it was better on the radio Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By Mogwai on Fri Nov 10 13:39:04 GMT 2000:

Yet again, rather than pour their energy into trying to create something original or at all amusing, the Corpses yet again choose to sit at the back and heckle loudly. Don't create your own material - it's a damn sight easier just to viciously lampoon people who do.

I do love the Corpses site, but for all their talent, they really are a couple of lazy cunts. Write your own stuff or stick to archiving other people's, but don't just stick to limp parodies.

The Corpses aren't the only ones prey to the idea that "it's so easy, anyone can do it". Check this out (it's from last week's NTK, so some of you might already have seen this):

http://www.thesatyr.com/archives/websites/bunion.htm

Anyone can do it, right? WRONG. For fuck's sake. (Although they are right about "Third article usually funnier than main headline".) Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By Mogwai on Fri Nov 10 13:45:38 GMT 2000:

Apologies for repeating phrases over and over. It's something I seem to be prone to over and over when I'm typing in a hurry, which I'm prone to over and over whenever I seem to be in a hurry when I'm typing.

Etc. Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'boki' on Fri Nov 10 13:53:18 GMT 2000:

>Apologies for repeating phrases over and over...

I wouldn't worry about it, it's not the kind of obssession that gets in the way of the facts...unlike that 'Brass List Sycophants' bit.
Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Chuckie' on Fri Nov 10 14:07:01 GMT 2000:

>Yet again, rather than pour their energy into trying to create something original or at all amusing, the Corpses yet again choose to sit at the back and heckle loudly. Don't create your own material - it's a damn sight easier just to viciously lampoon people who do.

Except of course, their original site which was, and still is, a highly original piece of work and we can only hope these parodies are an indication that the site might be coming back...

> Write your own stuff or stick to archiving other people's, but don't just stick to limp parodies.

Yeah Charlie... oh sorry, you meant the corpses. Not exactly 'limp' are they? I mean, certain people failed to realise that TGPs style is very much like the cartoon version. Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By Mogwai on Fri Nov 10 14:14:25 GMT 2000:

>> Write your own stuff or stick to archiving other people's, but don't just stick to limp parodies.
>
>Yeah Charlie... oh sorry, you meant the corpses.

Spot on. If Brooker's already doing a parody, then the Corpses doing a limp parody of a parody is pretty pointless, isn't it? After all, someone could easily in turn do a parody of their little effort, filling every available inch with random spatters of vitriol... except that that would be a waste of time and effort. Which kind of brings me back to my original point. (I think.) Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Chuckie' on Fri Nov 10 14:28:44 GMT 2000:

>Spot on. If Brooker's already doing a parody, then the Corpses doing a limp parody of a parody is pretty pointless, isn't it? After all, someone could easily in turn do a parody of their little effort, filling every available inch with random spatters of vitriol...

Yes, but that wouldn't be a parody of the corpses, it would be a parody of a parody of Brooker's style (See 'Pseudo Shocking' and then 'Cunt' in the current real TVGH)... Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Anonymous' on Fri Nov 10 14:28:48 GMT 2000:

I thought it was just nasty. Threatening to break his legs. Who are these people? Why don't they direct their venom towards someone who deserves it. He's just a parodist for god's sake. Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'MM' on Fri Nov 10 14:34:29 GMT 2000:

Corpses get abusive, yet again, stunningly changing nothing with their direct action.
Well Done. Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By TJ on Fri Nov 10 14:44:24 GMT 2000:

"Roll it over, in the clover, roll it over in the clover, do it again". Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Steven' on Fri Nov 10 14:45:31 GMT 2000:

Charlie Brooker was better when his comedy was confined to the pages of PC Zone, before he actually thought he could get famous with it, though I think I still have nightmares about Larry Grayson saying "Shut that door" locked inside a room full of naked sailors, deep inside a vasaline factory.

Didn't Eric Idle do this TVGo Home format thing in a 70's Ruttles annual? Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By Ewar Woowar on Fri Nov 10 14:50:09 GMT 2000:

Like that's going to change the fucking world. Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By Ewar Woowar on Fri Nov 10 14:56:15 GMT 2000:

The whole thing just wasn't funny. Neither was the TGP one. I'm just really disappointed.

When the forum went down recently I tried an old link, expecting to get that old "closed" message. When the word "Loading" flashed up I was so excited, thinking perhaps the whole site was back up. The crushing disappointment I felt at what was actually there must be akin to how the Corpses felt when they saw the TGP recording.

What a waste. Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Radiator Head Child' on Fri Nov 10 14:58:59 GMT 2000:

hey ewar have no idea about this thread, try the L&H website chatroom, I'm bored Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Steven' on Fri Nov 10 15:03:47 GMT 2000:

I agree with Ewar that doing parodies is a pretty lazy unconcstructive way of doing things, and it would be so much better if they went back to the old method of writing a nice long thought out article arguing their case. But I did find the parodies amusing, but of course they are just going to hurt the comedians they're directed at, rather than hurting them and educating them as the articles may do. Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Jon' on Fri Nov 10 16:09:30 GMT 2000:

"I mean, certain people failed to realise that TGPs style is very much like the cartoon version."

Blimey, you're right. They could have done a parody version that was nothing like the real thing. That would have kept us guessing, eh? Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Peter O' on Fri Nov 10 16:35:44 GMT 2000:

Pathetic, I thought. Yes, "TV Go Home" IS a very thinly-stretched idea that should have been canned about a year ago, but this supposed "parody" doesn't have anything remotely clever or funny about it.

When I was slagging "TV Go Home" off a while back and getting into mildly abusive arguments with Brooker, I seem to remember being in a minority of approximately 1. So why the sudden interest from the "corpses"?

Possibly something to do with those (probably bullshit) rumours of a Chris Morris association with "TV Go Home"?

Such bitterness, and baldly displayed for all to cringe at. Painfully embarrasingly obvious.

The "corpses" are apparently consumed with rage at being "left behind" by the world, watching other people becoming more famous than them. Come on, admit it, you just wish there was a rumour that Chris Morris was going to turn *your* website into a TV show, don't you? IT'S NOT FAIR, IS IT?

And that line about "as if that's gonna change the fucking world..." Oh Christ! At last we have a clue as to who the "corpses" are - one of them is obviously Bono, fallen through a timewarp from 1989. The other has some crayons and isn't afraid to draw bad cartoons, even if it might come dangerously close to impressing 12 gullible people on the Internet.

And anyway, the current issue of "TV Go Home" is, ironically, the best one for some time. Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Jon' on Fri Nov 10 16:41:51 GMT 2000:

What's more ironic is that, back in the "www.corpses" strand, Brooker posted a "funny, but what's the point?" message about the TGP parody. And I posted back "What's the point of TVGH?". And now I'm in the TVGH parody, down as someone who thinks CB's a genius. Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Peter O' on Fri Nov 10 16:53:49 GMT 2000:

What a bunch of talentless cunts going crazy at each other over the merest whiff of so-called success, eh? Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Peter O' on Fri Nov 10 16:56:59 GMT 2000:

Though I would say that "What's the point?" is a valid question to ask of anything the Corpses do, because that's what they claim to be about: doing something for a good reason, not because it's funny. Of course, we all know that's just their excuse for not being very funny most of the time. But it is not a valid question to ask of "TV Go Home," because the point is clearly just to be funny in a certain style, which it certainly does succeed at, at least when you first read it. Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Anonymous' on Fri Nov 10 16:57:21 GMT 2000:

Hammer, nail, head. It reeks of the bitterness of people who wish they were famous. Nothing hurts more than the success of ones peers. Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By Mogwai on Fri Nov 10 17:22:37 GMT 2000:

Following the criticism of the Corpses on this forum, watch out for next week's parody: a fearless pastiche of the forum itself, scathingly satirising its contributors, especially those who have been critical of SOTCAA.

Oh, wait, we had that already...
Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Jon' on Fri Nov 10 17:36:30 GMT 2000:

I've never said that Charlie Brooker was as good as Chris Morris. All I said was that some TVGH features were funny.

I once mailed Dr Hackenbush saying that I didn't think the format would bear imitation. Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Legal Brief' on Fri Nov 10 17:39:46 GMT 2000:

Can you give us the date and time of that mailing? For the trial? Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Chuckie' on Fri Nov 10 17:45:45 GMT 2000:

>"I mean, certain people failed to realise that TGPs style is very much like the cartoon version."
>Blimey, you're right. They could have done a parody version that was nothing like the real thing. That would have kept us guessing, eh?

Jon, I'm referring to the idiots who felt the cartoon was too 'clever-clever'... the style is so very TGP some people have obviously missed it. Looks like some people here are making the same the mistake again.

By the way Peter O - incase you've failed to notice, the corpses have been having a go at Brooker for quite a while now, so don't get all self-important... Brooker himself has commented on this.

Now, assuming anyone with some common sense reads this, anyone know if all this activity from the corpses means the full site is about to return to shut these fuckers up? Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By Justin on Fri Nov 10 17:55:03 GMT 2000:

I don't know if SOTCAA's coming back - I bloody hope it does. But I think TVGH is pretty poor these days - witless and profane for no good reason ("ejaculate on her face" this time - do you see, TVGH points out, I'm taking the piss out of TV programmes that don't actually exist and not at all getting a hard-on at the ability to write the word CUNT frequently in bold type *and* capitals), and certainly not as clever as the listings in, say, the Radio Active Times about 15 years ago.

And that Guardian column *is* jaw-droppingly lazy. Nancy Banks-Smith's contributions have more subversiveness, frankly.

