Don't know if this has been posted before, if so, I apologise in advance for being a twat. For anyone that hasn't seen it, you should check out the show Black Mirror, it has 3 parts and is on 4oD. Some really harrowing stuff about what potentially could happen, worst case scenario with new technology. It's well worth the watch if you're in to fantastic TV
A few people on here have been tossing themselves off over this programme. Never watched it myself, but may have a butchers.
Just watched the final part. Personally i loved all of them, last one a little less than the others, but still all of them have been miles above anything else i've seen recently on tv.
Seen the second one and recorded the third that was on earlier, never used to be a fan of Charlie Brooker but dead set and Black Mirror have been top T.V, although he has obviously been heavily influenced by George Orwell and 1984.. Some of the underlying messages in the second episode were very interesting!!
It's better than most stuff on our screens but I wasn't very impressed because he's shown he can do better. I preferred the second episode as it was more focused in its satire (as it's more relevant) and much darker than the other two. But as I said on here, the last twenty minutes appeared to be a dumbed-down 'Network' for those who are too lazy to download it or watch it in parts on YouTube. I've had a problem with Brooker ever since the 10 o'clock show though, so I am biased.
That was amongst the worst pieces of 'comedy' tv i've ever seen. I tend not to judge him on that as he's shown he can do much better.
I know, and I was a huge fan but how the hell could he sell out like that? He looked like he was on the verge of a panic attack every time he opened his mouth. And his hair! I wrote an article about that show, if anyone is interested I can post it. It's a big read though.
I only watched a bit of it and then ignored it. It was painfully obvious how **** it was. I'd rather ignore when someone sells out and focus more on the good work they produce. It's probably because i barely watched it that it doesn't annoy me as much. Please do post it!
It was written for a magazine I was putting together but in the end it just sort of folded into nothing so you're probably only the third person to read this, so thanks for showing an interest. One big panic attack of a show It would be unwise of me start this article with the premise of left versus right as the two increasingly meet in the middle, but Richard Littlejohn starts every opinion with “The problem with the left is...” so allow me to use it as a template. To be liberal comes with a frustrating obligation to all that is just, in an unjust world. Whoever’s beliefs are ultimately right, a liberal will always understand the mindset of a conservative, whereas the conservative will never fully understand the mind and heart of a liberal, not deep down. But the left has found some comfort in satire. Through the gloomy years of Thatcher and the bleak years of Major, we had Spitting Image. It was not only smart, it nearly made a difference, had Neil Kinnock not scored an own goal in stoppage time on the eve of the 1992 General Election. Today, liberals enjoy a greener sense of freedom, but its youth have grown up in a somewhat sanitised Britain thanks to the Blair years. Note, the only thing worse than Hare coursing is a ban on Hare coursing, which leaves the question who’s being impervious to whose feelings, the left or the right? When war was declared in the Middle East, the left was gifted the opportunity to parody Blair and particularly President George W Bush. But it didn’t do a particularly clever job of it. To anyone that took a step back, it was frankly embarrassing. Perhaps Christopher Hitchens said it best on Bill Mayer’s Real Time... “I’ve been on The Jon Stewart show, I’ve been on your show, I’ve seen you make about five George Bush IQ jokes per night, there’s no one I know that can’t do it. This is now the joke that stupid people laugh at.” Which brings me on to 10 O’clock Live on Channel 4. Let’s break this monstrosity down. We must start with its audience, young and left wing of course. Each member is asked only one question on admission – “Do you read the Guardian? Yes? Come on through.” Not only are these pale versions of culturally incensed people easily pleased, they are also made hideously visible, so we can now pick out each smug member in the background under moderate lighting; each character as predictable as their H&M attire will allow. The show is hosted by four presenters, each one bringing their intellect, or chic, whichever one, to the table. Fair enough, but you can practically smell the team of writers behind our first two: Jimmy Carr rifles through his opening gambit in his witless self styled way, via a sort of mathematic formula. “David Cameron claims the Big Society is not simply a cover to distract people from spending cuts, of course not. That’s the Royal Wedding, the Olympics and Larry the cat” he says. Which reads as d x s + 2 = laughter. It’s done in the same way that those dogshit guest presenters on HIGNFY do, reading the autocue like it’s a number plate. Lauren Laverne - the go-to presenter, a woman that can’t keep down a job, TV’s equivalent of Keith Gillespie. She ticks every ****ing box on a TV researcher’s sheet and as such is an automatic selection. She handles the transitions like a veteran, which she is, but when she contributes in the semi crescent, semi impromptu discussion, she is of no value. Culture show: Yes. Knowledge: No. Fraud: Yes. Time for the big signings – you would think. I stated in the title that this show is like one big panic attack, due mainly to David Mitchell’s break neck verbal release, but also in the way it presents itself within Charlie Brooker, who seems so lost on his big stage debut, that one would forgive him for running out of the studio half way through to catch some fresh air. Brooker is something of an unknown to the TV audience at large. He is however, to a cult following, TV’s anti-hero for his column in the Guardian and his Screenwipe show on BBC Four: Strange to see him on a mainstream show then? Yes, next question. Is he a sellout? Well...the jury’s out. The evidence: NO, because who would blame him at 39 for making a break for the big time? MAYBE, because he’s had to compromise his morals by rubbing shoulders with the very people he’s mocked for a decade. YES, because in his Guardian article he announced the end of Screenwipe because he felt he had been too rude to people on TV and has since mellowed, AND conscious of the fact he had ‘become one of them’ - apologised profusely for ever making it. The trouble with Brooker as a