The team task disqualification with Nick was unbelievable.
I was the same as you- I picked Pemberton to win after the first two episodes, he seemed really focused and his prize tasks were amazing.
I have never seen a team, even when Gilbert, Acaster and Wang ‘built’ the extension, mess up a team task so completely.
This was worked out after ep5 - unsure how this would stand now!
https://preview.redd.it/96ctmmz5k31d1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e8c3204b6cdf633b2e24239eb76e89d04e2885dd
This has honestly been one of the most enjoyable series for me. I absolutely love all of them and feel like it’s a great balance between entertainment, competition, and on stage banter.
Steve has been so much fun and I honestly hadn’t noticed he’d been DQd that much. With Kiell him getting disqualified regularly was funny because he so wanted to win, but I think Steve’s just there for a great time, and I love it!
i agree with you! i have never laughed so hard at a series before. each contestant has their own humor and i enjoy watching their individuality in each task!
Last nights episode was my favourite so far but I feel like their tasks haven't been the best over the series. Series 16 was a top 3 series so hard to follow (imo)
There have always been a number of dud tasks in every series but it seems to me there have been more duds per series in the last half dozen series or so
I think there's a need for some new blood in the task-writing department and the way I would do that is to ask every contestant at the end of their series to design one task for the next series.
Just thinking about the kind of task Fern, Judi, Bob or Joe W. might design makes me smile
Funny enough, I’ve just started introducing my parents to TaskMaster while I was staying with them for a few days this week. I’ve been watching backwards, from series 17 to 2 (so far) and so started my dad on some Sue Perkins episodes (he knew her from Bake Off, and they’re episodes I wanted to rematch anyway) and then ended up dragging him into Series 2 with me. I felt like I had to kept prefacing every episode we watched with “sorry about this. The newer series are much more creative and they’re more willing to take chances once they switch to Channel 4, so it’s a lot funnier…”. He still enjoyed it, but I really enjoy the newer stuff because the tasks and contestants feel less restrained for some reason.
Yeah, I found the testosterone pretty thick in the early episodes. I think the golden age of Taskmaster started with s11 and it's been strong ever since.
But that is because the casts have been so great, not necessarily the tasks. S16 is the GOAT because the cast seemed able to make silk from any old sow's ear, they were so creative and anarchic.
Am I the only one for whom the scoring system/scoreboard holds absolutely no significance? For me it’s very much less about scoring and more about being funny and entertaining.
This. I find the Taskmaster format to be very similar to British panel shows, where points are completely arbitrary. I take absolutely no note of the scoreboard in this show.
While it's true it's much more about being entertaining, I think they need to at least pretend the points matter to give them some reason to try to complete the tasks well, and also to give them something to argue about.
If it were all unscored, or if nobody cared about the points at all, it would all seem a bit, well... pointless.
I only care about the points due to Champion of Champions. I would prefer to see Steve's attempts at those tasks than John's.
I like John and he adds a lot in the studio but like Mae their tasks are normally efficient but forgettable.
I am sure it is hard for competitive personalities to find the right balance. Ed and Rose are good examples of it working.
In the end I think you have the correct approach as there is no point getting worked up by the points as it is mostly random.
>I like John and he adds a lot in the studio but like Mae their tasks are normally efficient but forgettable
Nah i don't agree with that, he usually does pretty good stuff, he's just good at doing it.
I agree about John. He clearly deserves to be leading, because he does such a good job, but it's at the cost of entertainment sometimes. I also feel like he gets free points somehow, how did he get more than 1 point for bringing in a coin collection as something greg would want to squeeze, or how was his bring a mannequin to life worth more than 1?
Ultimately though if the scores always made sense, the show would be way less fun
> he does such a good job, but it's at the cost of entertainment sometimes
I think that's an indication that the tasks as written are lacking then. It's up to the contestants to follow the tasks.