Why pick on Jon, though? Why not choose the twat who wrote that arse-kissing piece in this month's Select? Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Chuckie' on Fri Nov 10 18:01:34 GMT 2000:

>I don't know if SOTCAA's coming back - I bloody hope it does. But I think TVGH is pretty poor these days - witless and profane for no good reason ("ejaculate on her face" this time - do you see, TVGH points out, I'm taking the piss out of TV programmes that don't actually exist and not at all getting a hard-on at the ability to write the word CUNT frequently in bold type *and* capitals), and certainly not as clever as the listings in, say, the Radio Active Times about 15 years ago.
>And that Guardian column *is* jaw-droppingly lazy. Nancy Banks-Smith's contributions have more subversiveness, frankly.

Finally, someone who bothered to read the actual text...

>Why pick on Jon, though? Why not choose the twat who wrote that arse-kissing piece in this month's Select?

Dunno - not sure if they are picking on him... is that select stuff online?
Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Peter O' on Fri Nov 10 18:09:56 GMT 2000:

>By the way Peter O - incase you've failed to notice, the corpses have been having a go at Brooker for quite a while now, so don't get all self-important... Brooker himself has commented on this.

Er... I'm ready and willing to resign from any importance competion you may or may not think I'm trying enter. I wasn't trying to claim to have invented the idea that TV Go Home is a bit crap - you only have to read more than one issue to realise that. I was mainly concentrating on the theme that this supposed parody is very, very, *very* shit indeed.

It almost gives us all the examples we need to construct the "rules of parody."

Rule 1 would have to be: The aim of parody is to make the target look like a dickhead. So avoid doing anything that will instead make you, the author of the parody, look like a dickhead (e.g. mentioning yourself: "Directed by SOTCAA.")

>full site is about to return to shut these fuckers up?

Shut these fuckers up? You mean cause total disinterest so that people stop bothering to contribute to the forum? I wonder if I'm the only person who finds the forum more interesting than the SOTCAA site (even though the forum is largely boring except when there's a decent argument going on.) The average opinion of people contributing to this forum seems to have been one of ridicule towards all the crap the "corpses" used to spout about "direct action." I for one don't give a toss whether they return or not. Comedy trivia trainspotting *is* boring, and the "corpses" never did have any big clever ideas about how to stop unfunny things being broadcast (or whatever their "aim" was.) They seem more concerned with stopping anyone at all from getting their own TV show. Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Another Anonymous' on Fri Nov 10 18:10:07 GMT 2000:

Not sure if I've missed something here, but isn't TVGH just a free website that you can choose to read or choose to ignore?

It's not as if he's plastered his name all over the site, so why all these leg-breaking threats? Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By Justin on Fri Nov 10 18:17:19 GMT 2000:

>>Why pick on Jon, though? Why not choose the twat who wrote that arse-kissing piece in this month's Select?
>
>Dunno - not sure if they are picking on him... is that select stuff online?
>
Jon's listed as the producer of that Brass List bit. In fact, the only thing Jon's really mentioned about TVGH is that TV programme with Kurt Vonnegut's name in the title. I've mentioned Fozzie Bear's Eisteddfod Of Doom, so I'm just as guilty. Doesn't mean I still rate TVGH, though.

The Select feature is in the current issue (the one with Radiohead on the cover). I read it in WHSmith, so I don't have it to hand. Might be online.

The Corpses point, as I see it, regarding TVGH, is this: People in the media are going on and on and on about what a clever idea TVGH is, and how marvellous it will be in its TV transfer. This, in a weird but utterly predictable way, backs up exactly why TV comedy is largely fucked at the moment. TV people love TV parodies, because it makes them feel important. It's rather like the 11ocs doing homophobic spoof news -how can this be funny when the real news would never be so overtly foolish?

The trouble is, if you start railing about people swearing and making sexual references all the time on TV, it makes you a Daily Mail reader or something. Well, no. I hate the growing trend for profanity, because it is so fucking, cunting boring. And also it's an easy debate for broadcasters to chew over, rather than the actual content, the stuff that makes you think. Anyone remember that - content?

Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Another Anonymous' on Fri Nov 10 18:20:29 GMT 2000:

> The Corpses point, as I see it, regarding TVGH, is this: People in the media are going on and on and on about what a clever idea TVGH is, and how marvellous it will be in its TV transfer.

*Which* people in the media? And is that Brooker's fault anyway? Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By Mogwai on Fri Nov 10 18:21:49 GMT 2000:

I think Peter O may have been a little harsh toward SOTCAA's content - their "trainspotter" ways gave most of us the only opportunity to see/read/illegally download material which is otherwise completely unavailable, and for that alone they deserve our thanks. (Well, my thanks, at any rate).


> They seem more concerned with stopping anyone at all from getting their own TV show.

This, however, is true.

Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Anonymous' on Fri Nov 10 18:23:00 GMT 2000:

>TV people love TV parodies, because it makes them feel important. <SNIP> Anyone remember that - content?

The sad fact is Michael Jackson of C4 is a media studies graduate who likes his TV to be about nothing but TV.
Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By Justin on Fri Nov 10 18:28:57 GMT 2000:

>I for one don't give a toss whether they return or not. Comedy trivia trainspotting *is* boring, and the "corpses" never did have any big clever ideas about how to stop unfunny things being broadcast (or whatever their "aim" was.) They seem more concerned with stopping anyone at all from getting their own TV show.

Boy, have you missed the point of this site. It's not about trivia trainspotting - that'll be the fansites around the net which do that. Edit News was about producer politics - *why* things get cut out of broadcasts or repeats. Long-forgotten classics are highlighted, not least because no-one else would do it. Find me a decent Alfresco or Absolutely site and we can all get out of here...

And as for The Corpses' bitterness, maybe you should have heeded their oft-repeated reply of "Read the site" to understand what they were getting at. If we were currently experiencing a golden age of comedy, you might be on to something. But you know damn well that we're not. Apart from Black Books, there's been next to nothing this year of any use at all. (Yeah, alright, Jam, I suppose, not that I've watched any of them since they were broadcast...) Don't you agree? Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By Justin on Fri Nov 10 18:30:58 GMT 2000:

>>TV people love TV parodies, because it makes them feel important. <SNIP> Anyone remember that - content?
>
>The sad fact is Michael Jackson of C4 is a media studies graduate who likes his TV to be about nothing but TV.

See also Jane Root.
>

Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By Justin on Fri Nov 10 18:37:29 GMT 2000:

>> The Corpses point, as I see it, regarding TVGH, is this: People in the media are going on and on and on about what a clever idea TVGH is, and how marvellous it will be in its TV transfer.
>
>*Which* people in the media? And is that Brooker's fault anyway?

I've read loads of articles twatting on about its genius, from The Face to Select. I think even the Radio Times mentioned it one week, although they did say it was only for the broad-minded. Idiots.

No, it's not entirely Brooker's fault, obviously. Surely the parody was aimed at the media just as much as him. But that Guardian column is such a cop-out it's untrue.


Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Peter O' on Fri Nov 10 18:40:11 GMT 2000:

>And as for The Corpses' bitterness, maybe you should have heeded their oft-repeated reply of "Read the site" to understand what they were getting at.

I did read it, after a fashion - picking through the tripe to find the rare stuff (as pointed out by Mogwai.) But I still contend that in that case, I am enjoying the work of good comic writers, and I'm just being irritated by the shit injected into it by the "corpses."

>If we were currently experiencing a golden age of comedy, you might be on to something. But you know damn well that we're not.

To repeat the same basic obvious point yet again in the hope of it sinking in... What exactly are the corpses doing about that, apart from collecting rare examples of good comedy and then diluting it by mixing in more bad comedy of their own? Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Another Anonymous' on Fri Nov 10 18:44:01 GMT 2000:

If the parody was aimed at the media, why is it so relentlessly personal -- putting his photo at the top and basically threatening to break his legs?

I agree that some of his Guardian columns have been lazy, but most contain some funny material. Does it *have* to be a blistering subversion of television? Isn't he basically there just to try and make people laugh?

I simply can't see what he's done to deserve this kind of personally threatening abuse.
Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Peter O' on Fri Nov 10 18:47:52 GMT 2000:

He's got a column in the Guardian for one thing. He didn't even think to invite the "corpses" to help him write it - the silly boy thinks he's clever enough to do it on his own! Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By Justin on Fri Nov 10 18:50:50 GMT 2000:

>I did read it, after a fashion - picking through the tripe to find the rare stuff (as pointed out by Mogwai.) But I still contend that in that case, I am enjoying the work of good comic writers, and I'm just being irritated by the shit injected into it by the "corpses."

I find it less irritating than the average 'analytical' piece in a paper. And a damn sight more informative.
>
>>If we were currently experiencing a golden age of comedy, you might be on to something. But you know damn well that we're not.
>
>To repeat the same basic obvious point yet again in the hope of it sinking in... What exactly are the corpses doing about that, apart from collecting rare examples of good comedy and then diluting it by mixing in more bad comedy of their own?

Well, here's the thing. I'm not sure SOTCAA was ever supposed to be a comedy site in the first place. I have certainly not laughed at it a huge amount.* SOTCAA was/is not run by comedians or comedy writers, it was/is (as far as I know) run by people frustrated by the current political climate of the media and comedy industry. All I think they're doing is questioning the received wisdom of what we're being told on a daily basis. Think about it - as far as the current media is concerned, The Royle Family is where it's at comedy-wise (not Black Books), Robbie Williams is a cheeky chappie, Anne Robinson is an evil cow on The Weakest Link but never mind because apparently she's completely lovely backstage aaaaaah, Big Brother was annoying but (hey!) compulsive viewing. Try and question any of this outside your own circle of friends (or maybe on this forum) and you will get nowhere. You can't view SOTCAA in isolation, it's an alternative voice to what we have to put up with the rest of the time. They said on the original site FAQ that if you want sycophancy, there are plenty of other sites out there.

