How many Corpses did it take to write the Savile transcript?

Two - Scott, Mike and , Joe. Subject: Re: So ya want comedy, huh?
Posted By Anonymous on Thu Aug 10 14:35:25 BST 2000:

c
h
a
m
p
n
i
s
s
Subject: Re: So ya want comedy, huh?
Posted By Ailie on Thu Aug 10 14:36:28 BST 2000:

*applaudes*

Nice one.

Subject: Re: So ya want comedy, huh?
Posted By fizz on Thu Aug 10 14:41:05 BST 2000:

>Q. How many R****** N******s does it take to change a lightbulb?
>A. None - you can shag underaged groupies in the dark just as easily.


Richard Nixon had groupies?! Subject: Re: So ya want comedy, huh?
Posted By Gee on Thu Aug 10 14:51:12 BST 2000:

Thank you SOTCAA I enjoyed that. More please. Subject: Re: So ya want comedy, huh?
Posted By Ailie on Thu Aug 10 15:15:02 BST 2000:

Those jokes were piss-poor.

There wasn't anything funny about them, it just seemed like another smart-arse attempt at showing how clever you obviously are. Subject: Re: So ya want comedy, huh?
Posted By MM on Thu Aug 10 15:50:36 BST 2000:

Does this mean that, now that they've tried comedy, their opinoins become valid?
Will this stop the 'you have to be a pilot, before you can say the plane has crashed' brigade?

MM
Subject: Re: So ya want comedy, huh?
Posted By Jon on Thu Aug 10 15:52:03 BST 2000:

"Those jokes were piss-poor."

I thought my one was brilliantly inventive. Subject: Re: So ya want comedy, huh?
Posted By Ailie on Thu Aug 10 15:55:18 BST 2000:

>I thought my one was brilliantly inventive.

So did I! :0)

I wasn't referring to that.

Subject: Re: So ya want comedy, huh?
Posted By kinder surprise on Thu Aug 10 17:28:27 BST 2000:

>Those jokes were piss-poor.
>
>There wasn't anything funny about them, it just seemed like another smart-arse attempt at showing how clever you obviously are.

I take this is agreeable praise of the jokes. Exactly what a Mark Lamarr fan must look for in humour.

Subject: Re: So ya want comedy, huh?
Posted By The Other Corpses Editor on Thu Aug 10 17:35:17 BST 2000:

La la la Subject: Re: So ya want comedy, huh?
Posted By Jon on Thu Aug 10 17:45:34 BST 2000:

Oh, you love it really... Subject: Re: So ya want comedy, huh?
Posted By DL on Thu Aug 10 18:24:16 BST 2000:

How many Corpses editors does it take to change the set up for their comedy?

The same number as usual, but they have to dally with a month of peddling the same joke two months running before they think of anything original...

Well done though. Nice to see you've not lost the touch. I've since employed a spreader bar though so sock changing has become less of a hampering activity and the fire brigade can rest easily in their watch...

Notice, i could've made innumerable jokes that 'at least i change my socks and i am not a comedy - shyster bastard' but resisted the temptation... :)

Well done though, coz, at least with this sort of humour you allow me to rest aeasy at night.
And Dave Gorman too probably...

Subject: Re: So ya want comedy, huh?
Posted By Mike for SOTCAA on Thu Aug 10 18:28:09 BST 2000:

Q. How many forum contributors does it take to change a lightbulb?

A. None. Nothing's ever going to change - they're too busy blethering on about Gian Sammarco. Subject: Re: So ya want comedy, huh?
Posted By Anonymous on Thu Aug 10 18:28:18 BST 2000:

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARGH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Subject: Re: So ya want comedy, huh?
Posted By Anonymous on Thu Aug 10 18:29:03 BST 2000:

That was for Dan BTW Subject: Re: So ya want comedy, huh?
Posted By Prisoner #93A234 Simon Adebisi on Thu Aug 10 19:09:57 BST 2000:

