Home  

Members  

Join  

Search  

Listings  

 
<<<<   410   >>>>

Topic: Gyles Brandreth

Message 1 / 15
juliajellicoeFeb 11, 2007
 

 
has the most interesting quality to me. He's so pompous that I want to
kiss him. I'm not sure how to explain that, as I'm not naturally
compelled to kiss pompous men (even as only an element of
distraction), but I know he gets up some people's noses and somehow I
find him endearing. OK, discuss.

 
<<<<   411   >>>>

Topic: Re: Gyles Brandreth

Message 2 / 15
Sarah FalkFeb 11, 2007
 

 
I designed, for my friends and me, fantastic, tongue-in-cheek shirts
labeled "To Do List", with the pictures of 25-odd people underneath.

Mine has Gyles Brandreth on it.

I'm still not quite sure why.

Um.

--- In just-a-minute@..., "juliajellicoe"
<juliajellicoe@...> wrote:

>
> has the most interesting quality to me. He's so pompous that I want to
> kiss him. I'm not sure how to explain that, as I'm not naturally
> compelled to kiss pompous men (even as only an element of
> distraction), but I know he gets up some people's noses and somehow I
> find him endearing. OK, discuss.
>

 
<<<<   412   >>>>

Topic: Re: Gyles Brandreth

Message 3 / 15
Robert TorresFeb 11, 2007
 

 
Gyles is awesome!  upon his first appearance he hit the ground running marvelously, clearly not being afraid of anyone, especially Nicholas and hitting all the right notes of intellect, wit, and humor.  he is always a welcome presence on the show, plus he has a fruity voice that reminds one of Derek Nimmo, which helps. 

juliajellicoe <juliajellicoe@...> wrote:

has the most interesting quality to me. He's so pompous that I want to
kiss him. I'm not sure how to explain that, as I'm not naturally
compelled to kiss pompous men (even as only an element of
distraction) , but I know he gets up some people's noses and somehow I
find him endearing. OK, discuss.

---

No need to miss a message. Get email on-the-go
with Yahoo! Mail for Mobile. Get started.

 
<<<<   414   >>>>

Topic: Re: Gyles Brandreth

Message 4 / 15
Nathan LeonardFeb 12, 2007
 

 
I imagine I probably wouldn't get on very well with him if I met him, but from a distance he is very entertaining.

 
<<<<   415   >>>>

Topic: Re: Gyles Brandreth

Message 5 / 15
DaveFeb 12, 2007
 

 
Of course he gets up your nose, he was a Tory MP for gods sake!

So how come I'm prepared to forgive him that little bit more everytime
I hear him on Just A Minute? And - you couldn't help but marvel at his
knowledge (or was it bluff?) on his QI appearance.

--- In just-a-minute@..., "juliajellicoe"
<juliajellicoe@...> wrote:

>
> has the most interesting quality to me. He's so pompous that I want to
> kiss him. I'm not sure how to explain that, as I'm not naturally
> compelled to kiss pompous men (even as only an element of
> distraction), but I know he gets up some people's noses and somehow I
> find him endearing. OK, discuss.
>

 
<<<<   416   >>>>

Topic: Re: Gyles Brandreth

Message 6 / 15
Sarah FalkFeb 12, 2007
 

 
Oh, God, Gyles on QI? Phenomonal! He knew absolutely everything (except for the fact that there are words that rhyme with "purple"). The only one who ever comes close to matching him is John Sessions (and perhaps Rory McGrath, but he was just grating . . .). If anyone is interested:

Link to download the entire episode;

or for those who can't be bothered:

Link to watch the entire episode on YouTube;

or for people with a particular liking for textual renditions:

Link to the transcript, a-thank you. 

Who says I don't provide for my dear ones?

--- In just-a-minute@..., "Dave" <j_a_m_fan@...> wrote:
>
> Of course he gets up your nose, he was a Tory MP for gods sake!
>
> So how come I'm prepared to forgive him that little bit more everytime
> I hear him on Just A Minute?  And - you couldn't help but marvel at his
> knowledge (or was it bluff?) on his QI appearance.
>
> --- In just-a-minute@..., "juliajellicoe"
> <juliajellicoe@> wrote:
> >
> > has the most interesting quality to me. He's so pompous that I want to
> > kiss him. I'm not sure how to explain that, as I'm not naturally
> > compelled to kiss pompous men (even as only an element of
> > distraction), but I know he gets up some people's noses and somehow I
> > find him endearing. OK, discuss.
> >
>

 
<<<<   418   >>>>

Topic: Re: Gyles Brandreth

Message 7 / 15
Nathan LeonardFeb 12, 2007
 

 
I quite liked Rory McGrath.  The one who irritated me was Danny Baker, because he knew everything, but I still couldn't stand him.

The thing I've noticed about Qi, though, is that people tend to do much better on their first appearence.  I think this is for two reasons.  1)  Stephen goes a bit easier on them, and 2) they have a lot more interesting things to say, because by their second appearence, they've already told their most interesting facts and anecdotes in their first.  I've noticed this correlation with John Sessions, Danny Baker, and Jeremy Clarkson.  People seem to do less well at Qi with each successive appearence (except for Alan, who seems to have pulled his finger out in the latest series and decided to start trying).

On 2/12/07, Sarah Falk <minerva.moon@...> wrote:

Oh, God, Gyles on QI? Phenomonal! He knew absolutely everything (except for the fact that there are words that rhyme with "purple"). The only one who ever comes close to matching him is John Sessions (and perhaps Rory McGrath, but he was just grating . . .). If anyone is interested:

Link to download the entire episode;

or for those who can't be bothered:

Link to watch the entire episode on YouTube;

or for people with a particular liking for textual renditions:

Link to the transcript, a-thank you.  

Who says I don't provide for my dear ones?

--- In just-a-minute@..., "Dave" <j_a_m_fan@...> wrote:
>
> Of course he gets up your nose, he was a Tory MP for gods sake!
>
> So how come I'm prepared to forgive him that little bit more everytime
> I hear him on Just A Minute?  And - you couldn't help but marvel at his
> knowledge (or was it bluff?) on his QI appearance.
>
> --- In just-a-minute@..., "juliajellicoe"
> <juliajellicoe@> wrote:
> >
> > has the most interesting quality to me. He's so pompous that I want to
> > kiss him. I'm not sure how to explain that, as I'm not naturally
> > compelled to kiss pompous men (even as only an element of
> > distraction), but I know he gets up some people's noses and somehow I
> > find him endearing. OK, discuss.
> >
>

 
<<<<   419   >>>>

Topic: Re: Gyles Brandreth

Message 8 / 15
Sarah FalkFeb 12, 2007
 

 
(I was typing a reply to you and Firefox "quit unexpectedly". No
kidding it was unexpected. Ugh. Take two . . .)

I don't have anything against Rory, really, but his displays of
knowledge were less entertaining and more tiresome than Gyles's were.
Danny Baker I like, because you can tell that he's genuinely
interested in things. I would cite you examples (and I did in my first
draft), but you probably have to watch it to understand what I'm
talking about. I find it endearing.

In QI, as in "Just a Minute", people generally seem to do well if
they're new panellists, mostly because everyone--Stephen, the
regulars, the scorers--are easy on them so that they feel relaxed. But
I mean that in the sense that newcomers usually win against the
regulars, not that they do continually worse. I wouldn't say that they
run out of interesting things to say; not at all. I know that Jeremy
Clarkson won two games: his first and his last, out of three. And
Danny Baker won both of his, and scored higher on the second than on
the first!

--- In just-a-minute@..., "Nathan Leonard"
<dreadedwoekitten@...> wrote:

>
> I quite liked Rory McGrath. The one who irritated me was Danny Baker,
> because he knew everything, but I still couldn't stand him.
>
> The thing I've noticed about Qi, though, is that people tend to do much
> better on their first appearence. I think this is for two reasons. 1)
> Stephen goes a bit easier on them, and 2) they have a lot more

interesting

> things to say, because by their second appearence, they've already told
> their most interesting facts and anecdotes in their first. I've noticed
> this correlation with John Sessions, Danny Baker, and Jeremy Clarkson.
> People seem to do less well at Qi with each successive appearence

(except

> for Alan, who seems to have pulled his finger out in the latest

series and

> decided to start trying).
>
> On 2/12/07, Sarah Falk <minerva.moon@...> wrote:
> >
> > Oh, God, Gyles on QI? Phenomonal! He knew *absolutely*

*everything*(except for the fact that there are words that rhyme with
"purple"). The

> > only one who ever comes close to matching him is John Sessions

(and perhaps

> > Rory McGrath, but he was just grating . . .). If anyone is interested:
> >
> > Link to download the entire

episode;<http://www.gigasize.com/get.php/362814/QI_1x05__Rob_Brydon_Rich_Hall_Gyles_Brandreth_TD.avi>

> >
> > or for those who can't be bothered:
> >
> > Link to watch the entire episode on

