The Rest Is Entertainment - How many jackpots can quiz shows really payout?

Episode Date: January 11, 2024

Who pays for the prize pot and how much can contestants really win on quiz shows? Food - are the judges on MasterChef eating reheated dishes? And what is behind the success of Mrs Brown's Boys? Those and more of your questions answered by Richard and Marina in this episode. 🌏 Get our exclusive NordVPN deal here ➼ https://nordvpn.com/trie It’s risk-free with Nord’s 30-day money-back guarantee! ✅ Twitter: @restisents Email: [e-mail] Producer: Neil Fearn Executive Producers: Tony Pastor + Jack Davenport Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

This episode is brought to you by Peloton. Forget the pressure to be crushing your workout on day one. Just start moving with the Peloton Bike, Bike Plus, Tread, Row, Guide, or App. There are thousands of classes and over 50 Peloton instructors ready to support you from the beginning. Remember, doing something is everything. Rent the Peloton Bike or Bike Plus today at onepeloton.ca slash bike slash rentals. All access memberships separate. Terms apply. What day of the week do you look forward to most?

Well, it should be Wednesday. Ahem, Wednesday. Why, you wonder? Whopper Wednesday, of course. When you can get a great deal on a whopper. Flame grilled and made your way. And you won't want to miss it. So make every Wednesday a Whopper Wednesday.

Only at Burger King, where you rule. Best Western made booking our family beach vacation a breeze. And it felt a little like... A breeze. And it felt a little like... Life's a trip. Make the most of it at Best Western. Hello and welcome to The Rest Is Entertainment with me, Marina Hyde.

And me, Richard Osmond. Twice a week this week. We are twice a week. We are formally beginning our questions sessions. Questions and answers. And answers, yeah. We won't just be us reading out your questions. Originally, I just thought, let's do questions. But do you know what?

I listened to the producers. They're right. Let's do answers as well. I would say, do you want to begin? But I'm afraid I must begin with a little bit of housekeeping. OK. On our Boxing Day episode where we began answering questions, I suggested that the first appearance of Boba Fett

in the Star Wars holiday special, ill-fated and almost never seen again, made it canon. Thomas Aguilera-Fraga writes in to say, hello, I regret to reinforce stereotypes about Star Wars fans, particularly one on the male spectrum such as myself, but I feel the urge to write in to say that very technically the Star Wars Holiday Special was not the first appearance of Boba Fett. It is indeed the first on-screen appearance of Boba Fett as the first broadcast of the Star Wars Holiday Special was November 17th, 1978. However, on September 24th, 1978,

in the San Anselmo County Fair Day Parade, Boba Fett made his first public appearance. So I suppose Star Wars fans and pedants such as myself need truly to be considering Bay Area parades as canon. That is lovely. Thank you, Thomas. I stand correct. We all stand corrected. And that's all we've got time for today. Lovely. Do you know what? I'm not sure Thomas does regret reinforcing the stereotypes. I think he's happy to.

None of us ever regrets reinforcing the stereotypes. But also, if being in that parade, sorry to take this more seriously than maybe we should, but if being in that parade is canon, if that's the first appearance, then actually the person who made the costume, the first person to see Boba Fett was the first person who drew the costume. So that's it. Where do we go back to? Where do we go back to? I think that's a question, but we don't necessarily want everyone to send in their answers to it.

Imagine if that's what this show was every week. It's all Boba Fett all the time. Shall we try and move on to other areas? Let us. Or should we do another 20 minutes on Boba Fett? Right. Should we do our first question? Yes.

Sarah Cannon says, what are your opinions on spoilers? Does it ruin your enjoyment of something if it gets leaked? Yeah. It does, but i think there is a limit i think someone actually wrote in and said i had no idea you shouldn't have mentioned a certain event in succession because um i'm just starting watching it now and i thought well i mean the clue is in the title a bit and it was on the front of every single newspaper and all over social media for some weeks. It sort of had full cultural dominance. So in some cases, I think you have to be allowed to talk about a thing that has happened in a television show.

