behind is the Divine David and Ronnie Anconas Vicar ? Surely Kevin Eldon will stay away ......

Schnapps from Ice Warriors is still the most topical thing ever .

They should really just let some students have it , introduce some anarchy and it would be good .... HAVE IT PRESENTED BY DALEKS , gay or otherwise .

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'paul twist' on Wed Oct 4 01:24:30 BST 2000:

It always seemed like it was a student production to me anyway - nowhere near slick enough to be a 'proper' programme.

I am glad I am not a student anymore just because of that fucking "whaaazuuuuuup" beer commercial. Students up and down the land will be doing that now in between impersonating Ali G and pretending they "do no work" when they secretly revise their arses off behind closed doors. Twats.

I am not getting much sleep and am cranky. Sorry.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By TJ on Wed Oct 4 01:36:36 BST 2000:

Funny you should say that - I work in a University, and the students are indeed always shouting "wazzup" and impersonating Ali G...

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By subbes on Wed Oct 4 01:44:42 BST 2000:

Are they sports students?



"Beeeeeeeeeeeeeeer, yeah!". kill all of them. soon.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'A Bit of the 11 O'Clock Show' on Wed Oct 4 01:49:59 BST 2000:

>Buller was on there ? Oh please , tell me he's not been tainted ...And the stle wankers are there too , hoe far behind is the Divine David and Ronnie Anconas Vicar ? Surely Kevin Eldon will stay away ......
>
>Schnapps from Ice Warriors is still the most topical thing ever .

Ah Jesus, is there no respite from this abuse. The massive laugh from the studio audience at the Schnapps joke was taken LIVE from the studio. Do you think we bus in coach loads of morons to watch this show? No. Some of the people there contribute to this forum. I dare them to say they did not laugh once. My God you lot are infruriating, although why I should care I don't know. Perhaps I thought I once respected you. Well that seems to be short-lived.

I don't mean to be so immensely annoyed by your response to the new series. It's just so frustrating. Forgive me. I shall try and tackle your complaints sensibly in the future. Just not now.

Sleep on it.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By subbes on Wed Oct 4 01:52:14 BST 2000:

I'd recommend you sleep on a matress.


Or try Lodeine, it makes everything comical.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'A Bit of the 11 O'Clock Show' on Wed Oct 4 01:53:59 BST 2000:

>Buller was on there ? Oh please , tell me he's not been tainted ...And the stle wankers are there too , hoe far behind is the Divine David and Ronnie Anconas Vicar ? Surely Kevin Eldon will stay away ......
>
>Schnapps from Ice Warriors is still the most topical thing ever .

Ah Jesus, is there no respite from this abuse. The massive laugh from the studio audience at the Schnapps joke was taken LIVE from the studio. Do you think we bus in coach loads of morons to watch this show? No. Some of the people there contribute to this forum. I dare them to say they did not laugh once. My God you lot are infruriating, although why I should care I don't know. Perhaps I thought I once respected you. Well that seems to be short-lived.

I don't mean to be so immensely annoyed by your response to the new series. It's just so frustrating. Forgive me. I shall try and tackle your complaints sensibly in the future. Just not now.

Sleep on it.

(Apologies if this appears twice. Something seems to be amiss.)

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'A Bit of the 11 O'Clock Show' on Wed Oct 4 01:54:56 BST 2000:

Oops. It did.

And subbes, make an effort. Even if you didn't see the sodding thing.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By subbes on Wed Oct 4 02:02:24 BST 2000:

I've only ever seen one episode, and my general opinion was "They can't keep this up for so long, can they?". There's not that many topical jokes, surely? Even HIGNFY is failing miserably at this stage in the game, unless they mention sure-fire "laugh" triggers.

I find myself wondering if it isn't time to give up on being topical and just be *silly*.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'Gee' on Wed Oct 4 03:37:57 BST 2000:

If it helps A Bit of the 11 0'Clock Show I did like the phonebox cards bit. The writers seem to have 'discovered' that the humour comes from the reactions of the public. Before the public's comments weren't judge important enough to be heard - and of course it's their comments that produce the laughs. I thought it had its moments and the writers have thought more about there targets this time round. I certainly wouldn't write it off yet, and like everyone else I'll be watching it again.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'Anonymous' on Wed Oct 4 09:14:16 BST 2000:

>Do you think we bus in coach loads of morons to watch this show?

