It's finally happened, Mock the Week has been cancelled.

Not in the new woketard "Cancellation" sense where people are hounded to take something off because Maureen the Transwoman from Basingstoke got offended at a joke about a penis.

No, the good old traditional "Cancellation", simply because, well... people stopped watching.

I've moaned on here about Mock the Week for years.  It used to be a favourite of mine, I watched it from day one.

But ever since around Brexit times it became very samey. 

"Let's make a joke about Brexit!", oh ha ha ha.  Very witty.  But you did that joke last week.  Any other material?

"Donald Trump eh!  What about him?  What a tosser"

Oh, ok.  So, Brexit and Trump.  Anything else?

"And that's all we've got time for this week"


This is what happens when comedy is infiltrated by the Left.  It becomes all about being "right on".

Don't make jokes anymore, just say something political that the audience might clap at.

Doesn't matter if it's funny.

This week at the Edinburgh Fringe, Jerry Sadowitz had his show cancelled after the first night.

The venue, The Pleasance went on to say that they did not "censor comedians’ material" but this is clearly bollocks.

They didn't like what THEY saw and there were some complaints so the pulled the show.

Surely THEY knew what his act was like?  He's not a newbie!

Now, Jerry Sadowitz isn't my cup of tea.  He's not a comedian I've ever really found funny, but that doesn't mean to say he shouldn't have a platform.  If you're not keen on an act simply don't go to see it.

The people who complained have probably never seen him before because I refuse to believe they would be offended when they know what he is like.  As I recall, he's always been controversial.  Surely if you're a bit of a snowflake, prone to feeling "unsafe" by COMEDY you do your homework first.

Feeling unsafe, for fuck's sake.  Here's a stepladder, get over yourself.

Comedy is subjective, we all have our favourites and the ones we wouldn't touch.  But it is freedom of speech or freedom to perform that we must protect.  I can't stand Miranda or that Mrs Brown's Boys but they both pull in viewers.  Until such time people get sick of it and stop watching they will remain popular, even if I'd rather watch paint dry myself instead.

Some of my absolute favourites over the years have waned a little.  Frank Skinner struggles to create new material, and he's seemingly still dining out on double entendres.  That's not enough these days.

I've moaned about Russell Howard loads of times.  Used to be so funny then his show became all about political gestures and zero comedy.  The answer, I switch off.

Ricky Gervais is consistently funny, with a little tinge of controversy but he knows how to court it.  He's a clever comedian.  See also Jimmy Carr.

But if an act doesn't interest or you think you might find offensive then just switch off.  Don't watch it all the way through, get mad as fuck then campaign to have them hung, drawn and quartered.  The person with the problem is YOU.

We need to protect what is left of comedy as it's really a dying art.

Continuing the trend of bringing back TV shows for the 2020's sees a reboot of "Doogie Howser, MD"

Except it's not Doogie Howser now, because being a straight white male is something that's not allowed on TV anymore.

Nope, enter:

doogie k

Doogie Kamealoha, MD instead.

Yes, of course!  It's a girl.  And she's not white.  Nooo.  That would be sacrilege.

She's Hawaiian instead.

But still called Doogie, because otherwise how would we know it was a reboot?  It's like rebooting Indiana Jones but keeping the first name and changing the surname to Jane or Ongabonga.

And then, they remade that 90s tea time classic "The Wonder Years"

the wonder years

And of course!  It's a black family.  Nobody wants to see whitey on TV anymore.

I must admit though, I'm surprised that there isn't a white husband or wife in this but then again it is American; they don't seem to subscribe to that mixed race family nonsense that us Brits seem to be bombarded with in every TV show and advert these days.


You might be surprised to learn they've done a remake of "The Darling Buds of May"...  

larkins 1 larkins 2 


Look at this evil!  "The Larkins", it's actually an old fashioned white family!  Oh my god.  How has this managed to get through?

There appears to be no mixed race family nonsense, regardless of what might have gone (or most definitely not) at the time it is set and there doesn't appear to be a child desperately struggling with their gender identity or sexuality.  Perfick.


