|
Strange TV programs
|
|
Topic Started: Sep 9 2017, 09:37 AM (218 Views)
|
|
papasmurf
|
Sep 9 2017, 09:37 AM
Post #1
|
- Posts:
- 17,277
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #13
- Joined:
- Jun 27, 2014
|
Not being able to find anything interesting to watch on British based TV yesterday evening, I did a channel hop on the motorised satellite system. I came across a programme on iFilm English a state TV station, owned by Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting. It was launched in 2010. Apparently David and Victoria Beckham, Britney Spears, Nicolas Cage, and J.K.Rowling are engaged in a dastardly plot to take over the world.
Great comedy, but for one thing it was a serious programme, and to some non western eyes plausible.
|
|
|
| |
|
Alberich
|
Sep 9 2017, 12:38 PM
Post #2
|
- Posts:
- 1,690
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #8
- Joined:
- Jun 27, 2014
|
Talking of channel hopping, I was idly flicking through the channels the other night, suffering from the usual "there is never anything on worth watching" syndrome, when I came across a programme on channel 4 that stopped me in my tracks. And, at the risk of sounding like Mary Whitehouse, my reaction was one of initial incredulity, followed by anger born out of despair. It was a programme that seemed to consist of a number of physically unattractive men filmed naked from the waist down being scrutinised by an equally repulsive female, whose task it was to pick the one she fancied the most; presumably on the size of his knob and dangly bits.
Now I am not a prude...honestly. But this wasn't some minority viewing channel that no-one has heard of. This was mainstream channel 4. And it occurred to me that someone senior at that station had authorised this as entertainment, and had gone to the trouble to put it into production, with all that that entails. And that angered me. NOT that naked flesh was on show...God knows there is enough available on the web....but that someone of presumed intelligence could think that this dire crap should be shown as entertainment. It is easy to laugh at the Mary Whitehouse's of this world, and plenty did. But I'm beginning to think...was she so far wrong????
|
|
|
| |
|
Affa
|
Sep 9 2017, 01:03 PM
Post #3
|
- Posts:
- 11,999
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #58
- Joined:
- Jul 26, 2014
|
- Alberich
- Sep 9 2017, 12:38 PM
Talking of channel hopping, I was idly flicking through the channels the other night, suffering from the usual "there is never anything on worth watching" syndrome, when I came across a programme on channel 4 that stopped me in my tracks. And, at the risk of sounding like Mary Whitehouse, my reaction was one of initial incredulity, followed by anger born out of despair. It was a programme that seemed to consist of a number of physically unattractive men filmed naked from the waist down being scrutinised by an equally repulsive female, whose task it was to pick the one she fancied the most; presumably on the size of his knob and dangly bits.
Now I am not a prude...honestly. But this wasn't some minority viewing channel that no-one has heard of. This was mainstream channel 4. And it occurred to me that someone senior at that station had authorised this as entertainment, and had gone to the trouble to put it into production, with all that that entails. And that angered me. NOT that naked flesh was on show...God knows there is enough available on the web....but that someone of presumed intelligence could think that this dire crap should be shown as entertainment. It is easy to laugh at the Mary Whitehouse's of this world, and plenty did. But I'm beginning to think...was she so far wrong????
Who made you watch it?
|
|
|
| |
|
Deleted User
|
Sep 9 2017, 01:54 PM
Post #4
|
|
Deleted User
|
- Alberich
- Sep 9 2017, 12:38 PM
Talking of channel hopping, I was idly flicking through the channels the other night, suffering from the usual "there is never anything on worth watching" syndrome, when I came across a programme on channel 4 that stopped me in my tracks. And, at the risk of sounding like Mary Whitehouse, my reaction was one of initial incredulity, followed by anger born out of despair. It was a programme that seemed to consist of a number of physically unattractive men filmed naked from the waist down being scrutinised by an equally repulsive female, whose task it was to pick the one she fancied the most; presumably on the size of his knob and dangly bits.
