GAN(D/G)ISEE(G/D)

John Evans · Post by **John Evans** » Wed Dec 10, 2008 9:38 pm

Formal clarification may help for recaps/Kirk's 'guesses' next series!

Richard Brittain · Post by **Richard Brittain** » Wed Dec 10, 2008 10:26 pm

I think what I actually said was 'gandisee', not realising that I was missing a g. But I think we should imagine that I said 'gandiseeg' for purposes of anagrammic completion, and that the final g was merely inaudible. It definitely wasn't 'gangiseed'.

Jon Corby · Post by **Jon Corby** » Thu Dec 11, 2008 9:39 am

Richard Brittain wrote:I think what I actually said was 'gandisee', not realising that I was missing a g. But I think we should imagine that I said 'gandiseeg' for purposes of anagrammic completion, and that the final g was merely inaudible. It definitely wasn't 'gangiseed'.

That's strange, because I definitely heard it as 'gandiseeg'.

Richard Brittain · Post by **Richard Brittain** » Thu Dec 11, 2008 12:15 pm

Maybe I did say it then. But I thought I said gandisee but then told everyone afterwards I said gandiseeg because I didn't want to look like a complete idiot by not even being able to make a bullshit 9-letter word. I'm not completely sure, but we'll find out soon enough. Reams definitely said gandiseeg, so as far as anyone need be concerned the word is gandiseeg.

Charlie Reams · Post by **Charlie Reams** » Thu Dec 11, 2008 12:30 pm

Maybe the G is silent, so I'm the idiot for pronouncing it.

John Evans · Post by **John Evans** » Thu Dec 11, 2008 1:02 pm

Charlie Reams wrote:Maybe the G is silent, so I'm the idiot for pronouncing it.

I got the impression that mispronunciation was the cool way to go with all words. Zeroth especially.

Charlie Reams · Post by **Charlie Reams** » Thu Dec 11, 2008 1:09 pm

John Evans wrote:
Charlie Reams wrote:Maybe the G is silent, so I'm the idiot for pronouncing it.
I got the impression that mispronunciation was the cool way to go with all words. Zeroth especially.

Were we the only ones who thought that Susie's pronunciation and definition of ZEROTH was a bit odd? It sounded like she hadn't picked up on ZEROTH being the ordinal from ZERO, i.e. the one before the first.

Jon Corby · Post by **Jon Corby** » Thu Dec 11, 2008 1:21 pm

Charlie Reams wrote:
John Evans wrote:
Charlie Reams wrote:Maybe the G is silent, so I'm the idiot for pronouncing it.
I got the impression that mispronunciation was the cool way to go with all words. Zeroth especially.
Were we the only ones who thought that Susie's pronunciation and definition of ZEROTH was a bit odd? It sounded like she hadn't picked up on ZEROTH being the ordinal from ZERO, i.e. the one before the first.

Nah, Lu & I commented on that too.

Charlie Reams · Post by **Charlie Reams** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 7:59 pm

It is officially GANDISEEG, even the subtitler got it right.

Gavin Chipper · Post by **Gavin Chipper** » Wed Feb 18, 2009 8:06 pm

Charlie Reams wrote:Maybe the G is silent, so I'm the idiot for pronouncing it.

Or maybe it's GGANDISEE.

Martin Gardner · Post by **Martin Gardner** » Wed Feb 25, 2009 5:31 pm

The YouTube link posted by Kirk seems to prove pretty conclusively that it was GANDISEE, as he left one letter out.

Matthew Green · Post by **Matthew Green** » Wed Feb 25, 2009 10:36 pm

Whatever it is, someone start a facebook petition and get it in the dictionary immediately.

Phil Reynolds · Post by **Phil Reynolds** » Wed Feb 25, 2009 10:59 pm

Matthew Green wrote:Whatever it is, someone start a facebook petition and get it in the dictionary immediately.

Hey Matthew! Where the devil have you been?

Matthew Green · Post by **Matthew Green** » Mon Mar 16, 2009 10:35 pm

From Slumdog Millionaire:

'Who is on the front of a 10 rupee note?'
'I don't know'
'Ghandi, see?'

Maybe thats what RB was trying to say??

Chris Corby · Post by **Chris Corby** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 12:20 pm

Slumdog Millionaire spoiler:

Not only did the questions relate to incidents in the lad's life (spooky already) but they actually came out chronologically - what are the chances of that, eh?

Phil Reynolds · Post by **Phil Reynolds** » Wed Mar 18, 2009 1:07 pm

Chris Corby wrote:Slumdog Millionaire spoiler:

Not only did the questions relate to incidents in the lad's life (spooky already) but they actually came out chronologically - what are the chances of that, eh?

