What's so numbingly depressing about the new series of
The 11 O'Clock Show (which forced its vaguely revamped self onto Channel 4 on October 3) hasn't so much been the show itself, although that
remains as bad as ever. What's irritated SOTCAA over the past
few weeks is the number of clueless idiots on various TV fora
wittering on about how the programme is...well,
y'know...actually not all that bad really. 'Last
night's show was OK,' blethers one dick.
'I actually laughed at some jokes - maybe we should give
it a chance?' blethers another. It suggests not only that many
people don't identify the faults of the current 11
O'Clock Show, but also that they never fully understood
what its faults were in the 'bad old days'
either.
Let's clarify this. Yes, let's. The problems of
The 11 O'Clock Show in its first four
series had fuck-all to do with Iain Lee and Daisy Donovan. Both were
unpleasant, vacuous presenters, admittedly. Both came from a
disinterested autocue culture hell-bent on surfing inferior projects
solely to boost one's CV. We know that. But, although one can
despise them for being involved in and promoting the show, neither
were the instigators of the overall Channel 4 cancer that the
programme represented. Lee and Donovan (who wrote very little of the
show's scripts) were the equivalent of session musicians. They
were in it for the money. If they hadn't done the gig,
there'd have been no shortage of hopefuls waiting to fill
their shoes.
The real problem with The 11 O'Clock Show
- which we made clear in our original article - was in
its concept and attitude. And with this new series, nothing's
changed - it's a case of same shit, different planet. Iain Lee
may have left (apparently in protest at the quality of the scripts,
although most insiders claim he'd been the victim of long-term
elbowing), but all new presenters Jon Holmes and Sarah Alexander
have done is make it less of an easy target. It is, after all,
easier to join a mob of people attacking something if the object of
their derision happens to be a skinny wanker.
As a presenter, Jon Holmes is a Theakstonite. A hair-gelled,
interchangeable boy band of a bloke whose entire body language
(watch his contorting face when Sarah Alexander is talking, just
watch it) suggests someone who is super-slick and media literate
but, ironically, severely uncomfortable being on TV. His
sentence-codas are all delivered in an irritatingly ersatz-Chris
Morris tone, reminiscent of Gina McKee on Brass Eye saying 'And maybe that's the point'. Sarah Alexander is just as bad - her voice wavers
between Tracy MacLeod on A Stab In The Dark and a real-life version of Pamela Stephenson's Jan Leeming impression. They're not as overtly irksome as Lee and Donovan, but the smidgens of warmth that Fred MacCaulay (and even
Brendan Burns, whose corpsing was at least for real) brought to the
show's early days are not there. Neither give the slightest
fuck about the comedy they're reading out, and that's
the problem.
The 11 O'Clock Show had an image
crisis, so it decided to have a makeover. Unfortunately, it changed
all the wrong things. Apparently, the 'nasty' stuff
(largely attributed to second and third series producer Dominic
English and his 'get it in the can so we can go down the
pub' attitude - the homophobia, the misogyny, the bullying,
the lazy swearing, the tireless sex references) was out. In its
place, thanks to a new crack-team of writers wheeled in from Radio 4
staples The Way It Is
and Dead
Ringers, and a new producer (Phil Clarke - the bloke
who produced Radio 1's Loose Talk when it started to go a
bit blokey and dull), was a remit to turn the show around and make
it genuinely satirical.
The problem is that the 'proper satire' promise
misses so many points it's difficult to know where to begin.
Ostensibly, though, proper satire (as the term is understood by
producers) is rarely funny. The third series of the
Friday Night Armistice, for example, was
clearly a victim of this foolhardy boast - the silliness and
whimsical interplay of the earlier two series, which had resulted in
sporadic amusement, was booted out in favour of work-a-day
topicality. And this is so wrong. Because, contrary to belief, for
political comedy to work, comedians do not have to give a fuck about
the week's news. In fact, it's usually funnier if they
don't. The golden rule, however, is that they must be
joyously, deliriously, adrenaline-sluicingly passionate about
COMEDY. With the Lee/Donovan version, the political disinterest was
obvious; the problem was that the latter passion was also
desperately lacking - not just in the presentation and writing, but
in the production as well. It was a show without a soul.
