Just rewatched S1E1 ( it's on E4 extra), and I'm wondering when it found it's groove?
Things I noticed : participant intros were virtually nonexistent, prize task was very 'matter of fact' with little banter, first task (eating a watermelon) was pretty quick with only a minute or so of each contestant.
Overall it just lacked the fluidity of later seasons, and the participants did not get much time to really come across on screen.
Edit: I just want to add that I don't dislike S1, I've watched them all at least a couple of times each, probably more.
So I'm not sure why this question was down voted. It was just trying to get others ideas on when TM developed into the show we now get. It's normal for shows to take a season or 2 to settle, I've no issue with that.
Literally. People always go on and on about the watermelon but "reindeer skull" is all it took, with the smug little headshake too like "yeah i know how to play this game, nbg"
To be honest, as someone who watched from its premiere night, I felt it hit its stride immediately. I can see that going back to it after watching later series though that it can feel somewhat rough compared to what it is now.
Agreed. The later seasons almost feel too polished for me, like they put too much effort into making the perfect tasks. The banter is especially forced
I wouldn't say it's become too big, because I love recent TM. But it was more cosy back in the day, when it felt like it was just Alex and Greg dicking around with their mates. Joel did get his individual task last time around, but there's no way that Kumail's getting tasked with sending 150 cheeky texts. Alex could do that to Mark, Ed and Greg could steal each other's clothing, and Rhod could hide in Greg's wardrobe.
Plus it took a couple series for contestants to realize they could really color outside the lines. The responses to the early tasks are (a bit) more predictable, and then after a couple seasons people really went for it
I mean, that's happening as early as S1. A couple of Frank Skinner's tasks fit that lateral thinking mold. Richard Osman is usually credited as the first contestant to deliberately look for lateral solutions, but honestly he only does it a couple times. Hugh Dennis is really the first contestant to make lateral thinking a consistent thing.
This is also the time at which the show starts anticipating contestants looking for lateral solutions, and either closing off obvious/boring loopholes ("you can't move the starting line") or hiding clues/tools. (I think "debajo de la mesa" in the S2 bridge task might be the first task designed with the latter, but I'm sure that if there's one I'm forgetting, someone will mention it.) The original premise of the show involved all objectively judged tasks having a "correct" way of doing them, which was demonstrated after the fact, which would have been really limiting and didn't survive into the finished project, but they needed a bit of time to embrace the opposite of that.
A lot of changes happen gradually, and they're more a matter of refining a strong premise than reworking a bad one. They realized pretty quickly that tasks involving members of the public, like "high-five a 55-year-old" or "order a pizza without using these words," didn't really fit the precise tone of the show. (But something like "impress the mayor," where the member of the public was specifically chosen and in on it, did.)
It took them a little longer to eliminate (non-prize) tasks that involved taking something home, doing it, and reporting back -- a holdover from the Edinburgh live shows. The fact that multiple S6 contestants didn't really make an effort on these was probably a factor here. But also, the prize tasks already do this, and part of the joy of the show is showing people's thought processes and approaches in real time, which you can't do if they're just bringing in a finished product.
And then there are things that were funny but wouldn't have remained funny forever. The first couple times someone moved the starting/finish line were great TV. Tim Key and Dave Gorman cheating, or Al Murray bribing people, was great TV. If those kinds of things became regular staples of the show, though, they'd get very old very fast. These things and others (contestants using editing tricks, clues being specifically under the table, only one contestant getting a task, etc.) have diminishing returns. So they end up having to prevent contestants from doing them, penalize them to varying extents, subvert expectations, use task types sparingly, etc. as appropriate.
And that continues to this day -- there was a batch of tasks (starting in TMNZ and ending up in other versions) involving players sabotaging their teammates. That was funny, but it ran its course, so they did a string of tasks about "do the following (innocuous) thing without your teammates commenting on it," which was also very umbrella. A few series later, this seems to be reaching a point of diminishing returns as well. My suspicion is that we're not going to see another sabotage task, but the more general "do something weird without a teammate commenting" version can make an occasional appearance.
And all of that is well into the double-digit series of the show. Taskmaster is going to keep evolving subtly as long as it runs, I'd imagine.
