★★★★★ 0/5

Can of Worms

For a show that promised no fence sitting, Can of Worms played too safe with an edited episode that went for gags over truth.

87
Leave a comment

Dicko’s much-hyped new talk show Can of Worms premiered last night in a long, -very long- debut on TEN.

“Australia, we need to talk,” he promised.

But while there was conversation, and a hint of debate, there was a rush for punchlines. At almost every point, guests Craig Reucassel, George McEncroe and Jason Akermanis, were delivering gags to the questions “Is it offensive to call someone a bogan?” and “Is it ok to spy on your kids online?”

For the most part, the heavily-edited show lurched from one gag to another seemingly at the expense of debate and insight. As a show that had promised revealing truths this was unfortunate.

The core of the show, debating social questions, is a valid premise and television has done this since as far back as the 1960s with Beauty and the Beast. Geoffrey Robertson’s Hypotheticals did it particularly well during the 1980s.

But if Dicko is going to ask his guests “What do you think?”, “Why do you think that? and “Is it negotiable?” then I would like a follow up question: “Why should I care?”

Why do I care what a retired AFL footballer thinks about the concept of his wife having slept with more people than him? And why do I need an hour to learn this?

The three guests did not provide enough contrast in opinions to sustain the length of the show. Instead of giving us debate they spent more time laughing at each others punchlines.

But there was a moment of hope towards the end of the show when Dicko raised the subject of online bullying and suicide (one hopes the photo of a young man who suicided was included with family consent). It led to Akermanis talking about his teenage years and his belief that suicide was a selfish act. The serious moment in the show resonated much more than the gags.

The show’s biggest downfall is in not airing live and utilising the audience, two things Q & A achieves so well. Involving the audience will hold up a much better mirror than three celebs clamouring for the spotlight.

Including dated tweets (some were three days old) was pretty insulting, especially given Dancing with the Stars was widely hounded for this some weeks ago. This team knows better than that.

As a host Dicko will need to prove himself with the audience, but aside from some reliance on scripts I’ll give him a preliminary pass for a first show. But Dicko needs to be challenged to display his smarts rather than just serving as ringmaster. Meshel Laurie fitted easily into the mix in her support role.

The graphics used for the Roy Morgan poll results must have been done by the Hungry Beast guy at Zapruder’s.

I can see a role for the show in response to current news issues (Cronulla Race Riots, Carbon Cate etc) but much would depend on the guests.

Ironically, giving us a pre-recorded episode is the TV equivalent of doing exactly what Dicko said was a no-no: sitting on the fence.

Bite the bullet and air it live please.

Can of Worms airs 8:30pm Mondays on TEN.

87 Responses

  1. It was so boring that i actually started to notice audience members just as a visual breath of fresh air and i’m pretty sure i spotted Farmer Dave from Big Brother! I don’t really know who in television thinks Dicko can host a tv show. His timing is so off and don’t get me started on the accent.

    @JohnTV
    Really? A Jesus joke? Dicko should snap you up to write his one liners.

  2. I give this one week, I didn’t think anything could be more amateur hour than the Warnie Show. This is excrutiatingly bad. Tacky cheap set design. Meshel Laurie has no polish and comes across as a bit of a bogan really. The show is devoid of personality. Looks like ten is a one trick pony. In summary: Who cares…

  3. It was extremely tedious and also pretty terrible, so is likely to be yanked by Ten after a couple weeks. I’d suggest ditching the audience, reducing the show to 30 minutes and moving it to the 11 channel. Good News Week is never done live and is always pre-recorded.

  4. It was a reality check to switch over to Four Corners to see some of the most horrific footage that I have ever seen anywhere. Channel 4 from the UK was exposing scenes of the 2009 massacre of Tamils in Sri Lanka that were too shocking for words.

    I lost interest in whether it was offensive to call someone a ‘bogan’.

  6. I was expecting the program to be anything but boring but it was! Very, very undercooked. Horrible set, terrible casting for the first set of guests and just too much “comedy” padding. There was maybe a couple of minutes of actual discussion or debate, and the rest was really pretty pedestrian.

  7. I didn’t find it that bad, probably a C + (only saw the end half).

    Agree with most points, maybe actually do something radical and give it a few weeks to find its feet and it could be a good little show.

    @ JB – did you listen to Aker? I am not a fan of the man or footy for that matter and I won’t excuse his silly written remarks but his story about how he was bullied and nearly made the decision to take his own life was quite sad – noone deserves to be treated in such a way.

    Lastly – could they buy Meshell a bigger chair for the next episode?, she looked extremely uncomfy perched on the edge like that.

  8. I was disappointed. I agree that it was far too heavily edited, and while I’ve always liked Dicko, his job as host was a bit awkward to watch. Don’t even get me started on Jason Akermanis as a guest.

    I knew, being Channel 10, there was never going to be any real in depth discussions on the ‘worms’, but I was expecting something a lot less dumbed down.

  9. I was so hoping Can Of Worms would be entertaining, alas I was very disappointed instead.
    Not edgy enough, slow and boring.
    Might check back on in a few weeks time to see if it’s improved.

  10. Suspect it’s more about Zapruder being frustrated with Ten than the other way around. No matter how well conceived a format, networks will often do their utmost to mess with it. Still, it must be disappointing to invest such a huge amount in marketing yet draw such a modest debut audience. Promo saturation plus a massive external spend should have delivered 1.3m+ sampling.

    Few have the skills to be consistently interesting and amusing as a social commentator. Combining that with being front and centre in a prime time show multiplies the degree of difficulty. Denton executes it brilliantly. Ditto Paul McDermott and Wil Anderson. Leave it to the experts Dicko.

  15. I switched over during the ads to check it out cos i thought it was only fair to watch some and then judge. But it was crap just as i suspected. And as soon as Aker opened his mouth i switched over. No one wants to hear what he has to say on anything. And how ridiculous to have him talk about bullying and suicide. His article on gay footballers is exactly the type of stuff that turns young gay people to suicide with people telling them stay in the closet, no one wants to know, don’t be yourself cos it’s not okay. Sorry Ten. Fail.

  16. This was really disappointing.Ten must be frustrated with Zapruders, they thought they were getting the Gruen Transfer but this was just junk

  22. I think it should be less game show and more Gruen Transfer. Huddle the guys around a table and really debate the issues, with maybe a touch of humour. And make it Live.

  24. Totally agree with your critique, it is bang on. I was very disappointed and if it doesn’t improve, I can’t see it lasting, it may go the way of David Tench Tonight, which I think was a Zapruder production for Ten.

    I was under the impression this was going to be a serious and edgy Issues/discussion show, not a beat the punchline gagfest. The trailers for the show, featuring vox pops of people on the street made it look like it was going to feature in-depth and thought provoking discussions. Not so. It needs a hell of a lot of work, that’s for sure, and I agree about having input from the audience.

Leave a Reply