Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
Here we go.
Can I champion 2point4children?
and CROSSHAIR ASSISTED ZOOMING on the computer.
and watching it with your mum and dad.
Otherwise, nah. Not by a long stretch.
This is alright but all I can think is how it's clearly just an outlet for Brooker's hatred of Cameron more than anything else.
He's not particularly like Cameron. I think it's more about disgust with politicians in general.
kinda works, kinda doesn't.
Wasn't really funny.
Wasn't really dark.
Wasn't anything really. I expexted more.
I didn't think.
It was lacking.
Those BBC Four lectures about morality and so on were more intriguing and thought-provoking.
This felt like a dramatisation segment on the One Show, or something.
Have you a got a link, Wza? These completely passe me by :(
Part of a whole Justice season. Loadsa bits and bobs from ^that page.
how could it possibly have been darker? The shots of the PM in the toilet afterwards were so, so grim.
Anyhow, I thought it was pretty good all in all. I guess it raises the question, would he have done the same for any random girl who was kidnapped with the same ransom demanded?
It was marketed as some dark drama comedy thing but it was trying to create creepyness, comedy and tension all at once and it did none of these things because it was essentially a man fucking a pig.
And the reveal bit at the end was shit. He's an "artist" that art is obviously not painting...so why was he covered in painty overalls?
It was just a bit shit imo.
has 'done art' in a variety of mediums
Just seems a bit obvious for an artist to be painting whilst trying to create art in the form of kidnapping a princess and making the PM fuck a pig. Just seemed a bit odd to me that he'd have that stereotypical get up on whilst kidnapping someone and then doing what he did at the end.
'Just seems a bit obvious for an artist to be painting whilst trying to create art in the form of kidnapping a princess and making the PM fuck a pig'
I ... I don't know really. I don't want to fall out with anyone over this.
Its making sense in my head!
You did watch the end with the credits right? They said that critics have said its the greatest art work ever created....the person who kidnapped her was the artist....he cut off his own finger...he was wearing overalls with paint on and he looked like a painter....thought his mind might be too preoccupied to paint....AHH CHARLIE BROOKER HAS SENT ME INSANE! What am I talking about.
And can you please stop trying to patronise me?
Go away now.
When you see him during the show you'd think he was a painter, as in a guy who paints buildings, walls, etc. A builder or somesuch.
So when we find out at the end that he's actually the person responsible it seems a bit 'Agatha Christie'?
Dunno, I didn't really care quite enough by the end.
I don't care anymore. Someone link Brooker to this thread and let him clear up the shit.
But anyway, TEALEAF IS IN IT NEXT WEEK!
Definitely, DEFINITELY wouldn't tune in to a broadcast of Cameron hopping on the good foot and doing the bad thing with a farm animal.
in the pub as the pigfucking is due to commence, but the "straight" dramatic scenes were actually pretty effective.
was when they had a shot of facebook and someone's status was "LOL he's gonna get pig AIDS". Funny because that's exactly what facebook would be like if this happened IRL.
It is part of a series (i think) and although 3 colours can be viewed individually they are better as a whole?
So I don't see how this would link in with the PM fucking a pig.
Its just Brookers excuse to 'cleverly' slate everything he despises at the moment.
Brooker isn't going to come on screen at the end of episode 3 and say 'well done kids! The link was farm animals!!'. I can't interpret a connection between 3 episodes by only seeing 1 episode.
Luckily I despise the same things as Brooker on the basis of these episodes (politicians and reality TV) so seems fair enough to me.
Each episode is almost a caricature of real life, for the purposes of satire and social critique.
Ooh this is how the news and social media work. I'd prefer a straight up romp about a man banging a pig.
Still, as above, pretty excited about Tealeaf.
But the whole communal TV watching seemed to undermine the whole idea of a feral internet somewhat.