Yes

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'Jon' on Wed Oct 4 09:46:44 BST 2000:

Damn, Anonymous, you beat me to it!

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By Ewar Woowar on Wed Oct 4 09:52:28 BST 2000:

>What did we expect - the mong on a stick?
>

We got one - that stupid big-faced stick insect with her dead eyes and misplaced emphasis... WHY was she always jiggling about like that? Is it because it's hard to keep your balance when your head weighs twice as much as the rest of you?

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By TJ on Wed Oct 4 09:57:32 BST 2000:

Oh dear... they aren't calling people "mong" now are they? I always said that 11 OCS was only a couple of steps away from pointing at people in wheelchairs and shouting "spaz". Now it seems they've actually got there.

And I'm sorry, but I refuse to give the programme a second chance, as I was so stunned by the pointless offensiveness of the Dudley Moore joke in the Christmas 'Special'.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By Ewar Woowar on Wed Oct 4 09:59:35 BST 2000:

>Ah Jesus, is there no respite from this abuse.

HOW DO YOU THINK *WE* FEEL??? No matter how shit you are, no matter how low you sink (that Princess Diana joke - I've heard funnier death-rattles)you still get another fucking series and you still get paid. And then you come here and expect sympathy and patience HOW DARE YOU!!! You're shit, and you know you are, but why keep your dignity when you can keep Channel 4's money. Christ, how do you sleep at night?



AAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGHGHGHGHGHGHGHGh

Right. I'm ready now. When do we start with the death threats?

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By Ewar Woowar on Wed Oct 4 10:03:33 BST 2000:

Where are the Corpses - what about their "direct action"? If ever there was a worthy target....are they just all mouth and no trousers? I hope not...

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By Ewar Woowar on Wed Oct 4 10:34:59 BST 2000:

Do you think I was a bit harsh on Sarah Alexander? I think she's a decent comedy actress, but the image of some overpaid Producer going "Yes, but can she deliver a punchline?...Only joking! Ha ha! I had you there!" and then being given a big wadge of cash had me fuming. And it's her own fault - even if everyone was telling her she was good, she should know better than to listen to a bunch of TV whores. And it's not like she needed the career break - she must've had plenty of other options. No, I feel she's a justifiable target. And she has an enormous head.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By Bean Is A Carrot on Wed Oct 4 10:41:57 BST 2000:

The 11 O'Clock Show is typical of contemporary comedy - unfunny, cheap and badly realised. Joke after cheap laugh after cheap laugh after joke, none of which were funny, most of which were oh so funny because they refered to celebrities, politicians or other identities.

Watching this sort of pap is annoying, you almost laugh, it's almost funny, but it's not. Like a lot of comedy these days, you watch it in a sort of daze, you feel you could laugh at it if you really tried, but you don't, coz it's shit. But you don't turn off or go to bed, you just keep watching, optimistically waiting for it to improve. But it never does, so at the end of it you shrug your shoulders, switch off the TV and go to bed. You feel nothing, because there is nothing these days except for videos of comedy from 30 years ago which is funny.

It's when you watch these videos that you start to get annoyed. Why isn't comedy like that these days? It's because people in television are playing safe it. The producers picked two presenters who should be on The Priory with Jamie Theakston. They were relatively attractive, but they have no feel for or ability to do comedy. I wouldn't care if they're so bad looking they make me want to throw up - I just want them to make me laugh! Imagine if Jamie Theakston tried to do E.L. Wisty! He'd give it a go, but he'd be bad as he's not funny or talented and he'd have no feeling for it, just like the presenters of the 11OCS.

The sketches and stories were equally rubbish. The Gary Bushell story contained one possible joke, but no one came close to finding it. It's insulting that that a so called comedy show thinks it can get away with presenting us with a story that isn't funny at all. Oh look, a bunch of gay people are wearing Gary Bushell t-shirts, tee hee hee, coz Gazza hates gays, oh the irony, oh laugh laugh laugh! Because the presenter/reporter of that story failed to find the joke it came across as a serious news story. Had Newsroom South-East done it, it probably would have actually been funny. But only because Newsroom South-East is poxy and strangely reminisent of The Day Today/Brass Eye. In fact if there's anyone here who works for the British Comedy Awards I think Newsroom South-East should win best comedy for this year. It's piss funny compared to the 11OCS.

