As a person who loves talk shows and as a person who loves improv (well, watching improv), I must say it was a success. It's great to see Colin back in business on TV, great to see Wayne back to improv, and people like Jonathan Mangum in action..... it was just awesome to see some new TV improv again, especially after Improv-a-Ganza crashed.
I love the fact that they mixed it up - you know, a few games from Whose Line, a few games from Improv-a-Ganza, adding a few factors from a different game to a new game here and there, like changing the styles of it now and then.... a lot of it was like Hollywood Director, except without the actual director part, just the host changing the styles of the scene.
I heard someone saying they didn't much enjoy the premise of the show, about celebrities telling stories, and then our beautiful improvers acting out the story we just heard. And it is a weird sort of set-up, I suppose, but I honestly think it worked, and here's a few reasons why:
- It just about proves that they are, in fact, making it up as they go along. No script. Because who has ever heard of a script for a talk show? (I, of course, never doubted that for a second, but I know there are lots of people who have. And I believe it was Colin Mochrie who said "Who, when watching Whose Line, thought that we knew beforehand what was going to happen?" A few people clap. "Yeah? You people are bastards.")
- It was still funny. That's the point of the show, and it gets across, and that's really the main thing, isn't it? To make you laugh.
- It stays compelling. At least for people who like talk shows, anyways. And really, who doesn't like talk shows? The stories are still interesting and, you know..... amusing. And the scenes based off of them make them downright hilarious.
I really enjoyed the little touches they had, too, like cutting to the celebrity in question whenever something particularly outrageous happened. I love watching reactions, and the reactions of the celebrity are usually priceless.
That being said, there were one or two things I think they could have done better, and hopefully that'll be improved upon as the series goes on (fingers crossed that it'll go to series!).
First of all, the stories. That was one thing that took away from the talk show part of the show. The host always asks for a particular story that he already knows about them. And that bugged me, it made it seem to me like the show was already set up with what stories he wanted them to act out. Looking at Conan as an example, he doesn't right out ask for the story. He'll say something along the lines of "I heard something about........ [insert story subject here]. Is that true? What was going on?" And I know Trust Us With Your Life isn't a talk show, it's not trying to be a talk show, and I know the interview part or whatever it is shouldn't take TOO much time....... we wouldn't want to take time away from our wonderful improv heroes. But make it more casual for god's sake. Don't force them into telling a story you haven't interested them in telling.
If it were up to me, I would have the performers themselves talking to the guests, taking turns talking to the guests. Sort of like they did on Improv-a-Ganza, where they took turns introducing the scenes and everything. That, for me, would be ideal, but I suppose on a show in this format you do sort of need a host, so I guess there's that.
All in all...... it was good. I liked it and it has definitely become my new Tuesday show. It was pretty great in fact, it made me laugh pretty hard.
But let's not fool ourselves. It was no Whose Line. Whose Line had just the right collection of everything, it was a masterpiece, and nothing can live up to it.
But Trust Us With Your Life was in fact, great. I rate it 8.5/10 stars, and to any lingering Whoser wondering, I recommend you watch it, just to see our boys back in action. 8) It's good, it's funny, it's interesting.... it's very well put together. Watch it.
Peace out
MeganH
