He is left leaning but not a lefty. I do not think for a moment that he believes in communism or state ownership but I think he is probably in the Labour camp as seen by Kinnock or John Smith.
New Labour was nothing more than Conservative-lite. In fact a left wing Labour Government would have probably been better for the country. Labour whored itself to everyone. Tax cuts to placate the middle classes and social spending to placate the lower classes and the immigrants - anything for a vote. In fact it became a don't tax and spend party with the obvious bad results. You have to be tax cut and spending cut party or a tax and spend party but Labour chose to neither and screwed it up because of that.
Someone like Berlusconi frightens me more than Waldo. I kept waiting for the reveal in the last episode but there wasn't one. Depressed comedian, bullshit politicians, manipulative businessmen, woman getting shafted: same old. Hope there's a new series though because overall series two was better than so much else that's on at the moment.
Someone like Berlusconi frightens me more than Waldo. I kept waiting for the reveal in the last episode but there wasn't one. Depressed comedian, bullshit politicians, manipulative businessmen, woman getting shafted: same old. Hope there's a new series though because overall series two was better than so much else that's on at the moment.
Funny you should mention that as until last year Berlusconi had a stake in Endemol which made this programme.
It's now controlled by a couple of private equity groups.
That's kind of what I was saying, you can't be a socialist rebel and work for a big multinational company that used to be controlled by Berlusconi and Goldman Sachs.
I always think it's interesting that Charlie Brooker is married to Konnie Huq, who used to be a presenter on the X Factor, which seems to be the pinnacle of Charlie Brooker's beef with the media and tv in general.
I would consider myself against capitalism in general, or at least have a liberal mindset, yet I work for a global corporation. I don't like it, but that's my only option at this stage in my life/career and skill set. It's really difficult in this world to stand by your core beliefs and not end up on the dole because of them. My company always talks about expansion, all the rest, and it makes me feel ill. Agh.
Funny you should mention that as until last year Berlusconi had a stake in Endemol which made this programme.
It's now controlled by a couple of private equity groups.
That's kind of what I was saying, you can't be a socialist rebel and work for a big multinational company that used to be controlled by Berlusconi and Goldman Sachs.
And what makes you think CB is a socialist rebel? These left wing comedians you talk about like Brand and Izzard came from the alternitve comedy sence in the 80s which was a reaction to the right wing comics like Manning and Davidson and of course Thatcher, so was overtly political.
But that is dead now with the likes of Peter Kay, Lee Evens, Micheal Macintyre, Jimmy Carr and Kevin Bishop their acts are distinctly non political.
It was too much of a leap to go from finishing 2nd in a local election to global domination and a fascist police state in my eyes.
I choose to interpret it as saying the fascist police state is what will happen if we don't engage in politics to prevent it. Waldo could have made a contribution, by getting people to pay attention and vote again, but failed because Jamie abdicated and let it become a global brand instead.
I didn't really like the main story about politics etc, but I felt sorry for the main character throughout He was just lonely and wanted to be loved - playing Waldo was his chance to escape and be loved, even if the "love" wasn't really for him.
For me too it was more about that character than about the technology or politics. And it was a bit of a problem because he was such a loser. His low self-esteem was crippling - he was convinced he wasn't up to the job of operation Waldo, even though everyone else believed in him, and when he was put on the spot he did quite well, and came out with a tirade that made some of the best points in the episode.
In addition to his self-esteem, he sabotaged himself by attacking his would-be girlfriend in public, using information she had told him in confidence. He could have been happy, but he wilfully threw it away. He could have done some good with Waldo, but he threw that away too. It's hard to care for a character, or root for them, if they don't care for or root for themselves.
I always think it's interesting that Charlie Brooker is married to Konnie Huq, who used to be a presenter on the X Factor, which seems to be the pinnacle of Charlie Brooker's beef with the media and tv in general.
Yes but no doubt if it was made by Endemol he'd like it, just like he likes Big Brother.
I always think it's interesting that Charlie Brooker is married to Konnie Huq, who used to be a presenter on the X Factor, which seems to be the pinnacle of Charlie Brooker's beef with the media and tv in general.
Yep, and to add to the irony, she co-wrote the Black Mirror "15 Million Merits" episode which heavily mocked the X Factor.