YouTube;<http://www.youtube.com/results.php?search_query=qi+gyles+brandreth>

> >
> > or for people with a particular liking for textual renditions:
> >
> > Link to the transcript, a-thank

you.<http://www.freewebs.com/qitranscripts/105.htm>

> >
> >
> > Who says I don't provide for my dear ones?
> >
> > --- In just-a-minute@..., "Dave" <j_a_m_fan@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Of course he gets up your nose, he was a Tory MP for gods sake!
> > >
> > > So how come I'm prepared to forgive him that little bit more

everytime

> > > I hear him on Just A Minute? And - you couldn't help but marvel

at his

> > > knowledge (or was it bluff?) on his QI appearance.
> > >
> > > --- In just-a-minute@..., "juliajellicoe"
> > > <juliajellicoe@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > has the most interesting quality to me. He's so pompous that I

want to

> > > > kiss him. I'm not sure how to explain that, as I'm not naturally
> > > > compelled to kiss pompous men (even as only an element of
> > > > distraction), but I know he gets up some people's noses and

somehow I

> > > > find him endearing. OK, discuss.
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>

 
<<<<   425   >>>>

Topic: Re: Gyles Brandreth

Message 9 / 15
Nathan LeonardFeb 14, 2007
 

 
Okay, I admit that I didn't actually take note of their scores.  Anyway, since the total number of points scored in each episode varies so greatly, I think it's probably fair to say that Stephen (or whoever keeps the score) has generous days and harsh days.

I don't think it's the same in Just a Minute at all, though.  Most of the people who I've heard on it for the first time (at least in the last couple of series) have finished in "a triumphant fourth place", as Nicholas puts it.  That's because Just a Minute is different to most panel games in that there is actually a game involved, and a game that's quite difficult, at that.

As for Danny Baker, I don't know why I dislike him so much, he just really gets on my tits for no apparent reason.  At least it was for no apparent reason, then I downloaded some of his Xfm shows off UKNova, and I realised how collossally arrogant he was, and that he wasn't as clever as he seemed to be.  For example, at one point he ridicules a caller while on the line and then repeatedly through the rest of the show because the caller made the (correct) statement that clouds are moved by the wind.  Baker believed (and would not be corrected in this) that the clouds always stayed in the same place and the Earth just rotated beneath them.  I mean, come on.  If that was the case, then the weather forecast would be the same every day.  Furthermore, the reason the caller called up to mention this was that Baker had suggested that people should travel by flying straight up and then just waiting for the Earth to rotate beneath them before landing again - the caller was just phoning up to point out the existence of air and the fact that it rotates along with the Earth, but Baker would not be told.  And that was not an isolated incident.  In the end I couldn't get through all the shows I'd downloaded because of his collossally misguided arrogance, and just had to delete them.

I take heart from this because originally, I just didn't like him because of gut feeling, but I was later vindicated.  This is the converse of Phill Jupitus, to whom I also took an instant dislike, but whom I am now getting into.

On 2/13/07, Sarah Falk <minerva.moon@...> wrote:

(I was typing a reply to you and Firefox "quit unexpectedly". No
kidding it was unexpected. Ugh. Take two . . .)

I don't have anything against Rory, really, but his displays of
knowledge were less entertaining and more tiresome than Gyles's were.
Danny Baker I like, because you can tell that he's genuinely
interested in things. I would cite you examples (and I did in my first
draft), but you probably have to watch it to understand what I'm
talking about. I find it endearing.

In QI, as in "Just a Minute", people generally seem to do well if
they're new panellists, mostly because everyone--Stephen, the
regulars, the scorers--are easy on them so that they feel relaxed. But
I mean that in the sense that newcomers usually win against the
regulars, not that they do continually worse. I wouldn't say that they
run out of interesting things to say; not at all. I know that Jeremy
Clarkson won two games: his first and his last, out of three. And
Danny Baker won both of his, and scored higher on the second than on
the first!

