Russell Brand to host the Brit awards

xp to lex

interesting point about 1999 cos the brits of that years are really odd. des'ree, belle and sebastian, manics all winning ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brit_Awards#1999 . i think the thing about this years is that for all the snark and so forth uk pop at the moment really has it sewn up, commercially at least. this current fecundity has been going on for what 3 or 4 years british acts are starting to really make it in the US. the weird thing is that the brits can't actually be triumphant about it. well they can but it rings hollow. you have all these acts making serious money but for some reason it all needs to be wrapped up in this mythos, all this baggage from punk and britpop. things can’t just be a collection of good songs or whatever they have to at once dangerous and prove the collective musical / moral worth of the nation.

There is this bit in the middle of What’s My Age Again that is almost unspeakably beautiful. It's like 74-75 moving but in the middle of this upbeat tune. Wow.

There wasn't any swearing during the lead break in "Don't look back in anger" was there?

i guess sneakingly i want it to be shit, and for someone to show it to be shit. but the modern MO is 'get your retaliation in first' ie have a presenter who hates it and bands no-one could possibly care about either way. what would be the point of 'upstaging' something so desperate to shock.

xp

-- Sick Mouthy (njsouthal...), February 15th, 2007.

nick gets it, although i can't say i watched the blessed thing.

even more hillariously she has no auto-filter or whatever on her myspace page leading (by last night at least) to a deluge of 'oh you have let us down so badly' type comments on there for teh world and his wife to gawp and cringe at.

I just checked - either they deleted it all or the deluge of myspace comment spam has pushed it all down the list.

I still want to know how come no-one involved in making The Verdict seems to have noticed that Jeffrey Archer isn't actually eligible for jury service 'cos he's been in nick within the last 10 years....

that's ilx in a nutshell

So they couldn't find anyone else that middle aged folks had heard of who is eligible for jury service?

(I know it wasn't real, obv.* - but surely the object of the exercise was to make it as real as poss., using a jury who were a reasonable cross-section of the population who by some extraordinary coincidence just happened to be celebrities and to therefore appeal to as large a proportion of the population as possible?)

* - I'm wasn't 100% sure that all of the jurors realised this 'though

Is it just 10 yrs? I thought it was: criminal conviction = ineligible for life.

Apparently not.

"Isn't that for "being an MP"..?" I don't know abouit that, but I'm not sure the Conservatives have even allowed him to rejoin the Party.

He is a Lord 'though, isn;t he? Doesn't that make him not only ineligible to be an MP (didn't Anthony Wedgwood Benn have to disavow his own title in order to become / remain an MP?) but also again make him ineligible for jury service?

It would be a bit of a joke if, as a Peer, he is member of the ultimate Court Of Appeal whilst simultaneously being ineligibe for jury service - but then Lord Archer's entire life seems to have been filled with such incongruities.