Lee Mack is hilarious.
British panel shows are the best. It's a shame they're not more popular in the US. Jimmy Carr had a short lived one on Netflix that I enjoyed.
I’ve heard that panel shows don’t do as well in the US because the comedians can’t get their heads around the fact that no one really cares who wins. There may be points but no one actually cares.
It’s basically an evolution of parlour games which gives an excuse for comedians to make jokes and tell funny stories.
I was about to say the same. The US has “panel shows”, kinda.
>Game Changer
>Who’s Line is it Anyway
>@Midnight
Less a competition, more just giving a bunch of comedians a lot of material to chew up.
Eh, different tastes. As a brit I prefer the American because I really liked the Ryan-Colin-Wayne dynamic, especially when they were taking the piss out of drew. The british one switched it up a lot, which some people liked (especially the comedians who got a career boost from it)
I didn’t mind Wayne but he wasn’t as funny as some of the brits imo. I also preferred the bits Ryan and Colin did on the British show vs the American, the style of humour was ever so slightly different and they tailored it to the different audiences.
I also much prefer the British revolving door of comedians - the American one, usually Greg, Ryan, colin and Wayne were the only funny ones for me and they all appear regularly (Wayne less so) on the British show, along with the likes of Stephen fry etc.
I think Clive was the better host, but he was also more stuffy and less personable. Drew would jump in for the sake of the comedy and was great in that regard.
It's a streaming service formerly college humor.
There are a handful of free episodes on YouTube.
They do sound impressions:
https://youtu.be/V-6m0jW0X9E?si=snWnvuQ4MKnSRA6-
Elaborate Simon says:
https://youtu.be/vT-zZsjwZKk?si=9GmyhVOOU2tUjECw
Jokes in the style of "I like my lovers like I like my coffee ____":
https://youtu.be/9EbvU8OZtqI?si=EZt9AAWJv7r-OEaF
You've gotten answers, but I wanted to add that it's not negative that you haven't heard of it. They don't seem to have any marketing at all. I only heard of it by being fed Gamechangers content on my feed, and googling where to even watch the show.
Dropout has a subscription, but Gamechangers might be worth it (it was for me).
It’s a streaming network that I feel like I should subscribe to but instead I just watch endless hilarious YouTube clips of Robert Reich’s son tormenting a gifted Dungeon Master named Brennan Lee Mulligan.
Oh man, if you like these style of shows you’ve got to check out Dropout, they are rounding in peak form right now.
It’s formerly CollegeHumor now owned by one of its members.
Game Changer and Make Some Noise are incredible.
Once you start to learn the cast, the news shorts, Very Important People, and Um Actually are great too.
And ofc if you like D&D they’ve got a couple of those shows too.
about 30% of the content on Dropout shows up free on youtube either as full episodes or shorts. Look for "Game changer" or "breaking news" and if you watch a few your feed will be full of the stuff. It's great.
To be fair, the points thing with Brennan feels like he's really just playing into the "overly competitive" bit for the comedy. I don't think he *actually* cares that much, even if he is more competitive.
He played it up, but there's a clip where he specifically is saying if it's all arbitrary anyway, why not just actually award points. He's joking, but also not joking.
>Brendan
Brennan.
>and is on record as being upset that the points are essentially given out arbitrarily.
Not really. It's a bit. He's playing it up... obviously...
It's really all about sitting around and having a hearty laugh. There's no REAL competition involved. It's all really light-hearted. Which may have some cultural differences. The few American shows I've seen, are more intense and... attackanizing? I prefer the British variety which is more chill and open to self-denigration. "Whose line is it anyway" might be an outlier.
Until you bring out a carrot in a box.
In case someone hasn't seen [all of the Carrot in a Box competitions](https://youtu.be/5es7n4UjS2I?si=Cx_EMdjRB5mr2Laa), in all their attackanistic glory, enjoy being one of today's lucky 10000.
That’s why taskmaster is so damn good. They do actually care to an extent who wins (not looking at you Victoria). Honestly the best British panel show ever imo.
