Longer because they’ve telescoped the main and Q & A vids into one. Wonder why? Still v. enjoyable though, and enables Richard to get so many, many more plugs in for (Richard Osman’s) House of Games, which is probably great. Though TBH, I’ve never watched it. 😮
I usually listen to podcasts one once or twice before I get bored and stop listening. Not this podcast. It's always fascinating and Marina and Richard are the best kind of people.
I listen to this on Spotify most days and it’s only because of what Richard said at the start that I even thought to check it out on TH-cam. It’s like you’ve unlocked a new dimension for me.
Another great podcast. The what is a celebrity thing annoys me, every few months when celebrity reality TV casts (strictly, CBB, I'm a celebrity etc) I get so frustrated with people saying "none of them are celebrities" when what they mean is "I'm getting old and out of touch and only know retired 90's footballers and A list 1970's actors"
I appreciate how both of them are not afraid to hold their 'colleagues' to account for the part they play in contributing to the cesspit that is modern invasive journalism, all without sounding holier than thou.
Love the podcast. I'm not sure people having opinions is the issue, that's always been the case. Social media hasn't changed people it's revealed them. The issue is when people mistake opinion for truth and fact. As a kid, that differentiation was clear to me. You understood what the truth meant and your opinion was more aimed at its representation rather than its validity. We're all complicit in creating hysteria. It's why I don't think we'll ever be a republic, people would miss the 'gossip'. On a different point, to say Ryan Gosling is a 'B' movie star is ridiculous if you're going to say Julia Roberts is a star. That's insane.
Extra bit about clapping. On sitcoms, it used to be common for the warm-up comic to tell jokes to help "train" the audience how to come in quickly, etc. It was very clever and often far funnier than the show! But as part of that, they would tell a couple of jokes, then persuade the audience to not laugh immediately. It gave us sound people a couple of laughs for the show with clean ins and out - life savers. I am sure they must still do that. Sometimes you would use "canned" laughter. For instance, the BBC kept a library of laughs used during recordings. They would be marked up as to which studo they were recorded in. In the old days, the BBC didn't change their audience mics, so those could be put onto another show seamlessly.
When I played an obstetrician on CTM, the real baby was ‘delivered’ by the medical specialists on hand , one passing it carefully through to the other, then I had to repeat it with the ‘jelly baby’. Finally the shots are mixed in the edit so the close up is the real baby. It’s a well oiled machine, if you’ll forgive the pun.
My sister despises Meghan, a person who she has never met, and has no effect on her life. I often just have to sit back and let her vent about something that she'd read about, and is totally irrelevent. Crazy.
I believe in a free press of course when it comes to actual news. But I agree. Journalists who write hit pieces / opinion pieces on people day in day out (no matter who they are) will never be held to account for their actions and can therefore say what they like. Its disgusting really. The closed bubble of bigoty and nepotism that passes for our media elite in the UK. And they think they are the good guys!
Richards comment about stars doing adverts in other countries is very true. Japan were pioneers of this, as far back as the 70's. I remember a mate of mine who visited Japan in about 73 telling me he saw Bowie advertising Vespa's. This was at the height of his Ziggy/Aladdin Sane period when in this country at least he had this otherwordly persona, he also remembers Mick Jaggetr shilling for something. The stars knew at that time there wasn't a Clive James to expose these ads,what went on in Japan stayed there. As far as Bond is concerned I always found it a bit tiresome to be honest, even when I was a kid. I can watch a Connery one at a push. I mentioned this to a bloke I worked with once and he was horrified, thought I was going to have to hand in my man card. Harry Palmer was much cooler and he'd knock you up a decent omelette as well.
I was always under the impression that it was Daniel Craig in the first Bond that kick started the body building going to the gym phenomenon that we are living in now. And thank you so much for getting Aaron Taylor-Johnson name right & not calling him Arran (from an Aaron (air-run) with a big chip on his shoulder)
My favourite bit of media fuckery around the Kate story was something I found on the BBC news app. A story with a headline about William paying a visit to one of his homelessness charities, consisted of at least ten paragraphs about how it was an attempt to distract from the media storm surrounding Kate’s reclusiveness. Like the editor had a had a total irony bypass.
