http://uk.news.yahoo.com/28112005/80/longer-needles-needed-fatter-buttocks-study.html
Uh-huh.
Tuesday, November 29, 2005
Review DOOM
Review: DOOM
When Doom first came out I was not a PC owner, so I couldn't play it much; only on visits to my mate's house. I never really got too far through the game, but I'll never forget the effect it could have. Running through dark virtual corridors, never knowing when the next creature attack was coming. You always knew when they were close as you could hear them growling in the distance, catch fleeting glimpses of them around corners and the tension was a world away from the games we had played before. Prior to Doom this type of first-person game required the computer to re-draw the screen after each step taken. One button press took you one pace forward or turned you through 90° and it could become very disorientating. Often the games were as much exercises in mapping as they were in hunting monsters.
Doom was something new. The story was pants, but it was a game and it really only existed as an excuse to run around shooting things. The fact that your character actually had to die at one point to get to hell and continue hunting demons just made it clear how silly the whole enterprise really was. Yet, somehow the effect was more immediate and visceral than any horror movie I had ever watched. I got more genuine scares from turning around a corner and being jumped by a monster I didn't know was there than I ever got in a cinema. There were moments of tension creeping along a corridor listening to those growls that even Hitchcock couldn't have improved upon. Doom was something new and special.
It's been bettered in the gaming world since, even re-made for new, more powerful computers. Now, like many successful gaming franchises it has spawned a movie. In a world where movies of games are uniformly pants (and, oddly enough the reverse is also true, games of movies are usually awful) and totally fail to capture what it was about the original that made it special in the first place, could Doom once more break the mould?
The short answer is; yes.
Now don't go getting too excited. This is not any great cinematic experience. It's not a classic movie, maybe not even a particularly good one. But it does capture the game rather well in that the story's pants and only there as an excuse for several set-piece action sequences and some running around in corridors.
Oh, it's got the usual cinematic conceits, the dumb voice-over to explain the premise for the hard of thinking at the beginning, the compulsion to turn it into an accident caused by genetic experimentation and to stick really unnecessary character conflicts and stereotypes in at every conceivable moment. The dialogue is clunky, often badly delivered and 'The Rock' is a frequent offender in this category. (Odd how he seems to have given up on trying to get people to use his real name, isn't it?) The film is clearly targeted at what the producers think is a typical games-playing audience of teenage boys who listen to death metal. There are several in-jokes about games & gaming. Constant references to things like "getting my game face on." soon become wearing though. Calling one of the characters 'Duke' just has to be referring to one of Doom's rivals/imitators, Duke Nukem.
The game's monsters all make an appearance, though none seem to be able to spit fireballs like they can in the game and having made them genetic mutations instead of demons leaves the audience unsure why there are different types. Indeed, this seemingly minor change leads to many instances of bad science. Apparently, having an extra chromosome pair would turn you into a superhuman, smarter, faster, stronger and able to heal instantly and injecting blood from an alien who has such an extra chromosomal pairing will result in a spontaneous mutation in homo sapiens and it can tell if you're good or evil and turn you into a super-soldier or a monster accordingly.
One of the big things about Doom was getting bigger and better weapons to deal with bigger and badder monsters. To fit in with the action movie requirement of buff action heroes stripped to the waist punching the living daylights out of one another, there seems to be no real need for the likes of the BFG (yes, it does mean what you think). The monsters, true to the game, stay in the dark, are rarely seen clearly and as a result don't look unrealistic. Something many other users of cgi could do with heeding.
One sequence of the film takes the viewer into the experience of playing Doom by adopting the first person perspective and running through what appears to be a section of the game, including what happens when you die in it. It's all there: the re-loading sequence, the swaying as you run, the occasional glimpses of yourself in reflective surfaces and an appearance of the infamous chainsaw. It's totally cheesy, but it works. Med-packs and even the booster drugs make an appearance, too.
That is, in the end, what makes this film work. It knows what it is, it doesn't try to be something better than that and it makes the most of its strengths. It's good fun, it has a couple of good scares and gross-out moments and it passes away a couple of hours in over the top fantasy. You didn't play Doom expecting depth, characterisation and coherent thought. If you don't expect them from the movie you'll be happy enough.
I liked it.
One coda to that is the scene in which a character self-harms. I think it's there in some feeble attempt to appeal to that sad goth stereotype that the producers tried to appeal to. Lots of kids do that these days, so they'll think it's cool, right? Kids who self-harm don't need to see that being portrayed as acceptable and even noble behaviour.
Here’s a new feature for my reviews. I love nit-picking at crappy logic in films. You know, like in Highlander 2 where Macleod gets Ramirez back from the dead just by calling for him. If he could do that why didn’t he do it in all the time up to now if he missed him so much? Stuff like that. So here’s the new bit:
Things that don't make sense
1. 'Duke' has been estranged from his sister for 10 years. She is unaware of his marine nickname until she hears it used. So why is it the only thing she ever calls him?
2. You can't pull your own ear off. There's not enough traction, especially when covered in blood.
3. When designing a holding cell that's a pit in the ground, putting in electrified walls to stop the prisoner climbing out is a good idea. Hanging chains from the ceiling into the pit that can be climbed up is not.
4. When holding someone against said electrified wall the electricity will not only zap them in the real world it will get you, too.
5. Firing a really big gun you’ve never seen or used before is a bad idea. Especially when you have no idea what the ammunition is/does and you are in an enclosed space. You never know where that explosion’s going to go.
6. Genes have no idea if you’re good or bad. They don’t actually have any equipment for making moral judgments. Trusting a scientist who wants to inject you with an experimental drug whose only proven effect is to turn the previous recipients into freaky flesh-eating monsters just because she’s your sister means you probably shouldn’t have the right to say no to being a guinea-pig in the first place.
7. Just having a higher number of chromosomes than Homo sapiens does not actually mean that you will be smarter, faster, stronger and able to heal instantaneously. Not even if you are an alien. It is unlikely that scientists would be able to create a serum from that chromosome that will make Homo sapiens smarter, faster, stronger and able to heal instantaneously. Especially not without more extensive testing than putting it into a convicted murderer.
7a. Even if the above rubbish did turn out to be true why is it that at the end of the film there are suddenly many zombies attacking the soldiers? What’s the explanation for them, then? Are they the people who weren’t either good, altruistic, all-American boys or murdering, goat-raping psychopaths? (See the problems you create when you don’t want to upset the bible-belt and take the demons out of the story?)
8. Just because a soldier is new to your unit and younger than the rest of you does not mean that he will be issued with a smaller gun than everyone else. The military gives everyone the same crap, in the same colour and the same size. Unless you’re a 5-star general. Then you get pretty much whatever you want.
9. The military tend not to programme electronic equipment with your nickname. Especially not when even you don’t know it yet. Your name, rank and serial number, yes. What the rest of the boys in your squad call you, no.
10. Where does the female doctor suddenly materialise from? She’s never been mentioned and she’s in a med-bay in the section where everyone else is dead.
11. Why is it that everyone in this film is a bloody American? Even the non-American actors pretend they are, too. Okay, maybe the RRTS are some part of the American military, though that’s not stated. But the corporation who own the base on Mars are likely to be a multi-national and will have staff from all over. In the game the same company employs you as the scientists.
When Doom first came out I was not a PC owner, so I couldn't play it much; only on visits to my mate's house. I never really got too far through the game, but I'll never forget the effect it could have. Running through dark virtual corridors, never knowing when the next creature attack was coming. You always knew when they were close as you could hear them growling in the distance, catch fleeting glimpses of them around corners and the tension was a world away from the games we had played before. Prior to Doom this type of first-person game required the computer to re-draw the screen after each step taken. One button press took you one pace forward or turned you through 90° and it could become very disorientating. Often the games were as much exercises in mapping as they were in hunting monsters.
Doom was something new. The story was pants, but it was a game and it really only existed as an excuse to run around shooting things. The fact that your character actually had to die at one point to get to hell and continue hunting demons just made it clear how silly the whole enterprise really was. Yet, somehow the effect was more immediate and visceral than any horror movie I had ever watched. I got more genuine scares from turning around a corner and being jumped by a monster I didn't know was there than I ever got in a cinema. There were moments of tension creeping along a corridor listening to those growls that even Hitchcock couldn't have improved upon. Doom was something new and special.
It's been bettered in the gaming world since, even re-made for new, more powerful computers. Now, like many successful gaming franchises it has spawned a movie. In a world where movies of games are uniformly pants (and, oddly enough the reverse is also true, games of movies are usually awful) and totally fail to capture what it was about the original that made it special in the first place, could Doom once more break the mould?
The short answer is; yes.
Now don't go getting too excited. This is not any great cinematic experience. It's not a classic movie, maybe not even a particularly good one. But it does capture the game rather well in that the story's pants and only there as an excuse for several set-piece action sequences and some running around in corridors.
Oh, it's got the usual cinematic conceits, the dumb voice-over to explain the premise for the hard of thinking at the beginning, the compulsion to turn it into an accident caused by genetic experimentation and to stick really unnecessary character conflicts and stereotypes in at every conceivable moment. The dialogue is clunky, often badly delivered and 'The Rock' is a frequent offender in this category. (Odd how he seems to have given up on trying to get people to use his real name, isn't it?) The film is clearly targeted at what the producers think is a typical games-playing audience of teenage boys who listen to death metal. There are several in-jokes about games & gaming. Constant references to things like "getting my game face on." soon become wearing though. Calling one of the characters 'Duke' just has to be referring to one of Doom's rivals/imitators, Duke Nukem.
