The basic storyline is sound and I like the art direction, which is in the spirit of the source while managing to remain inside a reasonable budget. However the editing is bordering on awful - some of the cuts between stunt doubles and the actors are just eeesh - and the dialogue is really not very good. It kind of works as a whole but fails moment to moment. And let's face it, Theron in a skintight outfit is a cheap trick. A bloody effective one, but nevertheless...

It's diverting, but you wouldn't go out of your way to see it. Still better than anything the main channels foisted on us this evening.

Sums it up perfectly.

Mark

It was quite the dress

Russell Brand makes for a curious guest on the Andrew Marr show

I have to be honest, I have no idea why anyone thinks Russell Brand's views on many political issues are worth broadcasting to the nation.

He happily admitted he was promoting his tour at least, then shamelessly gave out his Twitter address

Tbf, he was wearing his heart on his sleeve it seemed and not afraid to question where the Tories got their funding in relation to tax avoidance, or saying that cutting international aid wouldn't be much good if we were only gonna have to send soldiers in later. And so on.

Ah, I'd be wondering why he was around so much.


Yeah, but that's not anything anyone with half a brain wouldn't be asking as well. They're the kind of points your proverbial man in the street would be coming up with. As you say, there's a value to him to being on the BBC to promote the stuff that makes him money, but what's the value to the BBC of having him on something like QT or Marr as oppose to someone who actually might say something the rest of us aren't already thinking?

I raise you

WOW

The way he says it is certainly a bit livelier though, especially in comparison to some of the drones they get on. But yeah, the Beeb have been going all out recently with the 'guest stars' when it comes to politics-related shows. I don't know how anyone sits through that Andrew Neil show for instance.

You're a bad influence

To be fair, there was a question about drugs on Question Time which, as a recovering addict, I think he was the most qualified to answer.

Obviously, the question was there because he was on the panel, it wasn't just a lucky coincidence. They do it with most of their 'celeb' guests. Give them a question on a topic they do know something of and can sound quite cogent on, otherwise they may end up saying sod all, and that's their appearance fee wasted. Brand was never likely to be quiet TBF, but it does also give them a chance to work into things, because they may not really be used to the debate format - comedians, for example, are more used to monologue.

As I say though, on anything other than drug rehabilitation his opinions are no better than yours or mine, and on the issue of drug rehabilitation his views are no better than a lot of other recovered drug addicts. He's on the show to get himself in the public attention but I don't see what the BBC have to gain by being complicit in that. Do they really think Brand fans are going to watch QT because he's on it and then think 'I quite enjoyed that show, I'll watch it again next week'. I kind of think that's unlikely to be honest with you. It seems to me it's just another expression of the attitude (very prevalent at the BBC at the mo) that some people have value simply because they're famous. There are celebs popping up in all sorts of places and you have to think there's actually non-famous people who'd be much better suited - or at least just as well suited, much cheaper and not leaving the BBC open to accusations of being ludicrously star-struck...

Seriously, what is the value for the BBC of letting celebrities promote themselves on BBC shows? Talk shows, yes, that's the deal - you interview the celeb, he plugs his tour/book/DVD. But QT or Andrew Marr? These are shows that are supposed to have some level of journalistic integrity, aren't they?

Mind you, it's not just the BBC. I've just looked at the Guardian's live coverage page for the cricket final (rain stopped play before it started) and in the right hand column is an article entitled 'Lou Reed's shock at Edward Snowden's NSA revelations'. Err.. who gives a screaming one what Lou Reed thinks about that?

FWIW, if you are on the Question Time Panel, you won't get paid. It's a free gig.

http://www.play.com/information/wuaki-tv

Needless to say, their selection's similar to Netflix, but if you're paying £6 a month to them you might as well half your bill if it works out programme/platform-wise.