--- In just-a-minute@..., "Nathan Leonard"
<dreadedwoekitten@...> wrote:
>
> I quite liked Rory McGrath. The one who irritated me was Danny Baker,
> because he knew everything, but I still couldn't stand him.
>
> The thing I've noticed about Qi, though, is that people tend to do much
> better on their first appearence. I think this is for two reasons. 1)
> Stephen goes a bit easier on them, and 2) they have a lot more
interesting
> things to say, because by their second appearence, they've already told
> their most interesting facts and anecdotes in their first. I've noticed
> this correlation with John Sessions, Danny Baker, and Jeremy Clarkson.
> People seem to do less well at Qi with each successive appearence
(except
> for Alan, who seems to have pulled his finger out in the latest
series and
> decided to start trying).
>
> On 2/12/07, Sarah Falk <minerva.moon@...> wrote:
> >
> > Oh, God, Gyles on QI? Phenomonal! He knew *absolutely*
*everything*(except for the fact that there are words that rhyme with
"purple"). The
> > only one who ever comes close to matching him is John Sessions
(and perhaps
> > Rory McGrath, but he was just grating . . .). If anyone is interested:
> >
> > Link to download the entire
episode;<http://www.gigasize.com/get.php/362814/QI_1x05__Rob_Brydon_Rich_Hall_Gyles_Brandreth_TD.avi >
> >
> > or for those who can't be bothered:
> >
> > Link to watch the entire episode on
YouTube;<http://www.youtube.com/results.php?search_query=qi+gyles+brandreth >
> >
> > or for people with a particular liking for textual renditions:
> >
> > Link to the transcript, a-thank
you.<http://www.freewebs.com/qitranscripts/105.htm>
> >
> >
> > Who says I don't provide for my dear ones?
> >
> > --- In just-a-minute@..., "Dave" <j_a_m_fan@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Of course he gets up your nose, he was a Tory MP for gods sake!
> > >
> > > So how come I'm prepared to forgive him that little bit more
everytime
> > > I hear him on Just A Minute? And - you couldn't help but marvel
at his
> > > knowledge (or was it bluff?) on his QI appearance.
> > >
> > > --- In just-a-minute@..., "juliajellicoe"
> > > <juliajellicoe@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > has the most interesting quality to me. He's so pompous that I
want to
> > > > kiss him. I'm not sure how to explain that, as I'm not naturally
> > > > compelled to kiss pompous men (even as only an element of
> > > > distraction), but I know he gets up some people's noses and
somehow I
> > > > find him endearing. OK, discuss.
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>

 
<<<<   426   >>>>

Topic: Re: Gyles Brandreth

Message 10 / 15
Sarah FalkFeb 14, 2007
 

 
In JAM, it's true that the newcomers often finish last, but they are
also often given points very generously by Nicholas and the other
panellists, who do things like purposely buzzing in incorrectly while
the newcomer is speaking. The thing is that the regulars are still so
good that they end up winning anyway . . . but they aren't greedy
about it.

I think part of the reason why newcomers on QI win, as well, is that
you can lose collosal amounts of points by forfeits, and the regulars
aren't afraid to shout out the "obvious" answers for the sake of
comedy. The newcomers generally are trying to "do well".

I haven't watched/listened to any Danny Baker past QI, so perhaps I
haven't gotten the real measure of him. I do like him from what I've
seen, but that cloud thing is worrysome. Someone should ask him what
would happen if a ball was thrown in the air by someone inside a
moving car--according to his logic, you wouldn't be able to catch it
again!

Phill Jupitus is pretty good, in my opinion; not really one of my very
favorites, but he's not a killjoy by any definition. His Stephen
impressions are some of the highlights of the show.

--- In just-a-minute@..., "Nathan Leonard"
<dreadedwoekitten@...> wrote:

>
> Okay, I admit that I didn't actually take note of their scores. Anyway,
> since the total number of points scored in each episode varies so

greatly, I

> think it's probably fair to say that Stephen (or whoever keeps the

score)

> has generous days and harsh days.
>
> I don't think it's the same in Just a Minute at all, though. Most

of the

> people who I've heard on it for the first time (at least in the last

couple

> of series) have finished in "a triumphant fourth place", as Nicholas

puts

> it. That's because Just a Minute is different to most panel games

in that

> there is actually a game involved, and a game that's quite difficult, at
> that.
>
> As for Danny Baker, I don't know why I dislike him so much, he just

really

> gets on my tits for no apparent reason. At least it was for no apparent
> reason, then I downloaded some of his Xfm shows off UKNova, and I

realised

> how collossally arrogant he was, and that he wasn't as clever as he

seemed

> to be. For example, at one point he ridicules a caller while on the

line

> and then repeatedly through the rest of the show because the caller

made the

> (correct) statement that clouds are moved by the wind. Baker

believed (and

> would not be corrected in this) that the clouds always stayed in the

same

> place and the Earth just rotated beneath them. I mean, come on. If

that

> was the case, then the weather forecast would be the same every day.
> Furthermore, the reason the caller called up to mention this was

that Baker

> had suggested that people should travel by flying straight up and

then just

> waiting for the Earth to rotate beneath them before landing again - the
> caller was just phoning up to point out the existence of air and the

fact

> that it rotates along with the Earth, but Baker would not be told.

