Paul Wetherilt

@EliPear45270452 @JohnCleese Yes , it's fake. But the problem (or may be it's an advantage to Trump) is that it is sometimes hard to tell.

@JohnCleese You post the fakest garbage and lies. Do you actually believe this fake stuff you repost, or do you think it is funny to spread lying, divisive propaganda while supporting the worst scum on Earth and their clickbait?

I love "Only drive downhill whenever possible"

@TheRobso98 @pterodaustro Yes, the individual presser, but...

@WetheriltPaul @pterodaustro Looked at your response as seperate thing, not extention of my answer. My mistake. I can partially accept that extention on red in that case, though I still am adamant on the fact that the only button which puts the presser under any danger is blue.

want to make it clear that i do not give a shit about the actual discourse this dumb poll is generating but i do find it a lil fascinating how like 90% of the people ive seen talking about it are in favor of the red button and present as the obvious choice. because i read this -

@TheRobso98 @pterodaustro I accepted your blue answer. (Except I would, using your answer in good faith, have added : All survive with 50+ % blue.) I had legit. problems with your disingenuous framing of red.

@WetheriltPaul @pterodaustro You simplified it and removed blue on purpose from your explanation.

@TheRobso98 @pterodaustro A dishonest wording. Red: nothing happens to you personally, probable lethal consequences for billions.

@pterodaustro The whole problem decively worded. If every person, individually, would be given buttons, describe as: Red - nothing happenes. Blue - everyone who pushes it dies, unless it's more than 50% of population. No one would push blue, it's illocigal choice, uless you want to die.

@jonathanbylos @Quasilocal If rules were that ridiculous that millions of babies and infants' random choices counted, then blue is the only rational humane response, otherwise roughly half of these babies and infants might die if red prevailed. Might include an infant of an adult who chose to press red.

it depends on the rules, and how clearly it is stated. The original game was literal about all toddlers/babies/dependents voting. So hundreds of millions of innocents, and potentially billions of guardians are already in blue - by protective instincts. Some people now reason from group interest: they can't live with themselves by not voting blue, even if they don't have kids. Now, reds are stuck with their "rational, self-interest". Ok, can you honestly say that billions of children and parents and conscientious people disappearing is really risk free to you? If you want to risk living in that world, you have to also consider risking voting for blue and everyone surviving, out of your own self-interest So, blue is more robust than naive reds originally considered, because it aligns protective instincts, group interest and even some self-interest of certain selfish voters that do perceive the risk of societal collapse.

Roughly it's like this right? Red button: "I don't think blue would come close to 50% in the real world" (So I can't safely press it) Blue button: "I feel confident in my fellow human to do the right thing and blue will win" (so it's safe to press blue)

@cycletothesea @whippletom The people who work behind the scenes must work very hard to produce such a seamless show.

@whippletom They are 'set up' jobs pre-arranged by fixers. Contestants simply given a list to pick from in each location.

My beef with race across the world: if you think at any point you are going to have to take a job, why not do it in the starting place, which is a high wage economy, rather than waiting until you are in Burkina Faso?

@depression2019 If this was real, it would certainly be helpful to have a discussion about it first with all the potential button pushers.

@depression2019 It also very much increases the chance that people will die, whereas if the majority look at the big picture and want to save everyone then it is a reasonable assumption that blue would be best for all.

It is actually disturbing how dumb the average person is Red gives you a 100% chance of living, you literally get nothing beneficial out of choosing blue

@T21949Presley @BritishComedy In my view probably the best after the radio and tv versions of Knowing Me, Knowing You.

@BritishComedy It wasn't funny, like the two series at the start of his career.

[Recap:] What's happening with Alan Partridge and Netflix? The platform removed Mid Morning Matters after just one day. comedy.co.uk/tv/news/8716/n…

@MartinKnight_ George Martin George R R Martin

On St. George’s Day - my five favourite George’s: 1. George Best 2. George Harrison 3. George Orwell 4. George Formby 5. George Cole. Yours?

@spclsmthin I wonder if you think this kind of response is helpful. Looks like we are getting into Flat Earth territory here.

He was reading lines that the program writer wrote. Remember, everything you see is rehearsed, blocked, gone over, and decided upon way before you see it. I have done thousand of interviews arranged by the studio where I was given lines to memorize & say or they didn’t print it.

@spclsmthin I was definitely there watching the telly when Michael Parkinson interviewed Fred Astaire and he declined to name any of his favourites, except, gallantly, Ginger Rogers. Didn't have to. If that is how he wants Ginger to be remembered , who are you to go against him?

You are listening to press put out by the studio to get box office attendance. It was all exaggerated to bring in the money and make the film something to watch. Little of what they ever released was based on the actual events or what went on. You weren’t there to know, were you?

@spclsmthin He acted in ten films with her so she must have done something right. Fred Astaire on the BBC Parkinson programme made a point of signalling her out. I suspect you are are exaggerating for effect. Also Eleanor Powell is considered to be excellent (only one film) . Many others.

Not at all true. Fred loathed Ginger and thought she was one of the worst dancers he ever had to endure. He adored Rita Hayworth and Barrie Chase, and that was it. He told me so on numerous occasions when I worked with him.

@afneil We know Mandelson was appointed to curry favour with Trump. It's so obvious.

Starmer has now dodged the Simon Case question five times — ie why did he ignore the advice of his then cabinet secretary (Case) to vet Mandelson’s before appointing him. He replies saying that a subsequent report by another cabinet secretary (Wormald) said he’d followed process. But that was almost a year after Case’s advice and therefore doesn’t explain why he ignored Case at the time. Moreover Wormald doesn’t say Starmer was right to ignore the Case advice — just that vetting ‘usually’ happened after job offer but before taking up post. Mandelson’s appointment, of course, was anything but usual.

