Well it’s been a long time coming and the road has been torturous but finally this evening we will see if Don’t Scare the Hare was worth bothering with in the end. It looks like a, er, very different proposition from the rather more straight-laiced pilot of legend from about 18 months ago. It’s likely to appeal to kids, but in this weather will any be watching? And despite putting out a big press release saying Miranda Hart was going to be involved, she’s not actually in it at all.
It starts at 5:25pm on BBC1.
Also starting tonight is the fourth series of Who Dares Wins.
The third saw quite a few couples come and go, with none of them coming close to the eight wins achieved by James Pearson and Daniel Chantrey. And for heavens’ sake, why were the vast majority of them man-lady? 😯
That said, some of them were lovely – especially Tex and Alison, and also Rob and Asha, who impressed enormously with their knowledge of Batman characters and Scottish football clubs (naming 24 of the latter).
Some weren’t, though. Alex and Liz certainly didn’t go down well with Travis 😉 – but the male half of Jon and Margaret was far, far worse…
Jeepers H Crackers, if ever I met him on the street, I think I’d do seriously well to control myself. He was one of the most arrogant pricks I’ve ever seen on TV!! 😡 😡 😡 😡
Saying that £50k winners Cassy and Clint had “won enough already” when they’d only won one game – and saying it straight in Kernick’s face that he wanted his job. And I didn’t detect any real chemistry between him and Margaret.
Stupid arrogant bastard… 😡 😡 😡
…Oops, I’ve gone too far there. 😳
Anyway, will this series see more same-gender pairings, and will there be a run like James and Daniel’s? And will there be any lists with strange answers – like the one on countries of Asia? 😉
8pm on BBC1.
We should be having some fresh lists this since since nearly all of them used on the last series was also used on the US show, The Money List.
What do you mean, Alex and Liz?
“What do you mean, Alex and Liz?”
Well, it was one year ago… 😉
To jog your memory, Alex and Liz actually beat Jon and Margaret (hooray! 😈 😈 ;)), but then blew £5k on their first money list, on the 20 countries whose names are last alphabetically – they went for Yugoslavia, which of course ceased to exist a long time ago.
They only won one more game before being beaten – and I do remember you saying that you were glad, because you didn’t like them. 😉
Also, I’m pretty sure Alex was gay.
Jon was still far, far worse than them, though… 😡
Can someone please fire the idiot who did the soundedit on DSTH?
Theres no need for sound inserts whilst the contestants talk..
I didn’t realise that the hare was so *big*. It’s the resurrection of Dusty Bin!
It’s… bizarrely surreal. I think I’ll be haunted by the occasional close-ups of the hare’s pupils dilating. I wouldn’t put it past this being a lost Beckett play.
I don’t actually think I hate it, and I’m not quite sure why. I think it’s Sue Perkins’ attitude. It’s nicely sardonic.
My verdict: this is awful.
I didn’t expect much from those YouTube clips actually… It wouldn’t feel out of place on the CBBC channel, but I think it’s slightly insulting on almost-Prime Time BBC One! There’s certainly a place for ‘silly’ shows at this time (cf, Total Wipeout and Hole in the Wall), but this takes the idea to the extreme!
Yeah, I was about to take this back. With no changes at all except for the age of the participants this would be perfect on cbbc. But it’s not right primetime or outside of the kids’ programming
I think if we were doing comparisons, the closest things I can think of would be shows like Get Your Own Back, or even CopyCats in terms of the presenting style, voiceover script (with a couple of exceptions in some of the one-liners) and set design.
I don’t quite get the scoring system either – 3 lives and 3 carrots is surely crying out for a “lose one life for every scare” system? 3 or 0 makes no sense to me at all.
On another note, emphasising that neither team knows how the other fared before telling them anyway seems completely pointless. Or is that just me?
This is terrific. Loving it so far, a perfect show for kids at this time of the evening.
It’s better than Sing If You Can.
It might be. Will have to watch more of it to make a fair judgement.
