general annoyances in modern society

hello there

for a confession to start with (since this is the start, look you see) i was going to call this "absolute tw@ts in the present day". people tend to get a bit picky about such terms, however, so i thought i would go with a somewhat sanitised, if not censored, variation. but, well, you know what i mean, like. 

every day it is, alas, so that each and every one of us encounters someone who is being a complete and utter tw@t. the emphasis there is very much on being, as in it is a life choice they have made and not their natural state. with just a fraction of effort they could be more better. no, alas, they opt not to be. 

obviously this list is neither concise nor comprehensive, for such a list of such examples taken from all of a single day here in the UK would take up all of the space on all of the internet. to illustrate them i requested skynet (or cyberdine systems, or whatever) to generate some of them "ai" pictures. if you happen to look like anyone in them, what can i say, try and be less ("fewer") of a tw@t and our machine overlords might be kinder to you with future requests. 

in no particular order, then.......

PEOPLE WHO REQUEST RADIO STATIONS PLAY "MR BRIGHTSIDE"

just how the band The Killers, and this song in particular, became so massive is inexplicable insanity. absolutely everything about the band is dull, beige, banal and bland. it's like that thing from 1984 where the human spirit and soul is destroyed, with people only singing songs written by machine. a slightly less hardcore version of Coldplay is, i think, the best description of them. 

yet popular they are, and this horrid, rancid song is somehow one of (if not the) most played song in the UK this century. which goes some (considerable) way to explaining why i prefer the previous century. for some reason it is an extremely popular song at weddings. considering the lyrical content of it, well, presumably these days most people get married purely because they are looking forward to breaking up. 

radio stations, in particular BBC Radio 2, are not shy of playing this song frequently. or a couple of others by the same bland band, with the incomprehensible, idiotic Are We Dancer being played far too much. why on earth people, given the chance to request any song they like, ask for one that the station has probably played already that day, is baffling and the act of a right tw@t. 

by the way, anyone seething at my comments on this hideous song, before you attempt to defend it go and play Special K by Placebo, off of the Black Market Music album. note how The Killers appear to have very much "Ed Sheeraned (or whatever) it, right down to singing "jealousy" the way the superior band sings "gravity". 

CYCLISTS NOT USING CYCLE LANES

the general view is that cyclists are (dangerously) nearly as bad as vegans for being all full of themselves with their "oh look at me i am saving the planet" identity. strangely, to be potentially controversial, cyclists in that there London (innit) tend to be really decent. everywhere else in the land, however, not so. 

for some reason our beloved government has spent an absolute fortune (of all of our tax money) making an exhaustive set of cycle lanes everywhere. a problem with this is, outside of London (innit), cyclists simply refuse to use them. daily i encounter cyclists still doing their thing on the road with an empty cycle lane right next to them. 

i wonder what would happen to moi, and my driving licence, if i went "well, yeah, i know there is a road i am supposed to drive on, but i want to drive on that cycle lane, so f*** off i am doing that". fine, perhaps? most likely points on my licence and maybe a custodial sentence for dangerous driving. no, i am not really one for the "test and tax" cyclists as some are, but they damned well should be issued with fines for not using their designated lanes. 

DINNER BLOCKERS

every single f*****g dinner (lunch, posh) break it is always the f*****g same. you get half an hour or so to grab a meal deal (Tesco best, Morrisons close second, Sainsburys if you wish to pay more for less) and eat it. yet when you go to the meal deal section there is always a bunch of people, invariably the elder members of society and normally on mobility scooters or with an empty trolley, blocking the sandwiches for no apparent reason. 

can they not do something else? i mean it's wonderful to see an active sense of community, but really, do they all have to meet up in front of the sandwiches down the supermarket between 12 noon and 1pm every single day? part of me is, oddly, sad that certain life choices mean i am (highly ) unlikely to make it to retirement age. i sometimes think it must be quite class to block people from going about their day, even if it is just to hear the sighs of resignation. 

also, could someone not do something to make the cushions on these mobility scooters a bit more comfortable? that would (surely) mean they all stop looking like a proper bunch of (right) miserable b@stards. unless they are all in constant excruciating pain and their facial expression shows just how courageous they are being attempting to stop people purchasing a deli meat feast sandwich. bravehearts, the f*****g lot of them, give them all an MBE for their sacrifice. 