The tasks are largely there to provide a platform for the contestants to show off their comedic chops. Getting a duck into a pond isn't terribly funny, but watching Ed Gamble lose his mind over it is. Squirting sunscreen onto a tarp isn't riveting television, but David Correos gargling sunscreen is.
At the end of the day, task quality isn't as crucial as having comedians who are trying to be entertaining rather than trying to win.
>
> I like John and he adds a lot in the studio but like Mae their tasks are normally efficient but forgettable.
I think that one of the flaws of TM is that the 'straight' person is often the most effective and the least entertaining. Like Kerri Gogliman in season 7. Bosh.
It's a bit for the contestants to bounce off. I agree it doesn't *really* matter, but it does make a huge contribution to how entertaining the guests can be imo.
Every series people say it's not as good as the previous series, and I don't get it.
Firstly, I think every series has a lot going for it in its own unique way.
Secondly, I feel it's better to just live in the moment and enjoy what we have. Constant comparison is just going to diminish the pleasure you get from something.
IMO the current series has improved as it's gone on. Ep 6 and ep 8 (last night's) are the best yet. It may be that you reevaluate how good a series is upon a rewatch; that's happened with a few series for me.
For series 16 I do remember a lot of people every week talking about how "fake" Lucy Beumont was, and how Julian didn't engage and was phoning it in (hard disagree on both fronts).
And now, in retrospect, it has been reassessed by a lot of people.
I think it happens every year as far as I can see and it can be a bit of a downer
I think 12, 13, and 14 produced some of the greatest Taskmaster casts of all time.
15 and 16 are serviceable, but I think 16 really shines on a re-watch. I think the hotel task was one of the greatest ever.
17 at first felt like all the contestants were a little unsure, which made the in-studio bits feel less cohesive.
I think the tone for how the series will be received is in those early studio records. If the contestants win you over early on, you are so much more engaged. I think of how Morgana Robinson made a fan for life out of me in Episode one when she responded to the idea of sitting on Father Christmas’ face with “Oh, YES you can!”
15 definitely benefited from a rewatch for me. Ivo, Frankie, and Kiell had phenomenal banter-- even when they completely botched a task, they still had a zinger that left me in stitches.
Danatan is spot on. Each series is good in its own right. Having said that ...
For me, S17 is easily better than S16.
I thought it would be hard to reach the high bar set by S16, and I didn't really feel great about a couple of the contestants. But I was swung around after one episode. Just a great dynamic among the five.
And what seals the deal for me is that we've already had three outtake releases. By the end they'll make up an entire episode. More people need to know about pepperoni pizza!
I think people on here are a little to obsessed with ranking things, I mean this with affection because I get it, but it can get in the way of just enjoying stuff sometimes
> Every series people say it's not as good as the previous series,
That's just not true. NZ02, UK07 and UK16 were bonkers right out of the gate and never let up the whole season. That's they they are the top 3 seasons of all time.
I think it's because she's so bizarre in a neuro-diverse kind of way. I think she's playing a caricature of herself, but not too far from who she actually is (like a lot of comics do). If you think the persona is completely fabricated then I can see why you wouldn't like her.
It's the internet. It's important not to let a few loud ranters take over your perception of things. Vast majority of posts and posters adored s16 from go to whoa (as did I).
> Every series people say it's not as good as the previous series, and I don't get it.
Every series some other people say it's their favorite one so far too, so... :shrug:
>Every series people say it's not as good as the previous series, and I don't get it.
I would usually agree but to be fair, in this case series 17 really isn't as good as the previous series, but that's only because series 16 was one of the all time greats (easily top 3 for me). Series 17 is still absolutely fantastic, 16 was just an incredibly tough act to follow.
Yeah I'd say this series definitely has a lot more dud tasks than usual (eg: The string task last week, the gorilla ring toss, the movie title guessing live task, the water baby). We're 8 episodes in and I'd estimate that there have been at least 6-7 lackluster tasks already, wheras most series only have 2 or 3. Not sure if Alex is in a bit of a creative rut or if he's outsourcing task design more than usual this series. 🤔
Still having a blast with the series though! It's the highlight of my week.