But I think the target audience of this show: 4-10 year olds will really enjoy Don’t Scare the Hare. It’s not in peak time, it’s in a 5:35pm timeslot which is absolutely fine for this type of programming. Frankly, I think it’s better than Hole in the Wall and Walk on the Wildside – two shows which have occupied that slot in recent years. It’s enjoyable.
That’s the problem I’ve got. This should be on CBBC, not on BBC One Saturday evenings.
It seems the kind of thing that might work better if there was someone like Vic and Bob hosting it.
Though considering its lead in it might be the best place for it considering the budget and all
Also 3 games and a endgame? Thats it?
Its tied with Sing at the moment but its finding new ways to annoy every minute…
It seems good-naturedly stupid, and I’ve got so much time for Sue Perkins that it’s hard to completely dislike anything with her in. Nevertheless, the hare is so mechanical and so inorganic that it’s hard to make any sort of emotional connection with it and not scaring it. Hole In The Wall had very clear cause and effect: you get hit by the wall, you fall in the water. (Probably.) The hare, sorry, HARE, is so obviously rule-bound that the cause and effect, while clear, doesn’t feel as thematically neat as even – say – The Crystal Maze‘s “three red lights and you get locked in”.
The rapid-cut direction doesn’t make the show any easier to watch and only serves to reinforce that the central HARE effect is pretty repetitive and lame.
The actual format isn’t too bad, though nothing brilliant, the style of the… And the direction is painful, making the against the clock games, especially, difficult to follow. Overall, though… Might watch it once more, and the show takes just the right amount of piss out of itself to get away with its slot for me.
(Although the first two games would work better for me if they weren’t all or nothing, so removing a carrot per scare in this case; and no consolation prize on a show like this feels utterly wrong. Give the losing team a carrot shaped trophie or something.)
Dear God, somebody shoot me now! This is the best BBC1 can do on a Saturday? There is not one thing about this programme that isn’t annoying…
Also – recognising that this is the sort of nerdy, unscientific, irrational criticism that gets me unduly annoyed when I see it coming from others – I was loooooooooooong over the 1950s comic book typeface for TV shows even by, say, Richard Hammond’s Blast Lab.
*blushes at own hypocrisy*
I was annoyed when I saw it on Marvel vs Capcom 3.
I hate that font, even when it’s used in the right place.
One final point: did anyone spot the credits began with:
Featuring:
The Hare
Whoever made this format:
Is this the best you could think up? If it didn’t have the hare it would never of been commissioned – nothing original at all.
4/10
Would be a decent kids show with kids playing (though agree completely with what Brig said earlier re: lives and not knowing scores). Absolutely not suitable for an audience over the age of 8.
The target age range are people aged under 8. That’s why it’s in a 5:30pm timeslot. If you want a show for adults, watch TV after 6pm.
It might need a more focussed marketing campaign.
Yeah, uhh… If the target age range is ‘eight and under’ then… Why is it on BBC1 outside the CBBC slots?
It was truly awful. It was so bad it felt like watching a train crash.
It looks like someone has tried to express video gaes in the real world and it makes it look so slow, corny and drawn out.
The show is called Don’t Scare the Hare but it really is distracting and slows down the tempo of the show. What is the point of the hare other that to give a twee reason for having 3 lives?
I can’t believe the BBC plan to show more episodes of this drivel.
I erm… I… *cough*…
I loved it. Yes, it would be absoloutley better suited to CBBC because of the set, hare, games, everything.
But at least it isn’t 101 Ways…
Also it seems that the finale should have been something physical rather than having to answer 3 fairly simple quiz questions for £15k.
Sing if you can is even better tonight than last week’s episode. It’s good.
I said I didn’t like Stacey last week but having watched the 2nd episode, she does have great chemistry with Keith. They work well together.
I thought it was a poor man’s Whole 19 Yards.
As a children’s game show, with maybe a family or children playing, I think this would work. But marketed as it is and without children playing, it’s a bit TOO silly to stomach.
