Just A Minute

JAM Series | JAM Stats | JAM Today | JAM Group

<<<< 2898 >>>>

Re: Celebrity types

Messages in this topic: 1
Robert TorresJan 28, 2009

I know what you mean. They rarely have serious actors or people who are dramatically trained actors on the programme (aside from Charles Collingwood). I wish they'd bring back people like Pam Ayers, she's not an actress or a comedian, but a poetess, and she added great nuance to the program. I also believe in the previous series they had a guy who was a poet, I think it was Robin Ince.

I enjoy a good joke and a trip down the surreal as much as anyone, but I do wish there was more balance to the proceedings as opposed to the whole 'lunatics running the asylum' atmosphere that pervades the show now. Even Nicholas doesn't seem to give a crap about things anymore, and even sounds like he couldn't care less about the rules, because in the recent episodes I've heard, when someone challenges on repetition, he'll give it to them on hesitation, or whatever other challenge that the person didn't challenge on.

Something I miss that doesn't even occur with the way the show is now, are the appearance of certain celebrity types that are neither actors nor comedians, but people like say.... Patrick Moore or Dr. Magnus Pyke. I believe there was a discussion about this on a thread some time ago, as to whether those particular types would or even could appear on JAM the way it is now. I wonder if there are any types like Patrick Moore or Dr. Magnus Pyke out there? Certainly Pam Ayers seems to be of that sort, being neither an actress nor a comedian. Certainly Tim Rice is one of those types as well, as he is a man who is an expert lyricist and not an actor nor a comedian (although he is damn funny). And then there's some like Gyles Brandreth, although he is sort of an actor, but definitely not a stand up comedian either.

They did sort of have those non actor non comedian type of celebrities appear during some of the episodes of the daytime televised version of Just a Minute. They had Clare Balding, who was a racing commentator, and Brian Sewell, who I think is an art critic, and John Sergeant, who I think is a politician or something. I think they also had Ken Bruce who is a radio disc jockey or radio presenter or something.

it would just be interesting if there was an infusion of these types into the proceedings in an attempt to 'redress the balance' as Nicholas so incessantly says week after week.

--- On Fri, 1/23/09, Clitheroe Kid <clitheroekid@...> wrote:

From: Clitheroe Kid <clitheroekid@...>
Subject: [just-a-minute] Re: Deviation of language
To: just-a-minute@...
Date: Friday, January 23, 2009, 1:46 PM

I've followed the show since the mid 1970s, and have heard recordings of
many editions which were broadcast even prior to that.

The programme has never had a serious purpose. It's always been light
entertainment.

And the rules were always chaotic. In its very earliest days, it was not
even certain what amounted to repetition: Nicholas Parsons made arbitrary
rulings in many early shows, and - for instance - often allowed panellists
to repeat particular words a certain number of times.

The rules were so arbitrary that at one stage, in the early 1970s, repeating
even the words on the card was forbidden.

Gradually, the rules as we recognise them today began to emerge from the
chaos of those early years. But it took a long time. By the late 1970s a
body of recognised rules existed. Today, most of those same rules are still
recognised, at least in theory.

But the players of today (save for Clement, of course) lack the erudition
and skill of the original foursome. The rules have been largely abandoned,
in favour of the "bonus points" scheme. All intelligent discourse has been
lost, and the surreal style of Paul Merton has changed the show out of all
recognition.

The players in the 1970s could talk intelligently about the subject on the
card, particularly Kenneth Williams and Derek Nimmo. Nowadays, most
panellists talk rubbish (or surreal rubbish). It may be funny, but you never
come away knowing more about the subject itself. The game use to be played
at a much higher intellectual level; yet it was still hysterically funny.

Was it more "serious"? The subject on the card was often serious; but
Kenneth could make absolutely any subject funny, and yet do so in such a way
that you actually came away from the show knowing something about the
subject that you hadn't previously been aware of.

I like Paul Merton. He would have fitted into the show nicely in the old
days, as a contrast to the others. But the show loses something, now that
nearly all the other panellists are emulating him by affecting a surreal
style too. It can work when only Paul is doing it; but it does not really
succeed if all the other panellists are doing it too.

The problem lies in too many of the panellists being stand-up comedians. In
the old days, none of the panel were. Not even Kenneth was a stand-up.
Sadly, there has been a certain dumbing-down, such that the 1970s are now
looked back on as being "serious".

At the time, they were not.

----- Original Message -----
From: "kj.naughton" <kj.naughton@ yahoo.co. uk>
To: <just-a-minute@ yahoogroups. com>
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2009 10:57 AM
Subject: [just-a-minute] Re: Deviation of language

> Hello Robert,
>
> If you genuinely are "punching the walls in anger" or anything
> remotely like that then may I gently suggest that you are probably
> taking Just A Minute a little too seriously?
>
> Just A Minute is not a quiz show. There are no real rewards for
> the "winner". There is no need for Nicholas (or anyone else) to be
> consistent between episodes, or even within an episode. Just A
> Minute is a show which provides light, humorous entertainment and
> nothing else. It is played for laughs.
>
> I've not been listening long enough to know whether Just A Minute
> originally started out with a "serious" purpose. It's perhaps
> heretical to say this, but I find most of the older shows utterly
> dull. I don't even (much) like the contributions that Kenneth
> Williams made, although I love the contributions from Peter Jones.
>
> So, as my daughter would say, "take a chill pill".
>
> Incidentally, the MP3 from Monday's broadcast (episode 4 of series
> 57) is now available for download. Please see the "Series 57" entry
> in the "Links" section of this group.
>
> Hope this helps
>
> kJ
>
> --- In just-a-minute@ yahoogroups. com, "Robert L. Torres"
> <bobbyshaddoe3004@ ...> wrote:
> >
> > However, something has occurred very recently that has me punching
> > the walls in anger. It was the very first episode of the new
> series,
> > it took place two days before New Year's Eve, and it was the
> > subject 'What I Got For Christmas' and Nicholas stops the entire
> show
> > to complain about the ungrammatical nature of the statement and
> over
> > the general ungrammatical nature of the subjects he's been given
> up
> > to now.
> >
>
>
>
> ------------ --------- --------- ------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

<<<< 2898 >>>>

Back to the Top

Message History

	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec
2019	10	23	12	1	13	5	1	19	12	31	4	14
2018	4	7	21	8	9	37	9	5	19	25	5	14
2017	4	34	22	12	17	20	4	19	23	44	23	16
2016	13	49	39	57	60	87	10	32	24	12	9	23
2015	51	97	32	49	41	54	20	28	0	14	31	16
2014	9	75	68	33	28	33	52	82	51	32	38	79
2013	463	251	98	87	81	192	88	98	86	38	54	27
2012	92	121	180	199	125	88	71	155	118	166	125	144
2011	112	78	71	73	134	225	252	152	62	183	165	63
2010	142	117	153	94	69	49	69	183	82	71	68	75
2009	67	45	42	97	90	149	110	70	63	42	35	39
2008	200	120	175	120	70	109	87	115	71	45	58	38
2007	165	447	132	99	95	57	140	118	74	88	125	99