The audio version of this on my podcast player is only 40 mins long and doesnt jave the questions about hulk hogan, baby actors, canned laughter etc. is that typical? Is the TH-cam version always longer?
Hi Tomas, apologies for the confusion, this is a combined video, the Regular episode + Questions (& Answers). We have been trialing combining episodes as many viewers have asked for longer uploads.
Given your talking about Bond, I was recently watching Casino Royale. One part of that film always bugs me. While Bond is on the train speaking to Vespa, she's mentions the watch Bond is wearing and asks 'Rolex?' Bond reply's 'Omega'. I'm unsure which company would have paid for that product placement, Rolex or Omega. Who do you think paid for this, and would they have had to get permission from the other party?
The product placement in Bond really bugs me and it’s obvious when they do it. At one point he asks for a beer by name and one of the movies morphs into a Ford advert about half way through.
Regarding the 007 discussion, one thing is for sure: neither of these two have the looks to be considered for a role in a Bond movie. Also, the assumption that Craig needed to start most days with "leg work" or some other gym work to keep himself looking fit, is wrong. Daniel Craig is simply lucky that way, lean and muscular, it's in his genes. He always looked very good before becoming Bond, for example in movies like Layer Cake or Tomb Raider.
I’ve always been bothered by Americans criticising British shows for having canned laughter when almost always its a live audience. I think American shows use old laugh recordings more regularly, so American audiences assume that it’s the same in UK shows, so complain about it - when in reality without a studio audience the British sitcom they’re watching would be flatter and less funny because the actors are getting no energy to bounce off of
M*A*S*H was the canned laughter killer. It was screened in the UK with and without the laughter track and the episodes without had so much more pathos. Made a lot of folk inside and outside the industry aware of the issue.
I've been bingeing on Podcasts to try and block out the election until I can watch the results and get blind drunk. But my main conclusion so far is that Marina Hyde and Rory Stewart should be running the country.
Regarding the new born babies having to be available to the production company's schedule... has there ever been anyone concidering being induced so their baby can be used? Honestly, I doubt it, but it popped into my mind - based mostly on "crazy US pagent parent" wildness.
I was just about to write that I am also in favor of only having five opinions a year, but I don't know if I want to spend an opinion on that. Is it sponge-worthy or not, thatis the question.
MI6 operative doing missions where names and places are named CAN'T REALLY STAY LIGHT HEARTED. Bond got dark because states were doing unthinkable things and that eventually came to light post-cold war.
Thank god on this one you're not judging "stars" or "celebs" by their income or how much money they generate. Yes it's subjective but the "star" quality is not always matched by income.
Great question, we’ve slightly touched on this topic before, but scripts are ever-changing, in fact, even in the editing stage it’s possible for things to be completely rearranged and even entire new scenes written and added in
having spent their opionion allowence on January 3. is quite optimistic. i doubt some people even make it to 3. a.m and are broke for the rest of the year
I wish the people who were always the first to clap after a piece of classical music would be escorted out of the room. Let the music sink in. It’s the same with streaming services that give you three seconds before they start playing the next episode.
I'd like to refer back to a previous podcast. I was largely unaware of the Kate conspiracy mill. I'm not sure who's buying the Daily Mail, or any newspaper for the news. But outside of social media, I don't believe it registered. Certainly not with me...
@@TheRestIsEntertainment hiya, apologies for any offence. I would like to thank you for your excellent podcast. I look forward to it every week. I was just getting annoyed by the amount of coverage this story is getting. I literally turned over to another podcast that was speaking about the same thing.
I get what you are saying, I almost didn't watch this one for the same reason. But I think you should give it a chance. Richard and Marina do an excellent and insightful analysis of the topic.
@@simoncarswell3515 I have watched it to the end and there is a lot of good stuff here. I was just disappointed as we only get an hour or so a week and a big chunk of this weeks I wasn’t interested in.
