reunion and meeting

tena koe

well, it was perhaps (somewhat) inevitable that a mere decade (give or take, look you see) after vowing never to be on a plane again that i would take just about the longest journey one could via this method of transport. yes, indeed, as some shall have concluded from my previous (to this post) i went to go and see Aotearoa, or if you like New Zealand. 

quite a few posts on this subject are rather likely to follow, since i took what seems like a formidable amount of pictures and yes, video. but for now, well, the primary - actually only - reason i went there. which would be to see family. those in the know would know that this isn't the usual sort of post i would do on this particular date, but here we are. obviously this is likely to be all of interest only to friends and family, but what the heck you are here, read on. 

one has to start somewhere with these pictures what i have. it would appear to make sense, then, to do so with one of me with Mum & Dad. and here it is. 

to state the obvious as a perfect understatement, absolutely brilliant to see them once more. it had been more or less (or around) a dozen (!!) years since i had last seen them. not a subject to dwell on or give too much contemplation about, but it did appear, seem or (sadly) feel that i might not have had the chance to see them again. yet, well, i have, and am glad to have done so. certainly i do not rule out seeing them further, for i absolutely would love to go over there again. even, yes, with the prolonged periods of being unable to smoke on the journey. 

go on then, to give some sort of quasi "reverse bookend" to the above picture, here you go. another image of the three of us, but one which was taken, give or take, fifty (50) or so years ago. 

no, alas, i don't have too many memories of when that (directly) above image was taken, but of course shall forever treasure the memories of the previous. 

about a dozen or so (give or take) years since i last saw Mum and Dad was one thing. yet it had been longer still since i had last seen my sister. one or two of you may be curious, or at the least mildly interested, in exactly how long it had been, so the answer is 17 (seventeen) years. and so here we are, on my very first afternoon (although time was a vague concept) in New Zealand.

from what i recall that picture was taken at Mission Bay, but also it may well have been the one a bit down from it, the name of which escapes me. co-ordinated wardrobe was a pure fluke and very much based on whatever i pulled from my suitcase. 

it strikes me as appropriate to do another sort of "then and now" picture interlude fr you. and so here i am (or here am i) with my sister, some 42 (ish) years ago, or at the least that time from the time what this all went live on that internet thing. 

my understanding is that the above image was taken in Brisbane, and yes the Australian one. which is kind of (sort of) next door to New Zealand. there, i have saved you looking it up on a map or atlas or similar. 

now, it was not just reunions that i was there for. indeed, a primary driver for my decision to go "yes, let me get on a plane again" was to meet someone i had not met before but expressed a wish to meet me. that would be my nephew, Daniel. he had asked his mum (as in my sister) why this curious person called Uncle Lee couldn't quit smoking and come to visit them. for some reason this pulled at heart strings that i was unaware i had. also, well, challenge accepted, really. it turned out that i could indeed, with some planning, go and grant his wish without doing anything silly (or sensible) like ceasing my unwavering support of the tobacco industry.

under no circumstances at all had it occurred to moi that anyone would actually wish to willingly meet me. just how i see myself, i suppose. my basic understanding is that if you care to name the connection, be it son, brother, father, uncle, nephew, cousin, friend, lover, partner or what have you, then i am pretty lacking (or wanting) in having any decent qualities. several people have been extremely kind indeed in pointing out my flaws, shortcomings and so forth, and indeed there are so many more such forms of folly that people aren't even aware of. but here we are, or there i was. 

hopefully it is so that Daniel got what he wished, if not hoped, for in meeting me. and of course his sister, or if you will my niece, Katie, who(m) i last saw when she was sort of around 1 (one) year of age. for me it was truly epic to meet both and spend as much time as was possible with them. they, as is the case for my whole family there, are truly wonderful people with a sensational life. 

and there above is all of us together, with the most excellent dogs Freddy and Charlie. this was taken on my (for now) final afternoon in New Zealand, just before it was time to bid farewell to all. quite strange, my time displacement of it all. ostensibly, or technically, it was just north of two (2) weeks that i was there, but it thankfully felt longer. and i do not mean that in a bad way at all, things did not drag, it just turned out to be a most beautiful time together. 

many more pictures and tales as i promised (or if you are of a mind to feel so, threatened) shall follow, assuming i can find the time to write and "upload". but for now, one final image, one of them selfie things taken as i was going down the escalator to the international departure thing. oh no hang on this was going down so i could go outside and have one more cigarette before flying. 

you can, if you elect to look at me, see how unusually happy i am at the prospect of about to be going well north of eighteen (18!!) hours sans cigarettes. actually that part was nowhere near as bad as i may have feared, but that's a tale for a different post. 

perhaps i have shown some unexpected emotional restraint into this foray of sharing, or maybe it was just me. anyway, whatever your reason (except odd strange ones) for stopping by and reading a happy thing for me, thanks!

kia pai tetahi ki tetahi!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

new zealand visa requirement for uk citizens, kind of

hello

so, i have been, with a sense of bravery and adventure, off to New Zealand. and back, look you see, but i rather think i am foolish for leaving such a magnificent place. considerably more to follow on my adventures, or if you will odyssey, but first off some reasonably (as in very) important information. my travels very nearly did not happen, thanks to what amounts to a visa but they claim is not. although you absolutely do need it. 

yes, then. if you have used google (or similar) to search for information (which admittedly i did not) you do need a visa to go to New Zealand, even if you are a UK passport holder. except they don't call it a visa as such, but a NZeTA (their lettering). that stands for "New Zealand electronic Travel Authority", and you can't even get on the plane if you do not have it. which is an interesting thing to (as was the case with me) learn when you are just four hours away from getting on said plane. how unfortunate no one mentions this when, say, buying the ticket. or checking your details, for the app for my airline of choice made no reference to me needing this, instead ticking me off as "complete" with details when i added my passport in. 

