Weaver's Week 2025-10-19

Last week | Weaver's Week Index | Next week

Milquetoast on the telly.

BBC1's new daytime show has been on for a couple of weeks, and we've seen enough to make a provisional judgement. And to describe it for you.

Six players are in the studio, each stands behind their own podium, all arranged in a semi-circle. At random, the players have been spotted amounts of money, their "secret stash". The top player begins with £4000, another has £1000, then £500, £100, £50, and someone begins with £0.

We viewers know who has what, like on The Traitors the information is on screen throughout the game. The players know their own amounts, but don't know who has what other figure. Neither does the host – Amanda Holden is not allowed to be told the facts, she might blurt it out at the most inconvenient moment.

Each episode begins with Moving in Circles, a multiple choice quiz. Three options for the first couple of questions, four options for the rest of the round. Here's something novel: the players indicate their answer by standing on sections of the board. The players get seven seconds to decide on their answer, and while this isn't enforced to the microsecond, there's no moving after time's up. One point for each correct answer, three points if someone is the only person to give the right answer.

Whoever scores the most after five questions has won the round. They get immunity from the next vote, and the first "power" – £1000 to add to their secret stash. And then there's a discussion of who has the money, and who ought to be eliminated.

At this point, players can give a hard claim to their amount. "I started with the £500, and now I've added the £1000." Other players can be more vague: "I've got a decent amount", or "One of the thousands, here". Curiously, it's very rare for there to be a claim that "No, I've literally got nothing".

Players will also refer to their quizzing ability, because some money can be added in the final. "You've seen I have a good general knowledge, so I'll add plenty in the final", that sort of thing.

Sooner rather than later, the time for talking is over, and it's the moment to lock in decisions. The player with the most votes is eliminated and leaves the contest; if there's a tie, the Strongest Link – er, er, player who won the power – will decide between the tied players. Players who are voted out before the final will return on tomorrow's show, unless it's a Friday edition because nobody wants to be stuck in a house with Amanda Holden all weekend.

After this, there are a number of other quiz rounds, which differ every episode. The powers are the same every day, and played in the same order.

The other quiz rounds are Sweet Spot, find the fact that links two things. For instance, "Famous Russian ballerina" and "Dessert with a meringue base, fruit and cream" has a sweet spot of "Pavlova". Clues are displayed on the giant LED floor. This round's on the buzzers, and quite often ends in a tie – ties in the quiz rounds are broken by "Fastest Finger First", a single buzzer question.

Connecting Circles, pairs of players are picked out at random and given six possible answers. Two are correct, and the players move across the floor to stand on the answer they believe is right. One point each if they stand on one right answer, three points if they cover both correct answers. Two questions for each player, so this round's only ever played when four remain, and one of the pairs never play together.

Circle Circuit, players are asked true-or-false questions. Right responses allow the player to spin an electronic dice, and advance around a clockface. First player to complete the circuit wins the round. The winner of the last round always begins play, and because players are asked questions in turn, a tie is impossible.

Vicious Circle, general knowledge questions on the buzzer. Wrong answer wallies you out of the next question. Two right answer takes your counter into the middle of the floor, and each right answer after that allows you to eliminate one of the other players. Last player standing wins the round.

Circle of Clues, three clues on the buzzer lead to one answer, like the middle round on Lightning. Players can buzz in early for more points, but can only buzz in once for each set of clues. Again, a tie is very possible.

The remaining powers are always played in the same order. Peek, look at another player's stash; Swap your stash for someone else's; and Puppetmaster choose who you take with you into the final. (They don't formally name the power in the final round, which is odd.)

In the final, the players have a minute to answer general knowledge questions. Right answers earn £100 for the daily pot, and play passes to the other player. Wrong answer and the same question stays with the same player until they get it right, or pass and get a new question. Play in this interlude always starts with the Puppetmaster, the winner of the previous round.

So our two final players have earned a few hundred quid in this endgame. They've also brought in some money from their "Secret Stash"; how much, only they know. And now they're faced with a choice; to share, or to steal. To split, or to trash. To cash, or to shaft.

Yes, it's everyone's favourite mid-aughts relic The Prisoner's Dilemma, dusted off and presented as though it's something new and/or exciting. Of course they're going to milk the final reveals for as much tension as possible, and then quite a bit more. Of course they are.

There is a glimmer of a good game on The Inner Circle. The basic idea has potential, but the execution isn't there.

Let's start with the prizes: an effective maximum of £6000, a theoretical minimum of £50, most likely somewhere in the £1000 – £2000 range. That's a somewhat banal amount of money: not big enough to change a life, not enough to have a holiday of a lifetime, especially when split with your opponent. It's money that will go towards a fitted kitchen, not a full new kitchen.

Now, we've nothing against Amanda Holden as a person, we're sure she is kind and generous and a dream to work with on set and all the rest. It is a decision not to tell Amanda who has the big money, and she lets us think that it's a decision based on her ability to keep a secret (or lack thereof).

And that leads us to think, if the producers don't trust Amanda with the big info, do they trust her with the little things? Can we trust that she's giving the right answers to questions, or counting the votes correctly? Throughout the show, Amanda gives off an air of incompetence, that she doesn't know what she's doing, that she's a supply presenter filling in while someone more experienced is away. The impression is wrong in fact, but we are able to think it, and it corrodes our trust in The Inner Circle.

Bringing back players from one day to the next is a choice – they could have a completely new suite of players every episode. We can understand why they've done it, at a stroke they've halved the number of contestants needed for the series.