There has to be a statute of limitations. I once got in trouble on Pointless for giving away the plot of Great Expectations. No. And it feels to me like that probably is we should be allowed to talk about. Yes. There must come a point. It's not clear when the limit is. I think it's's a bit like pornography you know it when you see it it's it's the old certainly as a writer if i know what's happened or can work out what happened

as i'm watching the thing on screen i'm always thinking how are they going to get there how are they going to do it oh i see yes it does i mean it's it sort of takes away doesn't it but i do think there is a limit to how in a kind of culture what with social media and just any form of media where you can't keep every single thing secret and actually you know that's why linear isn't dead in lots of ways people watch those new episodes of the very very big shows they try and watch them that night the next night and they stay away from social media in between well that's the thing I thing. Listen, I don't like spoilers, but I don't like people who will go on Twitter

and then say, I can't believe you gave away the end of that. I mean, honestly, if you really, really want to watch the end of, whether it's Traitors or whether it's The Apprentice, whether it's Succession, and you're going to watch it tomorrow, do not go on Twitter tonight. That's's really really on you i think i think i think you have to it's like there's the famous episode of um likely lads where um uh the the boys trying to you know avoid the football result they do everything that they can do to avoid the football results so they can watch it on match of the day uh do you know what it's got an interesting ending that show but i won't give away what that ending is in case people so they can watch it on Match of the Day. Do you know what? It's got an interesting ending, that show, but I won't give away

what that ending is in case people want to watch it. And that's from the 70s. So, you know, perhaps I am more sensitive to spoilers, but I think Sarah goes on to say she likes spoilers. She literally reads up on what happens. She said that as an anxiety-reducing tool she goes and reads ahead to find

out what happens, but she is aware that that's unusual. I really, really get that, though. I find it very hard to watch television programmes that are anxiety-inducing. I want to fast-forward through to the bit where it's okay. But, you know, like if someone is wrongly accused of something, I cannot watch until it's been sorted out. No.

I find it unbearable. And look, in my books, if there's moments of jeopardy, I sort them out pretty quickly because I like moments of jeopardy. But I'm not going to let something kind of just bubble for chapters and chapters and chapters because I find it too upsetting. And it's interesting, lots of new dramas and lots of comedies now where actually they dial down the jeopardy quite a lot or if there is jeopardy it's solved quite quickly and i think that's that's becoming a cultural thing because i think a lot of people find

it very awkward to watch things that are tense and so i'm i'm with sarah on that yeah but other than i haven't been aware of that but okay i, I'm going to be looking out for it now. Yeah, I wouldn't go to the very end. You don't want to find out who's won certain things. No. Do you? Or one of the great joys is to be able to watch Match of the Day

not knowing any of the results, which these days is almost impossible. And also, I would never do it because I need to know if Fulham have lost, which invariably they have. Very good question, though. But I do think if you are deliberately spoiling things for people, that's a very, very bad look. That is certainly a character note.

But yeah, great expectations. I will not tell you what happens. OK, Nick Harnett writes, what does the job of showrunner entail and how is someone like Taylor Sheridan, Taylor Sheridan is the showrunner of Yellowstone, America's most popular show. Taylor's production company, 1901 by my calculation, made five to six Paramount shows last year, all massive productions. How is he able to sustain multiple productions at once? Well, the job of showrunner, which we'll begin with, this is a sort of, it's more of a US role and we'll come to differences in the UK in a minute, but a showrunner is the creative authority on the show, the ultimate creative authority.

Most likely they had the original idea and developed it. They may have developed it from source material, e.g. now Warners are looking for a showrunner for the Harry Potter series, which they're going to turn into one whole TV series per book. That's a good idea. Where do they get their ideas from? Well, in a way, they think their property is laying dormant for too long. So anyhow. But the showrunner,

it's a huge job. You are liaising, apart from overseeing all the writing and doing a lot of writing yourself, you're running the writer's room, you are dealing with the heads of departments. Every creative decision on that show comes through you.