One final thing, if you're doing a sketch about style wankers (weren't they oh so observent, those scooters ARE wanky), it's not enough to wear vaguely wanky suits. You need to HAVE A POOFY SOUNDING VOICE TOO!!! If you do that it's HILARIOUS!!!

In conclusion, I'm glad I'm going out tonight so I don't have to sit through that rubbish again.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'Anonymous' on Wed Oct 4 11:36:40 BST 2000:

I could video it for you?

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'Steven' on Wed Oct 4 12:25:07 BST 2000:

I can't believe this 11 o clock show twat is coming on here telling us how awful WE are.
I bet hes one of the 25 writers who come up with that total pile of shit that was broadcast last night. Maybe he is miffed because the only line he wrote in last nights show was the Schnapps line..
Heres a joke for you Mr 11 o clock show twat, you could say news flash we've just discovered Mo Molam has been caught moonlighting, and we have proof, you could show her giving a speech at the house of lords, then walking out, cut to security cam of a behind view of an actress dressed up like Molam running into a tv studio. She then takes off her wig, and places a white one on her head and puts a monacle on, she then sits down in a chair as somone says 'we're coming live on air in 5 .. 4 .. 2 ..' and Molam adopts a wavering old man's voice and says "Hello, and welcome to the Sky at Night." Ho Ho Ho the hilarity.. And then you could do a follow up gag of her being the Gamesmaster, and do all the speakers in the House of Lords shouting at her how to get passed the 3rd level in Zelda on the gameboy, ho ho, and you could get a sly joke in about Domanic Diamond.
You're jokes aren't topical at all.. just inserting a current celebes name into the sentance "....... is a fucking cunt!" isn't topical. Christ, you had 25 FUCKING WRITERS!! Do you have any idea what a fucking travasty that is??! You had a whole fucking summer to write fucking gags!! And the best you come up with is that?! You weren't even under pressure to write topical stuff on that episode since it was the first in the series! The rest of the series will be in a 3 day deadline... jesus christ, how bad is it gonna be when you don't have a fucking summer to write your piss poor jokes. All of your fucking topical jokes could be replaced with another random celeb and they wouldnt make a fucking difference, they dont have anything to do with topicality, its just random celeb>action>swear word>followed by cunt!
The show is like 25-30 mins long.. 15 minutes of that is taken up by your crap guests who come on and spool old material that you've rehersed as a trying so hard to sound like a naturally flowing conversation with them. And those bits like Bulla.. what the fuck was that.. I never watched comedy nation thank god, but it was fucking awful, where were the fucking jokes? I mean at least I could see what were the attempts at jokes in the presenters awful one liners, but Bulla didnt seem to even have those.. Just sort of ramblings and intercut shots of him wearing shades or not. The entire show is actually worse than it was with Iain and Daisy, at least then I could laugh at Iain Lee's awful appearance and delivery..and the way you could feel he thought he was ace, but the two new ones just look like they they know they are in fact television prostitutes. Anyway I dont think Ill waste any more time on this awful awful awful show, because no matter what I say your going to defend it, take the fucking money and run before you end up sinking so low you will writing off the cuff remarks for Richard Whitely for the next 20 years.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'Topol' on Wed Oct 4 13:25:16 BST 2000:

I must say, this latest series of 11O'Clock criticisms on the site is nowhere near as funny as the last series. Still that's what you get when you get a team of talentless cunts to write them.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'Jon' on Wed Oct 4 14:27:18 BST 2000:

They're in the wrong job, eh?

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'Sam D' on Wed Oct 4 14:38:29 BST 2000:

Man: "Excuse me, waiter, but these potatoes are inedible and the steak appears to be rotten."
Waiter: "God, you people! In fact, didn't you complain last time you were in here? Well it's your own fault for giving us another chance then isn't it? You knew the food was bad, so you should at least have the sense not to bang on about it."

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By Jo_ham on Wed Oct 4 17:21:56 BST 2000:

I saw it last night - by chance. I didn't plan to watch it but it was on.

I don't think there has been a half hour like that for a long time - I didn't even smile once, let along laugh. There was *nothing* about that episode that was any good.

you say they had 25 writers? where did they find them? A couple of people I've seen on this forum could come up with better stuff in an afternoon.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'Anonymous' on Wed Oct 4 17:48:32 BST 2000:

Chris Moyles on R1 has just done an on-air rant about how AWFUL (his capitals) the show is/was. He says that he went for a drink with Jon Holmes once and he was on his coat tails all evening, asking if he could 'please meet someone famous'.