I don’t think Richard really heard what she was saying, I agree with her regarding her educated point of view. Charles‘s mother wouldn’t give up the throne to him because? Why didn’t she? He was youthful too at one point he doesn’t look well, he did not age well.
celebrity today is such a broad term, any "celebrity" show always has people in comments on socials saying "these celebrities, i only know 2" but each person is naming a different 2. the world of media is so broad that while i may enjoy one person others may not even be in the sphere of that area of the media. people are no longer all watching the same 4 channels. its now hundreds of thousands of channels across several thousand platforms. i could name 100 people that i and millions of others would stop in the streets for a selfie that others have never even heard of. the job of celeb shows these days is to get enough of a wide net that they capture the majority of an audience. also it seems social media stars or those who have gained a social media following do a heck of allot better on these shows if theres a public vote. mr beast could dominate any of these shows. but so many viewers would still not know who he is
Most often I would prefer a TV show with no audience. They spoil the show especially musical ones with the clapping in time and the woo hoos. I'm sure they increase the volume of the audience noise.
Patrick McGowan (sorry pred text won't let me get the surname right) of The Prisoner fane, was often talked of as a possible Bond hut he wasn't interested, didn't like the character or the general ethics of the films , I wish some actors would be bold like that now and say 'no thanks, not my cup of tea ' Tom Hiddleston would be terrible way too smug with himself , he would eat himself if he could. But that's just my personal opinion. I couldn't watch anything with him in it.
Re: canned laughter. It must be a different protocol on (specifically) Radio 4 comedy panel shows. Eg. "The Unbelievable Truth" doesn't record live laughter. All guffaws and applause heard on "The Unbelievable Truth" is stock laughter harvested from the 1956-60 Radio recordings of "Hancock's Half Hour". (I know this to be true because the sainted Jeremy Hardy said so.)
Why dont other "zoom" interviews or podcasts sound like this when participants are apart. It sounds and feels like youre in the same room. The others sound like being stuck in a coke can.
@@thomasdalton1508 What I wonder is if both audios are recorded separately and then combined together in sync, Is what I mean. As if this was "live" would it sound the same?
Trump won't get anything close to $3bn if he dumps his shares. The share price doesn't wait until you've finished selling before it tanks. Even ignoring the effect of the founder showing a lack of confidence in the business, there isn't enough liquidity to sell half the business at that share price. There would need to be $3bn worth of investors wanting to buy the shares at that price - who would those be?
@@daviebananas1735 As they said in the podcast, the board can authorise him to sell shares before that and the board is hand picked by him, so that really isn't a factor.
Who do you think should be the next James Bond?
Alexander Armstrong, obviously.
Alan Carr in "Alan Carr's James Bond"
Barry Keoghan
Paul Mescal
Or Regé-Jean Page
This is the absolute best podcast out there 😊
so glad these get longer and longer every week. New fav podcast. could listen to you both for hours
Longer because they’ve telescoped the main and Q & A vids into one. Wonder why?
Still v. enjoyable though, and enables Richard to get so many, many more plugs in for (Richard Osman’s) House of Games, which is probably great. Though TBH, I’ve never watched it. 😮
These are the most authentic and informative of humans.
Dont normally comment but the edit at 49:04 is 10/10.
Well done editor!
Late clap
the late clap cancels out the compliment I'm afraid... haha
I usually listen to podcasts one once or twice before I get bored and stop listening. Not this podcast. It's always fascinating and Marina and Richard are the best kind of people.
Best podcast on TH-cam, more behind the scenes what happens in Films and TV Shows please
I listen to this on Spotify most days and it’s only because of what Richard said at the start that I even thought to check it out on TH-cam. It’s like you’ve unlocked a new dimension for me.
Same haha
Perfectly put
I'm really impressed with the edit! It makes the filmed version of the (already great) podcast all the more worthwhile
I always look forward to listening to Richard and Marina . Great podcast.