*Fell off my chair at "Yes Arabella, it's fucking enormous", though.
Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By Justin on Fri Nov 10 18:56:25 GMT 2000:

>If the parody was aimed at the media, why is it so relentlessly personal -- putting his photo at the top and basically threatening to break his legs?

It looked like Frank Skinner to me. I've no idea what CB looks like. OK, appearing to advocate the breaking of CB's legs is a bit much, but does that mean that it's OK for TVGH to fantasise about humiliating/injuring etc. numerous public figures. IN the name of comedy, of course.

It is exactly the same argument. It is.
>
>I agree that some of his Guardian columns have been lazy, but most contain some funny material. Does it *have* to be a blistering subversion of television? Isn't he basically there just to try and make people laugh?
>
The humorous content doesn't work on me. On the strength of what he's done so far, VLS and Clive James (circa 1979) have little to worry about.


Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Another Anonymous' on Fri Nov 10 18:58:46 GMT 2000:

> All I think they're doing is questioning the received wisdom of what we're being told on a daily basis.

By threatening to break the legs of a comedy writer who's offended them? That's admirable, isn't it? Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Anonymous' on Fri Nov 10 19:01:59 GMT 2000:

>Anne Robinson is an evil cow on The Weakest Link but never mind because apparently she's completely lovely backstage aaaaaah

Are you trying to suggest that Anne Robinson is in fact evil and a danger to society with her haughty quizmistress activities, and that she will soon be causing a mass outbreak of frowning due to an increase in bad temperedness, but that there is a massive media plot to dupe people into ignoring this approaching danger by hoodwinking them into believing some rot about her being nice backstage, and the "corpses" have bravely exposed this deception, despite the clear risk that they will be tortured by the BBC?

And in any case, I note that ITV's autumn season includes a new edition of "It'll Be Alright On The Night," so we are clearly in for a treat, aren't we, gang? Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Peter O' on Fri Nov 10 19:03:14 GMT 2000:

Bollocks, forgot my name.

>OK, appearing to advocate the breaking of CB's legs is a bit much, but does that mean that it's OK for TVGH to fantasise about humiliating/injuring etc. numerous public figures. IN the name of comedy, of course.

So they *are* trying to be funny, then? Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By Justin on Fri Nov 10 19:10:18 GMT 2000:

>Are you trying to suggest that Anne Robinson is in fact evil and a danger to society with her haughty quizmistress activities, and that she will soon be causing a mass outbreak of frowning due to an increase in bad temperedness, but that there is a massive media plot to dupe people into ignoring this approaching danger by hoodwinking them into believing some rot about her being nice backstage, and the "corpses" have bravely exposed this deception, despite the clear risk that they will be tortured by the BBC?

That sentence was way too long. No, the Corpses didn't expose that. Anne Robinson herself said that the whole point of TWL is for her to behave like that. What is clever about that? Why are newspapers bleating about the groundbreaking cruelty of this programme? Are they all fools? Yes.
>
>And in any case, I note that ITV's autumn season includes a new edition of "It'll Be Alright On The Night," so we are clearly in for a treat, aren't we, gang?

At least it's new. It was the only way that The Upper Hand was ever funny - in blooper form.
Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Chuckie' on Fri Nov 10 19:13:21 GMT 2000:

>If the parody was aimed at the media, why is it so relentlessly personal -- putting his photo at the top and basically threatening to break his legs?

It's a parody. It's the kind of thing Brooker would put in the real TVGH (although not about himself obviously).

And Pete if you don't like the corpses way of doing things why don't you start up your own site? Your comments smack of jealousy and bitterness y'know. Fact is: No corpses, no place to spout your utterly pointless opinions. Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By Justin on Fri Nov 10 19:14:24 GMT 2000:

>>And in any case, I note that ITV's autumn season includes a new edition of "It'll Be Alright On The Night," so we are clearly in for a treat, aren't we, gang?
>
Besides, IBAOTN will last an hour, and no more. This is nothing like the reason why ITV is rubbish. What's really scary is that it's currently not much worse than its competition.

Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Another Anonymous' on Fri Nov 10 19:20:49 GMT 2000:

> It's a parody. It's the kind of thing Brooker would put in the real TVGH

Except he might have made it funny.

Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Peter O' on Fri Nov 10 19:23:59 GMT 2000:

>>If the parody was aimed at the media, why is it so relentlessly personal -- putting his photo at the top and basically threatening to break his legs?
>
>It's a parody. It's the kind of thing Brooker would put in the real TVGH (although not about himself obviously).

You are presumably a "corpse", then? As an occasional (and by no means particularly impressed) reader of "TV Go Home", I can confidently state that your parody of it is almost bad enough to be in Private Eye. It is certainly not as funny as the worst ever edition of "TV Go Home." It barely qualifies a parody. My single point about it is that it is neither funny NOR clever, and it just makes the corpses look stupid and bitter. I am also deriving immense smug pleasure from pointing this out.

>And Pete if you don't like the corpses way of doing things why don't you start up your own site? Your comments smack of jealousy and bitterness y'know. Fact is: No corpses, no place to spout your utterly pointless opinions.

Hang on - by writing my "pointless" opinions here (I'd be interested to know how you objectively measure the pointlessness of an opinion), I am merely using a very cheap and convenient method of creating my "own website." I am also eliminating the tedious effort involved in generating traffic to it, by linking my "own website" directly into one already frequented by like-minded people. So... ha ha!

An additional dimension to your stupidity: if "TV Go Home" is allowed to comment on TV, then the "corpses" are allowed to comment on "TV Go Home," and so I'm allowed to comment on the "corpses".

And please, please allow me to point out that I have never written a single thing that anyone else needs to feel amused by and I don't need a career in televison, so please stop trying to coat me with your own psychiatric problems. I'm just amusing myself, laughing at the shitness of the "corpses." Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Peter O' on Fri Nov 10 19:28:15 GMT 2000:

>>>And in any case, I note that ITV's autumn season includes a new edition of "It'll Be Alright On The Night," so we are clearly in for a treat, aren't we, gang?
>>
>Besides, IBAOTN will last an hour, and no more. This is nothing like the reason why ITV is rubbish. What's really scary is that it's currently not much worse than its competition.

So you're a sucker for the basic premise of the "corpses" site, which was that there was once (or one day there will be) some comedy golden age in which the perfect joyous spirit of the Goodies will infect all channels simultanously 24 hours a day and amuse us with their blacked up faces? Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By Justin on Fri Nov 10 19:29:18 GMT 2000:

>>>If the parody was aimed at the media, why is it so relentlessly personal -- putting his photo at the top and basically threatening to break his legs?
>>
>>It's a parody. It's the kind of thing Brooker would put in the real TVGH (although not about himself obviously).
>
>You are presumably a "corpse", then? As an occasional (and by no means particularly impressed) reader of "TV Go Home", I can confidently state that your parody of it is almost bad enough to be in Private Eye. It is certainly not as funny as the worst ever edition of "TV Go Home." It barely qualifies a parody. My single point about it is that it is neither funny NOR clever, and it just makes the corpses look stupid and bitter. I am also deriving immense smug pleasure from pointing this out.
>
>>And Pete if you don't like the corpses way of doing things why don't you start up your own site? Your comments smack of jealousy and bitterness y'know. Fact is: No corpses, no place to spout your utterly pointless opinions.
>
>Hang on - by writing my "pointless" opinions here (I'd be interested to know how you objectively measure the pointlessness of an opinion), I am merely using a very cheap and convenient method of creating my "own website." I am also eliminating the tedious effort involved in generating traffic to it, by linking my "own website" directly into one already frequented by like-minded people. So... ha ha!
>
>An additional dimension to your stupidity: if "TV Go Home" is allowed to comment on TV, then the "corpses" are allowed to comment on "TV Go Home," and so I'm allowed to comment on the "corpses".
>
>And please, please allow me to point out that I have never written a single thing that anyone else needs to feel amused by and I don't need a career in televison, so please stop trying to coat me with your own psychiatric problems. I'm just amusing myself, laughing at the shitness of the "corpses."

To be honest, Pete, you just sound rather cross.

Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By Justin on Fri Nov 10 19:32:44 GMT 2000:

>>>>And in any case, I note that ITV's autumn season includes a new edition of "It'll Be Alright On The Night," so we are clearly in for a treat, aren't we, gang?
>>>
>>Besides, IBAOTN will last an hour, and no more. This is nothing like the reason why ITV is rubbish. What's really scary is that it's currently not much worse than its competition.
>
>So you're a sucker for the basic premise of the "corpses" site, which was that there was once (or one day there will be) some comedy golden age in which the perfect joyous spirit of the Goodies will infect all channels simultanously 24 hours a day and amuse us with their blacked up faces?

1) I genuinely cannot see the connection between my point, and your response.

2) Whereas Them Next Door on The Day Today was facking hilarious, wasn't it?

3) You actually weren't kidding when you said you hadn't really read the site properly, were you?

Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By Mogwai on Fri Nov 10 19:33:26 GMT 2000:

> Fact is: No corpses, no place to spout your utterly pointless opinions.

Apart from the NotBBC TV Forum, obviously.

Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Peter O' on Fri Nov 10 19:43:35 GMT 2000:

>To be honest, Pete, you just sound rather cross.