Taylor Sheridan is a specific case. He writes, he lives on a ranch, so I think he's quite, and he writes a huge amount of Yellowstone. I think he's written something like 60 episodes of it, which is more than a lot of people will write of television in their entire careers. And as you say, a show that we don't really know over here, but it's the biggest show in America. It's the biggest show.

The Kevin Costner one, right? Yes. I think it's on Five now. Yes, I think it is now. I think they have bought it. What I will say is that a lot of people you see get that many credits. The writer's room has broken the story. Writers have gone away and written first, second, multiple drafts. And then the showrunner might rewrite that and essentially take the credits.

You can imagine what a lot of writers feel about this particular thing. But it's not something I've experienced, but a lot of people do, that does sometimes happen. So people can, it's really hard to be across everything. There's only so much of one person. So he hasn't got a sort of time to, I don't know, like, what's the name in Harry Potter? He can't.

So he can't do it to the extent that someone like Jesse Armstrong would do on Succession. Yeah, it's a weird combination of writer and producer, isn't it? Showrunner, essentially. So in the UK, that would be writer and producer combined. In the UK, you always see executive producer, which always hides a multitude of sins. Yeah, yes.

You know, it can literally be the person who's working hardest to someone who works in the office at the production company. There's an awful lot hidden behind exec producers. And in the US, it can mean writer, because the WGA have been so strong on granting credits for people that you can be credited as the executive producer of a show on which you are effectively a writer and you get

production credits. Well that's it, on those succession credits all the exec producers are essentially the writers in the writer room. Yes. The most senior ones. But those most senior ones will also be in charge of being in charge of a lot of stuff on location doing more than just someone who is more junior

in the writers' room is concerned. I have a question. I like that your questions are about very, very high-end, incredibly expensive American drama, and mine are about daytime quizzes. This is from Dovir Udin. Are the questions on daytime daily quizzes weighted to ensure there isn't a daily payout,

or are the questions selected randomly? I only ask because it seems to me it would be very expensive if the jackpot was won every day. Thank you, Dobbit. Well, it's a very good question. And the questions wouldn't be weighted particularly in that way, but lots of formats have ways of ensuring there isn't a payout. So you'll do like a final round where you could win or you couldn't win the jackpot so on pointless you don't win the jackpot every day you win it every few days um on something like you always have an algorithm so in in your budget daytime budgets are very small but in your budget will be a line item for prize money so when we used to make deal or no deal for example which is a very good example because it's all about money yeah and you got that250,000 box all the way down to the 1p box.

And the average amount of money we were supposed to give away was £16,500 a day. So that's the thing, which means you can win a quarter of a million, but an awful lot of other people are going to have to win £2,000. It's the truth. And there's an algorithm that you put together. For shows that give away a million. You can be insured as well in case

your algorithm breaks. So on Deal or No Deal, we know we've got £16,000 to give away, which is quite a lot given that a lot of people do crash and burn and walk away with £50 or walk away with £500. You can be having those £50,000, £70,000 wins.

Very, very few people, I think four or five in our run of it, go all the way and go for the 250,000 pounds. So you've got a 250,000 box. But the beauty of that format is you're left with 250,000 pounds and 15 pounds. And you're going to be offered 70,000. Very few people are turning that down.

