![]() In Immortal Egypt (BBC2) the engaging and highly enthusiastic Professor Joann Fletcher explored what she contends is the “world’s greatest civilisation”, beginning well before anyone thought to commemorate himself by throwing up a pyramid. All in all, an amiable enough half hour, and no one will ever accuse Insert Name Here of taking itself too seriously. Here, there was nothing established to undermine, unless it was the very notion of the panel show. With its breezy contempt for its own formalities, Insert Name Here occupies roughly the same ground as 8 Out of 10 Cats Does Countdown, although the latter has the distinct advantage of a well-understood and much-loved set of actual rules. TV historian Kate Williams repeatedly made the mistake of both knowing the answers and saying them out loud, as if she were on a proper quiz show. In fact, a lot of the jokes were at the expense of the format it felt like a parlour game played by people not entirely at home with the rules. “It’s a bit worrying for the longevity of the show that the first person we’ve chosen doesn’t even have the right name,” said team captain Josh Widdicombe. To be fair, this was not unremarked upon. When a secret Frank was settled upon, panellist Rob Beckett suggested it could be Anne Frank, which, though in mildly poor taste, made more sense than the actual answer: Frances Gumm, aka Judy Garland, aka no Frank at all. To kick things off, panellists were invited to choose between a Smooth Frank, a Secret Frank, a Heroic Frank and a Sporting Frank, about whom they would be asked trivia questions. That name – for this inaugural instalment – was Frank. The aim is to “find out everything you never needed to know about a group of people with just one thing in common – they’ve all got the same name”. Insert Name Here (BBC2) is a new panel show with Sue Perkins in the host’s chair and a premise that doesn’t really sink in on first hearing. Eat beforehand, and wait at least an hour. But if you like your crime dramas dimly lit, ably acted, only occasionally preposterous and chock-full of cut-open dead bodies, then Silent Witness is still right where it always was. The preview I watched was accompanied by a request not to mention how things fare with Dr Nikki at the end of this, the first of two parts, so I’ll just say they don’t fare great. If that sounds complicated, it’s way more complicated than that. Meanwhile, a mildly creepy old flame is sniffing round Dr Nikki. An exhumation is called for, much against the wishes of the victim’s son, a priest. In that case she ruled suicide as the cause of death, and now fears she may have been wrong. This crime scene is eerily like one Dr Nikki presided over some years ago. He also has a broken nurse’s fob watch jammed halfway down his oesophagus. ![]() ![]() His wrists are both so comprehensively slit – tendons and all – that once he’d done one he wouldn’t have been able to do the other. In the main plot, Dr Nikki Alexander (Emilia Fox) is at the scene of the apparent suicide of a “semi-famous” DJ, only it’s not a suicide. And it remains, as yet, part of a subplot. The woman landing on the car, it transpires, was an event from 10 years ago. Silent Witness is never afraid to be complicated before they present you with the latest jigsaw puzzle of a case, they like to give the box a good shake.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |