Alexander Armstrong has a new show

[Jason Larsen]

Alexander Armstrong, who almost got the Countdown hosting job, is to host a new show for the BBC. The premise of the show: Reverse Civilian Family Fortunes. The title: Pointless.

Source: A quarter of the way down on the website http://www.gameshownewsnet.com

The premiere date is not known.

[Derek Hazell]

Alexander Armstrong, who almost got the Countdown hosting job, is to host a new show for the BBC. The premise of the show: Reverse Civilian Family Fortunes. The title: Pointless.

Source: A quarter of the way down on the website http://www.gameshownewsnet.com

The premiere date is not known.

Very clever. A show that starts out calling itself "Pointless" sets itself beyond criticism doesn't it.

[Jason Larsen]

Well, Derek, instead of figuring out the most popular answer to a survey question, on this show you have to figure out the least popular answer to a question.

[James Robinson]

It seems to say today that he was forced to give up Countdown, so he could stay at the BBC. I think Armstrong is fantastic and would have been a good Countdown host, but he does do Have I Got News For You fantastically well and maybe this Pointless show will do good as well.

I hope it goes well for him.

They should try and get him to go into Dictionary Corner at least.

[Jason Larsen]

So, maybe this change won't be "pointless" for him after all!

[James Robinson]

Pointless with Alexander Armstrong begins on BBC2 today at 4:30pm, just 20 minutes after Countdown. Hooray

Every critic seems to hyped up about this new 30-part show, so I hope he can deliver.

I think Armstrong is a fantastic actor/comedian/quiz show host. A shame he didn't get the Countdown job, but Jeff is fantastic, so we needn't worry too much.

Having said that, I would like to see him in Dictionary Corner. He'd be absolutely fantastic

[Jason Larsen]

Can he appear in Dictionary Corner?

[James Robinson]

Can he appear in Dictionary Corner?

Why not? I don't think there's any reason why not. It might not happen because of the whole having to turn the host job down at the last minute thing. But, it'd be brilliant.

[Jason Larsen]

So, it would be "pointless" for him!

[James Robinson]

lol

[Jason Larsen]

Of course

[Phil Reynolds]

I enjoyed it. Some of the production aspects could do with slickening up a bit, e.g. the clumsy shuffling about when contestants swap places at the podium, but the basic format is sound and it has good "play along" value for the viewer. And, not surprisingly, Armstrong is an excellent host.

[Derek Hazell]

I agree with Phil. I liked the show. Hopefully I won't get fed up with this one, as I ended up doing with Knowitalls. It takes a special kind of quiz/game show to keep you watching all the way through.

Is it only me who would like to see Phil Reynolds given a chance at hosting a game show?


ps The contestant on today's show Mohammed is a regular on the intimate late night Terry Christian-hosted ITV chat show "It's My Life".

[Phil Reynolds]

Is it only me who would like to see Phil Reynolds given a chance at hosting a game show?

No, it's not only you.

[Karen Pearson]

I enjoyed it too. Much more fun to play along with than most of the dross we've had recently. Shame they ignored my request for an application form!! I shall try again if there's a second series.

[Jason Larsen]

How many of you were expecting the ghost of Bob Monkhouse to show up?

[James Robinson]

I enjoyed it too. Much more fun to play along with than most of the dross we've had recently. Shame they ignored my request for an application form!! I shall try again if there's a second series.

I agree, Karen. It was a fantastic show. Alexander is a fantastic host. I'll definitely apply if there is a 2nd series, although that must surely be guaranteed. Problem is that I'd need to find someone else as brainy to apply with. Any offers

[Craig Beevers]

Must be quite a strong cross-over of knowledge from that show Karen's husband won a load of money on.

Anyway the last round to win dosh seems quite tough

[Allan Harmer]

I enjoyed it too. Much more fun to play along with than most of the dross we've had recently. Shame they ignored my request for an application form!! I shall try again if there's a second series.

I agree, Karen. It was a fantastic show. Alexander is a fantastic host. I'll definitely apply if there is a 2nd series, although that must surely be guaranteed. Problem is that I'd need to find someone else as brainy to apply with. Any offers

I really enjoyed it too and will be watching it regularly - It's a good twist trying to remember most difficult or least known answer to a question.

The guys yesterday were hoodwinked on Olympic Gold Medallists when they were told it was post 1980 - I managed to get the 4x100 m relay team. I would have a go too.

AA was a very good host and I am sure he will get even better in time.

[Derek Hazell]

I'll definitely apply if there is a 2nd series, although that must surely be guaranteed. Problem is that I'd need to find someone else as brainy to apply with. Any offers

I would have a go too.