CLUB 40

let it (please) be said that i am someone who(m) recognises speed limits as a limit, as in not a target. there is, however, quite the difference in going slightly slower than the limit on a road and doing some 20 to 30 miles below it. welcome, ladies and gentlemen, to Club 40. 

minimum age requirement to join Club 40 appears to be 80, although every now and then a (slightly) younger person can join. for other expectations you need to be absolutely terrified of the idea of driving, and must always appear petrified as you clasp your hands on the steering wheel. under no circumstances whatsoever must you ever deviate from the speed of 40 (forty) miles per hour. often i have been sat (to be honest, stuck) behind one of them and watched in disbelief as they have maintained a 40 speed all the way through a 60 zone, when it drops to 30 and then also (near schools!) drops to 20. either they have been told that doing anything other than 40 is illegal (and/or likely to kill them) or they have totally misunderstood the film Speed. 

where are these people going at such a consistent speed? from what i can tell normally it's just to a particular supermarket or shop, at least a dozen miles from home, to buy the Daily Express or similar, from a retailer who(m) hires what they (the Club 40 members) consider to be people of an appropriate ethnic/nationality/religious background. bring back paper rounds and get them off the road. 

BROADCASTERS

you know how them Scandinavians (or whoever it was) aren't allowed to go and club baby seals to death for their skins? or that the Japanese are not allowed to harpoon whales any more? we should really consider not losing their skills, instead letting them loose to perform their art on anyone who plays any awful sounding thing at all on the tinny, crappy speaker on their phone in a public place. 

i say "anyone" but there is a type. normally it's quite sad, bald angry looking men, resplendent with nonsensical tattoos intended to make them look "hard". should you politely request that they turn it down, or preferably off, they shall of course (invariably) attempt to showcase these "hard" credentials by shouting angrily at you, or even offering you out for a fight. 

people who style themselves as broadcasters are usually found either on public transport or in hospital waiting rooms. quite often they have young children with them, who(m) they are steadfast in ignoring as they focus on whatever sh!t they are playing. actually, i have taken to looking upon them with something akin to sympathetic eyes. nearly always they have clearly done a custodial sentence, presumably for spousal abuse, petty theft (and/) or non-payment of a fine. with their effete pretty boy looks they were likely quickly passed around for use as the prison b!tch, and so maybe playing utter tripe to annoy people is just their security blanket away from the big boys in the cells. 

DOORWAY PONDERERS 

look, just f*** off out of it, will you? please? for some reason there has been a massive upsurge, or if you like proliferation, who believe that narrow paths and doorways is the place to stop and have a little think about goodness knows what. never mind anyone behind (or in front) of you just trying to get on with what they are doing, you want to stop and consider things so everyone needs to stop and accommodate this. 

yes, to an extent, these people are sometimes part of Club 40 or the Sandwich Blockers, but not exclusively. it seems age is not an essential part of just randomly stopping and contemplating life choices. we are too polite under the laws of the English way of doing things, if we simply had the will and the courage to barge them out of the way they would soon learn to cease doing it. 

SMOKE GENERATORS

as an old school smoker (sorry) i do find it hilarious that, somehow, "vaping" is the more better thing. it strikes me as these things must be even more addictive than cigarettes, for "vapers" appear to have to have their device permanently in their hands. 

despite all of the no smoking laws very clearly being applicable to e-cigarettes, vapes and what have you, for some reason vapers believe they are exempt. all too often i have seen them have a puff (as it were) in buildings which are clearly no smoking zones. much like the broadcasters no one dare say anything to them. just this last week someone was stood doing it (vaping) in a supermarket. 