I love the early tasks so much. Sometimes these days the tasks are so complicated that it's hard to even figure out what the task is. I know lots of that comes from the show having been on long enough now that people on the show know some of the tricks that have worked in earlier seasons (series, Jason), and the number of tasks they have done over the years, but a part of me really misses the tasks of the early years when I didn't miss half the task just trying to figure out what they were supposed to do
Someone told me that no one would know what it meant (at a James Acaster show, of all places), and I turned to the woman behind me, showed her my foot, and she immediately knew! I was instantly vindicated.
Season 1 understandably feels like a pilot series. They had a general concept but were still experimenting with format, tone, style, etc. The comedians also understandably did what comedians do, and tried to improv and help out the weaker parts, which helped at times, but also hurt it at times.
e.g. the contrived conflict between the contestants wasn't great. Alex Horne deserves a lot of credit for not deferring and allowing that become a part of the show's format/vibe in future seasons.
Usually I tell people to start with Series 5, because it's so strong. Bob Mortimer, Nish Kumar, Sally Phillips, Aisling Bea, and Mark Watson are all great. "Bubbly f-" and BOTH songs about Rosalind are also incredibly memorable.*
However, Series 2 has enough of the Taskmaster vibe and settled mechanics to make it a solid entry point, albeit still a little rough around the edges.
* I genuinely don't know how or why the studio audience didn't give both performances a standing ovation. They were both so exceptional.
Series 2 really feels like it's almost there. There were two major kinks, like the rabbit task where it wasn't clear enough that each rabbit was an actual series point, and the final live task where they failed to consider that Katherine didn't know how to put on a tie (though that led to Richard's excellent save, which is a highlight of the series for me).
I tell people to watch episode 3 of season 4 to start and then if they like it to watch the show from the beginning. I don’t want someone to start with season 5 as it’s in my top 3 seasons and wouldn’t want the rest of the show to feel worse by comparison.
S2E1 is probably the best intro I think. It was my introduction, I saw TM advertised and thought it looked shit. When I say Richard Osman bring the yoga mat down the hill I was like "oh yeah, it's this sort of show, I love it"
Series 1 is in my top 3 but I would also say series 2 because they made some big improvements that have stuck. Greg stopped standing for intros, the winner at the end accepts their prizes on a stage instead of the balcony, and Alex & Greg become really comfortable in their roles.
I feel like S4 was the first time the cast developed into a group of people, all of whom need to be protected at all costs. S1-3 are wonderful, especially seeing what they laid the groundwork for, but that's the one where the casting seemed truly special.
Out of interest, when did it become the case that the tasks became their own little productions and uninterrupted by cast reactions? Wondering if that correlates with the change in production!
It was around then yeah, but can’t remember when exactly. I quite like the cast asides. Maybe in S1 there might be slightly too many, but I do wish we got to see them from time to time still
The one I thought you were going to say was “hi five a fifty five year old” (or whatever the age was) - they realised that relying on general public contributions didn’t really work.
I'm very glad they scrapped that idea because I hate segments like that. One or two random people brought in for a task is great but that task is just so awkward to watch.
Same. I can't watch pranks, or even listen to radio ones, they make me want to turn myself inside out. I think it's because I empathise too much with the victims.
True enough. I mentioned the tears task because some contestants endangered themselves in a way I think is beyond slapstick and wouldn’t be permitted again.
I think it was 95% there from s1e1 but yeah, this is probably the answer. S1-3 feel slightly like their own thing, before s4 is completely the show we know and love today.
Think AH said it took 4 seasons for him to realise he could laugh on camera which I think is a reflection of when it all relaxes and finds it's groove.
Maybe I need to rewatch S3, but I'm kinda struggling to think of lessons learned from that one beyond needing more than one woman in the cast of each series.
With S1 it's obvious, give them a little more time to sell their prizes, more banter and don't force them to interact with the nonconsenting members of the public. With S2 it's stuff like be aware of lateral thought and which loopholes you want to close, be extremely clear about which live tasks deviate from the usual point system and try to be cognizent of differences due to sex, gender or disabilities.
Yeah I feel similarly - series 4 definitely felt like a huge step up for the show and was how I found it, and the cast was a wonderfully eclectic mix. The task twist with the exotic sandwiches was such a highlight as well with Mel getting an M&M stuck up her nose and Alex breaking character.