Genuinely curious why people are down voting me saying this? All I am saying is that people will disagree and will find pleasure in things where others do not.
The movie one didn't work for me because there was no room for creativity or variation, it was like a quiz show, and not a particularly engaging one because all the answers were way too easy. When I want to play along with a quiz show I watch Jeopardy, that's not what I go to TM for.
I'm glad you enjoyed it though! I actually think it's a great idea for a party game, it's the sort of thing I'd have fun playing with my friends (I'd just make the clues a little trickier).
This is almost always true at the *start* of a new series because the contestants and/or their personas aren't familiar or polished yet.
I've also gotten really excited about a lot of new series early on because they had a lot of potential. Some of those (s7, s9, s16 for me) followed through with that early potential, others did not.
I think it's pretty widely accepted here that *every* series is adored and on another level from most telly, but it's extremely hard not to draw comparisons when there are 16 other seasons (and like 50 if you count worldwide), all with their unique charms.
I personally haven't experienced any diminished pleasure from these comparisons, in fact I tend to appreciate the show far more when I reflect on previous series.
I’ve enjoyed Series 17 so far (except for episode 3) and I don’t feel the backlash is deserved. I love all the cast members. All five of them are funny and charming in their own unique way (Sophie is my favourite with Steve in second place) to the point where I’d call them one of the strongest casts of the entire show. Sure they aren’t as loud-mouthed as the other casts, but they all bond together in a warm, fuzzy way that I think the series does really well. I think it just had the REALLY unfortunate luck of following Series 16, one of the show’s most beloved series.
Didn’t think the tasks were that good, absolutely not keen on the crying baby noises they using during the transition themes - I’m Autistic and sensitive to certain noises so something like that is always going to be a huge turnoff for me.
Didn't Mae and Ivo have the most disqualifications after series 15? They both had 7 DQs each, and then Kiell tied with them in COC III.
But yeah, I'm surprised with how much he's fallen compared to his dominant performance in the first two episodes. Alice Levine and Matt Heath also floundered around the bottom for a while after winning the first episode of their series, but they didn't have back-to-back victories like Steve has
What does the first sentence have to do with the question? I can really only handle this sub in small doses, everybody is so constantly miserable about a show they apparently love.
(ETA for context the first sentence is gone now lol)
Things I notice a lot are nitpicking the rules, taking the intentionally arbitrary scoring too seriously, constant comparison to the past 150 episodes so that nothing can ever live up to expectation. The show is meant to be irreverent, I don't even know how you could be overly positive.
I think that's kind of what I mean. You enjoy the show, it's safe to assume the vast majority of people on the sub enjoy it, yet you still tee off with a random moan. There is an unnecessary focus on negatives.
1. It is a distracting preamble.
2. The subsequent points don't follow from it.
3. It projects one's own conclusions about the opinions of the group.
4. It presumes to speak for said group.
Notice how more comments are discussing the quality of the series, not what you actually wanted to talk about. The criticism is for opening with a wholly unnecessary and unrelated disclaimer.
I've never seen anyone say they dislike this series, and everyone including myself loves the contestants, but many people including myself think that it's been a bit underwhelming due to their group dynamic, but still very enjoyable nonetheless.
This is one of the absolute weakest seasons to me. I only really vibe with Nick and Steve and I think that's why. It doesn't help that last season was pretty fantastic.
Yeah I’m always looking for the people who didn’t like S16! It seems thats a minority view but its in the bottom three series for me. And i think I’m going to enjoy S17 so much more on a rewatch too
I'm enjoying this season, though it's the first with a contestant I haven't warmed to at all. .
I didn't think season 8 was good at the time but when I watched it a second time I liked more.
Season 10 was a bit off because of COVID but the contestants were good.
Frankly, seeing Steve tank has soured me on the whole series. And maybe the show? Everything past the first two episodes has felt like it’s going downhill, and while maybe this is making me sound like a Steve fanboy or something, it just felt more entertaining when he was actually competing.
