Just A Minute

From: kj.naughton <kj.naughton@...>
Subject: [just-a-minute] Re: The future of JAM,
To: just-a-minute@...
Date: Wednesday, February 24, 2010, 8:11 AM

 

Hello Robert,

In reality, this query is not answerable by anyone who posts on this group as none of us know how good or bad the BBC editing was in 2007 or Nicholas's state of health then.

However as the episode (and the previous post in the thread) are from 2007 then the fact that Nicholas is still going in 2010 without any noticeable drop-off in lucidity seems to indicate that it's perhaps the "bad" editing. But no worse, perhaps, than the recent apparent swapping round of last rounds which mucked up the scoring in two broadcasts.

I'm aware that most of us here tend to be Just A Minute "nerds" and would notice the things that the other several million listeners wouldn't. Having had some editing experience in a previous role, I don't envy the editor's task in trying to produce two programmes of exactly the right length from two pretty anarchic shows recorded in front of a live audience. I don't think it's that the BBC don't care or even aren't paying attention - I think it's more there is a line to be drawn between getting a programme broadcastable and getting it absolutely perfect. Personally I'm happy enough with the editing and I'm not sure that spending several hundereds or even thousands of pounds of the license fee on additional edit suite time would be worth it to get every show "perfect".

I was suprised and delighted to hear you being concerned for Nicholas's overall wellbeing. It had appeared from some previous posts that you had quite a negative view of him and, seeing your name on this one, I was braced for another broadside. Good too see you being more mellow.

Cheers

kJ

--- In just-a-minute@ yahoogroups. com, Robert Torres <bobbyshaddoe3004@ ...> wrote:
>
> I was just listening to an episode from 2007, the panelists were Paul Merton, Gyles Brandreth, Jenny Eclair, and Julian Clary.  Now, I'm not sure if it had to do with the way the show was edited, since we're talking about one session being split into two recordings, or if it was just general confusion on Nicholas' part...  but there was one point where at the end of one round, Nicholas starts talking as if he's about to wind up the show, saying that Jenny finished in fourth place, but it wasn't even the final round.  and then at the end of the final round he starts talking as though its only the end of the first round, in reminding people that whoever speaks when the whistle blows gains an extra point. 
>  
> This isn't a slag or slur against Nicholas, this is just genuine concern for his overall wellbeing.  I mean, is it because for 40 years he has said these scripted things so often, that now they just kick in automatically regardless of what round it is?  Is it a case of his mental computer, which he uses so often to rerun the whole of the show in his mind, suffering a glitch which takes him occasionally into auto-pilot? 
>  
> this is a genuine query, only cuz if its a case of bad editing, then it seems like the BBC aren't paying attention or don't care, but if its Nicholas, well then... I need say no more.
>

--- On Fri, 2/26/10, Dean <dbedford@...> wrote:

From: Dean <dbedford@...>
Subject: Re: [just-a-minute] Re: The future of JAM,
To: just-a-minute@...
Date: Friday, February 26, 2010, 6:07 AM

 

It seems very unlikely anyone suffering from dementia or alzheimers will ever chair a game show, especially one requiring the concentration of JAM. Nicholas is 87 this year - surely we should be congratulating him on his mental acuity at such an age! And I think that I share kj's view that there is little point to speculating on what terrible diseases he may have - it also seems in poor taste.

From: Robert Torres

Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2010 8:07 AM

To: just-a-minute@ yahoogroups. com

Subject: Re: [just-a-minute] Re: The future of JAM,

 

I know I've railed against Nicholas in the past, and I know many of my posts have been rather vociferous in my intense dislike for Nicholas' behavior and overall conduct on the program.  but I was worried as to whether it was the onset of dementia or alzheimer's or if it was just a case of bad editing.    Speaking of editing, I've actually taken to using the Audacity program to try, in some cases, to edit two editions of Just a Minute into one whole.  its a lot of fun, especially if both programs feature the same panelists, because it tends to enhance the overall presence and performances of all the panelists in attendance, and it does sorta give off a feeling of what it might be like to be in attendance to one whole recording before its edited to pieces for broadcast.  --- On Wed, 2/24/10, kj.naughton <kj.naughton@ yahoo.co. uk> wrote: From: kj.naughton <kj.naughton@ yahoo.co. uk> Subject: [just-a-minute] Re: The future of JAM, To: just-a-minute@ yahoogroups. com Date: Wednesday, February 24, 2010, 8:11 AM   Hello Robert, In reality, this query is not answerable by anyone who posts on this group as none of us know how good or bad the BBC editing was in 2007 or Nicholas's state of health then. However as the episode (and the previous post in the thread) are from 2007 then the fact that Nicholas is still going in 2010 without any noticeable drop-off in lucidity seems to indicate that it's perhaps the "bad" editing. But no worse, perhaps, than the recent apparent swapping round of last rounds which mucked up the scoring in two broadcasts. I'm aware that most of us here tend to be Just A Minute "nerds" and would notice the things that the other several million listeners wouldn't. Having had some editing experience in a previous role, I don't envy the editor's task in trying to produce two programmes of exactly the right length from two pretty anarchic shows recorded in front of a live audience. I don't think it's that the BBC don't care or even aren't paying attention - I think it's more there is a line to be drawn between getting a programme broadcastable and getting it absolutely perfect. Personally I'm happy enough with the editing and I'm not sure that spending several hundereds or even thousands of pounds of the license fee on additional edit suite time would be worth it to get every show "perfect". I was suprised and delighted to hear you being concerned for Nicholas's overall wellbeing. It had appeared from some previous posts that you had quite a negative view of him and, seeing your name on this one, I was braced for another broadside. Good too see you being more mellow. Cheers kJ --- In just-a-minute@ yahoogroups. com, Robert Torres <bobbyshaddoe3004@ ...> wrote: > > I was just listening to an episode from 2007, the panelists were Paul Merton, Gyles Brandreth, Jenny Eclair, and Julian Clary.  Now, I'm not sure if it had to do with the way the show was edited, since we're talking about one session being split into two recordings, or if it was just general confusion on Nicholas' part...  but there was one point where at the end of one round, Nicholas starts talking as if he's about to wind up the show, saying that Jenny finished in fourth place, but it wasn't even the final round.  and then at the end of the final round he starts talking as though its only the end of the first round, in reminding people that whoever speaks when the whistle blows gains an extra point.  >   > This isn't a slag or slur against Nicholas, this is just genuine concern for his overall wellbeing.  I mean, is it because for 40 years he has said these scripted things so often, that now they just kick in automatically regardless of what round it is?  Is it a case of his mental computer, which he uses so often to rerun the whole of the show in his mind, suffering a glitch which takes him occasionally into auto-pilot?  >   > this is a genuine query, only cuz if its a case of bad editing, then it seems like the BBC aren't paying attention or don't care, but if its Nicholas, well then... I need say no more. >