The Last Dragon
Author
Discussion

gruffy

Original Poster:

7,212 posts

288 months

Saturday 5th March 2005
quotequote all
Am I the only one who is disturbed at programmes like this?
How can the programme makers present fiction in a documentary, given the suggestability and stupidity of some of our nations finest?
I shudder to think how many of our population are now certain that dragons existed

Gruffy

Pies

13,116 posts

285 months

Saturday 5th March 2005
quotequote all
What a carp program

DanH

12,287 posts

289 months

Saturday 5th March 2005
quotequote all

I've got no problem with presenting fiction as a documentary. If you are too dumb to work it out, you probably shouldn't be entrusted with a remote control, or feeding yourself...

It was wank viewing though.

mybrainhurts

90,809 posts

284 months

Saturday 5th March 2005
quotequote all
Pies said:
What a carp program


It's a not cod programme......


silly.....

GreenV8S

31,013 posts

313 months

Saturday 5th March 2005
quotequote all
Watching channel 4 at the moment and it seems likely that dragons *did* exist but "they" don't want us to know about it. It's all a conspiracy you see.

simpo two

92,660 posts

294 months

Saturday 5th March 2005
quotequote all
Frankly I didn't see the point. It was neither informative or funny.

Better to put all that effort into something real.

gruffy

Original Poster:

7,212 posts

288 months

Saturday 5th March 2005
quotequote all
The way they delivered the fictional 'facts' in the voiceover was ridiculous.
DanH said:
If you are too dumb to work it out, you probably shouldn't be entrusted with a remote control, or feeding yourself...

Sadly, these people do exist and they're part of a growing population. The 'civilised' world is growing more dependent on TV and the media for it's education. This programme is right up there with the dumbing down of all the mainstream DJs who insist on speaking chav to listeners and those ng Claims Direct ads!

Gruffy
I've had a rough day, excuse the rant

V8thunder

27,647 posts

287 months

Saturday 5th March 2005
quotequote all
Channel 4 has nosedived, quality-wise, since they started doing Big Brother. TBH I've no idea what market they're aiming for any more. If I was to characterise each channel as a person, Martin Buckley-style, it would be:

BBC1 - Lower-middle-class Mondeo man with a wife and 2.4 kids, holidays in Lanzarote, works in insurance, sensible haircut, dress-down-Friday look, likes gardening, reads the Telegraph. He's called John. Everyone likes John. Real ale man.

BBC2 - Meet Piers - Saab driver, likes classical music on very quietly, always prefers something obscure compared to your tastes, wears linen suits and frequents art galleries on his lunchbreak. Reads every single section of the Times, every day. Drinks obscure wine from the ends of the earth.

ITV - Cackling laughter, drives a battered Cavalier with dodgy alloys, CD collection consists of those interminable 5-CD 'ultimate party' albums, lives on oven chips, Fried chicken and frozen vegetables, talks in predictable cliches and says 'put that bloody kettle on' every time they enter a building. Gets the Sun, and has a really blokish name, known by a nickname like 'Knacker', or something. Drinks Carling, holidays in Ibiza.

Channel 4 - Strangly resembles Harry Hill with bald head and lurid green shirt with a winged collar topped off with yellow-tinted glasses he doesn't actually need. Listens to Finnish ambient jungle chillout, Drives an Audi TT and lives in an inner city apartment the size of an Oxo cube. Snorts cocaine as a matter of course, claims to be a socialist man of the people etc but in fact loves embracing the shallowness of the media. Comes across as a 'new man' type but has a different girl back to his flat every night. Takes the Observer on Sundays but only reads the entertainments section. Drinks alcopops poured into a glass and passed off as a cocktail. Has one of those daft 'media' names like 'Grub' or 'Nish'.

Channel 5 - Likes to come across as intellectual and open-minded but is in fact a bit of a pretender on TV street. Drives a maroon Rover 45 with all the trimmings and pretends it's an X-Type when he's out in it. Takes the Daily Mail, drinks whatever wine was cheapest at the supermarket and has certain opinions on ethnic minorities and homosexuals, which he disguises by being extra-nice to them. Has boxed sets of classical 'favourites', and despite occasionally waxing lyrical about Kubrick, loves a good Clint Eastwood cop drama.

If only channels stopped pandering to their comic stereotypes and just made quality programmes, there'd be no need to make a joke about them!

