I'm a sucker, and usually watch for a bit on the night and end up donating after seeing one of the moving VTs about who the money goes to. Every time it makes me appreciate how much I take for granted in life.
This thread is so depressing - yet totally predictable. It's obvious - we all enjoyed it more when we were younger as everything was funnier when we were younger, it was also more prone to mistakes given technology wasn't as advanced, and us telly geeks loved the big event from TV Centre all lit up.
Times move on and it still makes a load of money, but we're all upset? Upset at fewer long-winded segments of cheques been handed over by someone from a car dealership in the audience? Fewer "wacky people" sat in baths of beans?
It's fair to say CiN has got blander in recent years, but there was one person who was the glue, Terry Wogan who made the show tolerable despite the younger presenters creeping in and now he's gone, it's a bog standard generic telethon.
Sadly, Friday will expose that it's an exercise in corporate handshakes, pop stars promoting their latest dirge, with some token PSB VT's and presenters attempting to enhance their careers.
I still have faith in Comic/Sport Relief as there's some genuine contributions during the programme, yet CiN hasn't been the same since 2014.
It's fair to say CiN has got blander in recent years, but there was one person who was the glue, Terry Wogan who made the show tolerable despite the younger presenters creeping in and now he's gone, it's a bog standard generic telethon.
I don't know how old you are London Lite, and I hope I don't offend. I'll also say that I have huge respect for Sir Terry who is a great broadcaster and I respect your opinion too.
But I do disagree. As a younger person, watching him present CIN for the past few years that he did I have to say that I found him cringe-worthy. I found his delivery very stilted and his delivery of the lighter lines quite forced and unnatural; he seemed to slow down the pace of the whole thing for me. His younger co-presenters often looked a little embarrassed I have to say.
Now as I say, this is simply my opinion, and perhaps an undeserved one. In all other areas, especially on the radio, he remained a true master until the end - but unfortunately my impressions of the last few CIN were that possibly his best days were behind him.
It's fair to say CiN has got blander in recent years, but there was one person who was the glue, Terry Wogan who made the show tolerable despite the younger presenters creeping in and now he's gone, it's a bog standard generic telethon.
I don't know how old you are London Lite, and I hope I don't offend. I'll also say that I have huge respect for Sir Terry who is a great broadcaster and I respect your opinion too.
But I do disagree. As a younger person, watching him present CIN for the past few years that he did I have to say that I found him cringe-worthy. I found his delivery very stilted and his delivery of the lighter lines quite forced and unnatural; he seemed to slow down the pace of the whole thing for me. His younger co-presenters often looked a little embarrassed I have to say.
Now as I say, this is simply my opinion, and perhaps an undeserved one. In all other areas, especially on the radio, he remained a true master until the end - but unfortunately my impressions of the last few CIN were that possibly his best days were behind him.
I disagree. Without Sir Terry CIN is not the same. He was the glue and the icon of the programme and the only presenter to present the entire show despite age.
I will still watch but Sir Terry is irreplaceable and certainly a great giant of a hard act to follow.
It's fair to say CiN has got blander in recent years, but there was one person who was the glue, Terry Wogan who made the show tolerable despite the younger presenters creeping in and now he's gone, it's a bog standard generic telethon.
I don't know how old you are London Lite, and I hope I don't offend. I'll also say that I have huge respect for Sir Terry who is a great broadcaster and I respect your opinion too.
But I do disagree. As a younger person, watching him present CIN for the past few years that he did I have to say that I found him cringe-worthy. I found his delivery very stilted and his delivery of the lighter lines quite forced and unnatural; he seemed to slow down the pace of the whole thing for me. His younger co-presenters often looked a little embarrassed I have to say.
Now as I say, this is simply my opinion, and perhaps an undeserved one. In all other areas, especially on the radio, he remained a true master until the end - but unfortunately my impressions of the last few CIN were that possibly his best days were behind him.
Where I agree with you is that he wasn't at his best towards the final 10 years of his television career. Wogan's Web in the late 90s was I think his last great piece of television. There was the awful Terry and Gaby show on Channel 5 in the noughties, which I don't think suited his presentation style at all.
However, I'd rather watch Wogan for his quips during his poorest point of working in tv than Fearne Cotton or Grimmy yoofing it up with no style or panache. FYI, I'm in my late thirties.
Eurovision is all the better for his departure but Children in Need is a slightly different beast. I do think the show will certainly be lacking over the next couple of years from his absence (he actually held together a piss poor line up), and as such I'm surprised more effort hasn't been put into this years event to compensate for his absense. I also think as is so often the case with replacing a long term host they won't be getting it right first time and it will take a couple of years to get it right.
I do think unlike Comic Relief, which has done a great job of bringing in relevant current hosts over the last 20 years, that Children in Need does need someone or something that anchors it. As much as I hate The One Show perhaps strengthening that link and letting Matt and Alex lead the show, at least in the 7-10pm slot, wouldn't be the worst idea. The show does just need something a bit more than someone who appear to turn up on the night to host.
I think the void that Terry has left really highlights how, in the late 90s and early 00s the industry cast aside many presenters of a certain age, and our screens were filled with a load of 20 somethings.
So we have basically skipped a generation of presenters that could now be considered the old guard. In years to come that role will no doubt be filled by the likes Ant & Dec and Dermot when they get older but there's no real equivalent now.
I think the problem is there are plenty of presenters around that could do the job on the night but Terry was a broadcaster - and those are few and far between.
For me, Children in Need has lost a huge amount since the reduction of the regional content to three four minute opts, hidden away without warning. Back in the day, the regions not only had longer opts but also contributions to the national programme as a whole. Yes it was often a shambles, but it did have a real event television feel to it, bringing the network together all in a good cause. I loved seeing regional bits on the national programme (much like I love seeing the national broadcasters linking up during the voting of the Eurovision Song Contest).
I think what the regional bits did was connect the telethon to the fundraising viewers would do themselves, and for a few years the fundraising efforts of individuals, schools and groups kind of got lost amongst the big corporate donations and in Comic/Sport Reliefs case the celebrity challenges.
I think the problem is there are plenty of presenters around that could do the job on the night but Terry was a broadcaster - and those are few and far between.
It's probably the same issue ITV have, where they are very few proper middle aged/older entertainers as presenters. You end up with a situation where someone like Tess Daly is practically the main BBC Light entertainment host. Then are lots of fairly competent autocue readers but not entertainers, like Alex Jones, fronting light entertainment.
In ITV's case it doesn't help that the likes of Jonathan Ross are now out of favour besides his chat show.
I'll be interesting to see how Greg James does, as he's great on the radio, but reinforcing what I've said above, nobody over 40, which in BBC One's case is probably about 75% of the audience will know who he is from Adam.