Mind you, he's Chris Moyles.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'topol' on Wed Oct 4 18:09:03 BST 2000:

instructions on how your average nerd-head can display dismal sense of comedy.

1) Think of dismal, sexist, offensive joke

2) Go to TV forum.

3) Say something like 'i bet the 11 O'Clock show writers would come up with something like this (insert, dismal, sexist, offensive joke here).

4) Hey presto! More derision heaped on writers, and you can get your appalling detritus in a public forum with a clear conscience!

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'Al' on Wed Oct 4 18:26:47 BST 2000:

>instructions on how your average nerd-head can display dismal sense of comedy.
>
>1) Think of dismal, sexist, offensive joke
>
>2) Go to TV forum.
>
>3) Say something like 'i bet the 11 O'Clock show writers would come up with something like this (insert, dismal, sexist, offensive joke here).
>
>4) Hey presto! More derision heaped on writers, and you can get your appalling detritus in a public forum with a clear conscience!

I really don't think that's the point of these comments at all. The fact is the 11ocs *is* full of dismal, offensive sexist jokes. The 'jokes' on this forum parodying it are no better, no worse. If you *are* a writer on the show, surely you don't think everyone here is in some conspiracy to deliberately not like it? If there was this much negative feedback on something I'd written or been involved with I'd have a serious rethink (and probably keep my head down too...)

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By Justin on Wed Oct 4 18:50:12 BST 2000:

>I must say, this latest series of 11O'Clock criticisms on the site is nowhere near as funny as the last series. Still that's what you get when you get a team of talentless cunts to write them.

Who's getting paid, though?

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'Anonymous' on Wed Oct 4 18:51:39 BST 2000:

anyone else notice a distinct similarity between this topol character and the fake jim yoakum?

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By Justin on Wed Oct 4 18:53:54 BST 2000:

>instructions on how your average nerd-head can display dismal sense of comedy.
>
>1) Think of dismal, sexist, offensive joke
>
>2) Go to TV forum.
>
>3) Say something like 'i bet the 11 O'Clock show writers would come up with something like this (insert, dismal, sexist, offensive joke here).
>
>4) Hey presto! More derision heaped on writers, and you can get your appalling detritus in a public forum with a clear conscience!

You may have a point with a few things posted on this forum, but that does not alter the fact that the 11ocs still got there first. You still made sure that Jon Holmes used the word "mong" last night - do you actually understand what you're doing?! Are you going to get him to say "flid" tonight? Am *I* doing it now?

Now, piss off and write some jokes. Or don't. I couldn't care less anymore.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By Bent Halo on Wed Oct 4 18:54:57 BST

Sorry, I'm catching up...

>I always said that 11 OCS was only a couple of steps away from pointing at people in wheelchairs and shouting "spaz". Now it seems they've actually got there.

TJ - you really have had better things to do with your time. Iain Lee cracked that very joke on 11OCS last series, with a gleeful expression that could scarcely be contained.

As for the Bushell sequence, dear 11OCS writer, we don't have that short term a memory! I remember routinely homophobic jokes on the show. Add that to the racist, sexist and downright dumb attempts at irony in the series' past and you have one of the central reasons why so many cast/crew members jumped ship. I know this to be true. It stops you sleeping at night.

And if that doesn't make you suffer enough, you have Fincham breathing down your neck when you speak out about it.

So why the volte-face last night? Why the peace treaty to homosexuals - giving them a voice and some kerrazy camera angles that make them seem only slightly freakish? Come on. Tell us what the real motivation behind that feature was.

Last night's programme was hateful. I only hope it gets cancelled early.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By TJ on Wed Oct 4 19:01:24 BST 2000:

>TJ - you really have had better things to do with your time.

Wow... that's praise if ever I received it! Cheers mate!

Where've you been hiding, by the way?

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By Bent Halo on Wed Oct 4 19:05:35 BST

Busy, but after a couple of answers.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'TJ' on Wed Oct 4 19:07:07 BST 2000:

Uh oh, ominous...

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'TJ' on Wed Oct 4 19:08:33 BST 2000:

What have I done this time!?!??!?!?!?