Please... it's "dark," not "cross." Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Peter O' on Fri Nov 10 19:47:15 GMT 2000:

>>>>>And in any case, I note that ITV's autumn season includes a new edition of "It'll Be Alright On The Night," so we are clearly in for a treat, aren't we, gang?
>>>>
>>>Besides, IBAOTN will last an hour, and no more. This is nothing like the reason why ITV is rubbish. What's really scary is that it's currently not much worse than its competition.
>>
>>So you're a sucker for the basic premise of the "corpses" site, which was that there was once (or one day there will be) some comedy golden age in which the perfect joyous spirit of the Goodies will infect all channels simultanously 24 hours a day and amuse us with their blacked up faces?
>
>1) I genuinely cannot see the connection between my point, and your response.

It was to do with the use of the word "currently" in the sentence "What's really scary is that it's currently not much worse than its competition." Name the year when everything was perfect. (Oh God, I bet you can...)

>2) Whereas Them Next Door on The Day Today was facking hilarious, wasn't it?

It was approximately eight times funnier than anything in the episodes of the Goodies I have on tape.

>3) You actually weren't kidding when you said you hadn't really read the site properly, were you?

What do you mean? Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Radiator Head Child' on Fri Nov 10 19:48:08 GMT 2000:

TVGH - whowhatwherewhywhen Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Peter O' on Fri Nov 10 19:52:57 GMT 2000:

http://www.tvgohome.com

The really ironic thing is that it isn't really *that* good in the first place. It's just average. Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By Justin on Fri Nov 10 20:04:47 GMT 2000:

>>1) I genuinely cannot see the connection between my point, and your response.
>
>It was to do with the use of the word "currently" in the sentence "What's really scary is that it's currently not much worse than its competition." Name the year when everything was perfect. (Oh God, I bet you can...)

Do I sound that cynical? TV's never been perfect, of course it hasn't. But there has seldom been so little decent TV over the space of one year. And I'm not being lazily nostalgic here - I have 25 years+ of TV to draw on, and it's never been so joyless or empty.
>
>>2) Whereas Them Next Door on The Day Today was facking hilarious, wasn't it?
>
>It was approximately eight times funnier than anything in the episodes of the Goodies I have on tape.
>
The Goodies and The Day Today are equally deserving of admiration. What's on today that approaches either of them? I'm waiting....

>>3) You actually weren't kidding when you said you hadn't really read the site properly, were you?
>
>What do you mean?

Well, to summarise the entire site with the opinion that the creators are pining for one single TV series seems a little hysterical. They have also been actively trying to summon interest in On The Hour, Absolutely, Fry & Laurie, Python, Fist Of Fun, Derek & Clive, and most recently, The Nualas and Smack The Pony. All the way along, people have slagged SOTCAA for unremitting negativity. And, sorry, but you've all been wrong. Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Peter O' on Fri Nov 10 20:12:19 GMT 2000:

Well... as long as you're sorry. Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Chuckie' on Fri Nov 10 22:18:46 GMT 2000:

>You are presumably a "corpse", then?

and you must be Richard Herring... Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Neil' on Fri Nov 10 23:19:40 GMT 2000:

> [The Corpses] have also been actively trying to summon interest in[...]Fist Of Fun[...]The Nualas and Smack The Pony.

Why the *fuck* would they want to do that?

>All the way along, people have slagged SOTCAA for unremitting negativity. And, sorry, but you've all been wrong.

Balls,,,The unremitting negativity is arguably the best thing about The Corpses. Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'boki' on Sat Nov 11 00:19:46 GMT 2000:

>Finally, someone who bothered to read the actual text...
Hey, I read the acutal text - and the actual part of the text where actual lies were told about a large group of people. Justify (I know you like that word) your bitterness towards BEMLI, corpses. Pretty please. Have you read it lately? It doesn't seem that way. Yes, many people on that list read TVGH but, tellingly, only a couple of people have stuck up for it when more have said they *don't* like it.

Yes, I am on the Brass list. I'm sure anyone who's been reading this forum for any more than a couple of weeks and is in any way curious knows exactly who I am. If you don't, it doesn't matter anyway.

Yes, I have had a couple of suggestions used on TVGH a long time ago (not by any means the funniest IMHO out of my submissions, but personal tastes are like that - a fact that seems to escape some people).

No, I don't regard TVGH as being on a par with Morris' ouput, and I doubt that Charile Brooker does.
Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Unruly Butler' on Sat Nov 11 00:32:40 GMT 2000:

Would the Corpses please stop trying to do comedy themselves? As I've said before (about Victor Lewis Smith): Let critics be critics. Don't try and do your own stuff if you want to criticise others, it merely destabilises your argument.
This TVGH parody is extremely weak, feebly satirising insider-politics of very little interest to the general public. Yeah, Charlie's doing well for himself, but you can just imagine how the Corpses would have responded to, say, Chapman and Cleese's shameless sucking up to the BBC in the mid-sixties after their radical fringe work in the Cambridge Footlights...
Let Brooker do some TV, then criticise that on its own terms. This parody seems merely annoyed that there's someone out there driven enough (Brooker - driven - ha! - never thought that would be said) to want to get their material on TV.
How is that different from The Pythons, The Goodies, The Absolutely crew? ...blah blah blah... Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Anonymous' on Sat Nov 11 01:24:10 GMT 2000:

>Hey, I read the acutal text - and the actual part of the text where actual lies were told about a large group of people. Justify (I know you like that word) your bitterness towards BEMLI, corpses. Pretty please. Have you read it lately? It doesn't seem that way. Yes, many people on that list read TVGH but, tellingly, only a couple of people have stuck up for it when more have said they *don't* like it.

To be honest, I thought 'Brass List Sycophants' was only referring to select people on the list anyway. Why do you think it means everyone? Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'kinder surprise' on Sat Nov 11 04:08:10 GMT 2000:

My god you should all take a look at yourselves. You're all worthy of parody. It's no wonder you all seem to fear any sign of it.

People pay psychiatric experts to be enlightened about their foibles. A few comedy writers are given a voluntary assessment and just look at the hostility it arouses!

It looks to me as if some you are professing wisdom yet haven't even realised that you're barmy - the most unarguable fact your protests would have had if put forward. Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'McGinty' on Sat Nov 11 05:29:51 GMT 2000:

What parody? Where is it? Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'boki' on Sat Nov 11 07:57:55 GMT 2000:

>To be honest, I thought 'Brass List Sycophants' was only referring to select people on the list anyway. Why do you think it means everyone?

It's implied that that's the prevailing attitude. You can't have it both ways - if it's about individuals then why not name or at least refer to them rather than tar a few dozen others with the same brush - that's just sloppy as fuck. Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'kinder surprise' on Sat Nov 11 08:02:19 GMT 2000:

>It's implied that that's the prevailing attitude. You can't have it both ways - if it's about individuals then why not name or at least refer to them

Isn't it always the 'knowing' that causes the problems?


>rather than tar a few dozen others with the same brush - that's just sloppy as fuck.

You really are all barmy!
Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By Justin on Sat Nov 11 08:52:23 GMT 2000:

>Would the Corpses please stop trying to do comedy themselves? As I've said before (about Victor Lewis Smith): Let critics be critics. Don't try and do your own stuff if you want to criticise others, it merely destabilises your argument.

There is a difference, surely: VLS has had plenty of exposure on TV, radio and in print. Not that I'm saying that SOTCAA is necessarily worthy of such exposure.

>This TVGH parody is extremely weak, feebly satirising insider-politics of very little interest to the general public.

Whereas apparently, the general consensus round here is that the new TVGH is the best for some time. Er, no. Read Cunt in the new one, for example. It is not dangerous. It is not subversive. It is not clever. It is *not* *funny*. Just a tiresome barrage of psuedo-pornographic rhetoric. Does CB get off on this, is what the Corpses are asking? (Possibly.) And maybe he is. It's not even like he's done that joke once - it's about the 30th variation, and it's not just limited to Cunt either. And in a strange way, the whole presentation of the column these days really does seem to be angled at the Loaded readership.

>Yeah, Charlie's doing well for himself, but you can just imagine how the Corpses would have responded to, say, Chapman and Cleese's shameless sucking up to the BBC in the mid-sixties after their radical fringe work in the Cambridge Footlights...

Somehow, I doubt that Zeppotron are going to be the new Python. Unless Channel 4 decides they ought to be marketed as such.

>Let Brooker do some TV, then criticise that on its own terms. This parody seems merely annoyed that there's someone out there driven enough (Brooker - driven - ha! - never thought that would be said) to want to get their material on TV.

That Guardian column, though. Presumably CB's getting paid for that. And it's nonsense.

>How is that different from The Pythons, The Goodies, The Absolutely crew? ...blah blah blah...

The small issue of whether it's funny or not.
Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By Justin on Sat Nov 11 08:56:56 GMT 2000:

>> [The Corpses] have also been actively trying to summon interest in[...]Fist Of Fun[...]The Nualas and Smack The Pony.
>
>Why the *fuck* would they want to do that?
>
Well, maybe one day the full site will be back, and you'd be able to read just why. I don't necessarily agree with their selections, but to say they're always slagging things off isn't true.

I still say they're wrong to single out Jon in that TVGH spoof, though.

Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'gribben' on Sat Nov 11 09:29:13 GMT 2000:

>The average opinion of people contributing to this forum seems to have been one of ridicule towards all the crap the "corpses" used to spout about "direct action."