And that

> was not an isolated incident. In the end I couldn't get through all the
> shows I'd downloaded because of his collossally misguided arrogance, and
> just had to delete them.
>
> I take heart from this because originally, I just didn't like him

because of

> gut feeling, but I was later vindicated. This is the converse of Phill
> Jupitus, to whom I also took an instant dislike, but whom I am now

getting

> into.
>
> On 2/13/07, Sarah Falk <minerva.moon@...> wrote:
> >
> > (I was typing a reply to you and Firefox "quit unexpectedly". No
> > kidding it was unexpected. Ugh. Take two . . .)
> >
> > I don't have anything against Rory, really, but his displays of
> > knowledge were less entertaining and more tiresome than Gyles's were.
> > Danny Baker I like, because you can tell that he's genuinely
> > interested in things. I would cite you examples (and I did in my first
> > draft), but you probably have to watch it to understand what I'm
> > talking about. I find it endearing.
> >
> > In QI, as in "Just a Minute", people generally seem to do well if
> > they're new panellists, mostly because everyone--Stephen, the
> > regulars, the scorers--are easy on them so that they feel relaxed. But
> > I mean that in the sense that newcomers usually win against the
> > regulars, not that they do continually worse. I wouldn't say that they
> > run out of interesting things to say; not at all. I know that Jeremy
> > Clarkson won two games: his first and his last, out of three. And
> > Danny Baker won both of his, and scored higher on the second than on
> > the first!
> >

 
<<<<   430   >>>>

Topic: Re: Gyles Brandreth

Message 11 / 15
lindaFeb 14, 2007
 

 

---

New Yahoo! Mail is the ultimate force in competitive emailing. Find out more at the Yahoo! Mail Championships. Plus: play games and win prizes.

 
<<<<   431   >>>>

Topic: Re: Gyles Brandreth

Message 12 / 15
DaveFeb 14, 2007
 

 
My opinion og Phil Jupitus rose a great deal when I saw him on TV
doing his own stand up show a few years back now. It was really quite
good.

--- In just-a-minute@..., "Sarah Falk" <minerva.moon@...>
wrote:

>
> In JAM, it's true that the newcomers often finish last, but they are
> also often given points very generously by Nicholas and the other
> panellists, who do things like purposely buzzing in incorrectly

while

> the newcomer is speaking. The thing is that the regulars are still

so

> good that they end up winning anyway . . . but they aren't greedy
> about it.
>
> I think part of the reason why newcomers on QI win, as well, is that
> you can lose collosal amounts of points by forfeits, and the

regulars

> aren't afraid to shout out the "obvious" answers for the sake of
> comedy. The newcomers generally are trying to "do well".
>
> I haven't watched/listened to any Danny Baker past QI, so perhaps I
> haven't gotten the real measure of him. I do like him from what I've
> seen, but that cloud thing is worrysome. Someone should ask him what
> would happen if a ball was thrown in the air by someone inside a
> moving car--according to his logic, you wouldn't be able to catch it
> again!
>
> Phill Jupitus is pretty good, in my opinion; not really one of my

very

> favorites, but he's not a killjoy by any definition. His Stephen
> impressions are some of the highlights of the show.
>
> --- In just-a-minute@..., "Nathan Leonard"
> <dreadedwoekitten@> wrote:
> >
> > Okay, I admit that I didn't actually take note of their scores.

Anyway,

> > since the total number of points scored in each episode varies so
> greatly, I
> > think it's probably fair to say that Stephen (or whoever keeps the
> score)
> > has generous days and harsh days.
> >
> > I don't think it's the same in Just a Minute at all, though. Most
> of the
> > people who I've heard on it for the first time (at least in the

last

> couple
> > of series) have finished in "a triumphant fourth place", as

Nicholas

> puts
> > it. That's because Just a Minute is different to most panel games
> in that
> > there is actually a game involved, and a game that's quite

difficult, at

> > that.
> >
> > As for Danny Baker, I don't know why I dislike him so much, he

just

> really
> > gets on my tits for no apparent reason. At least it was for no

apparent

> > reason, then I downloaded some of his Xfm shows off UKNova, and I
> realised
> > how collossally arrogant he was, and that he wasn't as clever as

he

> seemed
> > to be. For example, at one point he ridicules a caller while on

the

> line
> > and then repeatedly through the rest of the show because the

caller

> made the
> > (correct) statement that clouds are moved by the wind. Baker
> believed (and
> > would not be corrected in this) that the clouds always stayed in

the

> same
> > place and the Earth just rotated beneath them. I mean, come on.