The game's monsters all make an appearance, though none seem to be able to spit fireballs like they can in the game and having made them genetic mutations instead of demons leaves the audience unsure why there are different types. Indeed, this seemingly minor change leads to many instances of bad science. Apparently, having an extra chromosome pair would turn you into a superhuman, smarter, faster, stronger and able to heal instantly and injecting blood from an alien who has such an extra chromosomal pairing will result in a spontaneous mutation in homo sapiens and it can tell if you're good or evil and turn you into a super-soldier or a monster accordingly.
One of the big things about Doom was getting bigger and better weapons to deal with bigger and badder monsters. To fit in with the action movie requirement of buff action heroes stripped to the waist punching the living daylights out of one another, there seems to be no real need for the likes of the BFG (yes, it does mean what you think). The monsters, true to the game, stay in the dark, are rarely seen clearly and as a result don't look unrealistic. Something many other users of cgi could do with heeding.
One sequence of the film takes the viewer into the experience of playing Doom by adopting the first person perspective and running through what appears to be a section of the game, including what happens when you die in it. It's all there: the re-loading sequence, the swaying as you run, the occasional glimpses of yourself in reflective surfaces and an appearance of the infamous chainsaw. It's totally cheesy, but it works. Med-packs and even the booster drugs make an appearance, too.
That is, in the end, what makes this film work. It knows what it is, it doesn't try to be something better than that and it makes the most of its strengths. It's good fun, it has a couple of good scares and gross-out moments and it passes away a couple of hours in over the top fantasy. You didn't play Doom expecting depth, characterisation and coherent thought. If you don't expect them from the movie you'll be happy enough.
I liked it.
One coda to that is the scene in which a character self-harms. I think it's there in some feeble attempt to appeal to that sad goth stereotype that the producers tried to appeal to. Lots of kids do that these days, so they'll think it's cool, right? Kids who self-harm don't need to see that being portrayed as acceptable and even noble behaviour.
Here’s a new feature for my reviews. I love nit-picking at crappy logic in films. You know, like in Highlander 2 where Macleod gets Ramirez back from the dead just by calling for him. If he could do that why didn’t he do it in all the time up to now if he missed him so much? Stuff like that. So here’s the new bit:
Things that don't make sense
1. 'Duke' has been estranged from his sister for 10 years. She is unaware of his marine nickname until she hears it used. So why is it the only thing she ever calls him?
2. You can't pull your own ear off. There's not enough traction, especially when covered in blood.
3. When designing a holding cell that's a pit in the ground, putting in electrified walls to stop the prisoner climbing out is a good idea. Hanging chains from the ceiling into the pit that can be climbed up is not.
4. When holding someone against said electrified wall the electricity will not only zap them in the real world it will get you, too.
5. Firing a really big gun you’ve never seen or used before is a bad idea. Especially when you have no idea what the ammunition is/does and you are in an enclosed space. You never know where that explosion’s going to go.
6. Genes have no idea if you’re good or bad. They don’t actually have any equipment for making moral judgments. Trusting a scientist who wants to inject you with an experimental drug whose only proven effect is to turn the previous recipients into freaky flesh-eating monsters just because she’s your sister means you probably shouldn’t have the right to say no to being a guinea-pig in the first place.
7. Just having a higher number of chromosomes than Homo sapiens does not actually mean that you will be smarter, faster, stronger and able to heal instantaneously. Not even if you are an alien. It is unlikely that scientists would be able to create a serum from that chromosome that will make Homo sapiens smarter, faster, stronger and able to heal instantaneously. Especially not without more extensive testing than putting it into a convicted murderer.
7a. Even if the above rubbish did turn out to be true why is it that at the end of the film there are suddenly many zombies attacking the soldiers? What’s the explanation for them, then? Are they the people who weren’t either good, altruistic, all-American boys or murdering, goat-raping psychopaths? (See the problems you create when you don’t want to upset the bible-belt and take the demons out of the story?)
8. Just because a soldier is new to your unit and younger than the rest of you does not mean that he will be issued with a smaller gun than everyone else. The military gives everyone the same crap, in the same colour and the same size. Unless you’re a 5-star general. Then you get pretty much whatever you want.
9. The military tend not to programme electronic equipment with your nickname. Especially not when even you don’t know it yet. Your name, rank and serial number, yes. What the rest of the boys in your squad call you, no.
10. Where does the female doctor suddenly materialise from? She’s never been mentioned and she’s in a med-bay in the section where everyone else is dead.
11. Why is it that everyone in this film is a bloody American? Even the non-American actors pretend they are, too. Okay, maybe the RRTS are some part of the American military, though that’s not stated. But the corporation who own the base on Mars are likely to be a multi-national and will have staff from all over. In the game the same company employs you as the scientists.
Tuesday, November 22, 2005
Review Mrs Henderson
Review: Mrs Henderson Presents.
This should be a great British film. It stars two of British cinema's greatest luminaries, Dame Judi Dench and Bob Hoskins. It has a good, if not great, director in Stephen Frears. It has an interesting leading character for its' central protagonist and a wartime backdrop to add danger, threat and pathos to what might otherwise be a totally lightweight tale. Finally, it is filled with gorgeous, naked girls.
Sadly it falls into that oh-so-common category of British cinema of the near-miss.
There is a lot of truly good stuff in this film (sharp dialogue, excellent acting, interesting social comment and more). So much, in fact, that it's hard to see why it's not as good as it should be. Why, then is this a film I'd only recommend as a rainy Sunday afternoon time-waster?
Let's talk first about the central performances.
Bob Hoskins is a bad choice for Vivian Van Damme. As much as I hate to say it Mr. Hoskins has become typecast in my mind as the rough diamond. He has a broad London accent and mostly plays slightly dangerous characters. Being an actor and despising typecasting as a general principle I really shouldn't feel this way, but I do. Perhaps it's because the RP just doesn't seem entirely comfortable to Bob. I have a similar problem with RP; I can do it, but it never truly flows naturally from my lips. There are times one can get away with this, but not when sharing the screen with Judi Dench and her ilk. Sadly, he also lacks the right brand of charisma and charm for the part. Mr. Hoskins is not lacking in either characteristic, but just not in the way Van Damme needs it. Charles Dance, say, or Denis Lawson both have the smooth charm this character cries out for and does not have. Perhaps the fact that the executive producer and the actor cast are the same man helped with this piece of mis-casting?
Judi Dench, on the other hand is ideal to play the eponymous character. She has the poise, the self-assuredness and the charm Mrs. Henderson needs and one always has the sense of a wicked and mischievous wit underlying the strength and decorum in so many of her characters. She gives a fine performance, but is criminally under-used, especially considering the film is her story. Much of her motivation or her reactions are simply skipped over. The strange episode of her turning up to be auditioned dressed as a polar bear, for instance. Certainly, she explains herself, but who arranged the audition, and how?
Kelly Reilly does an interesting job as the lead tableaux girl. She's beautiful, poised, elegant and sweet (though, somehow strangely unsexy), but we rarely get a glimpse into the feelings engendered or effects on her life created by being the first nude performer in Britain (or in England, as the script resolutely states. Apparently, the rest of the UK were not in the war.) A minor bitch in a café from dancers in other shows is as close as we get to see the way these girls were perceived in prim and proper 30's society. I have heard it said that the Soho of the time was not the sleazy place it is today and that families attended the shows. Maybe that is the case, but if so then why is that scene there at all?
Indeed, this is the case with just about any indication of strong emotion or serious topic; it's just glossed over. Kelly's character falls pregnant, but before we can really see anything about how it affects her she's killed, thus relieving the film of any need to deal with the issue.
The biggest failure is the effects and, surprisingly, the cinematography. Andrew Dunn seems to have forgotten how to get a shot in focus at times. Doubtless this has to do with the efforts to integrate archive newsreel footage into the film. The result is a grainy, almost soft-focus look that merely manages to convey an impression of shoddy-amateurism and cheap production values.
Much of the problem stems from the very poorly done digital shots used. It seems to me that archive footage or photographs have been used to create many of the digital backdrops and they just look like those crappy old stock-footage shots from 60's and 70's Brit-flicks. You know, the ones that never quite merged with the rest of the film because they weren't shot on the same quality of film stock. Even shots filmed from scratch fail to look believable. The scenes on the roof of the theatre are particularly poor. There are times when looks like Bob Hoskins is a CG character or that neither he nor Judi were on the set or at the same time. Look out, too, for the shot of London in flames after a bombing raid. There is smoke rising from a fire in the bottom right-hand corner of the screen... It judders! I've seen computer games do better shots than the one of the biplane over the channel. Oh, speaking of which; to France & back from London on one tank of petrol?
The set of Windmill Street after it has been hit by a bomb suddenly looks like a set where it looked fine before the explosion.
No doubt this will be a very popular film when the BAFTAs next come around. It won't deserve a fraction of what it will likely win.