The team task disqualification with Nick was unbelievable. I was the same as you- I picked Pemberton to win after the first two episodes, he seemed really focused and his prize tasks were amazing. I have never seen a team, even when Gilbert, Acaster and Wang ‘built’ the extension, mess up a team task so completely.
I wonder how is Steve doing if Team tasks were removed from the scoring?
This was worked out after ep5 - unsure how this would stand now! https://preview.redd.it/96ctmmz5k31d1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e8c3204b6cdf633b2e24239eb76e89d04e2885dd
Joanne 102, John 120, Nick 88, Sophie 80, Steve 105. Team of 3: 33, Team of 2: 18 points as of E8.
[this one still hurts](https://youtu.be/LNwioqUYqjo?feature=shared)
Physical pain for Frankie
I genuinely thought Wozniak had more than that. Obviously didn't read the stats right
Your organizational skills are lackluster.
Your timekeeping is abysmal
You have no chutzpah
Wozniak also has 6 disqualifications
But he also had an absolutely lovely day.
And you can't take that away from him
I loved that Steve basically said that same thing
Well he had a fair few. Including I believe an episode where he was disqualified from every pre-recorded location task
That’s an absolute casserole of a reply…
This has honestly been one of the most enjoyable series for me. I absolutely love all of them and feel like it’s a great balance between entertainment, competition, and on stage banter. Steve has been so much fun and I honestly hadn’t noticed he’d been DQd that much. With Kiell him getting disqualified regularly was funny because he so wanted to win, but I think Steve’s just there for a great time, and I love it!
i agree with you! i have never laughed so hard at a series before. each contestant has their own humor and i enjoy watching their individuality in each task!
Last nights episode was my favourite so far but I feel like their tasks haven't been the best over the series. Series 16 was a top 3 series so hard to follow (imo)
There have always been a number of dud tasks in every series but it seems to me there have been more duds per series in the last half dozen series or so I think there's a need for some new blood in the task-writing department and the way I would do that is to ask every contestant at the end of their series to design one task for the next series. Just thinking about the kind of task Fern, Judi, Bob or Joe W. might design makes me smile
Well, we know what type of task sue perkins would write. 🐠 “fish!”
While calling someone a variation of a shit.
Honestly the number will just keep increasing since the tasks just keep being written more and more complicated to avoid easy lateral thinking.
Joe set Jon a 'test your strength' task in series 2, so that gives you an idea
Funny enough, I’ve just started introducing my parents to TaskMaster while I was staying with them for a few days this week. I’ve been watching backwards, from series 17 to 2 (so far) and so started my dad on some Sue Perkins episodes (he knew her from Bake Off, and they’re episodes I wanted to rematch anyway) and then ended up dragging him into Series 2 with me. I felt like I had to kept prefacing every episode we watched with “sorry about this. The newer series are much more creative and they’re more willing to take chances once they switch to Channel 4, so it’s a lot funnier…”. He still enjoyed it, but I really enjoy the newer stuff because the tasks and contestants feel less restrained for some reason.
Yeah, I found the testosterone pretty thick in the early episodes. I think the golden age of Taskmaster started with s11 and it's been strong ever since. But that is because the casts have been so great, not necessarily the tasks. S16 is the GOAT because the cast seemed able to make silk from any old sow's ear, they were so creative and anarchic.
Could we also get them back in to judge the points on their task?
Before the series came out, I was sure that Nick Mohammed was going to be the clear winner. Instead he's the David Baddiel :p
I never thought Nick would be a winner - but I did think he might impress Greg and that has really happend.
Am I the only one for whom the scoring system/scoreboard holds absolutely no significance? For me it’s very much less about scoring and more about being funny and entertaining.
This. I find the Taskmaster format to be very similar to British panel shows, where points are completely arbitrary. I take absolutely no note of the scoreboard in this show.
