c4countdown

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

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'.

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'.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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

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

Or maybe it's GGANDISEE.

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

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

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?

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??

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?

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.

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

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 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.

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.

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

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?!

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.

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.

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

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

Woody dies in number 3.

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

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

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

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:

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?)

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.

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.

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...

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

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

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

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