Matthew eats… Eurovision Song Contest 2024

This is normally the post I look most forward to writing. My thoughts on a joyful four hours where I can bemoan the UK at being rubbish, debate the merits of the winner and just generally review whatever has occurred on the night.

But this year is different for obvious reasons. Firstly, there is the cloud over Israel’s participation. I initially thought many months back the EBU had taken the right decision allowing them to compete. But over time I came to question this. There was the attempt to send a deliberately provocative song, that was eventually watered down. Then there have been persistent rumours that the delegation had been unpleasant in their conduct to other delegations that had openly criticised them being allowed to compete. On balance, whilst Israel should have been allowed to compete, it perhaps would make sense know for everyone involved to ask whether it is the best thing in the long run for anyone involved to allow this to be repeated.

Then there was the Netherlands’ disqualification following an altercation with a member of the production team. It says something about how toxic the environment was this year that the rumour mill immediately sought to blame Israel. Personally, though I find it regretful, I do think that the disqualification was the right thing to do. If the act was indeed engaged in threatening behaviour then that is a breach of the rules, and it would be worse for them to have carried on and perhaps won and then be found guilty then to be removed and later found innocent.

So what about the show itself? Well, overall it was brilliant to see the breadth of genres. We seem to have moved far on from ballads and eurodance being all that is available with the odd token rock song. Ireland, Croatia and Switzerland in particular all learnt how to do ‘different’ right. Less so Norway and Finland. The former were handsomely rewarded with both healthy jury and public vote scores. Switzerland were deserving winners in my view – easily the best voice on the night, an excellently constructed song and clever staging.

The biggest shocks were the big votes for Ukraine and Israel. Yes, there’s sympathy voting, but I am tiring of a certain class of viewer failing to actually reward good songs. Although in terms of Israel, it perhaps shows that underneath a progressive veneer, the average viewer is still quite conservative and not interested in the plight of Gaza the way younger generations might wish them to be.

And the UK? Well, we came 18th, which is several places higher than last year, thanks to a jury score that fell for the pop hook. But no viewer votes. Again, in hindsight staging the song around a homoerotic encounter in a men’s locker room in space was not the strongest of ideas when you are pitching to an audience that consider Eurovision to be a family show (although no such issues with scantily clad women or hetero men dancing suggestively). The LGBT audience were busy rallying behind Switzerland and Ireland anyway.

Plus, Olly’s voice was not the best. It was very much a performance that seemed to be focused on dancing and the bells and whistles, rather than showing any vocal prowess. With so many countries delivering something close to flawless (again Switzerland, but also France, Germany and Latvia) you can’t get away with those kind of wobbles.

But there is hope. The song was so nearly there. The vocals were not a complete disaster. The staging showed the UK can be bold. If we can build on this we can climb the leaderboard. That’s something to hope for in a difficult time for the contest.

Matthew eats… Baby Reindeer

Every so often a programme comes along that everyone instantly talks about. The days of streaming services have made this a rarer phenomenon, but it still happens. The last time was Tiger King, which was aided by the pandemic and no one had anything better to do. I can’t really think of another example that came along since then.

Until now, when Baby Reindeer came along. There doesn’t seem to be a day where there isn’t a new article or think-piece about it. First they came to praise, then they came to critique it, and of course everybody had their own ‘experiences’ of what the character went through. Oh, and the explosion of online detectives trying to find the real life versions of the character.

For those of you still unfamiliar with the plot, it follows Donny, a failing comedian working as a barman. After an act of kindness to a stranger he finds himself stalked by them. This in turn sees the return of a repressed trauma of when he was sexually abused by an elder man and his subsequent spiral. It’s labelled as dark comedy, and although there is something of that here it is very much a small speck.

It is not an easy watch. In fact, I actively seek something lighter to follow it up with. But it is so gripping. Richard Gadd, writer and lead actor, is captivating. Of course it helps it is based on a true story, but that doesn’t detract from his performance. Jessica Gunning is equally brilliant as deranged stalker Martha. And as for the episode where we see him fall victim to an older man, well it is something that won’t leave you.

Of course there is now the controversy as to whether Gadd should have be so honest about it being based on a true story. Online sleuths have been their worst selves in trying to track down the real people. But at the same time it is undeniable this hits harder knowing it really happened.

