Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Tonight’s Marf cartoon – on HSBC

13

Comments

  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    TGOHF said:

    GeoffM said:

    Tim_B said:

    AMC advertising on ESPN for the sequel to Breaking Bad.

    Better Call Saul - encore of yesterdays' first episode this evening followed by episode 2.

    Do I need to have seen Breaking Bad before the sequel or does is it stand alone/a vaguely related spinoff?
    There are a few in jokes so far but nothing crucial.
    Thanks Mr Flashman; much appreciated. I have the BB dvds lined up and ready to spin but they are a good 3 months down our viewing schedule at the current rate of consumption. Just wondering if they could be safely bypassed by the new offering.
  • saddo said:

    Smarmeron said:

    @saddo
    You have to be impressed by the fact that Labour and the Guardian seem to have been getting questions asked world wide about the affair?

    Its not a British story, its a Swiss story in the main, with many countries national's involved.
    One big unintended consequence of HSBC in total getting beaten up big time is them moving their HQ & tax base out of the UK to the Far East. That might cost a few 1000 nurses etc their jobs
    Yeah was the point I was making below. Not sure how this is being spun vs the Tories as I've yet to get stuck into the details but HSBC is a big multinational originating in the Hong Kong Shanghai Bank Corporation and as you say with big roots and operations in the far east.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,386
    Where's Audrey and Aveit? :D
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    GeoffM said:

    Tim_B said:

    AMC advertising on ESPN for the sequel to Breaking Bad.

    Better Call Saul - encore of yesterdays' first episode this evening followed by episode 2.

    Do I need to have seen Breaking Bad before the sequel or does is it stand alone/a vaguely related spinoff?
    Saul Goodman was main character Walter White's attorney in Breaking Bad.

    His commercials in BB always ended with the tag "Better Call Saul".
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108

    Mr. Dair, I think the lashes were fair enough, given on the Ark resources were ultra-scarce, whereas on the ground people become more valuable.

    I don understand this.

    But I understand this because I live in 2015 in a liberal democracy. I haven't grown up as the third/fourth generation living in a totalitarian society with a zero-tolerance approach to crime.

    It's more a fundamental problem with sci-fi interpretations. Applying the values of liberal democracy from the 21st (or 20th) century to characters who could have NO CONCEPT of such ideas. Regardless if they had a new legal framework, it would be incomprehensible to those trying to understand and accept it.
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    GeoffM said:

    TGOHF said:

    GeoffM said:

    Tim_B said:

    AMC advertising on ESPN for the sequel to Breaking Bad.

    Better Call Saul - encore of yesterdays' first episode this evening followed by episode 2.

    Do I need to have seen Breaking Bad before the sequel or does is it stand alone/a vaguely related spinoff?
    There are a few in jokes so far but nothing crucial.
    Thanks Mr Flashman; much appreciated. I have the BB dvds lined up and ready to spin but they are a good 3 months down our viewing schedule at the current rate of consumption. Just wondering if they could be safely bypassed by the new offering.
    On the evidence of episode 1, yes.
  • Dair said:

    kle4 said:

    Mr. Barber, ah. Not got Netflix.

    I'll tell you something weird. Apparently, the Flash and Green Arrow (from the series) will not be the same Flash and Green Arrow (either actors or continuity) when DC finally makes whatever its equivalent of the Avengers is. So, they'll have two parallel continuities for TV and film running.

    Maybe it'll work, but Marvel's integrated approach with SHIELD seems far better to me.

    Yeah, DC are making a hash of things with the cinematic universe...
    Started it a bit late it seems. Honestly, they seem to make far better TV shows than Marvel can manage, maybe they should stick to that outside of the big name movies, but of course there's more money in the movie business.
    DC are pretty much fucked as their Rights are all over the place. Even when they own the rights they seem to be determined to fuck it up and their Cinematic Universe will not have any ties to any of their Television Universes. We'll have different version of every character between the Cinematic Suicide Squad and the Television Suicide Squad.

    Marvel only suffer from not holding the Rights to the X-men. DC don't own the rights for Superman or Batman.
    Spiderman... Fairly critical to the events of Civil War. But hearing rumours that Sony are open to talks about that again.

    X-Men can largely be ignored.
    Sony are open yes.

    You can't ignore the X Men in The Avengers cinematic universe.

    Especially as Avengers can't mention the mutants, but in Age of Ultron, we've got Quicksilver and his sister, and their Daddy is well [redacted]
    I'm sure they will come up with a way for Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver to not be Magneto's children... Hydra experiments?

    How they'll replace the unmasking of Spiderman i'm not so sure.
    Apparently the deal has been done for Spiderman to be in the Civil War thread - which will be under the Captain America banner rather than the Avengers per se. And you can have the whole Civil War thread without the X-Men as that is basically what they did with the Comic version.
  • Dair said:

    kle4 said:

    Mr. Barber, ah. Not got Netflix.

    I'll tell you something weird. Apparently, the Flash and Green Arrow (from the series) will not be the same Flash and Green Arrow (either actors or continuity) when DC finally makes whatever its equivalent of the Avengers is. So, they'll have two parallel continuities for TV and film running.

    Maybe it'll work, but Marvel's integrated approach with SHIELD seems far better to me.

    Yeah, DC are making a hash of things with the cinematic universe...
    Started it a bit late it seems. Honestly, they seem to make far better TV shows than Marvel can manage, maybe they should stick to that outside of the big name movies, but of course there's more money in the movie business.
    DC are pretty much fucked as their Rights are all over the place. Even when they own the rights they seem to be determined to fuck it up and their Cinematic Universe will not have any ties to any of their Television Universes. We'll have different version of every character between the Cinematic Suicide Squad and the Television Suicide Squad.

    Marvel only suffer from not holding the Rights to the X-men. DC don't own the rights for Superman or Batman.
    Spiderman... Fairly critical to the events of Civil War. But hearing rumours that Sony are open to talks about that again.

    X-Men can largely be ignored.
    Sony are open yes.

    You can't ignore the X Men in The Avengers cinematic universe.

    Especially as Avengers can't mention the mutants, but in Age of Ultron, we've got Quicksilver and his sister, and their Daddy is well [redacted]
    I'm sure they will come up with a way for Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver to not be Magneto's children... Hydra experiments?

    How they'll replace the unmasking of Spiderman i'm not so sure.
    Apparently the deal has been done for Spiderman to be in the Civil War thread - which will be under the Captain America banner rather than the Avengers per se. And you can have the whole Civil War thread without the X-Men as that is basically what they did with the Comic version.
    Not that I doubt you, but do you have a link to the deal for Spidey to be in the Civil War?
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108

    Dair said:

    kle4 said:

    Mr. Barber, ah. Not got Netflix.

    I'll tell you something weird. Apparently, the Flash and Green Arrow (from the series) will not be the same Flash and Green Arrow (either actors or continuity) when DC finally makes whatever its equivalent of the Avengers is. So, they'll have two parallel continuities for TV and film running.

    Maybe it'll work, but Marvel's integrated approach with SHIELD seems far better to me.

    Yeah, DC are making a hash of things with the cinematic universe...
    Started it a bit late it seems. Honestly, they seem to make far better TV shows than Marvel can manage, maybe they should stick to that outside of the big name movies, but of course there's more money in the movie business.
    DC are pretty much fucked as their Rights are all over the place. Even when they own the rights they seem to be determined to fuck it up and their Cinematic Universe will not have any ties to any of their Television Universes. We'll have different version of every character between the Cinematic Suicide Squad and the Television Suicide Squad.

    Marvel only suffer from not holding the Rights to the X-men. DC don't own the rights for Superman or Batman.
    Spiderman... Fairly critical to the events of Civil War. But hearing rumours that Sony are open to talks about that again.

    X-Men can largely be ignored.
    Sony are open yes.

    You can't ignore the X Men in The Avengers cinematic universe.

    Especially as Avengers can't mention the mutants, but in Age of Ultron, we've got Quicksilver and his sister, and their Daddy is well [redacted]
    I'm sure they will come up with a way for Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver to not be Magneto's children... Hydra experiments?

    How they'll replace the unmasking of Spiderman i'm not so sure.
    You posted earlier in this thread that people don't give out spoilers on a single episode of a multi-episode TV series. It was respected. Then you post pretty major spoilers to anyone for a major motion picture series beyond the scope of any previous attempt to build a proper character Universe into film and television.

    VERY BAD SHOW.
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31327781

    "Bullies suppressed Rotherham warnings from 2002"

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,586
    edited February 2015
    Dair said:

    Mr. Dair, I think the lashes were fair enough, given on the Ark resources were ultra-scarce, whereas on the ground people become more valuable.

    I don understand this.

    But I understand this because I live in 2015 in a liberal democracy. I haven't grown up as the third/fourth generation living in a totalitarian society with a zero-tolerance approach to crime.

    It's more a fundamental problem with sci-fi interpretations. Applying the values of liberal democracy from the 21st (or 20th) century to characters who could have NO CONCEPT of such ideas. Regardless if they had a new legal framework, it would be incomprehensible to those trying to understand and accept it.
    They had a concept of it in this one at least - as they consumed media from before the apocalypse and were taught about old world concepts.

    Not just a sci-fi issue though. I don't actually have a problem with, say, a fantasy setting which is aping a harsh, medieval-esque society, but which is also accepting of all genders in all roles or something, but if you are aiming for a specific type of society with your fantasy culture, having people be 21st century liberals in attitude in any way needs to be done carefully to avoid making it seem like it doesn't fit even as an unusual opinion for that setting.
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    Tim_B said:

    Dair said:

    Mr. Dair, to be fair, season two did introduce Maggie. [That said, it was the weakest so far].

    I have a feeling that Season Two of The Walking Dead was originally supposed to be a 6 or 8 episode season (Seaons One was six) and when hte episode order was expanded they didn't really have enough story to fill. So there were... long.... slow.... shots.... where.... nothing.... happened. It would have been fine over 6 to 8 episodes.
    You can say that about both Breaking Bad and Walking Dead - and based on episode 1 Better Call Saul as well - they are not fast paced, the story line per episode is fairly sparse, and it's all bargain basement budget, with mainly hand held camera work.
    Someone at AMC really is raking it in and it's not the producers or the beneficiaries of budget spend.
  • Is there supposed to be a Scottish poll tonight? Any sign of it?

