Complete and utter toss.

as the standard of comedy has dropped the relative value of buzzcocks has gone up. i'd rather watch another series of buzzcocks than some shite like the office.

>
>What is the general opinion of this show ?
>
>

I imagine it's one of utter disdain. Auntie Beeb saw the ratings for 'Have I Got News For You' and decided to churn out increasingly derivative identi-kit programmes like this one on the conveyor belt. Still, at least it's not as bad as It's Only TV But I Like It.

What goes through the mind of Phil Jupitus when he's in the studio recording these programmes? I hope it's the sound of wretched sobbing.

NMTB started off with promise that was quickly wasted.

The nadir was an episode where Mark Lamarr spent thirty minutes attacking Gail Porter in the most remorseless, sickening fashion. I'm no fan of Porter, but this was unwarranted. Might have been excusable if it was funny, but it was plain cruel.

Better than a Question of Pop, not as good as that one with Mike Reid.

R e a d

Buzzcocks gets more and more like a boys' club every series. The patronising disdain with which the team captains treat anyone with a vagina is quietly dispiriting.

And it's less and less about music every series. More and more about heaping abuse on retired musicians and inoffensive pop stars. No joy in music - or knowledge - whatsoever.

> R e a d

(Sorry, that looked abusive. I was quoting Blue Tulip Rose Read, Mike Read's fantastic spherical stalker, who insists on spelling his name letter by letter, to distinguish him from the Eastenders star. Er. Anyone else a fan of BTRR?)

Phill Jupitus is apparently going to be in the new series of Holby City. The word 'desperate' springs to mind.

Women always seem to be included purely on a tokenistic level in most panel games anyway. If they're not being glamourous and stupid on Shooting Stars or They Think It's All over they're being ripped to shreds on Have I Got News For You or Buzzcocks. Mind you, Lamarr usually acts like a complete cunt to everyone, not just the girls, and I've got to admit sometimes it's funny. Sometimes it just seems too vicious, but in the last series he seemed to have toned it down a bit - obviously the producer was scared he was putting off guests.

>The nadir was an episode where Mark Lamarr spent thirty minutes attacking Gail Porter in the most remorseless, sickening fashion. I'm no fan of Porter, but this was unwarranted. Might have been excusable if it was funny, but it was plain cruel.

oh yeah she went home and cried about all the money she'd made sitting around doing fuck all.

the rule for this kind of thing is have a bit of intelligence and be entertainng or you deserve to be ripped to bits. not all women guests get bad treatment, just the shit ones.

I thought Lamaar was leaving the show? There was a big(ish) article in all the papers a month or so ago saying this.

>The nadir was an episode where Mark Lamarr spent thirty minutes attacking Gail Porter in the most remorseless, sickening fashion. I'm no fan of Porter, but this was unwarranted. Might have been excusable if it was funny, but it was plain cruel.

I thought the nadir was the one which Lemmy (supposedly) walked out of. Lamaar and Hughes severely insulted one of the women in the identity parade, and she looked really upset. At least Gail Porter could answer back.

The whole Larmarr/Porter thing was bullshit, I heard him interview her when he filled in for J Ross, it's tabloid nonsense.

But it was upsetting to watch. That wasn't tabloid nonsense. That's a fact.

So what did this other interview prove? That Lamarr and Porter were showbiz pals? Is that to imply the Buzzcocks abuse was staged? What a bizarre thing to do.

>So what did this other interview prove? That Lamarr and Porter were showbiz pals? Is that to imply the Buzzcocks abuse was staged? What a bizarre thing to do.

theres a middle ground between staging an argument and really insulting someone, just because they're not bosom buddies doesn't mean gail took it all to heart like you apparently did. it's the same with the people in the identity parades, everyone understands whats going on (except perhaps chris moyles).

I like Lamarr's radio 2 show. He knows (and loves) his stuff. When he fills in for J Ross, though, and he's trying to be 'funny' rather than enthusiastic, he's just crap.

Radio 2 is a fine station these days. J Ross on saturdays - v. amusing; Maconie's Critical List - excellent; Lamarr on his own programme - excellent; that soul show presented by Mica Paris or someone like that - excellent; documentaries - excellent; comedy - mostly shit, but you can't have . As Andrew Collins pointed out in that studybees interview, it's moving into Radio 1's early 90s territory, which can only be a good thing.

