Richard III

egg&chips

Well-Known Local
Weaver
Is it just me or does the reconstructed model of Richard III remind anyone else of David Cameron?
 
In what way?

Why not give us your reason for asking the question rather than assuming we know why you asked it?
 
In what way?

Why not give us your reason for asking the question rather than assuming we know why you asked it?

I think it's partly something to do with the plastic sheen to the skin and the eyes devoid of compassion. However, I wonder if some genealogical whizz could make a family connection between the two. I honestly think there's a resemblance.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...slain-king-500-years-death.html#axzz2K3TsvbUB

(Sorry rubbish at links in forums)
 
Last edited:
I think it's partly something to do with the plastic sheen to the skin and the eyes devoid of compassion. However, I wonder if some genealogical whizz could make a family connection between the two. I honestly think there's a resemblance.

Richard III facial reconstruction reveals slain king more than 500 years after his death | Mail Online

(Sorry rubbish at links in forums)

O.K.

Cameron has a plastic sheen, back in Dicky the turds day that would have cost a fortune.
 
Someone posted this on Facebook.

I feel so so sorry for Tony Robinson. After countless episodes of Time*Team, only finding pots, pans and the odd bit of charcoal, along comes a crazy woman who finds Richard III under a car park.
 
Someone posted this on Facebook.

I feel so so sorry for Tony Robinson. After countless episodes of Time*Team, only finding pots, pans and the odd bit of charcoal, along comes a crazy woman who finds Richard III under a car park.

Yes, watched the prog' I think she ruined it.
:o
 
Someone posted this on Facebook.

I feel so so sorry for Tony Robinson. After countless episodes of Time*Team, only finding pots, pans and the odd bit of charcoal, along comes a crazy woman who finds Richard III under a car park.

Yes, watched the prog' I think she ruined it.
:o
Totally agree Less, I cringed all the way through when she was on screen. Didn't think the presenter/narrator/comedian I'd never heard of added much either. TV gold for the producers though, look we've found a mad woman who'll cry on screen at the drop of a hat, just tell her he was a hunchback and so on and so forth. Ruined what could have been an interesting programme - wonder if Tony Robinson wasn't free at the time? Shame.
 
Totally agree Less, I cringed all the way through when she was on screen. Didn't think the presenter/narrator/comedian I'd never heard of added much either. TV gold for the producers though, look we've found a mad woman who'll cry on screen at the drop of a hat, just tell her he was a hunchback and so on and so forth. Ruined what could have been an interesting programme - wonder if Tony Robinson wasn't free at the time? Shame.

had this very same discussion with Mrs Church, i came to the conclusion that they chose "a nobody"
a) cos it was channel 4, and others probably have contracts with other production companies
b) the length of time it was filmed over, need a reletive nobody to be able to commit to a long term project

out of interest the woman Phillipa Langley, is now looking to sell her script for a movie deal, maybe that had something to do with all of the dramatics?
 
out of interest the woman Phillipa Langley, is now looking to sell her script for a movie deal, maybe that had something to do with all of the dramatics?
Nah think she is genuinely just about the wettest person I have seen on TV for a long time.
 
I don't know if you saw Prime Ministers Questions today, but it appears that the Department of Work and Pensions have this morning declared Richard 111 fit for work.
 
I don't know if you saw Prime Ministers Questions today, but it appears that the Department of Work and Pensions have this morning declared Richard 111 fit for work.
And so he should the Royals get a bad enough press already:rolleyes:
 
Back
Top