Alexander would surely be very impressed if during that bit at the beginning where he asks the pairs how they met, you said through your shared love of Countdown!

How many of you were expecting the ghost of Bob Monkhouse to show up?

Yes, that did kind of dominate the show for me a bit. After all he was one of the original great TV hosts. I even found myself fishing out my "Give a few Bob" Bob Monkhouse badge and pinning to the left side of my chest at one point.

[Karen Pearson]

Must be quite a strong cross-over of knowledge from that show Karen's husband won a load of money on.

Exactly what we were thinking. We both learnt loads of lists and we must have a fair idea of the least likely to be mentioned of those on the list.

It does seem tough to win in the final round but the fact that it's a roll-over makes it very appealing as the amount of money could grow to something pretty substantial. Didn't Eggheads get to about £60k recently?

[Phil Reynolds]

Rather worryingly, I seem to have vanished into a sort of game-show black hole at 3.25 yesterday afternoon and barely emerged for the rest of the evening except to eat and go to the toilet. I watched Countdown, followed by Pointless and Weakest Link; gave Eggheads a miss as it was one I'd seen before; then slumped back in front of the telly for University Challenge followed by the third-place playoff of Only Connect. Out of curiosity, I then flipped over to ITV2+1 to watch the repeat of that new Saturday night thing The Cube, before putting the kettle on and settling down again for Would I Lie To You? (which isn't strictly speaking a game show, but hey).

Mind you, it was worth losing a night of my life to witness this hilarious exchange on University Challenge:

Paxman The one-word English names of three EU member states end in the suffix -land. Name two of them.
Hapless student Ireland and Swaziland?
Paxman (stuttering incredulously) In the EU? Are you mad?

Written down, just how funny it was doesn't really come across so watch it on iPlayer - the relevant moment comes at 17:08.

[Jason Larsen]

James, how often can we say a fantastic show like Pointless comes along?

I bet we all expected Alexander to say, "Welcome to Regular Old Family Fortunes!"

[Matt Morrison]

the third-place playoff of Only Connect.

Here's one for you Phil, occurred to me whilst watching Only Connect.
For anyone to appreciate it, they'll have to have actually watched both shows as the pics I could find don't really show the likeness in its best light:

[Jason Larsen]

Pointless is like "The Family Fortunes Golf Game with Alexander Armstrong!"

[Sue Sanders]

the third-place playoff of Only Connect.

Here's one for you Phil, occurred to me whilst watching Only Connect.
For anyone to appreciate it, they'll have to have actually watched both shows as the pics I could find don't really show the likeness in its best light:

Woohoo - good one Matt

Beeege Traiiiin!!

[Oliver Garner]

James O'Driscoll from the Mathematicians looks like Jimmy Gough.

[Michael Wallace]

James O'Driscoll from the Mathematicians looks like Jimmy Gough.

I lived next door to James O'Driscoll in my first year. He's turned into a bit of a quizaholic - he was on Brainteaser, voted off first on The Weakest Link (it was a tie in the first round and the 'strongest' link voted for him because "he's a Cambridge student"), and made it to the final of Supermarket Sweep but they didn't get the money. I'm optimistic that he'll win won at some point. Maybe.

[Jason Larsen]

I just warched the show for the first time, and I have to give a mixed review of it.

Alexander was great as host, and I do like the premise of the game. The number board and line reminds me of the board from the show "The Power of 10" (Google that if you want to know more about it.)

When I saw the set, I said to myself, "What am I watching, current Cowntdown or Millionaire?." It just seems like every game show set needs to be darkened, especially since Millionaire is still on the air. I do like how it changes color, though.

The theme song is catchy, but, could it be any more juvenile? What child of a musician wrote that tune?

Finally, I would do terribly on this show, as I would do better with pointless US general knowledge than pointless UK general knowledge.

All in all, I give Pointless a C.

[Craig Beevers]

Thought they were amazingly lenient with the names of Oscar categories just now.

[Dinos Sfyris]

...and made it to the final of Supermarket Sweep...

My sole ambition when I was about 8! HELLOOOO SHOPPERZ

[Phil Reynolds]

Thought they were amazingly lenient with the names of Oscar categories just now.

The only one I thought they should have disallowed was "Best Screenplay", since there are actually two screenwriting categories - Original Screenplay and Adapted Screenplay. Best Adapted Screenplay and Best Sound Editing were the two that I would have gone with. Best Sound Editing was in fact a pointless answer, although I was surprised to see that Best Sound Mixing - which I'd have thought was even more obscure - scored 1.