    Embargo ends at 5am.

    Is a TNS poll
    I'll set my alarm, cheers.





    (joke, just in case anyone took me seriously)
  • Dair said:

    kle4 said:

    Mr. Barber, ah. Not got Netflix.

    I'll tell you something weird. Apparently, the Flash and Green Arrow (from the series) will not be the same Flash and Green Arrow (either actors or continuity) when DC finally makes whatever its equivalent of the Avengers is. So, they'll have two parallel continuities for TV and film running.

    Maybe it'll work, but Marvel's integrated approach with SHIELD seems far better to me.

    Yeah, DC are making a hash of things with the cinematic universe...
    Started it a bit late it seems. Honestly, they seem to make far better TV shows than Marvel can manage, maybe they should stick to that outside of the big name movies, but of course there's more money in the movie business.
    DC are pretty much fucked as their Rights are all over the place. Even when they own the rights they seem to be determined to fuck it up and their Cinematic Universe will not have any ties to any of their Television Universes. We'll have different version of every character between the Cinematic Suicide Squad and the Television Suicide Squad.

    Marvel only suffer from not holding the Rights to the X-men. DC don't own the rights for Superman or Batman.
    Spiderman... Fairly critical to the events of Civil War. But hearing rumours that Sony are open to talks about that again.

    X-Men can largely be ignored.
    Sony are open yes.

    You can't ignore the X Men in The Avengers cinematic universe.

    Especially as Avengers can't mention the mutants, but in Age of Ultron, we've got Quicksilver and his sister, and their Daddy is well [redacted]
    I'm sure they will come up with a way for Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver to not be Magneto's children... Hydra experiments?

    How they'll replace the unmasking of Spiderman i'm not so sure.
    Apparently the deal has been done for Spiderman to be in the Civil War thread - which will be under the Captain America banner rather than the Avengers per se. And you can have the whole Civil War thread without the X-Men as that is basically what they did with the Comic version.
    Not that I doubt you, but do you have a link to the deal for Spidey to be in the Civil War?
    I was going on what I read in one of the the latest SFX where it was said that the deal was done.. or maybe that was wishful thinking on their part.
  • Is there supposed to be a Scottish poll tonight? Any sign of it?

    Embargo ends at 5am.

    Is a TNS poll
    I'll set my alarm, cheers.





    (joke, just in case anyone took me seriously)
    Oh you wag.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,386
    I wonder whether TNS will heap more misery on to Ed?

    Going to bed tonight on bad news. Possibly waking up to bad news in the morning.

    You could almost feel sorry for him... Almost...
  • kjohnwkjohnw Posts: 1,456
    Dair said:

    Tim_B said:

    Dair said:

    Mr. Dair, to be fair, season two did introduce Maggie. [That said, it was the weakest so far].

    I have a feeling that Season Two of The Walking Dead was originally supposed to be a 6 or 8 episode season (Seaons One was six) and when hte episode order was expanded they didn't really have enough story to fill. So there were... long.... slow.... shots.... where.... nothing.... happened. It would have been fine over 6 to 8 episodes.
    You can say that about both Breaking Bad and Walking Dead - and based on episode 1 Better Call Saul as well - they are not fast paced, the story line per episode is fairly sparse, and it's all bargain basement budget, with mainly hand held camera work.
    Someone at AMC really is raking it in and it's not the producers or the beneficiaries of budget spend.
    breaking bad reportedly cost $3million per episode to produce, so not so bargain basement budget! and it has to rank as one of the best tv series ever
  • kle4 said:

    Dair said:

    Mr. Dair, I think the lashes were fair enough, given on the Ark resources were ultra-scarce, whereas on the ground people become more valuable.

    I don understand this.

    But I understand this because I live in 2015 in a liberal democracy. I haven't grown up as the third/fourth generation living in a totalitarian society with a zero-tolerance approach to crime.

    It's more a fundamental problem with sci-fi interpretations. Applying the values of liberal democracy from the 21st (or 20th) century to characters who could have NO CONCEPT of such ideas. Regardless if they had a new legal framework, it would be incomprehensible to those trying to understand and accept it.
    They had a concept of it in this one at least - as they consumed media from before the apocalypse and were taught about old world concepts.

    Not just a sci-fi issue though. I don't actually have a problem with, say, a fantasy setting which is aping a harsh, medieval-esque society, but which is also accepting of all genders in all roles or something, but if you are aiming for a specific type of society with your fantasy culture, having people be 21st century liberals in attitude in any way needs to be done carefully to avoid making it seem like it doesn't fit even as an unusual opinion for that setting.
    I think old Judge Dredd manages to portray the stresses on a totalitarian society pretty well. He certainly spends a lot of time throwing Democracy activists in the Cubes. :-)
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited February 2015
    Some advice on TV shows: don't watch them until at least 10 years after they were first broadcast. That way you avoid getting sucked into watching what is deemed to be "fashionable" at that particular time.

    I've just started watching The Wire. Not quite as "amazing" as I was expecting, although still fairly good.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,963
    edited February 2015

    I was going on what I read in one of the the latest SFX where it was said that the deal was done.. or maybe that was wishful thinking on their part.

    Thanks. I think Sony are trying to come up with a deal. The Amazing Spiderman 2, did poorly at the box office, relatively speaking. Taking less than the Winter Soldier.

    But the one that really hurt them was being outgunned by the Guardians of the Galaxy. I mean love the film, but in the comic universe, Spiderman is Premier League, The Guardians of the Galaxy is Scottish Pub League level.

    Hence why they've put on hold the Amazing Spiderman 3, and talking of even recasting Andrew Garfield.
  • An interesting snippet from Bloomberg:

    Oil may drop more than 50 percent to “the $20 range” by the start of the second quarter as oversupply fills storage tanks close to capacity, according to analysts at Citigroup Inc.

    Signs of a slowdown in U.S. drilling don’t mean the crude glut will be eliminated, Edward Morse, Citigroup’s global head of commodity research, said in a report e-mailed Monday.


    This is a key thing to remember about oil: the stuff costs money to stockpile, and the number of places you can stockpile it in the short term is fixed. Simplifying somewhat: once the tanks are full, you have to take whatever price anyone will offer you, 'cos the stuff keeps coming out of the ground (in the short term). This means that the dynamics of oil prices are very different to those of, say, gold or shares or currencies.

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-02-08/aussie-slips-with-bonds-on-china-import-slump-payrolls

  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    chestnut said:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31327781

    "Bullies suppressed Rotherham warnings from 2002"

    ... and yet Labour are odds on to win the seat again, and people voted against the only party that could topple them in the SYPCC, absolute filth
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,514
    edited February 2015
    AndyJS said:

    Some advice on TV shows: don't watch them until at least 10 years after they were first broadcast. That way you avoid getting sucked into watching what is deemed to be "fashionable" at that particular time.

    I've just started watching The Wire. Not quite as "amazing" as I was expecting, although still fairly good.

    The Wire gets better. Season 2 & 3 IMO are better than 1. Season 5 is probably the weakest.
  • MyBurningEarsMyBurningEars Posts: 3,651
    edited February 2015
    AndyJS said:

    Some advice on TV shows: don't watch them until at least 10 years after they were first broadcast. That way you avoid getting sucked into watching what is deemed to be "fashionable" at that particular time.

    Extend that to 100 years and you can safely apply that rule to literature :-)

    200 years and it's safe for art, too. Dido building Carthage is going to be very good, or so I'm told, for Turner fans of a Classicist leaning.
  • kjohnwkjohnw Posts: 1,456
    GeoffM said:

    Tim_B said:

    AMC advertising on ESPN for the sequel to Breaking Bad.

    Better Call Saul - encore of yesterdays' first episode this evening followed by episode 2.

    Do I need to have seen Breaking Bad before the sequel or does is it stand alone/a vaguely related spinoff?
    if you can watch BB first, but be prepared for v.late nights and a marriage breakdown, very addictive viewing, you just have to watch the next'n, just one more.....
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,514
    edited February 2015
    kjohnw said:

    GeoffM said:

    Tim_B said:

    AMC advertising on ESPN for the sequel to Breaking Bad.

    Better Call Saul - encore of yesterdays' first episode this evening followed by episode 2.

    Do I need to have seen Breaking Bad before the sequel or does is it stand alone/a vaguely related spinoff?
    if you can watch BB first, but be prepared for v.late nights and a marriage breakdown, very addictive viewing, you just have to watch the next'n, just one more.....
    I could never get going with BB. I got to about episode 8 of the first season and gave up. Did I need to give it longer, or by E7-8 of Season 1 should I be totally hooked?
  • Dair said:

    Dair said:

    kle4 said:

    Mr. Barber, ah. Not got Netflix.

    I'll tell you something weird. Apparently, the Flash and Green Arrow (from the series) will not be the same Flash and Green Arrow (either actors or continuity) when DC finally makes whatever its equivalent of the Avengers is. So, they'll have two parallel continuities for TV and film running.

    Maybe it'll work, but Marvel's integrated approach with SHIELD seems far better to me.

    Yeah, DC are making a hash of things with the cinematic universe...
    Started it a bit late it seems. Honestly, they seem to make far better TV shows than Marvel can manage, maybe they should stick to that outside of the big name movies, but of course there's more money in the movie business.
    DC are pretty much fucked as their Rights are all over the place. Even when they own the rights they seem to be determined to fuck it up and their Cinematic Universe will not have any ties to any of their Television Universes. We'll have different version of every character between the Cinematic Suicide Squad and the Television Suicide Squad.

    Marvel only suffer from not holding the Rights to the X-men. DC don't own the rights for Superman or Batman.
    Spiderman... Fairly critical to the events of Civil War. But hearing rumours that Sony are open to talks about that again.

    X-Men can largely be ignored.
    Sony are open yes.

    You can't ignore the X Men in The Avengers cinematic universe.

    Especially as Avengers can't mention the mutants, but in Age of Ultron, we've got Quicksilver and his sister, and their Daddy is well [redacted]
    I'm sure they will come up with a way for Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver to not be Magneto's children... Hydra experiments?

