Charlie Brooker's Screenwipe - Series 5 Page 14

Usually there's a few moments where Charlie mentions some shows that actually were really good, but I suspect those bits were lost in the edit this year. (According to previews, for example, he was set to praise Red Riding.)

Of course, Charlie slating stuff is much funnier than Charlie praising stuff, but I do miss it when he's "allowed" to because a) I tend to agree with his choices, b) he is often insightful in his comments, contrasting the failings of bad TV with the virtues of good TV, and c) it doesn't give his detractors an excuse to label him as a TV grinch, as opposed to the genuine lover of TV that he truly is.

Bit of a nothing epsidoe I thought. And what exactly does Barry Shitpeas bring to the party? I would have preferred to have Charlie's own thoughts on the programmes.

Well I'm sure Charlie wrote Barry's words.

Quote: zooo @ December 23 2009, 10:45 AM GMT

Well I'm sure Charlie wrote Barry's words.

View original

Really? Then in that case I would have preferred to have had Charlie's thoughts as Charlie, rather than having them channelled through a crap comic character.

Quote: Timbo @ December 23 2009, 10:43 AM GMT

Bit of a nothing epsidoe I thought. And what exactly does Barry Shitpeas bring to the party? I would have preferred to have Charlie's own thoughts on the programmes.

View original

I think technically one of things Barry brings to the programme is a more liberal use of un-bleeped swear words. I suspect that there's some stupid rule that means the "presenter" (i.e. Charlie) is under more stringent conditions as regards swearing than an (albeit scripted) "guest". You'll notice that all Charlie's f-words were bleeped, but none of Barry's. Perhaps this is some sort of loophole in the Beeb's new Byzantine offensiveness rules?

Quote: Tim Walker @ December 23 2009, 10:57 AM GMT

You'll notice that all Charlie's f-words were bleeped, but none of Barry's. Perhaps this is some sort of loophole in the Beeb's new Byzantine offensiveness rules?

View original

Charlie got one or two through the bleeper, I seem to recall. Isn't it the case that each swear has to be approved amd justified individually by the producer on their compliance form?

Quote: Kevin Murphy @ December 23 2009, 11:04 AM GMT

Charlie got one or two through the bleeper, I seem to recall. Isn't it the case that each swear has to be approved amd justified individually by the producer on their compliance form?

View original

Probably. I just wondered if there is some semantic difference between Charlie saying it and a "comedy character" when it comes to the content they are able to justify. Technically it counts as another person saying the words etc.

An enjoyable episode, but didn't sing for me the way the show normally sings. That said, the bit where he said Todd Carty's crazy antics on Dancing On Ice made him laugh so much that he forgot about death, made me LOL. And I liked the stuff on Noel's HQ. Although Noel is comedy gold whatever he's up to.

A poor episode IMHO. Usually Brooker can mingle his misanthropy with wit but now the wit seems to have disappeared leaving only an unpleasant smell. Too many easy targets ie "Rightwingers" who are merely abused as c**ts by Brooker (and his 'unenlightened' shill Barry Shitpeas) rather than intelligently deconstructed. Brooker's actually being to sound more like Alf Garnet than those he attacks.
He missed the most hilarious story of the year: the media's increasingly desperate hysteria over climate change, but then being a fully signed up Guardianista, he could not possibly comment on that. He mentioned the dodgy output of ITV2 but completely ignored the far worse offerings of BBC Three which is the biggest embarrassment to public service broadcasting ever. Conflict of interest?
His hypocrisy is staggering. He feigns outrage at the treatment of Susan Boyle by Simon Cowell over her appearance then spends the rest of the programme mocking people based solely on their physical appearance (ie Joe Bugner: cross between a lion and a scrotum).

Quote: Cheesehoven @ December 23 2009, 1:41 PM GMT

His hypocrisy is staggering. He feigns outrage at the treatment of Susan Boyle by Simon Cowell over her appearance then spends the rest of the programme mocking people based solely on their physical appearance (ie Joe Bugner: cross between a lion and a scrotum).

View original

Not really. He once described Boyle as looking like a haunted tree. He was annoyed at how the media acted as though it was an amazing thing that an ordinary looking middle aged woman could actually sing.

I haven't checked it myself, but apparently, this was Fearne Cotton's response on Twitter to the (deserved) slagging she received on Screenwipe...

"The reason grown men feel the need to slag me off is beyond me. The demergraphic of my shows is usually half their age for a start."

(Her spelling)

Jesus!

And, hold on, what's with all this griping about "grown men"? Like she's a seven year old? Yeah adults, don't have a go at the kids!

That's Fearne!

Quote: Tim Walker @ December 23 2009, 10:57 AM GMT

I think technically one of things Barry brings to the programme is a more liberal use of un-bleeped swear words. I suspect that there's some stupid rule that means the "presenter" (i.e. Charlie) is under more stringent conditions as regards swearing than an (albeit scripted) "guest". You'll notice that all Charlie's f-words were bleeped, but none of Barry's. Perhaps this is some sort of loophole in the Beeb's new Byzantine offensiveness rules?

View original

I'm pretty sure the bleeper is intentional. The swearing isn't against compliance rules at that time of night, there wouldn't be a problem with it. I always presumed it was just because swearing is funnier bleeped.