pap

I never said that Stewart Lee was going to be an enduring comic icon. He's just the source of the quotes. You and I both know who Morecambe and Wise (and the Two Ronnies) are because of our age. My eighteen year old daughter has no idea who they are, and while that proves nowt in itself, why would she? Porridge has endured far better than the Two Ronnies, and the only time you really see Morecambe and Wise on TV is on clip shows. The alternative comedy of the 1980s dragged us out of the racist and sexist age of the seventies. The media-savvy comedy of the '90s grew into the likes of Alan Partridge, Brass Eye and Veep, which is doing it over in the US right now. I ask, not because I think I've got you in a corner, but because I'm genuinely interested. What do you think that Morecambe and Wise and the Two Ronnies added to comedy? What will they be remembered for?

This is a joke post, yes? Good Christmas humour, I trust? Yes. Let's not compare games that run on both systems. Let us only consider games that are exclusive to XBox One. Forza's graphics are much better on the XBox One than they are on the non-existent Playstation 4 version, right? You can't even launch Ryse on a Playstation 4! The disc doesn't work! How sh!t is that? The idea of a benchmark, dear sir, is to run the same kind of test in multiple test environments. Thus, one can determine which kind of environment is best for running the test. It turns out, in nearly all comparable tests, that the PS4 is giving the XBone a leathering. 700Mb is chicken-feed for most connections. No disagreement here. Last-gen, Microsoft offered a 360 SKU that didn't have a hard drive, meaning that nearly every 360 game had to be bootable without a hard drive, even those that also were on Blu Ray media on PS3. It's just slower, and certainly for my tastes, unacceptably slow - but it's not accurate to say that you couldn't run most of game from a BR disc. It really depends on the game. It's not impossible. It's just unacceptable, and given the proliferation of hard drives at relatively cheap prices, just a crapload easier to set a hard drive as standard, rather than have your developers waste valuable man-hours trying to solve problems for cheapskates.

The PS4 does this as well. This must be jarring from a former 360 owner's point of view, which could never entirely rely on having a hard drive available, but the PS3, which did, often had first-time installation routines which you just had to wait for. From my experiences on PS4, seems to be a step up - a small portion of the game is made available while the game is installing. That's actually an improvement on early PS1 Namco games, which let you play one of their arcade classics while Ridge Racer was loading or whatever. That said, the age of the Internet+Hard Drive has allowed a culture of games to be released in an incomplete state, something that would have been nigh on unthinkable in the solid-state cartridge days of the SNES and the Megadrive. I'd hate to have to play games without an internet connection these days.

Ah, Sinatra and Presley - two templates of manufactured music that others have been so very keen to follow. The thing is, both are now seen in their proper contexts; superb performers able to evoke a fixed point in time. They didn't advance music like the Beatles (Helter Skelter must surely be credited as a birth cry of actual rock music). Can Elvis personally be credited for what his music did? Fuse the blues of black influences into something palatable to white tastes? I may have been hasty in my previous assertion that there is no difference between comic and musical performers. What if you can write great pop tunes but cannot sing yourself? That doesn't really apply in comedy. Most people can do stand-up, and if you can't do that, you can write your own show. Some do both. My fundamental objection is the chasm between expectation and reality. We've been spoiled with some great comics on both sides of the pond in the last thirty years and we've been used to them doing their own stuff. When someone is playing to that expectation and yet not playing by the rules, I think its fair to ask why, especially if the limelight they get from their borrowed glory is keeping other comics in the shade. Stand-up is very much in its infancy. In his examination of the provenance of gags, Stewart Lee remarks that before the 1980s, jokes were just shared around by anyone touring the scene. Some of the gags were so common that venues would have a board for performers to read; indicating which gags had already been done. I have to say, while I have a great deal of admiration for Eric Morecambe's comic stylings, I find it hilarious that you'd hold up Morecambe and Wise and the Two Ronnies as enduring comedy icons. Monty Python were operating at the same time, released three movies and are known around the world. They wrote their own stuff. I know there are lots of people who'll probably go gooey-eyed at the nostalgia, but the comics you mention weren't even the best in their time. They were just popular for the masses, which is usually the greatest hallmark of unfunny you can encounter. Monty Python's comedy will still be relevant in a decade or two, perhaps more. I can't see your timeless examples lasting the distance.

No, but people make determinations on those lines too. Manufactured pop groups singing songs from corporate writing houses will never have the credibility that writer-performers have. Rolling the same principle back a few hundred years, who do we remember? The composers or the people who played the instruments? We have a great deal of respect for creators.

For thirty years or so, the world of the stand-up comic has been dominated by comedians performing material that they have written themselves. In July of this year, Stewart Lee revealed that many household name comedians are employing writers to produce their material. The likes of Michael McIntyre, Jack Whitehall and Frankie Boyle are mentioned. I'm not talking about comic performers like Rowan Atkinson or Richard Wilson here. They're not on every panel show pretending to be funny at the moment. http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/comedy/news/stewart-lee-accuses-highprofile-comedians-michael-mcintrye-jack-whitehall-and-frankie-boyleof-using-writers-8718101.html For stand-ups though, I am a bit of a puritan. I feel the relationship between comic and audience is cheapened when one side of it isn't authentic, but then, that's just my opinion. If you pay money to go and watch a stand-up and end up laughing all the way through the show, does it matter who wrote the gags?

