Funny Pics

Citeer: "ZacUK"​
​

Citeer: "Worldwide collection"​

Citeer: "ZacUK"

​​Which film/tv show is this from?

Citeer: "rsirian1"​

Citeer: "Worldwide collection"​
​

Citeer: "ZacUK"​
​

​​​Which film/tv show is this from?

​​Bananas
​
​https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Y16HUOAmT0

Citeer: "ZacUK"​
​

Citeer: "ZacUK"​
​

Citeer: "ngdawa"​Can someone please explain what's so funny with cat pictures? I really don't get it. A cat in a tree - is that fun? A cat sleeping in the bed - what's so funny about that? I have many friends with cats, and they (mostly the cats) do a lot of stupid things, and of course I could've spent the date photographing the cat instead of spending time with my friends, but I really don't get it. When will this cat hysteria end? It's just a cat.

Citeer: "ngdawa"​Can someone please explain what's so funny with cat pictures? I really don't get it. A cat in a tree - is that fun? A cat sleeping in the bed - what's so funny about that? I have many friends with cats, and they (mostly the cats) do a lot of stupid things, and of course I could've spent the date photographing the cat instead of spending time with my friends, but I really don't get it. When will this cat hysteria end? It's just a cat.

Citeer: "harryg"​

Citeer: "ngdawa"​Can someone please explain what's so funny with cat pictures? I really don't get it. A cat in a tree - is that fun? A cat sleeping in the bed - what's so funny about that? I have many friends with cats, and they (mostly the cats) do a lot of stupid things, and of course I could've spent the date photographing the cat instead of spending time with my friends, but I really don't get it. When will this cat hysteria end? It's just a cat.

​​If you don't understand, nobody can explain it to you. You also have choices. Use them.

Citeer: "yvon"​

Citeer: "harryg"​
​

Citeer: "ngdawa"​Can someone please explain what's so funny with cat pictures? I really don't get it. A cat in a tree - is that fun? A cat sleeping in the bed - what's so funny about that? I have many friends with cats, and they (mostly the cats) do a lot of stupid things, and of course I could've spent the date photographing the cat instead of spending time with my friends, but I really don't get it. When will this cat hysteria end? It's just a cat.

​​​If you don't understand, nobody can explain it to you. You also have choices. Use them.

​​Mr.Ngdawa, it is a big secret, if you are not a member from the World-Wide-Cat-Lovers-Association you will never understand it...

Citeer: "harryg"​

Citeer: "yvon"​
​

Citeer: "harryg"​
​​
​

Citeer: "ngdawa"​Can someone please explain what's so funny with cat pictures? I really don't get it. A cat in a tree - is that fun? A cat sleeping in the bed - what's so funny about that? I have many friends with cats, and they (mostly the cats) do a lot of stupid things, and of course I could've spent the date photographing the cat instead of spending time with my friends, but I really don't get it. When will this cat hysteria end? It's just a cat.

​​​​If you don't understand, nobody can explain it to you. You also have choices. Use them.

​​​Mr.Ngdawa, it is a big secret, if you are not a member from the World-Wide-Cat-Lovers-Association you will never understand it...

​​Don't get me started on elongated pennies Yvon.

Citeer: "numinis"​I think the photo of a cat in a tree is considered funny due to the cat's facial expression. I find the picture of a cat in white bed less clear. Just my guess: the idea was that this cat's fur works as a camouflage against such a background.
​As for cat pictures in general: I think the label "funny" here frequently means not "laughable" but "amusing" or "entertaining". So cat lovers can say "ah, that cat is so cute!", possibly even smile, and feel somewhat better. They don't laugh at all, but a picture helps them to spend a second of their free time more enjoyably.
​In general, some "funny pictures" are considered amusing just because they distract for a moment, not because there is something ridiculous or comical about them.

Citeer: "yvon"

Citeer: "harryg"

Citeer: "ngdawa"​Can someone please explain what's so funny with cat pictures? I really don't get it. A cat in a tree - is that fun? A cat sleeping in the bed - what's so funny about that? I have many friends with cats, and they (mostly the cats) do a lot of stupid things, and of course I could've spent the date photographing the cat instead of spending time with my friends, but I really don't get it. When will this cat hysteria end? It's just a cat.

​​​If you don't understand, nobody can explain it to you. You also have choices. Use them.

​​Mr.Ngdawa, it is a big secret, if you are not a member from the World-Wide-Cat-Lovers-Association you will never understand it...

Citeer: "ngdawa​"​of course I meant no disrespect, but I seem to have missed the reason of total fascinanation of cats on the internet since, what, 2005? I just hoped thag maybe this would be a place free from all that. Just google "cat" and you'll get 50 million memes of cats. I just think "mmkay" and moves on. It's like eating chocolate every day. I love chocolate, but after a month it's lost its appeal. I have nothing against cars, but getting hundreds of cat memes thrown in my face everyday (not just here, of course) I just shrug and moves on. Come with something new and exciting instead.
​
​Sorry, I didn't mean to be a party pooper, and I don't "forbid" anyone to post cat pics, but therr are other things too. It's the variation that amuses.
​

Citeer: "numinis"​​I think the same applies for any content found on social media in general. Users are overfed with content (even if they aren't aware of that), because the nature of the media dictates perpetual oversupply of everything.
​The requirement for variation or diversity of content is just another feature of social media. For a while, increased diversity helps to win more attention. And this requirement is unachievable, because all is diluted and levelled in the glut.