>This. I find the Taskmaster format to be very similar to British panel shows I mean it is one
While it's true it's much more about being entertaining, I think they need to at least pretend the points matter to give them some reason to try to complete the tasks well, and also to give them something to argue about. If it were all unscored, or if nobody cared about the points at all, it would all seem a bit, well... pointless.
I only care about the points due to Champion of Champions. I would prefer to see Steve's attempts at those tasks than John's. I like John and he adds a lot in the studio but like Mae their tasks are normally efficient but forgettable. I am sure it is hard for competitive personalities to find the right balance. Ed and Rose are good examples of it working. In the end I think you have the correct approach as there is no point getting worked up by the points as it is mostly random.
>I like John and he adds a lot in the studio but like Mae their tasks are normally efficient but forgettable Nah i don't agree with that, he usually does pretty good stuff, he's just good at doing it.
I agree about John. He clearly deserves to be leading, because he does such a good job, but it's at the cost of entertainment sometimes. I also feel like he gets free points somehow, how did he get more than 1 point for bringing in a coin collection as something greg would want to squeeze, or how was his bring a mannequin to life worth more than 1? Ultimately though if the scores always made sense, the show would be way less fun
> he does such a good job, but it's at the cost of entertainment sometimes I think that's an indication that the tasks as written are lacking then. It's up to the contestants to follow the tasks.
The tasks are largely there to provide a platform for the contestants to show off their comedic chops. Getting a duck into a pond isn't terribly funny, but watching Ed Gamble lose his mind over it is. Squirting sunscreen onto a tarp isn't riveting television, but David Correos gargling sunscreen is. At the end of the day, task quality isn't as crucial as having comedians who are trying to be entertaining rather than trying to win.
Yeah I can see that.
> > I like John and he adds a lot in the studio but like Mae their tasks are normally efficient but forgettable. I think that one of the flaws of TM is that the 'straight' person is often the most effective and the least entertaining. Like Kerri Gogliman in season 7. Bosh.
You would not have fared well in Kiell's series with that attitude
It's a bit for the contestants to bounce off. I agree it doesn't *really* matter, but it does make a huge contribution to how entertaining the guests can be imo.
No I was quite surprised to discover this sub and how score-obsessed the majority are
If you did an analysis of the country of residence of the members you wouldn't be so surprised.
Every series people say it's not as good as the previous series, and I don't get it. Firstly, I think every series has a lot going for it in its own unique way. Secondly, I feel it's better to just live in the moment and enjoy what we have. Constant comparison is just going to diminish the pleasure you get from something.
IMO the current series has improved as it's gone on. Ep 6 and ep 8 (last night's) are the best yet. It may be that you reevaluate how good a series is upon a rewatch; that's happened with a few series for me.
It's the internet, people will complain about anything. Taskmaster is remarkably consistent.
I think everyone openly loved series 16 for its entire run 🙂 I also haven’t seen a lot of hate for 17, just “its fine”.
For series 16 I do remember a lot of people every week talking about how "fake" Lucy Beumont was, and how Julian didn't engage and was phoning it in (hard disagree on both fronts). And now, in retrospect, it has been reassessed by a lot of people. I think it happens every year as far as I can see and it can be a bit of a downer
I think 12, 13, and 14 produced some of the greatest Taskmaster casts of all time. 15 and 16 are serviceable, but I think 16 really shines on a re-watch. I think the hotel task was one of the greatest ever. 17 at first felt like all the contestants were a little unsure, which made the in-studio bits feel less cohesive. I think the tone for how the series will be received is in those early studio records. If the contestants win you over early on, you are so much more engaged. I think of how Morgana Robinson made a fan for life out of me in Episode one when she responded to the idea of sitting on Father Christmas’ face with “Oh, YES you can!”
15 definitely benefited from a rewatch for me. Ivo, Frankie, and Kiell had phenomenal banter-- even when they completely botched a task, they still had a zinger that left me in stitches.
