1the paul daniels magic easter show 1985 (BBC, GB) Sure, this may have been good, clean Easter weekend family entertainment but award-winning stuff?
Puh-lease.Comprising a variety of ''amazing''
magic tricks topped up with weak jokes and an extremely high cheese factor, this offering from the vertically challenged magician failed to pull
the wool over the eyes
of even the most docile
of viewers.
And who can deny they didn't look at Mr Daniels
in a different light when they found out he was doing the luuurve thing with his assistant Debbie McGee, 20 years his junior? Enough said.
2black and white minstrel show 1961 (BBC, GB)
Oh dear, oh dear. Who would have thought when the Black and White Minstrel Show scooped the first ever Golden Rose that, come the 40th anniversary of the award, it would be so politically incorrect?
Even looking back with hindsight, it is difficult to fathom just how this show, with its outrageous ''minstrel humour'' which regularly depicted black people as gullible and stupid, managed to last
two decades.
3rich little's christmas carol 1979 (CBC, Canada)
This so-called piece of television genius comprised a one-man
show with Canadian comedian-impressionist Rich Little providing all
the voices for his version
of Dicken's classic Christmas Carol.
But, despite Mr Little putting an original spin on the voices of his ''cast'' - with ''W C Fields'' as Scrooge and ''Humphrey Bogart'' as one of the
ghosts - it didn't really ring true as the stuff that ground-breaking TV moments are made of.
4hale & pace
1989 (ukib/lwt, GB)
With their sketches involving cruelty to animals, sex, violence and dismembered bodies, there is something truly crude about Hale and Pace, but not in the usual sense of
the word.
Our sympathies are with anyone under 30 who has had to live, almost their entire life, in a world where the contrived efforts of this duo pass for comedy.
5the kids in the hall 1993 (Broadway/CBC, Canada)
Yet another export from the country which gave us Bryan Adams and Celine Dion. Despite phenomenal success in its homeland, this quirky quintet of Canadian stand-up comedians failed to make much of an impression elsewhere. Last heard of having slunk back to Toronto to work on yet another comeback tour.
6julie and carol at carnegie hall 1963 (CBS, usa)
The first in a line of
on-stage performances made into television specials, Julie and Carol at Carnegie Hall deserves to be included for setting this unforgivable precedent. But slagging off legendary Julie Andrews and Carol Burnett is likely to get us lynched, so we'll stop there.
7shirley maclaine special 1978
(CBS, usa)
Likewise, reward for anything which puts the words ''Shirley MacLaine'' and ''Special'' together should be up there as an instantly punishable crime.
With sickly sweet extravaganzas like this on the box, who can blame Americans for banning their kids from watching too much television.
8brian orser:
night moves
1992 (CBC, Canada)
Despite sporting a
porn-esque title, Night Moves couldn't be risque
if it tried. Perhaps the judges confused it with
a flick of the same
name. Other than among the most enthusiastic
of figure-skating buffs,
the 1992 Golden Rose winner failed to make
any ripples in most people's list of all-time great television favourites.
9nor-way to broadcasting 1976 (NRK, Norway)
Everyone knows that Norwegians are not known for their outstanding contributions to world television but somehow this one sneaked in.
We could find no-one who would admit to having seen this, however if, as the title suggests, it was any kind of Norwegian guide to broadcasting, we are not sorry we missed it.
10the mole 2000 (VRT, Belgium)
With Britain's insatiable appetite for reality television game shows, this one should have been a dead cert. Sadly it failed
to set TV screens alight here, or pretty much anywhere elsewhere.
Instead it appears to have spawned a strange subculture of avid
viewers akin only to that
of the X-Files, Red Dwarf
or those who believe
Robot Wars is a good
show. Let's hope the 2001 winner, due to be announced on Monday, fairs a little better.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article