British Invasion

British Channel by Zifnab

The channel for all things British. British Music, Humour, TV, Culture, anything and everything British.

British Movietone from

"... British Movietone is arguably the world’s greatest newsreel archive, spanning the period 1895 – 1986.

Shot on 35mm film, this global archive contains many of the world’s enduring images and is rich in coverage of news events, celebrities, sports, music, social history, science, lifestyle and quirky happenings. It was the first newsreel to include sound, the first to use colour film, the first to break many exclusive stories, and is your first and last stop for newsreel footage..."

Has U.K. "Political Correctness" Gone Too Far?

22 year old Sam Gorman did a streak at a MAJOR soccer league game on Feb 12th...... My question is does he deserve to be put on the sex offenders register for two years as a result of this despite the fact that he sexually assaulted /harrassed/molested nobody?.......... because that's what happened to him.

I'm just interested in feedback here guys & gals.....please discuss.

Country channel criteria?

What qualifies a sift to be classified into one of the country channels?
I've been wondering this while sifting, as animation schools are in many different countries.

Is it the origin of the creator? Is it where video was made OR is it the subject matter it is dealing with?
Or is it any combination of these?

I'm tempted to say it's the subject matter, and that's what I have been going with so far. However, I keep bumping into this issue and I wondered what word on the siftstreet is.

Alien_concept gets crown, royal consort


Or would this one be better?

Oh well, you decide.

What you will NOT decide is her rightful ascension to Sift royalty. Alien_concept has earned her position here. No one hands you a thousand stars, that's for sure. And she's accomplished this while being fun and good-natured, which is what I like best about her. She may be royalty now, but she's never been a prima donna.

So bow before your new highness, and while you're at it, also commend her on her choice of royal arm candy. (I'm a little gay for Prince William, and very straight for Kate Middleton. God save the queen!)

DIY Walk on the Wild Side from ...

"Above is a little look at how Walk on the Wild Side is made. Fancy having a go yourself? Could you put words in the mouth of a seagull, or a donkey? Now's your chance to find out! The Walk on the Wild Side team have made four clips available for you to download so that you can add your own voiceovers..."

I think it is only for British people?

Karl Pilkington - anyone confused?

I thought i'd explain a bit about karl pilkington. He's popping up a lot on the sift lately and there may be people who don't know him, don't know his relation to gervais, or really like him and don't realise how many hundreds of hours of material there is for him. This will be my go-to informative post about karl, because i was lucky enough to be in on him from the start!

Karl pilkington has a huge cult following amongst people in the know. He met gervais and merchant working at XFM radio station (small local london station) which gervais did after the office broke as a favour to someone who gave him a job early in his life. Whilst working there, he as a celebrity was given someone to work the desk (technical stuff), and that someone was karl pilkington. It took them a while to get karl talking on air, but once they did they unleashed some of the most unbelievable stories and unbelievably stupid logic/opinions.

Since then, gervais has mercilessly taken the piss out of karl. Karl is unique in that he's the only person in the world who's both the stupidest person ever and a complete and utter genius. Some of the stuff he'll say will make you think he's putting it on because it's so stupid. Sometimes he'll have a perspective on something that you'd never have thought of yourself. Karl has changed over the years, and the current train of thought is that he's 95% genuine with 5% hamming it up or exaggerating because he's got to get ratings now he's on telly.

They made loads of radio shows and followed this with loads of podcasts long before the tv stuff where karl was untapped and unjaded - he was 100% genuine and is involved in the funniest recordings of any kind i've listened to - i listen to them on a gigantic loop and laugh even 5 years into the loop.

For the radio shows and podcasts, the format basically goes like this: Karl says something rediculous, tells an anecdote from his childhood, expresses an opinion on something, then gervais and merchant take the piss out of him. They often ask him questions which he has no chance of understanding just to see what stupid things he'll say.