>comedy - mostly shit, but you can't have...

everything.

i cant be doing with all this 'its cruel' business. people who go on the program know what its about. most of them go on there to prove what 'good sports' they are and how they can 'take a joke' so u think its good that lamarr push it as far as they do to see if they really can take a joke

and the reason lemmy walked off is because he is a twat who was being made to look stupid. all his retorts were either unintelligible or just plain rubbish. he was being far more offensive to women than lamarr and co ever are

And Radio 1's moving further and further down into its own ghastly little demographically-driven hole. How long before Mark and Lard jump to R2?

PS: re the Gail Porter abuse thing. The issue isn't that I found it upsetting (though I probably did a little) but rather that it came over as unpleasant, misogynistic and bullying, and therefore was uncomfortable to watch. Whether it was "staged" or not, and whether Porter was genuinely upset or not, is irrelevant: it was very bad television. It seemed to be designed to appeal to hectoring Lad mag boors, which is never a good thing, and it made most viewers I spoke to squirm. And he did tone it down next series, so someone must have mentioned it to him.

It showed how easily a sarcastic persona can be tipped over into being plain nasty - not the sort of frontman you want for a light hearted panel game. Bad TV.

i don't buy the the-guests-go-on-there-to-show-what-good-sports-they-are argument, and they certainly don't do it for the money - the fee's about (someone correct me if they know better) £200. shows like buzzcocks and shooting stars and hignfy need their guests, but their guests are rarely allowed to do their own thing, normally having to spend too much of their time answering funny questions to which there aren't funnier answers. it's a tough world, eh?

There's a wider tendency - that's rampant on this forum - to assume that anyone who becomes a celebrity is somehow now an Aunt Sally at whom you ought to be encouraged to throw things.

That's not why they became celebs. They became presenters / comedians / actors / singers in order to entertain you. If they don't entertain you, fine. I'm sure there are other performers and celebs you can follow around, enjoying them heartily. Ignore the ones you don't like.

Celeb-baiting panel games appeal to this base instinct to hurl abuse at the famous.
"They ask for it! They didn't have to become famous!"

Er, no. Their primary job is to entertain, not be a receptacle for your frustrations and bitterness. That's something you've decided they ought to do.

Now some pompous arses need their bubbles pricked. Nasty politicos or aggressive, hurtful critics might, possibly, be seen as "asking for it". But, apart from being a slightly over-effusive pop moppet, someone like Gail Porter or Billie is not actually deserving of public humiliation and vilification.

Anyone who enjoys watching inoffensive C-List celebs getting torn apart or simply embarrassed on these novelty shows is expressing their hatred for manufactured naff celebrity culture, but forgetting that the individuals concerned haven't actually done anything wrong themselves.

>There's a wider tendency - that's rampant on this forum - to assume that anyone who becomes a celebrity is somehow now an Aunt Sally at whom you ought to be encouraged to throw things.
>
>That's not why they became celebs. They became presenters / comedians / actors / singers in order to entertain you. If they don't entertain you, fine. I'm sure there are other performers and celebs you can follow around, enjoying them heartily. Ignore the ones you don't like.
>
>Celeb-baiting panel games appeal to this base instinct to hurl abuse at the famous.
>"They ask for it! They didn't have to become famous!"
>
>Er, no. Their primary job is to entertain, not be a receptacle for your frustrations and bitterness. That's something you've decided they ought to do.
>
>Now some pompous arses need their bubbles pricked. Nasty politicos or aggressive, hurtful critics might, possibly, be seen as "asking for it". But, apart from being a slightly over-effusive pop moppet, someone like Gail Porter or Billie is not actually deserving of public humiliation and vilification.
>
>Anyone who enjoys watching inoffensive C-List celebs getting torn apart or simply embarrassed on these novelty shows is expressing their hatred for manufactured naff celebrity culture, but forgetting that the individuals concerned haven't actually done anything wrong themselves.

Nicely put, UB.

The likes of Moyles however, deserve it.
If I remember correctly, Moyles appeared on NMTB the same week as Vic Reeves & Bill Bailey & was soundly ignored by Lamarr & the other panellists because

1: He ain't funny (even Jupitus is less offensive)&
2: ML spent most of the show getting his own back on Vic for 3 series worth of 50's throwback jokes on Shooting Stars.