of course if you question them you get the "it's harmless it is just flavoured water (or liquid)" response, like some valid defence. it might well be harmless, but it is not in any way, shape or form pleasant. most of the scents for these vapes these days are particularly repugnant. usually they are a far from subtle blend of elderberry, strawberry bubble-gum and how one imagines Pat Butcher's vagina smelt during the more prolific business end of her sexual career. just because it is not as harmful as they assure us second hand cigarette smoke is does not mean it is pleasant or welcome. go f*** off to the proper areas designated like (nearly all of) us smokers accept we have to, thanks. 

well, that will do for this list. quite (or very) likely i have missed off one or two you also get annoyed encountering. perhaps a follow up post shall, well, follow. 

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

one shot

howdy pop pickers

well, it's another November 5th, so it must be time for a commemoration (or celebration) of the night i gone done seen Tin Machine. Newcastle Mayfair, November 5 1991, look you see. so that's now 35 years ago. 

as ever for this annual post i am immensely grateful for the kindness of others. two people reached out to me, taken by (or simply acknowledging) my passion for this gig, providing me with bootlegs of it. whilst the tape (actual source) of it is quite decent, it is the video i usually show off here. much more better quality than you might think, considering the size (and limitations) of camcorders in the early 90s, plus the challenges of getting them past security. 

time takes (a cigarette, and) memories away. no, however, i shall never ever forget being all that close to David Bowie, thanks. or the rest of the band for that matter. certainly Bowie was the draw, but Hunt, Tony and Reeves were quite the characters and outstanding musicians. still are, of course, sorry. 

never sure of when shall come the "last" celebration of this gig has had me of a mind to dabble with something akin (or quasi like) the "subversion" Bowie was frequently amused by. so, after all the clips and what not i have shared before, here you go with the opening song that night, One Shot. 

pretty sure that One Shot got released as a single in some countries (America, i think), but not here in the UK. we just got You Belong In Rock N Roll and Baby Universal off the second album, of which the gig i went to was the tour to support / promote. 

considering the obvious and understandable commercial drive to release and/or re-issue everything what Bowie had gone done (like this one, recently) it is and is not a surprise there's been no "revision" of the music what Tin Machine did. the no (or lack) of surprise comes down, i think, to "cloudy" rights issues. whereas one label (EMI) released their debut, it was another (i think now no longer in existence) which released the second and the quite ho hum live album. although Tin Machine II did get a reissue a couple of years ago (or so) i seem to recall "issues" and "debates" about who(m) would be due what royalties from it. this was not, no matter what some lazy journalists and those who like easy targets may have you think, simply a Bowie vanity project; it was a functional, working band. 

regarding any sort of "reappraisal" of Tin Machine, well, i did my bit with this post years ago, although i was always of the view the songs were class. ever since we, the world, lost Bowie there's been a movement to declare just about everything he did as absolute genius, whether such is true or not. thus far this has not extended to Tin Machine. quite the shame, to be honest, as several songs off of the band would be considered as "up there" with his best (although not greatest) had they come out as just David Bowie songs. 

for those reading of my celebration of the day (night, if you will) i saw Tin Machine for the first time and are sufficiently interested to read, see and/or hear more, nice one. here is a link to the post from this time last year, which features a memory i am sure not to forget. down at the bottom of it you will find links to other moments from the very same gig. 

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

partial train success

now then

a relatively rare post which sees me not complaining about the sorry state of public transport in this country. well, fair's fair, look you see, and it's not unreasonable to give credit when it is (at the least) half or partially due. 

fairly recently we had a quite bad storm. it was one of them named ones, i believe they called it Storm Bolero or Storm Bono or something. they have reasons for giving them names, but (alas) i cannot recall what such are and, to be honest, i am not particularly interested. likely some marketing thing, or just a bit of fun for those who like to keep journals and what have you. 

usually, as i have discussed (oh so) frequently here, them what do the trains normally don't need a perfectly valid reason to not do what they are paid an insane amount to do. in previous posts, for instance, there has been cases where a train being cancelled was because one (1) staff member declined to come into work. far be it from me to suggest that you would expect a combination of a growing unemployment situation and a fairly large corporation would mean that they could easily employ people to cover for such. also that their entire service appears to hinge on just one person is alarming. 