Karl is fascinated by anything different (such as 'midgets', the elephant man, gay people, siamese twins, ANYTHING different to your average human) and he's entranced by monkies and thinks that monkies are basically humans who can't speak properly. A long running bit of the radio shows and podcasts were features such as "monkey news" - where karl would misinterpret, exaggerate or outright invent stories about monkies driving cars, flying planes, performing surgery to name the more rediculous. Other features included "nob news" - which is british slang for news penises, where karl would trawl the internet/strange magazines for rediculous stories about male genetalia.

He used to come up with pathetic game shows in which he'd invent clues that he'd label cryptic (to gervais' chagrin) where he'd give a clue and a pair of initials, and you would have to guess what band or artist name he was referring to, it amounted to this;
"The jamaican fellow is swinging a fish around his head, DS"
-- Detroit Spinners (The trout spinners, in a jamaican accent - de trout spinners)
"Keep whacking the cooker with a stick"
-- Beethoven (Beat - oven)

The radio show was an absolute shambles, it was barely even a radio show and more a case of 3 blokes having a chat in a pub with a microphone left running. And i will say with certainty that i have never laughed so hard or so much at any kind of comedy. I'd say gervais' BEST work is the podcasts and radio shows he did with pilkington.

During the course of the podcasts, pilkington has dropped MANY clangers and had many more catchphrases - gervais uses a lot of references to karl in his work. For example whenever gervais wants to play his 'arrogant jerk' routine and he refers to a gay person he says "little gay fellow", because it's inherently condescending. That's actually something he got off karl who innocently refers to EVERY diversity as "little <x> fellow" - little gay fellows, little chinese fellows, little gay chinese fellows, little disabled fellows and little midget fellows.

I could go on for pages about karl pilkington, but i'll stop before it turns into anything longer than it is. If you're interested, go and find "the ricky gervais show" series one - which is the first series of the podcasts. It's incredibly funny and one of the biggest selling podcasts ever, breaking so many records so often that they had to reclassify them a few times to stop them clogging up the charts. There are 4 more series of podcasts, there's a bunch of "guide to...."'s, and ~150 hours(?) of radio show recordings which are public domain and free to download.

If that doesn't help, you can find more info at</x>

David Mitchell: "Rupert Murdoch is pretty uncontroversial"

David is wonderful as usual.

"Rupert Murdoch is a pretty uncontroversial figure among people I know. Everyone agrees that he's a monstrous arsehole who wants to ruin everything for everyone. Liberals who've reluctantly come round to thinking that Margaret Thatcher might have had a point about the extremes of 1970s trade unionism, that Kim Jong-il just feels excluded from the international community and that Noel Edmonds is actually bloody good at what he does are unswerving in their hatred of the Murdoch empire and everything it stands for. This is the man Dennis Potter named his cancer after and, to most of my friends, that seems about right."


David Mitchell: "Sacked and fined £1,000 for a joke..."

I fell upon this and couldn't agree more.

David Mitchell writes:
"Sacked and fined £1,000 for a joke about an airport? You cannot be serious
The case of the man interrogated for seven hours for a silly quip he made on Twitter shows a depressing sense of humour failure

We live in serious times. Humanity is facing terrifying threats to its future, as usual. Most of them are self-induced, as usual. Britain feels itself to be on a precipice, about to plunge into a new canyon of mediocrity and self-chastisement, as usual. There are serious fears about disruption to people's holiday plans over the half-term break, as usual.

What is unusual is that this seriousness is being compounded by an intensifying national determination to behave terribly seriously about it. No one's buying frivolity or flippancy stocks at the moment. Piss-taking is falling on all markets and everyone's pouring their rhetorical investments into beard-stroking bonds, head-shaking futures and survivor's gilts.

Paul Chambers knows this to his cost. During the January snows, his hopes of a blind date with a woman he'd chatted up on Twitter were jeopardised by the closure of his local airport. He tweeted from his mobile to his 600 followers: "Crap! Robin Hood airport is closed. You've got a week and a bit to get your shit together, otherwise I'm blowing the airport sky high!" He was subsequently arrested, interrogated by detectives for seven hours and fired from his accountancy job. Last week he was found guilty of sending a menacing electronic message and fined £1,000.

