The 10 O'Clock Dive

The 10 O'Clock Live sits in the corner looking drastic, smoking and curling it's unkempt hair; it's in therapy.
"I just don't know who I am doc...sometimes I have this real desire to squeeze out these heavily scripted jokes...you know, satirical stuff, a little un-PC in places...but other times *it takes a drag of its cigarette* other times I think it's time to buck up my ideas and start interviewing politicians and talking about...you know, issues...not with any real depth or interest, but I do it in a sort of tokenistic sort of way....oh Doctor, it's all a facade *it grabs the doctors collar* tell me Doctor, WHO AM I!?"

"Who Am I" - the scream echoes up and down the halls of TV land. Other programmes look up in horror. No one wants to be that guy; the show that falls in between two stalls...hard.

On paper, this show looked absolutely fan-bloody-tastic. To the extent that I almost cancelled my trip to America so that I didn't miss the debut. Charlie Brooker, David Mitchel, Jimmy Carr, Lauren Lav..ergne? Yeah. What a line-up! Glasto eat your heart out, We've got insight, intelligence, wit AND someone that's down with the kids, all in one politically charged show.
The problems began though, right there. Politically charged show? I only say that from watching the damn thing. It marketed itself as a sort satirical take on the news, a send up of news reporting in general. Instead when I came to watch it, what I got was Newsround for the Hollyoaks generation.

Remember, us late 80s children, my generation, are the ones who set out with Newsround, right? They've realised that we have grown up and now they're back at it and cramming THE-WORLD-AROUND-YOU-FOR-DUMMIES down our throat again. Please, no, I can't breath, gaaargh *gorp, choke, dead*.
Seeing the four presenters sit round a table and discuss "issues" of government policing, or budget cuts, etc, is upsetting. I like these tv personalities, but they are being forced to act like all the active wankers at university that I wanted to stab in the eyes, the ones at Uni who take up real life issues that only they care about. It doesn't effect you, but they so adamantly pursue juuuusstiiiice that you want to become an anarchist and burn down the senate building just to spite them. Equally, I want to burn down the channel four executives who felt that they were hip and in touch enough to have found the legendary, hidden path to "appealing television for the fabled 20-25 year olds"

FAIL. EPIC. FUCKING. FAIL. You can't make a flying monkey just by stapling a pigeon to its back and you can't put in a couple of comedians and have them try and talk politics, whilst also try and be funny. The result is like water and oil, a heavily, heavily scripted production whose comedic and political sections sit very awkwardly next to each other over the course of a very long, disjointed hour.
The result is that no one quite enjoys the programme enough to really want to tune in again.

Jimmy Carr can do a bit of one-liner stand-up, sure, but contributes very little to the political discussions. Charlie Brooker looks like he wrote the damn thing and is having to watch everyone ruin his work. David Mitchell is a witty, commentator and referee but isn't quite a stand-up and suits other things more than a channel four youth-fest with fellow tv personalities. And Lauren Lavergne, sure, has youth-appeal and is a fine presenter, but when handed the detailed script of a section of..aha...satirical stand-up, she recited it like an auto-cue. In fact, in fairness, they all did. None of them can read from an auto-cue without adopting a sort of lazy eye.

In the end, I got bored. This is a greedy programme by Channel 4. Though broadly they are going for youth (just look at the hideous, vomit-worthy crowad of gel haired, shirt wearing, toss-faces in the crowd, all guffawing at crude jokes and booing & applauding as predictably as an X-Factor audience) overall this show is reaching for too broad of a demographic. As such, it's hard for them to keep anyones interest. I was geared up for entertainment when I sat down to watch this and I enjoyed the alternative election night, because then it has relevance...because there was an election...now it feels like GCSE-Bitesize came along to tell me about small businessman who aren't able to wear comfortable shoes in the Middle-East...by which I mean it feels irrelevant and dumb and as such it lost my interest very quickly.

Part of my annoyance about that is because on paper it should be a fantastic show. But it's not. It's the same reason Man City won't win the premiership. On paper it looks great, but it just doesn't gel. With all that money and talent, putting it together by selecting all the best players was just lazy and inorganic and the results showed that.

I'll probably still watch it though. There's not much else on afterall! DAMN THE TELEVISION TO HELL!