still, that day was a rare instance of them actually having a decent reason to cancel. whereas trains are quite heavy and could (in all likelihood) withstand a bit of rain and wind, being fair there was the safety of people going to and from stations to consider. when i saw the information board (pictured above) move from an "expected" actual arrival to "delayed", i thought, well, i have been here before, this would usually end in cancellation.  

wishing to avoid the costs of alternate transport i waited for a bit. for those alternates, well, in the name of "efficiency" or what have you, there are no buses where i need to go on a Sunday (or public holidays for that matter), so it would have been a (very) expensive taxi or slightly less ("fewer") expensive uber thing. so yes, i took some selfies, and the next picture is one so you have been warned. 

no that is not how my hair would usually (or normally) look, as eager as i would be to wander around with it all looking quite Sigue Sigue Sputnik. the picture emphasises just how windy it was, i suppose. also the coat was required due to it being somewhat nippy, with the odd flourish of rain. 

merrily, or if you will surprisingly, the train did (indeed) turn up. only (or just) 8 (eight) minutes after the scheduled time. since there was no connecting train i needed to get this wasn't all that much of an issue, so i was mostly simply relieved to see it arrive. which again is a sorry statement on exactly how bad public transport has become, for one feels relief and joy at it actually turning up. for those keen on such things here you go, a bit of video of the train arriving. 

it was with some (curiosity based) interest i observed, at the next station, three or four blokes dressed in safety gear and carrying chainsaws got on board. as it turns out this was quite ominous, or for those that like such terms a bit of "foreshadowing" what was to be. 

anyway, on with the journey. pretty decent (by the usual standards, they use the oldest, barely serviceable trains they can find for the route i use) trip, and as usual i took a picture of a landmark that would be familiar for family around the world. well, why would i not also add it here. 

giving credit once more they "made up" time on the journey, presumably by going a bit faster than would be usual from (as it were) station to station. brief chat with the lady what checks tickets, and i suspect that it is such a person who is routinely "off" when they cancel trains, but otherwise no real concerns or points of interest on the ride. 

sadly (or alas) no such joy was mine for getting back to my lodgings in this era of exile. as would be usual i checked to see if my return train was running at all (and if so was it close to on time) when i got this message saying no, it was not. 

hmn. was, i wondered, the tree blocking the railway anything (at all) to do with the chaps with the chainsaws that i saw? possibly. likely not, to be fair, as on my strolls i had seen quite a few trees torn from the ground. evidently the storm was a good deal stronger ("less fewer") overnight. would i be shocked if the tree on the tracks and the blokes with chainsaws on my earlier train were in some way connected? not really, not really, no. but i can't prove anything. 

yes, i did indeed get home to lodgings, with thanks to my now former (considerably) better half. again, then, one can hope that once our brilliant new prime minister has urgently addressed the most pressing problem in society - that of football fans not being able to drink alcohol whilst sat in a stadium - he has at least a gander at issues such as a lack of reliable public transport.

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

until the life i knew comes to my house and says hello

hello there

easily the best thing about this blogger (or blogspot, look you see) is that it does not cost me a single solitary penny. nice one, who(m)ever does it (google, i think), for it has been somewhere north of twenty years (!) i have been using it. and shall continue to do so. rarely do i hear from the powers that be, and as point of fact i think the last time i had done so (before the reason for this post) was when someone wished to show off just how much free time they had by bewilderingly claiming some posts had adult content in them. no, they don't, but anyway. 

recently, though, they did get in touch (via email) to caution me that some videos were being deleted. oh dear, i thought. has someone gone ahead and complained? maybe, though, it was some sort of copyright thing, although as this is not for profit (note the lack of adverts) i presumed not. no, indeed not, it was all just that some videos i had added were not playing proper, so would be deleted. 