And how many times did they say that? Once? Twice, as a joke? I think the corpses pointed that out ages ago. Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Anonymous' on Sat Nov 11 10:26:46 GMT 2000:

>What parody? Where is it?

http://www.notbbc.co.uk/corpses/index.html

Come on in, McGinty. Join the fun. Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Anonymous' on Sat Nov 11 11:04:20 GMT 2000:

>>Yeah, Charlie's doing well for himself, but you can just imagine how the Corpses would have responded to, say, Chapman and Cleese's shameless sucking up to the BBC in the mid-sixties after their radical fringe work in the Cambridge Footlights...


Yes, yes, yes. The Corpses have an ostrich-like attitude towards how people are supposed to get ideas off the ground. Cleese et al weren't just given Python. They toiled away for years contributing bits and bobs to other people's shows. Palin and Jones wrote for Ken Dodd, for God's sake. Writers have to actually get their name known by producers and commissioners before people are prepared to invest dosh in their imaginings. Lee and Herring tried writing material for Michael Barrymore at one point in their careers.

The Corpses seem to despise the notion of a 'career' in comedy. 'The Goodies' didn't spring fully-formed, Venus-like, from a 1970's BBC clam. It was the work of three comedians who had worked for years on other (often forgettable and much less funny) projects.

While the Corpses' archive is a thing of wonder and I take my hat off to their scholarship and devotion, their negative opinions are amusingly nasty in exactly the same way that TVGOHOME is - something you look at for 5 minutes, emit a small laugh, and then get on with your day.

Much as they would claim to despise it, the Corpses' nastiness is just "a birrova laff". Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Unruly Butler' on Sat Nov 11 13:07:00 GMT 2000:

Thankyou, Anonymous. (A name which usually implies an 110CS writer, but we'll let it pass...)

I'm not interested whether TVGH is good or bad (I love it, though think it's been poor recently, and have said so on other threads) but I am a little concerned that the Corpses' puritan attitude to comedy writing has been getting out of hand lately.

The tone of the TVGH parody seems to imply, not that Brooker is occasionally lazy, blokey, puerile, focusless etc etc (all allegations that can legitimately be made) but merely that he is... (HORROR)

... trying to get on TV.

Since when was this a crime? Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By TJ on Sat Nov 11 15:08:14 GMT 2000:

>
>>>1) I genuinely cannot see the connection between my point, and your response.
>>
>>It was to do with the use of the word "currently" in the sentence "What's really scary is that it's currently not much worse than its competition." Name the year when everything was perfect. (Oh God, I bet you can...)
>
>Do I sound that cynical? TV's never been perfect, of course it hasn't. But there has seldom been so little decent TV over the space of one year. And I'm not being lazily nostalgic here - I have 25 years+ of TV to draw on, and it's never been so joyless or empty.
>>
>>>2) Whereas Them Next Door on The Day Today was facking hilarious, wasn't it?
>>
>>It was approximately eight times funnier than anything in the episodes of the Goodies I have on tape.
>>
>The Goodies and The Day Today are equally deserving of admiration. What's on today that approaches either of them? I'm waiting....
>
>>>3) You actually weren't kidding when you said you hadn't really read the site properly, were you?
>>
>>What do you mean?
>
>Well, to summarise the entire site with the opinion that the creators are pining for one single TV series seems a little hysterical. They have also been actively trying to summon interest in On The Hour, Absolutely, Fry & Laurie, Python, Fist Of Fun, Derek & Clive, and most recently, The Nualas and Smack The Pony. All the way along, people have slagged SOTCAA for unremitting negativity. And, sorry, but you've all been wrong.

And Neil Innes too, for which they deserve my utmost admiration. Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Steven' on Sat Nov 11 18:30:22 GMT 2000:

Yeah Innes is good, I ain't heard much though apart from a few old Bonzo Dog albums, my favourite has to be How Sweet to Be an Idiot, but that Elton John parody was good, pity he sounded more like John Lennon though. Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By Rob S on Sun Nov 12 13:30:58 GMT 2000:

>I'm not interested whether TVGH is good or bad (I love it, though think it's been poor recently, and have said so on other threads) but I am a little concerned that the Corpses' puritan attitude to comedy writing has been getting out of hand lately.
>The tone of the TVGH parody seems to imply, not that Brooker is occasionally lazy, blokey, puerile, focusless etc etc (all allegations that can legitimately be made) but merely that he is... (HORROR)
>... trying to get on TV.
>Since when was this a crime?

You see, I don't view the TVGH parody as being about Brooker's upcoming TV work (simply because it hasn't started yet)... I can't see anything in there which suggests it is.

It's critising his existing stuff, mainly TVGH in it's Internet form. The only reference to any telly work is the 11ocs. This seems to be mentioned as an aspect of his career, just as the Guardian column is mentioned as another.

You've offered up no reasons to support your view, but you have a very good guess at what the parody is actually saying (ie that Brooker is lazy, blokey, etc)... that is all it suggests to me (and others), so why do you think that is wrong? Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By Rob S on Sun Nov 12 13:36:50 GMT 2000:

>Yes, yes, yes. The Corpses have an ostrich-like attitude towards how people are supposed to get ideas off the ground. Cleese et al weren't just given Python. They toiled away for years contributing bits and bobs to other people's shows. Palin and Jones wrote for Ken Dodd, for God's sake. Writers have to actually get their name known by producers and commissioners before people are prepared to invest dosh in their imaginings. Lee and Herring tried writing material for Michael Barrymore at one point in their careers.
>The Corpses seem to despise the notion of a 'career' in comedy. 'The Goodies' didn't spring fully-formed, Venus-like, from a 1970's BBC clam. It was the work of three comedians who had worked for years on other (often forgettable and much less funny) projects.

This is a very misleading point as the corpses have never denied that the comedy teams you mention had to work their way up as well. The important difference is that their work was of a higher standard than Brooker's endlessly-repeatitive TVGH. Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Anonymous' on Sun Nov 12 18:04:06 GMT 2000:

>This is a very misleading point as the corpses have never denied that the comedy teams you mention had to work their way up as well. The important difference is that their work was of a higher standard than Brooker's endlessly-repeatitive TVGH.

I'm not trying to be misleading. My point is that for all we know Charlie Brooker may well go on to produce fantastically brilliant TV work. But if the Corpses have their way and he doesn't get on telly we'll never know. I think TVGOHOME is excellent - sure it has its off-days, but often the quality of the jokes and wordplay is extremely high.

I don't mind if the Corpses don't agree with me. As I said, I love them for two reasons:

1. The loving scholarship they exhibit for great comedy.

2. Their childish nastiness to everything and everyone else.

Both are sources of joy, in different ways.

I think the line in the TVGOHOME parody about "listening to Sing A Song of Play School with undescended balls" is very telling. It's wonderful when a TV show (or album or radio show or whatever) fills you to the brim with simple childish pleasure. But even the presenters of Play School - (who were great,I am not worthy to touch a strand of Floella Benjamin's beaded locks) - had careers.


Incidentally, I am not an 11ocs writer.

Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'liam' on Sun Nov 12 18:20:16 GMT 2000:

Let's face it The Corpses didn't really give two fucks about Brooker until he came on the forum and publicly took a stance against their arrogant nature. Yeah maybe he looked like a dickhead at the time but he doesn't seem to be arguing with them any more. Besides at least he used his real name, which was ballsy considering the universal attitude toward the 11ocs. This was months ago anyway. What's their problem?

This 'spoof' isn't so much a parody of TVGH as a childish slab of vindictive nonsense slung together by a pair of angry failures who've made a teeny name for themselves courtesy of hosting a bootleg archive brim-full of other people's work. Their boring fucking oh-so-controversial opinions are probably of little interest to 90% of the sites visitors but they seem stangely unaware of this fact.

As far as I can see Brooker doesn't seem to have a publicity machine behind him and always chooses to remain nameless in press articles. A look at his personal website www.superkaylo.com reveals it hasn't been updated for over a year, contains no references to TVGH, or Zeppotron, or indeed much else - Hardly the work of a self-serving careerist.

What with this shit TVGH spoof and the woeful TGP cartoon the Corpses are simply making themselves look like a pair of sad daft fools.

Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'liam' on Sun Nov 12 18:26:15 GMT 2000:

> This is a very misleading point as the corpses have never denied that the comedy teams you mention had to work their way up as well. The important difference is that their work was of a higher standard than Brooker's endlessly-repeatitive TVGH.

Has he ever claimed otherwise? No. So what's the point of this 'parody'? Apart from making a pair of shit losers feel better about themselves that is.

Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By TJ on Sun Nov 12 19:05:26 GMT 2000:

"la la la la la la la, la la la la la la la, roll it over in the clover, do it again" Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By Rob S on Sun Nov 12 19:38:03 GMT 2000:

>I'm not trying to be misleading. My point is that for all we know Charlie Brooker may well go on to produce fantastically brilliant TV work. But if the Corpses have their way and he doesn't get on telly we'll never know

I think the corpses just don't like Brookers existing work - it not them having a go because he's trying to do telly (or trying to stop him or whatever). Ah well. Subject: Forum History
Posted By 'Jon' on Mon Nov 13 09:50:13 GMT 2000:

The first I ever heard of TVGH was in the SOTCAA Edinburgh Guide. Which, if I remember, wasn't particularly nasty to it, it just said was it a bit samey and limited.

But then 11OCS got raised from the dead, SOTCAA issue a screaming manifesto on the forum demanding everyone involved be publicly humiliated, and then Brooker turned up in the forum to say (a) yeah, it was crap, (b) who the fuck are you?

Thereafter the Corpses were the arch-foes of CB. Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By Bean Is A Carrot on Mon Nov 13 10:13:18 GMT 2000:

>This 'spoof' isn't so much a parody of TVGH as a childish slab of vindictive nonsense slung together by a pair of angry failures who've made a teeny name for themselves courtesy of hosting a bootleg archive brim-full of other people's work. Their boring fucking oh-so-controversial opinions are probably of little interest to 90% of the sites visitors but they seem stangely unaware of this fact.