On a production point of view – I found the colours very hard to distinguish between selected answers / stepped on podia, and also the numbers in the text were difficult to distinguish (the 1 looked like the 7 etc).
It’s a bit over produced, but there’s nothing really wrong with DSTH. It’s not ground breaking, it’s treading ground done before. Overall, I’d take The Whole 19 Yards over this, easily. (Yes I know it was on a different channel!)
I’m not sure it’ll make it’s entire run in its current timeslot.
And I meant “its” in the last sentence, before and grammar police come along. Move along, there’s nothing to see here – which, I notice, is what I’d say about Don’t Scare The Hare.
‘A bit’ is a bit of an understatement there. And in my previous sentence 😉
I don’t think the format is that bad, it is just on the wrong channel as pointed out, should be on CBBC, certainly not a show that should be on BBC1 featuring adults.
I have not seen any comments about the voiceover that was awful, sounded like she did not want to be there.
Hmm, well just watched it.
It’s better than the pilot, let’s get that out of the way. Nice set.
I’m not convinced about the use of spot tunes in honesty, it felt a bit half-arsed. However the music was alright was that Richard Jacques off of video games on the credits for this?
Leading onto the comedy element, I didn’t think that much of Sue Perkins, mainly because the voiceover script seemed to have Richard Hammond all over it, and he’s rather better at delivering it slightly apologetically.
Thought the alarm clock game was OK, although the frequent VTs of the Hare grew quite annoying, it’s a big shame it’s not something done as live. As noted in the pilot once you’ve seen the hare do his spinny thing there’s not an awful lot left, cute as it is.
I thought the Pond Memories game was rubbush although I liked the set – neither fun nor particularly interesting. It’s a 21 step memory game I didn’t really need to see twice thanks very much. I agree with the above comments re the scoring system, in fact that’s basically how it worked at the pilot. Hot hare balloons was OK but went on a bit.
The final had a much nicer set-up than the pikot did, and it was good to see Bradbury just let them get on with it in the main.
It could have been worse, although the editing is a bit drastic.
Disliked Pond Memories – liked the set up
You can ignore that last line if you want, iPads don’t like scroll bars.
I think this show will do very well. As long as we don’t have Scots on it every week.
I’m not prepared to call it a good show, but it gets surprisingly many things right. The set fits the bill. Jason Bradbury was reasonable. I liked the contestant introductions, as contestant introductions go. (If we like the use of spot tunes as beds on Fighting Talk – and we do – then I like the principle on TV, though it’s not nearly as artfully done here.) Two of the three games were passably entertaining, though the middle game was FFWD-worthily slow. I quite liked the questions in the endgame; it felt slow, but this passes for a respectable pace considering the money on the line. Sue Perkins is neither the new John Sachs nor the new Jonathan Pearce, but worked OK in context. I liked the music.
Obviously it gets a lot wrong, and when the show’s whole Macguffin gets it off to a bad start, then it’s a long uphill struggle. I really don’t know how this show made it past the pilot, because it really can’t be cheap. Nevertheless, remarkably, not disastrous.
Problem with the Fighting Talk comparison for spot tunes to introduce contestants: on TV, something has to happen visually while the tune briefly plays. In this case, that something was ‘everybody stands around and looks awkward for a few seconds’. Yet another reason why this never-should-have-got-past-the-pilot programme – despite the best efforts of the usually sublime Sue Perkins – is easily the worst game show to have aired on a Saturday night for quite a while IMO!
I’m assuming that Sue Perkins didn’t actually write her own script, though.
Since the beginning, the setup of the show has always felt like one of those classic awful B-movies where they came up with the name and the poster art before bothering to write the script. Here the producers knew they could sucker in an audience with a four-foot robotic hare and a rhyming title, and seemingly left the rest to some brainless intern to copy from the Big Book of Game Show Cliches.