If

> that
> > was the case, then the weather forecast would be the same every

day.

> > Furthermore, the reason the caller called up to mention this was
> that Baker
> > had suggested that people should travel by flying straight up and
> then just
> > waiting for the Earth to rotate beneath them before landing

again - the

> > caller was just phoning up to point out the existence of air and

the

> fact
> > that it rotates along with the Earth, but Baker would not be

told.

> And that
> > was not an isolated incident. In the end I couldn't get through

all the

> > shows I'd downloaded because of his collossally misguided

arrogance, and

> > just had to delete them.
> >
> > I take heart from this because originally, I just didn't like him
> because of
> > gut feeling, but I was later vindicated. This is the converse of

Phill

> > Jupitus, to whom I also took an instant dislike, but whom I am now
> getting
> > into.
> >
> > On 2/13/07, Sarah Falk <minerva.moon@> wrote:
> > >
> > > (I was typing a reply to you and Firefox "quit unexpectedly".

No

> > > kidding it was unexpected. Ugh. Take two . . .)
> > >
> > > I don't have anything against Rory, really, but his displays of
> > > knowledge were less entertaining and more tiresome than Gyles's

were.

> > > Danny Baker I like, because you can tell that he's genuinely
> > > interested in things. I would cite you examples (and I did in

my first

> > > draft), but you probably have to watch it to understand what I'm
> > > talking about. I find it endearing.
> > >
> > > In QI, as in "Just a Minute", people generally seem to do well

if

> > > they're new panellists, mostly because everyone--Stephen, the
> > > regulars, the scorers--are easy on them so that they feel

relaxed. But

> > > I mean that in the sense that newcomers usually win against the
> > > regulars, not that they do continually worse. I wouldn't say

that they

> > > run out of interesting things to say; not at all. I know that

Jeremy

> > > Clarkson won two games: his first and his last, out of three.

And

> > > Danny Baker won both of his, and scored higher on the second

than on

> > > the first!
> > >
>

 
<<<<   436   >>>>

Topic: Re: Gyles Brandreth

Message 13 / 15
Nathan LeonardFeb 16, 2007
 

 
"His [Phill Jupitus's] Stephen impressions are some of the highlights of the show [Qi]."

Agreed.  I love it when they all start to lay into Stephen.  He takes it very well, I think.

 
<<<<   438   >>>>

Topic: Re: Gyles Brandreth

Message 14 / 15
juliajellicoeFeb 16, 2007
 

 
Bringing this subject BACK to Gyles, I just heard an episode with him,
Derek, Kenneth and Sheila. You KNOW it's something different when
Kenneth is only the third most florid panelist.

--- In just-a-minute@..., "Nathan Leonard"
<dreadedwoekitten@...> wrote:

>
> "His [Phill Jupitus's] Stephen impressions are some of the

highlights of the

> show [Qi]."
>
> Agreed. I love it when they all start to lay into Stephen. He takes it
> very well, I think.
>
>
> On 2/14/07, Dave <j_a_m_fan@...> wrote:
> >
> > My opinion og Phil Jupitus rose a great deal when I saw him on TV
> > doing his own stand up show a few years back now. It was really quite
> > good.
> >
> > --- In just-a-minute@...

<just-a-minute%40yahoogroups.com>,

> > "Sarah Falk" <minerva.moon@>
> >
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > In JAM, it's true that the newcomers often finish last, but they are
> > > also often given points very generously by Nicholas and the other
> > > panellists, who do things like purposely buzzing in incorrectly
> > while
> > > the newcomer is speaking. The thing is that the regulars are still
> > so
> > > good that they end up winning anyway . . . but they aren't greedy
> > > about it.
> > >
> > > I think part of the reason why newcomers on QI win, as well, is that
> > > you can lose collosal amounts of points by forfeits, and the
> > regulars
> > > aren't afraid to shout out the "obvious" answers for the sake of
> > > comedy. The newcomers generally are trying to "do well".
> > >
> > > I haven't watched/listened to any Danny Baker past QI, so perhaps I
> > > haven't gotten the real measure of him. I do like him from what I've
> > > seen, but that cloud thing is worrysome. Someone should ask him what
> > > would happen if a ball was thrown in the air by someone inside a
> > > moving car--according to his logic, you wouldn't be able to catch it
> > > again!
> > >
> > > Phill Jupitus is pretty good, in my opinion; not really one of my
> > very
> > > favorites, but he's not a killjoy by any definition. His Stephen
> > > impressions are some of the highlights of the show.
> > >
> > > --- In just-a-minute@...

