XPost: england.chat   
   From: lucilu@harvey71.nospamfreeserve.co.uk   
      
   "Don Readies"  wrote in message   
   news:cfe7a461.0411231329.1c3a2ebb@posting.google.com...   
   > "Trigger"  wrote in message   
   > news:...   
   >> "lucilu"  wrote in message   
   >> news:cntc9k$kr0$1@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk...   
   >> > Two weeks of 'I'm a celebrity'  :o)   
   >> >   
   >>   
   >> Yeah was forced to watch it in work lastnight, What S**T   
   >   
   >   
   > There's a lot of snobbery about this programme, I loved the first   
   > three series and am not ashamed to admit it. I wish someone could   
   > discuss it from the viewpoint of having enjoyed the first three, but   
   > finding this series a complete turn-off.   
   >   
   > I think ITV have made two major mistakes. Firstly, they should have   
   > waited a couple of months, and shown it in January again like series   
   > 3. When series 3 was on, they said they wouldn't make two in a   
   > calendar year, and Ant and Dec were calling it 'I'm A Celebrity 2004',   
   > but greed took over, and they couldn't resist putting it on again   
   > before Christmas. I think a lot of the target audience will be too   
   > wrapped up in Christmas preparations to take a lot in this time round.   
   > I certainly haven't got the time to watch any of the ITV2 stuff like I   
   > did last time, and will probly even miss some of the ITV1 progs.   
   > Add to that, that in January there is no Champions League, and there   
   > is generally a lull in TV, it was the perfect time for a prog like   
   > this, and ITV have messed it up.   
   >   
   > The other big mistake is that is getting too geared towards the 15-24   
   > age group of tabloid and Heat-type magazine readers. There are not   
   > enough people like T Blackburn or J Lydon to keep the interest of us   
   > over-30s. 'Huggy Bear' sounded an intriguing choice, but he's proving   
   > to be very dull. One total nonentity 'model/ex of someone vaguely   
   > famous' could be expected per series, but this time there seems to be   
   > half a camp full of them. Who are Sophie, Nancy, and Fran? And there   
   > aren't enough contrasts. Putting Peter Andre in with John Lydon last   
   > time was genius, but Brian Harvey and Natalie Appleton will have been   
   > moving in the same circles for years anyway, so what is the point of   
   > that?   
   >   
   > The whole thing seems to be getting tired and stale, thanks to ITVs   
   > greediness. They are killing what has been and could still potentially   
   > be a brilliant format. Even Ant and Dec's jokes are stale - that   
   > running joke about the koala being part of the presenting team is the   
   > most feeble thing I've seen for ages, surely a pair with their nose   
   > for comedy can see it isn't working.   
   >   
   > In conclusion, I think all you snobs will get your way, the series   
   > will lose viewers this time round and you can all smugly say to   
   > yourselves 'it was crap anyway'. But it wasn't, it was great for three   
   > series, it's only this one that I think will kill it.   
      
   I saw the first three and enjoyed them. And so far I'm enjoying this series   
   too. It's early days yet anything can happen so I wouldn't write it off yet.   
   Although I do think you have made some very valid points, especially about   
   the mix of contestants.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)