How many times have we seen this format? First we have a number of rounds worth a fixed number of points. Then, near the end, we do a round worth a potential buttload of points, thus rendering the first rounds no more than elaborate preemptive tiebreakers. Finally, we have a sudden format shift where, having determined our winners by a series of physical stunts, we suddenly ask them what the capital of Botswana is. It shows a lack of creativity on the part of the creators that they can’t find a suitably impressive finale for the show. And notice that it’s always physical to trivia, not the other way around. It’d be odd to have a third round of Mastermind where the contenders must assemble a black chair bought from IKEA.
I’m having a lot of problems figuring out who this show is supposed to be aimed towards. The cartoonish setting makes me think they’re targeting children, but then why have adults playing for not-quite-life-changing amounts of money? Surely it’d work better with teams of children or families. If you are going to have adults as your contestants, at least make the challenges a bit more outlandish. Kids tune in to watch adults make right old arses of themselves, and seeing them dressed up in slightly silly costumes doing rather mundane physical challenges just ain’t going to cut it anymore. If they want to market this towards adults, they could probably get away with it if they ratcheted up the surreal humor and piss-taking to stratospheric levels.
The directing was rather clumsy. Yes, I know you have an animatronic hare. Yes, I know the name of the show. Please stop interrupting the flow of gameplay to shove them both down my throat. This is made all the worse during the timed games where your insistence on editing in the blasted rabbit prevented you from keeping a running clock on the screen.
I was expecting it to be bad, so kudos for matching my expectations. However, It wasn’t terrible. I also recognize that I’m not likely their target audience. Since it rose from the initial level of malodorous in pilot stage to being merely bad, perhaps that’s an achievement of some sort.
To be fair – It’s not as Golden Snitch as some shows – 10 vs 4 in the final game, iirc, vs the possible six in the previous games. It’s more significant than the general knowledge round in The Krypton Factor and the MSSN GVWL SRND in Only Connect, both of which are brilliantly balanced to not usually carry more (or at least, not much more) weight than the previous rounds, but it’s no Keynotes (£30 on the first game, £60 on the second, £120 on the third) or even Final Season Get Your Own Back (Where everything before came down to a single question advantage)
I feel like this will by my new 101 Ways. A show I absolutely adore, yet the only other fans of the show are half my age. TT_TT
I’m not quite sure what the problem is. The only thing I’d want changed is a 1 scare = -1 point, like everybody’s saying.
The sillyness I don’t mind, there’s enough ‘we don’t take this seriously either’ for it to get away with it, imo. The format is… Been done, but that’s not really a problem for me, with some minor niggles aside (no consolation prize in a show who’s tone really doesn’t benefit from lacking one; the scoring; etc), the editing makes what would otherwise be a take-it-or-leave-it, reasonable watch but which doesn’t do anything interesting and makes it very difficult for me to justify watching more than once more (Which I’ll be doing mainly to see how much game variety there seems to be)
I mean, it’s not quite as bad as the US “Cut away to contestant talking heads commenting on how they did in the game they cut away from before cutting back” thing, but, not being obscene doesn’t make the editing choices good (I can live with the random use of songs, it doesn’t do anything for me the way they’ve used them but it’s a reasonable choice, it’s the way they used the hare and cutaways and… Ugh… that bothers me, particularly in games like the alarm clock one.)
Nothing special but watchable + Really bad editing = Hard to endure.
Before reading any of the comments here, I’ll just say that I’ve watched the first game, then the rest of the show on fast forward as much as possible. There was much facepalmage from the people in the room.
I have a rather large confession I feel I have been keeping hidden from everyone here for far to long now…
I really liked 101 Ways… I thought it knew what its place was in the schedule and filled in the “silly game show” slot really well! The questions were interesting enough and, while a lot of the exits did involve being ejected from heights attached to a bungee rope, they were subtly different enough to make it a little bit entertaining.
I completely agree that there was plenty wrong with it, but we’ve all seen far, far worse things before and since, and tonight is a prime example of one such thing. The games were dull, repetitive and badly edited, the show’s USP had exhausted itself by the end of Round 1, the end game was easy and uninteresting (answering three not-especially-hard multiple choice questions correct out of five doesn’t give much tension at all!) and the commentary was amiable enough but not particularly special.