[James Robinson]

Thought they were amazingly lenient with the names of Oscar categories just now.

The only one I thought they should have disallowed was "Best Screenplay", since there are actually two screenwriting categories - Original Screenplay and Adapted Screenplay. Best Adapted Screenplay and Best Sound Editing were the two that I would have gone with. Best Sound Editing was in fact a pointless answer, although I was surprised to see that Best Sound Mixing - which I'd have thought was even more obscure - scored 1.

I was more surprised that they allowed "Best Wardrobe", when the award was for "Best Costume Design".

[Phil Reynolds]

I was more surprised that they allowed "Best Wardrobe", when the award was for "Best Costume Design".

She actually said something like "best costume, or wardrobe, I'm not sure what it's called", so they would have been pretty churlish to have disallowed it. It's not like it made it an ambiguous reference to the award, unlike the "best screenplay" answer. I think this is a different situation to, for example, the Kate Winslet films round where they disallowed "Neverland" (because the film is called Finding Neverland). When you're being asked for titles of artistic works, or people's names, it's fair enough to stipulate that they be exact; but insisting on exact titles of Oscars would mean, for example, that "Best Supporting Actor" would have been disallowed as it's actually "Best Performance by an Actor in a Supporting Role".

[Michael Wallace]

Thought they were amazingly lenient with the names of Oscar categories just now.

The only one I thought they should have disallowed was "Best Screenplay", since there are actually two screenwriting categories - Original Screenplay and Adapted Screenplay. Best Adapted Screenplay and Best Sound Editing were the two that I would have gone with. Best Sound Editing was in fact a pointless answer, although I was surprised to see that Best Sound Mixing - which I'd have thought was even more obscure - scored 1.

Yeah - I did wonder what they'd have done if someone had merely said "best sound".

Must say I'm quite enjoying the show, although the pacing is a little slow for my tastes. That said, I'm getting a bit fed up with the questions where it's more a case of can you remember any of them, rather than being able to know obscure ones. It's probably just the old problem of how you define what constitutes "general knowledge", but I think things like "countries beginning with C" are alright, whereas "songs from Grease" or "Formula 1 Drivers who started in the 2009 season" seem a bit too specific for my liking. I suppose you could say "oh well, songs from Grease pop up in popular culture in all sorts of places" (although I think I'd take some issue with that - you rarely encounter anything beyond the most famous 2 or 3), but with F1 drivers you're unlikely to come across those names (beyond Jenson Button/Lewis Hamilton) unless you pay some attention to the sport itself.

I'd like to see more questions like, say, "elements in the periodic table" or more country questions, where you've got far more opportunities to have learnt about them beyond having seen a particular film/followed a particular sport. Obviously in the later rounds it's less of an issue because there's subject selection, but it seems a bit harsh early on that you can be amazing at everything else but get knocked out because you don't happen to know a quite specific field.

I'm not sure how I feel about the final round either, it seems really quite difficult, but I suppose since it's a rollover that doesn't really matter. I do wonder if this show was on ITV whether they'd do the money differently - I could imagine them having a prize pot where every answer adds to it (£80 for a score of 20, £5 for a score of 95, and then maybe £200 as a bonus for getting a pointless), but that it doesn't roll over (you might have to tweak those numbers depending on how it comes out - I've no idea what sort of totals you'd get). I think that would also stop it becoming a bit stale when an elimination has been decided (sure, you can still go for a pointless, but a lot of the time it's pretty obvious that the answer that's been given won't be, and on the last couple of shows getting a pointless has seemed really quite difficult).

(Ramble ramble ramble.)

[Karen Pearson]

That said, I'm getting a bit fed up with the questions where it's more a case of can you remember any of them, rather than being able to know obscure ones. It's probably just the old problem of how you define what constitutes "general knowledge", but I think things like "countries beginning with C" are alright, whereas "songs from Grease" or "Formula 1 Drivers who started in the 2009 season" seem a bit too specific for my liking.

I'd like to see more questions like, say, "elements in the periodic table" or more country questions, where you've got far more opportunities to have learnt about them beyond having seen a particular film/followed a particular sport.

But surely, if you know you are going to be on the show, you would do some revision on your worst subjects. It's not that difficult to guess which subjects might come up (FA Cup winners, Grand National Winners etc). Personally, I was fine with F1 (despite not being a great fan of the sport) because I did make a conscious effort a while back to learn the names of the drivers. It just depends what you choose to apply your mind to. I probably wouldn't do too well on the periodic table however!