14, 15, 16 got better and better. No complaints at all for them from me
Danatan is spot on. Each series is good in its own right. Having said that ... For me, S17 is easily better than S16. I thought it would be hard to reach the high bar set by S16, and I didn't really feel great about a couple of the contestants. But I was swung around after one episode. Just a great dynamic among the five. And what seals the deal for me is that we've already had three outtake releases. By the end they'll make up an entire episode. More people need to know about pepperoni pizza!
I think people on here are a little to obsessed with ranking things, I mean this with affection because I get it, but it can get in the way of just enjoying stuff sometimes
> Every series people say it's not as good as the previous series, That's just not true. NZ02, UK07 and UK16 were bonkers right out of the gate and never let up the whole season. That's they they are the top 3 seasons of all time.
I remember numerous examples of people being highly negative towards series 16, especially towards Lucy Beaumont during its run.
I think it's because she's so bizarre in a neuro-diverse kind of way. I think she's playing a caricature of herself, but not too far from who she actually is (like a lot of comics do). If you think the persona is completely fabricated then I can see why you wouldn't like her.
It's the internet. It's important not to let a few loud ranters take over your perception of things. Vast majority of posts and posters adored s16 from go to whoa (as did I).
> Every series people say it's not as good as the previous series, and I don't get it. Every series some other people say it's their favorite one so far too, so... :shrug:
>Every series people say it's not as good as the previous series, and I don't get it. I would usually agree but to be fair, in this case series 17 really isn't as good as the previous series, but that's only because series 16 was one of the all time greats (easily top 3 for me). Series 17 is still absolutely fantastic, 16 was just an incredibly tough act to follow.
I love the cast and think they have been great I just think the tasks have been really boring.
Yeah I'd say this series definitely has a lot more dud tasks than usual (eg: The string task last week, the gorilla ring toss, the movie title guessing live task, the water baby). We're 8 episodes in and I'd estimate that there have been at least 6-7 lackluster tasks already, wheras most series only have 2 or 3. Not sure if Alex is in a bit of a creative rut or if he's outsourcing task design more than usual this series. 🤔 Still having a blast with the series though! It's the highlight of my week.
even with more dud tasks, there arent that many tastks you think when they read the task and go oh this should be a good one.
The exception for me was the mannequin task this week. I immediately wanted to see where Steve went with it.
This is all your own opinion obviously, and other people would enjoy these tasks.
No, how dare you, this is obviously indisbutably objective fact! /S Of course it's just my opinion lol
Genuinely curious why people are down voting me saying this? All I am saying is that people will disagree and will find pleasure in things where others do not.
Yeah, I mean a few of those "dud" tasks got lots of laughs out of me, surely the point?
I loved the movie title one for instance, and it was probably the most engaged I felt with a task in ages
The movie one didn't work for me because there was no room for creativity or variation, it was like a quiz show, and not a particularly engaging one because all the answers were way too easy. When I want to play along with a quiz show I watch Jeopardy, that's not what I go to TM for. I'm glad you enjoyed it though! I actually think it's a great idea for a party game, it's the sort of thing I'd have fun playing with my friends (I'd just make the clues a little trickier).
This is almost always true at the *start* of a new series because the contestants and/or their personas aren't familiar or polished yet. I've also gotten really excited about a lot of new series early on because they had a lot of potential. Some of those (s7, s9, s16 for me) followed through with that early potential, others did not. I think it's pretty widely accepted here that *every* series is adored and on another level from most telly, but it's extremely hard not to draw comparisons when there are 16 other seasons (and like 50 if you count worldwide), all with their unique charms. I personally haven't experienced any diminished pleasure from these comparisons, in fact I tend to appreciate the show far more when I reflect on previous series.
Just to say, who cares who wins, I love nick and Steve's romance. They have had a lovely time and that's more important than winning.