Another great podcast. The what is a celebrity thing annoys me, every few months when celebrity reality TV casts (strictly, CBB, I'm a celebrity etc) I get so frustrated with people saying "none of them are celebrities" when what they mean is "I'm getting old and out of touch and only know retired 90's footballers and A list 1970's actors"
I didn't know i needed this podcast, but it's now answering all the questions i ever had
Well, as others have said, this is just one of the best podcasts ever.
I appreciate how both of them are not afraid to hold their 'colleagues' to account for the part they play in contributing to the cesspit that is modern invasive journalism, all without sounding holier than thou.
What a lovely team! Luv’n the Marina and Richard combo! xx
I could listen to this all day. Fascinating!
Just loving the new 1 hour episodes 🤗🤗🤗
This show is the definition of 'sheer delight'; I can't think of anything better on the interweb.
We live in a world where there is more and more information, and less and less meaning (Jean Baudrillard, 1981).
Love the podcast. I'm not sure people having opinions is the issue, that's always been the case. Social media hasn't changed people it's revealed them. The issue is when people mistake opinion for truth and fact. As a kid, that differentiation was clear to me. You understood what the truth meant and your opinion was more aimed at its representation rather than its validity. We're all complicit in creating hysteria. It's why I don't think we'll ever be a republic, people would miss the 'gossip'.
On a different point, to say Ryan Gosling is a 'B' movie star is ridiculous if you're going to say Julia Roberts is a star. That's insane.
Watching this pod has made me realise Richard is definitely a national treasure
You've become a much adored fixture of my week. You and Dish are absolute highlights!
Extra bit about clapping. On sitcoms, it used to be common for the warm-up comic to tell jokes to help "train" the audience how to come in quickly, etc. It was very clever and often far funnier than the show! But as part of that, they would tell a couple of jokes, then persuade the audience to not laugh immediately. It gave us sound people a couple of laughs for the show with clean ins and out - life savers. I am sure they must still do that.
Sometimes you would use "canned" laughter. For instance, the BBC kept a library of laughs used during recordings. They would be marked up as to which studo they were recorded in. In the old days, the BBC didn't change their audience mics, so those could be put onto another show seamlessly.
That’s fascinating, thank you
When I played an obstetrician on CTM, the real baby was ‘delivered’ by the medical specialists on hand , one passing it carefully through to the other, then I had to repeat it with the ‘jelly baby’. Finally the shots are mixed in the edit so the close up is the real baby. It’s a well oiled machine, if you’ll forgive the pun.
No idea why, but I specially enjoyed this one.
Thanks very much!
This is hands down the most entertaining and engaging podcast out. Marina and Richard are fast becoming National Treasures!
35:12 I definitely heard "The Saucing of newborn babies" lol
So is that Richard decisively ruling himself out of the running as the next James Bond?
Never say never (again)...
He'd be a good Q also
My sister despises Meghan, a person who she has never met, and has no effect on her life. I often just have to sit back and let her vent about something that she'd read about, and is totally irrelevent. Crazy.
I believe in a free press of course when it comes to actual news. But I agree. Journalists who write hit pieces / opinion pieces on people day in day out (no matter who they are) will never be held to account for their actions and can therefore say what they like. Its disgusting really. The closed bubble of bigoty and nepotism that passes for our media elite in the UK. And they think they are the good guys!
These are always terrific. Thanks.
I wonder how long it will take channel 5 to do a documentary on the whole Kate Middleton conspiracy craze!
out tonight I heard
Richards comment about stars doing adverts in other countries is very true. Japan were pioneers of this, as far back as the 70's. I remember a mate of mine who visited Japan in about 73 telling me he saw Bowie advertising Vespa's. This was at the height of his Ziggy/Aladdin Sane period when in this country at least he had this otherwordly persona, he also remembers Mick Jaggetr shilling for something. The stars knew at that time there wasn't a Clive James to expose these ads,what went on in Japan stayed there. As far as Bond is concerned I always found it a bit tiresome to be honest, even when I was a kid. I can watch a Connery one at a push. I mentioned this to a bloke I worked with once and he was horrified, thought I was going to have to hand in my man card. Harry Palmer was much cooler and he'd knock you up a decent omelette as well.