This should be a great British film. It stars two of British cinema's greatest luminaries, Dame Judi Dench and Bob Hoskins. It has a good, if not great, director in Stephen Frears. It has an interesting leading character for its' central protagonist and a wartime backdrop to add danger, threat and pathos to what might otherwise be a totally lightweight tale. Finally, it is filled with gorgeous, naked girls.
Sadly it falls into that oh-so-common category of British cinema of the near-miss.
There is a lot of truly good stuff in this film (sharp dialogue, excellent acting, interesting social comment and more). So much, in fact, that it's hard to see why it's not as good as it should be. Why, then is this a film I'd only recommend as a rainy Sunday afternoon time-waster?
Let's talk first about the central performances.
Bob Hoskins is a bad choice for Vivian Van Damme. As much as I hate to say it Mr. Hoskins has become typecast in my mind as the rough diamond. He has a broad London accent and mostly plays slightly dangerous characters. Being an actor and despising typecasting as a general principle I really shouldn't feel this way, but I do. Perhaps it's because the RP just doesn't seem entirely comfortable to Bob. I have a similar problem with RP; I can do it, but it never truly flows naturally from my lips. There are times one can get away with this, but not when sharing the screen with Judi Dench and her ilk. Sadly, he also lacks the right brand of charisma and charm for the part. Mr. Hoskins is not lacking in either characteristic, but just not in the way Van Damme needs it. Charles Dance, say, or Denis Lawson both have the smooth charm this character cries out for and does not have. Perhaps the fact that the executive producer and the actor cast are the same man helped with this piece of mis-casting?
Judi Dench, on the other hand is ideal to play the eponymous character. She has the poise, the self-assuredness and the charm Mrs. Henderson needs and one always has the sense of a wicked and mischievous wit underlying the strength and decorum in so many of her characters. She gives a fine performance, but is criminally under-used, especially considering the film is her story. Much of her motivation or her reactions are simply skipped over. The strange episode of her turning up to be auditioned dressed as a polar bear, for instance. Certainly, she explains herself, but who arranged the audition, and how?
Kelly Reilly does an interesting job as the lead tableaux girl. She's beautiful, poised, elegant and sweet (though, somehow strangely unsexy), but we rarely get a glimpse into the feelings engendered or effects on her life created by being the first nude performer in Britain (or in England, as the script resolutely states. Apparently, the rest of the UK were not in the war.) A minor bitch in a café from dancers in other shows is as close as we get to see the way these girls were perceived in prim and proper 30's society. I have heard it said that the Soho of the time was not the sleazy place it is today and that families attended the shows. Maybe that is the case, but if so then why is that scene there at all?
Indeed, this is the case with just about any indication of strong emotion or serious topic; it's just glossed over. Kelly's character falls pregnant, but before we can really see anything about how it affects her she's killed, thus relieving the film of any need to deal with the issue.
The biggest failure is the effects and, surprisingly, the cinematography. Andrew Dunn seems to have forgotten how to get a shot in focus at times. Doubtless this has to do with the efforts to integrate archive newsreel footage into the film. The result is a grainy, almost soft-focus look that merely manages to convey an impression of shoddy-amateurism and cheap production values.
Much of the problem stems from the very poorly done digital shots used. It seems to me that archive footage or photographs have been used to create many of the digital backdrops and they just look like those crappy old stock-footage shots from 60's and 70's Brit-flicks. You know, the ones that never quite merged with the rest of the film because they weren't shot on the same quality of film stock. Even shots filmed from scratch fail to look believable. The scenes on the roof of the theatre are particularly poor. There are times when looks like Bob Hoskins is a CG character or that neither he nor Judi were on the set or at the same time. Look out, too, for the shot of London in flames after a bombing raid. There is smoke rising from a fire in the bottom right-hand corner of the screen... It judders! I've seen computer games do better shots than the one of the biplane over the channel. Oh, speaking of which; to France & back from London on one tank of petrol?
The set of Windmill Street after it has been hit by a bomb suddenly looks like a set where it looked fine before the explosion.
No doubt this will be a very popular film when the BAFTAs next come around. It won't deserve a fraction of what it will likely win.
Saturday, November 12, 2005
Pardon me?
7/11/05
Whilst on our visit to the in-laws we were told a story about our niece's school that just typifies a lot of what's wrong about our society.
Out niece has been brought up with manners and respect for others. During a recent parents’ night they were asked to discourage her from saying things like ‘please’ and ‘thankyou’ as it was making the other children think she was ‘posh’ and not talk to her!
Pardon me? Stop setting a good example to the other kids? Worse, encouraged by the teacher. Isn’t it part of a primary school teacher’s job to help teach manners to their pupils? It’s certainly not part of her job to recommend that her manners be removed so the other children don’t feel inferior. The teacher should be insisting that the pupils use please and thankyou within her class. Just because their parents don’t bother their arses doesn’t mean she shouldn’t. Or is it just that she doesn’t use manners much herself.
Review CURSE OF THE WERERABBIT
Review: CURSE OF THE WERE-RABBIT
Ardman return to their most famous characters in this brilliant comedy. Even the title graphic of the movie is amusing, and that, of course, is one of their trademarks - superlative attention to detail.
The voice talents are excellent and Helena Bonham-Carter must now be beginning to think of a career solely based on voice work (though she's going to have to polish up her repertoire of accents if she is. Have you heard that abomination she used in "Women Talking Dirty"?). However, it is the animators who pull off the best performance in Gromit's expressions. Their subtlety in conveying even quite complex thought processes - and Gromit is the only character who can see beyond the immediate- is nothing short of genius and has to be an Oscar© winner.
A sharp eye for the things going on behind the main action is essential. This is a big feature of Nick Park's work and guarantees either a second look or a lot of freeze-framing when you buy the DVD. It's only when you do that you really get the full extent of the wonderfully eccentric inventions. Do see if you can spot the brief cameo from one of the "Creature Comforts" tortoises.
Being a typically dour Scot it is hard to make me laugh out loud, especially sitting on my own at a press screening. This movie achieved real belly-laughs with ease. Not only from me, but from all the hacks in the room as Nick Park once again proves that style, wit and imagination out-do big budget, cgi projects every time.
Ardman return to their most famous characters in this brilliant comedy. Even the title graphic of the movie is amusing, and that, of course, is one of their trademarks - superlative attention to detail.
The voice talents are excellent and Helena Bonham-Carter must now be beginning to think of a career solely based on voice work (though she's going to have to polish up her repertoire of accents if she is. Have you heard that abomination she used in "Women Talking Dirty"?). However, it is the animators who pull off the best performance in Gromit's expressions. Their subtlety in conveying even quite complex thought processes - and Gromit is the only character who can see beyond the immediate- is nothing short of genius and has to be an Oscar© winner.
A sharp eye for the things going on behind the main action is essential. This is a big feature of Nick Park's work and guarantees either a second look or a lot of freeze-framing when you buy the DVD. It's only when you do that you really get the full extent of the wonderfully eccentric inventions. Do see if you can spot the brief cameo from one of the "Creature Comforts" tortoises.
Being a typically dour Scot it is hard to make me laugh out loud, especially sitting on my own at a press screening. This movie achieved real belly-laughs with ease. Not only from me, but from all the hacks in the room as Nick Park once again proves that style, wit and imagination out-do big budget, cgi projects every time.
No Future
"No future but that we make ourselves."
That's what they said in the Terminator films. Of course, they're quite right, but I very much doubt if it'll be killer robots under the control of a deranged defence computer that does for us.
Greed, selfishness and arrogance will deal with us long before that could ever come about. From all walks of life there are examples of how so many of us now only look after #1. From the people who moved in above us who didn't bother with sound-dampening under their laminate flooring to the executives whose first impulse if profits dip is to fire more workers and ruin hundreds of lives, other people just don't matter to most of us now.
I'm sure that not one of those who behave like this think of themselves as anything other than truly decent human beings. Yet in so many ways - little and big - we just make life worse for those around us. In some cases - and I truly see much of government & council policy as big culprits in this - they're going out of their way to make things harder. How?
Well, start at the bottom of the scale with the neds who'll roam the streets at night howling just to disturb as many people as possible. Or how about the way so many people now refuse to make the slightest effort to give way to others on the street. Not so much as a turn of the shoulder. As Abby and I were waiting for a bus the other day a boy-racer car crossed the street and pulled up in front of us. The door opened, the shell-suited ned driver leant out, pinched the bridge of his nose and expelled a long stream of snot onto the pavement, not into the gutter, in front of us. We were then fixed with a challenging glare before the door was slammed and he wheelspun back across the road forcing two other cars to brake. There were no other pedestrians within sight so this must have been purely to offend us. We'd never seen him before so he just went out of his way to spoil someone's day.
Government level? How about my recent attempt to apply for a driving licence? After filling in the form I went to sign it. The box is about the size & width of that on a credit card with a strict injunction not to touch the sides when signing it. As it happens my signature places one name above the other so it is quite impossible to fit it into this space. I called the DVLA 'helpline' and the callcentre drone I spoke to refused me any advice other than, "If your signature touches the side of the box it will be rejected." repeated in monotone at the end of every question.
Yeah, thanks. Very helpful.
Al Qaieda and their kind don't need to destroy our society, we're doing fine all by ourselves.
