IMDb > "RI:SE" (2002) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb

Reviews & Ratings for
"RI:SE" More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Index 7 reviews in total 

2 out of 3 people found the following review useful:

`So the Big Breakfast formula has failed – what will we replace it with?' `Errrr, How about a Big Breakfast style morning show!' `yeah, that'll work'

Author: bob the moo from United Kingdom
24 May 2003

When The Big Breakfast finally died, channel four ran old episodes of Futurama and I Dream of Genie in the weekday breakfast slot for a while before launching Rise. A group of presenters give news, gossip, opinion and jokes from behind a long desk, with a sports, headlines and weather coming from in front of a large screen.

I must be honest and say that I liked the first style of Rise. It wasn't great but at least it was different after years of channel 4 giving us the Big Breakfast formula endlessly re-cooked with different presenters until it died. It was a little different (although really just stolen from America) and it had a mix of energy yet structure whereas the Big Breakfast drove more off energy with a sort of mob-rule to it. Sadly this didn't really take off so channel 4 kept the brand name (Rise) but changed the formula. Now guess what they changed it to?

Imagine a boardroom of channel 4 execs. The only successful morning show they've really had is The Big Breakfast. Ignoring the fact that it was fresh once but went downhill quickly the execs decided that to simply rehash this same formula would win ratings despite the fact that the same formula had been axed less than a year prior! So in come Iain Lee and the girl from Big Brother 3 to mug around, deliver cr*p jokes and interview guests. The lack of genuine humour and wit is made all the more evident by the Big Breakfast style `posse' of handers on and cameramen etc who all laugh hysterically whenever anything approaching a joke is heard.

The guests are quite amusing. Rise has never manage to get big guests unless they are simply not aware of how many viewers channel 4 gets at 8am on a weekday. So the UK guests will tend to be average pop groups etc while the `bigger' guests will be clearly bemused by the sheer haphazardness of the whole damn affair. It makes for a sorry sight and the method of interviewing the same people again every 20 minutes (the assumption being that the audience is a transient one at that time of the morning) makes for an unintentionally funny thing. As Denis Leary said when being asked the same question for the third time that morning `well, as I said 20 minutes ago…..' – the nervous laughter from the presenters was worth watching the show for on that one!

Out of the two formats I not only preferred the formula of the first but also the presenters. Lee was funny once (on the first series of the 11oclock show) but not since then. And his most recent addition as co-presenter (the winner of last years Big Brother) just shows how low the standard has fallen. Regular presenters for segments include a horrid pair of gossip hounds who clearly have wear and, indeed, tear on their faces as they sit and cackle over their exploits on the party circuit several hours before coming on air.

On terrestrial tv BBC1 has the monopoly on the series news. BBC2 is a mix of kids programmes and filler, ITV has the gossip/news formula, channel 5 has even secured an audience with some well chosen American TV shows for kids (Bear in Blue House) but channel 4 has yet to find a niche. Sadly what they have is this awful `youf' programming agenda that simply doesn't work and thus doesn't get an audience. Personally I believe they need to accept that they will have a low audience share at this time and therefore really take a risk and do something different – why not, it's not like the audience can get any smaller! But to keep cranking out this sub-Big Breakfast rubbish years after the audience has abandoned it is not only stupid and pointless, it's straight up insulting to the audience.

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 3 people found the following review useful:

Just plain dull

Author: Ian Jenkins (Bulldog7) from Witney, England
2 January 2003

Because of education, I must get up early in the mornings. As mornings are not my best time, I was looking forward to a fresh, good show to replace the 'Big Breakfast' and help me wake up. How disappointed I was when this pile of rubbish with a 'snazzy' set turned up. The presenters are dull (even Kirsty Gallagher and Helen Chamberlain who are much better on their Sky shows) and I have watched an edition for over an hour before while completely awake and not been able to remember any of it. The worst bit about it though has to be the main presenter Mark Durden Smith. Where did they get him from. He tries to be funny and even his co-hosts cringe when he talks. If channel Four want to show something good in the mornings, buy the rights to 'Family Guy'!

Was the above review useful to you?

Okay, at least it tried to be different

7/10
Author: Parker Lewis from United States
19 March 2016

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I know it's mainstream and politically correct to bag RI:SE, and sure it had its areas for improvement, but at least it did its best to have a fresh, reality show approach to morning TV.

I wonder if maybe RI:SE was way ahead of its time. With the rise of Donald Trump and Jeremy Corbyn, RI:SE would have had so much material to play with.

