Broken News

Having been house bound with a remote, Freeview television and more channels being seeming to be added daily with nothing new at all to see, this expressed my my exasperation with TV today. I had not had so much fun in ages.

One hopes that media types rightly cringe at the wicked accuracy with which they were targeted. More TV airtime has left programmers with a very large amount of time to fill with very little worthwhile, Anbody forced to watch "fast breaking news" for any length of time will appreciate the banality portrayed in this show.

I am not sure however, that the joke is sustainable beyond its run - it is effectively a one-gag trick. But for a limited run - I think this is a worthy and very funny parody of the lamentable TV we are spoon fed.

Enjoy

The writing in incredibly witty. Its observations on news presentation are embarrassingly true to life and humour is used to good effect. Worth watching for these reasons alone but the roles played by many superb actors, Benedict Cumberbatch among them, raise its quality to a high level.

It is perhaps inevitable that Broken News will be compared to The Day Today. Although The Day Today is probably the funnier of the two shows, I don't feel that this means Broken News should be written off as a waste of time. Both shows may be satirising the same subject, but they choose different ways to do it. Broken News perhaps stays closer to the real thing while The Day Today chooses to get a bit more surreal with the stories they report. Despite the similarity between the two shows, I don't get the feeling that Broken News is trying to copy The Day Today.

The back of the DVD box says the show satirises "the on-screen world of rolling news where there's too much airtime and not enough news to go around". That's a pretty accurate summary of the show and some of it is cringingly familiar. The recognisability of it makes it even funnier, especially when you then go back and watch the real news and see those things happening there. Some of the parody is actually pretty close to reality.

The show holds up to repeat viewing quite well. Many of the jokes are quite subtle and it's easy for them to slip past you the first time. There are also the ticker-tape messages scrolling across the bottom of the screen which you tend not to read the first time you watch an episode. I found these particularly funny in the "hijack" episode (which is also my favourite episode).

The large cast did help to lend an air of reality to the whole thing and virtually all of them were convincing. Having real Americans playing the American newscasters was also a nice touch which could have easily been overlooked.

My only complaint was that the same jokes did get used in several episodes. In some cases this worked well, but in other cases I did feel like hitting fast-forward. However, the "channel hopping" format of the show actually works in its favour here as it helps segments appear longer than they really are without drawing a joke out for too long.

If the BBC commission a second series, I hope they add more writers. I think there's certainly scope for more, although the stories would probably be more surreal in order to avoid going over too much of the same material from the first series.

This blatant "Day Today" rip off promised a new, cutting edge BBC comedy. It's nothing of the sort, rather a tepid satire on the banality of television news but without the biting humour and insight that Chris Morris and Armando Iannucci provided for "The Day Today" and "Brass Eye".

Where does "Broken News" fail where the older shows succeed? 1) It's made itself a one trick pony: In episode one it shows the headless chicken style of modern TV news reporting, where no actual information is reported and presenters just love the sound of their own voice. Fine, after half an hour we get the joke. Then it's repeated week after week. Same joke, same premise. The show doesn't progress, introduce new elements or play around in its own rigid format. The American news desk will always be the same, the "Look Out East" crew will have suggestive banter in the same manner and Standing News was great as a one off joke, but it's repeated again and again.

2) The cast. It must have seemed like a great idea in the planning stages to have quality dramatic actors such as Benedict Cumberbatch, Pip Torrens and Claudia Christian in a satire/sub-sketch comedy show but these things are best done by comedy actors...even a team of them. There's no chemistry between the cast, which is huge (what a waste of money) and what made "The Day Today" and "Brass Eye" so good was the caricature like characters created by a smaller but gifted comedy group. Can any of the "Broken News" characters stand out like Alan Partridge, or Peter O'Hanrahahanrahan, or Austen Tasseltine or Ted Maul? The cast are playing it too serious, too real and the result is a flat comedy.

3) Blatantly stealing from "The Day Today". We're not just talking about the concept, but the actual material as well. Frozen urine, death penalty reports by glamorous American journalists, nonsensical captions, fake football team names, overwrought graphics...all done on "The Day Today" and done much better.

The BBC comedy department is at one of its lowest points at the moment. It's overly dependent on "Little Britain" and Ricky Gervais to keep it afloat for one thing. It thinks by re-hashing old comedy concepts such as "My Family" and "Broken News" it will count on getting viewers who have put much better equivalent shows out of their memories and it is fiercely loyal to character based sketch shows which can spin out episode after episode of 8 characters and their stock catchphrases. This is hardly a recipe for growth and surprise.

This is much better than some of the IMDb reviewers have claimed. Its parody of the reporting styles of news channels is spot-on. I particularly like "Look Out East". I presume many of those responsible for the main channels and programmes must have seen this show. That being so, it's a mystery to me that they nevertheless carry on in the same hackneyed and repetitious manner. I can only conclude that they simply cannot do any better. What a depressing state of affairs.

The show has its faults. Ironically, it is itself needlessly repetitious. The writers seem to have had the same problem as the channels they lampoon: too much time to fill and too little material to fill it. There is a series of six programmes, but to see two of them (any two will do) is probably enough. The rest is just more of the same.

Also, the guy doing the Hollywood news is way, way, way over the top and out of kilter with the carefully measured performances of everyone else.