Quote: ajp29 @ July 7, 2007, 10:19 PMWriters are bound to view comedy differently because they have a vested interest in it above that of a viewer. This doesn't make their view more valid but may make their view more abrasive.
Spot on.
Fonejacker Page 3
Quote: Walker @ July 7, 2007, 10:44 PMHowever, if it just isn't your cup of tea, and you didn't even watch it, or you watched it with prejudices already in mind, are you really qualified to say if it was good or bad?
The idea that people are bringing (percieved) prejudices to a debate so therefore it discounts their view is another retelling of the "This show is scientifically proven to be [good / bad], therefore opponents must have prejudice or agenda if they can't see its [greatness / weakness]." Clearly not true.
As to not watching it: I didn't watch it because I saw the trailers and didn't get inspired but my comments weren't about the show at all. They were deliberately neutral in that I argued that BOTH sides 
of a subjective debate (for and against)can't claim the objective middle ground and say "This show is (good / bad) therefore all opponents have an agenda."
As to prejuduice: Show me a human without prejudice in his / her life. We're all prejudiced to some degree on some subject. Some are socially acceptable prejudices, "I hate soaps / Jude Law" Some are not: "I hate (insert race, creed here)" Prejudice occupies our politics, our sexual partners, our buying choices. So why is there a distinction trying to be made on these forums? You can't disallow or discount contradictory voices on the basis of (percieved)prejudice because then the human race will become mute.
The whole point about subjective is that some people will never like it and some people will. It's a fact of life. Debate why you like it or don't like it but making out that all contradiction has a deeper undercurrent is claiming something for the show that is impossible.
Quote: SlagA @ July 8, 2007, 10:19 AMAs to prejuduice: Show me a human without prejudice in his / her life. We're all prejudiced to some degree on some subject. Some are socially acceptable prejudices, "I hate soaps / Jude Law" Some are not: "I hate (insert race, creed here)" Prejudice occupies our politics, our sexual partners, our buying choices. So why is there a distinction trying to be made on these forums? You can't disallow or discount contradictory voices on the basis of (percieved)prejudice because then the human race will become mute.
But comedy isn't as serious as politics. By prejudice i mean "I don't like this type of show so i am going to give it a bad review regardless of what the content is". I don't like a lot of things, but if i ever get around to watching/doing that i will at least try to see it impartially. Skins for example. I really didn't want to like it because of what it was about, but in watching it i picked up on it's excellent writing and cinematography. While some people will just discount everything in order to "justify" it being bad. Which is what i am getting at.
Agree with you. But people do make decisions like that with cars / lovers /politics and comedy - making decisions based on (sometimes illogical) prejudice that they may not even be conciously aware of, even.
But our problem is that only the poster knows the true intent behind their post, we can't decide that for them in their absence, or discount a negative / positive criticism on the basis that the show is somehow proveably good / bad and therefore any opposing criticism must derive from an agenda.
Quote: SlagA @ July 8, 2007, 5:17 PMAgree with you.
But our problem is that only the poster knows the true intent behind their post, we can't decide that for them in their absence, or discount a negative / positive criticism on the basis that the show is somehow proveably good / bad and therefore any opposing criticism must derive from an agenda.
And we have common ground. Excellent
I agree also. How long would it take not to judge every book by its cover? Its a mixture of predjudice, lack of time and experience.
well Im still enjoying it and I ca not believe the mouse got spiked last night 0:
I saw it last night at last. I have to say, it is very funny. I thought it would only have one or two good laughs in there, but as it turns out, i laughed many times. Maybe during every other sketch or similar amount. The character the guy has created are what makes this. If he took some of the sketches and wrote them out in a proper format and sold them as a proper sketch show, we'd all be laughing.
Just caught this for the first time. The sketches are fantastic; the characters/ situations are briliantly constructed/ contrived and the execution is absolutely spot on. All in all the most refreshingly funny show I've seen for a long long time.
Yeah i've seen some repeats and its very funny. The characters are brilliant. I especially like the telephones provindings guy.
Quote: ajp29 @ August 10, 2007, 1:01 AMYeah i've seen some repeats and its very funny. The characters are brilliant. I especially like the telephones provindings guy.
I like the providings guy too, he gave me free ring-ding
I'm loving Fonejacker. The Terry Tibbs character has got to be my fave. "Let me tickle ya." 
Fans of this show might be interested to know there's a new mini website setup here: www.christmasfonejacker.com
The new Christmas special is on E4 on the 20th December and repeated on C4 just after midnight on the 21st.
Look what he looks like.
I was surprised.
That's not a face that needs a balaclava.
I love phonejacker, partly because it's funny and partly because I can do 90% of the voices and my mates at work think it's a laugh when we phone some random phonejacker fan asking for all his monies