Just A Minute

 
<<<<   9099   >>>>

Re: Will JAM continue

Messages in this topic: 22 View All
Tony BaechlerJun 16, 2013
 

 
Yes, you sum up my feelings perfectly. When I first heard the series, it
was with at least two of the original players. I don't remember what show
it was, but I'll guess it was from 1976 or 1977. I know it had Peter Jones
on it because I was looking for him specifically at the time. I don't
recall hearing KW or DN until much later in my listening. I'm almost
positive it had CF as well. I remember noting at the time how similar PJ
and CF sounded.

When I first heard the show, I didn't know it was a comedy. I really
thought it was supposed to be a serious show with some comic moments. Now,
the show is done just for laughs and no one even tries to be serious. I've
noticed that the BBC doesn't even ask non-comedians on the show as guests
anymore. I've also noticed that Paul will buzz in for no reason at all and
sometimes I wonder if it's just so the person speaking doesn't get a full
minute. It certainly doesn't seem to be about the points anymore. In the
earlier days, CF obviously cared very much about winning, but in his later
years, I don't think he did. I think he felt out of place and didn't really
choose to participate anymore due to the subtle changes.

I don't think Giles would be a good choice as chairman for a few reasons.
First, I think he's much too serious about playing the game and I don't
think he could be objective enough. Secondly, he's also not that young and
I think they would want someone around Paul's age. Finally, I just don't
think he would be a good choice due to his personality. They had a show
called Wordaholics with him as chairman. While he did OK, I think they
could've done better and I wouldn't say he was great. Remember that the
chairman gets very few laughs for himself and has to put up with the jokes
aimed at him by the panel. I don't think a lot of comedians could let
themselves go that much. Interestingly, I think of the regular players, CF
was the most fair chairman on the few shows where they had him doing it
instead of Nicholas.

On 6/15/2013 10:29 PM, Dean wrote:
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Tony Baechler <mailto:tony.baechler@...>
> Anyway, I would be very much interested in what people think of the series
> now compared to previous years and how they think it has changed over the
> years other than the obvious. In other words, I'm wondering what subtle
> changes have happened.
>
>
> Me – I find this a really fascinating subject, and anyone who listens to
> Espen’s stream where you hear old shows followed by new ones must think a
> bit about how the show has changed. Nicholas often suggests that subtle
> changes in how he interprets deviation have been instrumental, but I’m
> actually struck when I listen how little Nicholas seems to have changed the
> way he does his job. He was always a showman and interested in the show
> rather than the contest.
>
> I think the key changes have been the personnel ones. Peter Jones’s arrival
> in 1971 was a turning point. For the previous three years the show was
> largely a battle of quick wit and word agility between Kenneth, Derek and
> Clement. Peter poked fun at the show, the rules, the contest elements in a
> way that I think proved to be crucial to the show’s development. Had JAM
> stayed primarily a word game without the comedy elements taking centre
> stage, I don’t think the show would have lasted as long as it has. The
> second major turning point was clearly Paul’s arrival. Paul’s background was
> in improvised comedy and the making up of stories and scenarioes on the
> spot. Now everyone plays the game Paul’s way. It’s possible I think that
> Clement’s death may prove to be a turning point too, though it may still be
> too soon to say.
>
> What’s changed? I think the major difference is that in the old days, part
> of the game was to talk about the subject. If the subject was say Stanley
> Baldwin, the panellists tried to talk about him, in an interesting way if
> not always a comic way. Much of the humour actually came from the banter
> over challenges rather than what was being said on the subjects. These days,
> the panellists wouldn’t even try to be informative on a straight subject
> like that. You’ve got to have a laugh line within 10 seconds or Paul will
> buzz in on you. In 2010 when John Sergeant was on the panel he was an
> example of what I am saying. He was actually quite good at the mechanics of
> staying on subject without hesitating or repeating. But he didn’t have many
> punchlines so he was mercilessly attacked by the other panellists. In the
> old days John Sergeant’s word skill and knowledge would probably have seen
> him coming back regularly as a guest
>
> I’m interested when people say they miss Clement because I reckon a Clement
> like personality would have no chance of becoming a regular on the show
> these days. I’m trying to think of a quick-witted and witty professional
> grump in today’s show biz world. The best I can think of is Simon Cowell!
> Would he be likely to be invited on to JAM these days – and would he fit in
> if he was?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


--
Have a good day,
Tony Baechler
mailto:tony.baechler@...

 
<<<<   9099   >>>>

Back to the Top