>> Edited by V8thunder on Saturday 5th March 22:39

shadowninja

79,986 posts

311 months

Saturday 5th March 2005
quotequote all
GreenV8S said:
Watching channel 4 at the moment and it seems likely that dragons *did* exist but "they" don't want us to know about it. It's all a conspiracy you see.


sure?

shirley temple

2,232 posts

261 months

Saturday 5th March 2005
quotequote all
not the last, saw 'em performing a while back and they are at the Wheatsheaf in D'unstable on good friday

http://hometown.aol.co.uk/dragonrockband/

DanH

12,287 posts

289 months

Sunday 6th March 2005
quotequote all
shadowninja said:

GreenV8S said:
Watching channel 4 at the moment and it seems likely that dragons *did* exist but "they" don't want us to know about it. It's all a conspiracy you see.



sure?



What has a picture of a letterbox got to do with anything

motco

17,594 posts

275 months

Sunday 6th March 2005
quotequote all
More leaps of imagination than even Crime Scene Investigation!

p.s. It's not new, conning the stupid: Orson Welles' radio version of "War of the Worlds" did it in the thirties. It had people panicking in the streets.

>> Edited by motco on Sunday 6th March 10:00

saf

448 posts

269 months

Monday 7th March 2005
quotequote all
[quote=V8thunder]Channel 4 has nosedived, quality-wise, since they started doing Big Brother. TBH I've no idea what market they're aiming for any more. If I was to characterise each channel as a person, Martin Buckley-style, it would be:


BBC2 - Meet Piers - Saab driver,
But Saab Drivers can't be pidgeon holed

likes classical music on very quietly,
None in our Saabs

always prefers something obscure compared to your tastes,
Not sure on this one - does that include TVR

wears linen suits and frequents art galleries on his lunchbreak.
Not here, Linen creases toooooooooo easily

Reads every single section of the Times, every day.
Don't get any daily papers.

Drinks obscure wine from the ends of the earth.
OK I admit it I drink Campari

Oh and dragons do exist - we have one on our flag

edited because I forgot the flag bit.


>> Edited by saf on Monday 7th March 15:41

JagLover

46,734 posts

264 months

Monday 7th March 2005
quotequote all
Want to hear something funny

My Mother watched this programme-and all Sunday she was telling me earnestly about how Dragons existed and how they had found the fossils-with fire ducts etc.

I was thinking emmm this sounds a bit strange.

Racylady

931 posts

262 months

Monday 7th March 2005
quotequote all
gruffy said:

I shudder to think how many of our population are now certain that dragons existed
Gruffy


And what's your evidence to prove that they definitely didn't exist?

lunarscope

2,901 posts

271 months

Monday 7th March 2005
quotequote all
Racylady said:

gruffy said:

I shudder to think how many of our population are now certain that dragons existed
Gruffy



And what's your evidence to prove that they definitely didn't exist?


[leadingQuestion]Are they mentioned in The Bible ?[/leadingQuestion]

Eric Mc

125,606 posts

294 months

Monday 7th March 2005
quotequote all
Racylady - that's a very modern argument as used by Tony Blair and his belief in Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction. How do you prove a negative?

So far, there is not a shred of evidence that "dragons" ever existed and lack of evidence is evidence enough for me.

My belief is that humans have been finding bones and skelletons of long extinct creatures for tens of thousands of years - particularly dinosaurs. I'm pretty sure that these discoveries would have fed stories of mythical creatures in lots of different cultures all over the world. It's only in the last 150 years that we really began to understand what dinosaurs really were (and we're still finding out).

bilko2

1,693 posts

261 months

Monday 7th March 2005
quotequote all
Still interesting to see Dragons portrayed as roughly the same thing by many cultures.
Not suggesting that they did exist although there isn't an awfull lot known about the dark ages - hence the name
It would be interesting to see if dragons were mainly displayed pictorally in churches or religeous places and how many of those were christian.

It would be nice to think that such beasts roamed the earth ( for me anyway ) and i did watch the program.
i thought it was ok but full of contradictions.

Eric Mc

125,606 posts

294 months

Monday 7th March 2005
quotequote all
On the contrary, an awful lot IS known about the so called "Dark Ages". The only reason why it became known as "Dark" is because later generations wanted to emphasise the importance of the Rennaisannce period in human history. Also, in the 17th and 18th century it became fashionable to glorify the "Classical" period of civilisation, especially the Greeks and the Romans. As a result, the 1,000 year gap between the Classic period and the Rennaisance became known as the Dark Ages - when in actual fact they were anything but.

Thank goodness people like Terry Jones are out there reminding us about the knowledge and customs that derive from that "Dark" period in history.