the most important thing i can throw in here for anyone searching is, well, to start with, to state again, yes you do, as a British passport holder, need a visa for New Zealand. after that it is how you get one of the things. my only option was to install the app, which you can find on whatever store your phone system is indelibly linked to. should you wish to pay NZ$6 more for it (don't ask me why) then you can apply for one off of their website, the link for which is right here. 

what, exactly, is a NZeTA? it feels cynical to say such but essentially little more than a cash grab and a means of trying to weed out anyone who(m) may be visiting for reasons the authorities of the country would prefer you not to. a more positive me would like to see it as a not at all unreasonable sort of tourist tax (which you do pay as part of it all) but it all feels rather too intrusive and certainly appears designed to catch people (like, for instance, me) out. 

as it turns out approval on it is fairly fast, apparently taking minutes. unfortunately the actual app is completely and utterly f*****g useless and does not update you with such information. i had a teary, jelly legged hour or so living in fear of missing my flight because my NZeTA app told me that my application was "pending". and then when i, in a slump of defeat, went to ask how i would go about moving my ticket on to another flight, the people at the airline desk informed me that the visa (for that is what it is) had been approved on their side, and off i could fly. which i did. 

frankly the NZ government really need to get their sh!t together with this thing. if you wish to charge me and many others to visit, fine, but don't make it such a big secret, and have the decency to give some support and help. you, New Zealand, are making massive efforts to attract tourists, yet you pull this on us. and by this i don't mean the not unreasonable "tourist tax" in the form of a visa, but rather the ludicrous level of difficulty. you have made something simple into a last minute barrier. 

beyond the somewhat specific, intrusive questions it asks (and surely anyone going to NZ for reasons they are being less than honest about would lie) i am at a loss as to why they can't have you simply pay for this NZeTA on arrival. or have some means that you can apply and pay via the airline you travel with, even if that does shove some "admin costs" on to it. oh, in respect of the cost, i think it clocked in at about £25 or so. quite a silly amount to jeopardise the thousands paid for a flight and make the name of your country a mockery of a shambles. 

not everyone has the "oh well at least it worked out in the end" story i do. this much i know to be true, for there were two ladies of maturing years who were also caught out. alas they could make head nor tail of what the requirement was, or how to get it, and so elected to leave the airport so as to stay at a hotel and work it all out from there. not really sure that's what the drive for New Zealand tourism had intended to achieve, but they hit that target anyway. 

hopefully this information (if not my commentary) has helped someone out with this. may they have a somewhat less stressed travel experience as a consequence. indeed New Zealand is quite far away, but by my word is it well worth the trip. and i can even go back, now i have this visa thing for a couple of years. 

be excellent to each other!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

landlord remonstrate

now then

just further observations what i have made recently. and by recently i do indeed mean the recent past, look you see, and not some future vision. 

back down it is to that there London (innit) place. specifically darn sarf as they say, by which they mean an area what is south of the Thames river. for much (not most) of the population of the place all that exists in the world is north and south of this river. my my, are they in for a treat if they bravely venture to other parts of the nation. sure, also some disappointment. 

one of the (many) complexities of living the London life is that there exists, in the same space, both a large proportion of empty houses and a shortage of housing. this is England. we pride ourselves on having train companies that have no wish to run trains, bus companies that have no wish to provide a bus service, roads constantly closed do to maintenance or works and cycle lanes everywhere which cyclists refuse to use, instead braving the road. as you can (kind of) see in the above image, presented in the greater glory and good of Commodore 64 mode, someone has taken to defacing a no (or limited) parking notice with their views on the subject of what to do with landlords. 

when he finally leaves the office he should never have had, and if London do not rid themselves of his folly this year then they get what they deserve, Sadiq Khan shall - at best - be vaguely remembered in a not good way. the fine city has been crippled and ruined by this man who clearly hates the place. his ruthless parking restrictions are just the cherry on the cake of his general war on motorists, doing all he can to prevent anyone at all from ever driving anywhere ever again. the sooner he f***s off to the same place of irrelevance as, say, Bercow, the better. 

i actually managed to capture the above picture, taken from a passenger seat, quite by chance. yes, that very much is the fabled cat statue of Catford. which makes me wonder why Dartford has statues of two of the proper members of the Stones instead of a dart, but anyway. yes, it is well worth going to see this, but the incumbent (at time of writing) mayor has placed three (or so) layers of driving tax and some parking fines on anyone wishing to go there. should for some reason you not have any wish to throw £100 or so at driving to see this, hope the picture helps. 

but, back to the defaced sign. i must say the purple pen used is a (really) lovely touch, and there is something quite engaging about the handwriting. just not sure about the sentiment. 

there is every likelihood that, in our society, some truly bad landlords operate. actually have, for purposes of verk, encountered one or two, but anyway. it is also likely there are a few good ones, too. so i am not certain "all" is appropriate here. further, i don't think you can just go around killing people on the basis of one aspect of their lives as if it defined them entire. do be careful giving the power to do so, as who knows, next something of you may be on that particular list. 

right, well, that's that for another insight into London (innit) thinking. i suppose, in many (or several, at the least) respects this is a quasi companion piece to someone in that there London who had an unexplained disdain for yuppies, which you can see (and read of) by clicking here. mostly, though, i would suggest, say or just ask if we can't all just get along. 

be excellent to each other!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

it's only rock and roll

hello there

every year, at least for the past few, i have done what i can to make sure there's at least one (1) post here which features a statue or statues. normally, notionally (or even nonchalantly, look you see) such pertains to ones outside football stadiums, or other such sporting concerns. not so this year. 