In the heady days of the boom, perhaps I'd have been inclined to laugh at this unfortunate idiot, pictured in the paper looking dazed and unshaven, tie at half-mast, still clutching his treacherous iPhone. He's executed a perfect and extravagant online pratfall – he's like a cyber-Frank Spencer – but, in the spirit of this serious age, I just feel terribly sorry for him. I'm not amused, I'm annoyed.

That's an attitude I suspect I share with the off-duty airport manager who spotted the tweet and informed security. He or she might have thought: "That's not funny. I work at an airport – what's funny about blowing it up? I'm going to take this further." But maybe it was more like: "I appreciate the dark humour of this frustrated remark but am duty-bound, under current security protocols, to pass this on to my superiors who, this being a sane world, will presumably ignore it."

What I can't believe is that anyone thought the message was a genuine expression of violent intent. I don't know much about al-Qaeda's MO but I imagine giving a week's warning of an attack, in the guise of an irritable and amorous accountant, would amount to a significant change in tactics.

Certainly, the threat – and I suppose it is theoretically a threat, in the same way that an aspirin is a food and George Osborne a successor to Gladstone – was classified as "not credible" by the airport. I don't know if that means they thought it was funny. Maybe these people sit in front of Morecambe and Wise, sides splitting, tears streaming down their faces, yelling "Not credible!" as Eric picks up André Previn by the lapels.

However, despite Chambers's manifest lack of credibility, the security people were apparently obliged to inform South Yorkshire police, who arrested him a week later. They were obviously convinced he was a man of his word in terms of the week-and-a-bit timescale. With many plausible terrorist threats, they might have rushed straight round there. Or maybe they're not morons and knew perfectly well that he had no intention of blowing up an airport but had decided to make an example of him.

It's vindictive and it's humourless. Could they not just have had a quiet word? Was bringing him to trial really in the public interest? Is a large fine, unemployment and a criminal record proportionate punishment for an irritated quip, albeit one made within the earshot of others? He didn't actually send the message to the airport, written in letters cut out from a newspaper, wrapped round a raw liver and a holy text (Christian, Muslim or SMS).

Or did some people resent his levity? While not deemed a threat, was his tweet considered "inappropriate" by those who had the means to elevate inappropriateness to a criminal offence? "In a world where people do try to blow up airports, such a remark can never be funny," they think. They've got it backwards: it's funny because such terrorists exist. If they didn't, it would just be wacky, like saying: "They've got a week and a bit or I'll cover the runway with jelly!" (not Napalm).

This aversion to levity certainly infused the election campaign. But there was a funny bit and most of us missed it. When Gordon Brown got in his car and called that woman a bigot, it was hilarious. It was a properly comical human moment, made funnier by the uncomfortable truths it hit upon, in terms of both the former PM's flawed personality and the jealous xenophobia that lurks behind many discussions of immigration.

But we forgot to laugh, because some of us have come to prefer the sensation of judging: judging Brown for the gaffe, judging the media for its reporting of it, poring po-facedly over the subsequent pantomime of apology. It was the equivalent of his accidentally showing his arse and yet all we could do was carp: "Has he been concealing from the public quite how fat his arse really is?" or: "Why, at this moment of crisis, are our media focusing on arses rather than policies?" No one said: "Ha ha! I can see his arse!"

Instead of finding genuine humour, we're expected to stomach the ersatz jokes that the leaders prepared for the debates, like Brown's "They remind me of my two young boys squabbling at bath time!" line – official moments of respectful jocularity, the humorous equivalents of a maiden aunt's one cream sherry every Christmas. And this in a country that used to like getting pissed.

We already live in a world where, when asked whether we've packed our own bags, we know that saying: "Yes, I put all the bombs in myself!" will not be taken in good humour; where a conversation with a US immigration official must be treated with all the piety of an audience with the pope. We have accepted that facetiousness, like smoking, while not officially illegal, is absolutely not for public places.