    How they'll replace the unmasking of Spiderman i'm not so sure.
    You posted earlier in this thread that people don't give out spoilers on a single episode of a multi-episode TV series. It was respected. Then you post pretty major spoilers to anyone for a major motion picture series beyond the scope of any previous attempt to build a proper character Universe into film and television.

    VERY BAD SHOW.
    Quite how posting the plot of a very well known story arc from the comics, and questioning how that will be replaced in the films given the rights ownership, is a spoiler is beyond me.

    Besides, it was a Morris Dancer not I who asked for no spoilers.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,403
    edited February 2015

    I was going on what I read in one of the the latest SFX where it was said that the deal was done.. or maybe that was wishful thinking on their part.

    The leaked Sony emails revealed that it was actually discussed but agreement was not reached. The rumored reason for the upcoming "Black Panther" movie (see the Phase 3 annoncement) is that he can take the "unmasked superhero" role that Spidey played in Civil War

    Parenthetically, the reason for the upcoming "Inhumans" movie and their emphasis on those characters is rumoured to be Marvel exploring the possibility of abandoning X-Men publication and let the X-Men wither on the vine.
  • saddosaddo Posts: 534
    Smarmeron said:

    @saddo
    If a crime is inconvenient, then it is best to ignore it?

    No I'm not saying that. Tories I suspect have been going for tax evasion in a balanced way, so that in the case of the Swiss, the Swiss can share bank details with HMRC. Being too bullish about it risks the Swiss bank rules stopping any account sharing. Its not perfect, but at least tightens things up quite a bit.

    Now we have Mr Never Done A Proper Job Miliband doing one of his Marxist rants at them and lets say the village idiot somehow gets into number 10.

    If you're HSBC, you get out quick, as no doubt do many large financial institutions as you know he's going to use you as a punch bag and tax you every which way.

    £bn's of tax payments at serious risk. At least Cameron & Osborne understand the real world a bit.
  • StereotomyStereotomy Posts: 4,092


    Quite how posting the plot of a very well known story arc from the comics, and questioning how that will be replaced in the films given the rights ownership, is a spoiler is beyond me.

    Which part are you having trouble with?
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    kjohnw said:

    Dair said:

    Tim_B said:

    Dair said:

    Mr. Dair, to be fair, season two did introduce Maggie. [That said, it was the weakest so far].

    I have a feeling that Season Two of The Walking Dead was originally supposed to be a 6 or 8 episode season (Seaons One was six) and when hte episode order was expanded they didn't really have enough story to fill. So there were... long.... slow.... shots.... where.... nothing.... happened. It would have been fine over 6 to 8 episodes.
    You can say that about both Breaking Bad and Walking Dead - and based on episode 1 Better Call Saul as well - they are not fast paced, the story line per episode is fairly sparse, and it's all bargain basement budget, with mainly hand held camera work.
    Someone at AMC really is raking it in and it's not the producers or the beneficiaries of budget spend.
    breaking bad reportedly cost $3million per episode to produce, so not so bargain basement budget! and it has to rank as one of the best tv series ever
    It doesn't sound like $3 million per episode.....

    http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/tv-movies/revealing-breaking-bad-secret-ingredient-success-article-1.1472845
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,403
    I'm going to show you something beautiful...

    Who Holds The Rights

    Marvel
    Avengers (inc. Iron Man, Thor, Cap, Hawkeye, Black Widow, Scarlet Witch, Quicksilver, Vision, Ultron, Chitauri, etc), Ant-Man, Daredevil, Elektra, Ghost Rider, Punisher, Blade, Man-Thing, Guardians of the Galaxy, Doctor Strange, Black Panther, Inhumans, Agents of SHIELD (Deathlok, Kree/Skrull, etc)

    Sony
    Spider-Man (inc. Sinister Six, Doc Ock, Sandman, the Lizard, Rhino, Green Goblin, Venom, etc)

    Fox
    Fantastic Four (inc. Dr Doom) Silver Surfer (inc. Galactus) X-Men (inc Wolverine, Magneto, Professor X, Deadpool - Hi, Tom! - Scarlet Witch, Quicksilver, etc), the rights to the word "mutant"

    Mixed
    Namor
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669

    kjohnw said:

    GeoffM said:

    Tim_B said:

    AMC advertising on ESPN for the sequel to Breaking Bad.

    Better Call Saul - encore of yesterdays' first episode this evening followed by episode 2.

    Do I need to have seen Breaking Bad before the sequel or does is it stand alone/a vaguely related spinoff?
    if you can watch BB first, but be prepared for v.late nights and a marriage breakdown, very addictive viewing, you just have to watch the next'n, just one more.....
    I could never get going with BB. I got to about episode 8 of the first season and gave up. Did I need to give it longer, or by E7-8 of Season 1 should I be totally hooked?
    I have the same problem with both Breaking Bad and Walking Dead. I find the plots thin, the progress slow, and the characters had to engage with. The TNT stuff I watch - Serious Crimes, Rizzoli and Isles etc - I really enjoy.
  • kjohnwkjohnw Posts: 1,456

    kjohnw said:

    GeoffM said:

    Tim_B said:

    AMC advertising on ESPN for the sequel to Breaking Bad.

    Better Call Saul - encore of yesterdays' first episode this evening followed by episode 2.

    Do I need to have seen Breaking Bad before the sequel or does is it stand alone/a vaguely related spinoff?
    if you can watch BB first, but be prepared for v.late nights and a marriage breakdown, very addictive viewing, you just have to watch the next'n, just one more.....
    I could never get going with BB. I got to about episode 8 of the first season and gave up. Did I need to give it longer, or by E7-8 of Season 1 should I be totally hooked?
    give it longer, its watching the slow transformation of walter white from mild mannered chemistry teacher with a failed career path hitting midlife crisis with diagnosed lung cancer to becoming a dangerous and deceitful drug producer, and the effect on all his family relationships. its full of dark humour, human hypocrisy, and the consequences of wrong choices. it does get better and better, you won't be disappointed
  • Dair said:

    Dair said:

    kle4 said:

    Mr. Barber, ah. Not got Netflix.

    I'll tell you something weird. Apparently, the Flash and Green Arrow (from the series) will not be the same Flash and Green Arrow (either actors or continuity) when DC finally makes whatever its equivalent of the Avengers is. So, they'll have two parallel continuities for TV and film running.

    Maybe it'll work, but Marvel's integrated approach with SHIELD seems far better to me.

    Yeah, DC are making a hash of things with the cinematic universe...
    Started it a bit late it seems. Honestly, they seem to make far better TV shows than Marvel can manage, maybe they should stick to that outside of the big name movies, but of course there's more money in the movie business.
    DC are pretty much fucked as their Rights are all over the place. Even when they own the rights they seem to be determined to fuck it up and their Cinematic Universe will not have any ties to any of their Television Universes. We'll have different version of every character between the Cinematic Suicide Squad and the Television Suicide Squad.

    Marvel only suffer from not holding the Rights to the X-men. DC don't own the rights for Superman or Batman.
    Spiderman... Fairly critical to the events of Civil War. But hearing rumours that Sony are open to talks about that again.

    X-Men can largely be ignored.
    Sony are open yes.

    You can't ignore the X Men in The Avengers cinematic universe.

    Especially as Avengers can't mention the mutants, but in Age of Ultron, we've got Quicksilver and his sister, and their Daddy is well [redacted]
    I'm sure they will come up with a way for Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver to not be Magneto's children... Hydra experiments?

    How they'll replace the unmasking of Spiderman i'm not so sure.
    You posted earlier in this thread that people don't give out spoilers on a single episode of a multi-episode TV series. It was respected. Then you post pretty major spoilers to anyone for a major motion picture series beyond the scope of any previous attempt to build a proper character Universe into film and television.

    VERY BAD SHOW.
    Quite how posting the plot of a very well known story arc from the comics, and questioning how that will be replaced in the films given the rights ownership, is a spoiler is beyond me.

    Besides, it was a Morris Dancer not I who asked for no spoilers.
    Indeed.

  • Quite how posting the plot of a very well known story arc from the comics, and questioning how that will be replaced in the films given the rights ownership, is a spoiler is beyond me.

    Which part are you having trouble with?
    The bit that claims speculation about how a crucial act from the comic will be changed to cope with the fact that the as yet unreleased film cannot use it due to the protagonist being owned by a different company, is a spoiler for a film that hasn't been made yet.
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    kle4 said:

    Dair said:

    Mr. Dair, I think the lashes were fair enough, given on the Ark resources were ultra-scarce, whereas on the ground people become more valuable.

    I don understand this.

    But I understand this because I live in 2015 in a liberal democracy. I haven't grown up as the third/fourth generation living in a totalitarian society with a zero-tolerance approach to crime.

    It's more a fundamental problem with sci-fi interpretations. Applying the values of liberal democracy from the 21st (or 20th) century to characters who could have NO CONCEPT of such ideas. Regardless if they had a new legal framework, it would be incomprehensible to those trying to understand and accept it.
    They had a concept of it in this one at least - as they consumed media from before the apocalypse and were taught about old world concepts.

    Not just a sci-fi issue though. I don't actually have a problem with, say, a fantasy setting which is aping a harsh, medieval-esque society, but which is also accepting of all genders in all roles or something, but if you are aiming for a specific type of society with your fantasy culture, having people be 21st century liberals in attitude in any way needs to be done carefully to avoid making it seem like it doesn't fit even as an unusual opinion for that setting.
    We know they got to watch SOME old world media, from reference basically sports and morality play Movies. As far as I can recall, education focused on liberal values or media which would reflect liberal values has not been mentioned so far.

    Watching the 1972 World Cup Final (I think it was this one) as they did in Series One isn't going to create any values other than a completely over-hyped and completed unrealistic view of Brazilian football.
  • viewcode said:

    I'm going to show you something beautiful...

