Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
why the hell is kermode not doing this?
i know he does the culture show, but does he not deserve this?
Couldn't they afford Davina or something...
which isn't too lowbrow - certainly more sophisticated than most of jross' stuff. it's sort of like newsnight review for actual humans.
did'nt (does) she do stuff for the culture show too?
I've never heard it, is it any good?
It's not really the right role for Kermode though anyway. He's too curmudgeonly and specific in his tastes, the Film (Year) programme needs to be a bit more populist.
Kermode reviews films for Radio 5, probably the most everyman and populist BBC service. I like Claudia Winkleman but I don't see how she can fill Jonathan Ross' boots. I was looking forward to Kermode stepping up.
I did think they'd try and change the format to have a Kermode and Mayo tv programme, but I guess it's tricky to replicate the spontinaity of the radio show in a tv studio.
called "The Screening Room". It wasn't as good as the radio show, but it was OK. Having an audience was a stupid idea though.
it's like getting charlie brooker to do points of view.
Kermode was saying on Friday that he's nowhere near populist enough, which is fair enough
Winkleman though? Sheesh
It was that key late 90s moment when Norman and then Lynam both decided that money was more important than credibility and left the BBC. Dark days.
He's dead to me now anyway.
I liked his reviews. I rarely agreed with them but he had a knack of both giving you his opinion but making it clear if a film would be your cup of tea even if he wasn't a fan.
...wasn't money motivated though as I recall it. He had a continual beef with the BBC about not putting Match of the Day on at times when kids could watch it. Having football on at 11pm was scandalous, he thought, and he had a constant beef with them about it.
So when ITV offered him more money and said "we'll be putting our flagship football programme "The Premiership" on at 6pm" he left because that was the time he thought football should be on. He wanted more kids to be able to watch it.
The idea bombed.
Poor Des. All he wanted to do was get more kids to watch football (albeit at a higher salary). And he completely ruined his career in the process.
Would James King not be a good shout for presenting Film 2010? He's fair populist.
To be fair, I don't like Kermode. Any man who thinks the Exorcist is the greatest film ever made and doesn't like Star Wars shouldn't be allowed anywhere near a mainstream TV programme about films...
Also I just remember him completely disappearing. He dominated the BBC as an anchor and on ITV he just faded away. Maybe he just retired anyway.
Des is all about the old ladies, not the kids. Know your level, Des.
I like a bit of Winkleman though, she's sexy.
was James King off Radio 1. I mean, he's a mongtard.. but he isn't Winkleman mongtarded
King would be waaaaaaaaaaay down my list. Chinless little scrubber looks like he's either dazzled by every film he's ever seen and understood or his opinion is very much for sale. I like Winkleman as far as a "what do they do again?" TV frontlady type, but I'd want someone a bit more substantial for the Film show. I'd have given it to Collins too.
I can never tell if Winkleman is a mongtard because every time she's on tv i end up pondering whether she is really super hot or actually quite odd looking instead.
if James King was handed the reins I would probably set fire to my own face. I just cannot stand that plonker.
although james king may have been interesting, if only to give him the opportunity to throw off the shackles of having to please the radio 1 demographic. i could just be kidding myself with that.
having kermode and king host it together might've been funny. or kermode and mayo.
claudia winkelman? pfft.
I mean J.Ross was hardly that good.
wossy was rubbish
i just want to see a kermodian rant on BBC One...
I knew Winkleman would be picked, just the same as I knew Kermode wouldn't be. I'm just that good.
What show is this for?
didn't winkleman cover the oscars this year? if that was her then she looked absolutely clueless and gave the impression that she was hearing about each film for the first time when she spoke. presumably they'll brief her to the hilt for any interviews and give her a script the rest of the time so she should do ok, but it really does jack all for the credibility of the programme.
You don't know what you're talking about. Aside from having more broadcast experience than Kermode (presumably why she applied for and got the job), she has just as long a career in the field of art criticism as any other popular contender and is also a nice lady - which should endear her to all the tired, contractually obliged actors she'll be having to interview.
Mark Kermode on the other hand has a jib I don't like and have never liked the cut of.
Also: If you're looking for the BBC's Film series to be 'credible' it's possible you're not that into cinema in the first place. It's a magazine show for BIG movies.
Naysayers should shut their whinging and go start a blog about what's on at Renoir or some shit.
i didn't mention mark kermode. he said this wasn't the right role for him and he's right.
second of all, i saw her present coverage of the oscars so i have first hand knowledge of what i'm talking about. she looked vaccuous and out of her depth.
third of all, she doesn't have more broadcast experience than kermode who started doing radio reviews back in early nineties. not that this is actually about kermode.
fourth of all, her career in the field of art criticism extends to a masters degree and bugger all else. i've only taken a cursory browse through the web for info on the woman because frankly i don't really care and i've got that renoir blog to be getting on with but christ she comes across as vaccuous. the only vaguely credible arts journalism i've managed to find for her is the bbc2 radio show - absolutely nothing else.
ross is a comedian and mainstream presenter but at least he had a history of presenting film programmes stretching back to the 80's - winklemans move into this seems like a carefully managed career shift away from something (hot gossip, glamour girls, strictly come dancing) rather than a move towards something she's actually passionate about, let alone qualified to speak on.