The next day, Moyles spent most of his worthless R1 show whining like a spoilt child about the fact he was ignored (loads of self indulgent bollox about being the "Saviour of R1" etc).

The next week a large pic of him was displayed behind ML, who called him a "worthless shit" or similar. Serves him right for the dual crimes of thinking he's Chris Evan's & ripping material of Mark & Lard.

They even reported Moyles humilation in Viz, referring to him as a "beached Moyle". He was absolutely taken apart, and he absolutely deserved it. Tragically, cos Richard Herring gave Lamarr a bit of grief Moyles seems to think the two share some kind of kinship. Pesky cunt.

>But, apart from being a slightly over-effusive pop moppet, someone like Gail Porter or Billie is not actually deserving of public humiliation and vilification.

you make me laugh, but you're wrong. anyone who decides to make a living in the public eye is potentially deserving of public humiliation and vilification from those that don't like them, just as they will recieve adulation from others. porter could always become a nurse or a waitress if she got tired if the c-list celebrity lifestyle.

But as I tried to point out before, it's different for the identity parade members - who are probably waitresses or nurses - who are alluded to as whores or slappers, without being able to answer back. As Butler said, it's not funny and it's certainly not ironically mocking sexist attitudes.

>>But, apart from being a slightly over-effusive pop moppet, someone like Gail Porter or Billie is not actually deserving of public humiliation and vilification.
>
Considering Ms Porter said on TV recently that she had no desire to see naked people in the popular press, maybe she asked for it. She is after all a bint.

PS Butler do they have to protect you from the tabloids in your local newsagent?

>But as I tried to point out before, it's different for the identity parade members - who are probably waitresses or nurses - who are alluded to as whores or slappers, without being able to answer back. As Butler said, it's not funny and it's certainly not ironically mocking sexist attitudes.

Would you say the same thing about the people Morris made fools out of on TDT with the soul reversal thing etc. For fuck sake its a joke!

If the people were that offended they wouldn't do it.

But Morris draws out people's stupidity, then mocks it. Lamaar sees a woman who isn't terribly attractive and makes unpleasant comments on her appearance. The former requires skill, the latter doesn't

>But Morris draws out people's stupidity, then mocks it. Lamaar sees a woman who isn't terribly attractive and makes unpleasant comments on her appearance. The former requires skill, the latter doesn't

Maybe Lamarr is satirising the fact that they come on the show to further their careers by going "Hey I'm hip" and then promptly takes the piss out of them. That is Lamarrs style.

I don't see you having a go at him for calling Chris Moyles a cunt, or Mel B.

I personally didn't think it was that bad, then I've seen Lamarr doing stuff outside of NMTB, and know he can let rip.

And come on the woman had her arse projected on the side of the HoC.

I suppose it comes down to whether you thought Larmarr was being cruel, if you do, why watch him on telly.

I keep trying to point out that some of Lamaar's more barbed insults are reserved for the Odd-One-Out section of the show, where he mocks ordinary people's appearances. With Porter and Moyles, he mocks them in person, and they have a chance to retaliate.

>I keep trying to point out that some of Lamaar's more barbed insults are reserved for the Odd-One-Out section of the show, where he mocks ordinary people's appearances. With Porter and Moyles, he mocks them in person, and they have a chance to retaliate.
>

I don't feel the barbs towards the odd-one-out section are not really aim at the people, they're just, usually, bad jokes. One line linked to another, I really don't think they are that malicious anyway.

it's obvious the people in the identity parade are extras rather than people dragged off the street, i'm sure lamaar goes up to them afterwards and they have a big laugh about it.

>it's obvious the people in the identity parade are extras rather than people dragged off the street, i'm sure lamaar goes up to them afterwards and they have a big laugh about it.

What you mean he doesn't have them sent off to work camps to die horrible and degrading deaths? You mean Lamarrs only joking?

Gosh tell me more about this thing you call comedy.

>>it's obvious the people in the identity parade are extras rather than people dragged off the street, i'm sure lamaar goes up to them afterwards and they have a big laugh about it.
>
>What you mean he doesn't have them sent off to work camps to die horrible and degrading deaths? You mean Lamarrs only joking?
>
>Gosh tell me more about this thing you call comedy.

theres no need to be sarky, some people seem to need it spelled out.

> porter could always become a nurse or a waitress if she got tired if the c-list celebrity lifestyle.

