Coogan had a very stuttery, hesitant delivery (in a bad way, as opposed to Leveson LJ's studied ... pregnant... style). It was odd: I'd have expected exactly that of Hugh Grant, whereas he was remarkably fluent, in contrast.
-
"...the isle is full of noises,
Sounds and sweet airs, that give delight and hurt not.
Sometimes a thousand twangling instruments
Will hum about mine ears, and sometime voices..."
-
caliban - there's 'pregnant', then there's obese ....
he's verging on the latter, since he doesn't deliver anything much, having taken 5 mins to spit it out. but i'd concede it is a studied control and respect ritual, defo.
i think possibly grant is a much better presenter of coogan's ideas than coogan is himself. i am biased though.
speculation as to their inevitable chats pre court aside, they are imv making a combined attack, along similar themes, and to their credit are working well together. grant has a decade more experience in show biz, and law suits ......rather than writing, production, comedy and acting + scandal. sc is very astute and creative in ways that grant might only dream of as a mainstream actor imv. arguably it's harder for comedians to do the straight and responsible routine publicly possibly? grant has played comparitively conservative, slick characters on film, in comparison. he seems to make the leap to the context of formal court film footage more confidently. hg wisely also chose a police outfit for the appearance - wearing a pale blue shirt....whereas steve coogan looks casual, younger, and upset. perhaps they're both quite effective as a unique team, and are particularly admirable in that they have a lot of courage in what appear to be a particularly cowardly and deceitful era generally.Comment
-
he did raise a couple of laughs though, one was when Piers Morgan was quoted as saying that he and Coogan had had a meeting in "an excruciatingly trendy" restaurant, Coogan said "he chose the venue"Originally posted by handsomefortune View Post
in a generally laugh-free zone Mr Peppiatt had the biggest response when he read out some typical Daily Star headlines. Milord Justice didn't laugh though but asked "are those real headlines?" in apparent genuine innocence. I know it's a bit of an old cliche that high court judges are out of touch with ordinary people but I don't suppose Lord L had clapped eyes on a tabloid before he was appointed to this inquiry (or am I being unfair?).
Peppiatt revealed how stories are concocted, with made-up or misattributed quotes, ditto sources, totally made-up stories, fictitious names of reporters etc. When someone buys the Daily Star are they totally conscious that what they are reading is more-than-likely fiction dressed up as fact? Campbell says that on American newspapers they have fact-checkers who independently verify all quotes, stories and sources before anything goes to press. He says that the PCC codes are broken day-in day-out. The general opinion seems to be that the PCC is unable to enforce its own codes of practice.
The inquiry is sitting approx. 5 1/2 hours per day, 7 days per fortnight - they're not exactly in a hurry are they. I've never attended any sort of court hearing, but there seem to be very long pauses while counsel decide what their next question is going to be.Last edited by mercia; 01-12-11, 11:59.Comment
-
As I said, elsewhere to someone, when it comes to the movie "Paul McMullan - Aha - Gotcha Love" the only person to play him with the right amount of manic sleaze is Steve Coogan. A lucrative pairing. McMullan at present runs a pub in Dover, Gawd, how dismal is that - Dover? You can just imagine it, pvc banquettes, dirty counters and something rubbery with chips and a willing barmaid
(sorry doversoul)Comment
-
...tsk tsk Dover is a major port and very old and so is the Castle Inn
...and judging by that description of the circumstances of the Castle Inn, Senor MacMullan is still tilting at windmillsAccording to the best estimates of astronomers there are at least one hundred billion galaxies in the observable universe.Comment
-
Oh! Sleaze-Ville-en-Sea. Lovely! "several young ladies remembered 'Hen nights ' and the popular karaoke evenings at the Castle" Just the job before a cross channel ferry!Originally posted by aka Calum Da Jazbo View PostComment
-
One of the episodes I found amusing was when McMullan claimed he was proud of causing a riot with his paedophile-bashing story. Lord L, his eyes popping out as if on stalks, took the trouble to read McM's comments back to him to confirm that he had heard aright. It is sometimes like a Cocklecarrot case from Beachcomber
One of the barristers (is it Jay?) has the most monotonous delivery imaginable, with long pauses in between each response and the next question, as if he were reading the telephone directory in a Pinter play.Comment
-
You can be confident that there is a huge amount of work going on in the background, mercia. What we see is the gliding swan, not the pedalling that goes into it.Originally posted by mercia View Post
Comment
-
According to the transcript:
LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: I'm sorry, I just want to check whether I'm reading this correctly: "I felt slightly proud that I'd written something that created a riot and got a paediatrician beaten up"?
Answer: Yes, I suppose I'm being a bit frivolous, but in a sense, how do you judge what you do in your career?Comment
-
I've done a lot of cycling in my time, but never pedalled into a swan!Originally posted by amateur51 View PostYou can be confident that there is a huge amount of work going on in the background, mercia. What we see is the gliding swan, not the pedalling that goes into it.
Comment
-
possibly the understatement of the yearYes, I suppose I'm being a bit frivolous [McMullan]
could someone clear up something for me. Mr McM was forced to appear before the inquiry, rather than volunteering to be there, does that mean he hadn't submitted a statement beforehand as the voluntary participants had?Last edited by mercia; 01-12-11, 12:38.Comment
-
One of the episodes I found amusing was when McMullan claimed he was proud of causing a riot with his paedophile-bashing story.
aeolium. tis pinteresque, except the tax payer doesn't pay for pinter's long gaps, and pinter writes fiction. (ooops, so does mcm ) darn it.
had to look up 'tilting at windmills' calum da jazbo, evidently it's an apt description! except unfortunately mcm has no sancho to explain stuff!