One thought that does bubble up though is that of the issue of gender here. If it was a woman being stalked by a man, would we be debating how much the victim led them on? Gadd is open about the mistakes he made, but is he trying to be chivalrous? It’s like at times he is apologising for her, blaming himself more than her.

Anyway, it’s unlikely you will see a more gripping drama this year. Just don’t go to bed on it.

Matthew eats… American Horror Story: Freak Show

I’m opening with a confession. I didn’t expect to be writing this review just yet. I thought I’d finish American Crime Story: The Assassination of Gianni Versace first. But four episodes in and it was just too dark. It is not Friday night fare. I will finish it, but in a different time slot.

So American Horror Story: Freak Show rode to the rescue. It might sound odd as a choice considering how I have just spoken about not wanting anything to dark. But AHS at least gives a dash of camp fun in among the bloodshed. Even some dark humour as well. There is something to break it up and preventing an unrelenting tone.

The plot of this season of the franchise focuses on the freak show ran by wannabe star Elsa Mars (Jessica Lange in a swansong performance). She hires suspected murderers Dot and Bette, siamese twins, to draw in the punters to her show, but is upstaged by them. Hunting for the murderers are the cops, and when one gets too close he is killed by another of the freaks. Oh, and there is a psycho clown killing and kidnapping people. Throw in a strongman who is also on the run from the law and you have essentially a circus of criminals.

You may be wondering where the fun is. Well, for a start Lange plays Elsa perfectly. Still dreaming but jaded, there is a sharp wit to her masking a sadness. The back and forth between the very different twins is also playfully caustic. True, it lacks the out-and-out dark humour of Coven or Apocalypse. But then we are dealing with a very different beast.

The only true darkness is in the Twisty plotline and to a certain degree the Del one. Obviously the threads will wax and wane throughout the season, but I hope they don’t come to dominate over other, more well-rounded stories. Let us see Elsa take centre stage as much as possible.

It’s because of my aversion to constant misery I will avoid some seasons. Asylum may be the most-highly regarded, but I still don’t see a reason to experiment with it. For now Freak Show fits just fine.

Matthew eats… Snowpiercer

It’s strange that as we feel like we are increasingly heading for destruction of humanity, that we are fascinated with fictional worlds where that is played out. Surely we long for escapism, a feeling that everything will be ok, that good is still more powerful, utopia more in reach than dystopia. Yet everywhere you turn, it is the sadness that pulls us in.

Snowpiercer is part of this. Set in the near future, it follows a train that travels the globe following the Big Freeze, a bodged attempt to deal with global warming through geothermal engineering. The train is divided by classes, from the elite in first class, to the ‘tail’ essentially a slum. The residents of this plan revolts to take over the train, but have so far failed, leading to brutal clampdowns. Then a murder in Third Class sees a former homicide detective be recruited from the ‘tail’ to solve it.

Essentially, the two plots interest with each other, and thankfully don’t quite fall into the trap of competing. Our detective uses his opportunity of solving the crime to develop schematics of the train to aid the next revolt. And there is the obligatory conspiracy theories of just who is in Mr Wilford, the train’s inventor and why does this murder matter so much. So the plot works.

This is vital, because it is certainly not a barrel of laughs. We have cannibalism, torture and a whole host of nastiness in general. But it is the intrigue that balances that out. Come for the shock value, stay for the mystery.

My one gripe is thought that once again we have anybody who is remotely successful in life being written as someone who is awful. Why is First Class so full of mean-spirited individuals who pulsate with snobbery and ingratitude? And why are the underclass some kind of anti-heroes? Yes, I know there are stark divisions in the real world, but can’t we have a nice rich person in these programmes just once?

For now though, I’m ignoring that and focusing on everything else. Although if someone could crack a smile, that would help. Let’s pretend we have some hope left.

Matthew eats… Unforgotten

A major cast change is always a gamble. How do you handle one or more of your leads going? Glee struggled with getting us to love newer castmates. Death In Paradise meanwhile slips easily from one lead to another.

Unforgotten has had to find a similar success after killing of its lead in series four. Nicola Walker’s character was killed off in a random hit and run. Now Sinead Keenan come along to replace her. We are introduced to her facing a personal crisis because she is that classic female lead of someone who has worked too hard and her husband has had an affair. Poor women. The terrible men they marry either ditch them for being too dowdy or too bossy.

The problem is no matter how much her chippiness is explained, you still struggle to sympathise. Their is little hint of softness to her. She is borderline cruel to the rest of her team, expecting respect whilst also not being part of them. I know we are supposed to see her as someone with too much on her plate, but instead she comes across as someone who lashes out at others.