late last (2023) year was quite the time for all things Stones. for a start there was that album of theirs which was actually pretty good and sold several copies. then came news that, if they were not so already via their music and general existence, they were to be immortalised in the form of statues. well, two (2) of them at least. yes, the third one (or thing) you can see in the below what is not a statue would indeed be moi. 

kind of a form of good fortune saw me needing to be in Dartford recently. the kind of element is that obscured by doubt sense of if it is wise to be there, but as it happens yes, for it provided a chance to go and see these fine statues of Mick Jagger and Keith Richards. not sure if you can make it out, but the statues, sculptures or art installation is (as point of fact) called The Glimmer Twins. without going and looking it up, i am fairly certain that is the name the two of them used for any production credits they gone done on their albums. absolutely no idea why they didn't just use their names for it. 

one immediate question is why, of all Stones past and present (not sure if there shall be future), was it that only these two were celebrated so. a potentially mean, if not catty, answer would consist of wording suggesting they are the only two proper active members of the band left. maybe, and i think this is likely, it is that these, other than obviously being the core heart of the band, were the only two what had that great fortune to have been born in Dartford. i have no idea where the others were born, but i do seem to remember Ronnie Wood making a big deal (if not fuss) that he was the first land born child of his otherwise water gypsy clan family. 

doubtful that i need to clarify this, but yes, that is Mick Jagger, or Sir Michael Jagger, above. i would suspect (or imagine) there are loads and loads of more better pictures of the statues around the internet, but as you are here hopefully this gives you some idea. 

is it worth going to Dartford to see these statues? from that complete question, yes. if you were to ask only the first five (5) words of that question, not really, not really no. so hopefully you kind of get the kind of good fortune i did and happen to be reasonably close to the area anyway, so as to go and see them. and yes, one does have to google "glimmer twins" to get the map location. 

being fair would be to also present a closer look at the Keith Richards statue too, so here it is. the modern day revisionism is appalling, really. a much more better, authentic and realistic statue of Keith would, of course, feature him either having a cigarette hanging out of his mouth, or stuck in the head part at the end of the neck of his guitar. to this day i still have no idea why in America he gets called "Keith Richard", but going on how they drop the "u" from so many words it is little wonder they get spooked and scared of the odd "s", i suppose. 

not the first time i have expressed doubts about the point (or wisdom) of presenting some video of a thing identified as not really moving (much), but here we are. should you wish to watch about eight seconds of video of these statues, then the video you wish for is below. 

great stuff, i hope you agree. 

yes, i am somewhat intrigued by the lack of Ronnie Wood here. there are all sorts of reasons not to have an actual statue of him, but still. considering how much he celebrates his own art, does feel rather strange that they didn't get him to do the statues. actually, now that i think (as i wrote this), they may well have asked him, and in return got a massive statue of Ronnie Wood. just go and look at the (very expensive) paintings he does of the band; he always makes himself fractionally bigger than the rest of the group. artists privilege, i suppose.

finishing this off then is the image above, which is kind of the two (2) statues but very much without me there disturbing the view, 

actually, i do hope these statues do bring a lot of people to Dartford, so as to see them. it may well inspire some other towns and cities to erect (so to speak) similar for legends from their area. we, the wider group known as the British, may have got a fair few things wrong, but we do tend to get our rock and roll perfectly spot on full tilt correct. this should be celebrated far more. even if it is already celebrated a fair bit. 

be excellent to each other!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

just another rainbow

howdy pop pickers

yes, indeed i am aware that this is only getting published about a month after its release. i have just been a bit busy with other things, look you see, and besides, i very much doubt many (if any) are waiting for my comments prior to spending five (or so) minutes listening to this song. with this song being the semi quasi surprise first "proper" collaboration between Liam "Oasis" Gallagher and John "The Stone Roses" Squire, no less. 

so, two (2) music legends in general but Manchester in specific have, after a few months of speculation, gone and announced a joint venture. well, a few months of speculation and several years (actually, oddly, decades) of Liam idol worshipping John Squire (rightly). apparently a full blown album is on the way, but just not quite ready for release yet. in the interim, then, we got the first single from this rather quite class sounding collaboration, Just Another Rainbow. indeed i very nearly did sprain my wrist with the speed i got my wallet out to order it the moment it was announced. 

no, this is not the first venture for the two in the realm of vibes (music). other than the celebrated guest appearances Squire made with both Oasis and Liam on his own (both Knebworth, though), it was so that the debut (and only) album off of The Seahorses (an anagram of He Hates Roses) featured a song called Love Me And Leave Me, which is credited to both John Squire and Liam Gallagher. odd that Liam would write a song for another band before he wrote one for Oasis, but still. actually he probably very well did write a song for Oasis, but, hey, Noel. 

and is it any good? you have heard worse from both. indeed you have heard (considerably) better from both, too. oh. so it's kind of quite better than average, decent. singing wise Liam does that sort of softer voice what he does from time to time, like on that All You Are Dreaming Of (i think that is what it was called) semi-Christmas single he did a few years ago. for the business end of the music, as in the guitar parts, it starts off a bit psychedelic Waterfall, and then Squire gets two (or so) minutes in the middle of the song to do all that "blues traveller" kind of thing. you know, the type that went down ever so well with everyone on the Second Coming album. 

my favourite bit, and i intend not to be contrarian or obtuse or what have you, was unexpectedly the drums on it. right proper boss, they are, to be sure. but that is absolutely not to say the focus of attention here, being Liam and John, is to be left aside. just really thought it would be all showcasing them two, so splendid to hear an absolute bangin' drums on it. 

how has the reaction been across the board for it? most reviews have tended to use one word in particular, and that is "predictable". i suppose Just Another Rainbow sounds exactly as one would have imagined it to, but this is no bad thing. regardless of how private and quiet he may be, John Squire is not someone who will deny the fans what they want. the lifeblood of Liam is, of course, giving fans precisely (and exactly) what they crave, it's giving that which keeps elevating him higher and higher.