[Dinos Sfyris]

I'd like to see more questions like, say, "elements in the periodic table"

^THIS

[Michael Wallace]

But surely, if you know you are going to be on the show, you would do some revision on your worst subjects. It's not that difficult to guess which subjects might come up (FA Cup winners, Grand National Winners etc). Personally, I was fine with F1 (despite not being a great fan of the sport) because I did make a conscious effort a while back to learn the names of the drivers. It just depends what you choose to apply your mind to. I probably wouldn't do too well on the periodic table however!

I think that obviously if you were going on the show it'd be smart to do some revision, but the vast majority of people watching it (and probably contestants too) won't have. The fact that, for instance, you could manage with the F1 question because you'd gone to the effort of learning the names (rather than just picking them up from reading newspapers or watching the news, say) is what makes me think it's a bit of an unfair subject. Given that the show is about finding the 'worst' answers, it just strikes me as a bit silly to have rounds where there aren't enough really obvious answers to go around the contestants.

[JimBentley]

I've been on holiday this week so have had a chance to see it every day, and I really like it. As Michael said, the pace can be a bit slow, but I don't agree that any of the categories so far have been "unfair", they seem to have got the balance about right. Alexander Armstrong is excellent (his general style of presenting makes me think that he could offer one of the contestants a Pimms at any point) and I even like the statto bloke who looks like Danny Wallace but is called Richard or something.

If it's on for 30 shows, the prize could get pretty big, too, it must be up to about ten grand already and it's only the fifth day.

[Michael Wallace]

As Michael said, the pace can be a bit slow, but I don't agree that any of the categories so far have been "unfair", they seem to have got the balance about right.

Perhaps unfair wasn't the right word - it's more that I'd like to see fewer subjects which are so specific that contestants run out of even obvious answers.

(For what it's worth, I'm not even saying this because I found the topics too tough - I've seen Grease and have a passing interest in F1 - it just seems a bit more reliant on "do you know this subject at all?" rather than "how well do you know this subject?". I seem to be in a minority (of 1) on this, though...)

[Karen Pearson]

I think you have to have a mix of topics and I think they are getting it right so far. You can always complain about a topic that you feel is too narrow but what is a difficult topic for one person is an easy one for another. For example, James and Dan had Grease songs on Who Dares Wins on the money ladder and only managed 3 answers because it was a difficult subject for them. I'm sure there were plenty of people at home screaming at their TVs and calling James and Dan stupid.

Re: F1, there are 20 drivers at the start of the season. I don't remember which round this question came in but the worst case scenario is that the group as a whole had to come up with 10 answers. I don't think that's unfair. It would be far worse if, with 4 couples left, they asked for first class cricket counties where there are only 9 answers.

[Michael Wallace]

Re: F1, there are 20 drivers at the start of the season. I don't remember which round this question came in but the worst case scenario is that the group as a whole had to come up with 10 answers. I don't think that's unfair. It would be far worse if, with 4 couples left, they asked for first class cricket counties where there are only 9 answers.

There may be 20, but I think you have to be fairly aware of the sport to know more than two. Maybe I'm just overestimating the difficulty though (I might have a better grasp of that if I didn't have an interest in it myself).

I think I'm beginning to make this sound like it's a really big deal, when it's really just a minor point. I just feel I'd find the game more enjoyable to watch if they didn't have subjects where some contestants were completely clueless. To me, the point of the game is working out the more obscure answers - if you have subjects where people only know one answer to begin with it removes that element of the game.

[Jason Larsen]

I read a review of Pointless and the person who reviewed it thought Alexander Armstrong was not a good host choice. They said so because he "was trying too hard to be funny."

I bet they're thanking goodness that Jeff Stelling is the host of Countdown and not Alexander Armstrong. I would have preferred Alexander, though because he is more witty.

Nothing against Jeff Stelling.

[Craig Beevers]

Heh just turned over to see some epic stuff.

Second round, question is "word ending in ...INGING"

Spoilery bit:

Question is a word ending in "...INGING"

Two of the answers? SPONGING (seriously) and SEINGING*

[Jason Larsen]

Wow.

[James Robinson]

Did anyone see tonight's final round?

The category was International Flags and the contestants were asked to name countries that have only red and white in their flags.

They won with the pointless answer of QATAR!

Now, isn't the RED of Qatar more a PURPLE colour

[Matt Morrison]

The category was International Flags and the contestants were asked to name countries that have only red and white in their flags.
They won with the pointless answer of QATAR!
Now, isn't the RED of Qatar more a PURPLE colour

The legend goes that Qatar's flag used to be red, and that a new type of dye was used for the original flags. However after being left in the sun, the colour changed to purple, which was then regarded to be a more beautiful colour (by coincidence). That is also why this specific shade of purple is called "Qatar Red"

Mostly it's considered to be 'maroon' - I personally call maroon a shade of red rather than a shade of purple.
You're also lucky you just managed to edit your RED to be RED in time for my reply. It was close.