Charles Bronson's Mandom perfume commercials are amazing.
And the song! *Lovers Of The World* with Jerry Wallace
1976
I was always under the impression that it was Daniel Craig in the first Bond that kick started the body building going to the gym phenomenon that we are living in now.
And thank you so much for getting Aaron Taylor-Johnson name right & not calling him Arran (from an Aaron (air-run) with a big chip on his shoulder)
House of Games sounds like instead of having a studio audience, it is just the people who are on set who are applauding.
My favourite bit of media fuckery around the Kate story was something I found on the BBC news app. A story with a headline about William paying a visit to one of his homelessness charities, consisted of at least ten paragraphs about how it was an attempt to distract from the media storm surrounding Kate’s reclusiveness. Like the editor had a had a total irony bypass.
I remember reading that years ago someone was interviewing Meryl Streep and called her a star. She said "Oh no, Morgan Fairchild is a star."
Instant Rebuttal Unit, my favourite Frank Zappa album.
As my dear departed dad used to say - "Opinions are like arses - everyone has one, but nobody really wants to hear anyone else's."
The audio version of this on my podcast player is only 40 mins long and doesnt jave the questions about hulk hogan, baby actors, canned laughter etc. is that typical? Is the TH-cam version always longer?
Hi Tomas, apologies for the confusion, this is a combined video, the Regular episode + Questions (& Answers). We have been trialing combining episodes as many viewers have asked for longer uploads.
Could 100% see Richard playing Q
Great show once again
Given your talking about Bond, I was recently watching Casino Royale. One part of that film always bugs me. While Bond is on the train speaking to Vespa, she's mentions the watch Bond is wearing and asks 'Rolex?' Bond reply's 'Omega'. I'm unsure which company would have paid for that product placement, Rolex or Omega. Who do you think paid for this, and would they have had to get permission from the other party?
Omega and I think they are mentioned in the credits. They basically want to say “look we are better than a Rolex”.
The product placement in Bond really bugs me and it’s obvious when they do it. At one point he asks for a beer by name and one of the movies morphs into a Ford advert about half way through.
The movie Ronin had an Audi ad crowbarred in halfway shamelessly, that was probably worse than Bond - which is pretty bad
When they mentioned actors rehearsing with jelly babies am I the only one who pictured them holding a tiny gummy sweet?
Regarding the 007 discussion, one thing is for sure: neither of these two have the looks to be considered for a role in a Bond movie. Also, the assumption that Craig needed to start most days with "leg work" or some other gym work to keep himself looking fit, is wrong. Daniel Craig is simply lucky that way, lean and muscular, it's in his genes. He always looked very good before becoming Bond, for example in movies like Layer Cake or Tomb Raider.
I’ve always been bothered by Americans criticising British shows for having canned laughter when almost always its a live audience. I think American shows use old laugh recordings more regularly, so American audiences assume that it’s the same in UK shows, so complain about it - when in reality without a studio audience the British sitcom they’re watching would be flatter and less funny because the actors are getting no energy to bounce off of
M*A*S*H was the canned laughter killer. It was screened in the UK with and without the laughter track and the episodes without had so much more pathos. Made a lot of folk inside and outside the industry aware of the issue.
After seeing it without it's pretty much entirely unwatchable with the laugh track.
@@anonymes2884 Precisely!
I've been bingeing on Podcasts to try and block out the election until I can watch the results and get blind drunk. But my main conclusion so far is that Marina Hyde and Rory Stewart should be running the country.
why is the audio podcast 1/2 the duration of the version on youtube?
TH-cam is combined but the podcasts are split into two parts (normal episode + questions and answers). The second (questions) bit is out now.
Regarding the new born babies having to be available to the production company's schedule... has there ever been anyone concidering being induced so their baby can be used? Honestly, I doubt it, but it popped into my mind - based mostly on "crazy US pagent parent" wildness.
Top tier podcast
Went to Burbank to see Friends being recorded (s6, e6) and we were told our laughs would be the ones used on the show.