where two after this? according to snippets (or if you will, highlights) it seems of the ten tracks proposed for the album they have 8 (eight) what they are happy with, and some work to do, i take it, on the other two (2). there have been a few gentle comments about some gigs, but one needs to be mindful of Liam being full tilt committed to a fairly extensive tour celebrating 30 (!!) years of Definitely Maybe. not too sure how much of a rush i would be in to see the pair of them live, but we shall see how it goes as and when (if) they announce any gigs. 

understated is perhaps the best and most surprising one word way to describe Just Another Rainbow. considering just how many anthems these two have been involved in the creation of, songs that shall almost certainly (maybe) outlive us all, it's a bit unexpected that they didn't hit the accelerator and go full tilt with the debut release. still, let's see what the album holds. 

be excellent to each other!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

pointy pointed pointless

heya

despite what you may (or might) think from the title, with particular emphasis on the latter word, no. this is nothing (really) to do with that quiz show, look you see, or even the former Sonia backing dancer what became really, really famous off of the show. just another instance of a shiny thing drawing my attention and costing me coins. 

i was, recently, out and about. doing a bit of a wander around with rare free time that i, apparently, had no fixed idea on how to fill or what to do. whilst doing this a rather distinct, somewhat unusual and reasonably curious item in a shop window caught my eye. so to speak. as in not literally. 

as you can (probably) clearly see above, what with it being presented in the greater good and glory of Commodore 64 mode, a bullet shaped thing. no, not an actual bullet, it is a bit large for such. perhaps i should have included something for scale. also not a love bullet, for those thinking that way. nor is it, ostensibly, a key ring, but it does appear to function as one also. if you want it to. 

this is, as point of fact, one of them so-called "USB" memory sticks, or flash drives, or what have you. oh. i have, or had, no particular or incidental need for such, but it was on offer for £3, so i deemed it curious enough to purchase it on the spot. the (memory) size of it is 8GB. a size which, a decade or so ago, would have made it a quite large one (so to speak) but now i don't think they make them of such a small nature no more. don't know, really. 

for comparison, or to entertain (if you find this sort of thing entertaining), here it is next to a regular looking memory stick / flash drive what i bought at some random stage of 2023. which was, at the time of writing at least, last year. indeed the "regular" one is a 128GB drive, and cost somewhere south of £10, off of Tesco as i recall. mostly i bought it via the vagaries of the temptation of price. i had and have no real use for that one either, hence it remaining in packaging. quite nicely this (or that) pic shows where the connector is to shove into a PC (or whatever). a bit bulky and cumbersome to use on the design of some devices, in truth.

not entirely sure all that many people still use these drives, or sticks. it's all "uploading it to the cloud" or "streaming" now, isn't it? from what i recall the main use of these devices were to (ahem) borrow films and tele shows off of an internet via a computer or what have you, then put this stick in the tele, or dvd player, to watch them. i suppose now most just have devices plugged into their tele what streams, officially or otherwise, what they fancy directly. lament the dying art of physical piracy if you will. 

maybe some (a select few) of you may wish to see a bit of a "think piece" on how a bullet can be seen as a metaphor for a love letter, or vice versa. with vice versa likely being more better. over to you, then, Frank, with a severe warning that the below video is absolutely not for everyone. be careful with that play button, now. 

people like to do polls, or votes, on things. some of these are film related, with a few being on the subject of who is (or was) the greatest ever screen villain. routinely such are won by the likes of Darth Vader, Hannibal Lecter, Dracula, Blofeld out of James Bond or even that shark. i would have thought the answer, or result, would always be Frank Booth out of Blue Velvet. those who watch this film routinely cannot sleep properly for days or weeks after the fact, for when they close their eyes their minds conspire to torment and scare them with a wide eyed Frank Booth staring at them. or maybe that's just me. 

giving the matter some thought, i suppose Spiros uses these memory drive stick things a bit. you might think he does so to transport important legal documents, but no. i generally switch off when he starts saying these things, but from what i remember he often films instances in public restroom facilities when he makes short term but mutually beneficial friendships with men of a similar proclivity. he has, somehow, obtained several flash drives or memory sticks branded with corporate logos from financial institutions. every now and then he shall add the mutually beneficial part of a video he has taken on to one of these sticks, and then leave it in a taxi, or on the tube, or perhaps even (in one case in particular) on a plane. you would have to ask him why. 

owing to the shape and dimensions of this device there is little chance of me using it as an actual flash drive or memory stick. a smaller sized one, or even one of them "micro sd" things what one shoves into a (non-Apple, of course) phone would be more likely used. but, even then, i am not sure when i even last used a conventional shaped one. 

but, still, i suppose i do now own this one. or i am (at least) the present, incumbent custodian of it. maybe i shall just (ahem) borrow some films off of the internet what have "bullet" in the title, or things that sound a bit like that (yes, Steve McQueen), to store on here so as to make some form of statement. 

be excellent to each other!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

sssshhhhhhhh.........

well, hello

do you know, i am not entirely sure (so also not close to certain, look you see) that i have the correct spelling in place for the title of this. truly, it is so, both here and in my life outside, that spelling has come to be a sort of abstract, theoretical thing for me. yet i for some reason have concerns about presenting a proper way of wording that "ssssshhhhhhh" sound one makes when they are indicating something should not be spoken, or general kept quite quiet. 

anyway, here we are. be it that you are a regular reader of this or have just elected to click here, it may be so that you are aware of me having a David Bowie calendar up on the wall for the year this year (2024). a major motivation for this (other than it being who it is one of) was the picture (image) used for the month that is this month, at least at time of publication. which is february, for clarification. 