Spoilers for Chrimbo Doctor Who ahoy. Read no further if you have not yet indulged. It's a contrived mess. The episode seems to very cynically be about one thing, which is the time lord transition. For most of the episode, the current Doctor is trapped in a twee town called Christmas, which happens to be the location of a giant crack in universes. Some techno-religious faction wants it gone because timelords from other universes may be able to get back, and are prepared to destroy the planet for it. The Doctor is so in love with the people and concept of Christmas that he hangs around for centuries, protecting it from all the things that happen to pop through the time crack; essentially a roll call of all the major Moffat-era villains. We all know the score; Smith is going and Capaldi is arriving. At least have the man go out with a bang. This was a neutered Christmas whimper, in which the Doctor betrayed his companion twice in one episode, all for the love of a town which was a bit weird anyway. No account of this episode would be complete without the end of the notion of thirteen timelords. Moffat's run introduced the War Doctor, who counts. Smith also said that a previous incarnation was vain and unhappy with his appearance, so regenerated. The big revelation of this episode was that Smith's Doctor couldn't regenerate. End of line? Except of course, Moffat's Who suffers from just as much deus ex machina as Russel T Davies' work. I sometimes get the impression that both of them have simply created a series of devices that they can wheel out when they, or the series, has painted itself into a corner. You could argue that a little bit of deus ex is justified when trying to consolidate the continuation of the show beyond the original limit of thirteen, and I have to say, I've no real problem with timelords conferring extra regenerative powers onto the Doctor. Who else could, for starters? And besides, the Master contrived a way to go beyond his limits. It's not unprecedented. My major moan here is that it was all done so cheaply. Most Who fans would love to see more timelord sh!t. I quite enjoyed the finale that had them as antagonists, if only for getting to see a little of Gallifreyan society. Having extra regenerative powers farted through a wall is a poor substitute for what they could have had; a chance to lay down the lore of Gallifrey in the modern era. Only seen it the once, so not quite sure what accent Capaldi is doing at the moment.

Merry Chrimbo from Liverpool, la.

There's something wrong with you if you don't pick option C, imo. I see they took a similar line that they did with LA Noire with the "performance" capture. Someone needs to make a Grand Theft Auto TV series happen.

I've just finished the main plot of GTA V. Excellent game, easily supplanting San Andreas from its place as fave GTA game ever. There is so much to like about Grand Theft Auto in general. Getting to play the movie "Heat" several times in a row is really smart. The three characters thing worked superbly, making the story more of an ensemble piece than ever before. And yes, Trevor Phillips is a very smart character.

That's a very creative use of Google, Barry. Remember this one?

Nope, it's not. They could go after Wyman on Smith's later claims alone. I'm sure she'd have a case with some corroboration. The difference between Wyman and a lot of the other cases is that no-one is making a complaint. I'm not saying that it excuses the behaviour, but it might go some way to explaining why the OB aren't prosecuting a case, when they are prosecuting cases where complaints have been brought. The CPS would have to justify any prosecution of Wyman as being in the public interest. Of course, none of that precludes money changing hands or influence being exerted in other areas.

That's certainly not the first time I've heard that interpretation offered.

It's an interesting case. The mother apparently gave consent for Wyman to see her pre-16, they always claimed that there was no underage sex going on, although Mandy Smith did later claim that she'd slept with Wyman at the age of 14. No idea why Wyman hasn't been arrested. Guessing that given that it was all out in the open, someone somewhere decided a prosecution wasn't in the public interest. Very seedy business, all told.

I am stoked for Christmas, for it is at this time of year we celebrate cyclical consumerism, and I get my PS4.