no big deal i assumed, as they were likely ones that anyone interested in would probably have seen, and if we are (entirely) honest the quality of my videos generally doesn't say "preserve for future generations". however, they did send screenshots of the videos, along with a list of them, and when i saw which ones i went "oh". 

glancing at the list (and screenshots) had me go oh, ok, one or two of them are really no loss, but then my heart sank a bit when i saw the above was also due to go. it just happens to be the moment my sons experienced snow for the first time. as the device that was filmed on (i am guessing blackberry phone) is long since gone and, to be frank, f*** knows where the back up would be, i decided to have a look and see if the video could be retrieved and saved. 

delighted (as in very happy) to say that indeed it could, and if all went well the saved version of it should be below in a playable video format. although when i went to the original post i could play it anyway, but no matter, here it is again, then. 

backing up, or otherwise retrieving, the videos was and was not straightforward. to get them i had to go and  back up all of the media from all of my blog, which i (as it turns out rightly) suspected would be a lot. the grand total of such was 8GB for context for the older readers here, well, that's a staggering 5.826 standard 3.5" discs you would need. once all of that was downloaded (as 8 separate 1GB files) i had to go through them to find the videos. handy they sent me the video names. 

perhaps no bad thing, really, since how much (exactly) can it hurt to have north of 20 years of doing this all backed up? well, it did hurt a little, due to ongoing internet issues as documented here with the less than stellar service EE are providing. still, done now. 

yes, it probably (more than likely) would have been an idea to add these back here in a chronological order, or to at least link to the original posts. no, not really. above is the screenshot they gave me for the splendid VHS mode video i made of Buckingham Palace. quite likely there are (considerably) more better videos of the place, but here we are. 

now that i think, though, if for some reason HMKC3(PO) is reading this (and one suspects he has better things to do) and wishes to add this video on to the official web thing, well, sure, why not. i mean, it is his house after all. 

doing the non-linear thing, then, and back a few years prior to my uncommissioned filming of Buckingham Palace and on to a nice spot of cricket. i am assuming (or taking as a given) that i wrote loads around the original video upload, so let me try and limit the words. 

some cricket, then, in the form of the eldest of my (known) children putting on a batting display against the team off of Hartlepool.  the screenshot i got sent first, and no, not sure why, exactly i am adding on screenshots when it is only the videos needed. because they are there, i suppose. 

video as promised, then..........

it isn't so that i spend any time actually looking at my own blog posts. at the very least it is all rather a lot less ("fewer") than one may think. other than not being able to read my own writing without an innate sense of "cringe", the whole idea feels vaguely vain. more than once i have been told by people close that i shall, one day, die alone and plagued by regret. probably true, but up to now it has not occurred to me to sit and look at all which i have lost. don't deliberately avoid it or what have you, simply don't think to do it. 

and on that happy, uplifting note, some vibes, man. yes, music. 

this video is down as the second part (or part two) of Simon & Oscar out of Ocean Colour Scene doing arguably their most famous (for many best) song, The Day We Caught The Train. i have certain sentimental hygiene reasons to love the song, but not my favourite. 

saying the same as before (once more) there is going to be totes better quality footage out there, but we are here now, so..........

 

really good gig that, as was the second time i saw them, and Steve Craddock on his own. strangely the crowd at the full tilt Ocean Colour Scene gig (for some reason) treated it like a tea party, spending much of the evening chatting (possibly gossiping) rather than, you know, digging the music. 

couple more videos, then, what were marked for deletion (or termination). first of the last two, for i am indeed using the classical understanding of couple, is Uncle Colin doing his thing with a pancake. 

every now and then one must let art just speak for itself, and i suspect that is what the best thing is to do with the above video. 

finally, unless some other videos of (flexible) consequence get identified as being deleted, one that i think was off of New Zealand, and seems to be of a house being moved. 

right, well, that shall do. if you went to any of the original posts for these videos, were disappointed to find that the videos were not there (or did not work) and then took the time to search to see if i had added them again, well, thanks very much.

oh, one last video. i really could not (at all) bear the idea of the boys seeing (and feeling) snow for the first time vanishing as a video, so i also took the precaution of doing a pirate version off screen......

isn't the above technically me pirating myself? 

that will, then, do (most decidedly so) do for now. eventually i shall work out how to add videos which were filmed in the future here, but for now i can say i am certain more off the past will be added. 