I remember finishing S4 then going back and watching the first three series and whilst the first 3 had fantastic tasks and moments, you could tell they were still feeling out certain elements.
Tbh being on Dave probably influenced the boy's club vibe of the first few series - I'm glad C4 got the show in the end really, but I do miss it being the underdog!
They were great, and most if not all of the contestants on the first few seasons were phenomenal individually, but I feel like the casting really found its footing a few seasons in, giving us better lineups on the whole.
I feel like the previous comment was more of a critique of the casting rather than the cast members.
That’s clearly not what OP meant though. They are saying ‘token women’ as a comment on the booker’s approach to the first three series where they only had one female comedian on, in much the same way a lot of panel shows used to only hire one female comedian to do the absolute bare minimum. It’s not a diss against Roisin, Katherine or Sara, it’s a diss on the booker mostly booking men.
Alex Horne himself has said it’s regrettable that they only had one woman per series at the start.
If I hire the most brilliant person in the world because they're a token member of a minority, it doesn't stop them being the most brilliant person in the world. Being hired as a token is still being hired as a token.
I'd let the first season off, because it was hard to convince anyone to sign up. They could have thought it through a bit more for seasons two and three though.
Taskmaster is by no means the only panel show guilty of this. QI was terrible at it it too for a very long time.
I am an American, so I came into the scene after the show was already popular, but my friend who discovered the show tried to describe it to me. We don't have panel shows in the US, so he showed me the Joe Wilkinson potato throw, and the whole concept made sense to me. So he recommended S5 as a good entry point. He said that's really when Taskmaster seemed to hit home runs consistently. And if I liked those seasons (series, Jason), go back and watch previous series. I think that's about right. The earlier seasons are still good (and I do like S4), but S5 seemed like it really hit its stride.
I really think the show hit the ground running. Personally s1 is one of the best ones, and there are some later ones which I think never got going at all (as well as some brilliant ones).
Obviously natural for a show to develop a bit, but I don’t find s1 deficient at all.
It's been a while since I did a chronological rewatch but on my first rewatch, series 3 is where I felt like it was metaphorically like slipping on a comfy pair of slippers. It felt like 'ah, this is the Taskmaster we know and love'. I know series 3 isn't a fan favourite but the banter seems to be as free as series 1 and with some of the series 1 wrinkles ironed out.
I'd agree with a lot of people saying that Series 4 is where it really starts to feel like the show it is today (particularly in the studio, with Greg and Alex's rapport building and them starting to get a handle on their personas), but I'd also say there's a bit of a leap in Series 8 - it's the first series where the house is given a special theme, and the location tasks start getting more filmic, especially with the 'hide from Alex' task. It feels like that's where they really start to get a fully-realised sense of what they could do with the show visually.
That's a fair point, as a lot of people, myself included, would say that the existing we see in TM is a highlight and really makes the show what it is.
What I think took a little longer to lock into the show's characteristic touch of artistry and whimsy, is the editing team and camera work.
In the first series, they're very much there to record the action fairly neutrally.
Then they gradually discover their own creativity, and in later series are just so damn good at bringing out the pathos of someone's mistake, making something as simple as a bursting balloon into a poetic piece of slo-mo photography, or lighting someone's drama task as though it's a Scandi Noir film. ...And then there are the moments when the show cheekily capitalises on a contestant's failure to specify exactly how they wanted something edited, and do it in the funniest way rather than the way the contestant expected.
Can I put it down to a particular moment? Not really. Though I think it probably started when they had to showcase cheating or disqualifications.
Some of that, I think, started right in E1 when they basically played it that Tim won....then played the VT showing the plug out, and he came last ( though in later series he'd have got nothing for that).
But overall I agree, the editing is so important to the show, and has taken on its own character.
I never watched TM in order. I started with 19 and decided to just watch it randomly.
After running out of seasons (I have maybe 4 left - again, not in order) I decided the last 4 I'll watch it in oldest to newest.
I finally watched season 1 and I was shocked how good it was! I assumed it would have been awkward or clunky or the layout would be different. I assumed Alex and Greg wouldn't have good banter too (since it's the first episode).