Or a cleaner. Or she could do some sewing. Or be a whore.

Yes, I think that's about it.

>it's obvious the people in the identity parade are extras rather than people dragged off the street, i'm sure lamaar goes up to them afterwards and they have a big laugh about it.


Why are you so sure about this? Does anyone actually know this to be true? The only eyewitness behind-the-scenes story I've heard about Lamarr wasn't anything like that...

>I personally didn't think it was that bad, then I've seen Lamarr doing stuff outside of NMTB, and know he can let rip.

I've seen and heard him outside of NMTB too and found that he can be just as unpleasant, arrogant, sneering and unfunny on his own as he can be with that fat sycophant Jupitus laughing exaggeratedly at his scripted insults.
>
>And come on the woman had her arse projected on the side of the HoC.

Loaded did that. If you want to have a go at Gail Porter, there's always the fact that she's not very good at her job, or that she popularised the trend for using kid's TV to break into presenting and then ditching it asap. Just calling her a slapper is pointless and lazy.
>
>I suppose it comes down to whether you thought Larmarr was being cruel, if you do, why watch him on telly.

What's really depressing about the "if you don't like it, don't watch it" argument is how bloody often I'm hearing it these days...

And ironically, that's exactly what I said about heaping abuse on c-list celebs.

If you don't like what they do, ignore them. You don't need to hang around with the school bully, waiting for him to rip them apart for you. What kind of sad satisfaction does that give you?

Someone asked if I needed to be kept clear of the tabloids, lest they upset me. No. I just... guess what... choose to ignore them as much as possible.

But remember, as with the Gail Porter's arse on the House of Commons incident, it was the tabloid / lad mag / pop culture press who did that, not the celeb-as-human-being. You can be sick of Mel B, or Nicole Kidman, or Helen Bleeding Adams, but that's mainly the fault of the press' decision to ram them down your throat, not the celeb's decision to get on your nerves personally. Most of the time, they're just getting on with their job of entertaining their fans to the best of their limited abilities.

If you've got a beef with the raising of the mediocre to the status of gods, then take it up with PR companies, tabloid editors and the general public (those plebs you despise so much, remember them?) who put these celebs on ludicrous pedestals. Most of the time (arrogant toerags like Evans and Moyles excluded) these mini-celebs have no huge illusions about what they do, They're just doing a job.

Look how easily Stuart Maconie turned from a journalist about whom few people had heated opinions, into a loathed hate figure and representative of all that's bad in clip TV. How did that happen? He was asked to help front one of his own shows. Suddenly he's a celeb. He's only taking money for journalism, as usual, but, because you can see his face, and his name pops up underneath, he's fair bait for a celebrity mauling.

He didn't set himself up, he was just paid £200 and did what the producer asked. If I, or anyone else on this forum, did a quick bit of work within my field of expertise for a couple of hundred quid, would I then expect the general public to be entitled to savage me at every opportunity? But it won't happen, because I wouldn't have committed the grave sin of appearing on TV to do it.

Because the TV set sits in the corner of your most private space, you feel anyone on it owes you enetertainment. It's intruded, it had better behave.

And the instant reaction to disappointment, is anger. And it's to this anger that bullies like Lamarr appeal. They try and create water cooler moments by "taking down" the people they feel the public want them to do over. Whether they deserve it or not.

I just think it's cheap.

Oh, and before anyone says, I think that the glee with which a lot of the celebrity baiting on Brass Eye was greeted, was cheap too. Most of the tricks exposed things unrelated to anything each celebrity puported to represent. Take Phillippa Forrester down for scientific ignorance, fine, but making Claire Rayner say rude words was a bit pointless. She's an adult. What are you proving? That she can't swear? Well, that invalidates her credentials as an agony aunt, sure... Funny, but not the cleverest thing Chris Morris does.

Sorry, typed that last para too quickly. Not very clear. Actually, just gibberish.

I meant that the celeb baiting on Brass Eye often panders to the same "take her down, she's been on TV, she deserves it" urges as the celeb-baiting on cheap panel games. Which, unless it's being used to make a valid point about someone's competence to do their job, or credibilty as a spokesperson, is beneath someone as clever as Chris Morris.

Before I start, I'd like to make it clear that I don't want a job as Gail Porter's career apologist, but:

Brass Eye attacks the motives of celebrities in appearing as 'spokespeople' for the general public - without having the intelligence to think about what they're saying.

