HomeCinemaBanter

HomeCinemaBanter (http://www.homecinemabanter.com/index.php)
-   UK digital tv (http://www.homecinemabanter.com/forumdisplay.php?f=5)
-   -   TOT Graham Norton and Monty Python (http://www.homecinemabanter.com/showthread.php?t=73980)

Bill Wright[_2_] January 1st 14 04:51 PM

TOT Graham Norton and Monty Python
 
Five minutes? How very strange, especially after all the dross and
padding that occupied the rest of the show. The pythons were a group of
men with far more intelligence and humour on offer than anything else on
the show, yet they only had five minutes.

Bill

R. Mark Clayton January 1st 14 04:57 PM

TOT Graham Norton and Monty Python
 

"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
Five minutes? How very strange, especially after all the dross and padding
that occupied the rest of the show. The pythons were a group of men with
far more intelligence and humour on offer than anything else on the show,
yet they only had five minutes.

Bill


Norton could not afford any more...



Paul Ratcliffe January 1st 14 10:54 PM

TOT Graham Norton and Monty Python
 
On Wed, 01 Jan 2014 15:51:10 +0000, Bill Wright wrote:

Five minutes? How very strange, especially after all the dross and
padding that occupied the rest of the show. The pythons were a group of
men with far more intelligence and humour on offer than anything else on
the show, yet they only had five minutes.


On the odd occasion I unfortunately catch The One Show and there is
somebody interesting on, you can almost feel the presenters urging
the guest to get on with it so they can move on to the next bit
of drivel.
The guest always looks uncomfortable knowing they have been cut
short.

Peter Duncanson January 2nd 14 12:02 AM

TOT Graham Norton and Monty Python
 
On Wed, 01 Jan 2014 15:51:10 +0000, Bill Wright
wrote:

Five minutes? How very strange, especially after all the dross and
padding that occupied the rest of the show. The pythons were a group of
men with far more intelligence and humour on offer than anything else on
the show, yet they only had five minutes.

Bill


They probably achieved what they and their management wanted: publicity
for the Monty Python Reunion.

--
Peter Duncanson
(in uk.tech.digital-tv)

Bill Wright[_2_] January 2nd 14 02:36 AM

TOT Graham Norton and Monty Python
 
Peter Duncanson wrote:
On Wed, 01 Jan 2014 15:51:10 +0000, Bill Wright
wrote:

Five minutes? How very strange, especially after all the dross and
padding that occupied the rest of the show. The pythons were a group of
men with far more intelligence and humour on offer than anything else on
the show, yet they only had five minutes.

Bill


They probably achieved what they and their management wanted: publicity
for the Monty Python Reunion.


No doubt that's what it was about, so from their POV the longer they
were on screen the better.

Bill

Brian Gaff January 2nd 14 12:38 PM

TOT Graham Norton and Monty Python
 
Maybe they do not want to blow too much material before the show they are
going to do as its their retirement fund.
Brian

--
From the Sofa of Brian Gaff Reply address is active
"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
Five minutes? How very strange, especially after all the dross and padding
that occupied the rest of the show. The pythons were a group of men with
far more intelligence and humour on offer than anything else on the show,
yet they only had five minutes.

Bill




Clem Dye[_2_] January 5th 14 02:00 PM

TOT Graham Norton and Monty Python
 
On 02/01/2014 11:38, Brian Gaff wrote:
Maybe they do not want to blow too much material before the show they are
going to do as its their retirement fund.
Brian

I suspect it was more to do with the fact that they were old and
therefore of no relevance to the 'yoof' of today, so a slot longer than
five minutes would have exhausted the attention span of the bulk of the
younger viewers.


Clem

Ian January 5th 14 06:58 PM

TOT Graham Norton and Monty Python
 
In message , Clem Dye
writes
On 02/01/2014 11:38, Brian Gaff wrote:
Maybe they do not want to blow too much material before the show they are
going to do as its their retirement fund.
Brian

I suspect it was more to do with the fact that they were old and
therefore of no relevance to the 'yoof' of today, so a slot longer than
five minutes would have exhausted the attention span of the bulk of the
younger viewers.


Clem

I wouldn't have thought that TV at 11pm on Friday was relevant to the
"yoof", who are likely to be out getting bladdered.
--
Ian


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:05 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HomeCinemaBanter.com