Now I am not a prude...honestly. But this wasn't some minority viewing channel that no-one has heard of. This was mainstream channel 4. And it occurred to me that someone senior at that station had authorised this as entertainment, and had gone to the trouble to put it into production, with all that that entails. And that angered me. NOT that naked flesh was on show...God knows there is enough available on the web....but that someone of presumed intelligence could think that this dire crap should be shown as entertainment. It is easy to laugh at the Mary Whitehouse's of this world, and plenty did. But I'm beginning to think...was she so far wrong???? Slippery slope is real.
|
|
|
| |
|
Alberich
|
Sep 9 2017, 03:42 PM
Post #5
|
- Posts:
- 1,690
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #8
- Joined:
- Jun 27, 2014
|
- Affa
- Sep 9 2017, 01:03 PM
- Alberich
- Sep 9 2017, 12:38 PM
Talking of channel hopping, I was idly flicking through the channels the other night, suffering from the usual "there is never anything on worth watching" syndrome, when I came across a programme on channel 4 that stopped me in my tracks. And, at the risk of sounding like Mary Whitehouse, my reaction was one of initial incredulity, followed by anger born out of despair. It was a programme that seemed to consist of a number of physically unattractive men filmed naked from the waist down being scrutinised by an equally repulsive female, whose task it was to pick the one she fancied the most; presumably on the size of his knob and dangly bits.
Now I am not a prude...honestly. But this wasn't some minority viewing channel that no-one has heard of. This was mainstream channel 4. And it occurred to me that someone senior at that station had authorised this as entertainment, and had gone to the trouble to put it into production, with all that that entails. And that angered me. NOT that naked flesh was on show...God knows there is enough available on the web....but that someone of presumed intelligence could think that this dire crap should be shown as entertainment. It is easy to laugh at the Mary Whitehouse's of this world, and plenty did. But I'm beginning to think...was she so far wrong????
Who made you watch it? I can always rely on you to miss the point completely. DO try and keep up; hard though that must be for you.
|
|
|
| |
|
marybrown
|
Sep 9 2017, 03:52 PM
Post #6
|
- Posts:
- 10,516
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #60
- Joined:
- Jul 27, 2014
|
- Alberich
- Sep 9 2017, 03:42 PM
- Affa
- Sep 9 2017, 01:03 PM
- Alberich
- Sep 9 2017, 12:38 PM
Talking of channel hopping, I was idly flicking through the channels the other night, suffering from the usual "there is never anything on worth watching" syndrome, when I came across a programme on channel 4 that stopped me in my tracks. And, at the risk of sounding like Mary Whitehouse, my reaction was one of initial incredulity, followed by anger born out of despair. It was a programme that seemed to consist of a number of physically unattractive men filmed naked from the waist down being scrutinised by an equally repulsive female, whose task it was to pick the one she fancied the most; presumably on the size of his knob and dangly bits.
Now I am not a prude...honestly. But this wasn't some minority viewing channel that no-one has heard of. This was mainstream channel 4. And it occurred to me that someone senior at that station had authorised this as entertainment, and had gone to the trouble to put it into production, with all that that entails. And that angered me. NOT that naked flesh was on show...God knows there is enough available on the web....but that someone of presumed intelligence could think that this dire crap should be shown as entertainment. It is easy to laugh at the Mary Whitehouse's of this world, and plenty did. But I'm beginning to think...was she so far wrong????
Who made you watch it?