So to make sure they don't, make sure that you do something to make a stranger's life a bit better just by being considerate. All it takes is stepping to one side and smiling.
That's what they said in the Terminator films. Of course, they're quite right, but I very much doubt if it'll be killer robots under the control of a deranged defence computer that does for us.
Greed, selfishness and arrogance will deal with us long before that could ever come about. From all walks of life there are examples of how so many of us now only look after #1. From the people who moved in above us who didn't bother with sound-dampening under their laminate flooring to the executives whose first impulse if profits dip is to fire more workers and ruin hundreds of lives, other people just don't matter to most of us now.
I'm sure that not one of those who behave like this think of themselves as anything other than truly decent human beings. Yet in so many ways - little and big - we just make life worse for those around us. In some cases - and I truly see much of government & council policy as big culprits in this - they're going out of their way to make things harder. How?
Well, start at the bottom of the scale with the neds who'll roam the streets at night howling just to disturb as many people as possible. Or how about the way so many people now refuse to make the slightest effort to give way to others on the street. Not so much as a turn of the shoulder. As Abby and I were waiting for a bus the other day a boy-racer car crossed the street and pulled up in front of us. The door opened, the shell-suited ned driver leant out, pinched the bridge of his nose and expelled a long stream of snot onto the pavement, not into the gutter, in front of us. We were then fixed with a challenging glare before the door was slammed and he wheelspun back across the road forcing two other cars to brake. There were no other pedestrians within sight so this must have been purely to offend us. We'd never seen him before so he just went out of his way to spoil someone's day.
Government level? How about my recent attempt to apply for a driving licence? After filling in the form I went to sign it. The box is about the size & width of that on a credit card with a strict injunction not to touch the sides when signing it. As it happens my signature places one name above the other so it is quite impossible to fit it into this space. I called the DVLA 'helpline' and the callcentre drone I spoke to refused me any advice other than, "If your signature touches the side of the box it will be rejected." repeated in monotone at the end of every question.
Yeah, thanks. Very helpful.
Al Qaieda and their kind don't need to destroy our society, we're doing fine all by ourselves.
So to make sure they don't, make sure that you do something to make a stranger's life a bit better just by being considerate. All it takes is stepping to one side and smiling.
Saturday, October 01, 2005
Oor Wallace
During my ongoing struggles with the PC to make it talk to various bits of equipment, I'm still having trouble signing in to write my blog. During this hiatus I've been rehearsing a play called 'Oor Wallace' and this finished last night. Whilst it certainly didn't go as badly as I feared, there were still several problems. Mostly due to our recasting at the last minute, but there were also several incidences of severe self-indugence from the members of Clann Alba who were drafted in to do a wee bit of bodhran playing.
After blackmailing the director into letting them tack on some more playing and the chance to -badly- perform a speech about Wallace at the end of the play, last night the playing got ridiculously long, especially at the end. I almost walked off because I thought they were never going to bloody well stop. At the point in the play where they were on, suddenly there were new lines that were never included and, again, seriously-extended bodhran playing. This last left me standing on stage like a total frigging lemon waiting to sing my song. At one point he built up to a resounding crescendo and I drew breath to begin the song and the bastard just kept right on going. By this time he wasn't even in the room!
Rank amateurism at its worst. When they turned up dressed in braveheart-style costumes topped off with cotton/lycra vests I was embarrassed to be seen on stage with them. Their performances convinced me of just how poor most of the 'societies' which have sprung up in the wake of Braveheart are. Oh, and one of them was the guy we had to re-cast at the last minute 'cos he couldn't learn lines.
As usual, Scotland's directors, producers and agents showed their usual enthusiasm for trying to discover new talent by failing to show up to take their free seats. I know they're busy and they can't get to everything, but maybe if they stopped only going to the main houses where the actors are generally represented and doing quite well we'd lose some of the cliqueishness which afflicts Scottish theatre & television.
Just a thought.
The Joys of Political Correctness
Calderdale Royal Hospital in Halifax, Yorkshire has banned 'Cooing over babies' in their maternity wards. Why? Because they're worried this might breach the babies' human rights! Varies reports cite the existence of either posters or displays featuring a doll with a sign saying "What makes you think I want to be stared at?"
Words fail me.
(After being surprised by the reaction this has caused the hospitals' PR department released a belated announcement indicating that this was also being done in an effort to prevent the spread of infections to the newborns.)
Words fail me.
(After being surprised by the reaction this has caused the hospitals' PR department released a belated announcement indicating that this was also being done in an effort to prevent the spread of infections to the newborns.)
Saturday, September 03, 2005
At LAST!
Dunno why, but my PC doesn't seem to want me to blog. For the past wee while it has started telling me that I have all my setting wrong to use the site. I didn't change anything and I've followed all the recommendations to put things back as before, but with no joy. I've only got in here by deciding to try coming through the dashboard instead of the Create post shortcut. Even that took nearly 8 minutes to load up! Anyway...
Having been off all this time I've missed being able to comment on all the stuff about the London bombings and the police's shooting of Mr Menezes. I felt unhappy about that last from the first time I heard an eyewitness account say that the poor bloke was essentially held down & shot by the police. Since this completely voids the excuse (entirely valid IMO) of needing to shoot a suicide bomber to prevent him triggering his device and the stated aim of capturing them where at all possible I had immediate doubts about this killing. When the officer who fired the gun was sent on a 'holiday' at the taxpayers' expense I knew they were hiding the bloke. No we know why. The police are caught between a rock and a hard place in these situations, but here was no excuse for this one. The guy wasn't running, wasn't carrying a bag and responded to police hails & was restrained before being shot. The gunman seems to have just lost it. What the politicos don't seem to realise is that it would be so much better to just admit to a SNAFU and to at least appear to be learning from the mistakes. Trying to hide the truth and cover up for the officer involved gives no one any confidence in them whatsoever.
Anyway, we've been on holiday to Rhodes and had a damn good time. Don't believe what you hear about it being a cheap place to dine out, though. Since it joined the Euro prices for a meal are only slightly lower than they are here in the UK. We did, though, find some truly great restaurants and it will be some time beore I get over the look on Abby's face when the 'Chicken Stuffed in Local Bread turned up at the table. This meal was so good that I ordered it a few nights later. The portions were so big that even I had trouble finishing it!
I got sunburned whilst snorkelling - made a newbie mistake & didn't wear a t-shirt. Yes, I know better, but we all do dumb things sometimes. I finally saw a wild dolphin and we had a fine time. Especially when we ignored the rep's recommendations. The hidden costs curtailed our plans somewhat & the awful flight back with the most cramped seats I've ever encountered didn't help, but we won't be remembering it as anything but a great time.
Hope whatever you did with your holiday time was as good.
Having been off all this time I've missed being able to comment on all the stuff about the London bombings and the police's shooting of Mr Menezes. I felt unhappy about that last from the first time I heard an eyewitness account say that the poor bloke was essentially held down & shot by the police. Since this completely voids the excuse (entirely valid IMO) of needing to shoot a suicide bomber to prevent him triggering his device and the stated aim of capturing them where at all possible I had immediate doubts about this killing. When the officer who fired the gun was sent on a 'holiday' at the taxpayers' expense I knew they were hiding the bloke. No we know why. The police are caught between a rock and a hard place in these situations, but here was no excuse for this one. The guy wasn't running, wasn't carrying a bag and responded to police hails & was restrained before being shot. The gunman seems to have just lost it. What the politicos don't seem to realise is that it would be so much better to just admit to a SNAFU and to at least appear to be learning from the mistakes. Trying to hide the truth and cover up for the officer involved gives no one any confidence in them whatsoever.
Anyway, we've been on holiday to Rhodes and had a damn good time. Don't believe what you hear about it being a cheap place to dine out, though. Since it joined the Euro prices for a meal are only slightly lower than they are here in the UK. We did, though, find some truly great restaurants and it will be some time beore I get over the look on Abby's face when the 'Chicken Stuffed in Local Bread turned up at the table. This meal was so good that I ordered it a few nights later. The portions were so big that even I had trouble finishing it!
I got sunburned whilst snorkelling - made a newbie mistake & didn't wear a t-shirt. Yes, I know better, but we all do dumb things sometimes. I finally saw a wild dolphin and we had a fine time. Especially when we ignored the rep's recommendations. The hidden costs curtailed our plans somewhat & the awful flight back with the most cramped seats I've ever encountered didn't help, but we won't be remembering it as anything but a great time.
Hope whatever you did with your holiday time was as good.
Wednesday, July 06, 2005
The Quality of Mercy
I've not written anything for the last few weeks because I've been spending a lot of time on the train to Perth. Why? I'm acting coach for Perth Youth Theatre's production of The Merchant of Venice and I'm having far too good a time to rant about anything much.
Today, though, was my Uncle Gus's funeral which means I had some time to sit and reflect on the production.
I'm so fired up by working with these guys. I've spent so much time working with inner-city kids who don't want to be at my classes and with whom it's a fight to gain an inch of progress. These guys are reminding me why I love working on Shakespeare. The complexities of dealing with an archaic language, the richness of the themes, the challenges and the choices are so much more thrilling to work on thn the average television script.
But today the play's big scene carries an extra message which I've been so busy lately I didn't even see.