it thus felt appropriate, or apt (pick one), to display images of that month on the calendar as and when it arrived. which is of the day today, or now. my presumption or assumption is that via presenting in the form of the greater good and glory of Commodore 64 mode (and VHS below) all of this kindly neatly steps aside of any provenance concerns. not that i believe, or think, that them what made this particular calendar had much in the way of concern for rights, etc. could be wrong, but probably not. 

so far as i am aware (and i have not looked) this image of Bowie only really came out and into the eyes and mind of we, the general public, after his passing. i don't ever remember seeing it other than in the last five (5) or so years. which is apt, if you are aware of a certain song. this has, as i am fairly sure i mentioned (once or twice) before, a firm favourite one. not entirely sure why, probably just the whole unspoken side to it all. 

my suspicion, or instinct, is that no, i shall not be showcasing (or showing off) every single month as it is presented on this Bowie calendar. but, that said, there are also further really smart images, so perhaps one or two shall pop up. especially if i feel short of something to write. 

right, well, off and on i go to do other things of stuff. possibly upside down. kind of. 

be excellent to each other!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

more films

hey

so, yes, then, following on from the post what i gone done earlier this month, yet more films it is that i have watched. a grand(ish) total of 6 (six) of them shall be commented on here, look you see. yes, i do appreciate that mostly, or for most, watching a film is not all that special; at the least not so special that they feel compelled to commit it to internet comment. my time for doing this most normal of things is limited, however, so forgive the indulgence. 

as with the previous post (as mentioned) i had a rare bit of time free, with said time being (or happening) around, during or in that whole Christmas and New Year thing. the one of 2023 that turns into this year (at time of writing), 2024. for something of an unusual (if not peculiar) change, it was a lot of films i had not seen before, well, mostly. one of these here is one i am pretty sure i saw once before, but would not gamble on it being so. 

these all got watched, as you can (kind of) see above via the greater good and glory of Commodore 64 mode, in fancy video. which would be blu ray. no, i am not ever switching formats again. my suspicion is that this "4K" fiddles so much with older films that they are likely to be no longer what the maker(s) of such film(s) intended. being honest (as i normally would be here) the only reason i sought to move to this blu ray format was because it was the only way you could get a proper version of Mad Max 2, for only on that disc can you get it complete (uncensored) and with the right name on it. 

which conveniently leads into the first of these films that i shall comment on (review implies an expectation i cannot deliver on), being Three Thousand Years Of Longing. no, it isn't really a film in the same feel or genre of Mad Max. yet it happened to be made by the same person. 

by no means is it that i know much of anything about marketing (or advertising), but still. i am really not sure that having "by the maker of Mad Max Fury Road" on the box is wise. yes, it is a true statement, the same person directed both. anyone watching this video (disc) on the basis of that comment, though, would be (i suspect) somewhat disappointed that Three Thousand Years Of Longing lacks any sort of barbaric post apocalyptic wasteland violence. 

quite simply this film, this Three Thousand Years Of Longing, is a truly beautiful, uplifting, breath of fresh air sort of thing. i was recommended this off of someone and i shall always be grateful for such a kind gesture of suggestion. so yes, i recommend it too. 

ostensibly the plot is a kind of vague yet direct variation of an Aladdin or rudimentary 'genie in a bottle' with the requisite three wishes sort of thing. ultimately it's a kind of love letter, or love film if you will, to the perpetual importance (and beauty) of storytelling. not since The Princess Bride have a watched a film so wonderful dedicated to the sheer joy of telling a story. 

now, then, the one (1) of these films i am not entirely sure if i had seen before. or previously. for some reason i have a hazy (possibly wonky) memory of watching this one, Escape To Athena, on the tele one 80s era Christmas. i could be mistaken. what i do know is that i am in a Sir Roger appreciation group on one strand of social media. mostly we just share images of Sir Roger, or post a statement like wasn't Sir Roger great, and we all say yes. of late a few promo stills from this one have featured in that group, so i decided to pick up a copy. besides, Christmas is a time to watch Sir Roger films. 

plot? hmn. something something Greece in World War 2, something something prisoner of war camp, something something valuable Greek relics and artefacts, something something steal them and escape. mostly this film appears to be an excuse for a quite impressive cast to get together for a good time and put together an almost coherent film. one of those ones you can watch again and again, especially when you get to see Richard Roundtree do this - 

well, you will (or did) get to see him if you pressed play on the video above. and indeed that was no less than David Niven you get a glimpse of, in a most dapper cardie. the remainder of the cast features the likes of Telly Savalas, who(m) played, as he always seemed to, a Greek sex machine god, Elliott Gould (post-Streisand version), Sonny Bono (that one, and not that one) and, of course, Sir Roger, when he was simply addressed as Roger Moore. 

deferential respect is very much at the fore with the latter, for the name of he (Roger Moore) comes up in massive letters during the credits. as to his part in the film, he plays a German soldier of some high ranking. yes, Roger does play the part with what one could reasonably define as a German accent. it is an accent what appears to come from the Shatner school of acting. interpret that as you will. certainly, yes, of course, Escape To Athena is one i would strongly suggest you watch. 

a bit of a (kind) of double bill presentation here, then, as i am assured by certain (news and what have you) outlets that Oppenheimer and Barbie were (are) the "best" of cinema 2023. i see. well, from what i recall, this is likely true in the financial sense, for i believe both made lots and lots of money, more than was anticipated and an awful lot in regards of the "new normal" since all of that plague stuff. probably up there with how much the excellent Top Gun Maverick made, as well as that Avatar 2 which, like the original, everyone appears to have forgotten about. no, i did not watch that one and really have no intention of doing so, the original being so dull. 

