Radio Times

Musicians are no more guaranteed to be funny than chefs are guaranteed to be able to perform on the flying trapeze. The odds that a bass player will say anything remotely interesting are minuscule - you need only flip open the NME to see another bunch of self-absorbed music industry puppets blathering on in a self-indulgent fashion. So the premise of a TV show in which they answer questions about each other is, well, just asking for trouble.

Of course, music quizzes aren't new to television. Mike Read hosted Pop Quiz throughout the 80s. I was unfortunate enough to watch a couple of episodes over Christmas, and man alive, time has not been kind. Toyah seemed to have some kind of attention deficit disorder, the massed ranks of Spandau Ballet looked nervous and fidgety, and Roger Taylor from Queen was so pumped up with competitive zeal that he looked as if he was about to participate in a welterweight boxing bout.

But at least Pop Quiz wasn't pretending to be funny. It was just a bad quiz show. Never Mind the Buzzcocks, however, has been masquerading as comedy for more than ten years, and a brow-furrowing 21 series.

Granted, it's marginally better than They Think It's All Over used to be. But they axed They Think It's All Over. The concept of both shows is just badly, badly flawed: pose some vague, open-ended questions, and hope that the comedians can riff their way into a laugh or two, while the non-comedians flounder helplessly, either delivering pre-scripted lines with all the comic timing of a sat nav, or just sitting there looking confused.

And with Simon Amstell at the helm, Buzzcocks has gone from being mildly unpleasant to downright tedious - a rambling, stilted chat show that feels as if you've stumbled on a dinner party where all the guests hate each other's guts.

To save the concept, they've tried to reposition it as the programme that pokes fun at the pompous world of pop. But by laughing at the inconsequential nature of pop stardom, they're just digging a highly unstable tunnel right underneath the show. Phill Jupitus even referred to it recently as "some crappy panel game" - indeed, everyone on the show constantly and self-consciously refers to how rubbish it is. "I'm in hell," said comedian James Lance on last week's show, with no apparent irony. And yet we, the punters, are expected to rate it as top-notch entertainment.

They'd be better off sticking Phill Jupitus and Bill Bailey on a sofa with a couple of pints and letting them discuss 30 minutes of archive pop videos. That's where the value of the show is. Everything else is fulfilling some desperate criteria to appeal to the 15-25 demographic, while forgetting about what actually makes good telly.

At the 2006 British Comedy Awards, Jonathan Ross said he would love to give an award to whoever made the decision to cancel They Think It's All Over. If that same person could unplug the life-support machine of Never Mind the Buzzcocks, they would be doing the whole country a great service.

Another of my favourite shows written off, I honestly can't believe it. Why does everything have to be so black and white for you?

With the references to musical acts of the 70, 80s and early 90s it's clearly not aimed at the 15-25 demographic at all. By your reckoning I'm right near the end of their intended audience and even I consider myself far too young to get some of their jokes. I love this programme and look forward to it ever week. I loved it when it was hosted my Mark, but I have go to say I've rather gotten used to Simon and he's doing a really good job of it so far. Now, I know opinions are just opinions, and yes, it is scrpited and somewhat false, but you must be lacking in a sense of humour to write this off as much as you have.

You need to be a certain age to find it funny? Well I'm 59 and a retired Chartered Accountant and I find it very funny although not as good as Mock The Week. It's not age that counts but attitude of mind.

Whoever wrote this article is an idiot! Full-stop! I honestly feel like Buzzcocks is one of the few remaining funny shows left on tv. TV schedules seem to be full of rubbish like Little Britain or Catherine Tate, or even worse American sit-"com"s, were people get laughs (albeit canned laughter) for walking into a room, wearing a silly costume or using a crap catchphrase. They can't even manage it half as well as the likes of Monty Python did years ago. At least Buzzcocks has lost the art of slagging someone to pieces, whether they deserve it or not. (Usually they do!) That makes me laugh!!

too be fair, theres not much credible music these days to make a credible show lamarr was great and had something amstell certainly doesnt frys episodes were great tho and as much as i love jupitus he doesnt seem to do much these days slash all thier wages, might make them work harder!

I'd love to know what you do find entertaining and worth cracking a smile for. Having quoted the fool called Ross, I wouldn't be surprised to find he is the sort of thing you find hilarious. Which I find utterly unbelievable. There are so many things on tv that are a waste of time and money, with attempts of being comedy so leave Buzzcocks along.