Q. How many Corpses Editors does it take to change a lightbulb?

A. The point is not that the lightbulb must change but the new bulb must break the circle of mediocrity that bulbs have been trapped in. In about 1996 all the dials which govern the general expectations of lightbulbs were completely reset to 00 00 00 00. Right across the board. A 'Year Zero' if you like. This meant that anything fantastic which was achieved over the previous few years was now completely wiped from common conciousness and anything created from thereon was given a whole new and worrying perspective.
This has resulted in lightbulbs/neon tubes / LEDs/ street lights / luminescence in general being judged without recourse to what they have replaced. For instance a bulb like the Lumex energy saver , instead of being a shallow and derivative missing-the-point-of-living rewrite of the lightbulbs of Calor 30w, 60w, 100w, etc, is accepted by some as new and exciting. ‘The Burnsley Neon tube’ , instead of being viewed as a vaguely illuminating but-not-that-bright-really tube is being described as 'daring to be quite unlike anything that's ever been attempted before'. All this despite there being actual crystal clear evidence both in shops and personal archives everywhere that much better and more innovative lighting had been used by an earlier generation.
The standard of expectation with audiences has dropped substantially. It would appear that nobody expects too much anymore so even the most shallow plagiuristic dullity can be raised on high as a work of pure lightbulb genius. And your average electrician views this regrettable situation as an absolute Godsend.
People moan at us, claiming we favour earlier generations of lightbulbs work over the current crop. This isn't necessarily true - even a cursory look through the site will reveal where our switches are aimed. Some have brought up the tedious accusation of looking at the past through misty neon-tinted eyeballs. But this is also quite easily disprovable - with so much fantastic (or even mediocre)lightbulbs from the past safely ossified onto magnetic videotape there's no mistaking (or debating) that things were better, even a mere five years ago.
Without looking back we can't look forward. And without looking back properly all we're likely to get are received opinions based on skewed memories.
The point is, we're trying to put the past and the present into some form of perspective. Part of this is to avoid the over-generous hailing of modern lightbulbs as 'innovative' without checking out what's gone before. It would be a brave person who ever claimed to deliver innovation these days anyway, at least without changing the rules of expectation. If modern-day audiences claim that the Fluorax Star is fantastic because he 'dazzles' everyone then they've obviously not experienced enough of lightbulbs history to realise how dim he actually is. If modern-day audiences claim that ‘The Burnsley Neon tube’ , ' is 'quite unlike anything ever attempted before' then they have obviously experienced no television whatsoever.
A few people are angered by our use of the word 'plebs' to describe the sort of punters who are lazy in their lightbulb choices and refuse to question their lighting. Well, hoorah for that. So now we all know that people don't like to be pigeon-holed by arrogant self-appointed guardians of the lightbulbs norm. But whereas we use that phrase as an obvious incitement to indignation, the media uses it far more insidiously and subtly. They have their own method of social grouping (AB1, AB2, etc) which governs the sort of lightbulbs we get to use. How many of you have complained about that? The trouble is, when people like Jane Root (BBC2 controller) start slicing up TV output into 'zones' (Lightbulbs; Art; History) then they are, quite deliberately, consulting a little folder with 'pleb-pleasers' written on it in florescent marker. They are discouraging people from making up their own minds about how lighting should be. And what's more, they have to power to do this without even offering a forum or debate on the subject. Don't ever forget that they have a deliberate policy about not taking e-mailed views seriously. Their 'Internet Zone' suggestions-folder is full of disparate views from people genuinely interested in television. Their 'Pleb Zone' folder is bulging with nice middle-ground Basildon Bond 'Well done Illumee for another range of 'Lumiere’s’ - more please' type scribblings. Which folder do you think they're going to present to the public? The whole thing is very creepy.
We've also been accused of misogyny. A furious woman has claimed that every time we mention a woman on the site we always follow it up with a derogatory comment. If anybody out there can find actual three-dimensional examples of this we'll be quite happy to explain that it was all a clever joke in a really patronising tone, giving well-argued examples along the way and swearing a bit...
Might be a good time to reiterate our remit here, following all the interesting assumptions on the forum. No, we're not failed bitter lightbulb writers out for revenge. No, we're not using this site as a means to break into the lightbulb scene. No, we don't hate all lightbulbs. We are just passionate lightbulb fans who are very worried that things have gone awry. Our aim is to provide a reference point or soundboard for people who feel the same way. Whether or not we can use this platform to change things is debatable (the industry has money on its side - we don't) but we hope at least to stir things up a bit. We are planning some 'concrete action' which we'll mention in the next update. Stay tuned.
Subject: Re: So ya want comedy, huh?
Posted By DL on Thu Aug 10 19:53:56 BST 2000:

Who are you to offer a reference point? Surely we must all find our own, enjoy it for what it is and move on as we see fit? Subject: Re: So ya want comedy, huh?
Posted By Justin on Thu Aug 10 20:24:49 BST 2000:

>How many Corpses editors does it take to change the set up for their comedy?
>
>The same number as usual, but they have to dally with a month of peddling the same joke two months running before they think of anything original...
>
*screams with frustration*
Subject: Re: So ya want comedy, huh?
Posted By Peter Ohanraohanrahan on Thu Aug 10 20:39:49 BST 2000:

How many lightbulbs does it take to change a lightbulb?

One - one to change itself and the other to be the same lightbulb and get a bit confused. Subject: Re: So ya want comedy, huh?
Posted By Dan on Thu Aug 10 21:59:10 BST 2000:

sorry justin, i have moved on from the other threads, starting a new critique.
Laters off to book. Subject: Re: So ya want comedy, huh?
Posted By Al on Fri Aug 11 00:35:58 BST 2000:

Simon Adebisis's comments on this thread. Genius.