[Hugh Binnie]

I agree. I thought that Qatar's flag must have been Bahrain's (and vice versa, I suppose) for it to be considered red.

[JimBentley]

I think International Flags was around as a category last week but no-one went for it, and you can't blame them really, it's always going to be a bit of a bastard.

[Hugh Binnie]

I think International Flags was around as a category last week but no-one went for it, and you can't blame them really, it's always going to be a bit of a bastard.

Alexander Armstrong said it was its fifth and final day as a final category, or something like that.

[James Robinson]

I think International Flags was around as a category last week but no-one went for it, and you can't blame them really, it's always going to be a bit of a bastard.

Alexander Armstrong said it was its fifth and final day as a final category, or something like that.

Yeah, he said if no-one picked it today it would be gone and replaced with something else for today's show. I'd like to see someone pick European Football Championships though.

[Ray Folwell]

I watched this for the first time today having seen this thread.
Very enjoyable - and Carol Vorderman was a Pointless answer

[James Robinson]

I watched this for the first time today having seen this thread.
Very enjoyable - and Carol Vorderman was a Pointless answer

Yeah, it definitely is one of the best game/quiz shows going at the moment.

For those of you who don't know, Carol was a Pointless answer on people who have guest presented Have I Got News For You.

EDIT: Glad that European Football Championships was picked today as well.

[Clive Brooker]

EDIT: Glad that European Football Championships was picked today as well.

Naively, I assumed this was going to be a question about the European Football Championships. Learning all the previous winners earlier today was a complete waste of time...

I thought it was a bit off that there wasn't time to tell us all the pointless HIGNFY presenters (although they did give us the most important one). All they needed to do was put them on the screen for a few seconds.

Potentially a great show once the format has been refined a bit.

[James Robinson]

EDIT: Glad that European Football Championships was picked today as well.

Naively, I assumed this was going to be a question about the European Football Championships. Learning all the previous winners earlier today was a complete waste of time...

I thought it was a bit off that there wasn't time to tell us all the pointless HIGNFY presenters (although they did give us the most important one). All they needed to do was put them on the screen for a few seconds.

Potentially a great show once the format has been refined a bit.

Yeah, I agree with you there Clive. I was wondering if it was going to be about the Euros, but then would there have been any "Pointless" answers? Probably only the Soviet Union, but who knows?

The second point I agree with too, I am a massive fan of HIGNFY and was so hoping to know all the "Pointless" answers, although I have to say I didn't think that Carol would have been one.

[Derek Hazell]

Just got round to watching Friday's show.

I knew I didn't know anything about football, but I would have thought I'd have heard of all the teams in the premiership. But never heard of Wigan Athletic! Our chairman will be glad to hear that they thought Southampton should be in the premiership though, and that man-with-the-facts Richard Osman is a big supporter of them.

I also couldn't believe how much one of the contestants looked like Peter Kay's Geraldine character - it was uncanny!

That was very rough on the finalists this time when they had actually thought of one of the pointless answers to win the money (Anthony from "Romeo and Juliet"), but dismissed it because they weren't sure.

It's been on for two weeks now, and I'm still not bored with it, so I reckon that must make it a better show than Knowitalls.

ps Doctor Who?

[Craig Beevers]

Yea I dunno why they're so conservative in the last round, the pairs nearly always go for 1-2 'safe' answers that will never in a million years be pointless - although I suppose they really are pointless answers in one sense.

[Hugh Binnie]

Yea I dunno why they're so conservative in the last round, the pairs nearly always go for 1-2 'safe' answers that will never in a million years be pointless - although I suppose they really are pointless answers in one sense.

Would you suggest making up answers and hoping they're correct, then? It seemed fairly clear from Dan and _____'s discussion that they actually didn't know Romeo and Juliet very well, so guessing obscure characters was probably beyond them. The same is true of most previous finalists, seeming to come totally unstuck on a round they have no good ideas for.

[Craig Beevers]

Well actually that was a question where you *could* guess as it happens, I think there were a bunch of servants with common names that were pointless. That's the thing really that with some questions you can guess and you're better off doing that than going for an obvious answer - in others it's virtually impossible to guess.

[Jason Larsen]

I bet Jeff Stelling was grinning from ear to ear when he heard that!