Looking forward to seeing the other two parts.
riddled with plot holes, too.
none. in fucking london.
trained secret service bodyguards overpowered by an art fag armed with nothing more than white overalls and a sixth form sense of existential angst.
here's a SUPER SECRET LOCATION where we're going to digitally manipulate footage of a pornstar fucking a piggy to make the pornstar look like the PM. oh, wait, some paunchy white boy is hanging around outside the SUPER SECRET LOCATION (the SSL being surrounded by security, police, secret service and politicians), but still manages to snap a picture of the pornstar (thus blowing the charade) and walk away without any of the police, secret service agents or security destroying his phone and "disappearing" him.
i'm pretty sure the country would understand the PM not wanting to fuck a pig. okay, the girl dies, but they did try to save her based on the intel they had. the PM has a family of his own. none of us are so enthral to the monarchy (even one appearing at the pride of britain awards) that we'd storm downing street with torches and pitchforks if the princess had been killed.
and the hospital segments were just stupid.
Thought itwas on a country road or something. The others aren't really plotholes
usually because you think, "wha...? that would NEVER happen like that!"
all of those points^ fuck the plot rigorously.
It's like saying 'Yeah big plot hole in Transformers right, I just can't fathom how that massive robot could reduce himself to the size of a cabriolet, ridiculous.
Fantasy. Lots of scope for fantastical explanations when things don't quite make logical sense if put in a realistic setting.
Not so much of any of the above.
I mean, I don't think that's actually a plothole since the toys came out roughly the same size.
But Transformers is fantasy set in our world. The idea that any ridiculous film can just get off the hook by saying, "Oh man, it's only a movie," is forgetting that the importance of a fantastic story of any sort is to ground it in enough reality that you have a suspension of disbelief.
But seeing as the whole premise is a shooty shooty robot car cgi-fest, I'd have no expectations re:plot before watching it, and i'd let it do what it wants.
But, as I say, I haven't seen it, so maybe my mind would be changed if I had. And with that, I yield.
Bumblebee (the yellow car) talks only using snippets from the radio.
in most Transformers he's a rounded character not reliant on a cheap gimmick
But there's no reason it had to be simply because it involved Transformers. You bring aliens and stuff into the world and you can still make a good film.
As much as I liked Melancholia overall, and it's semi-fantasy scenario, the last five seconds annoyed me on the grounds of implausibility.
I think I'm just so bad at following plots that their complete absence doesn't necessarily phase me as long as the film is presented in a certain way.
I can lap up some meandering plotless stuff all day long.
But when it comes to other stuff grounded in reality, with a pretence of being 'hard hitting' (or whatever) I struggle if it requires too many leaps of faith.
script implied she was a special princess, like a Diana.
And put her wedding ring on it. How did it fit? And I think it would take me about 2 minutes to tell if it was a mans or womans finger...not wait a few hours for DNA.
I think she was meant to be kate middleton. The picture of her and her fiance was exaclty like wills and kates one...and the wedding ring was the same.
Imma find a man and compare my wedding finger and his little finger.
First off, I have to stress here that this show was not actually set in the real world. As I mentioned up there ^ Brooker stated that it's meant to be like the Twilight Zone - an exaggerated version of real life for the purposes of parody and critique.
And I agree about the second point - why the hell wouldn't they confiscate that guy's camera? - but the other ones do make sense within the universe of the show.
It's not just about how our lives are being changed by social media, and how the traditional ways we experience big events are warping in ways we didn't expect. It's also about the fact that we live in a world now where politicians are absolutely wrapped in a cocoon of polling data and focus groups. Principles are increasingly rare in politics, with pragmatic gestures designed to go with the popular mood being much more of a focus.
In real life nobody would fuck a pig because nobody negotiates with terrorists. But what if fucking a pig actually would win in the polls? It's not a question of saving a girl's life, it's about the clash between principle and cynical PR - and the idea that PR concerns are becoming so absolutely fundamental to everything that a guy would actually violate the one dignified thing he has in his life - his love for his wife - just for the sake of three extra percentage points in the opinion polls.
I thought it was a pretty funny way of going about it, tbh. And dark. Definitely dark.
I would need some sort of diagram or instruction
whilst he was walking down the corridor towards the pig, but when he had that glass of water, I assumed he was washing down a viagra or two.
The bit with him in the toilet at the end and the final shot left me a bit shaken and sad
I especially enjoyed "the guardian are doing a live blog"
I await the more learned members of the board to come and tell me
I'm wrong and cite some obtuse silent Hungarian films at me
It was hardly This Is England in terms of watching through fingers.
there were lots of nice little details like when they thought the princess' finger had been cut off so they showed pictures of her hands on the news and that guy saying it seemed islamist
how they thought the finger of a male artist was that of a princess. Hmmm.