Re "Laugh Tracks" I hated the canned laughter on cartoons like Scooby Doo, Dastardly & Muttley and The Flintstones in the 70s.
I was just about to write that I am also in favor of only having five opinions a year, but I don't know if I want to spend an opinion on that.
Is it sponge-worthy or not, thatis the question.
I have a question: how do you send a question to the podcast The rest Is Entertainment and what are the chances of my question being selected?
I can only answer the first question I'm afraid 😂, therestisentertainment@gmail.com
If it's any consolation Richard, Susan Boyle's answers had to be translated into English when she was doing a Singing contest show in Japan.
MI6 operative doing missions where names and places are named CAN'T REALLY STAY LIGHT HEARTED. Bond got dark because states were doing unthinkable things and that eventually came to light post-cold war.
Did Captain Tom not skip “celebrity” and shoot to “National Treasure” status?
I usually know 2/4 people on House of Games too! 😂
I clicked on this thinking "prop cocaine" was a new, designer drug. 🤣
Richard Madden, would be my pick for the next James Bond.
Hope everything;s OK with Marina - just noticed absence of wedding ring... Anyway, another cracking episode, both.
Richard's 'five opinions' idea reminds me of the play 'Lemons Lemons Lemons Lemons Lemons' and its spoken word count!
Every time marina looks down I feel like her headphones will fall off and it's messing with my ocd........until 6:00 phew
Would like to point out, as a person who avoids royal stories of all types like the plague. Thanks for the timestamps so I could just skip it.
Katie with no surname is obviously the Princess of Wales
Thank god on this one you're not judging "stars" or "celebs" by their income or how much money they generate. Yes it's subjective but the "star" quality is not always matched by income.
I read that as "Poop Cocaine"...turns out that's a pretty accurate name for it
😂😂
Safer neckin' the real 'shit' 🤪
Of course, the big question should be "When is Marina going to appear on ROHOG?"
James Acaster for Bond!
I wondered with tv shows are the scripts set in stone or do they do rewrites upto the last minute or allow a certain amount of improvisations
Great question, we’ve slightly touched on this topic before, but scripts are ever-changing, in fact, even in the editing stage it’s possible for things to be completely rearranged and even entire new scenes written and added in
Fleabag was having parts rewritten right up to minutes before recording.
Talking about tax...how does a tax write off work as i do not understand not releasing a film that cost millions to make at least something back
having spent their opionion allowence on January 3. is quite optimistic. i doubt some people even make it to 3. a.m and are broke for the rest of the year
Surely Tom Hanks is classed a a Superstar ?
big ups my fellow late clappers.
good forum for Richard to plug his latest show...... what was its name??? haha
I wish the people who were always the first to clap after a piece of classical music would be escorted out of the room. Let the music sink in.
It’s the same with streaming services that give you three seconds before they start playing the next episode.
Has House of Games relocated to Manchester from Glasgow for Season 8
Would the next Bond baddie be a tech billionaire?
36:41 thought you were going to say Liz truss as prime minister
I'd like to refer back to a previous podcast. I was largely unaware of the Kate conspiracy mill. I'm not sure who's buying the Daily Mail, or any newspaper for the news. But outside of social media, I don't believe it registered. Certainly not with me...
Ideally, the UK newspapers would like to run stories quoting the odds on who will be William's future wife after Kate dies.
I loved the pandemic sport in silence. The noise of the crowds gives me a headache.
To quote the legendary Tina Turner: WE DON'T NEED ANOTHER EFFING JAMES BOND!!! R! I! P! please
I have a rule in the car 5 moans/whinges and done, so just count them and then reminding them
Grrr waited expectantly all week for this amazing podcast only for another boring “deep dive” into the Princess of Wales.
Please 🙏 more entertainment
Timestamps are in the description, you’re bound to find an interesting topic in there!👍
@@TheRestIsEntertainment hiya, apologies for any offence. I would like to thank you for your excellent podcast. I look forward to it every week.