Yeah, that had dawned on me well before the end of the film - but hey, it's fundamentally a fantasy (as the brilliant end credits sequence underlines). As in any movie, certain things are contrived for the sake of the story. Crucial to the last reel is the supposition that WWTBAM is broadcast live, when logically it can't be (otherwise the Phone-A-Friends would have already Googled the answers by the time the phone rings). In this particular instance, I was happy to suspend my disbelief to enjoy a terrific story.

Jon O'Neill · Post by **Jon O'Neill** » Wed Mar 18, 2009 1:42 pm

Worrying about a thing like that is a bit like seeing Toy Story and going, "well, toys can't talk, this is rubbish".

Charlie Reams · Post by **Charlie Reams** » Wed Mar 18, 2009 1:46 pm

Jon O'Neill wrote:Worrying about a thing like that is a bit like seeing Toy Story and going, "well, toys can't talk, this is rubbish".

A friend of mine went to see Lord of the Rings and dismissed it as "totally unrealistic".

Jon Corby · Post by **Jon Corby** » Wed Mar 18, 2009 2:08 pm

Jon O'Neill wrote:Worrying about a thing like that is a bit like seeing Toy Story and going, "well, toys can't talk, this is rubbish".

What confused me more with Toy Story is that Buzz should communicate with Andy (his owner) in the same way he does with the other toys (before his epiphany). Yet he clearly behaves 'as a toy' with him.

Explain THAT.

Ian Fitzpatrick · Post by **Ian Fitzpatrick** » Wed Mar 18, 2009 2:37 pm

Charlie Reams wrote:
Jon O'Neill wrote:Worrying about a thing like that is a bit like seeing Toy Story and going, "well, toys can't talk, this is rubbish".
A friend of mine went to see Lord of the Rings and dismissed it as "totally unrealistic".

That's why I would never go to see Cats, the Lion King or Beatrix Potter etc.

Phil Reynolds · Post by **Phil Reynolds** » Wed Mar 18, 2009 2:45 pm

Have you noticed how, in TV soap operas, no one ever sits down in front of the telly and watches a soap opera?

Lesley Jeavons · Post by **Lesley Jeavons** » Wed Mar 18, 2009 6:30 pm

Charlie Reams wrote:
Jon O'Neill wrote:Worrying about a thing like that is a bit like seeing Toy Story and going, "well, toys can't talk, this is rubbish".
A friend of mine went to see Lord of the Rings and dismissed it as "totally unrealistic".

I was a bit like that with the Sandman in Spiderman 3. I totally believe while watching the films that the Green Goblin, Doc Oc, Venom etc could actually exist from scientific experiments going wrong, but a man who's made of sand?!

Gavin Chipper · Post by **Gavin Chipper** » Wed Mar 18, 2009 7:14 pm

While some of these comments are no doubt valid, I don't think an unrealistic premise in a film means that absolutely anything can go or it becomes silly and it's all too easy for the heroes to escape any situation.

Ben Hunter · Post by **Ben Hunter** » Wed Mar 18, 2009 8:12 pm

Jon Corby wrote:
Jon O'Neill wrote:Worrying about a thing like that is a bit like seeing Toy Story and going, "well, toys can't talk, this is rubbish".
What confused me more with Toy Story is that Buzz should communicate with Andy (his owner) in the same way he does with the other toys (before his epiphany). Yet he clearly behaves 'as a toy' with him.

Explain THAT.

I've never thought about that. Toy Story is pretty much in tatters now.

Michael Wallace · Post by **Michael Wallace** » Wed Mar 18, 2009 8:14 pm

I have never seen Toy Story. Shouldn't this be in the spoilers forum? You bastards.

Jimmy Gough · Post by **Jimmy Gough** » Wed Mar 18, 2009 8:15 pm

Michael Wallace wrote:I have never seen Toy Story. Shouldn't this be in the spoilers forum? You bastards.

Woody dies in number 3.

Michael Wallace · Post by **Michael Wallace** » Wed Mar 18, 2009 8:17 pm

Must...resist...erection...joke...

Martin Gardner · Post by **Martin Gardner** » Wed Mar 18, 2009 8:31 pm

Michael Wallace wrote:Must...resist...erection...joke...

And if he had said "Woodie dies in number two"... hmm let's not go there.

Michael Wallace · Post by **Michael Wallace** » Wed Mar 18, 2009 8:32 pm

Martin Gardner wrote:
Michael Wallace wrote:Must...resist...erection...joke...
And if he had said "Woodie dies in number two"... hmm let's not go there.

