[chris]

Check out this clip: <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://rainbow.arch.scriptmania.com/rainbow_tv_episode.html">http://rainbow.arch.scriptmania.com/rai ... isode.html</a><!-- m -->

I am amazed that the actors were able to stay in character.

[o78]

holy crap - that was hilarious :lol: how on earth did you stumble upon that site???

[scottitude]

Obvioulsy they were able to stay in character because theyr're ac-tors; they were ac-ting, that's what they dooo. Alright, so much for my Jon Lovitz impression. Maybe they simply understood the importance of making sure all the little boys and girls knew how to interact properly.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I 'm off to play with my twanger...and I definitley won't forget to play with my balls! :wink:

[go(r)d]

George: "I've only got a tiny twanger. But it works well and I like to play with it."

HAHAHAHAHA

Oh my god that's the funniest thing I've seen in AGES!! Thanks!!

[o78]

Obvioulsy they were able to stay in character because theyr're ac-tors; they were ac-ting, that's what they dooo.

Or maybe they are just way more mature than we are :lol:

[thipfan73]

I didn't click the link but chances are they ran that scene over and over again till they got it right. I know I've done some theater and there is stuff that can be really funny and if you run the scene enough it's not as funny anymore. In fact, it can get down right annoying:-D

[go(r)d]

You say "I didn't click the link" a lot...LOL

I found out it's not real. I googled the show and found this out - -

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.boingboing.net/2004/10/07/old_british_kids_sho.html">http://www.boingboing.net/2004/10/07/ol ... s_sho.html</a><!-- m --> - -

'There are currently rumours doing the rounds that Rainbow was nearly axed due to an 'obscene' edition being made that contained a lot of sexual innuendo about balls, twangers, plucking and so forth, a clip of which was shown on a late-night Channel Four comedy show. In fact, this edition of Rainbow was never meant to be broadcast 'properly', it was an in-joke performed by the cast and crew for a Christmas party at the production studios. It has long been a tradition within the British television industry for the videotape editing department to produce 'Christmas shows' consisting of bloopers, X-rated moments and suchlike fare to be shown at the seasonal gatherings, and the 'adult' Rainbow was produced with that in mind.'

[chris]

You say "I didn't click the link" a lot...LOL

Who does? thipfan73? I did a search, and this thread is the only time that phrase came up.

I found out it's not real. I googled the show and found this out - -

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.boingboing.net/2004/10/07/old_british_kids_sho.html">http://www.boingboing.net/2004/10/07/ol ... s_sho.html</a><!-- m --> - -

'There are currently rumours doing the rounds that Rainbow was nearly axed due to an 'obscene' edition being made that contained a lot of sexual innuendo about balls, twangers, plucking and so forth, a clip of which was shown on a late-night Channel Four comedy show. In fact, this edition of Rainbow was never meant to be broadcast 'properly', it was an in-joke performed by the cast and crew for a Christmas party at the production studios. It has long been a tradition within the British television industry for the videotape editing department to produce 'Christmas shows' consisting of bloopers, X-rated moments and suchlike fare to be shown at the seasonal gatherings, and the 'adult' Rainbow was produced with that in mind.'

Interesting. Thanks for the info.

[go(r)d]

OK I am going to try and be as nice as possible but holy crap do you ever have a lot of free time...doing searches on things I say to try and undermine me?

For the record (I will go an look for it in a minute) I was NOT bashing 73, i was NOT. Recently they said in another thread "I didn't look at the video" or "I didn't read the article" or something like that, I just wondered why this person doesn't read things but comments on them...

I am trying not to make this personal. But I tried to hold Stephen Dame accountable for something I took exception to and you rushed to his defense, now you're questioning the validity of things I say...

[chris]

OK I am going to try and be as nice as possible but holy crap do you ever have a lot of free time...doing searches on things I say to try and undermine me?