I wouldn't be surprised if it is cancelled though, all the good things seem to be attacked and vanish.

Oh and just to let you know, I'm 18 years old and i have watched the buzzcocks avidly with my father for many years and have never had a show where we didn't laugh alot. I think age is nothing to do with it, some people have the humour and wit to get these kind of things such as buzzcocks, QI and have i got news for you. Whereas others don't and feel the need to p off the people who do.

Buzzcocks rocks...what is wrong with you people!!

Oh RhodriM. You just wish you had a pop quiz of your own to host, now don't you? Just come right out and say it. Instead of writing passive aggressive blogs about a really good one.

personally i think that the show is great and a good source of light hearted fun. I have many friends and family members who feel exactly as i do about the show. If you look at the show as a bit of fun i think you would enjoy it 10 times more.

I feel it's not as good as it used to be, but the episode with Stephen Fry as a guest captain had me in stitches. Not all episodes are gems, no series can have it that way, but the style of the show has to change with the times. Amstell while having presented before is still inexperienced in the role and often it shows, but it is very much deliberate. The comedian captains are really there to fuel the show with jokes not Amstell. It has to change because it has been on the TV for 10 years after all.

My daughter watches Buzzcocks, and as she was visiting last week, I had to watch it. It was so cringy and I dont think we laughed once. How did Simon Amstell ever get a job. He is not the least bit funny and loves making a fool out of the guests. Get rid of him.

The problem is that the format has changed to a poor chat show - Amstell asks these lame questions to each of the guests "...and what about it everyone is here (stilted round of applause)"> Very tedious. The guys funny, but he just can't handle the more complex format that being a front-man on this show requires. He's not quick enough and his attacks seem childish, bullying and formulaic as he reads them all of his cue cards. This is being shown up even more this series by the lack of Bill. If he were there we would see the spontaneity that the show used to have. If he's smart he won't come back to the sinking ship !

Buzzcocks has gone from being very funny in the early days to simply mean spirited. The name of the game appears to be lets humiliate one of the guests. Said guest seems to have been chosen particularly for that purpose. Purporting to be a comedy it's actually playground bullying, watched by the bullies. Pathetic really.

I used to like Buzzcocks before that pillock Amstell took over. he really is extremely unfunny, and just seems to amble through every show expecting his ego to get him through it. The show desperately needs a drastic makeover, and please, for the love of God, get rid of Amstell! Phil Jupitus and Bill Bailey are excellent though, and I generally only watch the show for them now!! Unfortunately, Buzzcocks is yet another show that has been ruined by BBC complacency, and the over inflated ego's of the people who appear on it!

Oh dear, why dont we ban all "objectional" shows like Ross and Top Gear and Buzzcocks, if this is the best they can do. Please lets go back to pre Ross issues . My license fee isnt paid to get half a show, they either push the boundries or they are boring and fail...

I had no idea Buzzcocks was aimed at 15-25 year olds. I'm heading for 40 and I love it. I thought it was great with Mark Lamarr and once I got over my disappointment at him not fronting it anymore, really liked Simon Amstell. It's hilarious and Amstell is well informed and really funny.

Would be great if Bill Bailey were still there too, but it's a great show, anyway.

look i don't know why i read your why i hate never mind the buzzcocks because if you dont get it opr find it funny it isnt aimed for you it is aimed for 15-25 year olds. I dont think you should say that you dont like something that wasnt aimed at you because that is just stating the obvious you cant go up to the people who run songs of praise and say i dont like it because i am jewish. You souldnt complain about something that wasnt aimed at you but applaued things that werent but you liked anyway

If you don't like it, don't watch it, it's a simple as that. No need to moan.

You couldnt be more wrong, this show is very funny (as was they think its all over was to). You just seem to be quite an angry man.

Also using the views of Jonathan Ross are proably not the wisest idea, it his his kind of crude humour that should be slated not this programmes.

How has one of my fave shows gone from achingly funny to almost irritating to watch! When Lamarr left I thought it would be the end, but Simon Amstell has done pretty well I think to keep the ship afloat.... until this series started! The disappearance of Mr Bailey has not helped one bit (and the same problem would exist if Mr Jupitus was not heading the other team) the combination of the two has been brilliant, but something is def. missing. It seems to have gone from a show where they would rightly take the p*** out of Britney Spears, Phil Collins or Chris DeBurgh, to now being half an hour of 'who do we have on the teams tonight?!' Things need to change sharpish if we are to get our 30mins of Thursday hilarity back!

i never liked mark lamaar, so i never watched him. but wensimon amstell came on i felt that this was one of my fave show on tv.

however, this new series has suddenly become not as good as previous series'. i believe that is because bill bailey is no long on the show. his style just made the show what it was.he was something special, that no one lse could be.

i also believe that the guests are not as good as some of the old guests. but thats not my problem any more, coz i have recently stopped watching it!!!