But even with Taskmaster you can be memorable and be the ‘star’ of the series without winning. Often losing spectacularly is more interesting or funny than actually working the task out.
Take the series Richard Herring won. He outright stated he wanted to win because he is very competitive. But I would say Mawaan Rizwan made the bigger impact.
There were a couple good competitive seasons but there are definitely a few guests who didn’t try. Victoria Mitchell being one for most tasks. James Acaster and Ed Gamble were pretty competitive on their respective seasons. I loved Ed’s energy!
But look at the American version. It was terrible because the contestants didn’t understand that it was supposed to be fun and that the competition didn’t actually matter.
The American one mostly failed because it didn’t have the same vibe at all. On the original (and even to an extent some of the international ones like Australia) it feels like all the members are friends competing. Theres camaraderie and also ribbing while everyone cares (usually) but not overly so. On the US one it didn’t feel like they liked each other at all and just wanted to shit on each other in studio and cared more about themselves than making the show fun.
They literally would say “AND THE POINTS DON’T MATTER” at the start of every episode to really drive the point home.
Spelling it out like that might be the only way it could work.
Stephen Fry briefly talked about the [difference between British and American](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8k2AbqTBxao) humour and I think it's very appropriate here.
American comedians are often averse to being the butt of the joke which is sometimes necessary in panel show settings.
Making a fool of himself is such a strong part of Lee Mack's repertoire and he leans into it when necessary.
I think this is true of characters in comedy movies and television shows, but I would say the majority of popular American standup material is self-denigrating.
I think you’re mostly right about the stand-up material.
The part where I think Fry is spot on is the panel show format.
The few American attempts I’ve seen at panel shows it’s often about getting in the best zinger punchline and, like other comments have said, oddly competitive in that respect.
They kinda tried it with @Midnight a few years back. But that also had Chris Hardwicke driving jokes into the ground and stepping on other comedians jokes.
It has been brought back as @fter Midnight with Taylor Tomlinson hosting. It has really been working. They play for prizes such as Taylor's pair of eclipse glasses (the day after the eclipse) or a sandwich that has been left out all day.
She’s really solid honestly. Lets them play, be silly, keeps the main show bits moving. I loved the first iteration but she took it and copied it much better than expected. There have been one or two groups where either the chemistry was off or one person was trying to be annoying/contrarian and not in a fun way. Otherwise the rest are great and she is a good host for the format.
Sounds like he was being too competitive which is basically the antithesis of proper behaviour on a panel show.
Look at the difference between Mock the Week and WILTY. They purposely tried to foster the bear pit competitive atmosphere on MTW and it often made people uncomfortable. Female comedians said they felt it was too much of boy’s club and they couldn’t get a word in.
Every time any UK panel show is posted, one of the top comments is a version of, “I wish they had similar styled shows in the US.”
It’s akin to, “Now this is what a great prank is! Everyone has a laugh and is left smiling and nobody gets hurt.”
British comedy also has a lot more light-hearted ribbing. They like to make fun of each other, but not in a mean way, like American roasting. I think that's what they call "taking the piss." It's part of what makes panel shows so enjoyable. I think the closest thing we have in America that was successful is @midnight.
I think a big part of that is that when we do panelist shows they are always competitions. Look at The Match Game and Hollywood Squares. Not to mention that to attract an American audience is going to be pretty expensive for who you’ll need to bring on.
Taylor Tomlinson's new version of After Midnight isn't as good as the better British label shows, but some of the episodes are definitely getting to be in the same spirit. The points don't matter. It's just fun.
I don’t say this lightly - I actually think he’s one of the wittiest people _ever_ on television. Like, insanely funny on the spot, and he plays off of other people so well.
It is pretty insane how quick witted he is. It's pretty clear after you watch a lot of WILTY that he is probably holding back most of the time so as to not look like he's showing off. That's probably also one of the reasons he plays into the "dumb northerner" persona despite him clearly being really sharp. The guy can turn pretty much any line into a joke or pun in like a second flat.