Schrodinger. Very, very few. Some people did, and it's great, but very few people are turning that down. Now, it's interesting, on the ITV reboot of it they've just done with Stephen Mulhern, which is very good, there's no £250,000 box. The highest box is £100,000,

and that is because their daily payout is probably something around 12,000 so they can't afford to have that 250,000 pound in there it's a algorithm in fact an algorithm can the algorithm break like you just said not really not really that algorithm is weirdly written by uh the banker the guy who's a banker glenn hugel who's a mathematical genius uh and so you know that's his algorithm and it's worked for years and years and years and years. But we did a show called Million Pound Drop with Davina for many years, which is a really good show. It was the best-selling show in the world for three years

running Million Pound Drop, the format, yeah. Was that Endemar? Yeah, back in the days where you could make money out of formats. You can't anymore. So we were doing that show and you're given a million pounds, and you move it across various answers and across 10 questions. You gamble some of it, and you walk away. If you get to the last question, you walk away with whatever money you've got left.

And our average payout for that, I think, was supposed to be 35,000, 40,000, something like that, because it was prime time. So it was nice money, because, again again a lot of people are leaving with nothing yeah and so you know you can really bump it up um literally the very first episode we did the very first episode the very first couple on the very first episode uh this couple got all the way through to question 10 and they still had half a million pound on the table, which that's a problem for us because we got 40,000 pound an episode

and we did like 12 episodes. So that's all of our prize money gone in one. And they had like a 50-50 question with half a million pounds. So you have to put all 50 or 500,000 pound on the same thing. And they put it on the wrong trap door and they lost all of it which is awful for them

yeah but absolutely saved the show if they'd won that in the first one is there a sense also that it's downhill from there that they won't do it as apart from the financial outlive yeah I think would you have all felt that okay it's like someone winning a millionaire on the first episode that's the problem is someone at some point can win half a million. Yeah. But on the first episode, you're thinking, oh, hold on. It'll never be as good again. Or have we got this wrong?

Is the algorithm fucked? Because on that show, there are certain junctures at which you have a very difficult question where you're almost forced to split your money because you're asked which is the tallest building out of these four. And it's very, very difficult to have a definitive right answer. And so it's designed to make you split your money because you're asked, you know, which is the tallest building out of these four. And it is very, very difficult to have a definitive right answer. And so it's designed to make you spread your money. But this couple just happened to play it particularly brilliantly.

Now, the problem would be is if, OK, we can give away this half a million. But what if we then give away another half a million and then another half a million? And the ashen faces amongst, that as producers we were quite happy because it's amazing telly uh if they if they win or they don't win but yeah channel channel four were like what have we bought here you're gonna you're you're gonna bankrupt us but yeah so by and large if you watch lots of shows you'll you'll find some of them have end games where you can lose all your money um you know pointless it is we have i think it's like £1,500 a day is our budget. So there's always £1,000 that goes up every day. And then, you know, extra

money for pointless answers and things like that. We had to recently introduce a new round where you could add extra money to the jackpot because we were slightly under where we should have been on our jackpot. But, you know, people often say, why is the prize money so bad on pointless? And the answer is because it's your money. It's paid for by the licence fee. But yeah, it all comes down to when it's commissioned by the channel, you have a number in that budget, which is your prize money number. And if you go over that, you probably have to make up the shortfall yourself.

If you go massively over it and it's sort of everyone's fault, then you share that burden. you probably have to make up the shortfall yourself. If you go massively over it and it's sort of everyone's fault, then you share that burden. But otherwise, that's coming out the bottom line of the production company, which production companies don't like. No, I can imagine. Okay, Paul Leonard says, what percentage of books that have the film rights purchased ever get made? This is an interesting one because a huge percentage of films and TV

are based on books as original material but i am told by someone who works as an agent that about one percent of the books which are options so that that's the ones that they've actually paid for the rights are ever make it to screen it's absolutely right an awful lot of books do get optioned. Of course, your book was optioned. Your book, Thursday Murder Club, was optioned before it even was published. Yes. And bought by Steven Spielberg. And bought by Steven Spielberg.