I get what you're doing with this article - pick a 'sacred cow' and slaughter it to grab a little bit of attention. It's a very old media trick, but still a good one. The only problem is, there's no real feeling behind anything you're saying, and I genuinely don't believe you when you say you dislike this show - if you really hated the show, well, you wouldn't know it inside-out, would you?

As for the people who have replied saying how much they, too, dislike the show - do you people actually hear yourselves when you talk?

"The guests are always flavour of the month musicians... find of clip of Rick Wakeman as a guest on the Lemarr-hosted show. Then think, would Simon know who he was?"

"Amstell, whilst sometimes funny, is just offensive"

You're absolutely right - who needs new music and edgy banter, anyway?

If you don't like the show, or Simon Amstell - well, what do you expect? You are (I assume) over the age of 25 and this show isn't aimed at you. But don't despair - there's this great new gadget all the kids are using these days that you should look into - it's called a 'remote control'.

Mark Lamaar was good, but in the last of his seasons seemed so frustrated with the show it was tedious to watch. Amstell did bring a freshness to it, he seemed to actually want to be on the show. However, in the last series the show did seem to be moving towards self-mockery again. If that isn't stemmed it will be time to wrap it up.

One other thing is, however good Jupitus (and Bailey) are, if the show is positioned more as "poking fun at the pompous world of pop" there is a danger the age of the regulars and most of the guest captains is going to make it look like grumpy old people moaning, however accurate the poking is.

Sorry chief, couldn't disagree more - the last couple of series' of Buzzcocks have been hilarious and is one of the only things left on television that can make me laugh out loud. Amstell and Bailey in particular continue to shine.

I agree with much of your blog Rhodri, although I do think Lamarr at least had the capacity to amuse. Amstell is indescribably unfunny.

On an editorial note, I would suggest not using quotes from Jonathan Ross to support a point of view in future. As others have mentioned previously it was he who did more than most to destroy They Think It's All Over - and with his fee now eating up a large portion of the BBC's licence fee-funded budget he's not everyones favourite person right now. If indeed he ever was.

Why I Usually Enjoy... NMTB.

Buzzcocks with Amstell, Jupitus & Bailey has been a far more entertaining show than it ever managed to be under Lamarr's charge, particularly in the Sean Hughes days. Granted, the quiz element isn't up to much, but that's not really the point. The avuncular nature of the team captains allows naughty schoolboy Amstell to cheek most of the guests, almost all of whom deserve it. It's never meant with malice and all of Amstell's "victims" know what they're walking into.

As he did so naturally on Popworld, Amstell rips into the celebrity-obsessed culture of this decade. His teasing of Preston Ordinary to the point where Ordinary walked from the show was terrific television, all the better for leaving everyone involved feeling uncomfortable. Matthew "Gavin & Stacey" Horne's misguided flirting at Kate Nash was a Heat gossip column played out live. And who could ever wipe from their mind Amy Winehouse's appearance as her sweet natural self? There have been plenty of choice moments and Amstell is only about to begin presenting his third series.

The annoying news is that Bill Bailey has just left the show. The guest captains announced should be fun, but only Bob Mortimer really fits into that avuncular role, and he's definitely not a long term bet. Let's just hope that they ultimately get the balance right.

Rhodri - we're the same age and I'm enough of a fan of NMTB to think that you're being a wee bit of a grumpy old man.

The real problem with buzzcocks is that it has gone from a music quiz with lots of comedy to a light entertainment show with a bit of music in it. Lemarr was angry and rude, but relevant in terms of what the show was about, and had good banter. Amstell, whilst sometimes funny, is just offensive to some guests (but not to others like tonights repeat, ripping on anthony costa, whilst not asking mockney kate nash a single interesting question, let alone insulting her, which should be standard fair)to the point where it is just not funny to watch, but quite sad. The guests are always flavour of the month musicians and the same circuit of 5 comedians that appear on every panel show. To see how the show has changed, find of clip of Rick Wakeman as a guest on the Lemarr hosted show. Then think, would Simon know who he was, let alone be co-operative enough to let some of the good jokes come forward?