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

halloween

heya

i have not, alas, found any further pictorial evidence of moi (with or without my siblings, look you see) marking the day of halloween. to be honest it would be that 50%, or if you will half, of the two (2) pics i have posted around this time of each year were ones that i was unaware of being a thing. should that make any sense.

mostly my thinking was to simply not bother doing any sort of halloween specific post this year, for it is not a thing that i am all that bothered about. yes, it is lovely for them that do go full tilt for it, and it's as good an excuse as any to watch a horror film and/or home wedding video. but then i noted (observed, as it were) something most decidedly "on topic" at my lodgings in this era of exile. 

for reasons unknown (there was no one to ask) someone had left two "carved" pumpkins by the communal refuse area, or if you will the big bins. really impressive looking, well made ones too, although no, you would not immediately appreciate that with my penchant for low quality, distorted images. just makes things different, doesn't it. 

to the best of my knowledge, no, it is (simply) not so that anyone has previously left any sort of halloween stuff on display near lodgings. a period north of five (5) years that is, now. perhaps someone has recently moved in and their "thing" was to (for whatever reason) carve pumpkins and leave them near the bins at their place of residence. 

everything about them and their placement suggested they would not be long for where they were, and so i thought it best to document them. well, take these (odd mode) pictures at least, which you have to concede is a kind of means of documenting them. sure enough within one day (or so) one of them, i think the one you see to your right, was smashed all over, either via malice or from (more likely) a car or similar vehicle twatting it one (no, not me). other one just disappeared, which may or may not have been via a spooky, eerie halloween style event. 

right, that shall do for this. my compliments to who(m) ever went right ahead and gone done these, for they were rather smart to have a gander at. 

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

act iii now signed, kind of

howdy pop pickers

something of a nostalgia post this, look you see, for it recalls something what happened, or if you will occurred, as long ago as last month. it is possibly (or potentially) not all that interesting, but as we know little wisdom exists in leaving it to me determine what is and what is not such. 

moving on, then, and this (as the title gives every indication) is all to do with further adventures concerning the (mostly) decent recent album off of Kasabian, act iii. whereas that link will take you to my findings that it was quite good i am not sure it was really (or truly) that good as to warrant me owning three (3) different copies of it. but, or and yet, here we are. or i am. 

it was, if it is anything, an "accident" that i purchased three (3) copies. considering i only bought the one copy in the first place because it was quite cheap, well, welcome to my world. the second copy was purchased entirely by accident, for i wasn't at comprehensively aware that when i bought a ticket for a warm up show they are doing i got a copy of the tape (disc) too. for the third (3rd) copy of it, well, guilty. in the week it was released, and obviously part of a strategy to make sure it went to number one in the charts (which it did) they were selling a digital copy with some extra tracks (decent ones) for south of £5, with the added allure of a signed card off of the band which would come personalised. so yes i purchased it and yes, as you can see above (and below) it turned up. 

eventually turned up. just a week or so ago. actually i had (more or less) forgotten it was coming, bar that i got an email a couple of weeks ago apologising for the delay. lovely touch that it came, and excellent that it is of a shape (or size) that it slots into the tape (compact disc) box (cover), where no doubt it will remain and be forgotten about. pretty sure all three (3) of the post-Tom Kasabian tapes in my collection all have some form of signed stuff with them. 

once it was really quite rare to get a tape (or disc) signed off of the artist. you basically had to meet them with the item or, if you were lucky, post it to them and they would sign and post back. now, for better or worse, it has become "common". never really thought i would say this, but i am really very tired of getting every new release off of the Manics being signed by them. just stop it. as in for their last release i quite specifically (deliberately) ordered a version not signed, but then they went and sent a signed copy of it anyway. 

as for the actual act iii tape (disc), oddly i played it again about a week or so ago, mostly as it was sat on top of the pile of tapes (discs) next to my stag. indeed the quality does hold up after all this time, but not sure it will be played all that much more. still, decent record. 