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'Anonymous' on Wed Oct 4 19:12:48 BST 2000:

>no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, ...
>
>
>no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no,
>

There's no limiiiiiiit

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'Big Cheese' on Wed Oct 4 19:18:52 BST 2000:

Careful, Anonymous. Nev Fountain holds that nom-de-plume round here.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'Steven' on Wed Oct 4 20:41:57 BST 2000:

I think TJ hit the nail on the head with this message..
Posted By TJ on Wed Oct 4 09:57:32 BST 2000:
Oh dear... they aren't calling people "mong" now are they? I always said that 11 OCS was only a couple of steps away from pointing at people in wheelchairs and shouting "spaz". Now it seems they've actually got there.

Clas..I can imagine that will be Iain Lee's new show.. he just stands in a busy town square on live TV with a mic, and when he see's someone in a weelchair, he just runs up to them and points and shouts "Spaz!" and runs off laughing..
his next series will be Iain in a busy supermarket waiting to see if any pensioners come by, and if they do he will run up to them, point and shout "OLD!" and run off laughing.. other new series will be called 'Iain points at midgets' and 'Iain points at the blind'

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'Anonymous' on Wed Oct 4 20:54:11 BST 2000:

hows bent halos name red?

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'tvspaulmoore' on Wed Oct 4 20:57:36 BST 2000:

Whilst I'm sure the 11ocs writers all work very very hard reading all the papers all day and making highly topical gags only to have the shame of finding their work slagged off here after all they've done etc etc etc, I would still like to know how on earth they get to 7pm or whatever it is in the evening and say 'Yes this script is very funny, let's put it on the television- it's *that* good.' And then come back the day after and do it all again. I just can't understand how they turn up for work every day without wanting to say 'hang on this doesn't really work as a programme does it? we can't possibly go on air with *another* thirty minutes like *that* again'. And yet they do... I'm no longer appalled by it, I'm just stunned.

And as for
>>I don't mean to be so immensely annoyed by your response... It's just so frustrating. Forgive me. I shall try and tackle your complaints sensibly in the future. Just not now.

Well if that was Ken Loach I'd think he was a bit rich to have that kind of attitude to anyone who happened not to lap up his every word with unadulterated glee, but this is a factory line sketch show (and not even a very good one at that)- what kind of statement are you making that we've all missed?

But by the same token I shouldn't get that worked up about it so I'll shut up.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By TJ on Wed Oct 4 21:17:32 BST 2000:

>I think TJ hit the nail on the head with this message..
>Posted By TJ on Wed Oct 4 09:57:32 BST 2000:
>Oh dear... they aren't calling people "mong" now are they? I always said that 11 OCS was only a couple of steps away from pointing at people in wheelchairs and shouting "spaz". Now it seems they've actually got there.
>
>Clas..I can imagine that will be Iain Lee's new show.. he just stands in a busy town square on live TV with a mic, and when he see's someone in a weelchair, he just runs up to them and points and shouts "Spaz!" and runs off laughing..
>his next series will be Iain in a busy supermarket waiting to see if any pensioners come by, and if they do he will run up to them, point and shout "OLD!" and run off laughing.. other new series will be called 'Iain points at midgets' and 'Iain points at the blind'



Yeah... but they need that pointless tedious "remember spangles, eh?" nostalgia angle, so won't he have to shout "Joey Deacon" at them instead?

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'Anonymous' on Wed Oct 4 21:21:52 BST 2000:

"Oh look, a spasmo heacon fleacon!!"

<cue audience hilrity, Lee wth a smirk in his abhorrent face>

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'Squidy' on Wed Oct 4 21:50:03 BST 2000:

Adam and Joe mak ereference to a dance they call the 'Mong' in last years Christmas tie-in book. Go and look it up and tell me if its offensive. I'm waiting...

Oh, and the reason I'm keeping schtumm about the 11OCS is that I haven't seen it yet, but I'll watch tonight and tell you what I thonk about it tomorrow.


Like you care.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'Squidy' on Wed Oct 4 21:50:04 BST 2000:

Adam and Joe make reference to a dance they call the 'Mong' in last years Christmas tie-in book. Go and look it up and tell me if its offensive. I'm waiting...

Oh, and the reason I'm keeping schtumm about the 11OCS is that I haven't seen it yet, but I'll watch tonight and tell you what I thonk about it tomorrow.


Like you care.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'Squidy' on Wed Oct 4 21:50:47 BST 2000:

(Sorry about the repeated message by the way.)

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'Anonymous' on Wed Oct 4 22:11:16 BST 2000:

Adam and Joe are offensive full stop

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'boki' on Wed Oct 4 22:16:48 BST 2000:

A Bit of the 11o'CS wrote:

>I don't mean to be so immensely annoyed by your response to the new series. It's just so frustrating.