BBC's new TV drama, Vigil has been on for a few weeks now, so is it any good?

vigil surrane jones

It started off pretty good with the first 2 episodes being available on iPlayer immediately - since then we've been spoonfed an episode a week just like the old days of linear TV.

Which frankly I'm OK with.

But the show itself?  Well, it's rather annoying.  Here's why:


Suranne Jones' character is a DCI who is "dropped" onto a nucelar submarine in the Atlantic.  Why would a DCI from the Scottish Police Force be winched onto a submarine when the Royal Navy have their own police?  She would have no jurisdiction there.

Secondly, it's a nuclear submarine but at one point was running on diesel!  What?  

At one point the sub was using a periscope to look for ships as it prepared to surface.  You're telling me a state of the art nuclear submarine doesn't have radar?!


Then of course there's the sheer uncooperative nature between the Navy and Police - I very much doubt they would be so surly and rude to each other in real life.  This is just like those American cop shows where an officer turns up at a suspects house and is met with such attitude that you wonder how the Police don't just take their ass in.  

"I'm not answering your questions" - shuts door... In reality would be followed up with "Oh yes you are motherfucker" followed by the door getting kicked in and guns drawn.


Suranne Jones' character is one of anguish.  Always glum looking, with her wonky nose.  Maybe she has good reason to.

You see, she had a boyfriend who she was about to marry along with a step daughter.  Things were going all tickety-boo when there was a car accident which Jones had caused.  In the accident their car careers off the road and plunges into a lake.  As a result she manages to save the kid, but husband-to-be perishes.

Cue lots of flashbacks to happier times.

And of course due to the anguish bestowed on her, she's on medication.  When her 3 day stint onboard is extended she naturally runs out (because clearly she only took enough for 3 days?) then cue lots of druggy type flashbacks like they do on American films to portray someone as being high... Lots of wavy lines and the sort.  I'm sure withdrawl from anti-depressents induces that kind of shit.


Anyway... If all that wasn't annoying enough then there's more.

Because the BBC have managed to tick some more boxes.

They've only gone and managed to tick the "Unlikely Lesbian" box.

I know, right!

Imagine, Suranne's life is all nice and perfect.  She's always been totally straight and then calamity happens.

Suddenly she's a lesbian, in a relationship with her colleague who is very much her junior.

In fact, it's her who used to shout "YOU NURR NOFFIN JOHN SNURR" on Game of Thrones.

Now, the couple aren't openly scissoring each other in the office in front of their colleagues but it hardly seems to be that secret either.

Strangely there's no outrage at all, because I'm pretty certain if it was an older male detective knobbing his female junior the feminazi's would be up in arms about it.  Must be the age we live in.

But the odd thing about it, and this is what annoys me, is that it actually does not offer anything to the story.

Apart from Jones and Leslie appearing in a flashback scene in the bath together or the odd kiss it really plays no real part.  It's just another needless relationship.

What does surprise me though is that this lesbian couple isn't inter-racial.  That's a first.

Finally, Jones' glasses are too big for her head.  When she puts them on she looks like a cross between Millhouse from The Simpsons and Edith Apfel.

The problem is, I'm 5 episodes in of 8 - I'm too far invested to stop now.  How many more plot holes will there be?

Who knows.

If you haven't seen it, don't bother - there's better stuff from the BBC or head straight over to the new series of Manhunt on ITV - for once they've done something worth watching.


So, they've brought back "The Equalizer" and in true woke fashion the lead character, an older white guy called Robert McCall has been replaced with a black woman
called Robyn McCall.

Why have they done this? It just makes no sense to me at all.

Now, before you call "Waycism!" on this one, let's look at the history of The Equalizer.

The original series which ran in the mid to late 80s over 4 seasons saw Edward Woodward as the main character; a character with a past but also firmly in the shadows.

McCall was the person people could go to when they had problems. And not problems like not being able to open a jar of jam but real problems like being pestered by gangs
and such like.