Mark Lamarr attacks Porter, Billie and various minor pop stars and presenters on what seems to be purely personal and malicious opinions. The insults are barbed and nasty, and often unfunny. It's the Iain Lee mistake of being offensive to see if it gets a laugh, as opposed to being genuinely witty.

People who live 'in the public eye' do set themselves up for speculation and criticism, but not for public insults which in other contexts would be libellous (I believe Lamarr called Gail Porter a whore).


>But, apart from being a slightly over-effusive pop moppet, someone like Gail Porter or Billie is not actually deserving of public humiliation and vilification.

>And come on the woman had her arse projected on the side of the HoC.

FHM did that to promote their '100 sexiest women' campaign. Gail Porter didn't have to give her approval- and she reckons they airbrushed the arse anyway.


>Maybe Lamarr is satirising the fact that they come on the show to further their careers by going "Hey I'm hip" and then promptly takes the piss out of them. That is Lamarrs style.

People in the line-up get more than the scripted insults about their appearance. And they're obviously out of work actors who've been given a minimal appearance fee (they're not allowed to speak, you notice).



>If you want to have a go at Gail Porter, there's always the fact that she's not very good at her job, or that she popularised the trend for using kid's TV to break into presenting and then ditching it asap. Just calling her a slapper is pointless and lazy.

True. And her agent must be stupid - he tried to push her into prime time far too early. Don't they ever learn?

>
>Mark Lamarr attacks Porter, Billie and various minor pop stars and presenters on what seems to be purely personal and malicious opinions. The insults are barbed and nasty, and often unfunny.

>
Just like Ian Hislop on HIGNFY with Paula Yates. It was horrible to watch. I wonder how he views it now? What crimes against humanity did she carry out again? He was less aggressive when the Hamiltons were on.

>Just like Ian Hislop on HIGNFY with Paula Yates. It was horrible to watch. I wonder how he views it now? What crimes against humanity did she carry out again? He was less aggressive when the Hamiltons were on.
>
A Woman who sleeps with everyone is a slag
A Woman who sleeps with eveyone but me is a bitch.

Ian Hislop typical,sexless,weakling,nerd,half man,ugly,cant get a shag,bitter,mysogynist creep.
public school cunt.

I find Lamarr repellent, talentless, unfunny scum; Phil Jupitus the same, Sean Hughes the same - after Buzzcocks *he'll* never work again. It's a hideous lad's club. People you wouldn't let into your back gardens, let alone your house.
Yet, strangely enough, humourless cartoon of a human being Lamarr's radio show about rock n roll wasn't too bad.
Why don't guests walk over to him and spit in his face? Or snatch his glasses off and stomp on them?
The man has no sense of timing - even when so blatantly reading off an autocue.
I HATE him and his unfunny ways.

Sean Hughes the same - after Buzzcocks *he'll* never work again.

He hasn't worked for quite a while.

> Yet, strangely enough, humourless cartoon of a human being Lamarr's radio show about rock n roll wasn't too bad.

The great thing about being anally obsessed by music, probably his ego won't let him put a duff track in.

> Why don't guests walk over to him and spit in his face? Or snatch his glasses off and stomp on them?

Um cos it's only a TV show, why don't they come back with either 1. equally nasty remark 2. Something witty & amusing.

> The man has no sense of timing - even when so blatantly reading off an autocue.
> I HATE him and his unfunny ways.

Write him a letter about it.

>

>Um cos it's only a TV show, why don't they come back with either 1. equally nasty remark 2. Something witty & amusing.

Oh, because the BBC would edit it out. Only the spontaneous wit that Lamarr reads off his autocue would be kept in. But if they stomped on his glasses, let's see him read off his autocue *then.*

> Oh, because the BBC would edit it out. Only the spontaneous wit that Lamarr reads off his autocue would be kept in.

Unless yer some daft pop bint who just flips the bird or tells him to piss off (I'm thinking of Mel B here, ohh a commoner being common, must see TV).

I don't mind Lamarr being horrible to these people, most of the time they've probably pissed him, take Danny from Cradle of Filth.

But if they stomped on his glasses, let's see him read off his autocue *then.*

I wonder if he'd cry?

This has been remarkably cilivlised and coherrent don't you think?