Frankie Boyle - Don't give it if you can't take it?
Discussion
rsv gone! said:
do like his dark humour but this is exactly how I find him. He's a one-trick pony.
Yes. He was funny for a while on mock the week, but in time it was just predictable and a bit 'here we go again, Boyles five minute rant'.On the other hand, whilst someone decried the situation where being an -ist can kill a career, this is the situation. If its true that's one thing, but for papers to decide to brand someone a racist is akin to McCarthyism, not that some people on here will consider that a negative...
M
WeirdNeville said:
ViperPict said:
Good on Frankie!
I can't believe the number of people on here who 'don't get him'!
You need people like him to push boundaries and satirise society.
What a boring place it would be if everyone conformed to the middle ground of society!
I have a funny feeling a lot of folk on here probably find Cannon and Ball the height of humour (who I once had the displeasure of seeing in Blackpool many years ago).
I dunno, I can see why people find him too much. I find him tolerable and occasionally funny on Mock the Week, for example, when he's filtered. I suspect I would find a live performance or DVD very unfunny. He's too often crass or goes for outrage and shock rather than true satire IMO, but that's just my preference.I can't believe the number of people on here who 'don't get him'!
You need people like him to push boundaries and satirise society.
What a boring place it would be if everyone conformed to the middle ground of society!
I have a funny feeling a lot of folk on here probably find Cannon and Ball the height of humour (who I once had the displeasure of seeing in Blackpool many years ago).
But then I find the likes of Jim Jefferies and Dave Chappelle and numerous other 'outrageous' comics very funny. No real reason why.
WeirdNeville said:
I on't paricularly care for Frankie Boyles 'comedy' but I think that it's very important that he wins this case.
We already live in a time when htings are taken at face value and often at their most serious: "I'm going to blow up Robin Hood Airport" for example (that's a quote and NOT a statement of my intened actions!)
Do we really want a society where you can't make jokes about anything to do with culture, race, sex, for fear of being labled an 'ist' and never working again? Or swearing in a pub being an offence of Sec T public Order act offence every time?
There is an important an demostrable difference between making jokes about race and being a racist. Using racially provokative language in the context of a joke or satire is an important way of challenging popular opinion.
So, I hope he wins to stop papers simply branding those they dislike racist and destroying ther careers.
We already live in a time when htings are taken at face value and often at their most serious: "I'm going to blow up Robin Hood Airport" for example (that's a quote and NOT a statement of my intened actions!)
Do we really want a society where you can't make jokes about anything to do with culture, race, sex, for fear of being labled an 'ist' and never working again? Or swearing in a pub being an offence of Sec T public Order act offence every time?
There is an important an demostrable difference between making jokes about race and being a racist. Using racially provokative language in the context of a joke or satire is an important way of challenging popular opinion.
So, I hope he wins to stop papers simply branding those they dislike racist and destroying ther careers.
(and O/T but I thought Slumdog was just a very entertaining film that was set somewhere other than America for a change)
So glad he won this case, and not just because his humour is often to my taste. The simple fact is, you should be able to make jokes about most (all?) things and, as long as they are just jokes, that should be the end of it. If you don't like the humour, don't attend/listen/read. No one is forced to watch his routines.
Nothing should be off limits imho. Whether it is funny to mock/joke about certain subjects is another (entirely subjective) matter which no law should have the right to decide.
Good to see common sense prevailing here.
Nothing should be off limits imho. Whether it is funny to mock/joke about certain subjects is another (entirely subjective) matter which no law should have the right to decide.
Good to see common sense prevailing here.
wiggy001 said:
So glad he won this case, and not just because his humour is often to my taste. The simple fact is, you should be able to make jokes about most (all?) things and, as long as they are just jokes, that should be the end of it. If you don't like the humour, don't attend/listen/read. No one is forced to watch his routines.
Nothing should be off limits imho. Whether it is funny to mock/joke about certain subjects is another (entirely subjective) matter which no law should have the right to decide.
Good to see common sense prevailing here.
That's the second intelligent comment I've read on PH today. I need to lie down for a bit.Nothing should be off limits imho. Whether it is funny to mock/joke about certain subjects is another (entirely subjective) matter which no law should have the right to decide.
Good to see common sense prevailing here.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff