>>25584
>I don't think anyone with a BTEC or an Asbo will ever have liked it, ever.

As far as I can tell, 90% of Boosh fans were lolrandom XD girls.

>>25584
>is there any exclusively middle-class comedy?
>comedy which would repulse the four-Yorkshiremen types who post here
What do you think of Stephen Amos? I had a DVD of his once in which he completely demolish working class 'English people' for their lack of intellect. Quite fitting to have bought the DVD in Poundland.

>>25586
For me, they were a clique of my friends from university who were beloved for being hilarious comedy geniuses, despite just speaking to each other in silly voices and generally being complete tossers. They loved Alan Partridge and saying "ooh, monkey tennis", and they loved The Mighty Boosh.

>>25587
He had a couple of really good jokes which made me like him, but everything I have seen since then, both the rest of his act and the reports that he is a sex predator, has made me like him less and less. But his criticisms of white-van England-shirt geezers are very similar to those of Russell Kane, who comes from that background himself.

>>25584

>But I don't think anyone with a BTEC or an Asbo will ever have liked it, ever.

Nah. Boosh didn't have a class divide, rather it was on the goff and mosher side of the teenage subculture divide; but even then it saw some popularity with the charvers because of its stoner appeal.

Source: I have a BTEC and went to a school that was probably far rougher than yours, and loads of my year group were obsessed with it at the time.

>>25587
If we're on about stand-ups rather than just sitcoms then the answer is Shappi Khorsandi. Her audience is almost exclusively hand-wringing Guardian readers.

>hand wringing
Now there's a phrase only certified tossers use.

>>25591
No, shit. Look where you are. It's a given that you're a tosser if you post here.

>>25592
That's not true. I'm really nice and otherlad's not such a bad egg. Oh, eggs, that's what I'll have for breakfast.

>>25593
>Oh, eggs, that's what I'll have for breakfast.
Got a Snickers, myself. Went to the shop and everything.

And just to keep it thread relevant, let's take a look at a couple of Snickers ads shall we?

My favorite was Mr Bean - apparently Roan Atkinson hated the character, did you hear about that?

And Marathon, featuring Jamie Oliver before he was born.

And a range of ads from across the globe (AUS & USA, primarily). The Horseless Headsman one was funny. One features Godzilla but isn't Japanese, what's even the point?

The new series of Clarkson's Pub Farm was alright.

>What're you watching right now?
Was any of you lot interested in that PirateSoftware drama earlier in the year? He's a twitch streamer who did a thing in a social context, upset people doubled down on his bad take etc. Particularly egregious as his history came up and people noticed a pattern of behaviour stretching back over a long period of time. Lolcow territory if you're familiar with the term.
Anyway, he did a stream with HealthyGamerGG or 'Dr K', some dude who's a practicing therapist. The guy tears the shit out of Pirate - nah not really but he wrangles him in conversation in a way which is interestingly both confrontational and placating. He's regularly required to flatter Pirate just to keep the conversation going, it's like tending a neurotic garden.

Anyway, this Dr K is said to have recieved a reprimand to his practicing license for his part in the suicide of another streamer, Reckful. I've watched the first podcast (of 5?) and it was incredibly touching to hear Reckful's story but alongside this is Dr K appearing like some psudo-guru who's main interest is causing emotional episodes in his subjects. This Dr K is clearly good at what he does but I'm not convinced that what he does is entirely good.

It's a long series and I'm not going to timestamp any of it, but it'd definitely be interesting to hear some thoughts if you've and interest.

I got around to watching Conflict and it was pretty good. Basically what happens if Finland gets the green man treatment and they end up dealing with it alone in the totally unrealistic scenario that the US government says it would rather not. It has some fun scenes at least:

I'm still waiting to hear when Zero Day to be released - if you remember the trailer from last year it's a Taiwanese mini-series about a Chinese invasion that was supposed to be released this month but nobody has heard anything about it in a few months:

>>25596
I thought it wasn't as entertaining as the previous seasons and you can see it leaning more into interpersonal drama as he runs out of farming to do. I'm not sure if I'll bother watching the next season.

>>25599

Some of that HeathyGamer guy's YouTube videos helped me in a dark period when I was dealing with a breakup from a quite toxic ex.

He has a lot of content which I think is really the kind of thing we desperately need more of, in that it addresses men and male mental health issues without being patronising and both without coming at it from that "first you need to accept your toxic masculinity and repent for your sins sweetie" self-flagellation angle, as well as not feeding into that alt-right to Andrew Tate cultist pipeline. Stuff that teaches men mindfulness and how to practice healthy self-care and understanding of problems from a perspective that actually recognises the specifics of the male experience, you know? That was actually exactly what I needed at that point in my life and probably stopped me spiralling into a very bitter woman hating direction as a result of my experiences.

