Quote: Natalie Of Wicks @ August 24 2013, 10:46 AM BST

Word. You only really use the apostrophe on its own after a plural noun or if it is a personal name ending with an S. Like Wicks' posts.

View original

Yes and Vicious for me is a name. I'm a cheese and biscuits fan as you know, and thankfully I've never seen Jacobs's cream crackers on a tin, or indeed McVities's digestives on a tin. It would look ridiculous if it were. Road names also don't have silly apostrophes on, nor thank God do pub name signs.

I think it was the Victorians wasn't it who started the mad grammar fad and you can still find the odd Victorian road name sign with a full stop at the end, like Wicks's End. Not meaning to be rude.

Quote: Alfred J Kipper @ August 24 2013, 9:33 AM BST

Gordon you're no more Swiss than the Queen of England and I maintain you weren't really wrong. Aaron (ever the editor)'s over precise technical definition is all that is wrong with Grammar - a pompous intrusion on man's time invented by pedants who had no great love or flair for English lit, often failed writers with a grudge. I like the Muirism 'real writers just write' and the more you write the more lovely that notion seems and we should look at getting back to that. imoo. Why haven't I noticed this smiley before, it's me.

View original

The uneducated do get curiously exceedingly angry for no apparent reason, don't they?

This smiley's in lieu of the one not here that withers you to a mere crumb.

Proves my point, grammar is more of an interesting subject to talk about than vicious, Badults and Joblot put together.

Proves the point that this thread is pointless. The real discussions were taking place in the threads to Vicious, Badults etc.

I'm really glad that The Job Lot and Vicious is returning as I really loved both of those but as for Badults - that has got to be one of the worst comedy shows ever made!

Quote: Aaron @ August 23 2013, 9:55 PM BST

Why? Because, thankfully, not everybody shares your sense of humour.

View original

I understand that not everyone shares the same sense of humour but surely you can't say either of these comedies are original, witty, unique or even offer real characters? It's sketchy, very sketchy one liners they don't have clever story lines or even arcs. Unoriginal, they take no risks and spell jokes out, this is the best of British? Jesus help us.

It doesn't have to be complicated or incredibly intelligent to be likeable.

Quote: Gordon Bennett @ August 24 2013, 5:29 PM BST

It doesn't have to be complicated or incredibly intelligent to be likeable.

View original

Agreed but surely it has to have something new about it? Otherwise we might as well watch repeats of other shows that already did it and better for that matter.

Maybe people like different humour but I do find it hard to think anyone would rate any of these shows more than 6/10? So if that is the case why have they got a 2nd series? BBC/ITV must be desperate or they bought it very, very cheap.

It's time for a change, I am sure on paper it's funny as they all have 1 liners but as episodes it doesn't work. Where's OFAH story lines?

Well every generation has its also-rans.

Check out the vast catalogue of info on this site about all the 60s, 70s, 80s etc shows you never heard of.

Not everything's going to be Dad's Army, Steptoe or Peep show. Some shows will just be the entertaining, laugh millions want at the end of the day.

There's a place for Rembrandt and there's a place for sad clowns.

Alfred J Kipper is better than Aaron.

Proof: http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/society/people-who-highlight-minor-grammar-points-are-amazing-2013082378916

That's an awesome article and kinda true.

Quote: james bream @ August 24 2013, 5:22 PM BST

I understand that not everyone shares the same sense of humour but surely you can't say either of these comedies are original, witty, unique or even offer real characters? It's sketchy, very sketchy one liners they don't have clever story lines or even arcs. Unoriginal, they take no risks and spell jokes out, this is the best of British? Jesus help us.

View original

Not sure which two you're referring to. I didn't care much for The Job Lot at all. Badults is very silly and rather fun. Vicious is terribly witty and makes me laugh a lot.

The amount of story and strength of character varies between each show, and some are better and worse than others, but all I ultimately want from comedy is to be amused. And all three programmes, but particularly Badults and Vicious, did that.

Which is cool, but The Royal Bodyguard?

It's a cheap copy of 70s golden age sitcoms.

Quote: sootyj @ August 24 2013, 9:19 PM BST

Well every generation has its also-rans.

Check out the vast catalogue of info on this site about all the 60s, 70s, 80s etc shows you never heard of.

Not everything's going to be Dad's Army, Steptoe or Peep show. Some shows will just be the entertaining, laugh millions want at the end of the day.

There's a place for Rembrandt and there's a place for sad clowns.

View original

Absolutely. By simple statistical law, there need to be many dull and okay-ish programmes produced to come up with a true classic.

Quote: sootyj @ August 24 2013, 10:39 PM BST

Which is cool, but The Royal Bodyguard?

It's a cheap copy of 70s golden age sitcoms.

View original

Good slapstick family-friendly fun, in my book.