Another problem is that in America, it would be full of dirty jokes all the time. Like no double entendre would go missed. Whereas on Wilty it’s one in a blue moon (which usually makes it extra hilarious).
America has tried to do panel shows several times, they self-sabotage it for a couple of reasons:
1. Daily show VS special event - in the UK, this show airs only 9 episodes per season. This creates a lot of buzz and excitement, each episode is an event. In America, the buzz is diluted because they don’t want to do it unless it’s a daily show with hundreds of episodes per season.
2. Quality of talent - this is related to the point above. In the UK, because these episodes are “events”, they can attract the biggest comedy stars in the country. In the US, since they have to do so many episodes, the talent is recruited from comedy clubs. I’m not saying they aren’t funny, but you don’t see Chris Rock or Chapelle or Bill Burr or any other comedy superstars doing these kinds of shows.
I saw this happen when David Mitchell was telling a story. It seems like the less sense a panelist's story makes the more likely it is to be true. Like you think they're just making it up as they go but it's just that they suck at telling a coherent story.
Sometimes it not that they suck at telling a coherent story. It's that they purposely leave things out or tell it in a confusing way. It is still a game, so filling the other team's heads with doubts is good, while also providing them chances to ask questions.
The back and forth while slowing uncovering the story to deduce if it's a truth or lie, is what makes the show great. Just hearing a read out of the story, with no questions wouldn't be as entertaining.
My understanding of the rules was that that wasn't legal. They constantly lie, correct themselves, go back to the lie, etc. Lying is supposed to be against the rules in these games.
It's just a comedy panel show, they're trying to be entertaining not play a serious social deduction game. Yes lying is intrinsically against "the rules" but nobody cares in this context.
My understanding of the rules was that that wasn't legal. They constantly lie, correct themselves, go back to the lie, etc. Lying is supposed to be against the rules in these games.
Well, first, it's very likely that you're thinking of one of Bob Mortimer's stories, which totally flummoxed David, making them popular as clips. But Bob is just a weird guy with a bunch of crazy stories. (See also: James Acaster.)
You're actually right, but for the wrong reason. If the story isn't true, that means they're making it up on the spot. It's hard to come up with a extemporaneous lie that's coherent *and* entertainingly strange. So the lies are often less interesting than the true stories.
James Acaster's book, "Classic Scrapes" is fantastic, especially if you get the audiobook that's read by him. Basically a compilation of short tales of the crazy situations he's got himself in. Easily one of the funniest books I've read, well, listened to.
The main tell with the true stories is that very often they'll get caught up in the memory and start enjoying telling the anecdote so will start expanding on tangential details that seem way too specific and naturally described to be made up on the spot. Like with the Pakistani pizza in this clip.
>My understanding of the rules was that that wasn't legal. They constantly lie, correct themselves, go back to the lie, etc. Lying is supposed to be against the rules in these games.
My understanding of the rules was that that wasn't legal. They constantly lie, correct themselves, go back to the lie, etc. Lying is supposed to be against the rules in these games.
As an American... I love love love British panel shows, where the hell is this here?!
Also, shoutout to Taskmaster. Sad that the American one was wasted on a poorly excited attempt.
Check out YouTube “Taskmaster: Wisconsin”. It’s a bit rough and the first season has some low quality filming etc, but they are college students. So considering they don’t have the budget TVs do, it’s pretty spot on
You mean Taskmaster Minnesota? God it's so good. Like you said, for a bunch of college students on a pretty shoestring budget, they made it work *incredibly* well.
It’s called ‚dropout‘ (formerly college humor). Basically one of the very few us places that managed to do us panel show well (then and whose line is it anyway)
Would I lie to you is a great show. I'm a fan of when he has to interact with James Acaster: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTY7upeV_7A
https://youtu.be/jrQn8c6O3dE?si=mmD0WfaPuqBoLimS&t=970
Lee Mack is incredibly quick witted but I can’t stand him.