Portia: The quality of mercy is not strain'd;
It droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven
Upon the place beneath. It is twice blest;
It blesseth him that gives and him that takes.
'Tis mightiest in the mightiest; it becomes
The throned monarch better than his crown...
...Though Justice be thy plea, consider this -
That in the course of justice none of us
Should see salvation; we do pray for mercy,
And that same prayer doth teach us all to render
The deeds of mercy.
Words which the men sitting dowmn in the luxury of the Gleneagles Hotel tonight should be remembering.
Today, though, was my Uncle Gus's funeral which means I had some time to sit and reflect on the production.
I'm so fired up by working with these guys. I've spent so much time working with inner-city kids who don't want to be at my classes and with whom it's a fight to gain an inch of progress. These guys are reminding me why I love working on Shakespeare. The complexities of dealing with an archaic language, the richness of the themes, the challenges and the choices are so much more thrilling to work on thn the average television script.
But today the play's big scene carries an extra message which I've been so busy lately I didn't even see.
Portia: The quality of mercy is not strain'd;
It droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven
Upon the place beneath. It is twice blest;
It blesseth him that gives and him that takes.
'Tis mightiest in the mightiest; it becomes
The throned monarch better than his crown...
...Though Justice be thy plea, consider this -
That in the course of justice none of us
Should see salvation; we do pray for mercy,
And that same prayer doth teach us all to render
The deeds of mercy.
Words which the men sitting dowmn in the luxury of the Gleneagles Hotel tonight should be remembering.
No Threat? Are you sure.
Yesterday the GMC decided against striking gynaecologist, Dr Tapash Saha from their register, deciding instead to suspend his license for a period of eight months.
'Doctor' Saha is currently serving nine months in prison for sexual assault. He will be on the sex offenders register for five years.
Apparently the MC found no evidence that he was a threat to patients.
Oh really? Let's see one of you let him give your wife/girlfriend/daughter an internal examination.
He's already done a runner from the area he commited his crime up to Dundee. Where's he going to have to go next? Will the women there feel safe being examined by him?
Sunday, June 19, 2005
Geldof Vs Ebay: A case for Hypocrisy?
I admire Sir Bob Geldof.
He's done a lot for the poor in Africa. I believe that the benefits he accrued personally along the way were incidental to him. I'm even ambiguous about whether or not he got Ultravox bumped down the running order at Live Aid so he could perform in front of the Royals rather than Midge Ure.
I also thoroughly believe that Midge Ure's role in the whole thing has been totally unappreciated, but that's another matter. It is, though, time that he was knighted too. Just because he's not a loud-mouthed, bullying egotist (not my description, but from many who know him and quoted from the recent BBC documentary about Live Aid) doesn't mean that he's not actually done more for the cause than Sir Bob.
However, for all my admiration of the man I have to say that his reaction to people selling Live8 tickets on eBay is pure hypocrisy. Why? Several reasons.
I understand his disdain for people trying to make money on these tickets. What Bob fails to take into account is the number of those selling these tickets who may actually be rather short of the readys themselves. In some areas of the UK 1 in 4 children presenting at A&E departments are suffering from symptoms of malnutrition. Many people live on or below the poverty line here. Who knows how many of them saw this as a way to get some money of the type of wealthy charity-plonker who supports causes only because they are trendy and who would not for one second actually consider doing something to help a real person? You know, the ones eBaying the charity wristbands for hundreds of pounds and wearing them without the slightest clue what they mean or concern for those they're ostensibly supporting.
Worse, though, is the fact that Sir Bob made no complaints about the multi-national telecoms giants who made a real fortune out of all those who appplied to his text lottery at full price. Even when asked directly about this he just shrugged & evaded the question. If he'd gone onto the news and slagged off O2 et al who made a profit on the back of his lottery you can bet that they'd soon have donated at least a fraction of those profits to Africa. A few ordinary people taking advantage of charity-plonkers with more money than sense, however, raises his ire to a white-hot level previously only turned on the BBC for not getting enough money in during the original concert and the journos who followed him to Ethiopia and and tried to make him pick up dying children for photo' op's.
Sir Bob, you don't know who these people are or why they are selling their tickets. You don't know how many texts they sent or how much their tickets cost them. You refused to either impose or advise a cap on the number of texts sent, taking advantage of parents whose children may well have run up large bills trying to get tickets they almost certainly wouldn't be able to use. For all you know some of these "scum" are genuine people who spent a lot of money trying to win these tickets and can now not make it to a concert. Hell, they may even be genuine enough to have been planning to donate the proceeds of the sale to your charity.
Doubtless there are profiteers out there with no legitimate reason for re-selling their tickets.
O2, Vodaphone & Orange spring to mind.
What makes it all right for the phone companies to profiteer on your charity and not for ordinary people?
Target your righteous anger at those with real power and money. The multi-national corporations who helped to engender the situation in Africa in the first place.
Wednesday, June 15, 2005
1320
For those who don't recognise the date it's the year the Declaration of Arbroath was signed in Scotland. A truly important historical document as it was one of the first statements of nationhood in the world. Where are the likes of its signatories now?
The G8 is coming and what is happening in our land of the free?
Our police are the first in the UK to threaten the use of the new 'anti-terror laws'. These laws were brought in under the proviso that they would not be used to stifle legitimate protest. What are the plans of those protesting at the summit, but a legitimate protest?
Yet it seems that there are already plans to arrest and imprison protestors for up to seven days without trial just for daring to protest. There are stories circulating about people wearing G8 protest t-shirts being questioned by police officers and even having follow-up 'interviews' conducted in their homes by detectives. The notion of an al-qaieda terrorist advertising their presence in Scotland by wearing one of these anti-globalisation t-shirts indicating that 'Police Intelligence' just may be an oxymoron. People have been pulled over & questioned just for being in the area of Gleneagles, and it's just been announced that 2,000 American troops have been flown into Scotland to 'protect' the delegates.
Who the fuck do they think they are?
Please excuse the profanity, but I'm so angry about this. Foreign troops being flown in to suppress our citizens' right to protest? Yes, we are now one of the countries America has seen fit to bring peace to. So much for our 'special relationship'. Don't we have our own troops? Or are they too busy fighting Tony & George's war in Iraq? Not that troops should be required there in the first place. But foreign troops? It's an abomination. And there's been almost no comment on this. That's the Big Brother generation for you.
I think much, if not all, of the protest is going to be wasted. These people don't listen for one thing. For another, the complaints of the protestors about not being allowed to march past the hotel as part of their activites stikes me as a combination of foolish and pointless. Have any of them ever been there? The gates are nearly a mile from the hotel and it's surrounded by trees. Even if they were allowed to march none of the delegates would see or hear them. Even if they did, I remind you that they don't give a toss what you say. The only people who will be affected will be the residents of the village you plan to descend upon instead.
This Live8 pish about coming to Edinburgh, too. Do you know how far Edinburgh is from Gleneagles, Sir Bob? What's the point in screwing up life in Edinburgh? By the way, do you know how many children live in poverty in Scotland? Are you aware how many children fetching up in casualty are also diagnosed as suffering from either borderline or even full-blown malnutrition? Where's the concert for them?
However, the use of these laws and foreign troops to enforce them is a disgrace. That the Scots police should be the first to even consider using these laws in this way makes me ashamed. These laws were put in place to 'protect' us from people who wanted, we were told, to take away our freedoms. The only people threatening my freedoms today are my own government and some 2,000 American marines.
The Declaration of Arbroath talks about how grateful the Scots were when Robert Bruce delivered them into freedom from the English, but went on to state that if he, or any of his descendents betrayed Scotland or her people or became a tyrant then they would 'cast him down' using any means neccessary.
Our leaders are permitting this to happen in Scotland today.
Where are the likes of the men who signed that document in 1320?
It STILL wasn't me.
I see Donald Rumsfeld has finally admitted what we all knew; that Iraq is no safer now than it was under Saddam Hussein. Since it has also been all but admitted that the reason for the attack on that beleaguered country was regime change, who's going to invade it now & kick us & the U.S. out? I mean, if Saddam had to go because his regime was unsafe for his people what about this one?
Yeah, I know, he was actively killing people, but it seems fewer people were dying at his hands than aredying there these days. At least under him the Iraqi's knew who to watch out for. True, that's facetious & beneath me but it is, sadly, still true.
Monday, June 13, 2005
Microshaft again
Do we really believe that periodically signing in to MSN Hotmail is an anti-spam measure?
No, of course we don't. If it was about that it would be a less frequent activity and after you'd had the account for a while it would no longer be neccesary. Hell, they could monitor the use patterns and only make people who were sending out mail-list e-mails sign in.
This is just a way to be fucking irritating and try to force us all onto the paid-for service. They've already stopped people from opening new free accounts. How long before they close the existing free ones? What tight-fisted corporate clone came up with this one, 'cos I don't believe it was the uber-geek himself.
No, of course we don't. If it was about that it would be a less frequent activity and after you'd had the account for a while it would no longer be neccesary. Hell, they could monitor the use patterns and only make people who were sending out mail-list e-mails sign in.
This is just a way to be fucking irritating and try to force us all onto the paid-for service. They've already stopped people from opening new free accounts. How long before they close the existing free ones? What tight-fisted corporate clone came up with this one, 'cos I don't believe it was the uber-geek himself.