And that's, well, that's the interesting part, is I've been around long enough to know that most books get optioned and very few books get made. And there's all sorts of reasons for that. Mainly, it's very difficult to get anything made in any genre anywhere absolutely but it's actually quite cheap to option a book so if you're a production company you know you can pay five grand for certain books and have a have a year long have them on the shelf and then you know you can then extend the option another year if you've made progress and you can keep them on the shelf yeah absolutely right so when i was sending the rights to the thursday murder club as you say before it came out and

amblin which is spielberg's company came in and said they'd like to buy it what i'm thinking then is this this book is never going to get made into a film because i know that the numbers suggest that however bigger book might be caramel but you know most things don that. However big a book might become, but most things don't get made into a film. So I think this is not going to get made into a film. However, I'm just about to go out and promote this book. And the fact that Steven Spielberg has bought the rights is a really, really good thing. It's quite a nice thing to have in your back pocket for the interview.

It's kudos and he knows storytelling. And so for me, selling it to Amblin was literally, this is going to be helpful for me in selling this book in lots of different territories and all sorts of things. But I didn't think for a second it would ever get made. It turns out it is going to get made this year, which is very, very exciting. It's been quite a while.

The continuing hard luck story of this book. Goodness me. Yeah, goodness me. It's the little book that could, isn't it? I mean, yeah. When am I going to get a break? So, yeah, it's getting made this year. But, yeah, most things don't.

It's with the streamers and stuff, there's more and more books are being made. And in the world I'm from, crime fiction and thrillers, there's actually quite a good sort of conversion rate. So it would be more than 1%, I think, for crime and thrillers, especially with the streamers. I think now the whole industry is contracting. It might go back to that. But yeah, the truth is it's quite cheap to buy the rights to a book.

It's very, very, very, very expensive to film a book. So in between those two numbers, there's an awful lot of drop-off. And the way those things are structured are you'll get money for an 18-month option. They might then extend it if there's a little bit of interest. But again, it'll be at the same rate. But there's a purchase price on the first day of principal photography, which is essentially when the cameras start rolling.

That's when the real money kicks in. But essentially, the production companies don't really have to spend very much at all to buy a book unless they actually start filming it, at which point they're making money anyway. Here is a question. I wonder if you can answer this because I don't have the answer to this. I suspect you might. Ruth Cousins asks this. Fast forwarding through the I'm a Celeb adverts,

my 16-year-old daughter asked how much ads in a massive show like that cost. I have literally no idea. So I thought I would ask you. Okay. It is about 300 grand for, say, a 30-second spot on I'm a Celeb. And that is obviously probably the biggest real estate for advertising because it's such a huge show. I saw that Ruth also said, has the contents of ads changed

now that advertisers know that at best they're viewed at half-time speed? This is definitely something I feel a bit sad about because I feel like I grew up in a great age of TV advertising where we all sat there and we were hostages. There was barely anything to switch over to because there were relatively few channels. The good old days.

And so you've got those incredible... You know, someone like Jonathan Glazer, who is, I keep banging on about Zone of Interest, which is this incredible film coming out in, I think it was midway through February, start of February. But he was responsible for some of those, you know, the Guinness Surfer ad, the Nike Parklife ad, the, do you know, the Sony Bravia,

where the whole paint tower exploded, the whole tower block exploded in colours and things like with paint. Did he do, we hope it's chips, it's chips. He did not do that one. But obviously there was a whole thing where lots of brilliant directors started in television commercials. I don't feel there's a scope anymore now. You sometimes see it with cinema adverts,

but in general advertising is like get the information out there as quickly as possible and often in writing on the screen because as you say Ruth people are fast forwarding through them and not watching them and a phenomenon I noticed when my children were quite young which was that when we even asked them what they wanted for Christmas I would have an entire list as a child you know like things that I never got I'd like the Barbie house please yeah you'll never get it Marina I'd like. Things that I never got. I'd like the Barbie house, please. Yeah, you'll never get it, Marina. I'd like this. Everything that I'd seen on adverts on TV. My children never watched adverts.