going left to right, then, and Oppenheimer was quite the perplexing paradox. for a start it is a Christopher Nolan film. the phrase "in Nolan we trust" exists for a reason. make no mistake, this film is made with the quality he is associated with, you are talking of an effortless peer of (and i do not say this lightly) Kubrick. acting is also outstanding, with Cillian Murphy surely in line for awards, followed closely (in a supporting capacity) by Robert Downey Jnr. Matt Damon is also good, but strictly in a Matt Damon doing Matt Damon way. yet, ultimately, my sense was "why make this"? a three hour epic about a famous scientist type. showcasing any personal proclivities he had is a footnote to history; that he may regret what he did with his theory is a given. i suspect this shall go on to become the most celebrated, in terms of awards, film what Nolan does, but ultimately will be the least fondly remembered of his works. but that is not to take away from the rewarding experience of watching. 

conversely Barbie was clearly made to make money, via the medium of being a comedy with some musical numbers and a lurking (somewhat darkly) wry satirical comment on society, values, etc. a suspicion i had was that all of the jokes, if you will the value, were right there in the trailer. yet people, not that many speak to me, said no, see it, it's really, really goo. and, you know what, it is. if it had to be a choice between these two for "best" of 2023 then i would be full tilt Barbie. a film that makes one, or in this case moi, laugh, smile, cry, feel elevated and be served pause for thought, all in less (or fewer, if you like) than two hours. excellent. 

undoubtedly other media (news) outlets have picked something different from these two as the by default or ostensible "best" of last year (2023). someone somewhere shall have made a hardly seen film about how brilliant lesbians and/or the EU all are, and that is the film the likes of Guardian, Observer, Metro and so on will have triumphed. once again i have not seen either Napoleon or Killers Of The Flower Moon. both are films i hope are good, but how it all went very quiet about them once they actually got me released has me somewhat hesitant. 

hesitant would be a very good (as in accurate) way to describe my approach to Indiana Jones And The Dial Of Destiny. whereas i thoroughly enjoyed the original trilogy on release in the 80s, and still fondly consider Raiders Of The Lost Ark and The Last Crusade, i never really thought or felt further was needed. not a great deal of Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull said there was much, if any, story left to tell, did it? 

opportunity, and indeed temptation, existed at the time of its release to go and see it at the cinema, or if you like at the pictures. this i declined. mostly due to the reported running time, being given as north of two hours, but that was backed up with reviews (and comments) of it being rather (somewhat dull). quite a few people declined to see it too, which led (i read) to it being quite a financial disaster. oh. when i have asked people why they did not see it, some said "because it will be streaming on Disney+ soon", which proved to be the case. most, however, said "Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull", as in they had no wish to get f****d over again. i did stand and consider the purchase in the shop for a bit, but of course eventually i bought the video (disc), but also didn't rush to watch. 

it turns out that this film, Indiana Jones And The Dial Of Destiny, is actually pretty good. not exactly as great as the original three, but vastly superior to the 4th one. for context, it was entertaining viewing on Boxing Day morning (say around 10am), sat on the couch, when i could pause two or three (or 4) times and go for a cigarette. perhaps in a cinema it would have led to a numb backside and a yearning for it to end soon so i could appreciate Marlboro. 

without going into the plot (ancient lost relic of power sought after, etc), the "twist" at the end was sort of kind of worthy of that in Raiders Of The Lost Ark. that was my initial thought. on reflection, though, it did occur to me that the plot could be seen as a second rate Da Vinci Code (remember that?) knock off. either way, it works. 

now that they own vast swathes of cinema it will be interesting to see where, exactly, Disney goes in the pursuit of money. which is the only reason they make films. from what i can tell the Marvel films have reached saturation point and one of their major actors planned to be used for the next few years has got into some trouble. also, they have discovered that simple nostalgia is not a way to print money, with this one and the last two Star Wars films not going down too well. maybe they will just focus on making a quality product people actually wish to see, but far be it from me to suggest such. 

finally, then, or in conclusion for here, The Flash. sort of kind of linked to something in the previous paragraph, i believe this film "failed" mostly as one of the actors (i believe the ostensible title character, by default the protagonist) is now considered one of those "not nice" people what get boycotted, or cancelled in modern language. that's a shame, as i believe the "test audiences" ranted and raved at how excellent this film was. and they were not wrong, at all. 

truthfully i wasn't at all @rsed about this film. i am very much feeling fatigue from all these hero or super hero films. of course there was some curiosity about Michael Keaton returning to the role of Batman, but i assumed (as it turned out incorrectly) that all there was to that was right there in the trailers and related promotional material. both James and William spoke highly of it, so seeing it on sale for £8 (or a penny fewer than that) at HMV had me go sure, why not. 

glad that i did, really. this was excellent. as in really, really f*****g good. i have no interest at all in the character The Flash (or the actor), so it was just as well they decided to make this pretty much just a straightforward Batman film, in all but name. all the ingredients which led to the "superhero" boom at the box office are here - it's witty, perfectly paced, full of tense action (with surprises) and superbly acted by all. further, the plot features one of the best, more intelligent explorations of the challenges of messing about with time / history that i have seen. this is a film i shall certainly watch again. might even dig out the original two Keaton Batman films on the back of it. 

what a shame the ostensible lead did whatever he did, or got accused of whatever (no i have not read up, i am not particularly interested) it was that seems to have ended any chance of major success for this film. it would be fair to say that the DC comics films, at least since Dark Knight Rises (yet i really, really liked Man Of Steel) haven't won over audiences. this could have been a turning point for that, as truly this really was brilliant. unexpectedly so. 

phew. well, that's that for this post. six (6) films i was overall very glad to have had the chance to sit down and watch. but now, alas, duty (as in verk) calls. my chances of getting to watch all that many more films in an immediate sense are somewhat limited, but you never know. it may be so that i take the odd break here and there, and use that time to watch a few more. 

be excellent to each other!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

an e for an i, an i for an e

heya

just another observance (or sighting, look you see) from my travels. also a kind of, bit of object lesson in not assuming that what you see turns out to be what you saw. or something like that; a bit profound but with more better wording that i would seem incapable of would be nice. 

as fate would have it (or just a plain simple decision) i got to ride in the passenger seat for a while. or i was "shotgun", as our American friends like to term it. this allowed me to look more closely at my surroundings, and indeed take images (pictures) off of my phone with a camera welded to it. like, for instance, this one. 

you can probably guess what happened here, and why i scrambled (or rushed) to take images. it was indeed so that eye and mind combined to fill in things that were not there. so yes, i did in the first moment or so see this as "Jane Austen", and not the "Jane Austin" it actually is. oh. right. 

well, most, or the majority, of what i could write here would very much have needed that i to be an e, really. all sorts of comments would have been available, mostly related to using a celebrated author not known for her interest in electricity being used to endorse electrification. but, obviously, no. sure, i could speculate if this Austin of Jane had any association with (or connection to) either of the famous Steve Austin people, with six million dollar man of course being the best one. that feels like it would be a fair waste of your time, allowing for mine being there to waste. 

in regards of what exactly goes on at this place, well, i am not entirely sure. going on the signs and the description, probably teaching people how to put electric in (or on) the various railway lines what are all over our nation. putting electric on (or in) railway lines is, presumably, one of the many ways them what do the trains find reason to actually not have trains running. just as, say, that squatter mayor, Sadiq Khan, absolutely hates London (innit) and the people of the place, them what run the trains really hate the idea of trains running and people using them. very strange. 

right, well, if i see anything else of remote interest (and should we be honest this is a most curious benchmark for such) i shall be sure to present it here. what else would i do? 

be excellent to each other!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

restoration

hello there

not really (or quite) one of my moans about people what have gone done changed things which they should not have, to be honest. this is more a celebratory (albeit qualified, look you see) consideration of what appears to be someone putting things back to the way they were. or making a restoration of better times. 

i had reason to procure, or if you like purchase, some new shampoo. well, obviously new i suppose, for one would take as a given that there's not much of a second hand (or "pre loved") market for this. not that i was immediately "out" of shampoo, mind. the bottle i was currently using was close to a point of exhaustion, and i did have another ready anyway. but, well, one never knows what the next panic buy craze shall be, so i felt it best to get another.

delight, or sheer unbridled joy, descended upon me when i saw a most dearly beloved name back on the shampoo shelf. very much back where it belonged. yes, as you can (unusually) see above in the greater good and glory of Commodore 64 mode, the greatest shampoo of all, timotei, is back. kind of. i looked and alas, no, the pinnacle of timotei shampoo, the one what has lemon in it, appears not to have been restored. but i shall accept this as a step towards a return to this. 

long term, if not regular, readers shall be aware that i am a devout discipline in the school of thinking that the best (greatest) shampoo ever is the type what has lemon shoved in it. this is based on a casual comment passed by Jason Donovan (that one) made in an interview in the 80s, when he revealed that he was partial to such shampoo. i have endeavoured to use this type (shampoo with lemon in it) ever since, but sadly most manufacturers of the stuff have ceased this practice. 

this is a purifying shampoo, then, as one can read (reasonably) clearly in the VHS mode image above. my thinking, or assumption, is that green tea extract (rather than just green tea) might be some sort of new century variation on lemon. granted, it may not be, but i am prepared to try. also i am prepared to look for the address details of timotei on the bottle and write to them, asking if they have plans to once again shove lemon into the shampoo what they do. 

slowly and only in a few ways it is so that a return to more sensible times comes. even if only briefly there was those instances where we got marathon bars and opal fruits back with proper names. the decision to bring back timotei is, however, a bit of a game changer. once again we, the people of this nation, can use a proper shampoo. bravo. 

be excellent to each other!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

paradox shatner

greetings

it is quite rare that i get to watch much, if any, television on a sunday. whereas i am not really going to discuss why here, know that it doesn't particularly pertain to any sort of religious concern. just one of those things, look you see. 

on, or during, the rare instances when i have a sunday as my own (to do with what i will) then a particular treat is the one channel here (UK) that basically shows Columbo repeats all day every sunday. quite class it is. which is even better when they show one (for i believe there are two) episode featuring the magnificence of Shatner. 

sometimes it is so that when i am indeed left to my own devices on a sunday they don't show one of the two (or however many) episodes what he blessed with an appearance. happily i am now able to counter this. a recent trip to a charity shop saw me find, and immediately (more or less) purchase a video (disc) what has three (3) episodes of Columbo on it. one of them is the celebrated edition off of the 70s what has Shatner in it, as pictured above. so far as i am aware this was his first ever appearance in the show. 

why is this episode so celebrated? it just so happens that Shatner is cast in the role of playing the greatest ever actor what the world has witnessed in it. needless to say this causes some (mass) debate and heated conversation. many would argue such a role is an absolute breeze for him, for by just turning up and consenting to be filmed he has immediately portrayed the world's greatest actor doing his thing. others may (and do) disagree, suggesting that accepting Shatner (in character) as the world's greatest actor calls on too much of a suspension of disbelief; that it disparages other actors too much. let me let you guess which side of this conversation i am on. 

from what i recall Shatner agreed, or consented, to be in a second episode (or edition) of this particular show, Columbo, in the 90s. mostly, or for the most part, i get distracted by his dapper pencil moustache when i watch that one. but i think he played the world' greatest writer, or lawyer or doctor or something in that one. 

here is where i shall more or leave this, then. you are free to continue thinking of the Shatner paradox, or if you like paradox Shatner, though. i do (obviously), frequently. 