Sunday, June 12, 2005
Too darn late!
I was loking for a really good excuse for those times I couldn't be bothered making an effort for years. Why does it turn up now that I'm married & off the market?
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/050608/12/fknzc.html
That of course was not true, I never needed an excuse. It's only there now for those of you who need it.
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/050608/12/fknzc.html
That of course was not true, I never needed an excuse. It's only there now for those of you who need it.
Wednesday, June 08, 2005
More knee-jerk politics
Our wonderful government has followed its usual course in responding to figures stating that violent crime is on the increase: it's going to ban replica hand-guns.
Well, whoopee-doo! I feel so much safer knowing that criminals will be going out and getting hold of the real thing instead to hold up the local corner-shop. Really, guys, do you actually think that banning the sale or manufacture of replicas will do anything to curb violent crime? We all know that it's easy to get your hands on illegal firearms. All the regulations brought in after Thomas Hamilton's rampage did diddly-squat to to curb their availability to the criminal fraternity.
The average ned planning to hold up a post-office or some-such will not go to the trouble & expense of obtaining a real gun. Nor will any casual criminal of the type these new regualtions are supposed to be targeting. No, they'll go down to the local version of Victor Morris and buy a replica. With this they will attempt to scare some shop assisstant into handing over some money. Remove this option and they'll be forced to get something else. Whilst this may not be an actual real-live hand-gun it will be an actual real-life weapon. Ask the teenage wage-slave which they'd rather these thugs have in their possession and I can bet you they won't be asking for the real weapon.
And where do you draw the line? Which of the fairlt realistic toy guns do you ban? What about gun-shaped cigarette lighters? "Don't be silly, " I hear you cry "No one could mistake those for the real thing." Let me tell you one day of the security alert a friend of mine once caused on a flight with a 1/4 scale Derringer-shaped lighter he had in his hold -not hand - luggage.
I agree with much of the called-for legislation regarding knives. They should be restricted to places like Scout-shops and fishing shops and these places should only be allowed to sell items which can clearly and legitimately be used for a purpose. Wall-hanger replica swords should not be sold sharpened or ever made from tempered steel. Knives which can only be used to slash or stab another human should be banned from general sale.
Oh, and could someone please tell the Strathclyde Police spokesman that hunting knives, by their very definition, have another use than violent crime? True, it is unlikely that anyone in the UK will be using them to hunt with, but don't bugger up your own argument with the use of poor semantics.
An article about the legislation is here:
Ding Dong the witch is dead
Which old witch? Lynn Bains.
Well, okay, not dead, but retired. And, to be honest it's not something I'm actually happy about.
All right, she's got some issues and so on and thre have been times when she was a complete bitch, but QMUC's acting course was exactly nowhere before her. It was a joke before Lynn took it over and now it's one of the most respected courses in the country. The way she was treated was shameful if some of the things I've heard were true.
Hope things go the way you hope, Lynn. Thanks for the good stuff.
x
Monday, May 30, 2005
Gods help us all. Whover your deity may be.
Abby & I bumped into an old lady today. It seemed that she had been dropped off at the bus station by a health-centre care-worker who was apparently too busy to actually take her home. Tilly is frail, fragile and having eye difficulties that make it difficult for her to see the edges of the pavement. She’s also clearly in a somewhat bewildered mental and emotional state having lost her husband less than a year ago and been moved from her home into sheltered accommodation whilst she was grieving.
We helped her find her way to shop to buy milk & bread and then walked her most of the way home; she refused to let us take her all the way. I cannot help but think that even as she thanked us profusely for our help that she was still somewhat afraid to let us see where she lived, just in case.
What a sad reflection on our society this is. Tilly is lonely, scared and facing a slow decline into ill-health and dependency on people who would walk away and leave her at a bus stop to save themselves five minutes. It was so obvious to us that she has neither gotten over her man’s death (He was found dead in the street – how must that have added to her pain?) nor been given any real grief counselling since. With no family left other than a niece who is there to help her? To my great shame I did not offer to look in on her or to do anything more to help than I already had. I will keep my eyes open for her and make an effort to see she’s alright if I can. I know that Abby will do the same but not too long ago this would never have happened, especially in a place like Govan.
It may never have been an affluent area, but there was a strong community here. Now, even here, there has been such a strong swing towards having an insular society that a woman like Mrs Brown can find herself like this. I hope that she’s a member of a local church. She was married in the area. Not because I’m religious or have any naïve faith that God will somehow save her but simply because the religious communities seem to be the last bastions of a true caring society.
The friends I have who are church members all have an interest in each others’ lives. Not in a nosey way. Well, not overtly, anyway. But they spend time together and plan ways to help those of their church that are in need of help. There’s a real community spirit. I think soap operas fill that void in our lives now. The things that soap operas seem to have replaced in our lives are all there in them. Even the likes of Desperate Housewives show neighbours dropping in on one another, rallying round to help and so on. There’s gossip to share, which, however reprehensible that might be at times, is another facet of communal life. We no longer know our neighbours or what’s happening to them so we indulge in the lives of fictional characters – many cannot separate the actor from the character - and ignore real people around us like Tilly.
We really are pathetic.
We helped her find her way to shop to buy milk & bread and then walked her most of the way home; she refused to let us take her all the way. I cannot help but think that even as she thanked us profusely for our help that she was still somewhat afraid to let us see where she lived, just in case.
What a sad reflection on our society this is. Tilly is lonely, scared and facing a slow decline into ill-health and dependency on people who would walk away and leave her at a bus stop to save themselves five minutes. It was so obvious to us that she has neither gotten over her man’s death (He was found dead in the street – how must that have added to her pain?) nor been given any real grief counselling since. With no family left other than a niece who is there to help her? To my great shame I did not offer to look in on her or to do anything more to help than I already had. I will keep my eyes open for her and make an effort to see she’s alright if I can. I know that Abby will do the same but not too long ago this would never have happened, especially in a place like Govan.
It may never have been an affluent area, but there was a strong community here. Now, even here, there has been such a strong swing towards having an insular society that a woman like Mrs Brown can find herself like this. I hope that she’s a member of a local church. She was married in the area. Not because I’m religious or have any naïve faith that God will somehow save her but simply because the religious communities seem to be the last bastions of a true caring society.
The friends I have who are church members all have an interest in each others’ lives. Not in a nosey way. Well, not overtly, anyway. But they spend time together and plan ways to help those of their church that are in need of help. There’s a real community spirit. I think soap operas fill that void in our lives now. The things that soap operas seem to have replaced in our lives are all there in them. Even the likes of Desperate Housewives show neighbours dropping in on one another, rallying round to help and so on. There’s gossip to share, which, however reprehensible that might be at times, is another facet of communal life. We no longer know our neighbours or what’s happening to them so we indulge in the lives of fictional characters – many cannot separate the actor from the character - and ignore real people around us like Tilly.
We really are pathetic.
Saturday, May 28, 2005
Here we go again.
One of the oft-repeated quotes about today's society is Everyone has rights, but no-one has responsibilities. i.e. It's always someone else's fault as far as many of us are concerned. This story http://uk.news.yahoo.com/050527/12/fjx92.html seems to be adding to that type of excuse. How long will it be before some defense lawyer is quoting this as an excuse for some gang-banger's behaviour? "My client may have shot randomly into a crowd of children, your honour, but he cannot be held accountable as, having been exposed to gang behaviour from an early age, he clearly caught the violence from those around him."
It's like this bollocks about addiction being a disease. Addiction is not a disease. It is a state of chemical or psychological dependency, certainly, but you get there by putting yourself into the spiral of addiction in the first place. You cannot catch alcoholism and you don't help addicts by telling them it's not their fault.
The current sorry tale of the woman whose three teenage daughters are all mothers is another example of this blame culture that has developed. All her daughters were having underage sex. One, by the age of 16 had had two miscarriages and an abortion before carrying a child to term. The youngest was eleven when she fell pregnant. But it's the school's fault for not giving them enough sex education. Never mind that this woman was allowing the eleven year-old to sleep with her boyfriend in her home. Never mind that she never had any kind of discussion with any of the girls after the first pregnancy. Why should she? It's up to the school to make sure that her daughters know what they're doing and don't get pregnant. Not that she'll see this (or be able to read it, probably) but listen up, lady: it is the school's job to teach children about the mechanics of the human body and that does include its reproductive systems. It is not the schools' place to be their mother! It is your job to ensure that they are moral, responsible human beings.
If we start saying violence is an infectious disease then no one has any responsibility for hitting someone else. Or stabbing them, or shooting them. Yes, violence begets violence, but it is still within the purview of every human being to make the choice of whether to respond violently or not in any given circumstance. There do exist circumstances in which violence is an acceptable response. I'd suggest some yob turning up at my door expecting to shag my eleven-year old daughter is one very good time when a severe kicking is clearly called for. However, we must all take responsibility for the choice to respond in that fashion.
It's like this bollocks about addiction being a disease. Addiction is not a disease. It is a state of chemical or psychological dependency, certainly, but you get there by putting yourself into the spiral of addiction in the first place. You cannot catch alcoholism and you don't help addicts by telling them it's not their fault.