They didn't basically watch scheduled television. So they didn't really know things to ask for unless you sort of took them to a toy shop. They hadn't seen things, which I thought was a real shift. Anyway. I always wanted Skeletstric. Oh, yeah.

Never got it. Never got it. Never got it. It's a shame, isn't it? But 300 grand for for a 30 second commercial then that's quite long a 30 second one you don't you know so not they're not all paying 300 grand but um so you need to be the big very very big brands to do that and you know tv linear tv advertising which which would be our big main channels you know

declining hugely so every story is oh oh, the collapse of linear television, the collapse of, it's still massive. I mean, it's still sort of the most effective thing you can do to launch a brand or to keep a brand up. But it's, yeah, as you say, it's not what it was in the days of, we hope it's chips, it's chips. Yeah. There is one thing which is bigger,

which never obviously used to exist, which is sponsorships of shows, but brand sponsor shows, because then they get that minute, the 20 seconds at the start, when you're sitting down to watch and it will go on the front, whether you're watching at catch up, whether you're watching at anything. So that is a much bigger business than it ever was. And there's all sorts of legislation around how many adverts can be shown. I think an ITV commercial hour is 46 minutes, a half hour would be 24 minutes. So you've got six minutes of adverts or 14 minutes of adverts.

Someone who's in the show that's being advertised in is not allowed to do the voiceover, for example. News readers are not allowed to do voiceovers, things like that. So all sorts of little rules. But, yeah, that's why whenever you watch something on ITVXA or your foreign demand, if you pay to get rid of the adverts, they're all 46 minutes long yeah if that which is you know that's that's uh the rest of it is adverts um let's take a 300 000 pound break shall we yeah working at your local tim's is more than serving

coffee it's building connections with a team in a great environment connecting with your guests in the community and participating in programs like smile Cookie and Hockey Card Trade Nights. So join your local Tim's team today. Apply now at careers.timhortons.ca. Welcome back, everybody. Marina, I have a question from Christine Knight. I think this is a great question. With the rise in true crime podcasts and documentaries for entertainment, has there ever been a story told which, in your opinion, should have been left alone out of respect?

Oh, that's a good one. It's how it turns out, which is whether or not you think it's been respect. I personally don't think anything should be off limits for art or creativity. Some of the true crime podcasts, I think, seem to me complete voyeurism and are awful. But that's just a question of execution. I don't think that anything should be beyond being tackled as a subject. One thing I would say over the past few years

is that I'm very, very bored of the propensity for any story to become immediately too war almost immediately after it's happened a crime story two warring documentaries then a book and then a kind of Netflix drama I I can you've by the time you get to the end I don't know the Elizabeth Holmes story or something like that you think yeah I think I'm across what happened on this one now I think I think I'm across the con now. So I think that what will get scaled down, and now there's going to be probably half as many scripted shows as there were if we've passed the era of peak TV or whatever,

but the documentaries will continue because they're much cheaper to make. It just depends on the execution. Actually, the recent ITV drama, The Long Shadow, or last year's, which was probably the first time that Yorkshire Ripper story had been told from the, actually the victims don't like the phrase, the Yorkshire Ripper, so my apologies for using it, but from the point of view of the women

and the point of view of the families of the victims. And so that is an example of something where, yes, I think going back to that story, yes, again, would just have been sort of salacious and we kind of know it, but doing it from that different angle, put right lots of wrongs that maybe past dramas have um have have wrought and so i think that kind of it just depends on the execution but i don't think anything should be off limits yeah there's certainly some schlocky ones that when you you

start watching in five minutes and you're like oh this yeah i i suspect this is not for me and that's difficult it's me you can't really legislate against it but yeah again there was an itv one the sixth commandment the timothy spool one about the awful sort of narcissist he moved in with old people and killed them and it was it was so beautifully done i was talking about my wife and i listen to lots and lots of true crime podcasts and i think one of the things you can take from it is there is an undercurrent in lots of them are very troubled, narcissistic human beings who then become awful and controlling. You know, that seems to be a subset of...