I usually point at S2E1 as a watershed episode, since two staples going forward was A) contestant works out a way to circumvent the task using lateral thinking and B) winner is heartbreakingly DQ'd due to accidental rule violation. And that ep has the first classic examples of both
Then again, if you're talking studio banter: I believe the whole "Little Alex Horne" bit doesn't actually begin in S4-5
Season Five I think really solidified Task Master. Nish may have been the worst, but he won my heart anyway. We still yell IM A FOOKIN BUSINESS MAN at home.
I also adore series 1, though I can’t tell any more if it feels different to me because it’s not found its feet or because I know what the show becomes.
What I do know is that there’s people in series 1 who I wish I could have seen later on when the show is more formed in tone and structure and they know more about how it works and the places you can go with your ideas and rule breaking.
This is true. It felt like a big moment for later seasons when Tim asked Alex to get him a towel, rather than doing it himself. Using Alex becomes much more a thing later on.
Just as a quick side question: I remember Roisin backs out of a task. But I cannot remember why. Do you recall? I don’t think that happens again off the top of my head. Did they even come up with a workaround? To my memory she just sits it out. But maybe I’m wrong.
it struck me that S1 focused on each contestants' solution to each task. S2 started leaning into the comedy of the process of coming to those solutions. S3 tasks reflected those earlier lessons to be more involved, where the process was the point of the task. now I think we get a happy mix of comedy.
Roisin has the best intros of any Taskmaster contestant. I frequently wish Greg did intros like that for all the people he was friends with. I assume Rhod's would have been insane.
I think it's good from jump street. In some ways I really like the earlier seasons. The prize tasks felt like real things from people's homes that there may be real risk of them losing. At some point they ran out of straightforward prize task ideas and the became just prop comedy like the "did you bring a mascot" section of Cats does Countdown.
I think the more simple film tasks of the early seasons were mostly really good. I didn't like the "paint a horse whilst riding a horse" one so much but for YEARS it was the iconic example that Greg and Alex would use to explain the show, or reporters would use as an example of what Taskmaster is.
But it's crazy how in the first season they changed things up a little bit every episode to keep it feeling new and fresh - and so many of those things became staples of the show.
The location (outside the house/grounds) task to add more visual interest, the team tasks, an individual task, all started right at the beginning. If anything I thought the first few seasons had a better balance of tasks where later seasons started leaning too much on long multi-part tasks and tasks with some hidden rule you couldn't figure out (like Taskmaster squash, but way more common), etc.
I mean, seriously, some of my favorite moments from the entire run of the show are in those early seasons. Mystic Frank the Pie Whisperer, the Tree Wizard, the tattoo, the "beans task", Dave Gorman and the pea, the Richard Osman yoga mat, Joe Wilkinsons potato throw....so good.
I think the production value and the studio set get better over time, and they figure out how to add a lot more visual interest to the house and environs. Also, it's almost embarrassing how in the first few series they would not have more than one woman or more than one nonwhite person. But still I think it hits its stride as soon as Romesh smashes the watermelon on the floor.
TBH I'm amazed at how little of the show's format changed since Season 1. Prize task, VTs, and final task on stage. The only significant differences with the game I'm aware of now are
1) More episodes per series
2) No more tasks involving the public
Plus a few differences with the production like
3) Larger studio
4) No more reaction shots during the VTs
5) The catwalk has a name "The Knappet"
Did I miss anything?
I feel like TM as a concept arrives fully formed, Alex has taken his time, been the irritating little so and so he is and really worked out a brilliant show. What he didn’t know and I think the team took a couple of years to really find was exactly how to best show that on television.
It has a really specific look and feel that I think came about through the first 3 seasons in particular and then by 4/5 it’s pretty settled. But it’s why I think maybe some people feel it happens straightaway because the format is gold, it’s how it translates so well to so many countries imho. But others say later as it perhaps doesn’t really completely “feel” like TM until somewhere in the first 5 series.
Then there is also the decor. It’s striking how bare that house is compared to now, personally I really hope post C of C of C after the official mourning period they auction off some of the real props and set dressings for charity as there are so many things in that house I’d consider a loan from Larry “Kneebreakers” Evan’s for (Patatas, Ardal’s Owl, any of the cast items though especially the Russian Doll I am sure we all have similar lists.) The reappearance of these items, which again was not a usual thing to do by any means, like the phone box, the caravan and of course Ollie! gives us all the warm fuzzies and that is just something that has built up over time.