Of course, it is obvious where this will go. At some point her and her detective partner will unburden themselves to each other, team respect will be found, everything will be resolved. It’s all so obvious for a show that prides itself from being unusual.

And the case itself? It’s decent enough. We have our previously unidentified victim, four potential suspects (all of whom have their own tragic stories) etc. But because everything feels like it is about personal lives, the detection gets lost.

So yes, the case change needs work. The heart of what matters has been lost. Hopefully, with the new lead bedded in, the next series takes us back to this.

Matthew eats… What We Do In The Shadows

One of the big trends in comedy that comes and goes is the mockumentary. It’s tricky to get right, as the need to be funny can run into the format leading to one being sacrificed for the other. It can also be too arch in its approach, expecting the audience to be in on a joke that hasn’t even been told.

But when it works it is wonderful, as it does in What We Do In The Shadows, the latest in my list of shows I am finally getting round to. The plot, so far at least, is three vampires living on Staten Island are tasked by some high-ranking vampires to take over the New World. For some reason that isn’t explained, this is being filmed by a camera crew. Their attempts are inept and hilarious.

What makes this work is that the humour is actually in the very human behaviours of the vampires. Nandor uses his authority to call secret meetings. Laszlo is sex obsessed. Nadja takes pity on other women and believes making them vampires will see them take revenge against men who wrong them. They are all a little bit dumb yet believe they are the smartest person in the room. They are baffled why they do not succeed.

Moreover, it also knows exactly when to lean into its oddness. The jokes work because it isn’t rapid fire, but instead well-timed peaks; for example, you can’t have an episode entirely given to charming and killing a pack of raccoons.

I’m only a few episodes in, but already I am delighted by it. I am not too troubled by the end result, I just enjoy the journey along the way. Throw in it being funny, and you can see why it hits the sweet spot.

Matthew eats… American Crime Story: The Assassination of Giovanni Versace

Yes, I am aware that this is another review of a Ryan Murphy show. I am honestly not making this a stan account for him, or for the Drag Race franchise. But it is something new I have tried this week so this is the review you are getting.

American Crime Story always seems the less-obsessed over anthology series of Murphy’s. This feels unfair as I would say the quality control is much higher and, like Fued, has something more to say about the world we live in, even if the stories are set in the recent past.

The plot of this installment is pretty obvious from the title, in that it recounts the events leading up to and after the murder of Giovanni Versace. Like all good Murphy productions, this isn’t just about the victim or their family. Everyone gets explored, not least the killer Andrew Cunanan. It is well plotted and interesting, although the opening build to the murder could have been tightened (couldn’t Cunanan have been introduced at the point of the murder and his pre-actions spliced in elsewhere).

The acting is also for the most part great. Ricky Martin takes the ‘surprisingly good’ accolade and Edgar Ramirez plays Versace well. The standout though is Darren Criss as Cunanan, who plays the chameleon nature of the part to near perfection.

The only issue is surprisingly Penelope Cruz as Donatella Versace. There are two blockers. One is that she plays it a little too cold, and not in that glamourous icy way that someone like Jessica Lange brings to her roles. The other is diction. There is a whole section of dialogue I missed because the words were blurred, and not deliberately so. This is really something that could have been ironed.

But despite that it is still enjoyable. It has become my Friday night go to until I have enough alcohol to truly appreciate the campy drama of Drag Race. Yes, I might stan Murphy at times. But with shows like this, you can see why.

Matthew eats… University Challenge

University Challenge is a television institution. It feels like it would be a true sign of end times if it was ever axed. Of course, it once was for a brief time, and I can only imagine the horrors that swirled around.

To add to its gravitas, it had only ever had two hosts; Bamber Gascoigne and then Jeremy Paxman, both doing the jobs for decades. For Paxman, his encroaching Parkinson’s disease saw him finally bow out in 2023. His replacement is Amol Rajan. He has now had almost a full run to bed in, so how is he doing?

Ok, let’s start with the positives. His arrival hasn’t led to a change in format, as that would be sacrilege. We do have a new set, which initially looked alarmingly 80’s but has now settled. He is an eloquent questioner, managing to avoid Paxman’s mangled pronunciations of scientific terms. We also see a splash of his private passions – bonus rounds on jazz or hip hop see him brighten up considerably.