@charlesarthur I believe this distinction is accurate in UK. But in USA judgment is correct for both contexts.

This guy is a fascinating example of someone who doesn't know what he doesn't know, is completely confident in his non-knowledge, but utterly refuses to listen when it's pointed out. Of course, he blocked me when I wrote this.

@zbogus77 Mind you it only took me ten seconds to grok TLT.

@zbogus77 Ironic. I just had to google A song of ice and fire. I did know Lord of the Rings.

Guys please stop abbreviating series unless it’s ASOIAF or LOTR. Especially if it’s only 3 words. It took me a month to figure out what TLT stands for 😭

@CinemaTweets1 It's a bit messy but somewhat fun.

The Bride! (🌟) is terrible. What I’m about to write pains me on so many levels, I’m basically holding back tears. My glorious, glorious king, Christian Bale, what have you done? Why? Another just absolute, total misfire from a man who hasn’t made a good film in a minute. No one on the Internet praised Jessie Buckley’s performance in Hamnet more than the man writing this review. But Lord heaven above, I hope Buckley has room on her mantel for a Razzie Award, which is going to sit adjacent to her Oscar. Penelope Cruz- from my family’s home town of Alcobendas, Spain, & whom I love- gives one of the worst performances of her career. I take zero joy in writing any of this, but I have no choice: The Bride! is just that bad. The longer I’ve run this account, the more I’ve learned that it’s difficult to review horrible films. It’s harder for me to put my finger on precisely what I don’t like about a movie compared to what I do like about a movie. What’s more- at least for me on a personal level- is the fact that I get emotional/angry when I see a shitty film. It pisses me off when I waste my free time on something that’s not good. All of that said, I’m going to try and do my best to speak loud & clear about why this film doesn’t deserve your time. The biggest issue with The Bride! is Maggie Gylennhal’s decision-making. The opening of the film is a microcosm for the countless creative misfires Gylennhall goes on to make for the next 2 hours. Jessie Buckley is used in a dual role & opens the film as author Marry Shelley speaking from the afterlife in black & white about “a story she has to tell.” The story Mary has to tell is about Shelley “possessing” a woman named Ida (again, also Buckley) in 1930s Chicago. Just why? Why did the film have to open like this & continue to toggle between Marry & Ida? It felt like an unnecessary over-complication that added nothing to the film. From this point on, Ida dies at the hands of mobsters but is resurrected by Frankestein’s Monster aka Frank (Christian Bale) who is looking for someone to love & keep him company. Another example of Gylennhal’s poor decision-making is the fact that it’s difficult to tell what this movie is really about: is this a story about Ida finding her voice & learning to step back into the world after being given life again? Or is this a story about Frank needing a companion & someone to love? Or…is this a story about two freaks engaged in crime that leads to detectives hunting them down (enter Penelope Cruz & Peter Sarsgaard)? The reason I criticize these dove-tailing plots is because it leads to a film with zero tone. There are moments of inexplicable violence, there are random dance numbers (shades of Joker: Folie a Deux in the worst way possible) and there are moments of attempted humor & forced brevity. All of this adds up to a story that feels like it has no direction whatsoever. Scenes felt like they didn’t go together, like this movie was just patched up piece by piece. All of that is punctuated by filmmaking from Gylennhal that feels totally unnatural and highly distracting. I can at least give her credit in the sense that I understand what Gylennhal was trying to pull off at certain points: take for example Ida’s death sequence when she falls down a flight of stairs or when Frank & Ida breakout into a dance number halfway through the film at a nightclub. I get that Gylennhal is trying to keep the audience on its toes and really speak with the camera. But everything is overdone. I equate it to a skier trying a course that’s too advanced-you’re bound to run into a tree and injure yourself. That’s precisely what Gylennhal does in this film, she bites off more than she can chew & the end result is a mess. Christian Bale gives a mediocre performance here but what I’m about to say about Jessie Buckley’s performance has to be said: she’s obnoxious in this movie. Her voice just truly turned me off from the entire film, I didn’t like how she executed any of her long monologues and never once did I find her funny. She shouted her way through this film. The fact that she spreads this sort of disastrous effort across two roles is a massive reason why this movie doesn’t work. Buckley is over-acting at every corner and it left me with a bad taste in my mouth. Again, I say this as someone who praised Buckley’s work in Hamnet to the high heavens. She absolutely deserved that Oscar & nothing in this film changes how I view her award-winning performance. We as adults can all hold two thoughts in our mind at once. Buckley was great there, horrible here. It’s that simple. Skip this film to protect your mental well-being.

@Fludded @BBCArchive In Studio 1, would the background of Blue Peter be where the seats are now, of eg QI filming? It is only thing that makes sense, thinking of the huge doors to the right as we see them on Blue Peter , but on the left from point of view of Q1 audience?

#OnThisday in 1986 Blue Peter presenters Simon Groom and Janet Ellis showed off a 70-metre wooden replica of the Bayeux Tapestry made over eight years from solid oak. Taking up 22 wooden panels, the carving by Pierre Bataille was so big it didn’t fit into the Blue Peter studio.

@edwardbrgr I hope @JohnBarrowman will be sending congratulations to this Olivier, Bafta and Oscar Winner star of stage and screen.

She lost I'd Do Anything and faced brutal criticism from the judges, except ALW who truly supported her. Now Jessie Buckley is an Academy Award winner. Life is funny like that ❤️