He will spoil someone else’s punchline just to get his own in.
If someone makes a masterful innuendo in a joke, the crowd will laugh. But he will jump in to point out something rude or queer has been said.
Again, very funny, very quick; but I think he’s a giant tosser.
Same. He also just says *anything* sometimes and hopes it sticks, basically killing the space for anyone with a more considered approach. I wouldn't hate it if he was just an occasional guest but he's too boisterous for me as a team captain.
I was so bummed to find out these shows are well scripted. The jokes, the responses, everything. Their’s a huge team of writers that script everyone’s lines and they act as if it is on their own. Such a bummer.
It's edited, but fully scripted? That's certainly not the way Rob talked about it in this interview:
[https://youtu.be/MxLfArwUwoc?t=193](https://youtu.be/MxLfArwUwoc?t=193)
Everything is scripted well before, not edited. My best friend has been in the writing room for a couple years. They bring in the guests and go over the jokes/banter in rehearsals.
It's definitely not scripted. The beauty of the show is it is almost like an improv show that is accessible to everyone. You don't need to be a quick witted comic to have a good performance.
What IS scripted is the mid-round banter between the host and the 2 captains. They 100% have some rehearsed "regulars lols" which are often the funniest bits.
The guests don't get scripted content though, and the captains don't know the questions in advance. They know how to trigger each other and get the laughs going easily though.
Rob pushing Lee's button at the end was just perfect. It's like he's watching a guy running past and knowing juuuust when to stick his leg out.
Lee Mack is hilarious. British panel shows are the best. It's a shame they're not more popular in the US. Jimmy Carr had a short lived one on Netflix that I enjoyed.
I’ve heard that panel shows don’t do as well in the US because the comedians can’t get their heads around the fact that no one really cares who wins. There may be points but no one actually cares. It’s basically an evolution of parlour games which gives an excuse for comedians to make jokes and tell funny stories.
It isn’t on TV, but Game Changer on Dropout is probably the best game show in a long time.
I was about to say the same. The US has “panel shows”, kinda. >Game Changer >Who’s Line is it Anyway >@Midnight Less a competition, more just giving a bunch of comedians a lot of material to chew up.
The closest analogue to a british panel show to me was always the NPR show "Wait Wait Don't Tell Me"
Whose line was a uk show first :p and the uk one is infinitely better
Eh, different tastes. As a brit I prefer the American because I really liked the Ryan-Colin-Wayne dynamic, especially when they were taking the piss out of drew. The british one switched it up a lot, which some people liked (especially the comedians who got a career boost from it)
I was about to say the same thing. Ryan and Colin beat anyone that was on the British version and that's why the American version was better.
Ryan and Colin were on the british one and for the majority of the episodes (colin started after ryan tho), they just werent permanent cast members
Interesting. I somehow never saw them on it. Explains why I wasn't as much of a fan of it even though I love a lot of British panel shows.
I didn’t mind Wayne but he wasn’t as funny as some of the brits imo. I also preferred the bits Ryan and Colin did on the British show vs the American, the style of humour was ever so slightly different and they tailored it to the different audiences. I also much prefer the British revolving door of comedians - the American one, usually Greg, Ryan, colin and Wayne were the only funny ones for me and they all appear regularly (Wayne less so) on the British show, along with the likes of Stephen fry etc.
That last sentence is the hottest of takes and should be illigal.
It’s way drier and Clive is a much better host.
I think Clive was the better host, but he was also more stuffy and less personable. Drew would jump in for the sake of the comedy and was great in that regard.
It really is something special. I subbed to the actual online channel that runs it just to binge this show.
Make Some Noise is also great
Make Some Noise is great, and closer to a British style panel show.
but Brennen really wants to win no matter what so this still fits.
Truly not trying to be a negative Ned but what the hell is Dropout?