I can always rely on you to miss the point completely. DO try and keep up; hard though that must be for you. I find the worse thing is..taking two mentally handicapped people..and watching the date..everyone is laughing and taking the piss..
|
|
|
| |
|
Jessamy Bride
|
Sep 9 2017, 04:25 PM
Post #7
|
- Posts:
- 1,939
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #29
- Joined:
- Jun 28, 2014
|
- Affa
- Sep 9 2017, 01:03 PM
- Alberich
- Sep 9 2017, 12:38 PM
Talking of channel hopping, I was idly flicking through the channels the other night, suffering from the usual "there is never anything on worth watching" syndrome, when I came across a programme on channel 4 that stopped me in my tracks. And, at the risk of sounding like Mary Whitehouse, my reaction was one of initial incredulity, followed by anger born out of despair. It was a programme that seemed to consist of a number of physically unattractive men filmed naked from the waist down being scrutinised by an equally repulsive female, whose task it was to pick the one she fancied the most; presumably on the size of his knob and dangly bits.
Now I am not a prude...honestly. But this wasn't some minority viewing channel that no-one has heard of. This was mainstream channel 4. And it occurred to me that someone senior at that station had authorised this as entertainment, and had gone to the trouble to put it into production, with all that that entails. And that angered me. NOT that naked flesh was on show...God knows there is enough available on the web....but that someone of presumed intelligence could think that this dire crap should be shown as entertainment. It is easy to laugh at the Mary Whitehouse's of this world, and plenty did. But I'm beginning to think...was she so far wrong????
Who made you watch it? I saw that last night ..... and you have to watch it so that you know who the body bits belong to.
Terrible TV. None of the people were compatible at all .....and were never are going to be.
You can't decide whether to go on a date based on how hairy a person is.
|
|
|
| |
|
Steve K
|
Sep 9 2017, 04:39 PM
Post #8
|
- Posts:
- 33,954
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- Jun 27, 2014
|
Strange mash up it may be but Channel 4's 8 out of 10 cats do Countdown is great TV
|
|
|
| |
|
johnofgwent
|
Sep 9 2017, 04:42 PM
Post #9
|
- Posts:
- 7,075
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #1
- Joined:
- Jun 26, 2014
|
- Alberich
- Sep 9 2017, 12:38 PM
Talking of channel hopping, I was idly flicking through the channels the other night, suffering from the usual "there is never anything on worth watching" syndrome, when I came across a programme on channel 4 that stopped me in my tracks. And, at the risk of sounding like Mary Whitehouse, my reaction was one of initial incredulity, followed by anger born out of despair. It was a programme that seemed to consist of a number of physically unattractive men filmed naked from the waist down being scrutinised by an equally repulsive female, whose task it was to pick the one she fancied the most; presumably on the size of his knob and dangly bits.
Now I am not a prude...honestly. But this wasn't some minority viewing channel that no-one has heard of. This was mainstream channel 4. And it occurred to me that someone senior at that station had authorised this as entertainment, and had gone to the trouble to put it into production, with all that that entails. And that angered me. NOT that naked flesh was on show...God knows there is enough available on the web....but that someone of presumed intelligence could think that this dire crap should be shown as entertainment. It is easy to laugh at the Mary Whitehouse's of this world, and plenty did. But I'm beginning to think...was she so far wrong???? oh, you tuned in to part two ...
guess what part one was all about ?
hint - there's a youtube video of what i sincerely hope was a spoof with four vicars.
|
|
|
| |
|
johnofgwent
|
Sep 9 2017, 05:00 PM
Post #10
|
- Posts:
- 7,075
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #1
- Joined:
- Jun 26, 2014
|
- Alberich
- Sep 9 2017, 03:42 PM
- Affa
- Sep 9 2017, 01:03 PM
- Alberich
- Sep 9 2017, 12:38 PM
Talking of channel hopping, I was idly flicking through the channels the other night, suffering from the usual "there is never anything on worth watching" syndrome, when I came across a programme on channel 4 that stopped me in my tracks. And, at the risk of sounding like Mary Whitehouse, my reaction was one of initial incredulity, followed by anger born out of despair. It was a programme that seemed to consist of a number of physically unattractive men filmed naked from the waist down being scrutinised by an equally repulsive female, whose task it was to pick the one she fancied the most; presumably on the size of his knob and dangly bits.