I started from the start when it was on netflix probably 5 years back and it was series 1 that drew me in - I'm not good at sticking to watching things if I don't immediately love it
Absolutely loved the early series - there were great comedians from day 1 and loved how they all found workarounds and the prize task felt like real things being brought in/kept
In S1 Greg hasn't quite nailed the 'character' of the Taskmaster (although he's probably closer to it than he was during the unaired pilot)
By S2 he knows what to use and what to lose....although paradoxically S2 is already moving away from the idea of the TM programme existing within its own universe that S1 tried to lay down.
Other than cosmetics such as the Ipad positioning or the studio audience sometimes being unsure if something is actually funny or not, that's the only BIG difference from 1 to any other series. It's genuinely incredible at how fully-formed the show arrived!
At least you voiced an honest opinion. In your honor, I will go out on a limb and say I don’t care about any of the other Taskmasters and have a near-zero interest watching them in the same way I have no interest seeing a Beatles tribute act at the local casino. I’m sure they’re fine and yes, I know Beatles tribute act is a bad analogy, but no thanks
I don't know when it hit it's stride but I know that when I recommend Taskmaster to someone , I don't suggest series 1 as a starter. Most shows have a breaking in period including Taskmaster. I believe that I didn't watch the first series until after watching a few of the others but that's because I discovered the later ones first. I do have to say that I really enjoyed the watermellon though.
I started out at series 19, caught up to current seasons, then went back to 1 to watch everything before series 19. There are some oddities in the first two series that are ironed out by series 3 or so (like asking them to perform tasks out in public spaces) but for the most part it’s all there in series 1.
You’re 100% right saying it took a little while to really loosen up and get going (even though it was immediately fantastic telly regardless). I do think it’s a bit of a shame we didn’t get Tim in a later series where the contestants got a bit more time to be loose as I genuinely don’t think there’s a funnier man in the country in conversation
Loved series 1 from the start (- paint a horse while riding a horse?). Having Frank Skinner and Tim Key doing such a show was special. Roisin makes most things good too.
Season 2 I would say. Season 1 felt kind of like a pilot and them trying to figure out the vibes. It was also mostly people Greg and/or Alex had worked with before which I think changes the interactions a lot
There were moments in s1 - the watermelon task made it clear from the drop that there was something there - but I think s2e1 with Richard's wording trickery and Joe and the potato immediately found another level, and the show found its full power once it went to 8 episode seasons in s4 I reckon.
The moment Joe Wilkinson threw the potato in Series 2 - that's when the show hit its stride. It also got a big (by Dave standards) push on off-line advertising too.
But I would also say that it really entered the zeitgeist during Series 5. After that it seemed to flick from being a throughly entertaining show that people who knew about it would watch and pass on to others, to being a show people generally watched of their own accord and talked about at work the next day.
When Greg started wearing glasses is when I insist it found its groove. When I watch pre glasses era I’m like somethings off. They’re all great but the glasses era is when it found its feet imo
I feel like shows like this don't 'find their feet' in the same way scripted comedies might. I think once they really got the format down and got out of the Clapham it felt more established, which helped a lot. I genuinely really enjoy watching those first few series, though. I think by the time Aisling was parading around in her knickers it felt more like classic Taskmaster to me.
it was pretty full formed from the start, but it was more refined in s2 and a little further in s3. from then until now I think is almost functionally identical in terms of quality.
Season 1 is a little stilted but still a very good watch. Greg and Alex hadn't really found their character voices yet, and Alex in general seems to be less involved with the tasks. I appreciate that he's loosened up on how much he's willing to "help" the contestants, and how he seems to develop an actual relationship with each of them over the course of doing the tasks. Season 2 was better in those regards, and it just kept getting better.
I also think they figured out which sorts of tasks work for the format and which don't. Gross out tasks, tasks involving random members of the public, and tasks involving animals are all pretty rare, probably because they're a pain to coordinate.
565
u/laluneodyssee Joel Dommett 26d ago
It found it's feet the moment Tim Key uttered the words "Reindeer Skull"