<applauds hearttily>
Now Simon - go and rest your weary fingers... Subject: Re: So ya want comedy, huh?
Posted By Jon on Fri Aug 11 08:20:25 BST 2000:

"Q. How many forum contributors does it take to change a lightbulb?

A. None. Nothing's ever going to change - they're too busy blethering on about Gian Sammarco."

People want to talk about GS because of his impact on comedy history and you should hang your heads in shame for daring to question the importance of his legacy... Subject: Re: So ya want comedy, huh?
Posted By Ailie on Fri Aug 11 08:36:07 BST 2000:

>I take this is agreeable praise of the jokes. Exactly what a Mark Lamarr fan must look for in humour.


I look for it to be funny. Mark Lamarr doesn't always deliver the goods and I've never said otherwise.
Subject: Re: So ya want comedy, huh?
Posted By Jon on Fri Aug 11 09:02:07 BST 2000:

Fibber. Subject: Re: So ya want comedy, huh?
Posted By Ailie on Fri Aug 11 09:05:48 BST 2000:

>Fibber.

Back that up, Jon boy!

Subject: Re: So ya want comedy, huh?
Posted By One Day Soon on Fri Aug 11 12:43:36 BST 2000:

I know I'm a bit late but I've only just come on-line for the first time in a few days, so here's what I want to say:

That is the least funny collection of underage drinking mates-in-a-pub in-jokes I have ever read in my whole life. Good Christ what a waste of time. The answer to all those 'How can you criticize my comedy if you don't have a go yourselves?' questions seems pretty obvious to me now. And this really does seem to justify the position that you don't have to be good at something to have worthwhile views on it.

How could the people behind the HIGNFY transcript and the Fringe guide be so tedious?

AAARGH! The world is broken! I don't understand! How can this be?!?

Still Simon Adebisi seems to have made a good attempt at redressing the balance. I haven't read more than the first few sentences but your stubborness in taking this to its logical elongated conclusion deserves immediate respect if only for its length. Subject: Re: So ya want comedy, huh?
Posted By Peter Ohanraohanrahan on Fri Aug 11 19:58:31 BST 2000:

He said length, huh, huh... Subject: Re: So ya want comedy, huh?
Posted By Gee on Sat Aug 12 09:54:22 BST 2000:

Only just read your comments Prisoner #93A234 Simon Adebisi, very amusing I thought. Very good idea <lightbulb>.
Subject: Re: So ya want comedy, huh?
Posted By Anonymous on Tue Aug 22 15:01:39 BST 2000:

Prisoner #93A234 Simon Adebisi is (name removed) Subject: Re: So ya want comedy, huh?
Posted By Joe4SOTCAA on Sat Aug 26 14:09:13 BST 2000:

>Still Simon Adebisi seems to have made a good attempt at redressing the balance. I haven't read more than the first few sentences but your stubborness in taking this to its logical elongated conclusion deserves immediate respect if only for its length

Or for his ability to operate cut and paste options.

Q. How many One Day Soons does it take to miss the point of life itself?

I love you though. Subject: Re: So ya want comedy, huh?
Posted By Joe4SOTCAA on Fri Sep 1 22:53:43 BST 2000:

In 'The Secret Policeman's Other Ball', just after a 'serious' musical act has finished their performance (Jeff Beck or Sting probably) Jasper Carrott comes on and says, raunchily, 'So ya like music, huh?'. He proceeds to sing 'Hangman, Slacken Your Noose' passionately for a few seconds before miming being hanged by the neck.

Anybody getting close yet? Subject: Re: So ya want comedy, huh?
Posted By One Day Soon on Sun Sep 3 18:12:02 BST 2000:

>>Still Simon Adebisi seems to have made a good attempt at redressing the balance. I haven't read more than the first few sentences but your stubborness in taking this to its logical elongated conclusion deserves immediate respect if only for its length
>
>Or for his ability to operate cut and paste options.
>
>Q. How many One Day Soons does it take to miss the point of life itself?
>
>I love you though.

Do you? I'm touched.
Subject: Re: So ya want comedy, huh?
Posted By Embarrassed Scriptwriter on Sun Sep 3 22:19:23 BST 2000:

SOTCAA may be responsible for the parlous state of comedy today cos me and at least two other scriptwriters I know spend far too much time reading and contributing to the forum when we should be finishing the bloody scripts we're writing. Shame Dave Gorman and the Boosh don't contribute to it. Subject: Re: So ya want comedy, huh?
Posted By One Day Soon on Mon Sep 4 12:06:44 BST 2000:

>SOTCAA may be responsible for the parlous state of comedy today cos me and at least two other scriptwriters I know spend far too much time reading and contributing to the forum when we should be finishing the bloody scripts we're writing. Shame Dave Gorman and the Boosh don't contribute to it.

Yes! At last, the secret! I blame them too for my lack of drive and focus! Down with SOTCAA!