We wish it was vale, Question Everything

Question Everything’s been on a journey. Remember when it was part news explainer, part fake news debunker, with vibes of Hungry Beast? Now it seems to be trying to cut The Cheap Seats’ lunch, right down to showing clips from the very sources The Cheap Seats has brought to national attention. Like 7 News’ Tasmanian bulletin, where the banter between newsreader Kim Millar and weatherman Peter “Murph” Murphy is something to behold.

As we’ve pointed out previously, using clips from the same shows as The Cheap Seats, or even the same actual clips, doesn’t matter given that the crossover between people who watch Question Everything and people who watch the Cheap Seats probably isn’t huge. But if you do watch both shows, it’s clear who does it better: Mel and Tim.

The Cheap Seats may not be original – everyone and their dog has based a comedy show around funny clips from the past week. But they win the laugh war by having a simple formula: they focus all their energies on getting the most laughs out of the clips. This includes not just selecting good, funny clips, but adding their own jokes too.

Imagine how The Cheap Seats would have handled the 7 News Tasmania clip shown on Question Everything last week, where Murph says he’s afraid to open his door in case it’s Halloween trick-or-treaters, and Kim replies that he’d definitely open it if it was a wine delivery.

On The Cheap Seats you’d expect a few follow-up gags from Mel and Tim, including, presumably, one of Tim’s running gags about his hard-drinking Mum – who, we’re guessing, always opens the door in case it’s a wine delivery. So, what did Question Everything do? They took Murph’s Halloween humbug as inspiration and asked panellist Nath Valvo to have a go at being a grumpy weatherman.

And while “be a grumpy weatherman for a few minutes” is a comedic challenge with plenty of potential, the result…wasn’t great. Which isn’t necessarily what you’d expect from a comedian of the experience of Nath Valvo. Similarly, what was going on in episode three, where everyone seemed so desperate to get laughs that they got panellist Brett Blake to hold his breath for as long as he could? It seemed like a bit which wasn’t planned, so maybe we should cut the team some slack, but on the other hand, a lot of Question Everything doesn’t seem very well planned.

If you told us that the panellists turned up a few hours before taping and were told to prepare a parody weather report or something about holding your breath for ages, we wouldn’t be surprised. The lack of preparation and honed gags would certainly explain why so many parts of the show fall flat. But if someone spent ages on those segments, it’s not just the writers who should be sacked, but the producers.

You could suggest it’s an ABC budget thing, where they can only pay people for a few hours of improvisation, rather than days of writing. But, more worryingly, what if someone on the team thinks that off-the-cuff improvising will lead to a better product?

Honestly, there’s a lot going on with Question Everything. Another problem is that after four series, and following endless tweaks to the format, it still doesn’t know what it’s trying to be. It seems to have largely dropped the news explainer/fake news debunker stuff – and this could again be down to budgets, meaning they now don’t have to spend money on those graphics-heavy, pre-recorded segments Jan Fran used to host. But whatever’s happening, it’s now a panel show where people react to wacky clips, with only occasional nods to being the sort of news-literate comedy that the ABC used to do a lot more of. So, what’s the point of it anymore?

Also, has no one down at the ABC considered that maybe, after four series of failure, it’s time to drop this show and replace it with something better? Is Wil Anderson really that much of a draw that the ABC must keep this show on air? Are there are really no other viable ideas for comedy shows out there?

Meanwhile, we simply note that while ABC comedy suffers from a lack of funding, a risk-averse culture, and an addiction to established talent, over at 10, which has its own financial woes, risk-averse culture and preference for big names, they can produce some very good comedy based on the news. It might not be the sort of comedy that tells you much about the world, apart from that there’s a lot of weird shit happening on commercial television, but at least it’s funny.