Returning in 2005?


Does anyone know if The Panel will be returning this year? It started again around about this time last year, and I am wondering if it will be on again at all this year. It's a hilarious show, with godd coverage of current events. I haven't seen any advertising for it, but does anyone know anything about it coming back?

reply

i feel it wont come back for a while. the line up on channel ten on a wednesday is pretty full with House, SVU and the Shield. I hope they bring it back soon. One of my favs :)

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

http://www.smh.com.au/news/tv--radio/year-off-for-the-panel/2005/07/05/1120329440888.html

reply

Thank God. Thanks for that nibar.

reply

[deleted]

I hope The Panel never comes back, and that the Working Dog crew come up with something fresh. I mean, I think what kept the D-Gen/Working Dog team consistently good was that they never stuck to the same project for too long, starting up something new every few years (The Late Show ran for two seasons, Funky Squad for one, and Frontline for three). The Panel went on for too long (six or seven years, wasn't it?) - I know that it was only supposed to be loose and light-humoured and all that, but to me the Working Dog guys just got lazy and the show became a formulaic and egoistic vehicle for their tirades. And it kinda stings me to say that, because I loved those guys from their previous work. Because of The Panel, Rob Sitch and Tom Gleisner have done irreperable damage to their comedic reputations (remember the arrogant, pseudo-intellectual dinner-party guest Rob played in The Late Show? He became that guy for real). Maybe the cumulative success of Frontline and The Castle went to their heads...And when you get paid to just sit behind a desk, rest on your laurels and talk, that's only going to go to your head even more.

Santo Cilauro, I think, remained OK but surprisingly, Glenn Robbins turned out to be the funniest member of the line-up (probably because he was the least opinionated and pretentious) and did anyone else notice how they only had Tony Martin and Mick Molloy guest-star together in the first season? After that they would only have one or the other of them on in the same episode, probably because when Mick and Tony appeared together they stole the show. And remember how Jane Kennedy used to occasionally host the show in the earlier years? Did her subsequent low-profile in the media have something to do with her having Rob's child? And Kate Langbroek should never have been allowed in front of a TV camera. I remember reading an article in which Tom attempted to deflect all the criticism against Langbroek, by claiming that people only had it in for her because she was a woman - uhhhh, no, it's because she's an unfunny bleating idiot. And although The Panel has had a fair few quality guests over the years, they've also had way too many morons - the kind they would have made fun of in the days of the D-Gen, but now they just kiss their asses.

Still, (most of) the people involved with The Panel have been funny and inventive in the past, so I still have faith that they can come up with something good. As long as it's not The Panel.

reply

The Panel is coming back, for their annual hour-long info-mercial on Xmas day.

To those Rove baggers, there is a reason he's still on and the Panel isn't. Unlike the Panel, his ratings aren't falling drastically, and that's probably because he keeps the show fresh and doesn't keep doing all the same things week-in, week out, only the things that work.

The Working Dog team seems to be lazy. Even in the days of The Late Show, which was one of the best shows ever, and with The Panel, no matter how good or bad they are going, they always seem to be having more breaks in the show, even mid-year, and then all of a sudden they stop completely. The last couple of seasons were only half a year, then nothing at all this year. Fair enough with The Panel it's probably about time anyway, but they stopped The Late Show when it was at its peak. It seems as though the name "Working Dog" is a little inappropriate to me. Its just such a shame because usually the stuff they do is really good (except for the last 2-3 seasons of The Panel and The Dish).
However, there could be some facts I'm not aware of that prove this wrong.


Obsessed much?

reply

To those Rove baggers, there is a reason he's still on and the Panel isn't. Unlike the Panel, his ratings aren't falling drastically, and that's probably because he keeps the show fresh and doesn't keep doing all the same things week-in, week out, only the things that work.


Let's face it - ratings have nothing to do with quality, and neither does longevity (Fast Forward ran three times longer than The Late Show and enjoyed higher ratings - but what was the better show?).

Rove will continue to be on because he's a marketable personality, his show has lots of high profile guests, and his brand of humour is fairly safe and accessible. I mean, that's fine, there's an audience for it - but come on, there's no edge to Rove's show. It's candy for the masses, and it doesn't have the subversive streak that you'd find in the likes of The D-Gen, John Safran, or even Shaun Micallef.

I'm not even arguing that The Panel is more "fresh" than Rove - to me, they're both formulaic and dull.

The Working Dog team seems to be lazy. Even in the days of The Late Show, which was one of the best shows ever, and with The Panel, no matter how good or bad they are going, they always seem to be having more breaks in the show, even mid-year, and then all of a sudden they stop completely. The last couple of seasons were only half a year, then nothing at all this year. Fair enough with The Panel it's probably about time anyway, but they stopped The Late Show when it was at its peak.


It's a shame that The Late Show ended after its second year, but I don't think it was because the guys got lazy - actually, it was probably the opposite, they wanted to expand their range and do more (surely Frontline was in their minds as early as when they were doing the second season of The Late Show).

However, there could be some facts I'm not aware of that prove this wrong.


The Late Show ended because of the enormous effort it took to make each episode, and also because the cast wanted to do other things - I mean, there was 8 of them, obviously there was some divergence in ambitions, as evidenced by the various directions in which they went, i.e. Working Dog and Martin/Molloy. Unfortunately, nothing any of them has done since has compared to The Late Show. Working Dog had Frontline, Funky Squad and The Castle, but they also must be held accountable for A River Somewhere, The Dish, Russell Coight's All-Aussie Adventures, and most of The Panel. I'd say that Mick and Tony's 1995-1998 radio show was the best post-Late Show venture from any former D-Gen members, but that's probably because the spirit and humour of the show was closer to The Late Show than anything done by Working Dog.

I think it's a shame that Mick, Tony, Jason and Judith didn't continue with The Late Show in some form or another after Working Dog was formed - but I imagine that making the show was hard enough before, to consider doing it with a diminished cast.

reply

"Candy for the masses" is a pessimistic term for popular, and popularity is what television, and all performing arts for that matter, is all about.

And please, don't get me started on that f%^*#$ idiot John Safran.


Obsessed much?

reply

"Candy for the masses" is a pessimistic term for popular, and popularity is what television, and all performing arts for that matter, is all about.


And that means...what? In performing arts, popularity is the only goal, so to hell with quality? The mentality of TV as product justifies everything? Make TV as dumb as possible? No wonder there's so much reality TV about. No wonder Australian comedy and drama is in the toilet. Let mediocrity reign, huh?

And please, don't get me started on that f%^*#$ idiot John Safran.


Too late. Looks like I got started already, in my last post. If you don't like Safran's brand of humour, fair enough, it's your prerogative. But Safran's no idiot, he's quite intelligent and shrewd at what he does (and there's more wit and intelligence in a Music Jamboree outtake than in any entire season of Rove Live). Personally, I find your hero Rove about as pleasant as a fart in an elevator, but I still think he's reasonably intelligent. I mean, get rich and popular by serving people with the comedic TV equivalent of elevator music, good for him. Sure, it makes you a corporate whore, but man do those Gold Logies look good on the mantelpiece.

Or maybe you're just offended at Safran for getting a Fatwa put on Rove?

reply