be excellent to each other!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

tolchocked by millicents

hi hi hi there droogies

well, no, that above is not true. it is simply not the case, look you see, that your friend and humble narrator, being moi, was assaulted by the constabulary. my choice of title was purely for needless dramatic purposes. appy polly lodgies. 

but still, you know, i did (indeed) have an encounter of sorts with a law enforcement official. recently, as in the past, not the future. i got stopped as part of what looked like a massive operation to catch people who may have been at the controls of a vehicle whilst intoxicated. or, in somewhat different words, they were doing a sting thing to try and catch drink drivers. 

pictured above, in the greater good and glory of Commodore 64 mode (of course), is the bit of the breathalyser test what i had to blow into. the member of the constabulary who gone done tested me said i could keep it as a souvenir. cheers for that, since my taxes had likely paid for it. quite a curious test thing, and it took me a few goes to register a reading. so as to avoid any further needless drama, indeed it was so that my reading was zero, or whatever it is that reflects no alcohol present in my system. had there been, well, i would have had serious words with who(m)ever manufactured my coffee. 

the vagaries of language come to the fore again. our friends in America reading this shall no doubt be confused (and bewildered) by the term "breathalyser". for them the spelling, for some reason, is breathalyzer. beyond getting rid of perfectly good "u" letters in words they do seem to have a tendency to replace "s" with "z" in seldom used (yet key) words. 

another look at the bit off of (or out of) the breathalyser what i was allowed to retain, then, but in this instance in VHS mode. no, i have no idea at all what i am supposed to do with it, beyond take a picture of it and place it here. 

did i mind, or object, to the constabulary stopping me and testing me so? not really. it is a minor inconvenience, true, but still, for the greater good, etc, if it helps get clearly dangerous drivers off the road, so much the better. 

be excellent to each other!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

don't do it

welcome frankie fans

yes, indeed, for the last two (or so) years i have suggested that no, i won't commemorate or celebrate the anniversary of certain gigs any further. for years i have done so, look you see, and there is perhaps a finite number of words i can command which are different to the ones used before. 

but here we are. it is so that on this date, at least in regards of the date this is published, i got to see Frankie Goes To Hollywood in a very real and live sense. well, this date in 1987, which i think (or believe to be) is now 37 (!!) years ago. one would think i would have lost this information from memory or mind, if the two are different, yet it would seem not. 

it might be if not prudent then wise for you to leave this post now, reading no further. well, no, by all means read, but the video (yes, we have got a video) below is unlikely to please or impress anyone. 

for those who have declined to heed the above, well, here is your reward. behold, for the video below presents fragments of me (moi), your humble narrator, performing a tribute (of sorts) to Frankie. done whilst out on the town on karaoke night. 

perhaps i should have taken, or found, the time to edit down some further sounds from the bootleg i have of the gig and added that instead of the above. or simply added no sound or video. still, done now. 

my memory of actual, proper Frankie doing Relax at the gig was Holly introducing it as "a blast from the past". that was 1987, barely 4 years after it was released and 3 years after the halcyon days when it was back in the chart (on sales alone, no streaming sh!t back then) at number 2, just behind Two Tribes by the same band, of course. well, if it was a blast from the past then, of what is it now?

should this sort of thing (ahem) be of interest to you then i would encourage you to look at posts i have made on this date over the years. one or two of them might be more better than this one. 

be excellent to each other!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

incident in a public lavatory

heya

no, no, no, not (so far as i am aware) that kind of incident, look you see. i have every confidence that my chum Spiros really enjoys the short term, mutually beneficial friendships what he strikes up with like minded men in general public restroom facilities but such isn't really my sort of thing. what i write of here, and indeed present images of, is an incident that i did not witness but can only wonder of. 

so, i was, i think, in a place called Marlborough. you would think that i would really (really) like such, going on how the spelling is close to Marlboro. for the most part it was all right, i suppose. people living there tend to be a bit full of themselves, and slightly @r5sey with one when one points out they are essentially a suburb of Swindon, and not some rather posh, exquisite province in its own right. 

as is (or would be) so often the case when i am on my travels, when in this place i felt a compelling need to visit a bathroom. i found, with the help of an associate, a suitable place where one, for a somewhat nominal and as it turned out optional fee, could do just that. 

quite a peculiar set up at public restroom facilities found, in truth. from what i could ascertain, or otherwise work out, one was required to pay a fee of 20p (or if you will a fifth of £1) if they wished to make use of the lavatory with the door locked. i did not think to try such, but it appeared that if one was happy to do as they will in there without a locked door, no coin(s) needed to be placed in the machine. oh. well, i opted for some privacy. 

let me refrain from speaking (or rather writing) of the specifics of what went on in there. the interest here was rather the sign what i saw as i stood there, generally doing my business (so to speak). it was one of those moments where i had to do a sort of double take, to check that what i believed i was reading was actually written there. indeed it was, as you can see in the above image, presented in the greater good and glory of Commodore 64 mode. and somewhat clearer below. 

where does one begin with this? most of the sign makes great sense, with the good people of Marlborough having no wish for their sewage system to become blocked like it is in that there London place. but, then, priority is given to (politely) requesting that people refrain from flushing tea bags down the toilet? taking as a given that tea bags are not some sort of euphemism in areas of Swindon, exactly how many people were engaging in the practice of flushing tea bags down the toilets to prompt or otherwise warrant this sign? and, frankly, why? i saw no facilities there to make a cup of tea, so i am assuming people were taking boxes of tea bags in and flushing away? 

indeed yes, i am aware of the (rather) clumsy if not poor phrase or sentence structure there, for it suggests that tea bags are regarded as "sanitary disposables". maybe they are there. weird. 

unfortunately i don't believe there's much in the way of other observations to add. at the least not from my side of this screen what you are looking at. do feel free to ponder on the above information, making of it what you will. 

be excellent to each other!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!