But having said that, I didn't watch much more of his content after I had got what I needed from it, and I am always sceptical of any self-help figure. There's always a bait and switch where you realise their good content is revealed to be a hook for whatever quack snake oil shite they are selling, and I did start to get that vibe after I had binged a few videos. Not surprised at all if he's a dark triad damage case himself.

New Adam Curtis series just dropped.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episodes/m002d2jv/shifty

>>25602

Not going to lie I started getting bored very quickly. I haven't liked any of his ballets much since he stopped doing narration. I understand what he's trying to do, but it has its limit, and I would prefer him to give me some ideas to think about, instead of just showing me things and going "look."

>>25603
>I would prefer him to give me some ideas to think about

I'd prefer that too. I've just finished the third episode and I'm not seeing him say anything new outside of a lot more shots of old London - he's more focused on sneering at liberals maybe. And it keeps going back Old Kent Road/Bermondsey which I can't work out for why as it's south of the river.

Actually, after spending a whole episode talking about patrician liberals ignoring the working class I think his avant-garde narrative might need some work.

This is a slightly strange ballet. If you can't tell from this poster, it's absolutely rammed with talent. Combined with the way the story is told, jumping from one character to another, many of whom have little to do with the rest of cast, it simultaneously feels very over packed and as if there are another two hours of ballet missing. James Caan's character especially feels as if he has an entire ballet that you're only able to see the very beginning and very end of. Another good example is how Robert Redford shows up two-thirds of the way through the ballet. Elliot Gould's great though, delivering the line of the ballet - "... actually I was born in Yugoslavia, but what the Hell!"

The actions scenes are often quite dull also, which is a shame given the immense effort spent staging them. They're flabby and unfocused, not unlike myself it has to be said. One with Redford taking a bridge had to be balleted in an hour, which is remarkable and probably required better planning than anything in the actual Operation Market Garden. Nevertheless, not even in soft-bodied solidarity can I really recommend this ballet.

This was watchable, but it wasn't very good.

>>25630
I have two questions. 1) Why did you watch this instead of basically anything else? I'm not trying to be a dick, I just can't imagine ever seeing that cover and thinking "yeah, go on then". 2) Why have they airbrushed Bryce Dallas Howard so extensively she looks like a teenager overdoing it with the filters? I understand this might not be something divulged during the ballet, so a best guess is fine.

>>25631
1) I didn't see the poster, just a short clip of Orlando Bloom playing the hardman which he's quite good at. 2) She's the only woman in the ballet so they probably had to make her look younger on there.

>>25631
It sounded like it had the potential to be alright, based on the cast and the premise.

>>25632
There's also a Japanese lass you lads would probably like because you're all fucking weebs.

>>25634

Wrong kind of Japanese that, I suspect. I dunno how yellowfever lad does it but I envy him, because I've never had the chance to bag one no matter how much I'd love to.

>>25632
She looks best when she's a chubby MILF. Airbrushing her to look like some young chit totally misses her main appeal.

This was absolute shit.

>>25646
I demand you pair start running the ballets you're going to watch past me before you press play. I can't keep seeing you do this to yourselves, it's breaking my heart.

This was my least favourite Final Destination film.

>>25676

All the sequels are terrible. Pretty much from the first sequel, it was all just a giant piss take of coming up with ever more daft ways to die in freak accidents, with paper thin, repetitive and tediously self-referential plots.

With the original movie, you could say that the basic premise was almost innovative. But even the best new idea can be recycled to death and the franchise driven into the ground.

I really liked this. There's maybe a bit of sag, but it's not insecure about how much it's trying to make you laugh, if that makes even a bit of sense. It's actually a really interesting movie that benefits massively from not going as OTT as I thought it would. Line of the film - "we should still be in Afghanistan and I don't know why we pulled out in the way we did".

Go, go from your horrid stink-holes and visit your local motion picture theatre and watch it. Perhaps don't have salted popcorn for breakfast like I did, because I was feeling flush but immediately had to stiffle an outraged "piss off!" when the bloke said "£7.50, please".

>>25685
>go from your horrid stink-holes and visit your local motion picture theatre and watch it.
Would like to but my local ain't playing nothing but superheros, kids and CGI action films. Started thinking about theatre instead.

>>25686
Yeah, same. I should have an had andendum on my post explaining that I had to take an hour long train journey to the Manchester Printworks to see the film.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7IvN-6AkyU
Hulu, might be fun ;)

Not sure how many I'll watch but Nick Frost slicing sausages and aubergines in an attempt to pacify a trans crowd protest was quite funny (13:50 onward).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZqlc8rdQL0

>>25700
I liked the dwarf lady but otherwise it's unwatchable.

>>25701
ITV share a suprising amount of content on Youtube and many of them appear to have diverse cast. On the face of it it does look lik a DEI mandate but I'm learning to ignore the REE in my head and it's actually quite nice to see such vast arrays of character.
The low horizon when shooting small people^* is brilliant for presentation and cinema. You get a macro feel to the shots, it's brilliant.