(and i've just realised that Meo already has that covered)
The whole thing was set over what, eight hours? And the finger was sent with even less time than that. We hear a character say, apparently an hour or so after the deadline, that DNA testing has confirmed it belonged to a man. DNA testing takes a few hours.
Anyone here have extensive knowledge of severed fingers?
a male who works with his hands all day will have visibly non pampered (well manicured?) young princess fingers.
She just got engaged. There are a million pictures of her hand with the wedding ring on....WHERE WAS HER FIANCE?! He could have identified the finger.
I doubt most people could tell severed fingers apart that well. That's a bit silly.
And you think he would've forgotten to varnish his nails?
about his aims/influences
It was decent. Nothing amazing but not bad or anything.
But it was meant to be about the internet changing the world and I don't think it managed to be that. It will be thought of as the drama where the PM fucked a pig rather than the drama where the internet made the PM fuck a pig.
I didn't get that at all.
It was certainly a part of it - that mainstream meadia no longer controls breaking news. But mostly I thought it was politician's obsessions with polls taken to an absurd extereme, but also a knowing nod by Brooker of the hyperbole in the media of which he is part of actually made real and people going 'oh this actually isn't very nice' - like if you actually made Clarkson execute public workers and their families on TV.
Anyway, I seem to be alone on this, so I'll just mooch in the corner
You fucking simpleton
They wouldn't drop everything and gather round the telly to find out the news like in the days pre-internet.
Not sure of any internet-specific examples, but huge news/media events always seem to engender communal viewing in the few selective examples I can immediately bring to mind.
and if something major was happening, people would gather round them....Not everyone would but most people would. There would still be people walking around the streets basically....especially if he was fucking a pig for an hour. I'd get bored after 10 minutes.
and now every time she looks into the eyes of her children's father, she can't help but imagine him balls deep in Peppa Pig.
Whilst watching the 'debasement of the nation' montage (iirc, all the colouration of the scenes went from golden sunny day to drab grey coldness) I thought it was all over, and we were into suggestive imagery territory. Techniques to tell the story, or whatever.
But no. Some dialogue kicked in an someone piped up to point out that he'd been at it for an hour. Purlease.
seemed a OTT.
It wasn't the apocalypse. Felt like Mr media man writer was overestimating how important such an event would be.
No matter how important the PM, Twitter, Pig humping, or the #1 Princess might seem in Meejaland, there will always be significant numbers of people who couldn't give a fuck about 'em, or any combination thereof.
Eg: the planes flying into the twin towers was utterly incredible and 'tv-friendly' and unfolded over the course of a morning (not quite as long as the ~6 hours in this example, but still... first crash 08:46 a.m., second tower collapsed at 10:28 a.m. which gives most people time to find a telly if they want to.). The truth is that most people out and about just carried on with their business. not a perfect comparison, but "1.5 billion viewers"?* Really? Hmmm.
*I think that's the figure they quoted. Doesn't matter really, cos an additional point is that the dialogue (and various other bits and bobs) tried just that little bit too hard to convey the scenario as being rather more monumental than I think it would be. Or maybe I'm underestimatng the demand for PM on bacon action.
Sometimes film makers use visual symbolism to illustrate a plot point, the point here being that this is a big event.
But then a character piped up to explain to the viewer that they'd been at it for an hour. Symbolism is kinda undermined when there's some ultra-literal dialogue to bring it crashing down to earth.
I think if someone told you when you woke up that the Call Me Dave was going to fuck a pig on live telly at 4pm or Kate Middleton would be killed, even if you were all "not arsed mate", you'd be at work, everyone else there would be totally watching it, you wouldn't want to be sat there working away whilst everyone else was watching the freak show unfold. I thought it was fucking brilliant.
The changing reaction in the 'polls' wasn't really portrayed as being the findings of weighted sample phone polls carried out by ICM (or even quick response YouGov internet polls). It was more just a kneejerk response to Twitter et al (they dropped in the phrase "hive mind" for emphasis). Throw in a bit of bad PR and media management (desperation of Gov woman using nekkid photos in an attempt to direct media coverage) and that's closer to the mark, I reckon.