Well, I don't remember agreeing to it and I'm sick of it. It's boring, I don't believe it saves a single life and it could do incalculable damage to freedom of speech. I'm serious."


"Stop taking the internet so seriously"

Want to be the most antisocial reprobate, spreading misery to people worldwide? Go right ahead, they're just taking the internet too seriously. Sure you insulted just about every family member of said person, sure you just viciously attacked someone with the intent of seriously hurting and upsetting them. It's their fault for taking the internet too seriously, you don't need a conscience. Afterall, we're using a written global communications medium, and every since the rules were written back in nineteen-dippety-doo, written global communcations shalt not be seriouscat.

I wonder why this didn't start on subways? Go right up to someone and start telling them they're a low life with no aspirations and they'll never amount to shit cos they're just a fucking noobcunt. Yeah fuck you fat bastard, i get laid by over a million chicks a year whilst you're sat in your mum's basement room wanking to old gillian anderson photographs because you're too poor to afford anything newer.

Oh what, you're upset fatty? STOP TAKING THE SUBWAY SO SERIOUSLY LOL

Why is it this particular medium that gets moral ambiguity? We're writing things and communicating to other people. In real life, we're speaking and communicating to other people. Some people can't speak so they use hand gestures. What does the rulebook say about hand gestures? Can they wave at you to stop taking hand gestures so seriously?

Stephen Hawking has to use his breath to control a robot which writes something which is then translated into speech by another robot to get his message across. How about there, does that give him the moral high ground so that he can attempt to hurt people? Hell he's even more removed than we are using our computers, surely that lets him be even more of an ass than you can be on the internetz! Is it OK if he robotically rapes someone? LOL STOP TAKING STEPHEN HAWKING-BOT SO SRSLY!!111

Or maybe the philosophy is "well you can ignore it, it's only words" - in which case i'll happily come along to whichever school your child is at and deride them into the ground. I'll spread a whole bunch of rumours and then stand there yelling swear words and insults directly into her face from inches away, screaming with all my might. If that kid cries and comes home saying some big guy just did all that, tell her that it's just words and she can ignore it. I'm sure when she grows up a cowering mess you'll feel proud that you championed some rediculous bullshit phrase which boils down to "sticks and stones will break my bones but names will never hurt me." Great job, that phrase really worked on those poor fuckers that got bullied at school and grew up into nervous and depressed wrecks.

Unfortunately, i can't placate my moral clock by saying "stop taking <x> so seriously." I hope others can't either. This is the stupidest phrase to emerge victorious from the internetz. Heralded by offensive individuals who want a second mask to hide behind, make themselves feel even better about aggressively accosting other people.

If you want to insult someone, get some balls. Grow a pair of testicles between your legs and take responsibility for what you say. It's not their fault for being offended, it's your fault for offending them, so either feel proud that you were able to elicit a response, or feel bad for upsetting someone. Don't try and shift the blame on to them because really, at heart, no-one is falling for it. Not even you.

Things are as consequential or serious as you make them. You're a bully who doesn't dare to risk getting their arses kicked by their target. Worse still, you're all of that AND you're unwilling to take the credit.

And if you don't like it, stop taking dannym3141 so seriously. I bet i can troll better than you can.


Coming to you from the rage inside dannym3141 when he sees "stop taking the internet so seriously" comments upvoted 12 times.</x>

"Sir Patrick Stewart"? Make it so!

Given my big gay man-crush on Patrick Stewart, I thought this was good news.

"He has played kings, princes, captains and professors on stage and screen, but now actor Patrick Stewart will have a new title all his own: "Sir."

The 69-year-old Yorkshire, England, native tops the list of those receiving New Year's honors from Britain's Queen Elizabeth II, the Cabinet Office announced Thursday.

Stewart, well-known for playing Capt. Jean-Luc Picard on "Star Trek: The Next Generation," will receive a knighthood. It means he will now be known in Britain as 'Sir Patrick.'"


Send this Article to a Friend

Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients

Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

New Blog Posts from All Members