And now the negatives. In early episodes, he rushed through the questions. Thankfully they were basic enough in the early rounds for the viewer to just about cope, but it did skew some of the opening matches, allowing the losing team a better opportunity to secure one of the top 4 runner-up spots then those who came later down the line when the pace had settled. His attempts at banter also fall flat; Paxman got away with it by presenting himself as some dowdy headmaster being exasperated by a particularly wasteful child. Rajan seems to think he can still pass for being a student himself and that he is in some glorified Student Union bar.

Having said that, he has grown on me. Although the transition isn’t faultless, he hasn’t ruined (or even tarnished) the show. Rather like a monarch new to the throne, he has made a wise move in grasping that the institution is bigger than him. Will it be a decades-long tenure? Who knows. But if he continues to mature into the role, it would be a shame for it not to be.

Matthew eats… Only Murders in the Building

My habit of being late to the bandwagon continues. In what feels like a lifetime after everyone else discovered it, I am not finally starting Only Murders in the Building. The question is though, is this one of those worth the wait, or a piece of over-hyped nonsense?

First, to the plot. Three strangers living in a New York apartment block after a fellow resident is murdered, which the police initially rule as suicide. Turns out they are all true crime obsessives, and decide to make their own podcast as they investigate the crime ‘live’. But they all have their own secrets, including a hidden past with the victim, financial problems and figures missing from their lives.

So, is it any good? Well, yes, very. The writing is sharp and witty, with a vein of humour that adds that sprinkle of something. All three of the central cast members (Steve Martin, Martin Short, Selena Gomez) bring something to the story. Having said that, I’m only two episodes in and I haven’t really seen much interplay between Short and Gomez, although this is bound to be fixed. And of course, the plot is gripping. It needs to be, this is very much the kind of show where that matters more than character studies.

Are there any drawbacks? Well, some of the scenes of introspection can sometimes jolt you out of the excitement of the plot. The change of pace is fine, but it very much feels designed to be a deliberate catch your breath moment rather than something that really adds anything. Or maybe these do matter further down the line.

In this case, I am definitely glad I jumped on the bandwagon. I can’t wait to solve the mystery and devour subsequent seasons.

Matthew eats… Beyond Paradise

The unqualified, and at times unexplained, success of cosy detective drama Death in Paradise was always ripe for a spin off. In fact, it seems nothing short of a surprise that it has taken over a decade for one to be forth coming. It is after all one of the network’s biggest bankers, which is perhaps embarrassing in some respects – having one of the most powerful drama departments in the television world and one of your biggest hits is something that could be made by any commercial rival.

But here we are, now with Beyond Paradise. Former lead Kris Marshall returns as the detective, having spent some years in London. Now it is off to the quiet seaside town of his wife’s childhood. Which of course, turns out not to be that quiet. It’s like Midsomer Murders pitched up at the seaside. Whether or not it trips over into the faintly ridiculous remains to be seen.

So yes, little town location – check. Now, the supporting cast. Well, it’s Devon, so some Doc Martin style – south-western yokels will work. Get a dim but well-meaning rookie officer (poor Dylan Llewellyn – all that Derry Girls and Big Boys kudos being leached off him). Put a grumpy late middle-aged woman on reception. Have a sidekick who is slightly too serious. Yep, every casting cliche is there.

None of this is a problem. They know the target audience for this and it gets lapped up. Not everyone wants crime dramas in dimly lit streets and violent deaths. And if you can wrap it up in 60 minutes, all to the good. I mean, with a bit more polish, I would barely be raising an eyebrow at this.

But it is the lack of polish that is the killer blow. For saying this is in a prime time slot, this is more reminiscent of the sort of cosy crime that sometimes goes out mid-afternoon. Death in Paradise looks like Chekov next to this. It is not some much comfort food, as an insubstantial ready meal pretending to be something more.

And finally, the tone. Yes, it is all breezy. But then we have Humprhey’s personal life, including his wife’s latest miscarriage and worries over an affair. It is these that put it rightfully in that 9pm window for viewing, yet are so at odds with the charm of everything else.

In short, Death in Paradise seems to have that magic that means it gets away with this approach that Beyond Paradise doesn’t. Perhaps it’s a time thing, or that with the exception of Marshall, the lead in it has always had a dash of vinegar in their spirit. Something isn’t quite right here. Maybe this is why a spin off was initially so slow to come.