I read the Guardian.
Extras Christmas Special Page 16
charisma speaks the truth.
Let's all have a cuddle and a calm down. I'm all for passionate discussion and friendly disagreements, but let's not get personal.
Quote: James Williams @ December 31, 2007, 6:47 PMAnd a friend of mine did his English thesis on Blackadder, so even in this context it's acceptable.
I seriously don't want to argue James so this is genuinely meant to be constructive. Surely you must know that people use different language in different situations. When you are writing something for university then of course the word thesis is correct. When you are writing a comment on a webboard then it is inappropriate. I know it sounds like I'm stating the obvious because I am but hopefully that got the point across.
Why can't I use the word on a web-board? Does it cease to have the same meaning? Even if it's not generally used, surely its meaning is so specific (as referenced) and relevant that its use can be forgiven?
My 'thesis' was quite specific - The special wasn't as good as it could've been due to its being overly long and not as fizzing with originality as it should've been - should I have said 'theory' instead? Or some other word? Who f**king cares?!
Quote: Godot Taxis @ December 31, 2007, 6:52 PMI read the Guardian.
I used to read it but now I generally read a Times/Indie combo, though of course it's my job to read all the papers wherever possible.
It's ironic (in the context of the thread) that Nick wants James to dumb-down his language. Should he also wear a wig and comedy glasses?
Quote: JohnnyD @ December 31, 2007, 7:01 PMIt's ironic (in the context of the thread) that Nick wants James to dumb-down his language. Should he also wear a wig and comedy glasses?
Haven't you seen his profile photograph? 
Quote: JohnnyD @ December 31, 2007, 7:01 PMIt's ironic (in the context of the thread) that Nick wants James to dumb-down his language. Should he also wear a wig and comedy glasses?
I already do!!!
Quote: Nick @ December 31, 2007, 7:01 PMHaven't you seen his profile photograph?
OK, I'm allowed to say it, you're not, even with a 'comedy wink'.
Quote: James Williams @ December 31, 2007, 7:03 PMOK, I'm allowed to say it, you're not, even with a 'comedy wink'.
He was only joking, mate, that's all. Fortunately this turned into some friendly banter cus I though it was gonna get nasty at one point, so let's take this as a joke 
Quote: James Williams @ December 31, 2007, 6:58 PMWhy can't I use the word on a web-board? Does it cease to have the same meaning? Even if it's not generally used, surely its meaning is so specific (as referenced) and relevant that its use can be forgiven?
My 'thesis' was quite specific - The special wasn't as good as it could've been due to its being overly long and not as fizzing with originality as it should've been - should I have said 'theory' instead? Or some other word? Who f**king cares?!
Most people on this board don't really analyse what they watch. They just respond in an atavistic way. It's not the language you used, it's that you looked into what you watched and found it wanting. Most people can't do that. The first series of Extras was excellently written and made, the second series was hilarious but full of bad characterisation and introduced this sour note of Gervais', where he attacks the TV and comedy establishment through his alter ego, even though he has had the best imaginable treatment from these people and the Xmas special represents an attempt to put to bed something that has become entirely confused and unsatisfying. Skib said it was shite, and he wasn't far wrong.
Whether people like it or not, Gervais has made Extras into a mirror that reflects his sour and obsequious personality. It has become as ambivalent as him, alternating between high self love and self hatred.
Quote: Godot Taxis @ December 31, 2007, 6:43 PMHow true. A forum about Gervais certainly doesn't need them. Shorter words like 'c**t' and sour' usually cover it.
Quote: James Williams @ December 31, 2007, 7:03 PMOK, I'm allowed to say it, you're not, even with a 'comedy wink'.
It was a small and very obvious joke. Sorry if you were offended because it wasn't intended that way.
I don't think Gervais has a sour personality?!
He's one of the few happy people in comedy, without the tiresome depressed comedian bollocks they all like to project.
Quote: Nick @ December 31, 2007, 7:33 PMIt was a small and very obvious joke. Sorry if you were offended because it wasn't intended that way.
Fine. You can't see the clown shoes in the photo, which is a plus I suppose.
It's so difficult to comment on a creator's personality. There are so many filters in the media that by the time any info reaches us you have to take personalities with a pinch of salt. Better to just look at the work itself, but I suppose speculation is OK... as long as it's not libellous!
Quote: Godot Taxis @ December 31, 2007, 7:16 PMMost people on this board don't really analyse what they watch. They just respond in an atavistic way. It's not the language you used, it's that you looked into what you watched and found it wanting. Most people can't do that.
Is that really a fair description of most of the people on this board? Most people on this board can't look into shows and find them wanting? I don't think people rating or not rating TV shows has anything to do with intellect or education but more to do with personal preference. Now some people on the board choose not to make detailed assessments of shows but that doesn't mean that they can't.
Quote: James Williams @ December 31, 2007, 6:52 PMI can understand people arguing vigorously over opinions on a show, but to pull up my profile and be quite specifically nasty - because of a discussion about a sitcom - is pretty cheap. Forgive me if I've lost all respect for Chapman!
Did you really ever have any?