Littlelep I learned about QI in a search for British comedy and was an instant fan of the quirky show that presented quirky facts with quirky comedic conversation thrown in.My subsequent binge-watching of all QI seasons has left me feeling dirty all over. When the learning and the laughs on YouTube ended and after Stephen Fry's last appearance as host, I began to reflect on what really had gone on and what the show was primarily all about.Basically, this has been a vehicle for gay propaganda. The majority of the panel members are gay and are eager to profess that -- some describing in great detail their perversion. This delighted Mr. Fry, whose constant references to gay acts and other private bodily functions make one's head spin. The first few seasons were temperate compared with Fry's final seasons, where depictions of nude men (and a few nude women) comprised a great percentage of the graphics. Topics were chosen that had otherwise benign references because they could be turned into juvenile gay witticisms -- any word that could be connected with gay sex or excretion or flatulence was.The news is that Fry's replacement is a lesbian. I expect that, because of her apparent dignity, the show will be less obviously focused on all things sexual and anal. One will have to tune in to see. Such a revised format would be more respectful of panelists and audience who find bathroom and bedroom humor uncomfortable. I expect that the trend toward gay guest panelists will continue and that they will proudly proclaim themselves to be such to the delight of the gay world and the giggles of those present in the studio; but it may also actually be possible to have a combination of education and comedy that stays out of the bedroom.One other trend we see in QI is the obsession toward political correctness in the composition of the panel. The first few seasons were tremendously successful because of the quality and recurring appearances of the same terrific comedians. The compliance with the demand for that to change was obvious when all-male panels or panels with the same female comedienne suddenly became comprised of equal numbers of males and females and then three-to-one females. The female shows have as a rule been stunningly boring, yet it is fair to say that with a female host, this will become the norm.All good things come to an end. In this case, "the end" was the beginning, middle, and conclusion. Sometimes comedy will permit one to become enmeshed in the sewer without one becoming cognizant of the sewage that surrounds you. QI is the epitome of that condition.

thud-5 Have you ever been watching a game show and thought, "what would it be like if the host just lost control and the celebrity panel took over?" Of course you have... we all have. Well, QI takes that premise and lets the humor fly.There are right answers which get a couple points, glaringly obvious and often actually wrong answers that get points ripped away, and the main point of the show: Quite Interesting tidbits that get lots of points.Stephen Fry stumbles through the questions, obviously reading them off of a prompter that is too far away, and completely knows when to just sit back and when to drop his own QI bits in.Unfortunately not available in the US, this British show is refreshing, wonderfully staged, and a delight to watch. It is obvious that like another British 'game show,' "Have I Got News For You" this program is shot over a period of many hours and edited down to the best parts. But who cares!?!? The point is not who wins or loses (generally the ongoing panelist, Alan Davies) but how many laughs we get per half hour and how many things you can learn by watching. Pray for DVDs full of this or at least having BBC America pick it up.

bob the moo With it not being a standard comedy panel show or easy to describe, I didn't manage to get round to watching QI for quite a while but am now busily catching up. The show sees host Stephen Fry asking very detailed questions to test the knowledge of the panel of four; the "questions" are almost all based on trivia or little known facts. As with all panel games the scoring is not really that important, what is important is that the show is funny and keeps moving or, in this case, that the answers be Quite Interesting.Interesting is not something it ever struggles to be because the questions are nearly always little "I never knew that" affairs that, although mostly trivial in nature, do at least mean that the show lives up to its name. This aspect is the foundation for the show so it is important that it was strong but what is just as important is that the panel can make jokes around the material while still being intelligent enough to be a going concern. Mostly they manage this and it is only some of them that are consistently annoyingly silly and seem to belong more on Never Mind the Buzzcocks than on QI. Fry is a perfect host for this sort of thing and he convinces that he knows it all – he seems genuinely in love with the detail of the answers and this helps convey it to me. The panellists are a mixed bunch but mostly do OK. I'm not a massive fan of Bill Bailey, Alan Davies or Jo Brand so I must admit being a little biased but mostly the panellists do well to deliver fresh jokes without detracting from the slightly intellectual nature of the programme.Overall an enjoyably different panel show that can be enjoyed by anybody despite the appearance of being a rather intellectual affair. Fry is a great host and keeps the humour from sliding too far into the silly, to ensure that the air is kept intelligent. Never as out and out funny as your "Have I Got News" or your "Buzzcocks" but it manages to be quite entertaining as well as quite interesting nonetheless.

tonygillan I have often heard Stephen Fry accused of being pleased with himself for being so clever. This implies that there is something intrinsically wrong with being clever.QI is a perfect vehicle for Fry and others to show how clever and witty they are. And why not?You know, if I was as clever and witty as Stephen Fry. I would be pleased with myself too.As for the complaints about the intelligence and wit being sullied by smut, remember that many of us LIKE smut. The difference between fans and opponents of smut, is that you are unlikely to hear comments on 'Points Of View' complaining about a paucity of dirty jokes. So keep the smut forthcoming please.There should be enough facts in the world to keep this show going for a while yet.