Hard Quiz's Tom tones it down for teens

The idea goes that if people watched the original show, then they'll watch the other one you create as well.

Sometimes the spin-off works, and sometimes it doesn't.

After watching the first episode of this Hard Quiz spin-off - where the contestants are teenagers - I'm still not sure which category it falls into.

A large part of the attraction with Hard Quiz is the sarcasm of Tom Gleeson, who puts down the contestants - they're okay with it because they knew that would happen.

But that obviously has to be dialled down when the contestants are kids; it's a very different look to be insulting to a kid compared to an adult.

Gleeson does a decent enough job of that; he does get a few jibes in but for the most part that key ingredient of Hard Quiz's success has been watered down

Perhaps that's the reason someone has to push the laugh track button a lot and crank up the volume; because Gleeson's humour isn't quite as arch.

There's also something a bit odd about the editing; some of the reaction shots of the teens feel like they've come from another part of the show. I can't quite explain why that seems to be the case, it's just a feeling I get.

The teens do know their stuff - subjects are birds of prey, Greek mythology, Minecraft and wives of Henry VIII - so if you tune in to get practice for your pub trivia night, then you'll be fine.

As for the other Hard Quiz fans, well, I'm, not so sure.

Michael Theo made his name in the first series of true-life dating show Love on the Spectrum.

That was real-life, so Theo just had to be himself. But Austin is a comedy, so he has to act. And on top of that, he's playing the title character Austin Hogan, who thinks recently cancelled children's book author Julian Hartswood (played by the UK's Ben Miller) is his father.

That pressure didn't seem to bother Theo; he does a fine job with the title character. And he's managed to ensure Austin is distinct from what we saw of Theo in Love on the Spectrum.

I'd go so far as to say Theo is the most enjoyable thing about Austin; the show tends to feel a little flat whenever he's not on camera.

This is a TV version of chef Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall's book of the same name - the concept is that you can make great dishes while just relying on a trio of ingredients.

The show sees Hugh competing against two other chefs to make the best meal out of three ingredients, one of which has to be the same - in the first episode that is beetroot.

Sure, the simplicity of making a good dish with just three ingredients has some appeal - though the meals in this first episode seem more like a light lunch than a sit-down dinner.

But there is a real annoyance that comes from Hugh constantly repeating the concept of the show and what each of them is making.

It feels a little insulting that he thinks the viewer is so dumb they can't keep track of what's happening in a half-hour cooking show.

And by the way, Hugh's recipe looks awful.