Hi Rhodri

Agree with much of what you say, but just how do we get Auntie to do the PJ and BB sofa thing? Now that would be watchable!!

I love Simon Amstell, much better than the old presenter.

This show makes me laugh more than anything except Mock the Week or one-off programmes.

Keep going NMTB!

Buzzcocks is the best programme on TV!! Amstell is a Comedy God, Mark Lamaar isn't worthy to shine his shoes in my opinion! I cant wait for the new series!!

Haven't watched the show in a looooong time but every time I have caught a glimpse I always seem to be catching it at the bit where the presenter says something unfunny and then someone in the panel responds by saying something equally unfunny and then everybody in the audience robotically laughs like the trained chimps they are.

rhodri. your opinion means nothing. you are evidently over 25. go and put your slippers on

i think buzzcocks has never been better. the latest series was a highlight of our week (we have very ordinary lives) and would always be first to view on our bt box.

long may it continue.

What I think we are all forgetting is that Never Mind The Buzzcocks has brought us some magical moments such as Noel Fielding completely dissing Donny Tourette, and the fantastic version of the opening to House of the Rising Sun by Bill Bailey.

Also, Noel Fielding as Captain recently made some of the funniest television I've ever seen and although Amstell doesn't match LeMarr, I think the series' format is entertaining, and does manage to make everyone I watch it with laugh.

They Think It's All Over used to be deliciously silly, largely because it was good natured, but then somebody scraped Jonathan Ross off the bottom of their shoe and added him to the mix. The programme then became a showcase for his preening self-regard, and the gentle satirizing of sport was over.

Buzzcocks, on the other hand, has been about self-satisfaction from the start - partly because there is not much substance to the music it features, and the participants have had to compensate for the lack of interesting subject matter.

ITV does vulgarity much better, and with the sort of conviction that the BBC never quite pulls off.

I really liked They Think It's All Over, at least in the earlier years (such as before when Jonathan Toss started appearing on it). Buzzcocks became instanteously tedious as soon as Amstell took over: an amateur presenter who thinks he's funny - and isn't.

As for the comments from Jonathan Toss. Well I'd give an award to whoever can cancel him and put him out of his misery - permanently. Another overpaid egotistical idiot who thinks he's funny - and definitely isn't. It might save some astronomical licence fee money as well. Result.

"you need to be of a certain age to find ... 'University challenge' interesting."

Really? What age would you need to be, then?

christmas together - ironic considering your issues with the jew amstell - what next from your fist full of sausages we wonder?

I've been a fan of 'Buzzcocks' for some years now. When Simon Anstell took over as host, I was expecting great things, as I've always liked his sense of humour.

However, it's been really disappointing lately, and, as sad as I am to say this, I think we have reached the it's "Best Before" date.

I think it's a combination of the now really quite tired format, and a really poor choice of guests. Invariably, these days, I'm lucky to have heard of of one of them. Maybe that's just me getting on in years though...

I think it's time to put this show to bed, or give it a dramatic makeover.

you quite clearly watch the show if you're able to quote it so easily. You have to be of a certain age to find it funny, just as you need to be of a certain age to find 'points of view' and 'University challenge' interesting.

A few moons ago I posted an opinion regarding the value of having messers Jupitus and Bailey on the show, along the lines of their being past their sell-by dates.

I have come to deeply, deeply regret that post; in fact, they are the glue that's holding the show together. Sorry Phill, sorry Bill. They are an inspired choice and as long as they're willing to do it, must be retained at any price.

I loved the totally inspired comment about the non-comedians "delivering pre-scripted lines with all the comic timing of a sat nav"; I've had that impression on more than one occasion, too.

Will someone please remind Simon Amstell to remember, if only once in a while, that while it's his show and his ideas that surprise and sometimes delight us, it's not all about him? An overwhelming ego, while essential in stand-up, does not always have to be set at full beam and aimed at the guests!

Hm. It's never quite clear whether you're disgusted at the blog posts, Kenneth, or the programmes I'm blogging about.

I imagine that it's me you don't like, but I'm holding out a sliver of hope that we may one day spend Christmas together.

oh yes- this is what we expected. you can barely conceal it. the jig is up. the relevant authorities informed. absolutely disgusting.