Torturing me? Please. If your posts are a form of torture, they'd be in the dull and numbing category, the sort of space shared with overlong headmaster speeches or a clueless colleague saying something, anything to add something to the proceedings during a conference call. I'm not here gagging under your trickling water-board of words here, sir. For someone who says that others don't understand the complexity does, your third paragraph is a picture painted only in black and white colours, and again, no relevance to the debate. I've got a better understanding of Muslims than most people on this forum. I observed haraam until the age of around twelve. I know Muslims who smoke weed and do pills (normal, not ritualised ecstasy ) and I even know a couple who will drink alcohol; but it is literally a couple. Haven't met one who will knowingly consume anything from a pig, and I've had my grandad chastise me for cooking chorizo in my old dear's house. My brother still observes haraam to this day. Seems to me as if you've entered this thread just looking to be a contrarian, and have cherry-picked some extreme examples, such as the only brewery in Pakistan or transvestites at weddings in a baffling attempt to prove the exception as the rule. In 38 years of speaking with my (admittedly homophobic) Pakistani grandfather, I've never heard of transgendered people being used as living shamrocks at family weddings. I'll no doubt be presenting many of your claims to him to determine their veracity. FWIW, I'm sure there is a grain of truth in everything you've said; there usually is. It's just the way you apply such information that irks me. Your argument here is what, exactly? Because you can find one example of a brewery and Muslims get up to other questionable stuff, pork and alcohol are okay in the wider Islamic world? It is genuinely fragile. Returning to the topic at hand, the M&S policies are being driven by employees, many of whom would prefer not to be involved in the sale of pig or alcohol. For me, that's all that matters. Are you suggesting that if a Muslim doesn't fancy selling a bit of streaky, his boss should say "shut up. The Sufis make hooch and ritualized [sic] ecstasy, y'know"? Feel free to bang on about the tribal practices of whichever bunch might happen to suit the latest extreme you're selling, but like everything else, it's irrelevant. It is the wish of British Muslim workers that are being honoured here. All the lucky transvestites at Pakistani weddings all over the world won't change that. Finally, I started this thread because it was an interesting topic which I thought would generate debate. I find it amusing that you choose to see my tongue-in-cheek call-to-arms in the way you do. The intention was actually to avoid a lot of the reactionary nonsense by specifically calling for it, thus neutering most of the more offensive boll*cks that you normally see on these threads. You'll have to take my word for that, but given my self-nobbling reputation of honesty on here, I think that'll do. Y'know what, it mostly worked. The only pathetic rise I got was from yourself, par for the course lately. I very much enjoyed your West London-oriented snipe at the rest of the country recently too. My advice to you? Pick your battles, sir. This is about the third or fourth thread you've waded into and made an utter mess of yourself.

Feeling like you were born too late, Bazza? I empathise. I always wanted to see Bon Scott front AC/DC. It happens.

If you're into dusky transvestites, Pakistani weddings are the place to be?

Well done. You can spout paragraphs of irrelevant boll*cks about Pakistani drinkers, hash smokers and cross-dressers (again). Save it for a book; most of it is not germane to this discussion. I never suggested that the brewery was the only one in the Islamic world, rather that it's the only one you were able to identify and (according to the Telegraph) the only one in Pakistan. I understand complexity all too well, sir. I also know the difference between that and mere obsfucation, which is what you offer here. It's like "bloke down the pub" meets "where's wally" - a series of unsourced ramblings melded with a game where readers have to hunt for something*. * Your point, whatever the f*ck that was

I'm simply commenting on the discussion as it evolves. Verbal whipped out the chicks with d!cks to prove that pork and alcohol are ok in Islamic countries. I didn't understand his reasoning either.

In most of the articles I've read, the chain has been keen to promote its secular credentials despite its ownership.

Yeah, it's a real shame. You'd figure they'd hit the more convincing end of the market if they could be arsed, too

Constraining the debate to what we were originally talking about, pig and alcohol, you've got what, one example from across the whole of the Islamic world of a brewery? The article even states that it is the only brewery in the entirety of Pakistan. The rest of your post is arguing a case that no-one made, largely because Marks & Sparks don't sell hallucinogenics, weed or transsexuals. I'll take Gemmel's mate's word over this poorly argued nonsense.

Just back from watching The Hobbit : The Desolation of Smaug. I was one of the people who didn't see how Peter Jackson was going to get three films worth of material out of what is a fairly short book, but having seen two parts of the trilogy, am now fully convinced that the whole enterprise will be worthwhile. As the title suggests, the movie's focus is on Smaug, the Cumberbatch-voiced dragon lurking in the bowels of the Lonely Mountain. You get to see the nasty things he's done, the fear he inspires in the locals and the mess he's made of the derelict dwarven kingdom. The VFX for Smaug are excellent, btw. Easily the most impressive winged serpent put on the screen, simultaneously craggy and volcanic. There's also enough filtering on Smaug's voice to allow the actor to be hidden but for the performance to come through. The pace of the movie will be a relief to anyone bored of the long scenes from the first movie. There are no dwarven songs to be had here. Like the first movie, much of the structure is provided by pursuit. The company is chased throughout the movie by one group or another (mostly orcs), which keeps things moving. The barrel-borne escape from the palace of the woodland elves is particularly diverting, at times feeling like a breakneck fairground ride. The performances are very good; no bum notes to be had from anyone, although Legolas doesn't have too much to say and comes across as a bit of a d!ck. Tauriel would be the big change in the movie. She doesn't appear in any of the books, but was introduced to the movies to balance up a very male cast. She is played by Evangeline Lilly, a.k.a. Kate from LOST. If Peter Jackson plans on padding the Hobbit out by casting Evangeline Lilly, I've no complaints, especially as she seems to fancy dwarfs. Looking forward to the conclusion.

Most people will get to know the score, but it's a weird one. There's objectionable material to be bought all over the supermarket. Someone might legitimately be against battery farming, for example. I'd have mentioned tobacco, but oddly, most people who work behind tobacco kiosks look like they're on 40 a day. I'm not sure that's a coincidence. The other thing to note is that collectively, these workers are still being paid using the profits of the sale of such items. As someone who is not particularly religious, the dogmatism always baffles me, but then I suppose it would.