I cannot believe that this show made me want to sleep.
I have been a huge fan of Craig Ferguson for a while now. Coming off of his tenure at The Late Late Show, the American comedian has been trying his hand at a few new shows both in syndication and on cable. Celebrity Name Game is okay, but it doesn’t really allow him to use his talents. So, one can imagine my excitement when I found out that he was coming back with a show about history. I was thinking that there would be no possible way that they could screw up jokes about humanity throughout the ages.
And then, I watched the first two episodes. By the middle of the first episode, I immediately pinpointed the problems with this show.
It Has No Idea What It Wants To Be.
What is it? Can someone let me know?
Is it a comedy show? Is it a serious discussion about history? The wavering tone seems to suggest both, but the half hour format and divided focus means that it is next to impossible to masterfully do both. I wasn’t going into this expecting another Late Late, but the writers should have had some inkling about where they wanted to go.
The starting monologues are a nice touch, but they are the only thing that is worth watching because Craig Ferguson shows off his underrated brand of humor here. Unfortunately, the panel portion of the show is where it completely falls flat on its’ face. The division between comedians and “experts” is notable in the first few minutes, but they are not fully unleashed to make the most of the material. Jimmy Kimmel is the most important example of this because he is renowned for delivering genius comedy on Jimmy Kimmel Live, but he is spectacularly wasted in his appearance.
The Format Is A Snorefest.
Writers? What are you doing?
The format of the show is essentially a discussion wrapped up in the guise of a game show. There are six choices for the biggest, worst, or some other adjective to describe the topic at hand, and the panelists end up whittling them down for a vote by the studio audience. In its’ current form, this show has absolutely no room for variety or spontaneity that would lead to interesting segments or viral videos, which are two staples that can get the attention of an audience in the modern era.
And by the way, you don’t even need to resort to cheap gags here. If you are stacking a show with comedians, just let them bring their A-game and the rest will take care of itself. The UK’s Argumental is a good example of a simple show that allows the comedians to deliver incredibly funny (and often tasteless) debates, and this show might benefit from examining that.
Conclusion.
What else could I possibly say about this show? In an era where there are so many other options for entertainment or a serious discussion on the issues that matter, this show just doesn’t cut it. It is as simple as that. Other than Ferguson’s monologues, I had a hard time laughing at anything that was being said and the half-baked humor left too much to be desired. Chris Hardwick tried his hand at courting controversy by saying that medical decisions should not be based on religion, but the show backed away from that as soon as they could.
If you want to be serious or funny, it needs to be based in truth. If I had to sum up this review, Join or Die missed that fundamental concept. And that, dear readers, is a crying shame.
Disagree. I enjoy the loose structure & lively conversation. Happy to watch the show develop over time, because that’s how Craig works. Maybe checking some of his interviews would make you feel better or at least give you more of his take on what the show is and can become.