Like most of the Black Mirror episodes this was a lot of good ideas not quite well executed enough. I really like Brooker's news columns and TV shows but I do think that perhaps he needs a co-writer for the dramas (although I think he did very well with Dead Set), someone to flesh out his ideas a bit more.
Even so, there was still a lot to think about as usual, especially about the cult of celebrity and the rise of certain characters to god-like status in the absence of any real substance. I wonder whether the episode might have worked better with a vacuous TOWIE type character rather than a cartoon character, someone who is perhaps famous for being mouthy and "keeping it real" but who actually has nothing to say.
That point was still fairly well made, though. You can't replace substance with a vacuum, even if the substance is rubbish. The guy operating Waldo freely admitted that he had no interest in politics and was out of his depth but those in charge didn't seem to care since his style was popular - the type of "entertainment" which relies on humiliation, embarrassment and insult but which lacks any subtlety or sophistication, so recognisable in some of today's so-called celebrities.
Interesting that this was a Nathan Barley idea originally. Now there was a meeting of two minds which could have achieved greatness but somehow missed the mark.
For me too it was more about that character than about the technology or politics. And it was a bit of a problem because he was such a loser. His low self-esteem was crippling - he was convinced he wasn't up to the job of operation Waldo, even though everyone else believed in him, and when he was put on the spot he did quite well, and came out with a tirade that made some of the best points in the episode.
In addition to his self-esteem, he sabotaged himself by attacking his would-be girlfriend in public, using information she had told him in confidence. He could have been happy, but he wilfully threw it away. He could have done some good with Waldo, but he threw that away too. It's hard to care for a character, or root for them, if they don't care for or root for themselves.
I really don't see what good he could have done with Waldo. He saw what Waldo for what it really was, a cartoon bear. He didn't have an interest in politics, he didn't have a belief system, he was just a reactionary figure, in a way, representing the masses. But if you don't believe in anything, then your viewpoint can be easily swayed, polluted, and used for ill, which is what I guess the end sequence represented, and has pretty much already happened in our world today. Most people I know are trapped, disengaged, don't have an opinion, are plodding along, dealing with their lives with their families, don't bother to get themselves interested and involved in the world that surrounds them. It's really quite astounding when you think about it. The level of fear about having an opinion, because oh no, you might be criticised about it on twitter.
I think the level of scrutiny people subject themselves to by having their fake, happy lives plastered on facebook is also worrisome. Why does everyone have to 'like' the same things that you like, watch and listen to the same stuff you do, look perfect in photos, share their every intimate moment with the world at large, who at the heart of it, don't care, and won't weep for you any more when you're gone? This fake existence is so pervasive in our society, and I think this is what Brooker is trying to get at.
I've only just caught up with White Bear, which I recorded. It's probably one of the most disturbing programmes I've watched for a long time.
The first thing that struck me was that it was like watching an episode of Utopia, with the girl "activist" playing a similar role to Jessica.
When it got to the bit about the crime she had committed (is it okay to have a spoiler after this amount of time?), I still thought there would be a final twist where it was actually a very sick entertainment programme in the future. The reality left it devastatingly bleak.
I really don't see what good he could have done with Waldo. He saw what Waldo for what it really was, a cartoon bear. He didn't have an interest in politics, he didn't have a belief system, he was just a reactionary figure, in a way, representing the masses. But if you don't believe in anything, then your viewpoint can be easily swayed, polluted, and used for ill, which is what I guess the end sequence represented, and has pretty much already happened in our world today. Most people I know are trapped, disengaged, don't have an opinion, are plodding along, dealing with their lives with their families, don't bother to get themselves interested and involved in the world that surrounds them. It's really quite astounding when you think about it. The level of fear about having an opinion, because oh no, you might be criticised about it on twitter.
I think the level of scrutiny people subject themselves to by having their fake, happy lives plastered on facebook is also worrisome. Why does everyone have to 'like' the same things that you like, watch and listen to the same stuff you do, look perfect in photos, share their every intimate moment with the world at large, who at the heart of it, don't care, and won't weep for you any more when you're gone? This fake existence is so pervasive in our society, and I think this is what Brooker is trying to get at.
Kind of true, get peeling the onions.
Facebook and Twitter are as real and fake as you want them to be - because they are virtual. Real, yet not.
The more you hold them up to any kind of analysis, to try and pin them down for what they are and try to hang the tail on the donkey, the more they seem absurd.