Well, funnily enough my dear fragment, I hoped not to be so annoyed by the new series, and that too is very frustrating. With so many changes in personnel, it seemed reasonable to expect if not any great improvement at least something slightly different. Can you honestly say that the show delivered in either of these respects? The fact that so many people have posted on this thread shows that the majority of us *do* care, *do* want the show to get better and were fully prepared to give it another chance.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'Nev Fountain' on Wed Oct 4 23:10:07 BST 2000:

I'm not sure about one of the above postings, i've never intentionally gone on the site under 'anonymous'.

A lot of my friends think that I'm mad not to, but there you are.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By george on Wed Oct 4 23:39:17 BST 2000:

Just seen show two. It stinks. Still not item or *joke* made me laugh or remotely smile.
Ricky Grover is well, er, mockney. Waugh on sport seems like a lazy rip-off of *Sally Jockstrap* from Private Eye. Instead of doing something fresh, we get interviewers copying, Donovan & Lee. Also I can confirm that the 11oCS hasn't changed, because I still reach for the remote control in under five minutes of the show starting.
After watching two full shows I'm considering contacting the IOC and have 11oCS in the next Olympics as an endurance sport - or maybe they show force contestants in Japanese game shows to watch it, as they really know how to make viewers suffer with pain.
Incidentally, I note that the 11oCS section on the C4 website isn't up and running yet. Any excuses, or the latest in a long line of C4 cock-ups this year?

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'Mmmmmmm' on Wed Oct 4 23:58:22 BST 2000:

Feel free to berate and abuse this silly twat using the email address he so thoughtfully provided us!!

11 O'Clock Show
posted by Mark Stockwell on 23:44 4/10/2000
(email) Mark.Stockwell@tesco.net

I can't believe what you have done to the 11O'Clock show. Ian Lee was brilliant and Daisey Donovan was the glamour/sex interest. Sarah Alexander is undoubtedly a brilliant comic actress but perhaps better suited to comedy sketch shows. Where as your new male lead, well he just does not have the same cutting wit that Lee had. I only hope that Ian Lee has gone on to something even better with you.
I miss them both!
Yours sinecerely
Mark Stockwell


AAAAAAAAHAHAHAHHHHHHHHHAAAAAHHHHH!!

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'TJ' on Thu Oct 5 00:09:34 BST 2000:

Hmmm... a lot of extraneous 'e's in there...

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'Mmmmmmm' on Thu Oct 5 00:13:19 BST 2000:

I know, silly tosser. That's why I singled him out really.

'I reealy lieked the elevene o clok showe when daisey and iane did doe it'

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By TJ on Thu Oct 5 00:14:09 BST 2000:

It was the Clowne!!!

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By Ewar Woowar on Thu Oct 5 09:14:33 BST 2000:

Who the hell is Nev Fountain?

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'Squidy' on Thu Oct 5 11:03:51 BST 2000:

Right, now listen to me. I sacrificed half an hour of my life yesterday to come to this conclusion:

THE 11 O'CLOCK SHOW IS AN INSULT TO COMEDY (AND TELEVISION) LOVERS EVERYWHERE!

It was recently called 'offensive' by the ITC. That's true. I'm offended by the fact that Talkback and Channel 4 think that if they get some halfway attractive people to read an autocue filled with half-hearted 'topical satire' (of which the punchline almost certainly calls the party involved a 'twat') will create a show akin to a Channel 4 version of Have I Got News For You. Here's some things I took particular offense at:

- The directors cutting away to long shots of Sarah Alexander and John Holmes to indicate 'Yes, it IS the audience laughing, not a laughter machine'. They don't cut to the audience, however, as this would probably show a bunch of people sitting stoney-faced at the banality of it all.

- Bulla pretending to be "'ard" in an attempt to identify with the Loaded audience the way Ali G did.

- Sarah Alexander (not a bad actress, but seems to have a knack for picking terrible shows) told a joke about Ann Widdecombe's birthday. She "blew on the cake and lit the candles" apparently. Anyway the thing that offends me is not that its a twenty-year old Not The Nine O'Clock News joke about Magaret Thatcher, but that SA killed it. Killed it! When Pamela Stephenson read it out in her Moira Stewart voice she displayed a rare comedy timing that was only recently surpassed by The Day Today. When SA read it, she was clearly reading an autocue, very badly, and therefore the joke died. Also, in the Waugh On Sport segment, she talked about the safety of horses in water polo. This joke was told as early as 1958 by Marilyn Monroe in Some Like It Hot. Funny then, funny now, but not funny when SA said it.