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

quite decent reading

hello reader

so here we go once again. i have (relatively recently) finished reading two (2) books, look you see, and so i feel obliged (or compelled) to write of them here. certainly it remains very much so that i have absolutely no idea who(m) may be interested in such words, but here we are. 

as the title gives you every indication, then, two particularly enjoyable books this time. yes indeed i do read all of them "to the end", even if they are clearly not good (or plain dreadful). part of me always wishes to see it through, to understand why a "bad" book made it to print. 

usual, then, as in a picture of the two, some spoiler free comments, and then more detail. with (of course) the more detail bits running a real risk of "spoilers".

from left to right, then, or the other way around (vice versa, if you like) should i have that one wrong, and it was so that The Knight's Pledge off of Scott Mariani was "frustratingly good", because it felt way better to have read than i expected. meanwhile The Widow off of John Grisham is brilliant. not, i must add, all flawless, but up there with his finest. 

if it was so that you needed another spoiler warning then this sentence is for you. 

to begin where i did with these two (2) is to do that (begin) with the second Will Bowman novel off of Scott Mariana, The Knight's Pledge. actually not (entirely) sure on provenance. well, certainly Tesco, but don't recall if it was their £4.50 "book of the week" thing or if it was slightly south of that when purchased with the Daily Mail. possibly the former, maybe the latter. 

plot? after seeking (and gaining) the revenge he sought Will Bowman remains bound by oath (or what have you) to King Richard and the Crusades. he commits an act of exceptional bravery to save much of the fleet as they head to (attempt to) reclaim Jerusalem, and for reward he is made a knight. however, Will's unflinching, unbowed morals bring him into dangerous conflict with a King who does not tolerate hearing "no"......

earlier (rather than later) i said this was "frustratingly good". by this i mean that i wasn't really expecting to enjoy it all that much, especially with the start being something of a pedestrian plod. yet as it went on, the better it got, and the more i found myself going no hang on, i am quite enjoying this. pretty sure i have the third one sat here in the "to read" pile somewhere, and that one might get moved up a bit as a consequence of this one being what it was. 

what parts did i enjoy? mindful (once more) of the spoiler warning, there was an ace bit where Will and his chums were led into a trap which took the form of a crocodile infested river. a creature none of them would ever have seen before and had scant (if any) knowledge. it just happened to be a rather enjoyable section to read. no massive "literary value" or what have you, but, you know, reading is supposed to be a fun thing to do. 

not sure if the Will Bowman books have been "as" successful as the Ben Hope ones, but then i wouldn't have the first idea of what books of his sold how many. the above, which i spotted, though, might suggest that the Bowman books have not "caught on" as much as he may have hoped, since we appear now to be in a world where Ben Hope "prequels" exist. oh, sorry, as per the cover, origin stories. no, i did not purchase, i believe i am all Ben Hope-d out, thanks. 

bit of an odd provenance story on The Widow off of John Grisham. whereas it turned out that it was on offer at Tesco for £4.50 (with a club card), for some reason i purchased it the moment i saw it, at Morrisons, for £6.50. no, i have no idea why i was not a bit more patient and just waited until i was at Tesco, it is not like i immediately started reading it. 

having already given it a good (great) review earlier, i shall try and do some plot stuff. mostly, though, i went into it without reading the back cover, and would strongly suggest you do the same. but, if you insist, Simon Latch is a so so lawyer, doing mundane things in "middle America", when an elderly lady approaches him to do a will. he discovers that the lady is tres (as in extremely) wealthy, and her existing will was done in such a way that the lawyer who(m) prepared it did very well out of it all. he decides that she needs a much fairer one, and that he needs to do rather well out of it.......