Ultimately, they are manifold, merely facets of the people they are avatars for and the medium by which they are spread and the effect they have on the recipient.
Funny you should mention that as until last year Berlusconi had a stake in Endemol which made this programme.
It's now controlled by a couple of private equity groups.
That's kind of what I was saying, you can't be a socialist rebel and work for a big multinational company that used to be controlled by Berlusconi and Goldman Sachs.
I wonder if it would be possible to produce the kind of politically aware tv dramas that Ken Loach used to produce in his early days? Given the state of the country you'd think there would be more than Miranda, Call the Midwife and the latest Poliakoff masturbation over how the rich are different.
Out of the three shows, I liked Waldo the least - I felt let down that the cartoon character was merely against things, rather than for them! Would have been much more powerful writing if Waldo had spouted radical opinions and the public all supported them.
The two prior shows were great viewing though.
I think Brooker will be pleased that his three shows generated 35 pages of comment, debate and analysis. And that's just on one forum.
Out of the three shows, I liked Waldo the least - I felt let down that the cartoon character was merely against things, rather than for them! Would have been much more powerful writing if Waldo had spouted radical opinions and the public all supported them.
The two prior shows were great viewing though.
I think Brooker will be pleased that his three shows generated 35 pages of comment, debate and analysis. And that's just on one forum.
That was kind of the point. Brooker's own show (<insert>wipe) is kind of the same thing.
Satire merely illustrates the absurdity of reality. The 'you have to laugh' mentality, it barely offers an opinion other than "there has to be another way".
If it's the one where she takes someone's cap, I think the message is, "Why pay for chocolate if you can steal it."
I choose to interpret it as saying the fascist police state is what will happen if we don't engage in politics to prevent it. Waldo could have made a contribution, by getting people to pay attention and vote again, but failed because Jamie abdicated and let it become a global brand instead.
For me too it was more about that character than about the technology or politics. And it was a bit of a problem because he was such a loser. His low self-esteem was crippling - he was convinced he wasn't up to the job of operation Waldo, even though everyone else believed in him, and when he was put on the spot he did quite well, and came out with a tirade that made some of the best points in the episode.
In addition to his self-esteem, he sabotaged himself by attacking his would-be girlfriend in public, using information she had told him in confidence. He could have been happy, but he wilfully threw it away. He could have done some good with Waldo, but he threw that away too. It's hard to care for a character, or root for them, if they don't care for or root for themselves.
Surely the message was the opposite; by allowing people to vote on any political point in lieu of a manifesto, we get masked riot police moving the homeless on with violence if that's what people want.
The message is that doing it the current way is actually better.
Out of the three shows, I liked Waldo the least - I felt let down that the cartoon character was merely against things, rather than for them! Would have been much more powerful writing if Waldo had spouted radical opinions and the public all supported them.
I was very disappointed in this episode. It just didn't have anything to say in terms of sending up or satirising politics that hasn't already been said over the years by watching regular news programmes.
I was just very non-plussed by it all. And that fact it was led by that twit* from the BT adverts didn't help.
That was kind of the point. Brooker's own show (<insert>wipe) is kind of the same thing.
Satire merely illustrates the absurdity of reality. The 'you have to laugh' mentality, it barely offers an opinion other than "there has to be another way".
I agree with you.
The show is called 'Black Mirror' and in most of these stories the point is for people to turn the mirror onto themselves.
In this case, it's all very well being against something, but the challenge is to think for ourselves and ask ourselves what the alternatives could be, what can we do about something, rather than just complain about our lot and demand that somebody else do our thinking for us.
This story probably highlighted it very clearly that Jamie was part of the problem and was the one who created it.
As maybe everyone who are apathetic but do nothing to change their lot other than take an anti-stance and don't try to think about an alternative solution do.
I was very disappointed in this episode. It just didn't have anything to say in terms of sending up or satirising politics that hasn't already been said over the years by watching regular news programmes.
I was just very non-plussed by it all. And that fact it was led by that twit* from the BT adverts didn't help.
(*misprint)
In hindsight I'm thinking that as with the other stories it's more about encouraging us to ask questions of ourselves.
Here it was probably less about satirising politics, but more to do with how we ourselves engage with politics.
Yep, and to add to the irony, she co-wrote the Black Mirror "15 Million Merits" episode which heavily mocked the X Factor.
I don't see how that is ironic. If anything it sounds like applying insider experience in order to make a better, more incisive parody.