    Who Holds The Rights

    Marvel
    Avengers (inc. Iron Man, Thor, Cap, Hawkeye, Black Widow, Scarlet Witch, Quicksilver, Vision, Ultron, Chitauri, etc), Ant-Man, Daredevil, Elektra, Ghost Rider, Punisher, Blade, Man-Thing, Guardians of the Galaxy, Doctor Strange, Black Panther, Inhumans, Agents of SHIELD (Deathlok, Kree/Skrull, etc)

    Sony
    Spider-Man (inc. Sinister Six, Doc Ock, Sandman, the Lizard, Rhino, Green Goblin, Venom, etc)

    Fox
    Fantastic Four (inc. Dr Doom) Silver Surfer (inc. Galactus) X-Men (inc Wolverine, Magneto, Professor X, Deadpool - Hi, Tom! - Scarlet Witch, Quicksilver, etc), the rights to the word "mutant"

    Mixed
    Namor

    Thank you.
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    kjohnw said:

    Dair said:

    Tim_B said:

    Dair said:

    Mr. Dair, to be fair, season two did introduce Maggie. [That said, it was the weakest so far].

    I have a feeling that Season Two of The Walking Dead was originally supposed to be a 6 or 8 episode season (Seaons One was six) and when hte episode order was expanded they didn't really have enough story to fill. So there were... long.... slow.... shots.... where.... nothing.... happened. It would have been fine over 6 to 8 episodes.
    You can say that about both Breaking Bad and Walking Dead - and based on episode 1 Better Call Saul as well - they are not fast paced, the story line per episode is fairly sparse, and it's all bargain basement budget, with mainly hand held camera work.
    Someone at AMC really is raking it in and it's not the producers or the beneficiaries of budget spend.
    breaking bad reportedly cost $3million per episode to produce, so not so bargain basement budget! and it has to rank as one of the best tv series ever
    Maybe it is the producers raking it in (I'd expect senior AMC execs are Exec Prods on most shows). There was definately not $3m on the screen.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,403

    viewcode said:

    I'm going to show you something beautiful...

    Who Holds The Rights

    Marvel
    Avengers (inc. Iron Man, Thor, Cap, Hawkeye, Black Widow, Scarlet Witch, Quicksilver, Vision, Ultron, Chitauri, etc), Ant-Man, Daredevil, Elektra, Ghost Rider, Punisher, Blade, Man-Thing, Guardians of the Galaxy, Doctor Strange, Black Panther, Inhumans, Agents of SHIELD (Deathlok, Kree/Skrull, etc)

    Sony
    Spider-Man (inc. Sinister Six, Doc Ock, Sandman, the Lizard, Rhino, Green Goblin, Venom, etc)

    Fox
    Fantastic Four (inc. Dr Doom) Silver Surfer (inc. Galactus) X-Men (inc Wolverine, Magneto, Professor X, Deadpool - Hi, Tom! - Scarlet Witch, Quicksilver, etc), the rights to the word "mutant"

    Mixed
    Namor

    Thank you.
    You're welcome
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    kjohnw said:

    kjohnw said:

    GeoffM said:

    Tim_B said:

    AMC advertising on ESPN for the sequel to Breaking Bad.

    Better Call Saul - encore of yesterdays' first episode this evening followed by episode 2.

    Do I need to have seen Breaking Bad before the sequel or does is it stand alone/a vaguely related spinoff?
    if you can watch BB first, but be prepared for v.late nights and a marriage breakdown, very addictive viewing, you just have to watch the next'n, just one more.....
    I could never get going with BB. I got to about episode 8 of the first season and gave up. Did I need to give it longer, or by E7-8 of Season 1 should I be totally hooked?
    give it longer, its watching the slow transformation of walter white from mild mannered chemistry teacher with a failed career path hitting midlife crisis with diagnosed lung cancer to becoming a dangerous and deceitful drug producer, and the effect on all his family relationships. its full of dark humour, human hypocrisy, and the consequences of wrong choices. it does get better and better, you won't be disappointed
    I agree with your summary.

    If it was 1/3 shorter it would be absolutely fantastic. The problem is that in any given episode, often nothing much happens plot wise. The pace sags frequently.
  • saddosaddo Posts: 534

    kjohnw said:

    GeoffM said:

    Tim_B said:

    AMC advertising on ESPN for the sequel to Breaking Bad.

    Better Call Saul - encore of yesterdays' first episode this evening followed by episode 2.

    Do I need to have seen Breaking Bad before the sequel or does is it stand alone/a vaguely related spinoff?
    if you can watch BB first, but be prepared for v.late nights and a marriage breakdown, very addictive viewing, you just have to watch the next'n, just one more.....
    I could never get going with BB. I got to about episode 8 of the first season and gave up. Did I need to give it longer, or by E7-8 of Season 1 should I be totally hooked?
    BB was great overall, but was a bit mixed and uneven at times. Personally, on Netflix, I just fast forwarded the talking heads episodes where the whole show was basically Walt & Jesse talking so they could win their best actor awards. On the other hand, the whole Pollos Hermanos arc was just genius TV.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    kjohnw said:

    kjohnw said:

    GeoffM said:

    Tim_B said:

    AMC advertising on ESPN for the sequel to Breaking Bad.

    Better Call Saul - encore of yesterdays' first episode this evening followed by episode 2.

    Do I need to have seen Breaking Bad before the sequel or does is it stand alone/a vaguely related spinoff?
    if you can watch BB first, but be prepared for v.late nights and a marriage breakdown, very addictive viewing, you just have to watch the next'n, just one more.....
    I could never get going with BB. I got to about episode 8 of the first season and gave up. Did I need to give it longer, or by E7-8 of Season 1 should I be totally hooked?
    give it longer, its watching the slow transformation of walter white from mild mannered chemistry teacher with a failed career path hitting midlife crisis with diagnosed lung cancer to becoming a dangerous and deceitful drug producer, and the effect on all his family relationships. its full of dark humour, human hypocrisy, and the consequences of wrong choices. it does get better and better, you won't be disappointed
    Better call Saul had more laughs in episode 1 than series 1 of BB.

    " subtle - like a hooker pulling a mosque..."
  • SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @saddo
    " At least Cameron & Osborne understand the real world a bit."
    You mean that they understand that rich criminals should only have to pay 10% of the money and a small fine, with their names kept out of the public domain?
    "all in it together" takes on an entirely new meaning in that context
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,586
    Tim_B said:

    kjohnw said:

    GeoffM said:

    Tim_B said:

    AMC advertising on ESPN for the sequel to Breaking Bad.

    Better Call Saul - encore of yesterdays' first episode this evening followed by episode 2.

    Do I need to have seen Breaking Bad before the sequel or does is it stand alone/a vaguely related spinoff?
    if you can watch BB first, but be prepared for v.late nights and a marriage breakdown, very addictive viewing, you just have to watch the next'n, just one more.....
    I could never get going with BB. I got to about episode 8 of the first season and gave up. Did I need to give it longer, or by E7-8 of Season 1 should I be totally hooked?
    I have the same problem with both Breaking Bad and Walking Dead. I find the plots thin, the progress slow, and the characters had to engage with. The TNT stuff I watch - Serious Crimes, Rizzoli and Isles etc - I really enjoy.
    I usually enjoy slow stuff, once it is all together and I know it has a payoff. With BB I enjoyed it but knowing how it progressed actually harmed it though, as WW seemed like a dick from the start to me, I enjoyed him but never symapthised with him. The Wire I thought I loved, but I have not watched it in 5-6 years, whereas stuff like Battlestar Galactica, Lost, Farscape, Game of Thrones, Continuum and even the more procedural shows like Elementary, Haven, Justified, I watch repeatedly, and week to week I'd rather a nice 'procedural crime drama/comedy with consultant to the police' than a Walking Dead or BB.

    I've still not seen Spartacus, but as I recall people thought it looked like it was going for trashy fun, but not necessarily more than that, which I gather it truly was.
  • Earlier this evening I was amused to notice that the Conservative candidate in Cambridge, who has rather implausibly been framing the Cambridge seat as a contest between herself and Labour, had her picture at a URL that included the text "Non target candidates": https://twitter.com/PhilRodgers/status/564909954411536386 Since then, another Cambridge resident, Richard Taylor, has analysed the Conservative website and found a total of 102 candidates who have "Non target candidates" in their picture URLs: https://twitter.com/RTaylorUK/status/564926726099439616 Probably no great surprise to anyone in those constituencies, but just a teensy bit careless...
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,586

    Earlier this evening I was amused to notice that the Conservative candidate in Cambridge, who has rather implausibly been framing the Cambridge seat as a contest between herself and Labour, had her picture at a URL that included the text "Non target candidates": htps://twitter.com/PhilRodgers/status/564909954411536386 Since then, another Cambridge resident, Richard Taylor, has analysed the Conservative website and found a total of 102 candidates who have "Non target candidates" in their picture URLs: htps://twitter.com/RTaylorUK/status/564926726099439616 Probably no great surprise to anyone in those constituencies, but just a teensy bit careless...

    That is fantastic.
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    TGOHF said:

    kjohnw said:

    kjohnw said:

    GeoffM said:

    Tim_B said:

    AMC advertising on ESPN for the sequel to Breaking Bad.

    Better Call Saul - encore of yesterdays' first episode this evening followed by episode 2.

    Do I need to have seen Breaking Bad before the sequel or does is it stand alone/a vaguely related spinoff?
    if you can watch BB first, but be prepared for v.late nights and a marriage breakdown, very addictive viewing, you just have to watch the next'n, just one more.....
    I could never get going with BB. I got to about episode 8 of the first season and gave up. Did I need to give it longer, or by E7-8 of Season 1 should I be totally hooked?
    give it longer, its watching the slow transformation of walter white from mild mannered chemistry teacher with a failed career path hitting midlife crisis with diagnosed lung cancer to becoming a dangerous and deceitful drug producer, and the effect on all his family relationships. its full of dark humour, human hypocrisy, and the consequences of wrong choices. it does get better and better, you won't be disappointed
    Better call Saul had more laughs in episode 1 than series 1 of BB.

    " subtle - like a hooker pulling a mosque..."
    He does have some good 1 liners...
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,586
    I do love mixing wonkish political talk with tv show discussion - normal people may get madder about the latter in general, but I feel it has the ability to cross political wonk boundaries in a way few things do.

    Good night all.
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    SeanT said:

    TGOHF said:

    kjohnw said:

    kjohnw said:

    GeoffM said:

    Tim_B said:

    AMC advertising on ESPN for the sequel to Breaking Bad.

