Ricky Gervais at the Golden Globes

[Andicis]

5 hours ago, DarkFruitsRam7 said:

I like Gervais’ work, but he’s so, so repetitive with his ‘it’s not my fault if you’re offended’ schtick. We get it, but the more you bang on about it and search for anyone talking about you on Twitter, the more desperate you look.

To be fair though, in modern society it works. People genuinely do get offended very easily these days. You say it's repetitive, but his work is quite funny due to the accuracy of a lot of what he says. I have more of an issue with some of the newspapers scrambling to call him out for slagging off paedophiles than anything else.

[Comrade 86]

23 minutes ago, Andicis said:

To be fair though, in modern society it works. People genuinely do get offended very easily these days. You say it's repetitive, but his work is quite funny due to the accuracy of a lot of what he says. I have more of an issue with some of the newspapers scrambling to call him out for slagging off paedophiles than anything else.

Kind of with you on this. What is quite interesting is that every year there's more chatter about him presenting the awards than the awards themselves and despite the fact that he does little else other than tear into the guests and the Hollywood Foreign Press Association themselves, he gets invited back every year. I always try and catch his opening salvos but never bother watching the ceremony itself. Just a bunch of lovies having a massive circle-jerk whilst pretending they respect each other.

[Andicis]

7 minutes ago, 86 Schmokes & a Pancake said:

Kind of with you on this. What is quite interesting is that every year there's more chatter about him presenting the awards than the awards themselves and despite the fact that he does little else other than tear into the guests and the Hollywood Foreign Press Association themselves, he gets invited back every year. I always try and catch his opening salvos but never bother watching the ceremony itself. Just a bunch of lovies having a massive circle-jerk whilst pretending they respect each other.

Agreed! I watched his prologue to the ceremony, without watching any more. He makes it worth watching for me, calling out the hypocrisy at the very top. I'm glad he tore into the guests, those are the type who absolute deserve mocking, comedy is good when punching up and that's exactly what Gervais did. Thing is, I absolutely agree there is a lot we all need to work on, but when it's said by a celebrity it makes me quite cross since they seem the biggest hypocrites of all. When they travel to these ceremonies by private jet and then talk about the environment, I can't stand with them. Gervais more stands for normal average people, which is why he's very funny.

[Comrade 86]

37 minutes ago, Andicis said:

Agreed! I watched his prologue to the ceremony, without watching any more. He makes it worth watching for me, calling out the hypocrisy at the very top. I'm glad he tore into the guests, those are the type who absolute deserve mocking, comedy is good when punching up and that's exactly what Gervais did. Thing is, I absolutely agree there is a lot we all need to work on, but when it's said by a celebrity it makes me quite cross since they seem the biggest hypocrites of all. When they travel to these ceremonies by private jet and then talk about the environment, I can't stand with them. Gervais more stands for normal average people, which is why he's very funny.

Yeah, think @TuffLuff made an interesting observation about the whole punching up thing and I guess there's an argument that the divide is closing and given it underpins his whole routine, that leaves him nowhere to go now. I still find him funny but I can see substance to this line of thinking and I believe Ricky himself can too.

My hunch is that without absurd amounts of cash being chucked at him, he might already have binned off this gig. I think he genuinely does despise some of the charade especially now he is almost part of it himself and I think it showed a little this time around. @DarkFruitsRam7 had a different slant on the whole, 'I don't care' schtick  but to my mind, this time at least, I'm pretty sure he meant it. There's was an undercurrent of something quite angry about him this time though perhaps I'm seeing more than is really there.

One thing's for sure, he generates more interest in the event than all the A-listers combined which, latent self-loathing aside, is the only reason I can see that keeps them hiring him. It's like a form of self-harming by proxy which for me is partly why it's such deliciously uncomfortable viewing ?

[DarkFruitsRam7]

6 hours ago, Andicis said:

Agreed! I watched his prologue to the ceremony, without watching any more. He makes it worth watching for me, calling out the hypocrisy at the very top. I'm glad he tore into the guests, those are the type who absolute deserve mocking, comedy is good when punching up and that's exactly what Gervais did. Thing is, I absolutely agree there is a lot we all need to work on, but when it's said by a celebrity it makes me quite cross since they seem the biggest hypocrites of all. When they travel to these ceremonies by private jet and then talk about the environment, I can't stand with them. Gervais more stands for normal average people, which is why he's very funny.

The thing is, he’s a celebrity himself now. He gets paid millions for his Netflix shows and he’s a household name. Why should he be allowed to preach a message, and not those receiving an award? 