The Waldo Moment was not very remarkable to me. Not many thoughts on it because it didn't provoke any aside from suggesting idiots rally round antagonistic caricatures they can identify with more than idealistic proponents of progress. Nothing too new there.
I really enjoyed the pm one, it was very dark and creepy and reflective on society! Wasnt so keen on the one where they could rewatch any event in their life. The other one with the talent show reminded me a bit of a film i saw where everyone was kept in sterile conditions fearing the world was ending but in reality their organs were being harvested.
I have only just caught the first series and was :eek: at The Nation Anthem. Didn't see that coming at all.
Where we lead to believe he enjoyed it as it lasted an hour ?
Out of the 3 that was the best episode. Didn't really 'get' the other 2.
I have only just caught the first series and was :eek: at The Nation Anthem. Didn't see that coming at all.
Where we lead to believe he enjoyed it as it lasted an hour ?
Out of the 3 that was the best episode. Didn't really 'get' the other 2.
Loved series 2. Thought they were all good.
I would have thought that fact that it took him an hour was an indication that he wasnt enjoying it and "struggled"..would have been concerned if it was over with in 3 minutes:eek:
Just nipping back to White Bear again, I thought it was mainly designed to portray a version of hell. I think the incomplete memory wipe was deliberate, otherwise there would have been no point in working the white bear into the rather over-elaborate fabrication about that power plant. It seemed to be put there to cause flashbacks.
Comments
No.
He is left leaning but not a lefty. I do not think for a moment that he believes in communism or state ownership but I think he is probably in the Labour camp as seen by Kinnock or John Smith.
New Labour was nothing more than Conservative-lite. In fact a left wing Labour Government would have probably been better for the country. Labour whored itself to everyone. Tax cuts to placate the middle classes and social spending to placate the lower classes and the immigrants - anything for a vote. In fact it became a don't tax and spend party with the obvious bad results. You have to be tax cut and spending cut party or a tax and spend party but Labour chose to neither and screwed it up because of that.
Funny you should mention that as until last year Berlusconi had a stake in Endemol which made this programme.
It's now controlled by a couple of private equity groups.
That's kind of what I was saying, you can't be a socialist rebel and work for a big multinational company that used to be controlled by Berlusconi and Goldman Sachs.
I would consider myself against capitalism in general, or at least have a liberal mindset, yet I work for a global corporation. I don't like it, but that's my only option at this stage in my life/career and skill set. It's really difficult in this world to stand by your core beliefs and not end up on the dole because of them. My company always talks about expansion, all the rest, and it makes me feel ill. Agh.
And what makes you think CB is a socialist rebel? These left wing comedians you talk about like Brand and Izzard came from the alternitve comedy sence in the 80s which was a reaction to the right wing comics like Manning and Davidson and of course Thatcher, so was overtly political.
But that is dead now with the likes of Peter Kay, Lee Evens, Micheal Macintyre, Jimmy Carr and Kevin Bishop their acts are distinctly non political.
I choose to interpret it as saying the fascist police state is what will happen if we don't engage in politics to prevent it. Waldo could have made a contribution, by getting people to pay attention and vote again, but failed because Jamie abdicated and let it become a global brand instead.
For me too it was more about that character than about the technology or politics. And it was a bit of a problem because he was such a loser. His low self-esteem was crippling - he was convinced he wasn't up to the job of operation Waldo, even though everyone else believed in him, and when he was put on the spot he did quite well, and came out with a tirade that made some of the best points in the episode.
In addition to his self-esteem, he sabotaged himself by attacking his would-be girlfriend in public, using information she had told him in confidence. He could have been happy, but he wilfully threw it away. He could have done some good with Waldo, but he threw that away too. It's hard to care for a character, or root for them, if they don't care for or root for themselves.
Yes but no doubt if it was made by Endemol he'd like it, just like he likes Big Brother.
Yep, and to add to the irony, she co-wrote the Black Mirror "15 Million Merits" episode which heavily mocked the X Factor.
Even so, there was still a lot to think about as usual, especially about the cult of celebrity and the rise of certain characters to god-like status in the absence of any real substance. I wonder whether the episode might have worked better with a vacuous TOWIE type character rather than a cartoon character, someone who is perhaps famous for being mouthy and "keeping it real" but who actually has nothing to say.