    Better Call Saul - encore of yesterdays' first episode this evening followed by episode 2.

    Do I need to have seen Breaking Bad before the sequel or does is it stand alone/a vaguely related spinoff?
    if you can watch BB first, but be prepared for v.late nights and a marriage breakdown, very addictive viewing, you just have to watch the next'n, just one more.....
    I could never get going with BB. I got to about episode 8 of the first season and gave up. Did I need to give it longer, or by E7-8 of Season 1 should I be totally hooked?
    give it longer, its watching the slow transformation of walter white from mild mannered chemistry teacher with a failed career path hitting midlife crisis with diagnosed lung cancer to becoming a dangerous and deceitful drug producer, and the effect on all his family relationships. its full of dark humour, human hypocrisy, and the consequences of wrong choices. it does get better and better, you won't be disappointed
    Better call Saul had more laughs in episode 1 than series 1 of BB.

    " subtle - like a hooker pulling a mosque..."
    Erm. I think Better Call Saul is pitched as a comedy, and BB was meant to be a drama.
    It's certainly not as dark as BB, to put it mildly.
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108

    I was going on what I read in one of the the latest SFX where it was said that the deal was done.. or maybe that was wishful thinking on their part.

    Thanks. I think Sony are trying to come up with a deal. The Amazing Spiderman 2, did poorly at the box office, relatively speaking. Taking less than the Winter Soldier.

    But the one that really hurt them was being outgunned by the Guardians of the Galaxy. I mean love the film, but in the comic universe, Spiderman is Premier League, The Guardians of the Galaxy is Scottish Pub League level.

    Hence why they've put on hold the Amazing Spiderman 3, and talking of even recasting Andrew Garfield.
    The Tobey Maguire Spiderman was too good. He really did completely embody everything I think of as the core of Spiderman. Also having Kirsten Dunst as such an appealing counterpoint was brilliantly cast, written and acted. Such a quick reboot was also pretty questionable.

    They burnt their own bridge (perhaps driven by retaining Rights). They can cast who-ever they want and it won't hit the bar that his Spiderman did.
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    isam said:

    chestnut said:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31327781

    "Bullies suppressed Rotherham warnings from 2002"

    ... and yet Labour are odds on to win the seat again, and people voted against the only party that could topple them in the SYPCC, absolute filth
    With an MP whose entire career was in Social Services before entering parliament - almost all of it in the Rotherham area.
  • ArtistArtist Posts: 1,893
    Strange that Cannock Chase and Dudley South are listed as non target.
  • Nice cartoon Marf!

    And greetings to PB Tories :)
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Rother Valley may turn out to be a better shot for UKIP than Rotherham.

    Same concerns, but without the ethnic voters — (to risk putting it politically incorrectly).
  • SeanT said:

    kle4 said:

    Tim_B said:

    kjohnw said:

    GeoffM said:

    Tim_B said:

    AMC advertising on ESPN for the sequel to Breaking Bad.

    Better Call Saul - encore of yesterdays' first episode this evening followed by episode 2.

    Do I need to have seen Breaking Bad before the sequel or does is it stand alone/a vaguely related spinoff?
    if you can watch BB first, but be prepared for v.late nights and a marriage breakdown, very addictive viewing, you just have to watch the next'n, just one more.....
    I could never get going with BB. I got to about episode 8 of the first season and gave up. Did I need to give it longer, or by E7-8 of Season 1 should I be totally hooked?
    I have the same problem with both Breaking Bad and Walking Dead. I find the plots thin, the progress slow, and the characters had to engage with. The TNT stuff I watch - Serious Crimes, Rizzoli and Isles etc - I really enjoy.
    I usually enjoy slow stuff, once it is all together and I know it has a payoff. With BB I enjoyed it but knowing how it progressed actually harmed it though, as WW seemed like a dick from the start to me, I enjoyed him but never symapthised with him. The Wire I thought I loved, but I have not watched it in 5-6 years, whereas stuff like Battlestar Galactica, Lost, Farscape, Game of Thrones, Continuum and even the more procedural shows like Elementary, Haven, Justified, I watch repeatedly, and week to week I'd rather a nice 'procedural crime drama/comedy with consultant to the police' than a Walking Dead or BB.

    I've still not seen Spartacus, but as I recall people thought it looked like it was going for trashy fun, but not necessarily more than that, which I gather it truly was.
    Justified is trash. Just cheap mainstream American TV trash. Well crafted trash, but meaningless, like Arrow,

    Spartacus has to be watched beyond, say, episode 5 or 6, when it suddenly morphs from being a fun, cartoony, sword-and-sandals, tits-and-tridents Rome-sploitation TV show to being something much more profound and charged and serious and stirring, while keeping all the cheery sex and violence. And from then on it just gets better. It is the ONLY modern TV series with an ennnobling, truly satisfying ending, to my mind.

    Gannicus, put cock in arse.

    Justified could have been really good, but just totally lost its way early on, and now it is just a mess.
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108

    Quite how posting the plot of a very well known story arc from the comics, and questioning how that will be replaced in the films given the rights ownership, is a spoiler is beyond me.

    Besides, it was a Morris Dancer not I who asked for no spoilers.

    External media spoilers are not a good idea, utterly selfish and should be confined to specific threads in specific forum. It's merely about self-control and respect for others.

    I apologise for the mix up with Morris Dancer but that does not excuse your choice to spoil.
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    SeanT said:

    kle4 said:

    Tim_B said:

    kjohnw said:

    GeoffM said:

    Tim_B said:

    AMC advertising on ESPN for the sequel to Breaking Bad.

    Better Call Saul - encore of yesterdays' first episode this evening followed by episode 2.

    Do I need to have seen Breaking Bad before the sequel or does is it stand alone/a vaguely related spinoff?
    if you can watch BB first, but be prepared for v.late nights and a marriage breakdown, very addictive viewing, you just have to watch the next'n, just one more.....
    I could never get going with BB. I got to about episode 8 of the first season and gave up. Did I need to give it longer, or by E7-8 of Season 1 should I be totally hooked?
    I have the same problem with both Breaking Bad and Walking Dead. I find the plots thin, the progress slow, and the characters had to engage with. The TNT stuff I watch - Serious Crimes, Rizzoli and Isles etc - I really enjoy.
    I usually enjoy slow stuff, once it is all together and I know it has a payoff. With BB I enjoyed it but knowing how it progressed actually harmed it though, as WW seemed like a dick from the start to me, I enjoyed him but never symapthised with him. The Wire I thought I loved, but I have not watched it in 5-6 years, whereas stuff like Battlestar Galactica, Lost, Farscape, Game of Thrones, Continuum and even the more procedural shows like Elementary, Haven, Justified, I watch repeatedly, and week to week I'd rather a nice 'procedural crime drama/comedy with consultant to the police' than a Walking Dead or BB.

    I've still not seen Spartacus, but as I recall people thought it looked like it was going for trashy fun, but not necessarily more than that, which I gather it truly was.
    Justified is trash. Just cheap mainstream American TV trash. Well crafted trash, but meaningless, like Arrow,

    Spartacus has to be watched beyond, say, episode 5 or 6, when it suddenly morphs from being a fun, cartoony, sword-and-sandals, tits-and-tridents Rome-sploitation TV show to being something much more profound and charged and serious and stirring, while keeping all the cheery sex and violence. And from then on it just gets better. It is the ONLY modern TV series with an ennnobling, truly satisfying ending, to my mind.

    Gannicus, put cock in arse.

    Proof the penis mightier than the sword? :-)
  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    edited February 2015
    SeanT said:

    isam said:

    chestnut said:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31327781

    "Bullies suppressed Rotherham warnings from 2002"

    ... and yet Labour are odds on to win the seat again, and people voted against the only party that could topple them in the SYPCC, absolute filth
    Indescribable. Basically Pakistani heritage councillors and policemen, in collusion with Labour councillors and careerist policemen, instituted a special "rape" fiefdom where they were free to prey on underage white girls at will, and to taxi them around them around the place for further raping - and anyone who challenged them, like this woman, were actively threatened with violence.

    And this went on for twenty years, across the country, and might still be happening now, across the country. And still rape-enablers on here, like Flightpath, the Watcher, Topping, Roger, et al, defend this so as to maintain "community cohesion".
    Not up to your usual standard of abuse. Have you forgotten to take your medication again?
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    viewcode said:

    I was going on what I read in one of the the latest SFX where it was said that the deal was done.. or maybe that was wishful thinking on their part.

    The leaked Sony emails revealed that it was actually discussed but agreement was not reached. The rumored reason for the upcoming "Black Panther" movie (see the Phase 3 annoncement) is that he can take the "unmasked superhero" role that Spidey played in Civil War

    Parenthetically, the reason for the upcoming "Inhumans" movie and their emphasis on those characters is rumoured to be Marvel exploring the possibility of abandoning X-Men publication and let the X-Men wither on the vine.
    Can you imagine an entire generation of fanbois without an Oedipal crush on Jean Gray?
  • kjohnwkjohnw Posts: 1,456
    i see the guardian have a picture of david cameron below Lord Green to try and link him to the HSBC scandal. I seem to remember that Fred Goodwin was knighted under a labour Government and only had his knighthood removed in 2012 under a conservative PM. Labour hypocrisy again, from 2008 - 2010 they never took it from him.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Artist said:

    Strange that Cannock Chase and Dudley South are listed as non target.

    Leicestershire South is in that list too. It is a safe Tory seat.


  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    AndyJS said:

    Rother Valley may turn out to be a better shot for UKIP than Rotherham.

    Same concerns, but without the ethnic voters — (to risk putting it politically incorrectly).

    Yep, but Rother Valley has John Barron, if Rother Valley had Champion you'd get the house on it :D
  • Is there supposed to be a Scottish poll tonight? Any sign of it?

    Embargo ends at 5am.

    Is a TNS poll
    I'll set my alarm, cheers.





    (joke, just in case anyone took me seriously)
    It's on the front page of the Herald. SNP 41, Lab 31, Con 16, Green 6, LD 4, UKIP 2. Hard to know what to make of it because it's the first full-scale VI poll of Scotland from TNS since... well, I'm really not sure, as all of their recent Scotland-only polls were of the referendum (nothing since).
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    SeanT said:

    AndyJS said:

    Some advice on TV shows: don't watch them until at least 10 years after they were first broadcast. That way you avoid getting sucked into watching what is deemed to be "fashionable" at that particular time.