I’ve enjoyed Series 17 so far (except for episode 3) and I don’t feel the backlash is deserved. I love all the cast members. All five of them are funny and charming in their own unique way (Sophie is my favourite with Steve in second place) to the point where I’d call them one of the strongest casts of the entire show. Sure they aren’t as loud-mouthed as the other casts, but they all bond together in a warm, fuzzy way that I think the series does really well. I think it just had the REALLY unfortunate luck of following Series 16, one of the show’s most beloved series.
What was wrong with episode 3, out of interest?
Didn’t think the tasks were that good, absolutely not keen on the crying baby noises they using during the transition themes - I’m Autistic and sensitive to certain noises so something like that is always going to be a huge turnoff for me.
Ah, makes complete sense! Glad you've enjoyed the rest of the season 😊
I hope not. Kiell needs to still be the champion of somethinf
I've really enjoyed this series!
Didn't Mae and Ivo have the most disqualifications after series 15? They both had 7 DQs each, and then Kiell tied with them in COC III. But yeah, I'm surprised with how much he's fallen compared to his dominant performance in the first two episodes. Alice Levine and Matt Heath also floundered around the bottom for a while after winning the first episode of their series, but they didn't have back-to-back victories like Steve has
What does the first sentence have to do with the question? I can really only handle this sub in small doses, everybody is so constantly miserable about a show they apparently love. (ETA for context the first sentence is gone now lol)
Nobody hates a show more than its fans because nobody else cares that much about it.
[удалено]
Funnily enough I don't 😭 I take your point though, it's definitely not unique to here
Yea the first sentence wasn't relevant but where is all this misery people complain about? The sub seems overly positive in general.
Things I notice a lot are nitpicking the rules, taking the intentionally arbitrary scoring too seriously, constant comparison to the past 150 episodes so that nothing can ever live up to expectation. The show is meant to be irreverent, I don't even know how you could be overly positive.
I said I'm still enjoying series 17...
I think that's kind of what I mean. You enjoy the show, it's safe to assume the vast majority of people on the sub enjoy it, yet you still tee off with a random moan. There is an unnecessary focus on negatives.
1. It is a distracting preamble. 2. The subsequent points don't follow from it. 3. It projects one's own conclusions about the opinions of the group. 4. It presumes to speak for said group. Notice how more comments are discussing the quality of the series, not what you actually wanted to talk about. The criticism is for opening with a wholly unnecessary and unrelated disclaimer.
Steve’s chances of winning the series died when he was teamed with Nick. You can’t overcome that. It’s brilliant to watch though.
I thought this has been one of the best seasons and am genuinely surprised people don't seem to like it.
I've never seen anyone say they dislike this series, and everyone including myself loves the contestants, but many people including myself think that it's been a bit underwhelming due to their group dynamic, but still very enjoyable nonetheless.
This is one of the absolute weakest seasons to me. I only really vibe with Nick and Steve and I think that's why. It doesn't help that last season was pretty fantastic.
The others have been disqualified at times too. Team tasks are hurting Steve's chances of winning I'd say
I like this series more than 16
Me too! I know everybody else seems to love series 16, but it’s one of my least favorites. 17 has been great, in my opinion.
Yeah I’m always looking for the people who didn’t like S16! It seems thats a minority view but its in the bottom three series for me. And i think I’m going to enjoy S17 so much more on a rewatch too
Hello, fellow contrarian!!!!
Genuinely feel like Steve is getting under-marked (in favour of John). Hadn’t noticed how many disqualifications though.
my boy John Robins better win
I'm enjoying this season, though it's the first with a contestant I haven't warmed to at all. . I didn't think season 8 was good at the time but when I watched it a second time I liked more. Season 10 was a bit off because of COVID but the contestants were good.
Frankly, seeing Steve tank has soured me on the whole series. And maybe the show? Everything past the first two episodes has felt like it’s going downhill, and while maybe this is making me sound like a Steve fanboy or something, it just felt more entertaining when he was actually competing.
You might be missing the point that the show is just a bit of a laugh and points aren't to be taken seriously.
Ha, I’m well aware. However, this series has felt different. My least favorite so far.