(To be fair to Ms Alexander, Jon Holmes was even worse...)

- That sub-Gilliam animation. The animation itself was good (they must have spent literally minutes scanning tapestestries into their 'Create-your-own-crap-cartoon-in-three-minutes-using-Macromedia-Flash' programme) but the script! Why didn't they just say "Hey, look at us, it's satire, its topical, and cos Diana's dead, its controversial too!!! Lets smile smugly, give ourselves a pat on the back, and go to the pub...."

- Finally, those sub-Chris Morris pre-recorded bits. Firstly, why did Sarah Alexander wear a dark wig when, not only was it unlikely that a horse groomer would have ever watched an episode of Coupling, but NOBODY knows who she is! (This is known as Marcus Brigstocke Syndrome, where you feel the need to assume a false name and put on a pair of glasses or a wig in the attempt to make yourself believe that people have actually heard of you.)
The so-called 'comedy' in these segments (especially Will Smith, "not the actor" as they repeated so much) was so pitiful that.....

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRGGGHHH!!!! I can't think about any more! I'm going to watch an episode of Monty Python to cheer myself up...

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'Peter O' on Thu Oct 5 11:56:34 BST 2000:

"Horses in water polo" would have been funny if she'd disagreed with the man more forcefully, saying "No, I think am I correct" over and over again, eventually putting a finger on his lip to hush him.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'Squidy' on Thu Oct 5 15:10:36 BST 2000:

But she didn't. That's the point I'm making, she may be a good actress but she can't do topical stand-up like Mark Thomas or man-on-the-street ad-libs like Chris Morris. The 11 OCS should either employ competant people or not exist at all.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'Australian Janet' on Thu Oct 5 15:39:39 BST 2000:

Wow. I haven't seen this show - I'm just amazed at the passion it has provoked. Dammit, I want to see for myself now!

I know it's fun laying into somebody, but I'm going to play Mum and introduce the voice of reason to redirect the forum's anger a little. Poor old Bit Of 11OCS! A bad production doesn't necessarily fall down simply at writing level, or even at performance level. What about the producer(s)? Surely the person in charge of the overall programme has to take the majority of the bile being directed at the writers? It's their fault the thing is happening in the first place, and has taken the shape it has. Head writers, script editors and directors can do more damage than the poor schlepping writers.
Uuuurgh. It makes me shudder still...I've written on things which I've known to be flawed in the hope that I can somehow drag themt out of the mire. Nup. You can't polish a turd. You can buff it up a little, and be proud of the buff-job, but in the end it's still brown and smelly.
And with that delightful imagery, I bid you adieu.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'Jake' on Thu Oct 5 19:27:37 BST 2000:

But Kevin Day is the script editor, and he's quite good, to my mind.
But the situation is a hard one to pull off - topical comedy 3 successive days a week. I say scrap the Wednesday show, do two a week and make them better. I reckon that'd work.
That said, I didn't think last night's was that bad. But Sarah Alexander as that sport woman was plain annoying, just like Daisy Donovan was.
But hey, it's just a telly show. Don't get so damn worked up!

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'Peter O' on Thu Oct 5 22:50:30 BST 2000:

Anything on more than once a week isn't supposed to be good. It's supposed to be cheap. I've said this before and I shall continue saying it until the price falls.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'zaber' on Thu Oct 5 23:02:35 BST 2000:

>Anything on more than once a week isn't supposed to be good. It's supposed to be cheap. I've said this before and I shall continue saying it until the price falls.

Yeah, coz Eastenders is sooo cheap to make.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'Anonymous' on Thu Oct 5 23:10:40 BST 2000:

Well... yes it is.

Pillock

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'chloe' on Thu Oct 5 23:27:31 BST 2000:

Two things people of the Forum:

1) Do you know the biggest thing to shock me about said show - Kevin Day being script editor. He's such a good stand up - they must be offering some serious money.

2)Biggest irony: C5 actually had a better program on the other side with Sean Cullen, Adam Bloom, Milton Jones, Rhona Cameron and Paul (know face, don't know name or work).