D:

Ben Wilson · Post by **Ben Wilson** » Wed Mar 18, 2009 8:39 pm

Martin Gardner wrote:
Michael Wallace wrote:Must...resist...erection...joke...
And if he had said "Woodie dies in number two"... hmm let's not go there.

How did this thread go from Richard Brittain to gay innuendo? (so slowly?)

Dinos Sfyris · Post by **Dinos Sfyris** » Thu Mar 19, 2009 2:00 pm

Jon Corby wrote:What confused me more with Toy Story is that Buzz should communicate with Andy (his owner) in the same way he does with the other toys (before his epiphany). Yet he clearly behaves 'as a toy' with him.

Explain THAT.

I WON'T let you tear my favourite film as a child to bits, so here's my theory.

OBVIOUSLY Buzz had his suspicions that Andy, a giant and strange being, was an agent of the evil emperor Zurg, sworn enemy of the Galactic Alliance.

Jon Corby · Post by **Jon Corby** » Thu Mar 19, 2009 2:33 pm

Dinos Sfyris wrote:
Jon Corby wrote:What confused me more with Toy Story is that Buzz should communicate with Andy (his owner) in the same way he does with the other toys (before his epiphany). Yet he clearly behaves 'as a toy' with him.

Explain THAT.
I WON'T let you tear my favourite film as a child to bits, so here's my theory.

OBVIOUSLY Buzz had his suspicions that Andy, a giant and strange being, was an agent of the evil emperor Zurg, sworn enemy of the Galactic Alliance.

Right, so rather than battle him, he'd be utterly submissive? Try again.

Dinos Sfyris · Post by **Dinos Sfyris** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 11:10 am

Jon Corby wrote:
Dinos Sfyris wrote:
Jon Corby wrote:What confused me more with Toy Story is that Buzz should communicate with Andy (his owner) in the same way he does with the other toys (before his epiphany). Yet he clearly behaves 'as a toy' with him.

Explain THAT.
I WON'T let you tear my favourite film as a child to bits, so here's my theory.

OBVIOUSLY Buzz had his suspicions that Andy, a giant and strange being, was an agent of the evil emperor Zurg, sworn enemy of the Galactic Alliance.
Right, so rather than battle him, he'd be utterly submissive? Try again.

It wasn't the opportune moment. Any self-respecting Space Ranger would know to wait for back-up from Star Command! Sigh...

Jon Corby · Post by **Jon Corby** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 11:12 am

It does kinda spoil the whole film, doesn't it?

Jimmy Gough · Post by **Jimmy Gough** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 2:20 pm

Jon Corby wrote:It does kinda spoil the whole film, doesn't it?

Stop. Just stop. You immoral human being. How dare you?

Charlie Reams · Post by **Charlie Reams** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 2:22 pm

Back on topic: http://www.countdownwiki.com/GANDISEEG

c4countdown

GAN(D/G)ISEE(G/D)

Which was it?

GAN(D/G)ISEE(G/D)

Re: GAN(D/G)ISEE(G/D)

Re: GAN(D/G)ISEE(G/D)

Re: GAN(D/G)ISEE(G/D)

Re: GAN(D/G)ISEE(G/D)

Re: GAN(D/G)ISEE(G/D)

Re: GAN(D/G)ISEE(G/D)

Re: GAN(D/G)ISEE(G/D)

Re: GAN(D/G)ISEE(G/D)

Re: GAN(D/G)ISEE(G/D)

Re: GAN(D/G)ISEE(G/D)

Re: GAN(D/G)ISEE(G/D)

Re: GAN(D/G)ISEE(G/D)

Re: GAN(D/G)ISEE(G/D)

Re: GAN(D/G)ISEE(G/D)

Re: GAN(D/G)ISEE(G/D)

Re: GAN(D/G)ISEE(G/D)

Re: GAN(D/G)ISEE(G/D)

Re: GAN(D/G)ISEE(G/D)

Re: GAN(D/G)ISEE(G/D)

Re: GAN(D/G)ISEE(G/D)

Re: GAN(D/G)ISEE(G/D)

Re: GAN(D/G)ISEE(G/D)

Re: GAN(D/G)ISEE(G/D)

Re: GAN(D/G)ISEE(G/D)

Re: GAN(D/G)ISEE(G/D)

Re: GAN(D/G)ISEE(G/D)

Re: GAN(D/G)ISEE(G/D)

Re: GAN(D/G)ISEE(G/D)

Re: GAN(D/G)ISEE(G/D)

Re: GAN(D/G)ISEE(G/D)

Re: GAN(D/G)ISEE(G/D)

Re: GAN(D/G)ISEE(G/D)

Re: GAN(D/G)ISEE(G/D)

Re: GAN(D/G)ISEE(G/D)

Re: GAN(D/G)ISEE(G/D)