Brian Edwards Media

Review of an Unnamed TV Programme


What Next?

My name is Brian and I’m a television addict. My addiction began when I was 10 and holidaying with my Aunt Jessie and Uncle Donald at their maisonette in Bromley in Kent.

Donald and Jessie’s TV had a 12-inch screen and delivered a rather muddy black and white picture. A rather bluish black and white to be precise, resulting perhaps from the limited luminance which the set was apparently capable of delivering. Drawing the curtains helped and added somewhat to one’s viewing excitement.

The first TV programme I ever saw was a stage production of Beckett’s Waiting For Godot. I have to say that this is not my favourite play, if indeed ‘play’ is the word. Not to put too fine a point on it, I would rather eat worms than sit through another performance of Mr Beckett’s renowned oeuvre. Call me philistine if you will. I don’t care.

But at the age of 10, I was transfixed, not by being kept waiting for Godot, but by the flickering images on the screen in front of me. “Hooked” would be a more accurate description. A lifelong addiction to the box had begun.

Where is this going, Brian, I hear you ask?

Well, last night two good samaritans offered me the prospect of a cure for my addiction, an anti-television drug so potent that, within minutes of taking it, I was writhing in agony on the living room floor, begging my good wife to TURN IT OFF… PLEASE!!!

“Pull yourself together, Brian!” she replied icily, “it’s not that bad. Give it a chance at least. It’s only the first episode of five.”

The woman is a covert sadist! “Not that bad! Only the first episode of five!” The bloody thing was dire. An hour of talking heads, in a dimly lit room, answering essentially the same question over and over and over again: “What do youse all reckon to the rapidly increasing advances in human technology then?”

Not that bad!? I’ve learnt more from a single episode of QI than I did last night.

Anyway here’s my layman’s opinion on how to save this turkey. Scrap the studio extravaganza; reduce the number of contributors, so that we get depth and development of ideas rather than headlines from each of them; and stop raving on about what a great “conversation” you’re having with the viewers. Quotes from half a dozen viewers and the results of a few polls do not qualify as a “conversation”. And please, please, just settle down.

There’s a great idea here, but this show could end forever my love affair with the box. Can’t have that, now can we?

 

 

 

 

4 Comments:

  1. I would say you have a remarkably high tolerance for the unpalatable if this is the straw that broke the camel’s back. Needless to say I can’t stand anything remotely similar to things like this. On the upside at least we got an amusing read out of it!

  2. Glad to hear I am not the only one, normally I could enjoy this sort of thing.
    Now they are talking about eating insects, what is wrong with sheep?
    They look like insects from afar.

  3. And they cut Masterchef off just before the judging of the first cook of “Sweets Week”! Bastards!

    Two points – Nigel Latta grizzled about all the “good” that could have been done if we hadn’t blown $26 million on the flag referendum. Irrespective of whether you agree with him that it was a poor use of money, his latest effort was made with substantial public broadcasting money. Doesn’t the same critique apply?

    Also, I seem to recall something similar on TV a few years ago, that made three programmes that examined future possibilities under the headings of climate change, political union with Australia, and increased Maori sovereignty. And the critique then was it was facile, as all it did was extrapolate out existing trends, rather than anticipating new ones.

  4. Pleased to have missed it, cringing at the description! I must remember to skip it next week.

Make a Comment