No, I don't have a lot of free time. I visit Hipbase while I eat my breakfast, so now that I'm done eating, you can post all the drivel you want without fear of me "trying to undermine" you. In reality, I'm just trying to understand what you are saying. You posted something without any information or evidence to back it up. Don't get so defensive, and don't take everything so personally. If you aren't prepared to discuss and defend what you post, don't post. It's really quite simple.

And hey, you must have a lot of free time to search out things that I post. You posted the information that the clip I posted was just a gag. How do I spell hypocrite?

For the record (I will go an look for it in a minute) I was NOT bashing 73, i was NOT. Recently they said in another thread "I didn't look at the video" or "I didn't read the article" or something like that, I just wondered why this person doesn't read things but comments on them...

I am trying not to make this personal. But I tried to hold Stephen Dame accountable for something I took exception to and you rushed to his defense, now you're questioning the validity of things I say...

If you have an issue with an individual, send them a PM. If you post it in a public forum, be prepared for public debate. That's how these discussion forums work.

And by the way, Stephen Dame does not need me to defend him - nor was I.

[go(r)d]

And hey, you must have a lot of free time to search out things that I post. You posted the information that the clip I posted was just a gag. How do I spell hypocrite?

I followed up on this thing in the Coconut Cream thread (figured I'd put all of our disagreements into one thread) but then you went and said this.

Now YOU're taking things way too personally. I sure hope that was sarcasm. At no time did it ever enter MY mind while posting, "hey, maybe I can make Chris look like he was duped". As a matter of fact, I found this thing so hilarious (and I posted to say so) that I felt like I'd been duped too. And for the record (even though there's no way I can prove this, you should know) I never even thought about WHO posted the clip. If I myself had posted it, I would have corrected myself with the additonal info I found.

I don't think you can take as good as you give. What you did to me about my comment to 73 was just about the same as I did to SD over his "get a life" comment. And yet you think you hold the upper hand here.

Hope you enjoyed your breakfast. :thumb:

[The Horrible Esthete]

I found out it's not real. I googled the show and found this out....

Not real? I swore i saw something...oh lord - can chris make me....hallucinate things? ok...i'm like...freaked out now....

[Stephen Dame]

And hey, you must have a lot of free time to search out things that I post. You posted the information that the clip I posted was just a gag. How do I spell hypocrite?

I followed up on this thing in the Coconut Cream thread (figured I'd put all of our disagreements into one thread) but then you went and said this.

Now YOU're taking things way too personally. I sure hope that was sarcasm. At no time did it ever enter MY mind while posting, "hey, maybe I can make Chris look like he was duped". As a matter of fact, I found this thing so hilarious (and I posted to say so) that I felt like I'd been duped too. And for the record (even though there's no way I can prove this, you should know) I never even thought about WHO posted the clip. If I myself had posted it, I would have corrected myself with the additonal info I found.

I don't think you can take as good as you give. What you did to me about my comment to 73 was just about the same as I did to SD over his "get a life" comment. And yet you think you hold the upper hand here.

Hope you enjoyed your breakfast. :thumb:

One more time cause I'm a gentleman... ah hell, I'll just C&P from the other thread:

"Hi, I'm Steve. Welcome to Hipbase. Good to have you aboard. Perhaps a search of my name with "Three Pistols explained" or "Nautical Disaster Explained" or a trip to Brazel's site will help ya get the joke.

Have a good one."

[go(r)d]

Well, the comment went way beyond what I said about what you said...it ended up getting personal between me and Chris. You always know it's gotten personal when you're arguing about more than one thing in more than one thread. But I think we're past it, I don't think it'll be a factor in the future. Sorry to all who had to see it happen, I don't want to be that guy around here.

[thipfan73]

For the record (I will go an look for it in a minute) I was NOT bashing 73, i was NOT. Recently they said in another thread "I didn't look at the video" or "I didn't read the article" or something like that, I just wondered why this person doesn't read things but comments on them...

Well for one thing, I'm on dial up. For another thing, I read what others had posted and made an assumption as to what the clip was about. If I was wrong, big deal. At least I admitted to not clicking on the link. BTW, I'm a SHE