There, I said it. I now await the torrent of abuse I no doubt deserve for such an opinion and will speak no more.
Most of 101 Ways criticism, as I recall, revolved around the sheer, insane, quantities of padding – It was a 20 minute (tops) game stretched over a 45 minute slot… Which combined with very little variety in the ways to leave.
Hare, meanwhile, while lacking anything interesting going for it, and having horrific editing (Though not as bad as a fair few US shows), seems to fill the slot well.
Well 20 minute game over a 60 minute slot.
Grr… this makes me really angry, because they’ve kinda got all the elements they need (pretty much), and they’ve missed the target by a wide margin by using them in misguided ways.
Notwithstanding the painful pilots, it’s the end product that matters. And the end product could have been really good – the set design is really fantastic given the space they’ve got, and some of the music matches the mood well enough. The hare itself is quite imaginative, and Bradbury kind of throws himself into it OK. Perkins is a bit “much” but not turnoffable.
BUT… the main problems:
1) The editing. When something bad happens, we really need to see reaction shots (MCU or better) of the participants. What we don’t need to see is a post-production animation, nor do we want to see this, identically, three times per game.
2) The scoring system is all kind of messed up. Just three games to decide the outcome of who goes into the final? And surely, SURELY to create a bit more ‘differential’ between the teams they should lose a carrot for each Scaring they trigger.
3) The games are actually pretty good considering, but the scoring format means they appear overlong for the amount of difference it makes to a team’s fortunes.
4) Is this really the game show intended for teams of three grown adults? Really? Wouldn’t family or mixed-aged teams have been far, far better? I know there is the principle that kids actually like to see adults make fools of themselves, but it came across as embarrassing.
5) The dressed-up 3 out of 5 endgame is terribly weak. There’s a far, FAR better way they could have used the same set up and kit for the quiz, but I’m going to keep that for myself.
The minor gripes:
1) I suppose I didn’t miss Miranda as the hare that much, but it still does seem like a bit of a missed opportunity for some laffs.
2) The horrendous use of pop music. If you’re going to have a make believe fantasy land, stick with it. You’ve got a pretty nice bank of specially composed fairytale music, don’t spoil the mood with Christine Aguilera or Bloody Katy Bloody Perry just to make it look young and trendy.
3) In almost every regard, it felt like the hare was meant to be a rabbit, but rabbit doesn’t rhyme with hare. Hares and carrots? Really?
They could’ve pulled a rabb… I mean a hare out of the hat at the last moment, but they’ve made some pretty bad decisions to cancel out everything they’ve done well.
I don’t suppose the public will mind all that much; it just disappoints me that this country is lacking enough decent producers and directors who can’t design a format or shoot a simple game properly.
*Glances at his 2010 Gibson’s edition Hare and Tortoise*
…What’s wrong with carrot fueled hares? (I mean, sure, I prefer the dice based jugging the hare thing of earlier editions of the game to the card based hare spaces – I think the 1d6 + race position, look up on table, is fundamentally more elegant than drawing a card, but…)
Josette inflicts the coup de grace on Cyrille (aka Schtroumfy) on Les 12 Coups De Midi. Cyrille didn’t know that Lauren Bacall was married to Humphrey Bogart and ran out of time in Le Coup Fatal. He leaves with 71 games played (4 less than the record) and 356186 € in cash and prizes (about 61k less than the record)
http://www.programme-tv.net/news/tv/15944-cyrille-les-douze-coup-de-midi-critiques/
Interesting and informed analysis in these comments. What no one has mentioned yet its the public reaction… Search for the show on twitter, facebook, etc. I have never seen such negative reaction. Sue Perkin’ twitter reaction is especially amusing.
The bemused look on my eight year old daughters as she turned to me and said, ‘ Dad, what IS this?!’ was all I needed to know they”ve got this one horribly wrong, I’d be amazed if it makes the full 9 week scheduled run.