A masters degree and a radio show about the arts isn't enough to present a half hour weekly film show on BBC1?
it's significant of the fact that she doesn't care enough about the subject to deserve the job. if she really gives a damn about the arts why has she only now got around to doing something in that area in the last 18 months. the whole shift seems cynical to me.
i'm sure she'll read her lines very prettily and most interviews are puff pieces anyway so i'm sure she'll do fine, but she won't actullay be any good at it or take the show forward.
ross balanced the rolls of presenter and critic really well given the difficulty of the task - he was funny, passionate, covered a wide range of films (god knows how many more people are away of anime films thanks to him) and he wasn't afraid to savage a film if it deserved it. i really can't see claudia doing that.
oh, and it's worth noting that the last woman to present the programme was joan bakewell. how far we've come, eh?
"won't just be me. will be with clever critics."
thank god we have her their to mediate for the clever critics. we'd never understand them otherwise. or perhaps we'd instantly turn off because we don't immediately want to have sex with them.
I'd recommend reviewing the content your last three posts - then you can get to work on what your real problem is.
Until then, I'm confident that the people who interviewed her for the job, have a somewhat more comprehensive idea of how much she cares about films than someone who's quickly looked up her entry in Wikipedia. And who apparently, has an issue with women...
the point i was trying to make was about how they were treated or in this case used. to clarify: look at the number of people in this thread, on other message boards, and on twitter whose only comment on this appointment is that they fancy her. compare that to joan bakewell who was a phenomenal broadcaster but still got judged on her appearance.
my point was that the shallow and sexist expectations of the media are exactly the same as they were 40 years ago - the only difference being that 40 years ago the women being objectified was a talented journalist and broadcaster. have you read winkleman's columns in the indie (yes i looked those up whilst i was checking her wikipedia page)?
so yes.. what exactly is my issue with women?
as to the people who interviewed winkleman for the job, they will have reported to basel comely, the executive producer of the show and the BBC Vision Studio Head for Arts, a man reputedly vain enough to enjoy the hell out of that title. it doesn't surprise me at all that he oversaw this decision. i'm sure their glad to have your confidence though.
I thought she was mid-40s or something?
well, either her looks or they're talking about the fact that there's nothing else to talk about.
You do realise Ross's reviews were entirely scripted by researchers and read from an autocue, right? Which of course makes the whole argument invalid, and thats before you take on board that its a wholly mainstream magazine show about "movies" as opposed to films, innit.
but i would argue that ross will have had a lot of imput on what he was reading. he was recognisably a film critic, amongst other things going back as far as the 80's. winkleman is a presenter not a critic and that's the departure that her appointment marks. yes the show covers 'movies' rather than serious cinema but they still deserve at least a basical level of critical consideration, which is why she's bringing in those 'clever critics' to help her out. so what's her job again?
that they only gave her the job so you could get angry on the interent.
She's pretty sharp.
And she's definitely, definitely hot. (Past her peak though).
I don't see it.
and regardless of my opinion of her presenting the programme she is still a pretty lass.
i don't want her presenting film 2010 though
...she's got a lovely face shape, lovely big eyes, a huge smile, exceptional legs and she is also warm, exuberant and funny.
Yeah I find personality sexy, and what of it? Heh...
Not just a talking head to camera but other critics in the studio as well, having a chat. Maybe Kermode would be good as part of that?
how i loathe him
(like Newsnight Review but just with film) it could work quite well, and Winkleman would be OK just as a presenter.
If she's carrying the show, with her doing all the reviews....it'll be absurd. I haven't come across anything that links to her films at all. I quite like Mark Kermode, he always spices things up a bit, and actually think he could become the focal point of a TV show.
If you want to get cynical, then it could be suggested that she got the job because she's married to kris Thykier, who has producer credits on Stardust and Kick Ass.
I like her, although I'm not convinced by this round-table idea. I enjoyed Film 20## because it was a little anachronistic - one person and their opinions directed straight to camera. I hope it's not going to become like a middle-aged T4.
can she present everything ever forever and ever please?
it's the format is the thing....if it's the same as ross...a talking head giving an opinion...might be dodgy
but as a meadiator ala kirsty wark...i think this will work well
she's actually quite a lovable, funny energetic lass i rekon. will be alright. certainly nothing to get on a high horse about like some have.
...after it emerged he was playing for the home team? (Allegedly)