The current sorry tale of the woman whose three teenage daughters are all mothers is another example of this blame culture that has developed. All her daughters were having underage sex. One, by the age of 16 had had two miscarriages and an abortion before carrying a child to term. The youngest was eleven when she fell pregnant. But it's the school's fault for not giving them enough sex education. Never mind that this woman was allowing the eleven year-old to sleep with her boyfriend in her home. Never mind that she never had any kind of discussion with any of the girls after the first pregnancy. Why should she? It's up to the school to make sure that her daughters know what they're doing and don't get pregnant. Not that she'll see this (or be able to read it, probably) but listen up, lady: it is the school's job to teach children about the mechanics of the human body and that does include its reproductive systems. It is not the schools' place to be their mother! It is your job to ensure that they are moral, responsible human beings.
If we start saying violence is an infectious disease then no one has any responsibility for hitting someone else. Or stabbing them, or shooting them. Yes, violence begets violence, but it is still within the purview of every human being to make the choice of whether to respond violently or not in any given circumstance. There do exist circumstances in which violence is an acceptable response. I'd suggest some yob turning up at my door expecting to shag my eleven-year old daughter is one very good time when a severe kicking is clearly called for. However, we must all take responsibility for the choice to respond in that fashion.
Tuesday, May 24, 2005
WTF?
I don't really feel like bitching much today.
I know, this is like fish not wanting to swim, but I seem to be feeling just a little benign towards the world right now.
Maybe it's because I just got cast in a play. Maybe it's 'cos I finally got my hands on a complete set of Space: Above & Beyond and it will even go on the SD card for my PPC.
More likely it's because having seen Revenge of the Sith before it was released I got to go onto the web & piss off hordes of Americans who couldn't give a shit that the rest of us have to wait for Hollywood's releases or that we're sometimes years behind on tv shows when they give out spoilers. I particularly enjoyed getting the son-of-a-bitch who once told me to "move to a civilised country." if I didn't like him talking about things no one else in the chat-room had seen. It was worth making all those memberships & fake ids just to get booted. The argument I had with an admin-drone who couldn't see the irony of banning me when he had refused to ban someone who repeatedly did this was great. The only site I got a chance to argue the toss on, btw. Generally, the attitude is that one a movie has been released in the US then the rest of us lose the right to be protected from spoilers.
Oh, and I'm rapidly getting pissed off again here because my computer keeps dropping the sync with my Axim and not copying over the music I want. Worse; it won't stay hooked up nearly long enough to transfer Space;Above & Beyond to the SD card. Right! I'm off to see what the politicians are up to now.
Monday, May 16, 2005
Technology, eh?
I use a nice shiny new Dell Axim X50v to which I recently switched after breaking the trusty Palm IIIx that I'd been happily using for years. It took me a long time to get over hating just about everything on the Axim. I was aware it was really Microshaft's software I don't like rather than the machine -with the sole exception of the truly lousy battery life, that is. These days I've mellowed out a bit over that (What, you? Mellow? Never!), but I still think everything about Palm OS is better. From the desktop interface - most of your customers don't need all that crap that clutters up Outlook, Bill - to not being able to security lock individual phone numbers. I know some quite famous people -no, I won't be mentioning any of them here- so I want their numbers protected. (I'm not as thick as Paris Hilton.) I don't, however, want to have to unlock my adress book every time I need a number from it.
So why didn't I buy a new machine from Palm? Easy; because just like Tony & co they ignore what everyone tells them. I posted a lot on Palm boards when I had one and they all asked for the same things of a new machine:
So why didn't I buy a new machine from Palm? Easy; because just like Tony & co they ignore what everyone tells them. I posted a lot on Palm boards when I had one and they all asked for the same things of a new machine:
- Better battery life and a replaceable battery.
- Wi-Fi built in.
- Silent alarm mode.
- Voice recorder (god knows why, the Axim has it, I've never used it).
What did we get from that list? Bugger all. Yet PalmOne boasted about how they'd listened to thier consumers and given them what was being asked for in the T5. Those were in order of preference as far as I could make out, by the way, and item#1 is why I decided Palm gould go fish for my money. Just like the i-pod it's a throwaway. The battery dies and you're screwed. Or you have to pay them a bloody fortune to replace it. A £350 PDA is not a disposable and this was supposed to be an upgrade. I got at least three months out of a pair of AAAs in my IIIx, three hours and at most two years life in a T3 or T5 isn't an improvement, people.
Why this rant? As it happens I'm having a bad technology day. I put in a new USB 2.0 card the other day and now my printer won't behave so I'm sitting here downloading about half a gb of new drivers in the hope that they'll make it work. On dial-up. Then today I'm sitting in a great wee pub called The Goat that offers free wi-fi internet access and decide to update my Blog. But this site just crashes my Pocket Internet Explorer as soon as it loads. Great.
The Goat, by the way, can be found here:
1287 Argyll Street, just up from the Kelvingorve museum and not as far along as The Park Bar. Oddly, they don't seem to have a website, but that may just be because I can't find it on Google...
Are we listening yet?
One of the first things ony promised us upon winning the election last week was that he would be listening to what people had to say.
One of the first things he plans to do is to press ahead with a raft of controversial reforms that many of his own party don't like.
Of course, he's promised to listen before. He's claimed that his would be a listening government. Why are you surprised that he doesn't seem to have any intention of listening this time, either?
One of the first things he plans to do is to press ahead with a raft of controversial reforms that many of his own party don't like.
Of course, he's promised to listen before. He's claimed that his would be a listening government. Why are you surprised that he doesn't seem to have any intention of listening this time, either?
Saturday, May 14, 2005
Revenge of the Sith
(Warning! Spoilers included)
I saw Revenge of the Sith yesterday and actually enjoyed it. I even enjoyed it quite a lot. I doubt that I’ll ever be as taken with a movie as I was by a New Hope and pity all those who didn’t get the effect of the Imperial Star Destroyer as an introduction to what cinema is capable of. I had fairly low expectations of this. Flatulent Menace was dreadful – though I must be honest & say I stopped hating it after a while. Reducing the force from a mystical energy field to a parasitic infection being something even worse, IMHO, than Jar-Jar Binks. I’m not even going to bother talking about how ill conceived he was.
Attack of the Clones was much better. Much, much better. I was disappointed to see the beginning of a pandering to fans by putting in an origin story for Boba Fett. I can tolerate it but I still think it’s only there because fans made so much of Vader’s seeming deference to Fett during Empire. Let’s get this straight people; Fett got to answer back on the bridge of the Executor because he was the only character. The other bounty hunters were extras and props. Needing to have everything explained to you and connected is a sad fan-boy trait that you need to get a grip of. Learn to enjoy and appreciate a bit of mystery.
There’s a lot of really good stuff in RotS. We finally get to see a proper space battle where the capital ships do something other than just float in space. Full-on broadsides (though we’ll ignore the shells being ejected from the breaches of energy weapons between shots), gun-decks, explosive decompression. Fighters firing at the big ships having no effect and getting twatted for their insolence. All the stuff that should have been in the Battle of Endor but wasn’t. I mean an A-Wing taking out a super Star Destroyer? Puhlease!
Don’t listen to the reviews that dismiss Hayden Christensen & Natalie Portman’s performances. They are well measured and delivered and it’s not their fault George writes such clunky dialogue. Obi-Wan & Anakin’s banter is much more natural than before and goes some way towards restoring the humour bypass Episodes 1&2 suffered. Ian McDiarmid is superb as the Emperor. I’ve had the good fortune to see him on stage and was thrilled to see him finally get the chance to show some of that talent in a Star Wars movie. I wonder how many people will connect that he made Anakin? The whole ‘virgin birth’ thing that got ignored in Episode 1 having its resolution in a way that even Anakin doesn’t seem to recognise.
There are problems with it, but they’re mostly pretty minor. At the end 3PO gets a memory (called mind) wipe to protect the twins’ identity and where they’ve been sent, but Artoo doesn’t. Why? Can’t the sith get something to translate an astromech’s beeps? There are a lot of the usual crap physics screw-ups. During the aforementioned space battle, the ship our heroes are aboard rescuing Palpatine gets damaged and pitches forward. Everyone and everything on the ship fall forward, staying that way until the ship is levelled off again. Why’s this a problem? The ships have artificial gravity. This will mean that it doesn’t matter which way the ship orients itself the floor will always be 'down'. Worse, when the ship is brought back under control the lift shaft they’re all sliding down seems to still have the same direction of gravity it had when they were falling. Oh, and if you’re standing still and someone sprays oil over your feet you do not immediately begin to slide around like a bad slapstick routine. Do look out for the continuity error during the Anakin/Obi-Wan fight where Ben is suddenly & inexplicably holding Anakin's lightsabre in one shot. It's in the trailer, so you don't even have to see the movie for this one.
Anakin has a bit of a problem when Palpatine orders him to execute Count Dooku, but accepts it, does it and – despite a wee whinge about it not being the Jedi code – says no more about it and is not angry with Palpatine for giving the order. Later, when asked by Obi-Wan & the council to spy on Palpatine, he completely goes off on one because, yes, it’s against the Jedi code. This is a big part of his motivation for going to the dark side. Added to his odd conviction that Padme is going to die in childbirth and somehow decides that the dark side can save her. Even when he doesn’t get the information from the Emperor, he doesn’t get angry with him.