<just-a-minute%40yahoogroups.com>,

> > "Nathan Leonard"
> > > <dreadedwoekitten@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Okay, I admit that I didn't actually take note of their scores.
> > Anyway,
> > > > since the total number of points scored in each episode varies so
> > > greatly, I
> > > > think it's probably fair to say that Stephen (or whoever keeps the
> > > score)
> > > > has generous days and harsh days.
> > > >
> > > > I don't think it's the same in Just a Minute at all, though. Most
> > > of the
> > > > people who I've heard on it for the first time (at least in the
> > last
> > > couple
> > > > of series) have finished in "a triumphant fourth place", as
> > Nicholas
> > > puts
> > > > it. That's because Just a Minute is different to most panel games
> > > in that
> > > > there is actually a game involved, and a game that's quite
> > difficult, at
> > > > that.
> > > >
> > > > As for Danny Baker, I don't know why I dislike him so much, he
> > just
> > > really
> > > > gets on my tits for no apparent reason. At least it was for no
> > apparent
> > > > reason, then I downloaded some of his Xfm shows off UKNova, and I
> > > realised
> > > > how collossally arrogant he was, and that he wasn't as clever as
> > he
> > > seemed
> > > > to be. For example, at one point he ridicules a caller while on
> > the
> > > line
> > > > and then repeatedly through the rest of the show because the
> > caller
> > > made the
> > > > (correct) statement that clouds are moved by the wind. Baker
> > > believed (and
> > > > would not be corrected in this) that the clouds always stayed in
> > the
> > > same
> > > > place and the Earth just rotated beneath them. I mean, come on.
> > If
> > > that
> > > > was the case, then the weather forecast would be the same every
> > day.
> > > > Furthermore, the reason the caller called up to mention this was
> > > that Baker
> > > > had suggested that people should travel by flying straight up and
> > > then just
> > > > waiting for the Earth to rotate beneath them before landing
> > again - the
> > > > caller was just phoning up to point out the existence of air and
> > the
> > > fact
> > > > that it rotates along with the Earth, but Baker would not be
> > told.
> > > And that
> > > > was not an isolated incident. In the end I couldn't get through
> > all the
> > > > shows I'd downloaded because of his collossally misguided
> > arrogance, and
> > > > just had to delete them.
> > > >
> > > > I take heart from this because originally, I just didn't like him
> > > because of
> > > > gut feeling, but I was later vindicated. This is the converse of
> > Phill
> > > > Jupitus, to whom I also took an instant dislike, but whom I am now
> > > getting
> > > > into.
> > > >
> > > > On 2/13/07, Sarah Falk <minerva.moon@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > (I was typing a reply to you and Firefox "quit unexpectedly".
> > No
> > > > > kidding it was unexpected. Ugh. Take two . . .)
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't have anything against Rory, really, but his displays of
> > > > > knowledge were less entertaining and more tiresome than Gyles's
> > were.
> > > > > Danny Baker I like, because you can tell that he's genuinely
> > > > > interested in things. I would cite you examples (and I did in
> > my first
> > > > > draft), but you probably have to watch it to understand what I'm
> > > > > talking about. I find it endearing.
> > > > >
> > > > > In QI, as in "Just a Minute", people generally seem to do well
> > if
> > > > > they're new panellists, mostly because everyone--Stephen, the
> > > > > regulars, the scorers--are easy on them so that they feel
> > relaxed. But
> > > > > I mean that in the sense that newcomers usually win against the
> > > > > regulars, not that they do continually worse. I wouldn't say
> > that they
> > > > > run out of interesting things to say; not at all. I know that
> > Jeremy
> > > > > Clarkson won two games: his first and his last, out of three.
> > And
> > > > > Danny Baker won both of his, and scored higher on the second
> > than on
> > > > > the first!
> > > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>

 
<<<<   439   >>>>

Topic: Re: Gyles Brandreth

Message 15 / 15
Robert TorresFeb 16, 2007
 

 

"His [Phill Jupitus's] Stephen impressions are some of the highlights of the show [Qi]."

Agreed.  I love it when they all start to lay into Stephen.  He takes it very well, I think.

On 2/14/07, Dave <j_a_m_fan@yahoo. co.uk> wrote:

My opinion og Phil Jupitus rose a great deal when I saw him on TV
doing his own stand up show a few years back now. It was really quite
good.