And then went for a follow-up in the loo.
she worked at the UKN and used her baps to get info out of the jobsworth at the government
That'll be my http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prosopagnosia kicking in again (and why i find 99% of TV drama a total chore).
If she wasn't from the gov, trying to influence the media, why was she papping her baps?
She worked for the news channel. She was sending the images to a civil servant very close to the Government to make him give up important secrets.
so went him a pic of her baps for a snipped of news then sent one of her clunge to say thanks and keep it coming.
...I'm getting the feeling that she was on the news side and wanted to extract info from the Gov. ;-) Good one, Wza. Pay more attention next time, eh, you plot-idiot?
but if you’re going to start with the supposition that the video had spread before the PM and his staff were aware of it (as would happen in real life), then I do think that it’s odd that TV was shown as being the main news-spreading source and that a TV news network was ahead of the curve when, even today, that’s not the case.
The point was everyone had already heard about it/seen the video and didn't understand why mainstream UK news weren't covering it
the internet might as well have stopped existing.
I assumed that from what Brooker himself said:
"The media has already started using Twitter as a kind of unofficial focus group; entertainment producers can monitor the reaction to their shows and tweak them accordingly. News organisations use it to publicise stories and gauge public interest. It’s only a matter of time before politicians start pandering to the online hive- mind too – and failing. This is what the first episode of my new series, Black Mirror, is about. Sort of. Although it’s better than I’ve made it sound. No, really."
I guess you could read it a few ways but to me it implied he wanted to examine Twitter's effect and the internet in general in a stronger way than the show seemed to.
...was one of the few redeeming features for me as it was actually satire. The whole thing felt nowhere near as satisfying as Dead Set. I'll keep faith with it for the remaining episodes though.
Satisfying. Good word. More appropriate than 'enjoyable' in this context.
sounds like I made the right decision.
i wanna join in.
(not really i thought it was quite good, and made me realise how much i hate cameron as I would love to see him crying in the bogs after shagging a pig)
you wanna see a post pig porking cameron, but i'm the joyless one?
As if you wouldn't fake it after 10 minutes of bashing away at a pig though.
But then we didn't see what all the rules were regarding camera angles and stuff :( Two words... Cream pie.
so shirley this would be VOID
But he'd been going for an hour, I'm sure other camera angles were involved. If the instruction was to just show his face for an hour then he could have easily faked penetration.
was that it had to be a handheld camera, constantly moving. I think we can assume that more than his face was shown.
2. (In real life) Because Channel 4 would get in a lot of trouble for showing graphic, albeit simulated, footage of a man inserting his penis into the backside of a pig.
I WAS JOKING!
Can we all lighten up now?
Viagra or no viagra.
would be like he loved fucking a pig so she told him to last longer which is why he took viagra I assume. Was the supposed to be the queen? I doubt the queen would say such things or use a mobile phone.
She was meant to be one of his spin doctors, I presume.
so he could get a stiffie in the first place
Just made it feel incredibly self-important and oddly humourless to me, like Brooker was saying 'this could happen EXACTLY LIKE THIS because WEB 2.0 HAS CHANGED EVERYTHING' when it should have come across a bit more like a grotesque satirical parable.
So I'm not sure how he's at fault for that
seems pretty inconceivable that he just turned the script over to Otto Bathurst and said 'do what you want with it, mate'.
I dont think the internets role being less important later on mattered, seems like thats the way things go things do the rounds on the internet twitter starts trending then the real news picks up on it and it becomes a real story, I reckon without actual news sources picking up on these things theyd fizzle out
because it seemed to exist as only satire. As in, The Twilight Zone was good because it was a cool mystery story, but with an allegory underneath it, and you could still enjoy the story in its own right. But this was just SATIRE where you were going 'oh, that's supposed to be Kate Middleton, that's supposed to be Sam Cameron' and I couldn't care about any of the characters. It was a bit shallow I thought, especially as the day before I'd seen Take Shelter, which is a commentary on the financial difficulties of the American working class, but you wouldn't need to have realised that and it's a great story anyway.
The main question it raised was 'would I watch Cameron fuck a pig on tv?' and the answer is 'yes, probably'. It didn't make me think anything new apart from that though, so I wish it had been funny as well.
QUESTION: shouldn't the PM have then been arrested for bestiality?
I assumed that the same would apply to the PM.