The pledge to remove the 'nasty' stuff also misses
the point. Homophobia, for example, can be funny if it's real
(ie, it reveals a person's stupidity and paranoia), or if
it's overtly ironic (ie, it reveals a character's
stupidity and paranoia). On The 11 O'Clock
Show, the homophobia fell between these two stools, and
deliberately so. It allowed the writers to appease right-on viewers
by wearing the 'ironic' badge, while at the same time
being reliant on a mass audience of plebs (it's no surprise to
learn that The 11 O'Clock Show's
audience was largely made up of Ali G-impersonating adolescents) to
make up the viewing numbers. The inverted commas were there, but
they were detachable at will.
With the new show's feeble 'Garry Bushell as a gay icon' piece,
this attitude seems unchanged - not only was it a cowardly and
insidious attempt to convert those who tarred them with the
homophobia brush in the first place (people who also missed the
point, like those morons on Right to Reply ), it remains just
as cynical: it was clearly a spoof item, but smugly presented as if
it was real - the producers obviously knowing full well that most
people are too dense to know the difference. Inevitably, we're
reminded of the Armistice team pretending to wreck the
Blue Peter time capsule.
This patronising philosophy is less subtly exposed on the
11 O'Clock Show spin-off chat show,
Meet Ricky Gervais , which airs prior to
the current series' end-of-week compilation. Even a tiny child
can see that Gervais is clearly a character, but there are still
a frightening number of idiots who are happily playing into his
hands by moaning about how 'sick' and
'ignorant' he is. The correct way to complain about Ricky Gervais is to
point out that his character is boring and badly-realised, which - ever
dependent on the cackles of the boozy classes - is offensive only in
its blatant hypocrisy. But because it's easier just to call
him an ugly fat twat, his reputation is fed and his continual
presence on Channel 4 becomes assured.
So what does the all-new 11 O'Clock Show offer us? Well, the pseudo-reactionary stuff is
kinda half-in, half out. The homophobia may be absent, but the jokes
are just as lazy, with jibes about celebrities'
physical appearance (Hague's baldness, Branson's beard)
still ruling leeringly supreme. The satirical thrust is just as
listless as before - the same limited set of studenty reference-points
are plundered for watery squibs about cannabis, Posh Spice and the
Tory conference, all smeared - in lieu of proper punchlines - with
a cheap, heavy-handed, 'I've heard of this
act everyone' sex-obsessed vernacular. (The show's 'cut it
in case the plebs don't get it' mentality - pioneered
by past script editors, removing the names of obscure indie
bands from Robin Ince's 'John Peel' routines for
example - is evidently still in effect.) The animation inserts,
like 'Gratuitous Wood' and that tapestry thing about the Royal Family,
all stink - their creators unanimously failing to understand that,
in animated comedy, a good script is everything. And even though
we've been spared the vox pops that Iain Lee prepared for the
new series, the spoof interviews are just as embarrassing, and for
all the wrong reasons. As one forum contributor amusingly noted,
there is nothing more ludicrous and self-important than wearing a
wig to disguise your appearance (as Alexander does to transform
herself into 'Suzannah Waugh') when nobody knows or cares who you are
in the first place.
