programmes to watch

I started to watch the first few episodes of this latest series on "Daily Motion," a few months back.

I have to confess that I liked the first series, particularly the production values, clothes, (Regina's in particular), furnishings, classic contemporary recordings etc., but my interest sadly lessened in subsequent series. The new series starts with Regina being released from the mental asylum or whatever it was she was in and she'll obviously be back to her old machinations.

For me, this series really has nowhere to go apart from more of the same as before, so I gave up with it. But I'm sure it will appeal to some.

 

TONIGHT
Ch.4
8pm
New series Location Location Location

 

I saw one of these once. The husband didn’t really want to move. None of the 3 places they showed him ticked all his boxes. The presenters were very rude to him. They tried to bully him into choosing one. He was told “it’s not the property that’s the problem, it’s you.” I would have told them where to stick it.



G.

 

Sometimes it is the people, they don't know what they're looking for until they see what's available. It's compromise and they don't see it. All the boxes sometimes can't be ticked.

 

I agree but it’s somebody’s life they are playing with. You can’t bully somebody into making life decisions just for entertainment.

G.

 

I've always wondered where TV programme makers find all these dysfunctional people for these programmes.

I'm sure they're very selective, there's probably lots of footage where couples are reasonable, sensible and able to make good choices, but they don't make good television so that footage is discarded.

Then there's the others who have no intention of doing/buying anything, but see it as an opportunity to get themselves on TV.

I try never watch any of these programmes, some of them are two or three years old and the prices quoted are no longer relative.

Then there's the presenters. Their prime objective is to get themselves noticed, they hope the programme in which they are appearing is a steppingstone to something better.

and what's with that forty-odd year old, fat git with his shirt outside his ever increasing waist-line, the wavy hands and spikey hair transplant?

The only time I see a bit of any of these programmes is through a bit of "passive viewing."

Urban Dictionary: passive viewing

 

I always laugh when people moan about TV programmes they profess to loath but know lots of details about them. How? I ask myself. Maybe I am better at not passive viewing than they are. There are many programmes that I might have seen a few minutes of, decided it was not for me and never taken notice of again. I am a Coronation Street fan and have been since it's inception god knows how many years ago. The number of folk who have looked down their noses at me liking this programme and yet know all the characters and story lines while deny watching it.

 

Nearly ten years ago I put my "Laws of Television," on Urban dictionary. Nothing in my opinion, has happened in the last decade that has made me change my mind or improved anything.

It's not to be taken too seriously.




_____________________________________________________

From observation, recognising that the general standard of television in my opinion has deteriorated and continues to do so year by year, so much so I now watch very little, I’ve found as far as the programme quality and content on all television channels, the following Doghouse's Laws of Television often apply.

I started compiling this list several years ago and some of these "laws" are now occasionally mentioned by contributors to a specific TV network message board, though of course they can apply to any channel.
I'm sure other contributors may relate to some of them and can think of other examples of practices which could be added to the list.



With a new programme, if your impression of it after ten minutes is that it's going to be rubbish, you’ll only be right 95% of the time.


The number of advance programme trails screened, will be in inverse proportion to the quality of the programme. The ”best bits” of any programme will be included in the trail.

The volume of background music will often be in inverse proportion to the amount of watchable activity on the screen at that time.


Any TV audience gets the standard of programmes it deserves. It’s no good complaining about the quality of a programme if you continue to watch it.

If an idea for a programme suggested to a TV network commissioning department isn’t another soap in one form nother, or requires an "in your face" presenter/auto-cutie, celebrities, judges, phone votes, or the inclusion of dysfunctional members of the public, it is unlikely to be made
The number of programme presenters appearing at any one time, will usually be in inverse proportion to the quality of the programme.

The number and variety of similar programmes on TV, are likely to be in inverse proportion to their cost to present.

To reach the widest audience, in a programme where the subject is of a specific nature, it may include totally unrelated elements in an attempt to also “engage” viewers who aren’t the slightest bit interested in the actual topic, in a futile attempt to increase the ratings.

Some programmes,even a few news bulletins, given the level at which the programme makers pitch their production, should have the words; "for Dummies" added to the title.

If you've any doubts about watching a programme, from the trails or advertising you've seen...... take a chance, give it a miss.

Urban Dictionary: Doghouse's Laws of Television

 

"The Artist," BBC1 last night.
A romance set against the change in the motion picture industry from silent films to "talkies."
It's presented entirely as a silent film, with a very limited number "balloons," of just some of the essential dialogue as it was with silent films.
There's background music and towards the end some everyday sounds, but still no speech.

Worth catching on i>Player.

First time I heard this for decades, though not written until 1936, later than when the film was set, but still enjoyable.



Rose Murphy 1913 - 1989, was better known for this.

 

Usually for me if i don't like it after the first episode i won't watch it again.

I watch eastenders sometimes it can be a bit boring, but i still watch it.

Been watching A Place to Call Home, very good.

 

I might be a bit generous with ten minutes, but "intros and credits " seem to be taking even longer than they once did, so my ten minutes might only include five of the actual story or subject.

I only read the news headlines on the BBC "red button."

As Nookie Bear said about TV commercials. "Good story, over quick!"

 

If they're that desperate to be on the telly they deserve it in my opinion!

Anyway, there ain't much that I bother with on the box at the moment. I record Ashes To Ashes on Drama Channel and Homeland on Channel 4.
Ashes To ashes is a classic and Homeland is still very good.

 

All hale the Quattro

 

And Keeley Hawes done to the nines in classy '80s fashion