Is that the podcast, as I sometimes feel? Well, listen, no comment. But I think it's quite useful sometimes in working out who the people are who commit crimes. And I think so long as a podcast nails its colours to the mast very early which is this is about the victim I'm talking to the victim's family and they're happy to talk to me they understand why I'm doing what I'm doing then I'm always very very happy to listen to them but the other cautionary tales I suppose but yes occasionally you'll listen to podcasts and there's sort of a glee in people's voices or it's clear that the investigative reporter wants to be the star of the podcast.

And you just think this. I like the way it's sent up in Only Murders in the Building where Tina Fey plays a sort of absolutely kind of exploitative. I think she's got a sort of about six franchises of crime podcasts by this point. So I think, yes. of crime podcasts by this point. So I think, yes. But obviously at the kind of lowest level, I would say it is honestly people just turning up to crime scenes saying I'm doing a podcast

and they've just got an iPhone and I just don't think that's obviously remotely acceptable. I know you hear from the police these days and they're saying every single time there's any sort of investigation, there's like five podcasters. Yeah, no, are you? No, those people should, if it's not,

if it's honestly just you doing it for TikTok, then I don't think that that is something that should be democratised down to that extent. I think whenever covering stuff like crime, you should have a whole structure where you can put the content you're creating through various checks and balances and it can be questioned ethically.

And I just don't think one person acting alone can do that. Thank you, Christine. Great question. OK, here's a good one. Paul O'Connor says, why do all children in American film and TV shows have to sound like adults? Usually adults with insight into the particular problems of their parents' guardians.

Is it just American scriptwriters who seem incapable of adapting that children are children? Well, it's hard, isn't it? Because you need every character in something to do a job for you. And you've got to move the story on or be insightful one way or another. And that thing of, oh, actually, if I put these words in the mouth of an innocent child, perhaps they'll carry extra weight. Well, I'm afraid to say that I think American children

can deliver those lines. This is a very unpopular opinion, but I'm of voicing and yet here I am I think American children wipe the floor in terms of acting with British children I just don't really think British children can act I just I I really think there's something in American culture maybe it's having you know kind of dominated global culture they they entertainment culture for the last half of the 20th century. They sort of know how to say lines. They're kind of instinctive performers. I remember seeing Millie Bobby Brown on Stranger Things

and thinking, wow, she's very good. Someone said, she's British. And I thought, what? Hang on, my theory's broken. Then I had to look, oh, raised completely in America. Well, there you go. British kids can't act. Did your daughter get turned down for the EastEnders audition? No, but look in America. Well, there you go. British kids can't act. Did your daughter get turned down for the EastEnders audition?

No, but look at the Harry Potter, I mean, look at the George and Harry Potter. I'm sorry, but they honestly get worse as the series goes on. I think British child actors have gotten an awful lot better. There's some amazing stuff. By the way, there's an amazing

Harlan Coben's show, Fool Me Once, which is brilliant on Netflix. There is a two-year-old kid in that who absolutely steals every single scene she's in. She is amazing. She's got no lines, because she's two, but she's absolutely brilliant.

Next question is from Andy Williams. He says, based on your recent discussion, read the need for hard comedies on TV. Is that the rationale for the continual recommissioning of the awful Mrs Brown's Boys? Is there a market out there for this programme? Or is there something I'm missing?