Here's a crazy piece of advice for you liam, if you don't like them or aren't interested in them...DON'T READ THEM!!! Just IGNORE them!!! No one is forcing you to visit those particular parts of the site.

>As far as I can see Brooker doesn't seem to have a publicity machine behind him and always chooses to remain nameless in press articles. A look at his personal website www.superkaylo.com reveals it hasn't been updated for over a year, contains no references to TVGH, or Zeppotron, or indeed much else - Hardly the work of a self-serving careerist.

Either that or he's too fucking lazy to update it.

>What with this shit TVGH spoof and the woeful TGP cartoon the Corpses are simply making themselves look like a pair of sad daft fools.

The parodies are simply pointing out that TVGH and TGP are shit, marketable shit. As I see it, the ehtos behind the Corpses site is that comedy isn't a good as it used to be. It's quite simply a quality issue. What most of you fail to understand is that there are people out there, like the Corpses, who actually care about quality. Just because you don't have the same level of interest, you don't have a God given right to go around slagging off those that do. Most of you are missing the point. Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By TJ on Mon Nov 13 10:48:41 GMT 2000:

>comedy isn't a good as it used to be.

Sorry to take a bit of your posting in exclusion to the rest, but if you really do believe that, then you are as blinkered as all those idiots who believe that music was better when it was in the sixties when they wrote tunes what had words you can whistle and eveything. There has ALWAYS been bad comedy to outweigh the good, and always will be, because you simply can't change the nature of the mass audience. Fact. I agree that - and I think this is probably what the Corpses were/are really getting at - the attitude of the industry has swung towards favouring poor comedy, but good stuff is still there. And frankly I don't like TVGH, but it's certainly a damn sight better than most of the toss that I have to listen to people on the bus extolling the virtues of.

>What most of you fail to understand is that there are people out there, like the Corpses, who actually care about quality.

Just like all of us do...

>Most of you are missing the point.

Care to name any names?
Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By Bean Is A Carrot on Mon Nov 13 11:01:00 GMT 2000:

>>comedy isn't a good as it used to be.
>
>Sorry to take a bit of your posting in exclusion to the rest, but if you really do believe that, then you are as blinkered as all those idiots who believe that music was better when it was in the sixties when they wrote tunes what had words you can whistle and eveything. There has ALWAYS been bad comedy to outweigh the good, and always will be, because you simply can't change the nature of the mass audience. Fact. I agree that - and I think this is probably what the Corpses were/are really getting at - the attitude of the industry has swung towards favouring poor comedy, but good stuff is still there.

I agree with your point TJ, but can you name some good comedy around at the moment? And I don't mean just good comedy, I mean REALLY good comedy.

>And frankly I don't like TVGH, but it's certainly a damn sight better than most of the toss that I have to listen to people on the bus extolling the virtues of.

Yes it is better than a lot of stuff, but just because it's better than a load of shit it doesn't mean it's a bar of gold. The Corpses are pointing out that and the fact that it has gone from being an OK parody to a repetitive and purile parody.

>>What most of you fail to understand is that there are people out there, like the Corpses, who actually care about quality.
>
>Just like all of us do...

Horrah for that!

>>Most of you are missing the point.
>
>Care to name any names?

Here are a few:

laim, all the billions of people called Anonymous, Peter O, mogwai and Ewar Woowar. Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By TJ on Mon Nov 13 11:05:46 GMT 2000:

>I agree with your point TJ, but can you name some good comedy around at the moment? And I don't mean just good comedy, I mean REALLY good comedy.

I don't want to get into a futile row about this - my ethos is "each to their own" - but OK: League Against Tedium, Chris Morris, Let There Be Lighthouse, John Connors. And if you're looking at some of the names on that list and thinking "never heard of them", doesn't that somehow prove my earlier point?

>>Care to name any names?
>
>Here are a few:
>
>laim, all the billions of people called Anonymous, Peter O, mogwai and Ewar Woowar.

I would question your summation of Ewar, Peter and Mogwai, certainly... Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By TJ on Mon Nov 13 11:07:54 GMT 2000:

And if you are saying, as you appear to be, that only "bars of gold" should be allowed to infiltrate our consciousness, I refer you to both the story of King Midas, and the episode of Mr Benn where he went to the planet with precious stones. Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By Bean Is A Carrot on Mon Nov 13 11:15:09 GMT 2000:

>>I agree with your point TJ, but can you name some good comedy around at the moment? And I don't mean just good comedy, I mean REALLY good comedy.
>
>I don't want to get into a futile row about this - my ethos is "each to their own" - but OK: League Against Tedium, Chris Morris, Let There Be Lighthouse, John Connors. And if you're looking at some of the names on that list and thinking "never heard of them", doesn't that somehow prove my earlier point?

I agree with your choices. The problem is that these great people cannot be on our screens or our radios or whatever all the time. In between the champagne comedy, we get average comedy like TVGH.

It seems to me that some of you people on this forum are getting all upset about the Corpses doing parodies of TGP and TVGH because you don't believe that bad comedy or indeed any comedy should be parodied in the same way that comedians parody the bad aspects of society/television/politics/whatever. Why on earth do some of you think that comedy is exclusive in this way? (And this is not directed at you TJ, your points are very good.)

>>>Care to name any names?
>>
>>Here are a few:
>>
>>laim, all the billions of people called Anonymous, Peter O, mogwai and Ewar Woowar.
>
>I would question your summation of Ewar, Peter and Mogwai, certainly...

Well perhaps they would like to post something that makes sense then! Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By Bean Is A Carrot on Mon Nov 13 11:21:50 GMT 2000:

>And if you are saying, as you appear to be, that only "bars of gold" should be allowed to infiltrate our consciousness, I refer you to both the story of King Midas, and the episode of Mr Benn where he went to the planet with precious stones.

I'm afraid I have not heard this story so I cannot comment on it.

I agree that it is impossible for all comedy to be gold, but the notion that we should accept bad comedy and ignore it and never allow it be parodied as if it were sacred is a ridiculous one. It is as worthy a fodder for satire as corrupt politicians and idiotic chat shows. Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Chuckie' on Mon Nov 13 11:22:42 GMT 2000:

>And if you are saying, as you appear to be, that only "bars of gold" should be allowed to infiltrate our consciousness, I refer you to both the story of King Midas, and the episode of Mr Benn where he went to the planet with precious stones.

Glad to see nothing has changed over the weekend... Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'lurkio' on Mon Nov 13 11:35:54 GMT 2000:

Surely no-one is seriously questioning whether people have the right to think TVGH is shit, or whether comedy itself is a worthy target for parody, but as Peter O has pointed out the Corpses' TVGH thing is barely a parody, more a childish / malicious personal attack. It apparently has more to do with Brooker's disagreement with SOTCAA than anything else. Read Jon's post regarding Forum History.

Of course if they'd done a decent spoof in the first place this wouldn't have been an issue. Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Chuckie' on Mon Nov 13 11:49:38 GMT 2000:

>Surely no-one is seriously questioning whether people have the right to think TVGH is shit, or whether comedy itself is a worthy target for parody, but as Peter O has pointed out the Corpses' TVGH thing is barely a parody, more a childish / malicious personal attack. It apparently has more to do with Brooker's disagreement with SOTCAA than anything else. Read Jon's post regarding Forum History.
>Of course if they'd done a decent spoof in the first place this wouldn't have been an issue.

See, I think think the reason why some of you think the spoof seems like strong personal attack is because it mimics Brooker's style so well... Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By Ewar Woowar on Mon Nov 13 11:52:33 GMT 2000:

>Of course if they'd done a decent spoof in the first place this wouldn't have been an issue.

Exactly. Nobody's disputing their right to criticise, it's just the quality of that criticism that disappointed me, particularly in the light of their previous work. I thought that came across in my previous post, sorry if it was confusing.

I think people just feel let down, because we all know the Corpses are capable of much better things.

Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'lurkio' on Mon Nov 13 11:58:13 GMT 2000:

> See, I think think the reason why some of you think the spoof seems like strong personal attack is because it mimics Brooker's style so well...

Really? Read just like a standard Corpse rant to me - bitterness, arrogance, and speculation with a few feeble stabs at humour thrown in.
Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Sam D' on Mon Nov 13 12:04:13 GMT 2000:

What's with all this 'anyone who has a different opinion than me is missing the point' business? As far as I can see no-one has missed the point. It's just some people don't think that there is much point to parodying TVGH and some people do.
Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Sam D' on Mon Nov 13 12:04:55 GMT 2000:

I'm sick of sitting on this fence. Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Sam D' on Mon Nov 13 12:05:54 GMT 2000:

>I'm sick of sitting on this fence.

Perhaps if I got off him he'd do a better job of filtering the diamonds on to the market.

Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By Bean Is A Carrot on Mon Nov 13 12:06:00 GMT 2000:

>> See, I think think the reason why some of you think the spoof seems like strong personal attack is because it mimics Brooker's style so well...
>
>Really? Read just like a standard Corpse rant to me - bitterness, arrogance, and speculation with a few feeble stabs at humour thrown in.
>

Sounds a bit like TVGH to me. Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Stocky' on Mon Nov 13 12:10:59 GMT 2000:

Both Corpses and TVGH were/are OK at their best, but are mostly angry stabs at humour which simply miss their target. In both cases the writers end up thinking they are the dog's bollocks and criticise everyone else who doesn't agree with them. They deserve each other. Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Jon' on Mon Nov 13 12:12:44 GMT 2000:

What do we deserve? Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'lurkio' on Mon Nov 13 12:16:24 GMT 2000:

> In both cases the writers end up thinking they are the dog's bollocks and criticise everyone else who doesn't agree with them.