First output from the Beeb’s new Salford studios isn’t it? Not a good start.
It’s quite rare that any game show gets anything better than a 50/50 reaction on first airing. But here, the opinion is around 85/15 and, moreover, the 85% hate it whereas the 15% mildly like it.
It think it is mainly a shame that everyone has gone ‘OMG a robotic hare WTF!!!!!’ without a bit of a closer look. The Digital Spy forums hate everything anyway, but if kids aren’t liking it then something has gone wrong somewhere – maybe it would have got an easier ride five-ten years ago when kids programming had more of an influence on the mainstream channels.
Indeed – I’d expect that sort of thing from the American general public (Who are so uptight as to bemoan Windwakers graphics), but I thought the British public could take a bit of sillyness. The editing, though, deserves all the bile that’s being thrown at the Hare himself.
…Still, the ratings were awful across the board last night, with only BGT, Doctor Who and (arguably) Casualty have anything decent.
(Besides which, Hare only looked silly by television standards to me… No way is it as silly as Katamari Demancy)
Didn’t most people in the UK point fingers at ‘Cel-da’ back in Wind Waker times? I remember it being the case.
4.5m watched Sing if You Can last night*. Not bad for a show people were saying would rate terribly.
Don’t Scare the Hare only began with 1.9m!
*at 7.55pm
Interesting use of statistics, according to lots of posts on DS the average was more around the 3.3m mark. So it’s basically lost 40% of it’s week 1 viewers. Once again Endemol Joe backs a hit!
Also the figure is a whole one million viewers down to that The Whole 19 Yards had last year.
Chris Addison was weirdly giving endorsement to Sing if You Can on Twitter last night. I doubt it would’ve affected the ratings in anyway but it was interesting to see.
Also less than 2m on a BBC1 Saturday night is unacceptable. If they can’t get it above 3m at least then this might challenge for Judgment Day’s record.
That’s really poor for both Sing if you can and Don’t scare the hare. On average SIYC dropped by 2m viewers!Who dares wins did realatively decently when you consider it was up against BGT.
Perhaps it’s just me, but I can’t help feeling this got the comission because they’d already built the hare for the pilot.
I don’t have much of an issue with it being CBBC fodder, as this is where all these shows seem to be being repeated anyway (save 101WTLAGS, interstingly). What I do object to is a show being produced that focuses more on its props than the actual mechanics (again, like 101WTLAGS). Perhaps a reedit can save this from become too repetitive, or maybe some games with variable scoring.
Also, apropos of nothing, Jason Bradbury is now officially my pick should Dave decide to make new episodes of Robot Wars, don’t ask me why, it just feels right somehow
It’s actually a different hare to the pilot – the original one could only move up and down a track on a stick and looked a lot less cartoony.
Thing is, I really do like Jason Bradbury. He was good on The Gadget Show, and good on Combat Cars (anyone? no?). It’s just that this is basically the complete opposite to what I think he’s best at doing.
And yes, he would be quite good as a Robot Wars host.
A couple of things from last night…
1) Don’t Scare The Hare. And the axed Beat The Star for tha..
Oh, wait a minute.
I’m look forward to seeing this show spend it’s last couple of episodes airing just after the Eastenders omnibus edition on a Sunday afternoon – as that’s where it’s heading unless the audience picks up.
As a show for children (on CBBC or in the Saturday morning BBC Two programming block) it’s alright. The right mix of noise and colour – but, as the foundation to build the audience for the night’s programming on the main BBC channel? No way. Hole in the Wall and Total Wipeout get away with it as it’s adults doing stupid things. DSTH is in ‘the-just- before-Saturday Night’ peak credability trouble as it’s main hook is a device to appeal to young children.
Oh, and as mentioned before. When the history of television broadcasting is written, this show was the first to be recorded at MediaCity. Can’t help thinking it actual deserved much better.
2 – Who Dares Wins.
