Plaigarism Thread Closed Please Unlock

[Sar]

Nevermind the Buzzcocks!

*looks sheepish* sorry - I had to say that

 

[Stewart]

there's plenty of good modern stuff out there. Little Britain for example.

Sorry, but I'll never be able to put Little Britain into any "great comedy" bracket. I know it's very popular, it wins awards, and people even have some of its catchphrases as their ringtone but I just don't think it's funny. Sure, there's the odd moment where I may snigger because Mr. Lucas and Mr. Walliams have actually made an original joke but the whole thing is based upon catchphrase comedy wherein the writers are so lazy they tell the same joke each series. Every sketch featuring specific characters typically ends the same - with a certain catchphrase - which will keep the students shouting out (and putting the actors off) when they see the stage show that's touring soon. This sort of comedy has already been prevalent in recent years on British TV with such sketch shows as The Fast Show, Bruiser, and Chewin' The Fat. Going a little bit further back, Naked Video and Absolutely. Eventually you can get back to the probable television origins in Monty Python's Spanish Inquisition.

Continuing with Monty Python, the notion of playing all of your characters - whether male of female - with the exception of the 'vixens' portrayed by Carol Cleveland was done here too. Little Britain is nothing new in that respect.

While the idea of it being a comedy guide for non-Brits to learn from and Brits to laugh at is certainly nice the notion of repeating characters living in an area is not new either. The League of Gentlemen is superior in this respect. Not only do their characters recur with their own quirks and catchphrases, the actors play all male and female parts, and set it within a defined microcosm, the characters inhabit each others' world and interact with each other as the sketches dissolve from one into another. Far superior.

That said, I would like to retract my statement about all British TV of recent years and say that The League of Gentlemen is an extremely worthwhile view.

Little Britain stars Lucas and Walliams are not good together. Their Rock Profiles show was dire and it shows that Lucas needs the humour of Vic Reeves and Bob Mortimer to really be funny - most laughs are really based on his unique look and his ability to babble. Walliams is probably some guy nabbed off the street.

 

[lies]

I don't agree with you, Stewart, but I do see your point.

I personally think Little Britain is more fun than The League in some ways and that The League is more fun than Little Britain in other ways. I like both shows for very different reasons. I also think originality is overrated (you can't be original anymore these days; it's all been done before), so I don't mind as much. I think part of why I like Little Britain is that it's so very predictable.

Now as far as Monty Python is concerned. I'm a fan too, but I don't think it's the holy grail of comedy. Quite a few of their sketches were, well, bad, really. They certainly had their moments of genius and are definitely worthy of praise, but nothing more. (Not that I think you're saying that; I just wanted to mention this in passing.)

 

[demetrio]

Weak or not is not the point.

This should have been dealt with in private, and therefore it will continue to be dealth with in private. I don't stand alone in this.

If you have anything to say, contact me, or anyone, through PM.

Martin: Your plaigarized reviews were not private. You are abusing your moderator status. Neither action was a careless mistake, nor a private issue between individual parties. These were willful and public. A public forum post should be countered with a public forum post - that is called dialogue. That is the real power of the Internet. Rarely should things be taken private.

ritalinperson: I'm not out to "punish" anyone. This is an internet forum, I don't lose any sleep over it. In reality, I don't care about martin.

I do enjoy debates and logic, and when I see fundamentally screwed up situations I like to expose them. If you're looking for my motive (ritalinperson), that is where it is, it is all an exercise. That may bother you, but I don't claim any divine motivation - just don't read the thread if it irks you so.

You're (martin) a plaigarizer (original thread). You abused your moderator privs to close a thread that exposed you as such (what this thread is about). You don't have to read what they say about you, you don't even need to respond - but to attempt to cut off the communication of other members, just because they are talking about you in a negative but true way....that's just plain sad.

 

[Martin]

You're (martin) a plaigarizer (original thread). You abused your moderator privs to close a thread that exposed you as such (what this thread is about).

I'd like to mention that the Site Admin has expressed on several occasions that he strongly thought this should have been handled in private. This as not a decision I made on my own.

but to attempt to cut off the communication of other members, just because they are talking about you in a negative but true way....that's just plain sad.

This is not a forum on which you can simply go and burn people down, no matter what they did. If you have a problem with me, contact me or the Admin, but don't go about making it shamefully public. Now I know that, for an outsider (such as yourself), it is great fun to watch someone get slaughtered, and you'll probably have a giggle over it, but if you want to watch a carcrash, you've come to the wrong forum. This is not the place.

Discuss books, and have fun - but there's no need to burn people down. Not like this.

Cheers

 

[jenn]

ritalinperson: I'm not out to "punish" anyone. This is an internet forum, I don't lose any sleep over it. In reality, I don't care about martin.

his name is ritalinkid, thank you very much. and in reality we do care about martin and the other members of this forum. we are a community and yes we are having a rough patch, but we are also not here to amuse you. notice the direction of this thread. get over yourself and move on to another topic. some of us are not interested in picking our own scabs.

 

[novella]

his name is ritalinkid, thank you very much. and in reality we do care about martin and the other members of this forum.

Thanks jenn, I would do the same myself.

 

[Cathy C]

Boy, go out of town for a couple of weeks, and I miss all the fun! Which thread started the flame war? I hate to miss out on a good battle. Can I bring in war penguins?

Cathy <who's sharpening her weapons gleefully... >

 

[Darren]

I support Martin's decision to lock that thread after his reply. It wasn't a decision he made on his own, he did discuss it with some of the other moderators who were online at that time.

We're not going to have a public flogging. What Martin did was wrong and it will be dealt with.