From what we've seen, contestants seem not to learn from each other's play in previous shows, when Shirley bluffs about having the top prize on Monday, it is not held against her on Tuesday. When Jim proves he has poor general knowledge one day, the fact he has poor general knowledge the next day is not a pretext to vote him out. This is an omission on the contestants' part.

The producers could have kept the same six players for the entire week's shows. Let us see the players work out who can be trusted, who will play honestly and fairly. Yes, this means that someone could win lots of episodes, but this knowledge would be shared around the group and would lead to more interesting game play. We've seen on Genius Game and The Inheritance that seeing dynamics within a closed group can be fascinating. Social deduction games are great to play; as an outsider just watching, we need a way in, some continuing drama. "Tom has been kyboshed today, but he can blab to the group and eliminate Josh tomorrow, that will be fun."

The Inner Circle has also been airing celebrity editions on Saturday nights. These are played by a member of the public with an associated celebrity. Cash prizes are mostly doubled – they're £0, £100, £200, £1000, £2000, but the top prize only increases to £5000. The pairs can confer on some rounds; on others, the celebrity becomes the player's token on the LED floor. The final cash maker round, and the "Split or Shaft" decision, are made by the civilian player alone. Eliminated contestants – and the celebrities – are out and do not return.

According to the grapevine, The Inner Circle was commissioned to replicate the Round Table bits of The Traitors. We don't get that vibe, it's people spouting off about the small amount they know (and the large amount they don't) in a brightly-lit television studio. But if they are going to use ideas from that neck of the woods, perhaps other powers could be brought in. Off the top of our head: "The Fortune Hunter", one of these two players has the top remaining prize. "Penniless", one of these two players has the bottom remaining prize. "Expose", reveal any player's stash (including your own) to the whole group.

Returning to the "brightly-lit television studio", and could they have changed it? The walls are LED panels, generally lit in solid colours with barely a hint of pattern. Behind the host is a screen showing the programme's logo, a lightly-stylised version of The Inner Circle. There are technical reasons why LED panels in the studio seen on LED panels at home look terribly blocky, and the logo behind Amanda is horribly blocky and distracting. It's one of those rare cases where a physical logo, made out of card or light wood, would have looked so much better.

Positive bits? The quiz questions are written with wit and verve, as is the modern style. The programme knows that it's playing for "nice weekend in Venice" money and doesn't try to make things heavier than they are. In spite of her protestations, Amanda Holden keeps the game on track, and it's edited to be reasonably breezy.

Reaction amongst this column's peers has been almost uniformly negative. "Really disappointing", "even worse than I expected", "it all feels very 2000s". This column cannot honestly argue that The Inner Circle is must-see television; we do argue that there is an idea, and it could come good if it's given a lot of work.

Vote off Following a ceasefire in the ongoing Gaza war, the EBU has postponed their vote on whether to exclude KAN from next year's Eurovision Song Contest. The broadcasting union had planned to hold a secret ballot amongst member broadcasters in early November, but have now deferred the decision to an in-person discussion at the winter assembly in December. It is unclear whether a formal vote will take place.

Very tight quizzing on House of Games this week, nothing to choose between Una Healy, Joanna Page, Jack P Shepherd, and Emmanuel Sonubi – so little between them that we went into the final round on Friday with the prospect of three trophies being handed out. We got the impression that while nobody was brilliant, everyone was competent, and that led to an unpredictable week of shows.

A rare Tuesday outing for the BBC2 quiz block, moving in graceful synchronisation to avoid the football. Would be interesting to see the Quizzy Monday First XI take to the field; we reckon they could give the Mighty Mighty San Marino a bit of a fright.

Richard Kerr won on Mastermind, taking the 1944 Battle of Normandy as his specialist subject. Seven passes from the winner shows he was playing the percentages, getting in a couple of extra questions in his search for nine right. Paddy Moore had given a strong general knowledge set, but had given himself a lot of work to do following a disappointing specialist round, and added to his burden with a couple of "answer in haste, repent at leisure" moments where his self-correction came too late.

Very tight on Only Connect, where Oh No They Didn't emerged victorious over the Whitley Baes. The Baes got off to the best start in the first two rounds, finding bands named after women and bodies of water separating larger continents. ONTD kicked back with things lasting five years, and the regnal numbers of recent Windsors. Nothing between the teams after two rounds, and nothing between them after three rounds. The better team at Missing Vowels won.

The show gave gentle encouragement to watch the 1970s sitcom Porridge, where Ronnie Barker passes sentence on himself; and to hear the 1980 song "Vincent". One of the teams was born in 2004, making them younger than this column. Pass the zimmer frame.

Magdalen Oxford came through to win University Challenge, beating Robinson Cambridge handily. Robinson got the first two starters right, but once the Oxonians had found their feet, they were unstoppable. Perhaps not the most convincing performance, as the side got 54% of the questions correct – winning sides tend to get over 60% right. Not fatal for their long-term chances, but doesn't mark them out as early favourites.

Very little literature in this week's show, Robinson didn't face a single question on the written word.

Missing some QI? Dame Sandi and the crew return (BBC2, Tue). Stepped off The Wheel? Micky Mac's back (BBC1, Sat). Find out TG4's representative to Junior Eurovision (Sun). It's the final of Masterchef Down Under (W, Fri).

We're also looking forward to continuing series. Les Dennis makes Countdown that bit more fun (C4, weekdays), and an eighties-themed episode of Never Mind the Buzzcocks (Sky Maximillian, Tue).

To have Weaver's Week emailed to you on publication day, receive our exclusive TV roundup of the game shows in the week ahead, and chat to other ukgameshows.com readers, sign up to our Google Group.

Last week | Weaver's Week Index | Next week