[Boycie]

11 minutes ago, DarkFruitsRam7 said:

The thing is, he’s a celebrity himself now. He gets paid millions for his Netflix shows and he’s a household name. Why should he be allowed to preach a message, and not those receiving an award? 

Cus he’s still one of us, sneering at the fools in their Hollywood bubble, and that’s what is relatable to us. Forget his worth, he says what we think.

[Angry Ram]

17 minutes ago, DarkFruitsRam7 said:

The thing is, he’s a celebrity himself now. He gets paid millions for his Netflix shows and he’s a household name. Why should he be allowed to preach a message, and not those receiving an award? 

Oh they still preach and he knows they will.. Loved how he tore them a new one.. 

[Stive Pesley]

14 hours ago, maxjam said:

Movies etc should be about entertainment not hitting various targets.

The Bechdel Test isn't about hitting targets though - it's just an interesting way to gauge how patriarchal the entertainment industry is. No one is forcing films to pass the test (as can be seen by the amount of mainstream films that don't pass it)

As you say - it ultimately comes down to entertainment, but interesting that the figures show films that pass the test gross more at the box office (if that is a barometer of how entertaining they are?)

Anyway - we digress. Has anyone stopped for a moment to wonder if the Golden Globes gig is given to him under strict instruction to generate as many headlines as possible, and that if he gave a tame speech that made no news, he'd not get asked again.

Excuse me if I don't get a hard winky over Gervais saying "controversial" stuff for money

[maxjam]

7 minutes ago, SchtivePesley said:

The Bechdel Test isn't about hitting targets though - it's just an interesting way to gauge how patriarchal the entertainment industry is. No one is forcing films to pass the test (as can be seen by the amount of mainstream films that don't pass it)

I know what the Bechdel test is, its just another measure of diversity.  

If they want to win BAFTA's TV shows will now have to hit diversity targets.  Entertainment by committee, yay.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/tv-shows-must-hit-diversity-target-to-win-bafta-8ghk7t6sj

 

9 minutes ago, SchtivePesley said:

As you say - it ultimately comes down to entertainment, but interesting that the figures show films that pass the test gross more at the box office (if that is a barometer of how entertaining they are?)

This is all that should matter - entertaining people and making money.  Good films are good films no matter who the star is (Wonder Woman, Aliens) and bad films are bad films (Ghostbusters 2016, Charlies Angels 2019).  Keep your diversity quota's and SJW messages out of it and entertain - that's literally your only job.

[DarkFruitsRam7]

Just now, maxjam said:

I know what the Bechdel test is, its just another measure of diversity.  

If they want to win BAFTA's TV shows will now have to hit diversity targets.  Entertainment by committee, yay.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/tv-shows-must-hit-diversity-target-to-win-bafta-8ghk7t6sj

 

This is all that should matter - entertaining people and making money.  Good films are good films no matter who the star is (Wonder Woman, Aliens) and bad films are bad films (Ghostbusters 2016, Charlies Angels 2019).  Keep your diversity quota's and SJW messages out of it and entertain - that's literally your only job.

I don't agree with rigid diversity targets, but my mind was opened slightly by a couple of shows I've watched on Netflix recently.

In Season 2 of 'You', there's a deaf character, who communicates through sign language (subtitled). It has absolutely no relevance to the plot, but I did actually find that it made me like the show more for some reason. It's not something that you see very often, but it is something that exists.

I've also blitzed through 'Sex Education' recently, which is a very interesting show. It contains two mothers of one child, homosexuality, cross-dressing, religion, etc. Some of these aspects are important plot points, whilst others are presented in the show as little details that are completely normal (which they are, but you don't expect it in a big Netflix program).

Again, I'm not a massive fan of forcing diversity, but I do find that it adds to the entertainment value of some shows and can open minds a little, regardless of whether they're important plot points or not. 

[Stive Pesley]

20 minutes ago, maxjam said:

I know what the Bechdel test is, its just another measure of diversity.

A measure of male/female diversity yes, and I don't think it is any measure of quality - nor is anyone claiming that as far as I can see. The only use it has in my eyes is merely to provide evidence of the continuing male bias in the industry. If it opens people's eyes to that, then that can only be a good thing

23 minutes ago, maxjam said:

If they want to win BAFTA's TV shows will now have to hit diversity targets.  Entertainment by committee, yay.

Then we're back onto the subject of positive discrimination. It's hard to argue that BAFTA not nominating a single ethnic minority between 1996 and 2009 is a good look. It's actually textbook institutionalised racism and it's a positive that they have recognised it

Will it result in entertainment by comittee? Well no one is stopping people from making the films/shows that they want - it's just saying that they will only nominate shows that meet certain criteria. Criteria for nominations is not a new thing. eg Best male actor has to be a fella. No one ever said - "ugh to get a best actor nomination we are being forced to cast a MAN!?"