Irritation A) – When did all this air punching, false nastyness, and air of general over excitement creep in to the show. There appeared more of it last night that I’ve seen in previous shows.
Irritation B) – If you are going to record a show in HD, make sure all the other things are in HD as well. The pod backdrops looked a horrid mix of blue sploges, and none of the on screen graphics (or opening titles) were given the High Def spit’n’polish.
Wouldn’t it be great to have a post edit button?
Wrecked that gag.
It, of course should read “and they axed Beat The Star for tha…”
Humphhh.
I’ve got one!
And the font is still Handel Gothic. 😉
The contestants were still considerably more tolerable, though, than Jon from the last series…
Jason Bradbury was a bizarre choice for host.
I’ve worked out my problem with the HARE: it’s on wheels.
Imagine if it was a big lollopy walker robot. Imagine if it shuffled along in an ungainly fashion. Imagine if, when scared, it rolled from side to side and tilted wildly and plausibly ejected a carrot from its backpack in fright. This would then (a) sort out the scoring system to a more sensible “number of lives left = number of carrots” result and (b) give you a gameplay reason to watch the HARE having been scared and panicking and losing a carrot, rather than the scared HARE merely being ten seconds of confusing television that makes no sense and doesn’t even look particularly good. It would make the cause and effect work rather better and engender some symapathy for the poor scared HARE who has lost his carrots through fright.
I believe legs are, to use the technical term, bloody hard. Especially two legs.
Agreed, but I’d argue not outside the scope of a game show format that can be amortized over the course of a series at worst and can be hired out globally for years to come at best.
FWIW, on the evidence of only one episode, I think I’ve settled on this being a solid 4/10 show. If this turns out to be in the year’s bottom five then either (a) it really hasn’t been a bad year or (b) the voters aren’t being too discerning.
Having said that, I do think the hare is pretty cool, and not creepy looking at all, which was something to avoid!
The original hare looked much more like a robot, didn’t have the cute face and just two bright lights for eyes. It looked more like a hare than a rabbit at any rate.
According to a post on Digital Spy, this has scored the lowest Appreciation Index score of all time, which is something I suppose.
Big Top got 56, and that was said to have been one of the lowest ever in BBC prime time.
I’m a bit sad that people are panning it for the fairytale-type theme – as a concept, it’s not terrible. As a concept for an pre-peak Saturday night show that’s a bit different, it’s sounds quite suitable. I think the casting of three adult teams is a big mistake that sends out the wrong message about who this show is for.
I’m a bit sad that people are panning it for the fairytale-type theme – as a concept, it’s not terrible. As a concept for an pre-peak Saturday night show that’s a bit different, it’s sounds quite suitable.
Yes this is something I’m quite in agreement with. There are lots of things to moan about the show for, punishing it for showing some imagination is a bit sad.
For comparison, DSTH got 46. 75 is said to be average.
More specifically, and iirc way too in depth discussion on this sort of thing on a Doctor Who forum for anyone’s good, 75 means the panel considered it average quality. Dunno what the average AI for LE is, but average AI for drama is low 80s, iirc.
Party Political Broadcasts can get as low as 20s, but for real programs it quite possibly is lowest ever.
Bad ratings (artificially boosted by people tuning in for DW near the end – the first 15 minutes averaged 1.6m) + abominable AI… could this go sub-1m next week (especially if you exclude the Who-boost)?
I like the titles:
They are good, but they make me want to respond with the titles to Lucky Numbers. Unfortunately, they don’t appear to be online. How can this be?
Instead, a link to footage of a slot machine featuring Ver Richie. Blinding!
…Wow, does anyone know who did the animation for that?
http://www.oncewerefarmers.com
Well I thought who dares wins was a complete load of rubbish, But don’t scare the hare takes the biscuit. I pay my TV license for this rubbish.
What about 101 Ways To Succeed In Being Even Worse Than Total Wipeout, then? 😉 😉
I wasn’t aware there was an extreme hatedom of Who Dares Wins?
What exactly is there to vehemently hate about it?