presenter is that he struggles with the nuances of live TV, unlike Laverne. He’s not a comedian by profession, unlike Carr and he lacks wit, unlike Mitchell and so he is left looking like the odd one out. So much so, those who don’t know Brooker, must wonder what his niche is, and those that do must see a man that has to put on an act. He applies an affected cynical tone to pluck half baked opinions from his reserves just to get him through conversations, which lack any real conviction. The strain is evident in his face, he looks like a man still uncertain if he’s in the right place, and whether he can survive another 14 episodes of a programme his heart’s not really in. If he deals like Faust and this is just a springboard to greater things, then he will look back at this time as a tough but vital education, or else he will look back at it as a lesson, where he made a wrong turn and had a nervous breakdown in front of the nation. And having purged himself of impurity, he will be able to reflect on what was a ‘strange old time’ in his life. As he mulls over these pervading thoughts, sat like a nervous school boy, he looks to David Mitchell to save him from drowning. Mitchell obliges, but whilst he rescues one of Brooker’s tentative one liners, he also impedes by speaking over the end of his statement, so now we don’t know what Brooker’s point was after all, and so he hasn’t drowned, but been drowned out. Mitchell can’t help himself. He has it all, he’s on top of his game right now, he’s the people’s champion, he’s carrying the entire programme on his shoulders, and he is basking in the responsibility. His co-presenters know that; unfortunately so does he. The man is blessed with wit and brainpower, and the quicker and more aggressive his streams of verbal onslaughts become, the funnier he is. That is a gift. But episode 1 is ruined by his inability to hold back. Over confident, Mitchell directs a thousand words at 100mph into a single question like it’s a race against time, which it is. In reply, his guest will inadvertently insinuate something or other, opening the merest gap for Mitchell to intersect. As a cackle filters through the audience who have spotted the look on Mitchell’s face which implies ‘you know what I’m thinking’, he pounces on his guest’s fumble and spends a whole minute orally exploring the comedy avenues that have opened up in front of him. In his discussion with the absurdly unrealistic Milo Yiannopoulos in episode 5, Mitchell cuts his guest short no less than four times, after only three seconds into his reply. When his guest finally makes his point, Mitchell retorts with a put down that is greeted by a now Harry Hill like audience who give him a standing ovation for his comments and in return jeer the villain, and so a political debate turns into a pantomime. By the end of the show we realise Mitchell is both interviewer and interviewee. The hosts could do without the encouragement. Even when Charlie Brooker treads familiar ground with his written segment, his material is greeted with overzealous laughter that hinders his usually stylish scrutiny of the news, and so it’s more arsewipe than newswipe. The audience are by this point actually pre-empting the punchline. And that’s when you realise the format is all wrong. Brooker and Mitchell are in truth prized square pegs in very coarse round holes. It’s ultimately a show that can’t decide what it is. On one hand it serves to mock the news yet seeks to usefully address it on the other. It tries to fit too many concepts into 47 minutes. On the whole, I feel uneasy watching such trite. It’s as dizzying as Dancing on Ice and as disposable as Mock the Week. I will not give this show a rating, I will simply compare it to its natural predecessor, the forgotten-about ’11 o’clock show’ which ran on the same channel over a decade ago. It was assisted by Ricky Gervais and Ali G, but I will take them away and say that it was still a better show, chiefly because it didn’t think so highly of itself. For anyone that does remember it, that’s a pretty damning verdict.
Great article I have to agree, from what i saw of Brooker on the show he did seem unnaturally obvious. It was like he was overplaying the caricature that he uses in Screenwipe for some cheap laughs from the audience, in a sort of 'lets all laugh at the funny angry man' manner. When you say that he has sold out for going back on his criticisms of those he now works with, i think that's true, but there are still inferences in his work that suggest he has the same opinion he always did. (For me this is the show about fat people in 15 Million Merits, which is similar to Total Wipeout that he's panned on a few occasions.) I can see where you're coming from with David Mitchell as well. It was almost as though he was showing off in a childish way, trying to prove that he was better than the guests because he could make the audience of prize idiots guffaw. It's a wonder anybody agreed to appear on the show! Have you ever written for any newspapers or magazines besides the one you were putting together? If not you should! I'd definitely read more of your articles
I thought all three were watchable, but not fantastic by any means. I'm a Brooker fan, I loved Screenwipe/Newswipe etc and used to love his column in PC Zone magazine while I was at school (superb frankly), but while he tends to come up with decent concepts for his drama writing they just aren't fleshed out enough to last the duration of a TV show.
Mitchell really pisses me off at times. I'm sorry you had to read all of that I'd forgotten how long it was. In my head it was only three paragraphs! Thanks for reading it though. I wanted to create a bi-monthly on-line magazine, of which I created one, but I'm just a lazy bastard and didn't put the second one together, and seeing as one of the articles was about Keys and Gray getting the sack, I don't think it'd be newsworthy, sadly. I'm working on a few different things at the minute, but it all returns to my laziness. What about you? I'm wanting to do another magazine because I've got a lot of spare time at the minute. If you wanna write something for it let me know and I could put it together. I really need to get off my ass, which is growing more flaccid day-by-day.
No it's fine, i enjoyed it. It was nice to read something substantial. sounds like me! Everything's a good idea it's just getting around to actually doing it that's the problem! I'd love to write for something, i haven't before but something of that ilk interests me. I'd probably not be able to write much for the foreseeable future as i've got heaps of work on for exams. If i have any substantial free time then i'll give it a go though