Is the worry that it might all go too far and we'll have shows dominated by women, or ethnic minority characters, and the white male characters will be relegated to stereotyped minor parts, inconsequential to the plot and who just talk about cars and football ?

 

[maxjam]

10 minutes ago, SchtivePesley said:

Will it result in entertainment by comittee? Well no one is stopping people from making the films/shows that they want - it's just saying that they will only nominate shows that meet certain criteria. 

Then the awards will be meaningless, even more so than they are already.  For arguments sake, a truly awesome tv show with only white male actors, won't be nominated but a crappy diversity rich show could win every award going. 

 

13 minutes ago, SchtivePesley said:

Criteria for nominations is not a new thing. eg Best male actor has to be a fella. No one ever said - "ugh to get a best actor nomination we are being forced to cast a MAN!?"

Woah, thats dangerous ground these days ?

 

17 minutes ago, SchtivePesley said:

Is the worry that it might all go too far and we'll have shows dominated by women, or ethnic minority characters, and the white male characters will be relegated to stereotyped minor parts, inconsequential to the plot and who just talk about cars and football ?

Nope, see first reply above.

[Stive Pesley]

24 minutes ago, maxjam said:

Then the awards will be meaningless, even more so than they are already.  For arguments sake, a truly awesome tv show with only white male actors, won't be nominated but a crappy diversity rich show could win every award going. 

For arguments sake - if the awards are so meaningless then why are you bothered?

If it means the death of entertainment industry awards then I'm definitely not bothered.

I guess it's just one more thing to wind up the social media factions about though

[maxjam]

1 minute ago, SchtivePesley said:

For arguments sake - if the awards are so meaningless then why are you bothered?

I'm not.  Other than movies and sport I don't watch much tv. 

I did think the Ricky Gervais speech and reaction to it was funny though.

 

2 minutes ago, SchtivePesley said:

If it means the death of entertainment industry awards then I'm definitely not bothered.

Yup, they are just there for self-aggrandizement.

 

3 minutes ago, SchtivePesley said:

I guess it's just one more thing to wind up the social media factions about though

Yup and it was interesting to see the different reactions from left/right wing media, twitter and us more down to earth folk.

[Stive Pesley]

35 minutes ago, maxjam said:

Yup and it was interesting to see the different reactions from left/right wing media, twitter and us more down to earth folk.

Is your New Year's resolution to increase your "down to earth" credentials by not getting triggered by SJWs and "political correctness" quite so much?

?

 

 

[maxjam]

3 minutes ago, SchtivePesley said:

Is your New Year's resolution to increase your "down to earth" credentials by not getting triggered by SJWs and "political correctness" quite so much?

?

Depends if you equate 'getting triggered' to calling out stupidity/hypocrisy.

And my New Year's resolution was to lose a bit of weight.  4 days into a 2 week potato diet and they are starting to lose their appeal ?

[DarkFruitsRam7]

Interesting that it's the right-leaning posters who are supporting Gervais, and the left-leaning ones who aren't giving him as many plaudits. I thought it would be the other way round to be honest.

[Bubbles]

Two of my favourite comedians are Frankie Boyle and Ricky Gervais, we need more people who don't care, and just say exactly whats on their mind.

Too many snowflakes about nowadays

[Norman]

3 minutes ago, DarkFruitsRam7 said:

Interesting that it's the right-leaning posters who are supporting Gervais, and the left-leaning ones who aren't giving him as many plaudits. I thought it would be the other way round to be honest.

He's been accused of being right-wing following that speech. 

For attacking rich people and paedos. 

Weird. 

[Alph]

Anyone read The Wheel Of Time or The Witcher.

The cast of The Wheel of Time includes a mixed race group that come from a corner of the world similar to England. There's parts of the world where they have darker skin and hair. But the Two Rivers where the story begins, it's within the lore that the people are pale skinned, brown eye and brown hair. It's part of the story telling that the main character has reddish hair, grey/blue eyes and darker skin. Casting mixed race people here doesn't make sense yet that have done it

And The Witcher. In that world you get dark skinned people. Probably more Asian than black. Yet the TV show has cast mixed race people in white roles. Triss for example is white with red/brown hair. In the show she's mixed race with black hair

Now I know it doesn't really matter that much. But that's the point. Surely it doesn't matter if they are all white? 

I mean it's not racist to have an all white cast in a movie about Vikings. It's just the subject. 

Where I do think it isn't quite right is in like Last Of The Mohicans (one of my favourite films). Does Daniel Day Lewis need to be a yankee adopted by the tribe? I never read the book but I'm sure the tribe is only natives?