TE
The 50th anniversary show was surprisingly entertaining - an indication of what can be achieved when there is a flow in proceedings and synergy between various parts.
I don't think the show is necessarily too long - rather, how the show has changed in recent years makes it more tedious than it should be. As previous contributors have mentioned, it is chopped up like a modern chat show into bite-sized 15-18 minute slots, which, when repeated over the course of two hours, is thoroughly repetitive and formulaic. It is also frustrating, as the number of guests and items booked injects the programme with a sense of haste and a palpable anxiety to get through a marathon schedule. When things are getting good with a guest, or debate gets lively, it is chopped off in the interests of time and accommodating later items. There is also the associated issue of rigid scheduling - the programme should have reasonable rein to exceed its length when appropriate. RTÉ laughably and persistently boasts about the show being the living room of the nation, while demonstrably failing to accommodate the vagaries of this unique programme.
While acknowledging that it has become more difficult in recent years to arrange stimulating panels of guests, it is far from impossible to achieve. It is patently apparent that this organic model of content is being consistently avoided in the interests of brevity, ease of management and indeed Tubridy’s own limited skills in this department. This has been the single most damaging downfall of the Late Late over the past ten years; if the show does not play to its strengths and unique format, then simply, what is the point? It might as well be the Saturday Night Show, and indeed there has been occasion for more stimulating debate on that in recent times than on the Late Late.
Tubridy also needs to get his act together. There is no point in indulging in personaility disputes, as everyone differs on this front, and by and large I think he is a competent presenter, but he needs to focus on his act. His insessant interjecting during interviews, including just ‘yes’ and ‘yeah’, never mind his opinions, is both highly irritating and adds an unnecessary air of haste to conversation. Gay Byrne’s sterling performance the other night, listening to audience members and just nodding, highlighted in stark contrast Tubridy’s constant gabbing.
He also needs to facilitate debate much more, instead of limiting his role to cutting people off and pushing items to a typically premature close. He also requires more depth and a more engaging presence on issues. His interviews on artistic or cultural or environmental or religious matters are embarrassing for their lack of even a passing iota of interest in the subject, never mind his usual diversions onto what an item is worth, or how much money can be made in a pursuit, or how lucrative such and such an activity can be. He always returns to a base matter, as if this is all his audience wants.
He is a highly competent presenter – superb at links, working a stage and a busy studio environment, and is generally good with young people and quite well informed, but he needs to let his own eagerness take a back seat.
The same for the show itself – its pace needs to slow down and treat its audience with more intelligence.
Oh and please, somebody push director Niamh White over the gallery balcony. She has brought the show back to the 1980s in presentation. It is truly, shockingly bad.
I don't think the show is necessarily too long - rather, how the show has changed in recent years makes it more tedious than it should be. As previous contributors have mentioned, it is chopped up like a modern chat show into bite-sized 15-18 minute slots, which, when repeated over the course of two hours, is thoroughly repetitive and formulaic. It is also frustrating, as the number of guests and items booked injects the programme with a sense of haste and a palpable anxiety to get through a marathon schedule. When things are getting good with a guest, or debate gets lively, it is chopped off in the interests of time and accommodating later items. There is also the associated issue of rigid scheduling - the programme should have reasonable rein to exceed its length when appropriate. RTÉ laughably and persistently boasts about the show being the living room of the nation, while demonstrably failing to accommodate the vagaries of this unique programme.
While acknowledging that it has become more difficult in recent years to arrange stimulating panels of guests, it is far from impossible to achieve. It is patently apparent that this organic model of content is being consistently avoided in the interests of brevity, ease of management and indeed Tubridy’s own limited skills in this department. This has been the single most damaging downfall of the Late Late over the past ten years; if the show does not play to its strengths and unique format, then simply, what is the point? It might as well be the Saturday Night Show, and indeed there has been occasion for more stimulating debate on that in recent times than on the Late Late.
Tubridy also needs to get his act together. There is no point in indulging in personaility disputes, as everyone differs on this front, and by and large I think he is a competent presenter, but he needs to focus on his act. His insessant interjecting during interviews, including just ‘yes’ and ‘yeah’, never mind his opinions, is both highly irritating and adds an unnecessary air of haste to conversation. Gay Byrne’s sterling performance the other night, listening to audience members and just nodding, highlighted in stark contrast Tubridy’s constant gabbing.
He also needs to facilitate debate much more, instead of limiting his role to cutting people off and pushing items to a typically premature close. He also requires more depth and a more engaging presence on issues. His interviews on artistic or cultural or environmental or religious matters are embarrassing for their lack of even a passing iota of interest in the subject, never mind his usual diversions onto what an item is worth, or how much money can be made in a pursuit, or how lucrative such and such an activity can be. He always returns to a base matter, as if this is all his audience wants.
He is a highly competent presenter – superb at links, working a stage and a busy studio environment, and is generally good with young people and quite well informed, but he needs to let his own eagerness take a back seat.
The same for the show itself – its pace needs to slow down and treat its audience with more intelligence.
Oh and please, somebody push director Niamh White over the gallery balcony. She has brought the show back to the 1980s in presentation. It is truly, shockingly bad.
BK
I wholeheartedly agree with that statement by telefis as the show is getting more and more tedious by most weeks. I think that a change in the format for the 50th Series should be a very good idea to let guests speak out more and more while they are on the show.
If Tubridy does not believe in reforming himself as a host as becoming more manly in his role, well what is the point of him doing the Late Late in the first place.
Some examples of interviews have come to mind such as Jerry Springer; Steven Gerrard and that woman who was on recently being into angels.
This is one video in where the show itself has become a joke
I thought it was utterly cringeworthy and embarrassing to watch.
If Tubridy does not believe in reforming himself as a host as becoming more manly in his role, well what is the point of him doing the Late Late in the first place.
Some examples of interviews have come to mind such as Jerry Springer; Steven Gerrard and that woman who was on recently being into angels.
This is one video in where the show itself has become a joke
I thought it was utterly cringeworthy and embarrassing to watch.