Anyone see this? God that made me laugh. The Queen and Paddington Bear mowing down soccer hooligans with assault rifles. Classic
that was funny. john oliver’s outrage was even funnier.
Video available here, but I don’t know how to link directly.
Just use the video archive links. Click videos, go to May 3, and then choose the appropriate video.
For example: The Daily Show with Trevor Noah - TV Series | Comedy Central US
For us Daily Show fans in the UK, where thedailyshow.com videos are blocked and stupid Channel 4 have replaced the daily Daily Show with a feeble weekly “Global Edition”, could someone describe the gag?
(yeah, I know there are “other means” of watching it. Can’t be arsed.)
Basically, you know those Taiwanese (I believe) animators famous for their…interesting reenactments of famous events? The Daily Show had them (or a close facsimile) do one for the royal wedding, involving guests from Paddington Bear to Hitler, the Queen with a machine gun, and dildoes at the honeymoon suite.
I cried laughing.
Nice, an acknowledgement of the Chaser.
The reason that Jon Stewart said that they employed the Taiwanese company to create the animation was that the palace prevented comedy or satirical shows from using any actual footage of the wedding. But I wonder if that restriction could be extended to shows in the US. Couldn’t the Daily Show, or another program, just tape of the broadcast on one of the American channels?
I’m sure they could have, but this was funnier.
Paddington Bear isn’t British, he’s from Peru!
That was perhaps just a set-up line from Stewart. I don’t see how the Royals could stop people doing whatever they liked with footage taken in a public place. Maybe the BBC or whoever owned the rights to the footage.
First, he explained that the Royals decreed that the actual newsfeed from the wedding could not be used for satirical purposes. However, he pointed out that actual news programs could run the feed, then showed a clip of Piers Morgan giving commentary on the wedding guests, describing this one lady and how she had nose surgery last week because her nose was “totally destroyed by cocaine use” but she had it repaired. Yes, the actual commentary.
Then he jumped to describing how they had a video simulation cobbled up, which starts with Kate coming down the aisle, then scanning the guests that include Harry Potter, Beckham, Hitler, and Paddington Bear. Then the Queen giving Kate the traditional welcoming head butt. Next come the vows, with the rather poor choice of Gollum as the ring bearer (some hunched back midget graphic carrying in a giant ring and then not wanting to give it up). Finally the kiss, with the official Westminster Bishop - a rabbi. Then the bouquet toss to a group of soccer houligans, who start a riot. Then the Queen jumping up with a machine gun and her and Paddington Bear unleashing on the soccer rioters.
Interruption from a British guy on the Daily Show set complaining about making fun of the Royals, John abashedly pointing out they banned use of the wedding footage in satire, then that guy yelling “Fuck them”. Finally, they move to the Royal Honeymoon, which has William tied up on the bed and Kate beating him with a whip, and the Queen, Paddington Bear, and Hitler watching from in the room and drooling. Followed by Hilter doing dirty things to the Queen.
Both wonderfully accurate and completely incapable of capturing the essence of silliness. 
I actually preferred the night before - when Stewart was going off about Bin Laden and turned to John Oliver for commentary, only to see Oliver in a bowler hat. Just that visual - and its signal that we were about to get more of Oliver “still obessing” with Kate and Wills - was a great diversion from the main discussion of bin Laden’s take out.
Thanks for the descriptions btw. Hopefully it will show up in the Global Edition. I want to see the Bin Laden stuff too.
I was kind of curious about this to. I’m pretty sure that the Daily Show’s use of news clips is under fair-use (otherwise I’m sure Fox and Friends would’ve sued them long ago to keep them from using clips to make fun of them). So how would the Brits keep them from using clips of the royal wedding?
I’m quite sure they couldn’t. The Brits would only have jurisdiction in Britain, not the US. Any compliance by the US media would have been a gesture of courtesy.
So it was a weird move by TDS. On the one hand, they respected the Royal Family’s wishes. On the other hand, they proceeded to mercilessly mock them anyway.
That wasn’t respect, that was them openly mocking the royal family for trying to control how people talk about them. The whole point was to demonstrate that they could be extraordinarily disrespectful of the royals without needing to use any actual footage of the event. The subtext was that, if they hadn’t made that decree, the Daily Show’s coverage would have been much gentler.
It’s pretty much exactly like when your little sister complains to mom that you keep touching her, so instead you hold your finger a milimeter away from her skin and say, “I’m not touuuching you!” They’re demonstrating that they can abide by the royal’s strictures and be an annoyance at the same time.
OK, but again. How did the royals try “to control how people talk about them”?
Having dug around a bit, it seems that the story comes from a contractual agreement between the BBC and ABC (Australia) - ABC planned to run alternative live wedding coverage with satirical commentary, and it is true that a Palace press secretary persuaded the BBC to change the terms of the contract to prevent it. But I really doubt there was ever any contract between the BBC and Comedy Central!
By refusing the use of footage from the wedding for satirical purposes.