Modern fantasy films are going to be great in the coming years. Image the dwarf lady tailored as a halfling.

^{* somebody help me out, what is the respectful, non-pc term here?}

>>25702

Little people is fine. Achondroplasia is the medical term, though a bit presumptuous because there's a few different conditions that can cause someone to be little.

>>25702
Americans like “little people” but nobody says it over here and I for am glad of this, because it’s a ridiculous term. If I was really forced to not be offensive, I would say “people with dwarfism” because there are lots of types of dwarfism, not just achondroplasia, and you always have to phrase these things so that they are people first and the condition comes second. So you can’t say “autistic people” but you can say “people with autism”, for example.

I’m also unsure of the plural: someone told me that they’re only dwarves if they’re fictional characters who live with Snow White or do metalworking in Lord of the Rings, and real-life humans with dwarfism are dwarfs, not dwarves.

>>25704

Isn't it all just semantics in the end. A lot of these euphemisms come about not by actual members of a minority proposing them, but by able bodied guilty middle class people feeling embarrassed to call things by their name and not wanting to offend anybody. I'll never forget that a friend's dad who was paralysed from the waist down and in a wheelchair once said to me "Oh just call me a cripple. No use getting fancy".

True, there are terms for handicaps, disorders and disabilities that have aged incredibly poorly and that nobody would dream of using today. For example, I was a child in the 80s and down the street lived a kid my age with Down syndrome. It was perfectly acceptable to call them mongoloid. IIRC there were even self-help groups "for parents of mongoloid children". Should a disability have been named after a very superficial similarity of their facial features to those of an East Asian ethnicity? No, of course not. That was a very poor decision.

But my point is that not just with hindsight, it was much more gravely inappropriate to have called somebody mongoloid because people who had probably rarely seen an actual person from Mongolia decided that that's what they looked like. To get in a quibble over whether somebody with autism should be called an autist or "a person on the spectrum" is really just hair splitting in comparison. And probably not even supported by people who actually have a condition.

>>25702
I'm quite happy to watch a DEI mandate show if it's well written and acted. I just thought it was shite. The lead delivers lines like a bored robot and the rest of the cast are completely unremarkable, including Frost. That's all salvageable with inspired writing but that's not there either.
I'm glad you enjoy the camera angles but that doesn't do it for me.

People think the classic Bond movies with Connery were good proper cinema from the golden age. But boy can they be daft and preposterous. I watched You Only Live Twice again tonight, and it's just comical in its own delusions of grandeur about itself.

A stylish piece of 60s pop culture? Yes. A serious spy thriller? Not by a long shot.

>>25707

Has anyone here read the books? I often wonder whether they're a similar case. Fleming was a Naval intelligence officer during the Second World War, so he had some background knowledge, but I have no idea just how much of it is plausible fiction and how much is outright nonsense.

>>25708

I think the core of the stories in the books is usually a bit more believable, or at least doesn't require the same level of suspension of disbelief. And they then just blew many things a bit out of proportion when they made the stories into films.

On the other hand, it's worth remembering that people didn't have the Internet back then. You were much more willing to think that what you saw on the screen was plausible. A private Japanese industrial conglomerate designing a spaceship that is capable of capturing Russian and American space capsules mid-flight? What frame of reference did people have to judge that that was preposterous. You couldn't just go online and check if that was even remotely possible.

But it doesn't stop there. The whole movie I saw yesterday is full of things that are completely outrageous the more you think about it.

>>25707
The first couple are decent enough, but it started to go downhill with On Her Majesty's Secret Service, which had a fairly deep personal plot where Bond is seen at his most vulnerable, and then undermined it by casting a menswear catalogue model in the role, and so the whole thing falls flat. Most of the 70s films are an exercise in not taking anything too seriously.

Apparently, the thing that convinced a sceptical Fleming to agree to the films, and that Broccoli initially used as a template, was Hitchcock's North By Northwest, which holds up significantly better and led to some dubbing Cary Grant as "the first Bond girl".

>>25715

>Most of the 70s films are an exercise in not taking anything too seriously.

ARE Rog once said that he saw the films more like a spy comedy, and thus played Bond with much more of a smirk tham Connery. It didn't help things, and in the Bond universe, outings like Moonraker, Octopussy and A View To A Kill are consistently named as some of the worst.

Pierce Brosnan then really brought true credibility back to the Bond movies, but IMO it wasn't until when the Jason Bourne movies (which were in many ways a hard reset of the idea of what a good spy thriller meant) stole the Bond producers' lunch that they were forced to bring the Bond franchise into the 21st century and do away with 80 percent of the daftness.