That brings me to my biggest problem with it. When Padme has given birth she just dies for no apparent reason. She doesn’t have a difficult birth, she hasn’t suffered a lot of damage from Anakin’s force-choke and the medics even say there’s nothing physically wrong with her. She just loses the will to live. When she dies there is no effort made to revive her, not even by Obi-Wan who we saw trying to save her in Anakin’s vision of her death. Hardly the strong, independent woman she’s been shown as up until now. Her husband turned evil and died so she just drops dead? Come on, George. More damage from the force-choke and she wills herself to live to see her children born, yes. She just abandons them? No. Remember Luke & Leia’s conversation about their mother in Jedi? Leia remembers her mother, which gives the impression that she went into hiding with her. That makes things even better. Padme goes into hiding, damaged by the force choke, perhaps, but never really gets over Anakin’s betrayal and dies young. But no, we have to have the entire plot resolved. No looses threads because it seems we’re too thick to figure out something like that happening between Episodes 3 & 4. Given that there’s to be a TV show set in that period it could have been resolved there. Character development has never been a forte of Mr Lucas’. Witness allowing Greedo to fire first. In the original this scene shows Han to be ruthless and determined and at a point where he might possibly have become a villain, but is redeemed by his meeting with the heroes. Luke’s heroism and his love for Leia putting him on the straight & narrow. Now he’s an out and out hero from the get-go and a less interesting character because of it.
Speaking of changing things previously established might I quote Yoda? “A Jedi uses the force for knowledge and defence. Never for attack.” All the Jedi use the force to throw things at opponents, knock them off high places & smash them into walls. It seems, too, that Obi-Wan has decided that having the high ground in a lightsabre fight is an automatic win. He's on a slope up from Anakin and when the latter tries to jump over him he gets his arm & a leg cut off. How come Darth Maul never managed that? Or does it only count when a Jedi is the one above his opponent? I was thoroughly uncomfortable with Obi-Wan just standing watching the, now basket-case, Anakin sliding into the lava & bursting into flames.
And just how fast is hyperspace travel? Palpatine fights Yoda (who gives up & runs away for no apparent reason) on Coruscant & then becomes aware that 'Lord Vader is in danger.' Since the impression is that these two duels are roughly simultaneous how can Plapatine get to the volcano planet in the Outer Rim before Anakin - who now needs a walking iron lung to keep him alive - dies? And when they're re-assembling him why does he get no treatment for his burns? Don't they have bacta? Or even anaesthetic? Have prosthetics advanced so far that just clipping them to his stumps is sufficient?
You'll have seen the shot of the Death Star under construction. I hoped there was to be an impression of time having passed, but there isn't. Are we now to believe that they took twenty years to build Mk I, but got the 10 times larger Mk II done in three years?
There’s far too much reliance on CGI some of it quite poorly done. The wookies are repeated very obviously in their big appearance (The whole wookie thread is a waste of time, by the way.) and things are done just because they can be not because they advance the plot or make things better. For example, why use cg to put a couple of clone troopers behind Anakin & Obi-Wan when it must have been easier and cheaper to put guys in suits there instead? There’s a dreadful shot on Coruscant where the characters seem to glide above the surface they’re walking on. This is, IMO, the big problem with CGI in general. There’s always a failure of interaction between the computer images and the real world. I’ve even seen examples where computer images don’t seem to interact properly where different houses have done the elements. Even Artoo gets the CGI treatment allowing him to take on super battle droids and catch a com-link thrown to him by Anakin. (Didn’t he have one built in by Jedi?)
I know, I know; I’m sounding negative. Put it this way, though: this time I care enough to talk about it. The last two weren’t worth the effort.
One thing I did notice, though, was a seeming reference to contemporary politics, especially American foreign policy. Some very interesting comments about how democracy is won or lost and having the villain quote Dubya’s infamous ‘You’re either with us or against us.’ statement had me wondering if George was making a wee stand.
Wednesday, May 11, 2005
Results
So, we got Tony's Cronies again. No big surprise there. What has surprised me is the way his own party don't seem to want him any more. Alright, it's people who never got along with him in the first place, but to be described as a liability by your own party after you WON the election, that must hurt!
I am also disgusted that he has, yet again, elevated one of his buddies to make him an unelected minister and there's bugger all protest. It was bad enough the last time he pulled that stunt (With Gus MacDonald from STV) but at least there seemed to be a reason for it. I don't know a lot about this latest appointment yet, but I'm against it in principle. Only the elected should govern us. Or why vote at all?
And all those people who had to resign through various instances of mis-conduct & incompetence back in the cabinet. Having an election did not wipe their slate clean. There may be far fewer NL members around these days, but there are still enough to cover all the jobs without having soiled goods in office once more. Or don't they all agree with you Tony? God forbid you should have someone in a Labour cabinet who's actually a (say it in hushed tones) Socialist!!!
Thursday, May 05, 2005
Exercising the franchise
No, not what George Lucas does. Voting, which Abby & I did on the way home.
Anyone who knows me will be able to guess where my cross went, but I was disappointed that we were the only ones in the polling station the whole time we were there. I guess there's a good chance of as low a turnout as many pundits feared.
Not only were voters absent, but so were the party activists. Now, I've never really understood the concept of handing out the flyer you put through everyone's door a few weeks ago at the entrance to the polling station. I seriously doubt that anyone has ever suddenly decided where to cast their ballot just because someone handed them a flyer on the way in. On this occasion the only party represented were the SSP, for whom I have a good deal of respect and who seemed to have conducted a much more traditional, and positive, campaign than the others. Just a pity they had to go and spoil the effect by crowding four people around the gate and getting quite sniffy when given a polite 'No thanks' in return to their proffered flyer.
Coincidentally, I was playing a paranoid schizophrenic all day with much of his background to the psychosis being about being a socialist. I brought in all the stuff about the government colluding, allegedly, with the US in kidnapping our citizens and taking them abroad to be tortured as part of the "War on Terror." Several students thought I'd made that up and were genuinely shocked when told not. Hopefully I cost Tony's Cronies a few votes. It was strange putting my mind into that place, though, on polling day. I could see how someone could go over the edge a bit when you look at the lies and spin that government in this country has descended into during 'Smiler' Blair's tenure. Say what you like about Thatcher - and I have lots to say about what she did to us all - but at least you knew what you were getting with her. She made her decisions, followed them through and stood by them. TB & co react to every passing fad whipped up by the tabloids, dodge, evade and lie about everything and accept responsibility for nothing.
PS I was Nearly sad enough to get up early this morning so's I could post this blog at 5.05 am. But being asleep was more important to me than being a sad twat.
Anyone who knows me will be able to guess where my cross went, but I was disappointed that we were the only ones in the polling station the whole time we were there. I guess there's a good chance of as low a turnout as many pundits feared.
Not only were voters absent, but so were the party activists. Now, I've never really understood the concept of handing out the flyer you put through everyone's door a few weeks ago at the entrance to the polling station. I seriously doubt that anyone has ever suddenly decided where to cast their ballot just because someone handed them a flyer on the way in. On this occasion the only party represented were the SSP, for whom I have a good deal of respect and who seemed to have conducted a much more traditional, and positive, campaign than the others. Just a pity they had to go and spoil the effect by crowding four people around the gate and getting quite sniffy when given a polite 'No thanks' in return to their proffered flyer.
Coincidentally, I was playing a paranoid schizophrenic all day with much of his background to the psychosis being about being a socialist. I brought in all the stuff about the government colluding, allegedly, with the US in kidnapping our citizens and taking them abroad to be tortured as part of the "War on Terror." Several students thought I'd made that up and were genuinely shocked when told not. Hopefully I cost Tony's Cronies a few votes. It was strange putting my mind into that place, though, on polling day. I could see how someone could go over the edge a bit when you look at the lies and spin that government in this country has descended into during 'Smiler' Blair's tenure. Say what you like about Thatcher - and I have lots to say about what she did to us all - but at least you knew what you were getting with her. She made her decisions, followed them through and stood by them. TB & co react to every passing fad whipped up by the tabloids, dodge, evade and lie about everything and accept responsibility for nothing.
PS I was Nearly sad enough to get up early this morning so's I could post this blog at 5.05 am. But being asleep was more important to me than being a sad twat.
Wednesday, May 04, 2005
Why not?
I've been reading a few other people's blogs for some time now and hadn't really had more than a passing whim to add my own voice to the blogosphere. But the whole UK election has just got me so riled up I have to do something.
Trouble is, I don't want this to just be a political rant. Oh no. I'm sure I can rant about a lot more stuff than just our lying bastard politicians.
However - and this is just the way our political masters want us- I'm working in the morning and am spending the next two days playing a paranoid schizophrenic, so both of us are off to bed.
I do, however, promise to begin ranting soon and to do other things than rant. I might rave a bit, too.
Trouble is, I don't want this to just be a political rant. Oh no. I'm sure I can rant about a lot more stuff than just our lying bastard politicians.
However - and this is just the way our political masters want us- I'm working in the morning and am spending the next two days playing a paranoid schizophrenic, so both of us are off to bed.
I do, however, promise to begin ranting soon and to do other things than rant. I might rave a bit, too.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
