|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Thu Jan 25, 2007 10:00 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jan 25, 2007 11:27 am
I could quote pretty much all of this page but seeing as this covers my fav Doctor:
In a bid to attract the new peace-and-love generation of hippies, it was decided that the new Doctor Who, to be played by character actor Patrick Stewart, was to be a spaced out and incoherent 'cosmic' hobo, with the attention span of a goldfish. (The word 'cosmic' was particularly in vogue at the time, in a mind altering sense.)
In the straight-laced environment of the BBC it was still not actually possible to show Doctor Who taking LSD, so writers, actors and producers worked hard to push their pro-drugs message within the confines of a family programme. Unable to show the lead character chugging on a bong, the BBC Props Department substituted a Recorder instead, which Doctor Who would play while giggling at nothing in particular.
xd rofl
EDIT: And There have been a number of assistants through the various series. Assistants are typically used as foil for The Doctor's razor-sharp wit, or, during the time of the seventh doctor, a scratching post.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jan 25, 2007 2:33 pm
xd xd
I'm gonna have to book mark that. xDD
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jan 25, 2007 5:50 pm
Hahha, seriously that site is crazy, they just take the piss out of everything. Except Chuck Norris. It's hillarious!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jan 25, 2007 6:23 pm
xd You have to wonder how people manage to be that silly. Wiki is kind of like the Force. It can be used for good, evil, or something in between and a bit off to a funny angle. And the Abbott and Costello bit just kicks arse.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jan 25, 2007 6:32 pm
Too funny!!! rofl Thanks for sharing that!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jan 25, 2007 10:35 pm
Not really related- but its just one of those pages you HAVE to check out:
http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/List_of_melee_weapons_that_don't_exist,_but_should
... they aren't very nice to David Tennant though...
http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/David_Tennant
Interesting Daleks...
http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/Dalek
They have qutie a few articles on there...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 12:16 am
DT's article is hilarious. rofl
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 7:27 am
I'll see that when I get home.
But that's not nice. stare
DT bashers get hurt. I hurt them.
I officially don't like uncyclopedia. Hmph.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 12:40 pm
Ceribri I'll see that when I get home. But that's not nice. stare DT bashers get hurt. I hurt them. I officially don't like uncyclopedia. Hmph. There's no bashing, sweetheart. Just clean fun. wink
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 1:37 pm
Nashiba Ceribri I'll see that when I get home. But that's not nice. stare DT bashers get hurt. I hurt them. I officially don't like uncyclopedia. Hmph. There's no bashing, sweetheart. Just clean fun. wink Exactly. And if it gets personal, take it to a network game of Marathon. (Or indeed Civilization IV, if you like pretending to be Elizabeth The First whilst launching inter-continental ballistic missiles at Saladin, "IMMA CHARGEN MAH CRUZADERS" style) Anyway, while the David Tennant, British Isles and Dalek articles on Uncyclopedia are great, avoid entries where there might be conflicts of opinion. It ends up un-funny.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 2:15 pm
Stresshog Nashiba Ceribri I'll see that when I get home. But that's not nice. stare DT bashers get hurt. I hurt them. I officially don't like uncyclopedia. Hmph. There's no bashing, sweetheart. Just clean fun. wink Exactly. And if it gets personal, take it to a network game of Marathon. (Or indeed Civilization IV, if you like pretending to be Elizabeth The First whilst launching inter-continental ballistic missiles at Saladin, "IMMA CHARGEN MAH CRUZADERS" style) Anyway, while the David Tennant, British Isles and Dalek articles on Uncyclopedia are great, avoid entries where there might be conflicts of opinion. It ends up un-funny. ^^ I'll keep that in mind, thanks. xD *retracts bashing statement*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 2:37 pm
neutral Why is it that the people who do Uncyclopedia don't understand that if you don't want to make the effort to actually be funny, you can't just write a bunch of outlandish meanness and expect it to add up to humor? The David Tennat article is just stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jan 27, 2007 2:59 am
Lullabee neutral Why is it that the people who do Uncyclopedia don't understand that if you don't want to make the effort to actually be funny, you can't just write a bunch of outlandish meanness and expect it to add up to humor? The David Tennat article is just stupid. Uncyclopedia is almost 90% outlandish meanness. It works sometimes though, some of the articles are hilarious!! (read the ones on Rednecks and hippies) And the entry for G-Dubya is massive.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jan 27, 2007 2:37 pm
Lullabee neutral Why is it that the people who do Uncyclopedia don't understand that if you don't want to make the effort to actually be funny, you can't just write a bunch of outlandish meanness and expect it to add up to humor? The David Tennat article is just stupid. Thank you! *un-retracts bashing statement* *starts viciously bashing the article writers*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
