--- In just-a-minute@..., "Robert L. Torres" <bobbyshaddoe3004@...> wrote:
>
> As a counterbalance to previous posts about people I consider to be 'Brief But Memorable', I'm going to dedicate a number of posts to individuals who (in my humble opinion) should've never been brought onto the program in the first place. The first object of scorn for me is Janet Brown.
>
> She first appeared alongside Dr. Magnus Pyke, and then went on to have a number of other appearances on her own against the big mouths, Kenneth, Derek, Clement, and Peter in a rotating fashion. WHY!?
>
> Her main talent seemed to be vocal impersonations, and I enjoy that sort of thing as much as anyone else, but for every other subject, she had this voice that sounded perpetually chipper and happy, and not in a natural fashion. She sounded like a Stepford Wife, and any time she opened her mouth to say anything it just grated on my nerves.
>
> She wasn't all that funny nor was she at all interesting. At times she even seem perpetually befuddled for even interrupting because she kept forgetting the rules or something. its ridiculous that someone like her would get more appearances than Dr. Magnus Pyke, who was far more insightful, entertaining and enjoyable than her.
>
I tolerate her appearances on the episodes that also featured Dr. Magnus Pyke, largely because the presence of Dr. Magnus Pyke manages to elevate the proceedings, not to mention (as you said before) Peter Jones' contributions were exceptional. I think Dean mentions on the website that Janet Brown seemed very much a one-trick pony, and was astonished that she ever managed to appear as often as she did. Although some guests like say 'Patrick Moore' had a great deal to say on other subjects and not just on any subject specially made for them to talk on. --- On Thu, 4/9/09, lapsedcat <lapsedcat@...> wrote: From: lapsedcat <lapsedcat@...> |
On Friday, April 10, 2009, at 01:22 PM, Robert Torres wrote:
I think Dean mentions on the website that Janet Brown seemed very much a
one-trick pony, and was astonished that she ever managed to appear as
often as she did.
>
I wondered if I had been so unkind (the cast descriptions were written
almost six years ago)- I find I wasn't...
Here's what I wrote..
"Another of the women who tried and were quite nice but didn't really
get into the swing of the game. The main interest from her seemed to be
her undoubted skill as an impressionist and she performed some of her
best-known impressions in most of her shows."
That seems about right. She wasn't great, but I wouldn't say she was
terrible. She is about the same as a lot of women who appeared on the
show in the first 20 years, plucky, pleasant, sometimes funny, but not a
stand-out.
| 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 |
| FAQ | Contact | Services | Terms | Privacy | Credits |
[Page generated in 0.0808 seconds under 2.32% server load]
© 2012-2025 TVRDb.com. All rights reserved.