Now I am not a prude...honestly. But this wasn't some minority viewing channel that no-one has heard of. This was mainstream channel 4. And it occurred to me that someone senior at that station had authorised this as entertainment, and had gone to the trouble to put it into production, with all that that entails. And that angered me. NOT that naked flesh was on show...God knows there is enough available on the web....but that someone of presumed intelligence could think that this dire crap should be shown as entertainment. It is easy to laugh at the Mary Whitehouse's of this world, and plenty did. But I'm beginning to think...was she so far wrong????
Who made you watch it?
I can always rely on you to miss the point completely. DO try and keep up; hard though that must be for you. Well, i wil lcome to mary whitehouse in a moment.
But on your main point, I agree with you. Moira flicked through the other night heading from BBC1 to Film 4. And when she got to channel 4, there's a pair of (nope, can't say it, steve will ban me) on legs with the rest of the owner covered up in a cubicle, with some (cloothed) woman "presenter" and some bloke discussing the finer points of how they're structured.....
And at first we both wondered whether freesat had reshuffled its channels, because as you say, there is plenty of well oiled naked flesh stuff (far more entertaining than this) on many of the other channels I could acquire witha little effort and absolutely sod all outlay. I remember Sat Eins Plus had this rather strange film with the actor that played Mr Claypole in rentaghost, (or his doppleganger) hogtied butt naked to a milka cow on which he's sat back to front by some topless milkmaids ... for example, and in some strange way I found what was going on in that film peculiarly fiunny.
I would LOVe to see the viewing figures for this thing.
And isn't Channel 4 in receipt of some taxpayers loot ???
And no, nobody MADE me watch this, except for the fact that for about a minute and a half we both sat there thinking "what the holy fuck is this and are we sure the channels are what they say they are" but if somebody's used my fucking tax money to subsidise it ...
Now, I said I'd come back to mary whitehouse.
I remember her interview with someone (my pal says it was ludo kennedy) when she was well and truly shot down IMO by his rather straightforward "So, Mrs Whitehouse, would you like to tell the viiewers exactly how many people there are in your national viewers and listeners association.... don't you think the viewers of this programme are entitled to know just how many people you represent ..."
she wasn't terribly forthcoming, so he revealed it was a hundred and forty something ...
Im muy opinion, whitehouse was the other extreme of what this is;
|
|
|
| |
|
johnofgwent
|
Sep 9 2017, 05:06 PM
Post #11
|
- Posts:
- 7,075
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #1
- Joined:
- Jun 26, 2014
|
- Steve K
- Sep 9 2017, 04:39 PM
Strange mash up it may be but Channel 4's 8 out of 10 cats do Countdown is great TV
yes, it is ... watchable.
ok humour and so on is a funny thing, ad as I have said, I found game of thrones so bloody B-O-R-I-N-G after three episodes of season 1 i could nnot be arsed to watch anothe rminute. I don't care what i'm missing if it warmed up. They had their chance to captivate me, the way CSI did, and the way breaking bad did, and they F-A-I-L-E-D.
I suppose these days I give a programme about as much chance as most recruiters give my CV
|
|
|
| |
|
Rich
|
Sep 9 2017, 06:07 PM
Post #12
|
- Posts:
- 14,458
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #30
- Joined:
- Jun 28, 2014
|
- Affa
- Sep 9 2017, 01:03 PM
- Alberich
- Sep 9 2017, 12:38 PM
Talking of channel hopping, I was idly flicking through the channels the other night, suffering from the usual "there is never anything on worth watching" syndrome, when I came across a programme on channel 4 that stopped me in my tracks. And, at the risk of sounding like Mary Whitehouse, my reaction was one of initial incredulity, followed by anger born out of despair. It was a programme that seemed to consist of a number of physically unattractive men filmed naked from the waist down being scrutinised by an equally repulsive female, whose task it was to pick the one she fancied the most; presumably on the size of his knob and dangly bits.