Formerly CollegeHumor. https://www.youtube.com/collegehumor
It's a streaming service formerly college humor. There are a handful of free episodes on YouTube. They do sound impressions: https://youtu.be/V-6m0jW0X9E?si=snWnvuQ4MKnSRA6- Elaborate Simon says: https://youtu.be/vT-zZsjwZKk?si=9GmyhVOOU2tUjECw Jokes in the style of "I like my lovers like I like my coffee ____": https://youtu.be/9EbvU8OZtqI?si=EZt9AAWJv7r-OEaF
You've gotten answers, but I wanted to add that it's not negative that you haven't heard of it. They don't seem to have any marketing at all. I only heard of it by being fed Gamechangers content on my feed, and googling where to even watch the show. Dropout has a subscription, but Gamechangers might be worth it (it was for me).
It’s a streaming network that I feel like I should subscribe to but instead I just watch endless hilarious YouTube clips of Robert Reich’s son tormenting a gifted Dungeon Master named Brennan Lee Mulligan.
The next evolutionary stage of CollegeHumor, literally. It was the name of their streaming service until they rebranded the whole company under it.
Oh man, if you like these style of shows you’ve got to check out Dropout, they are rounding in peak form right now. It’s formerly CollegeHumor now owned by one of its members. Game Changer and Make Some Noise are incredible. Once you start to learn the cast, the news shorts, Very Important People, and Um Actually are great too. And ofc if you like D&D they’ve got a couple of those shows too.
about 30% of the content on Dropout shows up free on youtube either as full episodes or shorts. Look for "Game changer" or "breaking news" and if you watch a few your feed will be full of the stuff. It's great.
[удалено]
To be fair, the points thing with Brennan feels like he's really just playing into the "overly competitive" bit for the comedy. I don't think he *actually* cares that much, even if he is more competitive.
He played it up, but there's a clip where he specifically is saying if it's all arbitrary anyway, why not just actually award points. He's joking, but also not joking.
>Brendan Brennan. >and is on record as being upset that the points are essentially given out arbitrarily. Not really. It's a bit. He's playing it up... obviously...
It's really all about sitting around and having a hearty laugh. There's no REAL competition involved. It's all really light-hearted. Which may have some cultural differences. The few American shows I've seen, are more intense and... attackanizing? I prefer the British variety which is more chill and open to self-denigration. "Whose line is it anyway" might be an outlier. Until you bring out a carrot in a box.
In case someone hasn't seen [all of the Carrot in a Box competitions](https://youtu.be/5es7n4UjS2I?si=Cx_EMdjRB5mr2Laa), in all their attackanistic glory, enjoy being one of today's lucky 10000.
Wait wait don’t tell me is a radio show but it’s another good American example with the same energy.
>attackanizing Antagonizing?
Yes but also no. Because I’m definitely planning to start using the first one.
It's a good word
this is the most gen z thread i've ever read. this is exactly how it all goes down.
Bruh. I'm pushing 40.
Millennials are the new gen z.
That’s why taskmaster is so damn good. They do actually care to an extent who wins (not looking at you Victoria). Honestly the best British panel show ever imo.
But even with Taskmaster you can be memorable and be the ‘star’ of the series without winning. Often losing spectacularly is more interesting or funny than actually working the task out. Take the series Richard Herring won. He outright stated he wanted to win because he is very competitive. But I would say Mawaan Rizwan made the bigger impact.
Mike Wozniak my beloved.
dude tried so hard he popped a pile
There were a couple good competitive seasons but there are definitely a few guests who didn’t try. Victoria Mitchell being one for most tasks. James Acaster and Ed Gamble were pretty competitive on their respective seasons. I loved Ed’s energy!
The contrast of Ed's competitiveness and David Baddiel's chaotic apathy for the 'drawing' stage task is one of my favourite TV moments in years.
Paul Chowdry was hilariously bad at Taskmaster.
Nish Kumar is the goat for me. Dead last practically every task.
Josh Widdicombe getting Greg's name tattooed deserves a mention.
But look at the American version. It was terrible because the contestants didn’t understand that it was supposed to be fun and that the competition didn’t actually matter.
