Cor!! Sand and rocks! We'd have killed for sand and rocks, all we had was rotton wood and mud. We had to work, play and sleep in it!
Oy! You lucky bastard. You got to sleep on rotten wood and mud, that is luxury. We had to sleep on a thick, sludge, that would kill us if we didn't wake every hour to stay on the surface.
Wake up every hour, on the hour.......life of bleeding luxury! We weren't allowed to sleep, ever, had to have pins inside yer eyelids to keep awake!!!
You had pins? Bunch of namby pamby lucky whiners. We had to hold our own eyelids open while digging a pit that we had to fill with sludge for the LUCKY KIDS to sleep in! We would have killed to have pins that we could stick in our eyes.
I explain to my little nieces and nephews that I don't find most comedy that funny. After being raised on Monty Python and Benny Hill, some of it is just too painful. The comedic timing alone is something just so awe inspiring. Rowan Atkinson is a grand master of timing.
Yus mate, I am in total agreement. I am not very good at the techy stuff but if I can, I will post"the Gorilla sketch" from "Not the Nine O'clock News" an old BBC show starring Rowan amongst others.
Basically, in a nutshelll... no, that's silly. It would never fit in a nutshell, it's far too big. Okay, so in a coconut shell... Monty Python is a series of comedy films about a Flying Circus, Monty Python's Flying Circus, and the weird and madcap personalities who work there, like the owner, a Python called Monty, and this guy called Brian who is a Very Naughty Boy. Anyway, they have a series of ridiculous adventures about Jesus and the Holy Grail, and each one is more ludicrous than the one before. It's classic British comedy building on the work of the Goon Squad, who were comedy bankrobbers in the 50s, I think. I could be wrong about everything. Except the coconut. It definitely wouldn't fit in a nutshell.
Quote This is actually really illuminating, thank you for the quick n dirty summary! End Quote Aah, no, don't actually believe me. I should come with a disclaimer or something.
I came into it from the side panel, with the most recently commented on threads. Should still have probably started at the beginning though
The disclaimer seems to be of a nature that screams of one of several possibilities. Either a government worker or a fine member of the philosophy department of the University of Woolamaloo. Question, is your name really Bruce?
I might have t borrow this without asking and use it shamelessly until the wheels fall off. 99% of what this person posts is designated: not actually true* *Depending on your definitions of words like not, actually and true** **And depending on your perception of truth*** ***Which is, of course, dependent on your perception of reality**** ****Which is to say that, dependent on your perception of reality, the nature of truth may vary so much so that that which was true can no longer strictly be considered true and that which wasn't true can no longer strictly be considered not true and, applicable to various and sundry variables being applied, and on a sliding scale of truthfulness, and considering the quantum mechanic theorem that everything must be possible and everything that is possible must therefore be, the above statement can alternatively be read as: 99% of what this person posts is designated: actually true***** *****possibly, somewhere