    I've just started watching The Wire. Not quite as "amazing" as I was expecting, although still fairly good.

    Looking back, the Wire was a fine effort, but mildly overrrated (classy acting + nice scripting + mediocre plotting = good but not quite great?).

    Breaking Bad was and is as brilliant as everyone says.

    Spartacus is THE most underrated TV series. It was reasonably honoured in its time. but it deserves to be remembered as one of the greatest TV drama series ever. FFS they invented their own language!

    Gratitude, Crixus. Show me to wine.
    Game of Thrones has at least six synthetic languages. Even The 100 has a Synthetic language. As a historical piece, the need for a Synthetic language in Spartacus appears quite strange as a choice.

    Spartacus was pretty much crippled by factors beyond the producers control, which is a shame because the first Season was excellent. Maybe you should watch Arrow, they're recreating Batiatus Ludus on Lian Yu.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,040
    edited February 2015

    Earlier this evening I was amused to notice that the Conservative candidate in Cambridge, who has rather implausibly been framing the Cambridge seat as a contest between herself and Labour, had her picture at a URL that included the text "Non target candidates":

    twitter.com/PhilRodgers/status/564909954411536386

    Since then, another Cambridge resident, Richard Taylor, has analysed the Conservative website and found a total of 102 candidates who have "Non target candidates" in their picture URLs"

    twitter.com/RTaylorUK/status/564926726099439616

    Probably no great surprise to anyone in those constituencies, but just a teensy bit careless...

    So we are aiming for 548 seats? Ave it would approve.
  • JohnOJohnO Posts: 4,291
    Pulpstar said:

    AndyJS said:

    Rother Valley may turn out to be a better shot for UKIP than Rotherham.

    Same concerns, but without the ethnic voters — (to risk putting it politically incorrectly).

    Yep, but Rother Valley has John Barron, if Rother Valley had Champion you'd get the house on it :D
    He's more known as (Sir) Kevin Barron.
  • hunchmanhunchman Posts: 2,591
    Firstly, well done to Mike K for posting Christopher Booker's Sunday Telegraph article yesterday about fraudlent manipulation to temperature records by the AGW crowd - I refuse to call them scientists as they are simply not worthy of the name. I note that the AGW apologists on here (Mukesh, OblitusSumMe, Woger et al) have been conspicuous by their absence of criticism of this valuable report that hopefully is a major waypoint on the journey to consigning the AGW nonsense to the dustbin of history.

    Secondly, as a fellow Libertarian, even though I have my differences, it would be good to see Socrates posting on here sooner rather than later.

    Thirdly, I give my best wishes to Lowell Goddard as the 3rd person fronting up the ever so important child abuse inquiry. I took time at the weekend to delve deep into what is around on the internet about this. All I can say without prejudicing any of the ongoing inquiries at this stage, is that if a tiny fraction of what I have read as allegations is correct, then when the truth outs, as it surely will at some point, post general election as it seems sadly now, it will be one of the gravest days in history for the wider British establishment - we shall see.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,928
    kjohnw said:

    i see the guardian have a picture of david cameron below Lord Green to try and link him to the HSBC scandal. I seem to remember that Fred Goodwin was knighted under a labour Government and only had his knighthood removed in 2012 under a conservative PM. Labour hypocrisy again, from 2008 - 2010 they never took it from him.

    Er............ you do realise that the Guardian is not part of the Labour party?
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    Dair said:

    SeanT said:

    AndyJS said:

    Some advice on TV shows: don't watch them until at least 10 years after they were first broadcast. That way you avoid getting sucked into watching what is deemed to be "fashionable" at that particular time.

    I've just started watching The Wire. Not quite as "amazing" as I was expecting, although still fairly good.

    Looking back, the Wire was a fine effort, but mildly overrrated (classy acting + nice scripting + mediocre plotting = good but not quite great?).

    Breaking Bad was and is as brilliant as everyone says.

    Spartacus is THE most underrated TV series. It was reasonably honoured in its time. but it deserves to be remembered as one of the greatest TV drama series ever. FFS they invented their own language!

    Gratitude, Crixus. Show me to wine.
    Game of Thrones has at least six synthetic languages. Even The 100 has a Synthetic language. As a historical piece, the need for a Synthetic language in Spartacus appears quite strange as a choice.

    Spartacus was pretty much crippled by factors beyond the producers control, which is a shame because the first Season was excellent. Maybe you should watch Arrow, they're recreating Batiatus Ludus on Lian Yu.
    I'm working my way through The Tudors. I've got to episode 4 and they've loosely based it on Henry VIII reign. It just has this lightweight, trashy, bodice ripping feel to it.
  • kjohnwkjohnw Posts: 1,456

    kjohnw said:

    i see the guardian have a picture of david cameron below Lord Green to try and link him to the HSBC scandal. I seem to remember that Fred Goodwin was knighted under a labour Government and only had his knighthood removed in 2012 under a conservative PM. Labour hypocrisy again, from 2008 - 2010 they never took it from him.

    Er............ you do realise that the Guardian is not part of the Labour party?
    what like pravda was not part of the USSR!
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669

    kjohnw said:

    i see the guardian have a picture of david cameron below Lord Green to try and link him to the HSBC scandal. I seem to remember that Fred Goodwin was knighted under a labour Government and only had his knighthood removed in 2012 under a conservative PM. Labour hypocrisy again, from 2008 - 2010 they never took it from him.

    Er............ you do realise that the Guardian is not part of the Labour party?
    Officially or unofficially?
  • hunchmanhunchman Posts: 2,591
    JamesMo said:

    Is there supposed to be a Scottish poll tonight? Any sign of it?

    Embargo ends at 5am.

    Is a TNS poll
    I'll set my alarm, cheers.





    (joke, just in case anyone took me seriously)
    It's on the front page of the Herald. SNP 41, Lab 31, Con 16, Green 6, LD 4, UKIP 2. Hard to know what to make of it because it's the first full-scale VI poll of Scotland from TNS since... well, I'm really not sure, as all of their recent Scotland-only polls were of the referendum (nothing since).
    Still around a 16% Labour to SNP UNS swing in the whole country (Scotland) on these figures. I still think the SNP will outpoll this number, and Labour a bit under, but its within the MoE. I await a further batch of Ashcroft polls - particularly Edinburgh seats, a borders seat and others in 'No' areas. Does anyone know when these are going to come out? I think the SNP vote will be incredibly well distributed getting the swing where it is really needed (Glasgow / Lanarkshire) with hardly any swing in its existing seats like Moray, Perth, Angus where its not needed. Lets see!
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    Tim_B said:

    SeanT said:

    TGOHF said:

    kjohnw said:

    kjohnw said:

    GeoffM said:

    Tim_B said:

    AMC advertising on ESPN for the sequel to Breaking Bad.

    Better Call Saul - encore of yesterdays' first episode this evening followed by episode 2.

    Do I need to have seen Breaking Bad before the sequel or does is it stand alone/a vaguely related spinoff?
    if you can watch BB first, but be prepared for v.late nights and a marriage breakdown, very addictive viewing, you just have to watch the next'n, just one more.....
    I could never get going with BB. I got to about episode 8 of the first season and gave up. Did I need to give it longer, or by E7-8 of Season 1 should I be totally hooked?
    give it longer, its watching the slow transformation of walter white from mild mannered chemistry teacher with a failed career path hitting midlife crisis with diagnosed lung cancer to becoming a dangerous and deceitful drug producer, and the effect on all his family relationships. its full of dark humour, human hypocrisy, and the consequences of wrong choices. it does get better and better, you won't be disappointed
    Better call Saul had more laughs in episode 1 than series 1 of BB.

    " subtle - like a hooker pulling a mosque..."
    Erm. I think Better Call Saul is pitched as a comedy, and BB was meant to be a drama.
    It's certainly not as dark as BB, to put it mildly.
    Are you really sure.

    Forgetting the B&W opening, it seems very clear that Jimmy is a very honest and open person who will not take advantage of anyone or anything except the legal system. He's not an honest crook just now, he's an honest man who is going to become an honest crook which I think is far darker than him just becoming a crook.

    It also answers the overbearing question about season five of Breaking Bad where everyone was asking "why doesn't Saul just run off with the money".

    BCS might surprise people. A lot.
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    edited February 2015
    Dair said:

    Tim_B said:

    SeanT said:

    TGOHF said:

    kjohnw said:

    kjohnw said:

    GeoffM said:

    Tim_B said:

    AMC advertising on ESPN for the sequel to Breaking Bad.

    Better Call Saul - encore of yesterdays' first episode this evening followed by episode 2.

    Do I need to have seen Breaking Bad before the sequel or does is it stand alone/a vaguely related spinoff?
    if you can watch BB first, but be prepared for v.late nights and a marriage breakdown, very addictive viewing, you just have to watch the next'n, just one more.....
    I could never get going with BB. I got to about episode 8 of the first season and gave up. Did I need to give it longer, or by E7-8 of Season 1 should I be totally hooked?
    give it longer, its watching the slow transformation of walter white from mild mannered chemistry teacher with a failed career path hitting midlife crisis with diagnosed lung cancer to becoming a dangerous and deceitful drug producer, and the effect on all his family relationships. its full of dark humour, human hypocrisy, and the consequences of wrong choices. it does get better and better, you won't be disappointed
    Better call Saul had more laughs in episode 1 than series 1 of BB.

    " subtle - like a hooker pulling a mosque..."
    Erm. I think Better Call Saul is pitched as a comedy, and BB was meant to be a drama.
    It's certainly not as dark as BB, to put it mildly.
    Are you really sure.

    Forgetting the B&W opening, it seems very clear that Jimmy is a very honest and open person who will not take advantage of anyone or anything except the legal system. He's not an honest crook just now, he's an honest man who is going to become an honest crook which I think is far darker than him just becoming a crook.

    It also answers the overbearing question about season five of Breaking Bad where everyone was asking "why doesn't Saul just run off with the money".

    BCS might surprise people. A lot.

    Am I sure? No. On the basis of 1 episode extrapolating is dangerous. I watched last night's episode while concurrently having a conversation. I shall watch it again this evening without distractions.

    It starts in 90 minutes.
  • PongPong Posts: 4,693
    edited February 2015

    Artist said:

    Strange that Cannock Chase and Dudley South are listed as non target.

    Leicestershire South is in that list too. It is a safe Tory seat.


    Roachester & strood is listed also.

    I can't see the tories giving up on that.
  • Dair said:

    I was going on what I read in one of the the latest SFX where it was said that the deal was done.. or maybe that was wishful thinking on their part.

    Thanks. I think Sony are trying to come up with a deal. The Amazing Spiderman 2, did poorly at the box office, relatively speaking. Taking less than the Winter Soldier.

    But the one that really hurt them was being outgunned by the Guardians of the Galaxy. I mean love the film, but in the comic universe, Spiderman is Premier League, The Guardians of the Galaxy is Scottish Pub League level.

    Hence why they've put on hold the Amazing Spiderman 3, and talking of even recasting Andrew Garfield.
    The Tobey Maguire Spiderman was too good. He really did completely embody everything I think of as the core of Spiderman. Also having Kirsten Dunst as such an appealing counterpoint was brilliantly cast, written and acted. Such a quick reboot was also pretty questionable.

    They burnt their own bridge (perhaps driven by retaining Rights). They can cast who-ever they want and it won't hit the bar that his Spiderman did.
    I loved the Tobey Maguire Spiderman!
  • Tim_B said:

    kjohnw said:

    i see the guardian have a picture of david cameron below Lord Green to try and link him to the HSBC scandal. I seem to remember that Fred Goodwin was knighted under a labour Government and only had his knighthood removed in 2012 under a conservative PM. Labour hypocrisy again, from 2008 - 2010 they never took it from him.

    Er............ you do realise that the Guardian is not part of the Labour party?
    Officially or unofficially?
    They endorsed the lib dems in 2010, didn't they?
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    hunchman said:

    Firstly, well done to Mike K for posting Christopher Booker's Sunday Telegraph article yesterday about fraudlent manipulation to temperature records by the AGW crowd - I refuse to call them scientists as they are simply not worthy of the name. I note that the AGW apologists on here (Mukesh, OblitusSumMe, Woger et al) have been conspicuous by their absence of criticism of this valuable report that hopefully is a major waypoint on the journey to consigning the AGW nonsense to the dustbin of history.

    Secondly, as a fellow Libertarian, even though I have my differences, it would be good to see Socrates posting on here sooner rather than later.

    Thirdly, I give my best wishes to Lowell Goddard as the 3rd person fronting up the ever so important child abuse inquiry. I took time at the weekend to delve deep into what is around on the internet about this. All I can say without prejudicing any of the ongoing inquiries at this stage, is that if a tiny fraction of what I have read as allegations is correct, then when the truth outs, as it surely will at some point, post general election as it seems sadly now, it will be one of the gravest days in history for the wider British establishment - we shall see.

    No matter how many times American Corporatists describe themselves as Libertarians, they will not be Libertarians, they will remain Corporatists.

    Noam Chomsky is a Libertarian.
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    Tim_B said:

    Dair said:

    SeanT said:

    AndyJS said:

    Some advice on TV shows: don't watch them until at least 10 years after they were first broadcast. That way you avoid getting sucked into watching what is deemed to be "fashionable" at that particular time.

    I've just started watching The Wire. Not quite as "amazing" as I was expecting, although still fairly good.

    Looking back, the Wire was a fine effort, but mildly overrrated (classy acting + nice scripting + mediocre plotting = good but not quite great?).

    Breaking Bad was and is as brilliant as everyone says.

    Spartacus is THE most underrated TV series. It was reasonably honoured in its time. but it deserves to be remembered as one of the greatest TV drama series ever. FFS they invented their own language!

    Gratitude, Crixus. Show me to wine.
    Game of Thrones has at least six synthetic languages. Even The 100 has a Synthetic language. As a historical piece, the need for a Synthetic language in Spartacus appears quite strange as a choice.

    Spartacus was pretty much crippled by factors beyond the producers control, which is a shame because the first Season was excellent. Maybe you should watch Arrow, they're recreating Batiatus Ludus on Lian Yu.
    I'm working my way through The Tudors. I've got to episode 4 and they've loosely based it on Henry VIII reign. It just has this lightweight, trashy, bodice ripping feel to it.
    The Tudors is nothing.

    Try Reign. It's AMAZING.
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    News item - The US Army is providing Viagra tablets - at $25 each - to soldiers who have a prescription.

    There must be stiff competition.
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    JamesMo said:

    Is there supposed to be a Scottish poll tonight? Any sign of it?

    Embargo ends at 5am.

    Is a TNS poll
    I'll set my alarm, cheers.





    (joke, just in case anyone took me seriously)
    It's on the front page of the Herald. SNP 41, Lab 31, Con 16, Green 6, LD 4, UKIP 2. Hard to know what to make of it because it's the first full-scale VI poll of Scotland from TNS since... well, I'm really not sure, as all of their recent Scotland-only polls were of the referendum (nothing since).
    Maybe it's accurate.

    Or maybe the three Scotland wide polls conducted during the period it's fieldwork was done are accurate. Fieldwork 16th Jan to feb 2nd. Completely at odds with everything except the broken Panelbase poll with misleading questions.
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    edited February 2015

    Tim_B said:

    kjohnw said:

    i see the guardian have a picture of david cameron below Lord Green to try and link him to the HSBC scandal. I seem to remember that Fred Goodwin was knighted under a labour Government and only had his knighthood removed in 2012 under a conservative PM. Labour hypocrisy again, from 2008 - 2010 they never took it from him.

    Er............ you do realise that the Guardian is not part of the Labour party?
    Officially or unofficially?
    They endorsed the lib dems in 2010, didn't they?
    It's a ferret rouge, so they can say they're not in the tank for Labour, unlike the US press for Obama, which was simply shameful. Even ultra liberal Tom Brokaw said it was wrong.
  • murali_smurali_s Posts: 3,067
    edited February 2015
    hunchman said:

    Firstly, well done to Mike K for posting Christopher Booker's Sunday Telegraph article yesterday about fraudlent manipulation to temperature records by the AGW crowd - I refuse to call them scientists as they are simply not worthy of the name. I note that the AGW apologists on here (Mukesh, OblitusSumMe, Woger et al) have been conspicuous by their absence of criticism of this valuable report that hopefully is a major waypoint on the journey to consigning the AGW nonsense to the dustbin of history.

    Secondly, as a fellow Libertarian, even though I have my differences, it would be good to see Socrates posting on here sooner rather than later.

    Thirdly, I give my best wishes to Lowell Goddard as the 3rd person fronting up the ever so important child abuse inquiry. I took time at the weekend to delve deep into what is around on the internet about this. All I can say without prejudicing any of the ongoing inquiries at this stage, is that if a tiny fraction of what I have read as allegations is correct, then when the truth outs, as it surely will at some point, post general election as it seems sadly now, it will be one of the gravest days in history for the wider British establishment - we shall see.

    Hmmm, I fell of my chair laughing at this attempt at journalism. Does anyone with half a brain take Christopher Booker seriously?

    Anyway, It's no surprise that he's in good company - what a bunch of nutters....

    http://www.campaigncc.org/climate_change/sceptics/hall_of_shame
  • On the HSBC story, the BBC said the whistle blower leaked the data in 2007, but the treasury didn't get it until 2010. Why the three year delay? Calling it 'leaking' implies the whistle blower was making some attempt to inform people, not just sitting on the information. Someone in HMRC ought to have been aware that information on tax evasion was being offered.

    If the three year delay is the result of HMRC or treasury failings, responsibility ultimately rests with the ministers in charge, who were all Labour.
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    Dair said:

    Tim_B said:

    Dair said:

    SeanT said:

    AndyJS said:

    Some advice on TV shows: don't watch them until at least 10 years after they were first broadcast. That way you avoid getting sucked into watching what is deemed to be "fashionable" at that particular time.

    I've just started watching The Wire. Not quite as "amazing" as I was expecting, although still fairly good.

    Looking back, the Wire was a fine effort, but mildly overrrated (classy acting + nice scripting + mediocre plotting = good but not quite great?).

    Breaking Bad was and is as brilliant as everyone says.

    Spartacus is THE most underrated TV series. It was reasonably honoured in its time. but it deserves to be remembered as one of the greatest TV drama series ever. FFS they invented their own language!

    Gratitude, Crixus. Show me to wine.
    Game of Thrones has at least six synthetic languages. Even The 100 has a Synthetic language. As a historical piece, the need for a Synthetic language in Spartacus appears quite strange as a choice.

    Spartacus was pretty much crippled by factors beyond the producers control, which is a shame because the first Season was excellent. Maybe you should watch Arrow, they're recreating Batiatus Ludus on Lian Yu.
    I'm working my way through The Tudors. I've got to episode 4 and they've loosely based it on Henry VIII reign. It just has this lightweight, trashy, bodice ripping feel to it.
    The Tudors is nothing.

    Try Reign. It's AMAZING.
    Season 1 is in my Netflix queue
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108

    Tim_B said:

    kjohnw said:

    i see the guardian have a picture of david cameron below Lord Green to try and link him to the HSBC scandal. I seem to remember that Fred Goodwin was knighted under a labour Government and only had his knighthood removed in 2012 under a conservative PM. Labour hypocrisy again, from 2008 - 2010 they never took it from him.

    Er............ you do realise that the Guardian is not part of the Labour party?
    Officially or unofficially?
    They endorsed the lib dems in 2010, didn't they?
    So when their chosen party and affiliation were clearly going to lose they encouraged the country to vote Liberal to stop the Tories and give Labour the chance of a coalition? (Which they would have been able to get if they hadn't shunned the SNP.)
  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,320
    Twitter
    NumbrCrunchrPolitics ‏@NCPoliticsUK 18m18 minutes ago
    TNS (Scottish Westminster): SNP 41 CON 16 LAB 31 LIB 4 UKIP 2 GRN 6 Fieldwork 14th Jan-2nd Feb
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    edited February 2015
    Dair said:

    JamesMo said:

    Is there supposed to be a Scottish poll tonight? Any sign of it?

    Embargo ends at 5am.

    Is a TNS poll
    I'll set my alarm, cheers.





    (joke, just in case anyone took me seriously)
    It's on the front page of the Herald. SNP 41, Lab 31, Con 16, Green 6, LD 4, UKIP 2. Hard to know what to make of it because it's the first full-scale VI poll of Scotland from TNS since... well, I'm really not sure, as all of their recent Scotland-only polls were of the referendum (nothing since).
    Maybe it's accurate.

    Or maybe the three Scotland wide polls conducted during the period it's fieldwork was done are accurate. Fieldwork 16th Jan to feb 2nd. Completely at odds with everything except the broken Panelbase poll with misleading questions.
    This is the best news Labout has had from Scotland for 4 months. With UNS, they are now upto 20 seats. SNP 35 seats.
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    Tim_B said:

    Dair said:

    Tim_B said:

    Dair said:

    SeanT said:

    AndyJS said:

    Some advice on TV shows: don't watch them until at least 10 years after they were first broadcast. That way you avoid getting sucked into watching what is deemed to be "fashionable" at that particular time.

    I've just started watching The Wire. Not quite as "amazing" as I was expecting, although still fairly good.

    Looking back, the Wire was a fine effort, but mildly overrrated (classy acting + nice scripting + mediocre plotting = good but not quite great?).

    Breaking Bad was and is as brilliant as everyone says.

    Spartacus is THE most underrated TV series. It was reasonably honoured in its time. but it deserves to be remembered as one of the greatest TV drama series ever. FFS they invented their own language!

    Gratitude, Crixus. Show me to wine.
    Game of Thrones has at least six synthetic languages. Even The 100 has a Synthetic language. As a historical piece, the need for a Synthetic language in Spartacus appears quite strange as a choice.

    Spartacus was pretty much crippled by factors beyond the producers control, which is a shame because the first Season was excellent. Maybe you should watch Arrow, they're recreating Batiatus Ludus on Lian Yu.
    I'm working my way through The Tudors. I've got to episode 4 and they've loosely based it on Henry VIII reign. It just has this lightweight, trashy, bodice ripping feel to it.
    The Tudors is nothing.

    Try Reign. It's AMAZING.
    Season 1 is in my Netflix queue
    Give it 6 episodes. The first four episodes of Reign were a surprise (it was way better than I expected) but aren't that far away from the "Gossip Girl meets Mary Queen of Scots. But by the middle of Season One first half and by Season One post hiatus the Bat Shit Crazy insanity is just irresistible.

    Things most Serials do over a season, Reign does in half an episode. It's just awesome.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,514
    edited February 2015

    On the HSBC story, the BBC said the whistle blower leaked the data in 2007, but the treasury didn't get it until 2010. Why the three year delay? Calling it 'leaking' implies the whistle blower was making some attempt to inform people, not just sitting on the information. Someone in HMRC ought to have been aware that information on tax evasion was being offered.

    If the three year delay is the result of HMRC or treasury failings, responsibility ultimately rests with the ministers in charge, who were all Labour.

    To call him a "whistleblower" isn't exactly correct.

    The backstory to guy who stole the information is rather more complex. As I understand, first he tried to sell the info to rival banks, then he did send emails to all the tax authorities (including the UK) in 2008, which said something along the lines of contact me for this info, but they didn't bite. Although he didn't ask for money in those emails, given he tried to sell it to rivals banks before, I am presuming he probably hoping to gain again.

    Ultimately the information was eventually seized when the French raided him. Only then did the information start slowly to be circulated amongst other EU nations.

    So far than being some heroic leaker of tax dodger for the greater good (although that is what he claims now), the backstory doesn't equate to this at all.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    On the HSBC story, the BBC said the whistle blower leaked the data in 2007, but the treasury didn't get it until 2010. Why the three year delay? Calling it 'leaking' implies the whistle blower was making some attempt to inform people, not just sitting on the information. Someone in HMRC ought to have been aware that information on tax evasion was being offered.

    If the three year delay is the result of HMRC or treasury failings, responsibility ultimately rests with the ministers in charge, who were all Labour.

    Labour were out of office in May 2010. What happened since then ?

  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    surbiton said:

    Dair said:

    JamesMo said:

    Is there supposed to be a Scottish poll tonight? Any sign of it?

    Embargo ends at 5am.

    Is a TNS poll
    I'll set my alarm, cheers.





    (joke, just in case anyone took me seriously)
    It's on the front page of the Herald. SNP 41, Lab 31, Con 16, Green 6, LD 4, UKIP 2. Hard to know what to make of it because it's the first full-scale VI poll of Scotland from TNS since... well, I'm really not sure, as all of their recent Scotland-only polls were of the referendum (nothing since).
    Maybe it's accurate.

    Or maybe the three Scotland wide polls conducted during the period it's fieldwork was done are accurate. Fieldwork 16th Jan to feb 2nd. Completely at odds with everything except the broken Panelbase poll with misleading questions.
    This is the best news Labout has had from Scotland for 4 months. With UNS, they are now upto 20 seats. SNP 35 seats.
    No, they had the same result in the late Jan Panelbase poll, 41% SNP, 31% Labour then it was discovered the question was biased. TNS also seems to be very pro-Labour, didn't they have an 11% Labour lead a few weeks ago?
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Dair said:

    surbiton said:

    Dair said:

    JamesMo said:

    Is there supposed to be a Scottish poll tonight? Any sign of it?

    Embargo ends at 5am.

    Is a TNS poll
    I'll set my alarm, cheers.





    (joke, just in case anyone took me seriously)
    It's on the front page of the Herald. SNP 41, Lab 31, Con 16, Green 6, LD 4, UKIP 2. Hard to know what to make of it because it's the first full-scale VI poll of Scotland from TNS since... well, I'm really not sure, as all of their recent Scotland-only polls were of the referendum (nothing since).
    Maybe it's accurate.

    Or maybe the three Scotland wide polls conducted during the period it's fieldwork was done are accurate. Fieldwork 16th Jan to feb 2nd. Completely at odds with everything except the broken Panelbase poll with misleading questions.
    This is the best news Labout has had from Scotland for 4 months. With UNS, they are now upto 20 seats. SNP 35 seats.
    No, they had the same result in the late Jan Panelbase poll, 41% SNP, 31% Labour then it was discovered the question was biased. TNS also seems to be very pro-Labour, didn't they have an 11% Labour lead a few weeks ago?
    No. They did not !
  • surbiton said:

    Dair said:

    surbiton said:

    Dair said:

    JamesMo said:

    Is there supposed to be a Scottish poll tonight? Any sign of it?

    Embargo ends at 5am.

    Is a TNS poll
    I'll set my alarm, cheers.





    (joke, just in case anyone took me seriously)
    It's on the front page of the Herald. SNP 41, Lab 31, Con 16, Green 6, LD 4, UKIP 2. Hard to know what to make of it because it's the first full-scale VI poll of Scotland from TNS since... well, I'm really not sure, as all of their recent Scotland-only polls were of the referendum (nothing since).
    Maybe it's accurate.

    Or maybe the three Scotland wide polls conducted during the period it's fieldwork was done are accurate. Fieldwork 16th Jan to feb 2nd. Completely at odds with everything except the broken Panelbase poll with misleading questions.
    This is the best news Labout has had from Scotland for 4 months. With UNS, they are now upto 20 seats. SNP 35 seats.
    No, they had the same result in the late Jan Panelbase poll, 41% SNP, 31% Labour then it was discovered the question was biased. TNS also seems to be very pro-Labour, didn't they have an 11% Labour lead a few weeks ago?
    No. They did not !
    That was TNS-BMRB a couple of weeks ago! TNS proper had a 6% lead last week.
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    edited February 2015
    surbiton said:

    Dair said:

    surbiton said:

    Dair said:

    JamesMo said:

    Is there supposed to be a Scottish poll tonight? Any sign of it?

    Embargo ends at 5am.

    Is a TNS poll
    I'll set my alarm, cheers.





    (joke, just in case anyone took me seriously)
    It's on the front page of the Herald. SNP 41, Lab 31, Con 16, Green 6, LD 4, UKIP 2. Hard to know what to make of it because it's the first full-scale VI poll of Scotland from TNS since... well, I'm really not sure, as all of their recent Scotland-only polls were of the referendum (nothing since).
    Maybe it's accurate.

    Or maybe the three Scotland wide polls conducted during the period it's fieldwork was done are accurate. Fieldwork 16th Jan to feb 2nd. Completely at odds with everything except the broken Panelbase poll with misleading questions.
    This is the best news Labout has had from Scotland for 4 months. With UNS, they are now upto 20 seats. SNP 35 seats.
    No, they had the same result in the late Jan Panelbase poll, 41% SNP, 31% Labour then it was discovered the question was biased. TNS also seems to be very pro-Labour, didn't they have an 11% Labour lead a few weeks ago?
    No. They did not !
    TNS had a 6% Labour lead on a poll conducted 29th Jan to 2nd Feb.
    TNS had an 11% Labour lead on a poll conducted 23rd Jan to 26th Jan.

    I would love to speculate on TNS but as OGH has warned against it, I won't.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,514
    edited February 2015
    surbiton said:

    On the HSBC story, the BBC said the whistle blower leaked the data in 2007, but the treasury didn't get it until 2010. Why the three year delay? Calling it 'leaking' implies the whistle blower was making some attempt to inform people, not just sitting on the information. Someone in HMRC ought to have been aware that information on tax evasion was being offered.

    If the three year delay is the result of HMRC or treasury failings, responsibility ultimately rests with the ministers in charge, who were all Labour.

    Labour were out of office in May 2010. What happened since then ?

    Well it appears that the vast majority of people have fessed up and paid a load of tax / penalties / interest.
  • The National Institute of Economic and Social Research increased its forecast for GDP growth this year to 2.9 per cent – the highest since 2006,
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    @Dair Green @ 6% looks high to me, should be low hanging fruit for the SNP I'd guess.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    Which is your constituency btw @Dair ?

    The twitter picks related to #GE15 are reassuring.

    SNP looks to have alot more people to GOTV.
This discussion has been closed.