|
Please login to reply.
| 4 of 14 |
|
|||||
|
Posted at 03/01/2008, 15:58
|
|||||
learn to spell you tosser |
|||||
|
Posted at 04/01/2008, 03:51
|
|||||
|
took me a while to work that out as well, i think it's galactica. only the true scifi nerd would notice that one. |
|||||
|
Posted at 04/01/2008, 04:05
|
|||||
|
i have given up on ripping funny man now, everyone can see he's a 'tard, he doesn't need anyone else to point that out to him. as for his 'reviews', they've never held any merit for me but will probably continue to give me a good chuckle at the expense of the authors sheer stupidity. ok, now i've given up ripping funny man 
|
|||||
|
Posted at 04/01/2008, 07:12
|
|||||
|
funny man review: the tudors. as much as funny man wanted to like this show he cannot. it is historically inaccurate to the point of meltdown. the acting in this show is middling to say the least, with many miscast actors. the story tends to lean towards entertaining people as opposed to supplying an accurate historical account. funny man is not entertained by this in the slightest and the fact that they are tampering with history makes funny man's blood boil. rhys-meyers' performance is about the only saving grace for this show. 4/10 - watch "rome" instead. much love to all the funny man fans. |
|||||
|
Posted at 04/01/2008, 18:43
|
|||||
ok, so i'm a nerd then 
|
|||||
|
Posted at 04/01/2008, 22:35
|
|||||
i'm not so sure i've seen much evidence of a fan base, funny man ... but i will acknowledge your staying power amongst adversity. also, though i don't agree with your assessment of the tudors (entertainment for the sake of entertaining is not neccessarily a bad thing imo), your last two evaluations suggest you may have accepted some advice in regards to writing a review of sorts. you've provided some examples from the programs to back up your opinions, and discussed different aspects of the production in regards to acting, story, and even camera work. obviously, you could still use some improvement but i appreciate that you are making an effort to learn at least. to everyone else, perhaps it is time to recognise and accept the funny man character for what it is - light-hearted entertainment. i mean, does it really matter that funny man thinks he has fans and refers to himself in the first person? not everyone is the same and it would be an awfully boring world if we were blah blah. it wont hurt to cut him some slack and let him have his opinion, there is always the "the funny man show reviews criticism thread" in which to demonstrate your own flair and offer an alternate viewpoint to the masses ... many of you can be absurdly funny, even if funny man is not.
|
|||||
|
Posted at 07/01/2008, 13:38
|
|||||
|
funny man review: battlestar gallactica as an avid fan of the original series, funny man was overwhelmed when he heard the series was getting a make-over. thinking back to the days of starbuck and the sylons, funny man remembered the "good old days". however, his nostalgia was short-lived, and soon thereafter smashed to pieces.... the pilot episode begins, and you are immediately thrown into the middle of a haywire story where not a lot makes sense. funny man spent the majority of the pilot just trying to figure out what was going on....then he just gave up. some nice special effects will not cover up the mess that is the "storyline". the people responsible for this truly have "lost the plot"! no starbuck (dirk benedict) no sylons no use 3/10 - totally confusing! an insult to the original series! |
|||||
|
Posted at 07/01/2008, 17:49
|
|||||
what a tool. if you actually had the ability to comprehend what funny man was saying, he said he was an avid fan of the original series, which ran in 1978. this new version started in 2004. what a noob. much love to all the funny man fans. |
|||||
|
Posted at 08/01/2008, 03:12
|
|||||
and what part of waiting years to watch it don't you understand fuglyman? galactica started in 2003. . . . . . it is now 2008 also the fact that you watched (or at least reviewed) the first episode of the tv episodic series, instead of actually watching the previous 3 hour (4 episode) miniseries (2003) of which the 'pilot' 42 min episode continues. had you done so, you would have seen a cylon in the first 5 minutes. and on the topic of starbuck, i am sure dirk slept with more men than katee ever will. on the topic of glen larson, this is what he had in mind but was restrained by 70's television. thank god they don't come accross a human occupied planet every episode that apollo can attempt to re-populate in his own image. they did an excellent job (with 2003 mini and the first 2 seasons) ps. was that you on the news last night, getting rescued from your flat after having a fall? or was that your smaller brother? |
|||||
|
Posted at 09/01/2008, 12:43
|
|||||
|
stay tuned for the next funny man review: shark. much love to all the funny man fans. |
|||||
|
Posted at 11/01/2008, 14:10
|
|||||
|
funny man review: shark. with high expectations funny man tuned into cbs' legal drama "shark" one unsuspecting night. funny man soon discovered that this would be a lesson learned. the premise of the show is laughable, with the main procrastinator, james woods starring as himself yet again. the usual string of situations where woods can "lose his temper" all crop up here. the "high-blood pressured basket case" routine has long since worn thin by this stage, woods! the laughs cannot be found for love nor money. the creepy supporting cast are lame and confusing. the cases dealt with are so far fetched only a fool would buy into them. last, but not least, the music is godawful. 4/10 - bad, but at least it's not "top gear". |
|||||
|
Posted at 11/01/2008, 14:32
|
|||||
|
no big loss about shark .. there's a glut of lawyer shows as it is. how about a review of the new techie show jpod - any potential there or is it likely to be another deadend? |
|||||
|
Posted at 13/01/2008, 10:53
|
|||||
|
stay tuned for the next funny man review: (as requested) jpod much love to all the funny man fans. |
|||||
|
Posted at 15/01/2008, 14:32
|
|||||
|
funny man review: jpod funny man went into this one optimistic that a good show awaited him him judging by the description. the description forgot to mention a few things though. allow funny man to elaborate. the premise of the show is an annoying mix of scrubs, the office and my name is earl. unlike two (office, earl) of the three aforementioned shows jpod is a total mess. the characters are stereotypical and lack any depth. there are many "in-jokes" in this show also - something that funny man really hates. the storyline is garbage that doesn't seem to want to go in any particular direction. the only thing that puzzled funny man upon first hearing of this show was what the "j" in "jpod" meant. funny man will now reveal the meaning. the j stands for junk, because that's what this is! 2/10 - absolute garbage! 6 broadcast episodes (max.) before being axed! extremely annoying, avoid at all cost. |
|||||
|
Posted at 16/01/2008, 18:35
|
|||||
|
stay tuned for the next funny man review: 24. much love to all the funny man fans. |
|||||
|
| 4 of 14 |
|
|||||
Please login to reply.