That point was still fairly well made, though. You can't replace substance with a vacuum, even if the substance is rubbish. The guy operating Waldo freely admitted that he had no interest in politics and was out of his depth but those in charge didn't seem to care since his style was popular - the type of "entertainment" which relies on humiliation, embarrassment and insult but which lacks any subtlety or sophistication, so recognisable in some of today's so-called celebrities.
Interesting that this was a Nathan Barley idea originally. Now there was a meeting of two minds which could have achieved greatness but somehow missed the mark.
I really don't see what good he could have done with Waldo. He saw what Waldo for what it really was, a cartoon bear. He didn't have an interest in politics, he didn't have a belief system, he was just a reactionary figure, in a way, representing the masses. But if you don't believe in anything, then your viewpoint can be easily swayed, polluted, and used for ill, which is what I guess the end sequence represented, and has pretty much already happened in our world today. Most people I know are trapped, disengaged, don't have an opinion, are plodding along, dealing with their lives with their families, don't bother to get themselves interested and involved in the world that surrounds them. It's really quite astounding when you think about it. The level of fear about having an opinion, because oh no, you might be criticised about it on twitter.
I think the level of scrutiny people subject themselves to by having their fake, happy lives plastered on facebook is also worrisome. Why does everyone have to 'like' the same things that you like, watch and listen to the same stuff you do, look perfect in photos, share their every intimate moment with the world at large, who at the heart of it, don't care, and won't weep for you any more when you're gone? This fake existence is so pervasive in our society, and I think this is what Brooker is trying to get at.
The first thing that struck me was that it was like watching an episode of Utopia, with the girl "activist" playing a similar role to Jessica.
When it got to the bit about the crime she had committed (is it okay to have a spoiler after this amount of time?), I still thought there would be a final twist where it was actually a very sick entertainment programme in the future. The reality left it devastatingly bleak.
Kind of true, get peeling the onions.
Facebook and Twitter are as real and fake as you want them to be - because they are virtual. Real, yet not.
The more you hold them up to any kind of analysis, to try and pin them down for what they are and try to hang the tail on the donkey, the more they seem absurd.
Ultimately, they are manifold, merely facets of the people they are avatars for and the medium by which they are spread and the effect they have on the recipient.
Arab Spring, anyone?
Subvert from within
The two prior shows were great viewing though.
I think Brooker will be pleased that his three shows generated 35 pages of comment, debate and analysis. And that's just on one forum.
That was kind of the point. Brooker's own show (<insert>wipe) is kind of the same thing.
Satire merely illustrates the absurdity of reality. The 'you have to laugh' mentality, it barely offers an opinion other than "there has to be another way".
The message is that doing it the current way is actually better.
I was very disappointed in this episode. It just didn't have anything to say in terms of sending up or satirising politics that hasn't already been said over the years by watching regular news programmes.
I was just very non-plussed by it all. And that fact it was led by that twit* from the BT adverts didn't help.
(*misprint)
I agree with you.
The show is called 'Black Mirror' and in most of these stories the point is for people to turn the mirror onto themselves.
In this case, it's all very well being against something, but the challenge is to think for ourselves and ask ourselves what the alternatives could be, what can we do about something, rather than just complain about our lot and demand that somebody else do our thinking for us.
This story probably highlighted it very clearly that Jamie was part of the problem and was the one who created it.
As maybe everyone who are apathetic but do nothing to change their lot other than take an anti-stance and don't try to think about an alternative solution do.
In hindsight I'm thinking that as with the other stories it's more about encouraging us to ask questions of ourselves.
Here it was probably less about satirising politics, but more to do with how we ourselves engage with politics.
I don't see how that is ironic. If anything it sounds like applying insider experience in order to make a better, more incisive parody.
The Waldo Moment was not very remarkable to me. Not many thoughts on it because it didn't provoke any aside from suggesting idiots rally round antagonistic caricatures they can identify with more than idealistic proponents of progress. Nothing too new there.
I have only just caught the first series and was :eek: at The Nation Anthem. Didn't see that coming at all.
Where we lead to believe he enjoyed it as it lasted an hour ?
Out of the 3 that was the best episode. Didn't really 'get' the other 2.
Loved series 2. Thought they were all good.
I would have thought that fact that it took him an hour was an indication that he wasnt enjoying it and "struggled"..would have been concerned if it was over with in 3 minutes:eek: