Comments on: Ten O’Clock Live: Three Men and a Little Lady?

By: dan

dan — Wed, 18 Jul 2012 10:53:48 +0000

Laverne doesn’t have the same intellect as the likes of david mitchall and charlie brooker so she cant keep the banter going, I think she is fab as a radio dj but this is out of her league.

By: Stephen B

Stephen B — Thu, 17 Feb 2011 17:16:11 +0000

In reply to Russell.

I think that’s partly where I’m torn – I want a show as focused on comedy as The Daily Show, and this isn’t it. It didn’t even occur to me that it would be an alternative to Question Time on BBC, I hadn’t put it anywhere near that category.

One thing Lauren Laverne said on her twitter when she mentioned this post (and my previous comment read as though I didn’t think she was awesome, but I do, and she saw it, woe, woe) was that she’s not there to be a comedian. She’s there to cover the gaps in arranging a live show.

Which is fine, but then we’re back to the “…no female comedians, then?” question.

Mitchell has been *fantastic* in some of his political columns in print. Really cutting, angry and absolutely right.

By: Russell

Russell — Thu, 17 Feb 2011 14:50:46 +0000

In reply to Stephen B.

One of the cool things about Ten o’Clock Live for me has been that it isn’t always just for laughs, though. Of the two episodes I’ve seen (no TV Licence in the new place) Mitchell’s interviews have been better than – well, pretty much any BBC interview since 2007 (at least). Laverne really got me when she described the Tories as “destroying the country she loved” (paraphrased). So far it seems to be balanced with Carr and Brooker as the comedians and Laverne and Mitchell still being funny but with a more hardcore bent to them. I’m surprised and pleased with how good Mitchell is.

By: Pet Jeffery

Pet Jeffery — Thu, 17 Feb 2011 09:10:52 +0000

In reply to Rhian.

Interesting that you’re debating which is the more expendable, Carr or Brooker. I haven’t watched “Ten O’Clock Live” and, thinking about it, my disinclination to watch has to do with Brooker and Carr. They present themselves as people with whom I wouldn’t wish to spend time in real life, which leaves me wondering whether I wish to spend time with them on my television. (Laverne and Mitchell, by contrast, present themselves as people I’d enjoy meeting.) I hope that the real life Carr and Brooker are very different from the people they purport themselves to be. (Maybe they are, I’ve seen Graham Norton drinking in a pub, and he seems rather drab in real life.) But, for me, “do I wish to invite these people into my living room?” remains a significant question.

By: Stephen B

Stephen B — Wed, 16 Feb 2011 17:18:13 +0000

I think Laverne’s material has been terrible. Her delivery is fine, but it’s like the writers have said “She’s not a professional comedian, we don’t need to make her funny.” It’s the first show in a long time where I really noticed the gender imbalance immediately, possibly because of the caustic stage personas of Carr and Brooker.

I haven’t seen all the eps, but the consensus seems to be that Mitchell is running away with the show (albeit lightweight when it comes to doing interviews). I expected it to be slow in the early days, will have to catch the next one and see if they’ve settled in better yet!

By: Rhian

Rhian — Wed, 16 Feb 2011 17:11:18 +0000

In reply to Russell. Apart from finding Carr more expendable than Brooker, I agree.

By: Russell

Russell — Wed, 16 Feb 2011 16:41:22 +0000

I’ve been impressed with Ten o’Clock Live, and Laverne’s role within; if anyone is extraneous to requirements I’d say it’s Charlie Brooker. Lauren Laverne has been interesting in a variety of ways.