What was interesting was the 9/11 show, when the cast devoted pretty much the stories to the second anniversary of 9/11, and that was a very serious and hard journalism for a show like RI:SE.

Who knows, maybe RI:SE will return from the ashes, ready for a new generation.

Was the above review useful to you?

RI:SE was a mixed bag

7/10
Author: david-fernandez from United Kingdom
9 November 2014

For a breakfast TV show it wasn't too bad, not as zany as the Big Breakfast that replaced it but entertaining nonetheless. I do remember one of the more humorous male presenters stating (as a joke in the form of innuendo) that one of his female co-presenters liked 'salty crab sticks' but she didn't see the funny side and took great offence, this cause momentary extreme awkwardness live on TV... does anyone remember this happening ? maybe this is why the show ended ... conflicts between the presenters. Although the style was very much 'upbeat' with young presenters, they were more restrained than those in the Big Breakfast. The set was very clean and modern I remember but the interviews and activities were a tad boring. I haven't seen breakfast TV in decades, I've just never had the time.

Was the above review useful to you?

What a waste of time and money...

Author: RedCooper from UK
25 August 2003

I hoped despite the awful beginning, RI:SE will ...rise above all criticism and turn in something watchable. It could have made it if it wasn't for the addition of the annoying Mel & Sue, rendering useless the last 1/2 hr and later on for turning into a Big Brother discussion show.

As someone said, C4 should buy some sitcoms from US and spare all of us the trouble.

Was the above review useful to you?

some thing to watch in the morning

Author: (Blink_1822k@hotmail.com) from Mansfield, england
25 June 2003

I get up at 7 in the morning to go to school. The only thing to watch is RI:SE,its funny and good nothing special But its better than bbc, bbc2,itv and Five.Its presented by ian lee whos not really funny and the wonderfull kate lawler who's bimbo style comedy is funny.I think channel 4 should keep this show on.

Was the above review useful to you?

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

So,it's coming to an end then?

Author: davideo-2 from United Kingdom
7 December 2003

STAR RATING:*****Unmissable****Very Good***Okay**You Could Go Out For A Meal Instead*Avoid At All Costs

It would appear from this programme's IMDB homepage that a lid is about to be closed on the whole can of worms,with it's [TV Series 2002-2003] notice.I'm guessing maybe around christmas,or even the new year (if this is actually the case,although I can't guess what else it might be).I can just imagine the (probably literal) big song and dance they'll make about it as the final instalment draws near.

And that would mean it's only lasted for a year.Oh,tragedy.

Well,there's only so far that degrees of celebrity (in this case,Iain Lee and Kate Lawler) can go.And there's certainly only so far an inferior,lacklustre show can be stretched.

This can ultimately be seen as little more than a half hearted attempt to fill a gap in the meaningless void left in the hearts of sad,die hard Big Breakfast fans,with presenters who would probably not even qualify to that deceased show's standards.

Lee is an irritating,third-rate comedian whose constant high pitched hollering and comedic mugging lowers the standard of the show even further.Lord help the poor guests who are trying to explain or answer a question,only to be interrupted on frequent intervals.

And then,there's Kate.Her vacuous,nonchalent manner would suggest a girl who is not particularly a force to be reckoned with,but in fact,this is one devious,manipulative girl we have in front of us.

We all know sex sells,and,despite her abundant lack of presenting skills,not to mention chemistry with her co-host (although,fair play to the girl, establishing an effective rapport with this baffoon would probably prove a challenge to Michael Parkinson),Kate seems to have figured that wearing the shortest skirt in her wardrobe and exposing as maximum an amount of leggy flesh as possible (and choosing a nice pair heels to compliment it) every morning will cause a large majority of the male population to wake up from their kip at 6:55am just to cop a glance at her.

And,speaking of which,one question to Zora,the weather girl:Are those breasts real?Aaargh,I watched some of that delightful Fierce Creatures movie again today,and was just reciting a wonderful one-liner delivered by Kevin Kline to Jamie Lee Curtis.

Seriously though,everyone's gotta know the weather,right?,and this girl has bazongas large enough to offer competition to Jordan in terms of frontal supplement.Again,the male viewers would soon catch notice of this and,in this case,suspicion is aroused as to whether she's had a boob job and resorted to plastic surgery to boost ratings,not to mention most likely her career.This show offers smutty incentives by the bucketload,and it's made all the more tacky and demeaning as a result.

Overall,this is an amateurish,poorly made and poorly presented show.If it does go off the air,well,looks like I will get that lie in after all.**

Was the above review useful to you?


Add another review


Related Links

Ratings Official site Plot keywords
Main details Your user reviews Your vote history