3) Even bigger irony.... the show on C5 was called "Bring me the head of light entertainment" ..... that must be more than just scheduling? sureley someone foresaw the pending dreadfulness of 11 o'clock show?

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'Peter O' on Thu Oct 5 23:27:59 BST 2000:

Yes. And Emmerdale is going to be a five-day-a-week jobbie to replace Home and Away, and it will become correspondingly cheaper, per episode. Volume discount.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'Chloe' on Thu Oct 5 23:53:08 BST 2000:

shite - can't count... that was three things not two. sorry - took me four times to get my maths o'level.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By TJ on Thu Oct 5 23:55:36 BST 2000:

Home And Away confuses and frightens me. Last time I saw it not only was Sally about 26, which made me feel very old, but there was also some Placebo-style kid who was saying "Forsooth, Mr Fisher, verily I shall go to the surf club" or something.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'Jon' on Fri Oct 6 09:57:39 BST 2000:

Placebo are rubbish. Worse than the old 11OCS.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'Jake' on Fri Oct 6 10:16:05 BST 2000:

>Placebo are rubbish. Worse than the old 11OCS.

Harsh, and distinctly untrue to my way of thinking.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'Janet ' on Fri Oct 6 10:33:21 BST 2000:

I quite like them too.
Especially since their last tour when I drank them under the table. Brian Molko made it onto the Rolling Stone top 20 hellraisers at number 14. Guess that makes me at least #13.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'Jon' on Fri Oct 6 11:03:29 BST 2000:

They're terrible. Their topical stuff is lousy.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By Ewar Woowar on Fri Oct 6 11:13:49 BST 2000:

Yes, Placebo are rubbish, but why slag them when you could be slagging 11ocs?

I flicked over last night after How Do You Want Me and the Moon On A Stick woman was actually doing a (poor) joke about how big Minnie Driver's face is! Was this deliberate irony? I can't believe they'd be that clever.

At least Minnie Driver's eyes are even.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'kinder surprise' on Fri Oct 6 19:19:52 BST 2000:

Ewar that's rather cruel. You are criticising them for the exact same tactic of abuse you are using.

You are a horrible man.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'Jon' on Sat Oct 7 09:46:36 BST 2000:

Ewar is a lady. I can confirm that, for I have spoken to her using a telephone-machine.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'kinder surprise' on Sat Oct 7 11:41:13 BST 2000:

Jon your judgement is hardly reliable.

btw is the phoneline open to all?

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By TJ on Sat Oct 7 17:29:50 BST 2000:

"she's a lady..."

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'kinder surprise' on Sat Oct 7 18:44:05 BST 2000:

I know. I guess she's just got a very masculine vocabulary. All credit to her for adapting into a man's world.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By sheep on Sat Oct 7 19:55:03 BST 2000:

Nothing to say really. I just wanted to keep this thread going as TGP is the show I currently look forward to each week.

And I wanted to encourage debate.

Best show at the moment? Best show ever? Heap of shit and 11ocs is better? (unlikely, but I'm trying to promote balanced debate..)

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By sheep on Sat Oct 7 20:47:04 BST 2000:

The above msg belongs to the TGP strand.

I am a fool.

In the strand-posting regard *only*.

Oh, and in thinking I'm important.

Move along now, nothing to see.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By Ewar Woowar on Tue Oct 10 10:58:03 BST 2000:

>Ewar that's rather cruel. You are criticising them for the exact same tactic of abuse you are using.

I've defended this point on the other 11ocs thread, I think - as far as I'm concerned, the gloves are off. Nothing can be as insulting as the 11ocs itself. I feel fully justified in responding in kind. And as I said, constructive criticism got the same petulant response as angry slagging from those people claiming to be 11ocs writers - why bother trying to reason with them? And she *still* has an enormous head.
>
>You are a horrible man.

I try.

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'kinder surprise' on Tue Oct 10 16:37:51 BST 2000:

>>You are a horrible man.
>
>I try.
>

lol

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By 'Anonymous' on Wed Oct 18 10:41:37 BST 2000:

And that was funnier...

Subject: Re: 11 o'clock..
Posted By george on Thu Oct 19 22:59:27 BST 2000:

The fact still remains, that it is still, even when at it's mediocre best, a poor HIGNFY.
Five series and this is utterly the best they can do, despite a busload of writers from the University of Typing Monkeys (Hemel Hempstead)? For crying out loud! We deserve better than this, so kindly stop it causing more pollution of the airwaves. NOW.