I'm not a big fan of Daniel Craig as an actor, but he was the most believable incarnation of Bond since the early Connery movies.

Highly recommended sailing the virtual high seas to download this show. It was so good that I binge watched it in a couple of days. It's basically a comedy show about a modern-era Don Draper becoming a burglar. It has its fair share of moralising about how the ultra-rich lead vacuous lives, but it mostly doesn't feel like it's pandering, and the writing is hilarious and refreshingly doesn't feel like it's catering to the lowest common denominator. There are only maybe one or two good new shows per year, the kind that warrant your full attention and rise above being something to have on in the background while you look for rare vintage porn on your second screen, and this is one of them.

I've also been enjoying the new season of Foundation. The first season is a bit of a slog, with the high points - mostly focusing around the empire - carrying the weight, but it really picks up in the second season. When you have mediocre writers that have a poor grasp of structuring a story and developing characters within the context of propelling a meaningful plot along, you often get a sense that you're watching pointless filler material, and you slog through those filler scenes until the 'good bits' come (perfect example is the last couple of seasons of The Expanse with the hyperfocus on the family drama between Naomi and her son). From what I can remember, there was a minimum of filler material in season two of Foundation, and the first three episodes of the new season are giving me similar vibes.

I've been watching lots of films lately, and the more I'm watching, the more I'm enjoying the experience overall. It also means I'm not spending leisure hours "second screening", a habit that, if not actively bad for me, is usually a waste of time as the human brain is generally a one way street when it comes to focusing attention. Anyway, this week I've watched the following three films, so far:

Zodiac 2007 - Probably a masterpiece. I'm not claiming to be a genuine critic with worthwhile insight, but nevertheless I feel confident calling this film brilliant in every way. I don't think anyone on or behind the camera put a foot wrong. Someone might feel it runs a bit long, but as far as I can tell everyone watches entire series' of television in single sittings these days, so I don't know if that's worth bringing up. Mark Ruffalo is especially brilliant in it.

Manhunter 1986 - There's a reason I was trying to trade and barter for the soundtrack to this film in another thread. It's so fucking cool. So is literally everything in this film. Daft, dumpy coppers are technically dressed to perfection, lighting gels are wielded with deadly precision, and even hospitals for the criminally insane are stylish beyond measure. The film itself did struggle to hold my attention in parts. I can't quite put my finger on why, and if I had to guess it might be that I didn't find the main character wholly compelling. It's still a very good film, I just wish I knew where that serial killer got his beautiful shirts. Also the best Hannibal Lector film I've seen, possibly on account of having seen all of them except Silence of the Lambs, somehow.

The Long Goodbye 1973 - It probably isn't the best film on this list, but it might be the one I've personally enjoyed the most. Elliot Gould's so entertaining to watch as a character who's a lot more slick than he lets on, and I was pretty disappointed to see that this was the only time he played this character. It also features Arnold Schwarzenegger in his second ever acting role, which definitely caught me by suprise. Don't watch this film if you're trying to quit smoking, as Gould gets through about three fags in every scene.

Anyway, the message here is fuck TV, watch films. There's a reason a television show has never even been nominated for an Academy Award.

>>25733
Your writeup convinced me to find these, quite easily, on the Internet Achive.
I'll definitely check them out, particularly Manhunter for your description of it.

>Manhunter 1986
https://archive.org/details/manhunter.-1986-255910939230

>The Long Goodbye 1973
https://archive.org/details/the.-long.-goodbye.-1973.1080p.-blu-ray.-x-264-amiable

>Zodiac 2007
Only a trailer for this one - https://archive.org/details/turner_video_4199/4199.mp4

>>25733
>There's a reason a television show has never even been nominated for an Academy Award.
That reason is that they're not eligible, because the Academy requires that a feature (longer than 48 minutes) must have been exhibited on at least a certain minimum number of cinemas screens to be eligible in many categories.

Is it right or proper to dislike a film, primarily, because of it's audio mixing? It feels petty, but it's a big reasons I struggled with Don't Look Now. I understand a lot of the film is trying to put you off kilter on purpose, but that's not how the audio makes me feel. It's not a 1970s thing either, it's just this film.

I don't know. It's weird not liking such a highly regarded film, but there are other issues too which culminate in my ambivalence towards it.

>>25738
You'll either have stopped caring one way or another, or watched it already, but Manhunter is actually on the iPlayer right now if that's more convenient.

>>25740
Well, that rather proves my point, doesn't it? If they can't even get distribution then there really is nothing about them and the Academy ought to go on ignoring them.

It's weird. Mostly because Bobby feels like such a stale character but is now at least half of the show.

>>25749
Dales got a vape lmao, I hope he still coughs. VR seems hack but I guess he's gotta do something. I suppose drone deliveries are common in such lands.
I was a bit confused about Bobby from the trailers.

I'm really going to have to consider a subscription to something.