I was just getting annoyed by the amount of coverage this story is getting. I literally turned over to another podcast that was speaking about the same thing.
I get what you are saying, I almost didn't watch this one for the same reason. But I think you should give it a chance. Richard and Marina do an excellent and insightful analysis of the topic.
@@simoncarswell3515 I have watched it to the end and there is a lot of good stuff here. I was just disappointed as we only get an hour or so a week and a big chunk of this weeks I wasn’t interested in.
Diana Rigg used to chomp on raw garlic before kissing scenes with Bond, such was her hatred of Lazenby.
Amazing fact haha
I do the same with the wife, she can't get enough garlic😊
@billybob-bm4mn it wouldn't put me of either.
The UK press & everyone who slated that women should go hide for years.
I don’t think Richard really heard what she was saying, I agree with her regarding her educated point of view. Charles‘s mother wouldn’t give up the throne to him because? Why didn’t she? He was youthful too at one point he doesn’t look well, he did not age well.
celebrity today is such a broad term, any "celebrity" show always has people in comments on socials saying "these celebrities, i only know 2" but each person is naming a different 2. the world of media is so broad that while i may enjoy one person others may not even be in the sphere of that area of the media. people are no longer all watching the same 4 channels. its now hundreds of thousands of channels across several thousand platforms. i could name 100 people that i and millions of others would stop in the streets for a selfie that others have never even heard of. the job of celeb shows these days is to get enough of a wide net that they capture the majority of an audience. also it seems social media stars or those who have gained a social media following do a heck of allot better on these shows if theres a public vote. mr beast could dominate any of these shows. but so many viewers would still not know who he is
india doesn't use vfx unions, the industry frowns upon it
Most often I would prefer a TV show with no audience. They spoil the show especially musical ones with the clapping in time and the woo hoos. I'm sure they increase the volume of the audience noise.
Pronounciation....amazing how often it is said that way
Opinions, a question. Are we allowed to buy unused opinions?
Patrick McGowan (sorry pred text won't let me get the surname right) of The Prisoner fane, was often talked of as a possible Bond hut he wasn't interested, didn't like the character or the general ethics of the films , I wish some actors would be bold like that now and say 'no thanks, not my cup of tea '
Tom Hiddleston would be terrible way too smug with himself , he would eat himself if he could. But that's just my personal opinion. I couldn't watch anything with him in it.
Jodie Comer would be amazing Bond
Re: canned laughter.
It must be a different protocol on (specifically) Radio 4 comedy panel shows.
Eg. "The Unbelievable Truth" doesn't record live laughter. All guffaws and applause heard on "The Unbelievable Truth" is stock laughter harvested from the 1956-60 Radio recordings of "Hancock's Half Hour".
(I know this to be true because the sainted Jeremy Hardy said so.)
He was joking. You can hear the trains at Waverley Station Edinburgh when they record it in the tent during the festival for example
(I know). 😄
Rick, you weren't filming anything.
Why dont other "zoom" interviews or podcasts sound like this when participants are apart. It sounds and feels like youre in the same room. The others sound like being stuck in a coke can.
- prop Coke can ?
They are both in proper studios. Being in the same studio isn't important, as long as you are in a studio.
@@thomasdalton1508 What I wonder is if both audios are recorded separately and then combined together in sync, Is what I mean. As if this was "live" would it sound the same?
@@lord123j Absolutely, they recorded them separately. Even very cheaply produced podcasts do that.
Trump won't get anything close to $3bn if he dumps his shares. The share price doesn't wait until you've finished selling before it tanks. Even ignoring the effect of the founder showing a lack of confidence in the business, there isn't enough liquidity to sell half the business at that share price. There would need to be $3bn worth of investors wanting to buy the shares at that price - who would those be?
@@daviebananas1735 As they said in the podcast, the board can authorise him to sell shares before that and the board is hand picked by him, so that really isn't a factor.
I do believe the "royal" family owe the public.
That's not how a monarchy works. You owe them
What do you think they owe the public?
@@NinaGray-eq9onBack rubs.