Just then they came in sight of thirty or forty windmills that rise from that plain. And no sooner did Don Quixote see them that he said to his squire, "Fortune is guiding our affairs better than we ourselves could have wished. Do you see over yonder, friend Sancho, thirty or forty hulking giants? I intend to do battle with them and slay them. With their spoils we shall begin to be rich for this is a righteous war and the removal of so foul a brood from off the face of the earth is a service God will bless."
"What giants?" asked Sancho Panza.
"Those you see over there," replied his master, "with their long arms. Some of them have arms well nigh two leagues in length."
"Take care, sir," cried Sancho. "Those over there are not giants but windmills. Those things that seem to be their arms are sails which, when they are whirled around by the wind, turn the millstone."
is his pub up for sale? just above where the silver car is parked there looks like a 'for sale' sign? anyone will have a job holding onto a pub in these times, so he's flying by the seat of his pants, as are other publicans.
how do you judge what you do in your career?
well posted john bennett ... a great shame that self judgment only comes into question when actually in court, because both professional, and personal ethics are under close scrutiny! the rest of the time presumably you might just barge around like a loose cannon, intruding on whoever. carelessly ruining their peace and sanity for cash. happily, the majority of sane people would rather be dead, than do that for a living.
it's almost amusing that tabloid employees (kelvin m included) continue to suggest that 'tabloids help keep moral and social order in society' ....almost..... it's certainly laughable...if you look at it from the assumption that the pcc lack teeth, are in some way 'enjoying' their own impotence, failure to regulate what's published? really, perhaps the pcc should be the ones under most pressure, if a constructive, rather than sensational approach were the case. next week, we might well be witnissing a complete reversal, and a whole sorry network of soul less excuses for human beings will continue, as 'normal'.
it's a sober reminder of the sheer numbers of people who accept merely providing lip service, simply acting out a role for wage/pension, whilst causing others harm. imv it's potentially pretty disheartening in this respect especially.
might have known melanie phillips and amanda patel would be stirring things, and personally profiting from their typically disgusting hateful biilge. in this context, is it any wonder that mysoginy is popular, and increasingly acceptable again?
Piers Morgan was quoted as saying that he and Coogan had had a meeting in "an excruciatingly trendy" restaurant, Coogan said "he chose the venue"
yes, that was definitely comic mercia!
I know it's a bit of an old cliche that high court judges are totally out of touch with ordinary people but I don't suppose Lord L had clapped eyes on a tabloid before he was appointed to this inquiry (or am I being unfair?).
imv it's a pertinent point mercia ..perhaps caliban knows the answer? i think arguably, someone who purports to know 'nothing' of the london news industry is perhaps unsuitable to judge anything much at all about journalism? incidentally, what is justice leveson's particular specialism, if any?
on the other hand, i expect there's some tedious excuse for a 'naive' approach, so as to claim that no 'pre conceptions might affect, or contaminate the evidence before the court'. but the general effect is to dumb things down, aided by quite extraordinary levels of s-l-o-w-ness , which leaves pace, continuity, and sense aside ...it's perhaps not very hopeful?. pressurising volunteer witnesses, rather than the pcc, or those actually guilty of repeatedly breaking privacy laws, arguably makes a mockery of the law initially. or at least, this is how it appears at this stage.
the right amount of manic sleaze is Steve Coogan yes anna. it does make me wonder if sc is a misandrist, as he generally portrays stupid/negative aspects of male behaviour. it's always been his comic source. i suspect hanging out with piers gave him several volumes of future source material! the court case this far, certainly brings out the misandrist in me!
dirty counters and something rubbery with chips and a willing barmaid ugh! mcm would be in his element amongst such grottyness!! i don't see why doversoul would be worried, as i'm sure the rest of dover pubs are proud of their heritage, but living in real time..instead of the backward looking, seedy landscape of a tabloid journalist's weekend retreat. 'the league of gentlemen' cast might make a good job of portraying life at 'the castle inn'! 
westminster apparently has the most brothels per square mile than anywhere else in the uk, so there'll be lots for mcm to 'do' in the evening, 'reporting' on lonely careerists after work recreational activities . mcm might just bump into chaps he's met previously in the day, mind you! what ho - trot on!
anyway, the old boys network is definitely hale and hearty by the looks....perhaps they could teach the pcc a thing or two, at minimum. otherwise, the whole shebang is quite possibly a waste of cash, and a bit of a farce.....although i adore sc and hg for taking a chance on restoring the good reputation of uk journalism, in emphasising the necessity for effective privacy laws, which is what this case should be about. (as well as ni monopolies) meanwhile, the world must be smiling and nodding knowingly, as 'our' brit sleaze is unfortunately as notorious as our journalistic excellence.... not that this issue seems to be perceived as of much importance at all .....as ever.
Comment
-
I didn't know he had been forced to appear but it is significant that on the Leveson website there is no witness statement from him, neither has the video of appearance been posted. I assume, given his candour (foolhardiness?), his whole testimony is under investigation due to his incriminations.Originally posted by mercia View PostComment
-
it has appeared here, starting at approx. 37 minutes in
when I say 'forced' to appear I mean required or ordered under section something ??Last edited by mercia; 01-12-11, 16:06.Comment
-
Oh and the video has just now appeared on the BBC Democracy link. I'll look at it later.Comment
Comment