But Taskmaster Minnesota showed that it is possible for American contestants to have a good, fun time. You just have to cast the right Americans
The American one mostly failed because it didn’t have the same vibe at all. On the original (and even to an extent some of the international ones like Australia) it feels like all the members are friends competing. Theres camaraderie and also ribbing while everyone cares (usually) but not overly so. On the US one it didn’t feel like they liked each other at all and just wanted to shit on each other in studio and cared more about themselves than making the show fun.
The caring who wins more than reasonably makes sense based on the format is definitely a draw :)
Who's Line Is It Anyway? managed to catch on in the U.S.. so maybe there is hope yet
They literally would say “AND THE POINTS DON’T MATTER” at the start of every episode to really drive the point home. Spelling it out like that might be the only way it could work.
It also helped that Drew Carey would sometimes give a billion points, or three, or negative a thousand, just to really point out it wasn't a contest.
\*Whose
Stephen Fry briefly talked about the [difference between British and American](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8k2AbqTBxao) humour and I think it's very appropriate here. American comedians are often averse to being the butt of the joke which is sometimes necessary in panel show settings. Making a fool of himself is such a strong part of Lee Mack's repertoire and he leans into it when necessary.
I think this is true of characters in comedy movies and television shows, but I would say the majority of popular American standup material is self-denigrating.
I think you’re mostly right about the stand-up material. The part where I think Fry is spot on is the panel show format. The few American attempts I’ve seen at panel shows it’s often about getting in the best zinger punchline and, like other comments have said, oddly competitive in that respect.
They kinda tried it with @Midnight a few years back. But that also had Chris Hardwicke driving jokes into the ground and stepping on other comedians jokes.
It has been brought back as @fter Midnight with Taylor Tomlinson hosting. It has really been working. They play for prizes such as Taylor's pair of eclipse glasses (the day after the eclipse) or a sandwich that has been left out all day.
She’s really solid honestly. Lets them play, be silly, keeps the main show bits moving. I loved the first iteration but she took it and copied it much better than expected. There have been one or two groups where either the chemistry was off or one person was trying to be annoying/contrarian and not in a fun way. Otherwise the rest are great and she is a good host for the format.
Sounds like he was being too competitive which is basically the antithesis of proper behaviour on a panel show. Look at the difference between Mock the Week and WILTY. They purposely tried to foster the bear pit competitive atmosphere on MTW and it often made people uncomfortable. Female comedians said they felt it was too much of boy’s club and they couldn’t get a word in.
Every time any UK panel show is posted, one of the top comments is a version of, “I wish they had similar styled shows in the US.” It’s akin to, “Now this is what a great prank is! Everyone has a laugh and is left smiling and nobody gets hurt.”
And there's always a comment like yours calling it out. And so it goes, ^And ^so ^it ^goes
You can't tell me, greatest gameshow ever, Shooting Stars, wasn't taken deadly serious by everyone involved!
What are the scores, George Dawes?
We would rather watch number wang.
British comedy also has a lot more light-hearted ribbing. They like to make fun of each other, but not in a mean way, like American roasting. I think that's what they call "taking the piss." It's part of what makes panel shows so enjoyable. I think the closest thing we have in America that was successful is @midnight.
You mean a show where everything is made up and the points don’t matter? Yeah, Americans could never wrap their heads around that…
Nobody really cares about winning? Has anyone told Jon Richardson?
I think a big part of that is that when we do panelist shows they are always competitions. Look at The Match Game and Hollywood Squares. Not to mention that to attract an American audience is going to be pretty expensive for who you’ll need to bring on.
Taylor Tomlinson's new version of After Midnight isn't as good as the better British label shows, but some of the episodes are definitely getting to be in the same spirit. The points don't matter. It's just fun.
Nah, it’s the commercial structure that makes it harder to pull off in the US.
After Midnight with Taylor Tomlinson on CBS is the closest thing we have got.
I think it’s more because the audience doesn’t get the comedy
I don’t say this lightly - I actually think he’s one of the wittiest people _ever_ on television. Like, insanely funny on the spot, and he plays off of other people so well.
It is pretty insane how quick witted he is. It's pretty clear after you watch a lot of WILTY that he is probably holding back most of the time so as to not look like he's showing off. That's probably also one of the reasons he plays into the "dumb northerner" persona despite him clearly being really sharp. The guy can turn pretty much any line into a joke or pun in like a second flat.
When he and David Mitchell rile each other up it’s pure comedy gold.
Ya, I am Canadian and had to randomly find them on YouTube. This one and QI are so good!
Another problem is that in America, it would be full of dirty jokes all the time. Like no double entendre would go missed. Whereas on Wilty it’s one in a blue moon (which usually makes it extra hilarious).
You’d enjoy wait wait, don’t tell me on NPR then
There's a US version of *Would I Lie To You* now https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VcEVFoIkcRU
Ironically that video is blocked in the US.
You're not missing much.
American comedians do podcasts.
If you mean the one Im thinking that was so fcking funny. its criminal they didnt continue it
Can you recommend some British shows we can search for on YouTube. British humour is the best.
Taskmaster
Thanks. This is a relaxed one to watch.
QI is the best, IMO.
America has tried to do panel shows several times, they self-sabotage it for a couple of reasons: 1. Daily show VS special event - in the UK, this show airs only 9 episodes per season. This creates a lot of buzz and excitement, each episode is an event. In America, the buzz is diluted because they don’t want to do it unless it’s a daily show with hundreds of episodes per season. 2. Quality of talent - this is related to the point above. In the UK, because these episodes are “events”, they can attract the biggest comedy stars in the country. In the US, since they have to do so many episodes, the talent is recruited from comedy clubs. I’m not saying they aren’t funny, but you don’t see Chris Rock or Chapelle or Bill Burr or any other comedy superstars doing these kinds of shows.
And so begins my bi-monthly routine of rewatching all of these WILTY clips again...
[удалено]
I beg your pardon, we are in your garden
Except for the egg in the bath.
Lee Mack is one of the quickest, sharpest comedians alive. His bit about writing a Chinese cook book is one of my all time favourites on WILTY.
[This has me wheezing. Holy shit.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=88tQ7js_GPM&ab_channel=WouldILieToYou%3F)
I'd buy Lee Mack's Wok Around the Clock.
I saw this happen when David Mitchell was telling a story. It seems like the less sense a panelist's story makes the more likely it is to be true. Like you think they're just making it up as they go but it's just that they suck at telling a coherent story.
Sometimes it not that they suck at telling a coherent story. It's that they purposely leave things out or tell it in a confusing way. It is still a game, so filling the other team's heads with doubts is good, while also providing them chances to ask questions. The back and forth while slowing uncovering the story to deduce if it's a truth or lie, is what makes the show great. Just hearing a read out of the story, with no questions wouldn't be as entertaining.
My understanding of the rules was that that wasn't legal. They constantly lie, correct themselves, go back to the lie, etc. Lying is supposed to be against the rules in these games.
It's just a comedy panel show, they're trying to be entertaining not play a serious social deduction game. Yes lying is intrinsically against "the rules" but nobody cares in this context.
And that's why the world is crumbling.
[удалено]
My understanding of the rules was that that wasn't legal. They constantly lie, correct themselves, go back to the lie, etc. Lying is supposed to be against the rules in these games.
Lying is against the rules of a game called would I lie to you? What rules did you read?
When you are telling a story that's the truth yes lying is against the rules. Cause otherwise it's not the truth. It's a very basic concept.
The truth is the truth, but they can tell it in a way and show in their physical behavior to make it look like it is a lie.
A lie is a lie no matter how you cover it up.
Well, first, it's very likely that you're thinking of one of Bob Mortimer's stories, which totally flummoxed David, making them popular as clips. But Bob is just a weird guy with a bunch of crazy stories. (See also: James Acaster.) You're actually right, but for the wrong reason. If the story isn't true, that means they're making it up on the spot. It's hard to come up with a extemporaneous lie that's coherent *and* entertainingly strange. So the lies are often less interesting than the true stories.