Don't recall Brooker taking that stance Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Contrapercy' on Mon Nov 13 12:38:16 GMT 2000:

Bean is a Cretin wrote:

>Here's a crazy piece of advice for you liam, if you don't like them or aren't interested in them...DON'T READ THEM!!! Just IGNORE them!!! No one is forcing you to visit those particular parts of the site.

And here's an insane advice thing for you, old Bean: if you don't like Liam's message, don't read it! And don't dare to comment on it, oh no...

Now someone do that to me, etc. Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By Bean Is A Carrot on Mon Nov 13 12:40:12 GMT 2000:

>Bean is a Cretin wrote:
>
>>Here's a crazy piece of advice for you liam, if you don't like them or aren't interested in them...DON'T READ THEM!!! Just IGNORE them!!! No one is forcing you to visit those particular parts of the site.
>
>And here's an insane advice thing for you, old Bean: if you don't like Liam's message, don't read it! And don't dare to comment on it, oh no...
>
>Now someone do that to me, etc.

Dear Contrapercy,

Now that you've done the old personal attack thing, perhaps you would like to enlighten us as to what your views are regarding the Corpses' TVGH parody.

XXOO, Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By Steve Berry on Mon Nov 13 15:39:35 GMT 2000:

Justin done:

>The Corpses point, as I see it, regarding TVGH, is this: People in the media are going on and on and on about what a clever idea TVGH is, and how marvellous it will be in its TV transfer.

True! It's practically impossible to walk the corridors of Television Centre without hearing some mention of it. Nobody these days is making TV programmes. Everyone's sat outside smoking fags and reading the two-page printout of TVGH.

Yeh, Brooker, that's shit. You should have made it fit onto one page. Tch! Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By Justin on Mon Nov 13 18:13:29 GMT 2000:

When I first started reading TVGH about a year ago, it seemed as though here was a frustrated rant at the vacuity of the media, particularly TV, with its obsession with things about the media, and spin-offs (handy, since people didn't need to spend any time inventing ideas for entirely new programmes - that would take ideas and imagination, right?). And a howl at the laddish vein of late-night telly for people with a nanosecond of a concentration span.

A year on, and whaddaya know...TVGH is in development with TalkBack (makers of Ricky Gervaise, 11ocs and Too Much Sun), while a column without the difficult bits has now made it in to Loaded. It seems to be that CB is not so much biting the hand that's feeding him, but (to paraphrase his own tired collection of 13-year old metaphor) fellating the greasy spunk-nozzle of the media that he professed to despise so terminally twelve months ago.

*That's* why the parody was (mostly) fair enough. Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'winter 2001' on Mon Nov 13 18:35:39 GMT 2000:

So, TVGH is in development with TalkBack is it?

And you know this to be true because...? Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By Steve Berry on Mon Nov 13 18:37:59 GMT 2000:

*Sigh* I always bite:

>When I first started reading TVGH about a year ago, it seemed as though here was a frustrated rant at the vacuity of the media, particularly TV, with its obsession with things about the media, and spin-offs

Partly, I'd have thought, but also a satire of the kinds of programmes that *could* be made in the current TV climate (despite being plainly ridiculous), and the stuff about Mick Hucknell's scrote.

>And a howl at the laddish vein of late-night telly for people with a nanosecond of a concentration span.

Not necessarily just laddish. I think there was a lot of deliberately low-budget-production-satirising stuff there. Switch Me Off Or They Will Eat You and so on.

>A year on, and whaddaya know...TVGH is in development with TalkBack

How do you know this? And, if it is, well fucking done, CB. One of "us" making it out there in media circus land. Unless it all goes Pete Tong, like it did for Alexei Sayle's character in TCSP... Strike, I'd have thought that shows that even humble PC Zone writers might indeed one day make it, therefore encouraging most of the people here who want to do the same.

>(makers of Ricky Gervaise, 11ocs and Too Much Sun)

And Brass Eye.

>while a column without the difficult bits has now made it in to Loaded.

Probably more to do with Loaded's legal people than the original articles. Also, presumably as Brooker is making money from the Loaded pages, he can't include stuff sent as submissions.

>It seems to be that CB is not so much biting the hand that's feeding him, but (to paraphrase his own tired collection of 13-year old metaphor) fellating the greasy spunk-nozzle of the media that he professed to despise so terminally twelve months ago.

If you ask me, it's the Corpses (and their oh-so-vocal supporters) who come across as despising the media.

As for Screen Burn, well it can't be much fun being a TV critic in these days of rubbish TV, can it? There's only so many ways you can say "this would have been good if there'd been some investment in it", isn't there?

Cheerio Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By Justin on Mon Nov 13 19:51:37 GMT 2000:

>*Sigh* I always bite:
>
>>When I first started reading TVGH about a year ago, it seemed as though here was a frustrated rant at the vacuity of the media, particularly TV, with its obsession with things about the media, and spin-offs
>
>Partly, I'd have thought, but also a satire of the kinds of programmes that *could* be made in the current TV climate (despite being plainly ridiculous), and the stuff about Mick Hucknell's scrote.
>
>>And a howl at the laddish vein of late-night telly for people with a nanosecond of a concentration span.
>
>Not necessarily just laddish. I think there was a lot of deliberately low-budget-production-satirising stuff there. Switch Me Off Or They Will Eat You and so on.
>
>>A year on, and whaddaya know...TVGH is in development with TalkBack
>
>How do you know this?

I really must stop reading the papers. See what I mean, isn't the media full of inaccurate speculation. (Seriously, apologies. This is genuinely what I read. If it's inaccurate, I can only retract that.)

>And, if it is, well fucking done, CB. One of "us" making it out there in media circus land. Unless it all goes Pete Tong, like it did for Alexei Sayle's character in TCSP... Strike, I'd have thought that shows that even humble PC Zone writers might indeed one day make it, therefore encouraging most of the people here who want to do the same.

No no no no no, that's not the point at all, and that wasn't (I presume) the point of the parody. CB is, of course, absolutely welcome to make a living out of whatever he wants to do, but doesn't it strike you as somewhat ironic that he's doing it in an industry that (from the content of TVGH) he despises. TVGH's FAQ even admits such a thing. Loaded, basically conceived as an ironic alternative to the overtly New Man tendencies of Arena and so on, has a letters page full of cretins who couldn't reach/afford/pluck up the courage to buy Razzle. This is now TVGH's readership. Wow - I'd be proud.

>>(makers of Ricky Gervaise, 11ocs and Too Much Sun)
>
>And Brass Eye.
>
Four years ago. And I think now that TalkBack is owned by the mighty Pearson, shows like that (intelligent) will be replaced by lite-versions of the same thing.
Oh come to think of it, that's already happened.

>>while a column without the difficult bits has now made it in to Loaded.

>>It seems to be that CB is not so much biting the hand that's feeding him, but (to paraphrase his own tired collection of 13-year old metaphor) fellating the greasy spunk-nozzle of the media that he professed to despise so terminally twelve months ago.
>
>If you ask me, it's the Corpses (and their oh-so-vocal supporters) who come across as despising the media.
>
Steve - read the columns, for goodness sake. They have a central, if vague, pillar of media scepticism (although, crucially, it doesn't attack existing programmes or anyone truly influential in the media world). I'm not saying it was originally contrived to be sycophantic to the media industry, but seeing as most of it doesn't have a single decent idea, of course it's going to applaud TVGH. Look at us, we're shit, the industry will say, but at least we're being talked about.

And, since you ask, yeah, I do actually hate a great deal of the media industry. And it's a pernicious disease that engulfed a fuck of a sight more than comedy. You pretty much admitted it in your last post, Steve.

>As for Screen Burn, well it can't be much fun being a TV critic in these days of rubbish TV, can it? There's only so many ways you can say "this would have been good if there'd been some investment in it", isn't there?
>
For what it's worth, I don't necessarily buy the idea that CB's a careerist, or a chancer. He always seemed affable enough on here. But he's been applauded by an industry full of people who don't care about quality, merely their own cvs.


Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By Ewar Woowar on Mon Nov 13 20:59:08 GMT 2000:

Shit. I think I'm about to disagree (partly) with Justin.

>No no no no no, that's not the point at all, and that wasn't (I presume) the point of the parody. CB is, of course, absolutely welcome to make a living out of whatever he wants to do, but doesn't it strike you as somewhat ironic that he's doing it in an industry that (from the content of TVGH) he despises.

Couldn't the same be said of Chris Morris? He clearly dispises the industry in which he works.

Incidentally, does anyone know what the image on the TV in the Corpses parody is supposed to be? Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By Justin on Mon Nov 13 21:53:17 GMT 2000:

>Shit. I think I'm about to disagree (partly) with Justin.
>
That's absolutely fine, Ewar...

>>No no no no no, that's not the point at all, and that wasn't (I presume) the point of the parody. CB is, of course, absolutely welcome to make a living out of whatever he wants to do, but doesn't it strike you as somewhat ironic that he's doing it in an industry that (from the content of TVGH) he despises.
>
>Couldn't the same be said of Chris Morris? He clearly dispises the industry in which he works.

