BR
I think you've summed it up. The issue is it's far too much music. All the TV stars tend to do musical acts - but the popstars just go on and do their day job, unlike on Comic Relief when they tend to do something a bit different. Of course there should be some music, but it was virtually back to back all night - and IMO the only music really welcomed was the West End stuff which doesn't get a TV airing too often.
The show just needs a bit more fun in it - and I think they need to remember the fundraising aspect too. Don't just tell us how you spend the money, tell us how it was raised too - and by that I don't mean giving a plug to a corporate sponsor with a six-figure cheque!
I also thought the filmed (non-musical) segments were poor this year - the Merlin, Royle Family and Ashes to Ashes specials were just a minute or two each. Now we're not expecting full episodes, but they used to be much longer, generally split over 2 or 3 parts over the evening.
Also, what was the point of Tess Daly. She did the Strictly thing and that was about it, disappearing half way through the night - it's not like Strictly was on at 9am the next day. Terry seemed to do much more alone this year, and I think he was all the better for it, rather than trying to fake an on-screen chemistry with his ever changing co-host.
cylon6 posted:
We watch each year in the vain hope it will get better. It used to be an entertaining show and you would look forward to it, now it's formulaic. The BBC think that because it gets large audiences it's fine as it is, even though in some cases people are probably watching it because it's there and nothing else is on. Live shows are difficult but with a bit of planning you can make entertaining television such as Comic Relief.
There's nothing wrong with the charity, it's the execution of the end product that's the problem I have with it. I'd rather better performers gave up their time and effort to be on the show than tone deaf newsreaders and lead footed soap stars. If that was served up on any other show people would complain. There's not much variety with endless singing. We get singing on The X Factor or those Andrew Lloyd Webber musical shows. There is virtually no other type of entertainment on TV anymore.
Children In Need was never a lavish spectacle years ago, but it was an entertaining one and that's something that it hasn't been for quite a few years.
There's nothing wrong with the charity, it's the execution of the end product that's the problem I have with it. I'd rather better performers gave up their time and effort to be on the show than tone deaf newsreaders and lead footed soap stars. If that was served up on any other show people would complain. There's not much variety with endless singing. We get singing on The X Factor or those Andrew Lloyd Webber musical shows. There is virtually no other type of entertainment on TV anymore.
Children In Need was never a lavish spectacle years ago, but it was an entertaining one and that's something that it hasn't been for quite a few years.
I think you've summed it up. The issue is it's far too much music. All the TV stars tend to do musical acts - but the popstars just go on and do their day job, unlike on Comic Relief when they tend to do something a bit different. Of course there should be some music, but it was virtually back to back all night - and IMO the only music really welcomed was the West End stuff which doesn't get a TV airing too often.
The show just needs a bit more fun in it - and I think they need to remember the fundraising aspect too. Don't just tell us how you spend the money, tell us how it was raised too - and by that I don't mean giving a plug to a corporate sponsor with a six-figure cheque!
I also thought the filmed (non-musical) segments were poor this year - the Merlin, Royle Family and Ashes to Ashes specials were just a minute or two each. Now we're not expecting full episodes, but they used to be much longer, generally split over 2 or 3 parts over the evening.
Also, what was the point of Tess Daly. She did the Strictly thing and that was about it, disappearing half way through the night - it's not like Strictly was on at 9am the next day. Terry seemed to do much more alone this year, and I think he was all the better for it, rather than trying to fake an on-screen chemistry with his ever changing co-host.
I just spent the entire night watching Frasier.