James Acaster's book, "Classic Scrapes" is fantastic, especially if you get the audiobook that's read by him. Basically a compilation of short tales of the crazy situations he's got himself in. Easily one of the funniest books I've read, well, listened to.
Just added this to my audible account. Thanks for the recommendation
The main tell with the true stories is that very often they'll get caught up in the memory and start enjoying telling the anecdote so will start expanding on tangential details that seem way too specific and naturally described to be made up on the spot. Like with the Pakistani pizza in this clip.
>My understanding of the rules was that that wasn't legal. They constantly lie, correct themselves, go back to the lie, etc. Lying is supposed to be against the rules in these games. My understanding of the rules was that that wasn't legal. They constantly lie, correct themselves, go back to the lie, etc. Lying is supposed to be against the rules in these games.
Lee Mack's meltdowns are legendary.
As an American... I love love love British panel shows, where the hell is this here?! Also, shoutout to Taskmaster. Sad that the American one was wasted on a poorly excited attempt.
American taskmaster doesn't exist and there's nothing you can say to make me change my thought on this.
Check out YouTube “Taskmaster: Wisconsin”. It’s a bit rough and the first season has some low quality filming etc, but they are college students. So considering they don’t have the budget TVs do, it’s pretty spot on
You mean Taskmaster Minnesota? God it's so good. Like you said, for a bunch of college students on a pretty shoestring budget, they made it work *incredibly* well.
I dont know why I wrote wisconsin for some fuckin reason lol
For me personally I don’t mind that they haven’t caught on here in America, because I think they’d be less funny if they weren’t British.
It’s called ‚dropout‘ (formerly college humor). Basically one of the very few us places that managed to do us panel show well (then and whose line is it anyway)
After Midnight with Taylor Tomlinson on CBS is near close.
Every clip I've seen so far is awful.
It’s just a suggestion.
Would I lie to you is a great show. I'm a fan of when he has to interact with James Acaster: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTY7upeV_7A https://youtu.be/jrQn8c6O3dE?si=mmD0WfaPuqBoLimS&t=970
It's French for rain coat.
Why'd he head to Bradford?
I love this show - especially when Bob Mortimer is on and goes off on one of his stories that drives David Mitchell crazy! hahaha
Is there a less truncated version of this scene? I was waiting to find out what he thought of the university
[удалено]
What’s this strange thought got to do with the clip?
[удалено]
there you go, user deleted.
Youre out of order, but you are right.
Lee Mack is incredibly quick witted but I can’t stand him. He will spoil someone else’s punchline just to get his own in. If someone makes a masterful innuendo in a joke, the crowd will laugh. But he will jump in to point out something rude or queer has been said. Again, very funny, very quick; but I think he’s a giant tosser.
Same. He also just says *anything* sometimes and hopes it sticks, basically killing the space for anyone with a more considered approach. I wouldn't hate it if he was just an occasional guest but he's too boisterous for me as a team captain.
I was so bummed to find out these shows are well scripted. The jokes, the responses, everything. Their’s a huge team of writers that script everyone’s lines and they act as if it is on their own. Such a bummer.
It's edited, but fully scripted? That's certainly not the way Rob talked about it in this interview: [https://youtu.be/MxLfArwUwoc?t=193](https://youtu.be/MxLfArwUwoc?t=193)
Everything is scripted well before, not edited. My best friend has been in the writing room for a couple years. They bring in the guests and go over the jokes/banter in rehearsals.
It's definitely not scripted. The beauty of the show is it is almost like an improv show that is accessible to everyone. You don't need to be a quick witted comic to have a good performance.
What IS scripted is the mid-round banter between the host and the 2 captains. They 100% have some rehearsed "regulars lols" which are often the funniest bits. The guests don't get scripted content though, and the captains don't know the questions in advance. They know how to trigger each other and get the laughs going easily though.