Now I am not a prude...honestly. But this wasn't some minority viewing channel that no-one has heard of. This was mainstream channel 4. And it occurred to me that someone senior at that station had authorised this as entertainment, and had gone to the trouble to put it into production, with all that that entails. And that angered me. NOT that naked flesh was on show...God knows there is enough available on the web....but that someone of presumed intelligence could think that this dire crap should be shown as entertainment. It is easy to laugh at the Mary Whitehouse's of this world, and plenty did. But I'm beginning to think...was she so far wrong????
Who made you watch it? I think you miss the point Affa, someone is being paid to broadcast such shite when soft/hard porn is already easily available on the net, (so I am told but have no interest in)
|
|
|
| |
|
Steve K
|
Sep 9 2017, 06:22 PM
Post #13
|
- Posts:
- 33,954
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- Jun 27, 2014
|
- Rich
- Sep 9 2017, 06:07 PM
- Affa
- Sep 9 2017, 01:03 PM
- Alberich
- Sep 9 2017, 12:38 PM
Talking of channel hopping, I was idly flicking through the channels the other night, suffering from the usual "there is never anything on worth watching" syndrome, when I came across a programme on channel 4 that stopped me in my tracks. And, at the risk of sounding like Mary Whitehouse, my reaction was one of initial incredulity, followed by anger born out of despair. It was a programme that seemed to consist of a number of physically unattractive men filmed naked from the waist down being scrutinised by an equally repulsive female, whose task it was to pick the one she fancied the most; presumably on the size of his knob and dangly bits.
Now I am not a prude...honestly. But this wasn't some minority viewing channel that no-one has heard of. This was mainstream channel 4. And it occurred to me that someone senior at that station had authorised this as entertainment, and had gone to the trouble to put it into production, with all that that entails. And that angered me. NOT that naked flesh was on show...God knows there is enough available on the web....but that someone of presumed intelligence could think that this dire crap should be shown as entertainment. It is easy to laugh at the Mary Whitehouse's of this world, and plenty did. But I'm beginning to think...was she so far wrong????
Who made you watch it?
I think you miss the point Affa, someone is being paid to broadcast such shite. . So?
Tawdry it may be but it is apparently one of the highest viewed programmes on Channel 4 so will be paid for by advertising revenue and is on after 10pm so well beyond the water shed
|
|
|
| |
|
Rich
|
Sep 9 2017, 08:07 PM
Post #14
|
- Posts:
- 14,458
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #30
- Joined:
- Jun 28, 2014
|
- Steve K
- Sep 9 2017, 06:22 PM
- Rich
- Sep 9 2017, 06:07 PM
- Affa
- Sep 9 2017, 01:03 PM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
I think you miss the point Affa, someone is being paid to broadcast such shite. .
So? Tawdry it may be but it is apparently one of the highest viewed programmes on Channel 4 so will be paid for by advertising revenue and is on after 10pm so well beyond the water shed It would not bother me if it was shown at lunchtime.....what gets me is the fact that the broadcasters hold the minds of the viewing public in such low esteem as to think that it is "watchable".....bugger me, if you have nothing better to do than watch such rubbish then you are wasting your life (I must confess, I am commenting upon something I have never seen).
|
|
|
| |
|
johnofgwent
|
Sep 9 2017, 08:15 PM
Post #15
|
- Posts:
- 7,075
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #1
- Joined:
- Jun 26, 2014
|
anyway, back to the channel in papa's OP .... if anyone else wants to see what it's all about and can't be arsed to set up their very own steerable satellite dish ...
http://wwitv.com/tv_channels/b6733-iFilm-English.htm
|
|
|
| |
|
papasmurf
|
Sep 10 2017, 08:43 AM
Post #16
|
- Posts:
- 17,277
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #13
- Joined:
- Jun 27, 2014
|
- johnofgwent
- Sep 9 2017, 08:15 PM
Link to the home page:-
http://www.ifilmtv.com/English/Home/Index
|
|
|
| |
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
|