--- In just-a-minute@ yahoogroups. com, "Sarah Falk" <minerva.moon@ ...>

wrote:
>
> In JAM, it's true that the newcomers often finish last, but they are
> also often given points very generously by Nicholas and the other
> panellists, who do things like purposely buzzing in incorrectly
while
> the newcomer is speaking. The thing is that the regulars are still
so
> good that they end up winning anyway . . . but they aren't greedy
> about it.
>
> I think part of the reason why newcomers on QI win, as well, is that
> you can lose collosal amounts of points by forfeits, and the
regulars
> aren't afraid to shout out the "obvious" answers for the sake of
> comedy. The newcomers generally are trying to "do well".
>
> I haven't watched/listened to any Danny Baker past QI, so perhaps I
> haven't gotten the real measure of him. I do like him from what I've
> seen, but that cloud thing is worrysome. Someone should ask him what
> would happen if a ball was thrown in the air by someone inside a
> moving car--according to his logic, you wouldn't be able to catch it
> again!
>
> Phill Jupitus is pretty good, in my opinion; not really one of my
very
> favorites, but he's not a killjoy by any definition. His Stephen
> impressions are some of the highlights of the show.
>
> --- In just-a-minute@ yahoogroups. com, "Nathan Leonard"
> <dreadedwoekitten@> wrote:
> >
> > Okay, I admit that I didn't actually take note of their scores.
Anyway,
> > since the total number of points scored in each episode varies so
> greatly, I
> > think it's probably fair to say that Stephen (or whoever keeps the
> score)
> > has generous days and harsh days.
> >
> > I don't think it's the same in Just a Minute at all, though. Most
> of the
> > people who I've heard on it for the first time (at least in the
last
> couple
> > of series) have finished in "a triumphant fourth place", as
Nicholas
> puts
> > it. That's because Just a Minute is different to most panel games
> in that
> > there is actually a game involved, and a game that's quite
difficult, at
> > that.
> >
> > As for Danny Baker, I don't know why I dislike him so much, he
just
> really
> > gets on my tits for no apparent reason. At least it was for no
apparent
> > reason, then I downloaded some of his Xfm shows off UKNova, and I
> realised
> > how collossally arrogant he was, and that he wasn't as clever as
he
> seemed
> > to be. For example, at one point he ridicules a caller while on
the
> line
> > and then repeatedly through the rest of the show because the
caller
> made the
> > (correct) statement that clouds are moved by the wind. Baker
> believed (and
> > would not be corrected in this) that the clouds always stayed in
the
> same
> > place and the Earth just rotated beneath them. I mean, come on.
If
> that
> > was the case, then the weather forecast would be the same every
day.
> > Furthermore, the reason the caller called up to mention this was
> that Baker
> > had suggested that people should travel by flying straight up and
> then just
> > waiting for the Earth to rotate beneath them before landing
again - the
> > caller was just phoning up to point out the existence of air and
the
> fact
> > that it rotates along with the Earth, but Baker would not be
told.
> And that
> > was not an isolated incident. In the end I couldn't get through
all the
> > shows I'd downloaded because of his collossally misguided
arrogance, and
> > just had to delete them.
> >
> > I take heart from this because originally, I just didn't like him
> because of
> > gut feeling, but I was later vindicated. This is the converse of
Phill
> > Jupitus, to whom I also took an instant dislike, but whom I am now
> getting
> > into.
> >
> > On 2/13/07, Sarah Falk <minerva.moon@> wrote:
> > >
> > > (I was typing a reply to you and Firefox "quit unexpectedly".
No
> > > kidding it was unexpected. Ugh. Take two . . .)
> > >
> > > I don't have anything against Rory, really, but his displays of
> > > knowledge were less entertaining and more tiresome than Gyles's
were.
> > > Danny Baker I like, because you can tell that he's genuinely
> > > interested in things. I would cite you examples (and I did in
my first
> > > draft), but you probably have to watch it to understand what I'm
> > > talking about. I find it endearing.
> > >
> > > In QI, as in "Just a Minute", people generally seem to do well
if
> > > they're new panellists, mostly because everyone--Stephen, the
> > > regulars, the scorers--are easy on them so that they feel
relaxed. But
> > > I mean that in the sense that newcomers usually win against the
> > > regulars, not that they do continually worse. I wouldn't say
that they
> > > run out of interesting things to say; not at all. I know that
Jeremy
> > > Clarkson won two games: his first and his last, out of three.
And
> > > Danny Baker won both of his, and scored higher on the second
than on
> > > the first!
> > >
>

---

No need to miss a message. Get email on-the-go
with Yahoo! Mail for Mobile. Get started.