Really, its export value seems to me a very little artistic or comedic merit. So I'm really interested in your views on why it may be so popular and why it survives. Andy Williams has changed since You're Just Too Good To Be True, hasn't he? We talked about hard comedy, and hard comedy essentially just means

proper old-fashioned comedy that people are good to be true, isn't he? We talked about hard comedy, and hard comedy essentially just means comedy that people, like proper old-fashioned comedy that people are going to laugh at, not kind of smart-arsed, you know, comedy, but just kind of very mainstream comedy. It's a good question, but it's, gosh, people find Mrs Brown's Boys very difficult. This is what I would say about it. There are an awful lot of comedies that, you know,

well, certainly used to be 10 years ago, released every year in Britain. Most of them don't exercise people. And the reason they don't exercise people is because nobody watched them and they disappeared and they didn't go for another series. The reason that Mrs. Brown's Boys upsets people so much is because it was wildly popular and it was wildly successful. I mean, hugely successful. And the reason it was hugely successful is because of all the shows that are a bit like Mrs. Brown's Boys, it was the best. And it was done by a cast of people who've acted together for years and who've done theatres for years.

And it was done with a sort of glee that was absent from a lot of other television programmes. And it was done maybe from a different perspective of humour from other television programmes. So it was something that had been massively underrepresented. There were an awful lot of very, very clever comedies coming out 10 years ago. Well, not represented for a while. It's clearly a nostalgic thing to it all. It's that old studio audience kind of comedy

that you just don't see anymore. Exactly that. And done well. And I know people don't want to hear that because... Yeah, it rates well. Otherwise, they wouldn't keep recommissioning it. Also, if you don't like it, if you don't like that humour,

none of it is going to win you over. But Brenda Lowe Carroll, who is Mrs. Brown, is a brilliant performer, brilliant writer. It's not a woman. Mrs. Brown is not a woman. What?

Which again, was very, very ahead of the curve. Can we stop please? I mean, I'm going to need a moment to process this. First of all, you're saying Mrs Brown's voice is good

and now Mrs Brown herself is a man. I noticed you didn't. Yes, yes. Carry on. So I think it's a brilliantly put together bit of television and if you don't like it, you are going to absolutely hate it

because it has the courage of its convictions. It does what it does to the absolute nth degree. And it is greatly loved by viewers, which is nothing more infuriating. If I can just break another little bit of news since we're in the exclusives game, there is other TV. I mean, it's fine not to watch it. Exactly that. I mean, I personally don't watch it,

but there's plenty of other things for me. Marina, you shocked me. But if this is the sort of thing you don't like, then it is infuriating that it is so popular. You know when you watch a show that everybody seems to love and you're like, I'm sorry, I don't get what this is at all. And it really, really is enraging sometimes where you go, how are people missing the fact that this isn't good? And the truth is maybe it is good.

It's just there's something about one's own sensibility that means you don't like it. It's like when you look at the replies to a tweet and you go, hold on, everyone's an idiot? I really want to know the answer to this. Lily Williamson writes, I'm an avid watcher of cooking shows and competitions, but I'm always flummoxed as to how the food

looks so fresh or warm for the judges or critics to try when they obviously can't eat or film everything at once, can you explain the process of the judging sections please if you have any insights, I would love to know those My only insight from the few cooking shows I've been around is the food is cold, you give it a bit

of a spray to make it look a bit glossy and it's well lit. The food stylists, yeah, they, what, with a little bit of oil. Yeah,

but yeah, they're essentially eating cold food, which on Bake Off is fine. Yeah. That's why Bake Off is the truest of all those formats. But also, the judges know,

they can judge semi-lukewarm food, can't they? Yes, I guess. Yeah. Let's pitch a show to the BBC called Can You Judge Semi-Lkewarm food, can't they? Yes, I guess. Let's pitch a show to the BBC called

Can You Judge Semi-Lukewarm Food? Have you seen that Is It Cake on Netflix? Yeah, I love Is It Cake. Again, no problems there. That was a lot of fun. That was brilliant. The questions are so good. There are so many of them. We will get through as many as we can.

Do please send others if you wish the rest of this entertainment at gmail.com and we'll be doing the same next week so we'll be back on tuesday with a regular episode yes and then on thursday with more questions see you next week everyone bye © BF-WATCH TV 2021