Is it wise to follow the advice of horoscopes? Dave Gorman, never one to turn down a daft quest, decides to live his life strictly by the advice of horoscopes for 40 days and nights. He picks 20 astrologers and picks one piece of clear advice each day to follow. To ensure that he can compare his happiness with how he would have been without the advice, he uses his twin brother as a control. A panel of experts on love, health and wealth sit in judgement on how he has done in order to ascertain his HQ (happiness quotient).
Dave Gorman uses the same tools in his shows - the overhead projectors, the graphs, the charts and so on. Here his deadpan experiment takes his horoscope to the letter and makes comedy from it. It isn't quite as catchy as his first show (where he searched for his name sakes) simply because it is a lot more complex. Whereas with the DCC the graph was only for comedy value and was easy to understand, DGIAE has tonnes of data which you need to get - it also takes up time every week explaining it.
Of course this is all nonsense and it's all a set up. I very much doubt that the control is really Gorman's twin but who cares. The horoscopes themselves are hilarious even if Gorman's antics are forced or repetitive. The `acting out' of the advice is very staged but is mostly very funny and very well presented - and I believe that some of it isn't a fix and really worked out for him (for example setting a lucky bet and winning £500).
The graphs are a little bit of a downside because they take up more time. Or at least they take more time to do. For each day an expert panel give opinions on love, health and wealth and then the audience vote on Dave and his brother's status in each category. This takes time and a flash up of a stat during the voting is tired and not often funny.
Overall however this is enjoyable. It lacks the pace and simplicity of the Dave Gorman Collection, but all his trademark methods are here and he still manages to get lots of laughs out of his experiment even if some of it is silly and the panel/voting bits drag on a touch too long.
Dave Gorman uses the same tools in his shows - the overhead projectors, the graphs, the charts and so on. Here his deadpan experiment takes his horoscope to the letter and makes comedy from it. It isn't quite as catchy as his first show (where he searched for his name sakes) simply because it is a lot more complex. Whereas with the DCC the graph was only for comedy value and was easy to understand, DGIAE has tonnes of data which you need to get - it also takes up time every week explaining it.
Of course this is all nonsense and it's all a set up. I very much doubt that the control is really Gorman's twin but who cares. The horoscopes themselves are hilarious even if Gorman's antics are forced or repetitive. The `acting out' of the advice is very staged but is mostly very funny and very well presented - and I believe that some of it isn't a fix and really worked out for him (for example setting a lucky bet and winning £500).
The graphs are a little bit of a downside because they take up more time. Or at least they take more time to do. For each day an expert panel give opinions on love, health and wealth and then the audience vote on Dave and his brother's status in each category. This takes time and a flash up of a stat during the voting is tired and not often funny.
Overall however this is enjoyable. It lacks the pace and simplicity of the Dave Gorman Collection, but all his trademark methods are here and he still manages to get lots of laughs out of his experiment even if some of it is silly and the panel/voting bits drag on a touch too long.
