Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
I think even Liza Tarbuck managed it.
and i've done some stinkers in my time.
I bet he gets off on it.
it's true....his one weakness. ole brooksy gets off on knees under chins.
anyway.....what we should've been saying is.....naked elvis?...someone show tanya gold...this is woman tanya....this is what women do....naked fucking elvis.
i havent watched in quite some time but i bet its quite sexy
i havent watched in quite some time but i bet its sexy
they've got rid of spencer brown. is this old news?
About a week ago or something.
did they just slowly realise how awful he was do you think?
must be why
wish me luck
only this: http://watchwithmothers.net/2009/08/11/those-comedy-3-mobile-adverts/ trying to work out who is responsible.
Look at this article and the photo contained within: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/gordonfarquhar/2009/08/noone_in_their_right_mind.html
and guess what the very, very first question in the comments section below is.
i should have more faith in my country
the shoddy nature of humanity
it's a fair point really.
"Let's see what's been on TV this week and laugh at it" is the worst idea for a programme ever.
Ego TV. Competing 'comedians' trying to outfunny eachother with bad sarcasm and fish-in-a-barrel celebrity gossip jokes.
didn't see naked elvis no?
and not a harry hill fan no?
i actually think ''let's see what's been in the news this week and laugh at it'' is the worst idea for a programme ever
can't people be funny about a greater variety of subject matter?
think of a hour hour tv comedic slot that could realisticly be filled with a topic other than telly or current/cultural/politcal affairs........good luck.
qi or genius or, or, i don't know i'm not a comedian, but i don't think having subject matter that the audience is already familiar with makes the programme funnier. see: Andy Parsons.
Harry Hill is absolutely wonderful - probably because he doesn't take himself seriously.
Charlie Brooker's style just grates on me.
I can't articulate why at this hour, but I think the fact Harry Hill doesn't need to use foul language to be hilarious has something to do with it, whereas CB can't really utter a sentence without saying a naughty word.
Harry Hill can take something utterly innocuous and make it hilarious, whereas Charlie Brooker... well he pretty much does the opposite.
do you mean, point out your massively flawed point?
you did didn't you.
and the brooker thing....i can't see either of you coming up with objective reasons as to why he isn't funny.....but then, i don't like tomato's...what's that all about?....you likes what you like i guess.
'massively flawed point'?
yeah I'm done
he's the perfect man
''Looks like a pedophile walrus''
i once google image searched him for 40 minutes
i think i just have a perverse gravitation towards mongs