Also present and correct are the same desperate, bland set of
wannabe comedy whores using the show to promote their under-written
and tedious fucking (and we can't employ the Smash Hits
inverted commas strongly enough here) "characters". George
Jeffrie and Bert Tyler Moore reprise their 'Style
Wankers' routine, last seen in Comedy
Nation . No, guys, we heard you on The Now
Show doing your fucking Bill Clinton material - you'll
clearly do anything to get into the comedy business, except perhaps
care about comedy. Will Smith adapts his boring 'I'm
middle class, sorry everyone' stand-up persona into a
will-this-do character called 'Posh
Boy', clearly hoping to grasp some kind of sub-Ali G
limelight. And comedians like Ian Stone and Sean Meo - both
inoffensive performers from the know-their-place school of stand up
- misguidedly take the work when it's offered (and do their
fucking Bill Clinton material). The implication seems to be that it
doesn't matter how good or bad these performances are - the
important thing is that they're doing them. Bollocks to the
product, they seem to be saying - here is our televisual CV. You
like it, it's shiny.
Well, fuck 'em. Who says comedy shows should be a fucking
'factory' for aspiring writers and performers anyway?
Well, Nev Fountain mainly. But fuck him too. You see, it used to be
a great idea, using comedy shows as workshops - when the Baddiels
and Herrings were writing for Week Ending,
when the Punts and Coogans were voicing Spitting Image , it
was exciting that these people were developing their craft in
public. Why? Because although all these people wanted careers in
comedy (let's be under no naïve illusion about that),
they also wanted to do comedy. PER FUCKING SE. Why? Because
they loved it. It was their life. It was part of their lymphatic
systems. It was a thing of joy that pushed and possessed them
towards the creative genius they would inevitably create as a
result of loving it. What's more, they wanted to make
the shows they worked on as good as possible - not because they were
using them as springboards, but because...well, it was a matter of
personal pride. And listening to such shows was a real lucky dip -
even if people weren't very good, the breathless enthusiasm
and sheer pleasure they took in their work was a delight in itself.
However, with comedy now being big business, everybody wants a
stable career more than they want to write a good joke, and comedy
shows inevitably reflect this. We know for a fact that, should Jon
Holmes ever front a big mainstream BBC1 success with Oh No
It's The Jon Holmes Experience, he will not view
The 11 O'Clock Show as a glory period
in its own right. Why? Because, as far as he's concerned,
topical comedy shows are a means to an end, and - if that involves
denying your roots in the process - then so be it.
It really boils down to how much pleasure is in evidence on the
participants' faces. For example, can you honestly imagine Jon
Holmes writhing around on a carpet in hysterics as he reads his own
material back to himself? No, we can't either, but we
can imagine Jack Docherty and Moray Hunter doing so when they
wrote the 'What do all the buttons do?' sketch for
Alas Smith & Jones. And we know which
one we'd rather watch.
At the end
of the fourth series of The 11
O'Clock Show
, when everyone involved knew the
show was fucked, Iain Lee was seen desperately pitching potential
'wacky' spin-off ideas (interviewing celebrities as a
dog, for example), essentially using the show as a forum for his own pilots - desperately
squeezing whatever airtime he had left into an 'I can do
anything' frenzy. In the opening show of the new series, Jon
Holmes - with his Channel 4 publicity hat on - told viewers that
they 'may recognise Sarah from Smack the Pony'.
And that, for us, sums up the show both past and present.
It's a sad show, created by sad people. Yes, there may be the
occasional funny gag (saying that Minnie Driver was suffering from a
disease called 'Medieval Picture Of The Sun
Head', for example), but the humour simply
evaporates in such a cripplingly unenjoyable context. The truth
remains that comedy can only ever work if the participants can
convince us that they are having a ball. Anything less than that is
worthless, and a betrayal of comedy.
And that is why The 11 O'Clock Show
is still shit. And to even talk of its 'redeeming
features' indicates a wider ignorance of the even greater
decline facing the comedy world as a whole.
No bathos.
|
|
mail from "Mike Scott"
Fri, 15 Dec 2000 16:07:54 -0000
to "Champniss"
Jon Holmes has just written, saying he's asked for some hair gel and a Jamie Theakston annual for Christmas...
Mike
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
|
| |
|
RELATED ARTICLES