It worked well because the lead actor was an age that fitted the character.

"But why does he have to be white?" I hear you say.

(Actually, I think that's Tinnitus)

The Equalizer

Roll on to the 2010s and they've made 2 Equalizer movies featuring Denzel Washington as McCall. Both GOOD movies I should state.

So it's not the colour of the lead role that's an issue for me, it's the gender.

I'm sorry but McCall's character just doesn't lend itself to a female playing the role.

"Oh, sexist now then?"

(That Tinnitus again)

Not at all. But let's get some perspective here, you simply can't shoehorn someone of a particular gender into a role that should be played by someone of the opposite sex.

You wouldn't take Jessica Fletcher from "Murder She Wrote", replace her with "Jeremy Fletcher" and change the show to "Murder He Wrote" would you?

You wouldn't have a male actor playing HRH The Queen in "The Crown".

Why not create a whole new TV show instead rather than taking an existing idea and dumping on it from a great height?

Some characters should be a particular gender, colour or sexuality and shouldn't be tinkered with, it's simple as that.

Remember when the Feminazi's wanted a female Indiana Jones and George Lucas suggested creating an "Indiana Jane" instead?

What the fuck is that? It doesn't even work! Indiana is the character's FIRST name not surname. You can't replace Jones with Jane and it just work.

Fucking nutters.

Anyway, back to The Equalizer.

In this new woke world of TV there's a good chance that Robyn McCall will be a lesbian, and there's a good chance she'll have a white girlfriend.

All the TV shows are getting the same now.

You might wonder if I have heeded my own advice from the GB News article and not commenting before I've seen the show?

I have indeed seen about 30 minutes of the first episode. What I can tell you is Queen Latifah is a terrible actress and the show is absolute dogs cock.

The Equalizer, more like The Equalitizer.

Channel 5 have filmed a new series about Anne Boleyn and have cast a black actress to play her.

And I think it's wrong.

Why?  Well, we know Anne Boleyn was white - it's supposed to be a historical drama, and that means it should be as close to reality as possible.  Having a black actress play the part is not reality.

It's clear that Channel 5 are only doing this to be edgy, given that there's been shit loads of Tudor related stuff over the last few years.  It's hard to top The Tudors and the excellent Phillipa Gregory based retellings in The White Queen, The White Princess and The Spanish Princess.

Naturally, The Grauniad says, "Predictably, racists are losing their heads over it" which frankly is just insulting.  To disagree with the casting of an actor or actress does not make a person racist.  

Instead of making shows like this to be edgy, why not look back at other non-white historical royals?  There are plenty of black queens dating back hundreds of years with a real story to tell.  I'd rather watch that.

There's being diverse, and then there's casting an actor of colour for the sake of it.

Now, personally I don't care the colour of an actor or actress in a show that's fiction.  That really doesn't matter to me, but I love my history and frankly I want my history to be accurate.  I want to see the real portrayals of actual historical figures.  What's wrong with that? 

As one person said on Twitter when they posted a portrait of Boleyn: "What Anne Boleyn used to look like. Do we have to change the history books now and change every person to a person of colour?"

You kind of have to question this don't you?  This kind of behaviour is creeping into shows all the time now.  Every historical drama seems to have some kind of gay relationship that doesn't really form part of the story, it's just in the background (matron).  Is it there to be cool?  Is it is forced diversity? 

Not everyone agrees though, as one person said:

"anna [sic] boleyn doesn’t need to be white, just in her paintings she was portrayed as white, being white has nothing to do with her at all, but martin luther king needs to be black, he was an amazing person who stood up for black rights and a role model for so many people.

So, basically, Anne Boleyn was just portrayed as white (even though she was white) but can be played by ANY actress of any colour BUT Martin Luther King can only be played by a black actor because he was amazing?

What tosh!  MLK should ONLY be played by a black actor because HE WAS FUCKING BLACK.  That makes it historically accurate, for fucks sake.