I do agree with you, although there is a certain amount of affection in his earlier work - certainly his work for GLR, even the stuff he did for Radio 1 was actually quietly respectful of the medium of radio (it is clear that Kenny Everett was a huge influence on his early work). But Morris has a similar relationship with the media - he has dozens of sycophants around who either rip off his ideas (I saw a Trigger Happy TV video with the words "The most original comedy show in years" - for fuck's sake...) or who unquestioningly talk of his genius (Hobbs on R1 last Monday was only the most recent). Neither of these groups of people actually understand what he is doing. Sometimes I find myself almost wishing Brass Eye never happened because of the sheer dearth of ideas it's inspired since its transmission. Although I thought TVGH was sporadically hilarious to begin with, the ideas have now well and truly run out, and I think it's fair to say that CB owes a lot to the influence of Morris.
>
>Incidentally, does anyone know what the image on the TV in the Corpses parody is supposed to be?

I was convinced it was just a photo of Frank Skinner. Though I could be wrong (let's face it, I've already been wrong on one point tonight....:0) Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By ''smell'-anie' on Mon Nov 13 23:48:45 GMT 2000:

I know Charlie Brooker personally and spoke to him this evening. I thought some of the things we discussed might shed light on some of the confusion in this thread.

1. Talkback are not making a tv version of TVHG. Charlie was surprised anyone thought they might be. If a tv version of TVGH goes ahead, he wants to call it "Television, a warning from history".

2. He thought the TVGH thing the corpses did wasn't very good mainly because "the fonts weren't right", and because they should of made it 'blurry and hard to read". He thought the bit about having his legs broken was a joke. He said he'd rather see the Corpses site open rather than closed down

3. He isn't surprised some people are sick of TVGH because it's been going for almost two years and is obviously repetitive because he does it every two weeks. It's not shoved down anyones throat and people are supposed to dip into it whenever they like. He also said the the newest one was the best for a while, and the one before it was shit. He might stop doing TVGH next year or do it less often, or get someone else to take over. He enjoys unnovations more at the moment anyway.

4. The loaded version of TVGH is different because they can't print some of the language or use the entries from readers. They pick their favourite bits from a months worth of TVGH and use them. They don't pay much for it.

5. He's pleased with about half of his guardian columns and less pleased with the other half. He also said something about not always being able to get hold of the programmes he wants because of the time difference between writing and prinitng. They don't pay much either.

6. He doesnt ask magazines to write articles about TVGH and when they do he asks them not to use his name.

7. At the moment he's doing a cartoon called Office Romance based on a superkaylo comic strip called Horny Estelle, a new website filled with "lots of clicky things", and a couple of other things.

8. He's never compared himself with Chris morris or Python or anyone else and doesn't think anyone else would or should either.

So now, whether you care or not, you know.

'Smell'-anie

Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Cynic' on Mon Nov 13 23:53:51 GMT 2000:

>I know Charlie Brooker personally and spoke to him this evening.

No you didn't Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By george on Mon Nov 13 23:57:20 GMT 2000:

>I was convinced it was just a photo of Frank Skinner. Though I could be wrong (let's face it, I've already been wrong on one point tonight....:0)

The pictures used probaly came from here:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/education/archive/thekit/index.shtml

Nope, that definetely IS Mr Brooker. As seen on *The Kit* on BBC Knowledge, I beleive. Mr Brooker comes across on television as a bloke-ish, Johnny Vaughan clone (the voice definetely). Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By Ewar Woowar on Tue Nov 14 00:11:43 GMT 2000:

Are you talking about the photo? No, I mean the moving image on the TV set behind the flickering "JUST GO". I can't for the life of me figure out what it's supposed to be...it looks quite obscene. Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By george on Tue Nov 14 00:21:46 GMT 2000:

I'll take another look Ewar...... Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'smellanie' on Tue Nov 14 00:25:23 GMT 2000:

> No you didn't

oh yes I did! Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By george on Tue Nov 14 00:37:05 GMT 2000:

Ewar> the image behind the words on the screen is a menacing ghoul-like face, possibly laughing. Very evil. Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By TJ on Tue Nov 14 00:46:57 GMT 2000:

Not... The Clowne??? Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Anonymous' on Tue Nov 14 02:13:00 GMT 2000:

The same. Live via satellite. Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Anonymous' on Tue Nov 14 09:35:36 GMT 2000:

Unlike Brooker, Clowne and Gas Bottle really are developing a series with Talkback. Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Anonymous' on Tue Nov 14 09:44:31 GMT 2000:

we are prsentingh channel fopurs one hundred best iodetns of all times

we are doing it inf sdectret sio that they doi not know what weer are up to

IDENATS! Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By Steve Berry on Tue Nov 14 11:01:13 GMT 2000:

Most of the points have been addressed, but Justin done:

>[TVGH has] a central, if vague, pillar of media scepticism (although, crucially, it doesn't attack existing programmes or anyone truly influential in the media world).

I don't feel that media scepticism necessarily equals "despising" the media. I work in the media, and I'm very sceptical about it but I wouldn't still be here if I despised it. It's a close-call thing, but I'm not quite there yet.

>You pretty much admitted it in your last post, Steve.

Well, I'd go as far as the above. There's a lot of *people* I don't have time for but, on the other hand, I know that a lot of good people have to make a lot of compromises that means they don't end up producing the "product" they would like to.

>For what it's worth, I don't necessarily buy the idea that CB's a careerist, or a chancer. He always seemed affable enough on here. But he's been applauded by an industry full of people who don't care about quality, merely their own cvs.

I honestly don't think that all the people in the media who claim to like TVGH are doing so purely to advance their own CVs.

Oh, and I'm not convinced that Loaded was ever intended ironically. I think it was purely reactionary.

Cheerio

Steve Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'simon Hundleby' on Tue Nov 14 12:28:11 GMT 2000:

>*Sigh* I always bite:

Ste Berry is a wanker, always has been and always will be.
Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Jon' on Tue Nov 14 12:33:15 GMT 2000:

Before you kick off, may I just say: why don't you 2 just be nice to one another?

It takes fewer muscles to smile than to frown, y'know. Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Stuart O' on Tue Nov 14 13:12:19 GMT 2000:

If we spread this thread with enough peace and love, the cunts might go away, do you think? Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'William Wordsworth' on Tue Nov 14 13:14:08 GMT 2000:

I wandered lonely as a cloud
That floats on high o'er vales and hills,
When all at once I saw a crowd,
A host, of golden daffodils;
Beside the lake, beneath the trees,
Fluttering and dancing in the breeze.

Continuous as the stars that shine
And twinkle on the milky way,
They stretched in never-ending line
Along the margin of a bay:
Ten thousand saw I at a glance,
Tossing their heads in sprightly dance.

The waves beside them danced; but they
Out-did the sparkling waves in glee:
A poet could not but be gay,
In such a jocund company:
I gazed---and gazed---but little thought
What wealth the show to me had brought:

For oft, when on my couch I lie
In vacant or in pensive mood,
They flash upon that inward eye
Which is the bliss of solitude;
And then my heart with pleasure fills,
And dances with the daffodils.
Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By Steve Berry on Tue Nov 14 13:25:57 GMT 2000:

Simon Hundleby done:

>>*Sigh* I always bite:
>
>Ste Berry is a wanker, always has been and always will be.

Fucking hell. Talk about your past coming back to haunt you. How's it going, Simon? Still a ginger tosser? Oh, and what do *you* think of TVGH. Unless, of course, you're really Andrew Buchan making me paranoid.

Cheerio Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Jon' on Tue Nov 14 13:31:50 GMT 2000:

I don't think there's anything any of the rest of us can add to that. Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Jayne' on Tue Nov 14 13:41:32 GMT 2000:

>I don't think there's anything any of the rest of us can add to that.

Go on Jon. Have a try. Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Jon' on Tue Nov 14 13:44:10 GMT 2000:

No, I couldn't.

It's clear they're beyond listening to reason. Or that's the impression they give. Perhaps it would be better if one or both of them explained what the rgudge was all about. Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Jon' on Tue Nov 14 13:44:41 GMT 2000:

And the grudge as well. Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Anonymous' on Tue Nov 14 14:57:02 GMT 2000:

Steve Berry, which part of the media do you work in? Just curious. Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Simon Hundleby' on Tue Nov 14 15:58:12 GMT 2000:

>Fucking hell. Talk about your past coming back to haunt you. How's it going, Simon? Still a ginger tosser? Oh, and what do *you* think of TVGH. Unless, of course, you're really Andrew Buchan making me paranoid.
>
>Cheerio

Haha 'Ginger tosser' your actually thinking that I'm Phil Gargin.

How come you've left the 'Brass list'?

Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Jon' on Tue Nov 14 16:03:43 GMT 2000:

"Haha 'Ginger tosser' your actually thinking that I'm Phil Gargin."

You mean to say:

"Haha 'Ginger tosser' YOU'RE actually thinking that I'm Phil Gargin."

But who are you people, and what is your dispute about? Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By 'Simon Hundleby' on Tue Nov 14 16:06:12 GMT 2000:

>But who are you people, and what is your dispute about?

Were just old adversaries from the Brass Eye Mailing List.

Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By Steve Berry on Tue Nov 14 17:11:49 GMT 2000:

Mr Hundleby is my arch nemesis from way back. It all stems from the Brass List where I, sycophantically licking the arse of Charlie Brooker, was discovered in a toilet by Simon, who was looking for somewhere to indulge his pork scratching habit. Don't worry, shan't be bringing it on to here but, as I said, I always bite.

Oh, and Simon, I left the Brass List through boredom.

Cheerio Subject: Re: Corpses do TVGH
Posted By Steve Berry on Tue Nov 14 17:14:43 GMT 2000:

>Steve Berry, which part of the media do you work in? Just curious.

Television, Internet, Magazines. In that order.

Cheerio

Steve