Citeer: "ZacUK"​
​

Citeer: "harryg"​​​Thanks Zac, but can we have more funny cat stuff please?

Citeer: "ZacUK"​
​

Soundalike albums did well, because even though the 60s/70s was a prosperous time, many consumers of popular music were not. Most buyers of these albums included the working class, young mothers and teenagers. I know as these were huge in NZ and my Mum, who was very poor until the 80s had several of these albums as she told me its was all she could afford and you got them at Petrol stations, the newsagents and chemists and supermarkets. Often you never saw them in record stores as the producers of them were not welcome and they could not afford the cost.

[removed] 

The music helped too, many of the songs on these were not epics like Stairway to heaven or more "heavy songs" or ones with complex musical parts like Albatross. Most were the sugary pop offerings by groups like the Hollies, Monkees, Beatles before 1967, Tremeloes, Fortunes etc and solo female singers. Also in the early 1970s the arrival of British glam rock filled these albums - groups like the Sweet, Slade, Wizzard, T Rex and Gary Glitter's songs were big hits and known for their basic guitar chords, drumming and rhythmic singing along with stomping beats. It was very easy to reproduce - Stairway to heaven and smoke on the water were not - some tried and the results were hilariously bad.

Basically if the music was cheap and easy to make "instant rubbish" as one reporter described a new song by the Sweet (Easily one of the very worst of all the Glam groups - for some unknown reason they were huge in Germany), it would be on a soundalike album with in weeks of it hitting. The fact songs covered were hits was a selling point. 

The words "Hits", "Chartbusters", "Pops", feature heavily on these albums - yet only half of the cuts were big hits, mostly they had songs that reached like #34 for 2 weeks.



 

Basically in the late 60s - Bubblegum and smaltzy ballads like Engelbert type stuff filled them. The early 70s saw singer/songwriter stuff like the carpenters and Joni Mitchell with the arrival of Glam Rock and light rock songs, novelties like In the Summertime and Git Down.
The mid 70s saw 70s bubblegum like Bay City Rollers, Jigsaw, Mud, Rubettes, Paper Lace etc and the arrival of early disco. The late 70s was very much disco and light weight ballads like Debby Boone and many Country and Western Knock offs too. Much Black and Reggae music was covered with laughable results as most of the knockoff artists were white Englishmen.

Soundalikes carried on into the 80s and stopped around 1987, music got too complex with more guitars, keyboards and technology - the music of the 60s and 70s was more basic chords, acoustics and singing. Soundalikes could not compete with synths. Plus the arrival of series like "Hits 89" and "Thats what I called music" became more relevant - albums that cobbled together hit songs a few weeks after they dropped and they relied on record company co operation. In the 60s there were dozens of labels and many refused to co operate - so 20 big hits was hard to do. NZ has Solid Gold Hits between 1971 and 1984, but these albums mainly relied on 2 major labels (HMV and EMI) and often faded songs before their end to squeeze more on a record.

Citeer: "ZacUK"​

Citeer: "numinis"​Moneytane: thank you for this interesting turn in the thread!
​It is indeed interesting how something that was seen as cheap and tasteless at that time now looks intriguing when put together as a collection.

Citeer: "ZacUK"​

Citeer: "Moneytane"​Besides the dubious quality of their contents - the artwork on these albums was pretty cheap too, if you did not have some heavily reproduced lo res cheesecake cover - you got bad artwork! Some of the cheaper series used the same designs for 10 or more albums, merely changing song titles and sadly the 1967 - 1980 period was the golden age of Psychedelic art, helvetica script and the fake Art Deco (Biba) look.
​
​
​Some late 1960s design atrocities - Fake art deco, Helvetica script and pink colours, bad psychedelia and a mix of all 3, a tripped out hippy chick swaying to the groovy beat of 1968's most sugary songs!
​
​The albums often had the cheapest and roughest cardboard sleeves that fell apart quickly, the records often had no insert sleeve or cellophane wrap and the record was the cheapest vinyl with hisses and pops and the label was the plainest and cheapest available, some did not even have even holes in the middle.
​
​These were a cheap product and they showed that, think of the high quality artwork on some post 1967 albums and compare these. This was the era of concept art, gatefold albums and some fine psychedelic and air brushed artwork (Osibisa, Led Zeppelin, Later Beatles, Stones, David Bowie covers etc)
​
​They sold though, in 1971 several budget soundalike records hit the British album charts and two volumes of Top of the Pops (91 albums between 1968 and 1981) reached number #1 in 1971, this led to a loophole banning "Budget albums" from chart placings. Their price was the main point and given many of the songs were currents hits that aged fast, no one cared if the record was cheap quality.
​
​I hope you all enjoyed this and learned something!
​
​
​
​Sadly the covers of the early and mid 70s saw a move towards Cheesecake and soft porn. 2 of these are 1970, the others are 1973/74. I felt sorry for any young female buying these records.

Citeer: "numinis"​Am I the only one who has found the joke about 007 ableist and racist? :(