I found the THE ECONOMY stuff in Take Shelter really ostentascious and almost tacked on as if it was an old script someone had been asked to make feel more modern
I hadn't really thought of the storm being symbolic of anything more than his inner turmoil. Interesting.
I didn't think it a commentary, it just seemed to be more place setting
before I saw it, so I guess that skewed my interpretation. Apparently the director intended to make a film about the knife edge of job security/health insurance/home repossession/anxiety/depression that American blue collar workers are living on. Not sure if I would have necessarily got that if I hadn't been told beforehand though!
I'm going to show my extreme close-mindedness by saying that I've always had the impression blue-collar America was like this. I mean, everything I've seen/read would imply America has never been a place that's kind to the working classes in terms of health benefits and the like.
I read the Nickel and Dimed book brokenchairs recommended last year and it was horribly bleak and written at a time where the economy was booming. :-/
So I suppose I just accepted that entirely as unsurprising and 'normal'.
If you mean the PM then this is probably torture rather than rape.
Personally I think I wouldn't believe it could happen so I'd be watching until the point it did, where I'd turn off/turn away.
is given under duress, like if someone pointed a gun to my head and made me have sex with them, that's non consensual = rape.
and the pig is unable to give consent so is also being raped.
While it's a bit odd to be rating these things I'd claim there's more than just rape going on here and the rape is part of a larger torture on many levels.
...the pig is already there, the PM may as well just relax into the situation and enjoy himself a little. A notch is a notch after all.
...mine, anyone in my family, any of my friends, people I've met, anyone who likes The Cure, any Crystal Palace fan, people that give to charity, Dutch people, nurses, bus drivers, you...
...meh, i've done worse.
Which he didn't do if the trailer for next week is anything to go by. Would have really emphasised the uncanny aspect of it.
Overall I thought it was pretty decent, though not as funny as it should have been. The personal aspect between the PM and his wife was pretty confused at times, and as such the final scene during the credits didn't work as well as it should have, though it was still pretty powerful. The wife was pretty 2D. Not much to talk about on the satire front. I mean yeah, twitter, yeah, facebook, yeah yeah yeah, get it.
As long as we're keeping the twilight zone thread running, the twilight zone had the same actors playing different roles all the time. It destroys and enforces suspension of disbelief at the same time, which is useful when you're trying to do something 'symbolic'.
We haven't even seen the next two yet ffs.
brooker mentions its a different cast
by the Mark Zuckerberg/Facebook programme that was on BBC 2 at the same time (once I get round to watching it).
sounds good. might watch that soon.
...just require the usual level of suspension of your disbelief. But I agree it was strictly average because:
a) it was blatantly obvious who the culprit was from the minute they showed that little snippet of news that "blah, blah... controversial artist removed his exhibit from the Tate Modern..." or whatever it was; pretty sure this happened really early and so there was no intrigue left
b) it didn't really hit any of the targets or explore the issues it aimed for in any depth or effectiveness at all - my mate summed it by saying sarcastically "Doesn't the modern world raise issues? Bollocks"
c) it was impossible to care in any way about any of the characters - didn't sympathise or hate or feel anything about any of them (tough task to generate this in one hour)
It was ok but didn't really succeed - 5/10. Next week's looks shite. Talent shows? An easy target that is beyond parody, surely?
I'll ask him but can't promise owt. Don't worry you'll find someone eventually.
I don't think it raised any thought-provoking and the themes have been covered before by both Christpher Brookmyre and, to an extent, Kick-Ass...
Given it was Charlie Brooker, and given he was citing things like the Year of the Sex Olympics as influences, I'd hoped for something a bit more ground-breaking. But I thought it was decent television nonetheless.
I suspect the next two instalments will be his 'hell in a handbasket' scenarios that have more in common with Clarkson and Littlejohn than the demographic who decide to watch them.
I suppose it could be considered fairly entertaining.
"Two personal bodyguards stuck with anaesthetic... no signs of a struggle..." sounded like an attack of Stockholm Syndrome in the back of the roller to me.
I could see the Year of the Sex Olympics references: manipulative execs, the family man cracking, exploitation of tragedy. All it needed was Reggy Perrin sucking on a cocaine lolly and the allusions would've been complete.
People should write more Nigel Kneale allusions. Mark Gattis' Crooked House was meh.