the characters are the real treat here. one does not get any nice, neat clear cut hero or villain. all of them have serious flaws and faults. really, for the first couple of hundred pages (or so) you don't particularly like any of them, yet their story (actions, what have you) are remarkably engrossing. it's on a par with, from the top of my head, The Firm, The Rainmaker and to a slight (with one obvious exception) extent also The Chamber in that you don't really "care" for anyone depicted, yet you are very quickly invested in finding their fate. bravo, John Grisham. 

with respect to my occasional "100 page test", as in how feasible does a plausible ending "feel" coming once you get to one hundred pages to go, well, as i said, it is not a flawless novel. although the conclusion is (highly) satisfactory, a great many things get "crammed in" at the end. not contrived or forced, but all the same with a feeling of a greater rush when compared to the pace of the rest of the novel. oh well. indeed this does feature "social commentary" off of Grisham for some things, the nature of which i shall refrain from stating, but it is his book. quite a few twists, turns, false leads, misdirection and what have you. actually, a brilliant novel, and i would not hesitate to give to anyone to read. 

righty-ho, that's that, and of course i finish off with a look at the backs of the novels, which is quite clever when i have suggested that you do not read it in the case of The Widow. very much doubt that you would be able to make out all that much of the text anyway. 

once more, and as ever, many thanks (indeed) for taking the time to read this. should it have been of any use at all, nice one!

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

dim traces of connection

greetings

oh dear. this post shall, alas, be seen by some as quite the moan and groan. or whine, look you see. it is all with fairly good reason, i believe. that said, if you by any chance you are here for confirmation, if not outright affirmation, that EE are a bunch of f*****g useless ****s (as in a real shower of sh!t), well, then, you might well enjoy this one. 

under no circumstances at all would i willingly have made use of EE. several years ago i was a pretty much content (as in no issues) customer of a phone network called Orange, for they were the only ones that offered packages (so i was told) for BlackBerry phones. you know, proper secure phones before everyone got all excited about "touch screen" and so Android and Apple. anyway, they got bought by EE, so i "had" to change to them, and for several months (!) they made a right mess of my account. 

moving to the present day (the here and now) and i have been a very happy customer (for internet) with someone called PlusNet (or similar). in all of the time north of five (5) years in my era of exile i only ever had one (1) issue, and that was resolved within a ten (10) minute call. and then, in technical terms, something something something, telephone lines being deactivated, something something something, the only way to retain the internet connectivity as i need it is to move to EE who(m) is owned by the same people anyway. fine, i said. well, no, obviously, as much as a complete sack (or shower) of sh!t i knew EE to be, i trusted PlusNet. them saying it was a straightforward switch was good enough.  

not so, of course. above is an image of my new EE "router" that does not actually "route" or whatever it is supposed to do (connect to the internet, perhaps). don't be fooled by the blue light you can see, for it really is a case of lights on, no one home. or not connected. actually, they get really p!ssed if you call it a blue light. the staff have to call it an aqua one, and they get in trouble if they don't call it that. further they have to correct you on the shade. how lovely that they have a chap who is clearly good with colours, and probably a friend of Dorothy, so high up. oh, if only they were quite so interested in matters such as the service they are supposed to provide. 

anyway, at first, it seemed (appeared) to be relatively painless. i kept getting updates on my shiny new, pastel black router, and could even arrange for it to be sent to one of them "delivery box" things. when it landed i fetched it and left it sat in the box until such time as they told me it was ready to go, or if you so wish ready to rock and roll. 

the day dawned that they said my services would go active. i got this text at 12:32pm (as in nearly half past noon) whilst out at verk. lovely, i said to myself, will sort it out when home and what have you. 

except (of course) no, not at all. i plugged it in and just kept getting a solid blue ("aqua") light, showing connected, switching to a rather sinister orange (no shade given to me) light flashing off and on. this was on repeat, and the connection went off and came on with all the changes of colours. 

gave this performance (or what have you) a couple of hours and went "no, something is busted" and called EE. whereas i did not know it then, what happened was i got (of course) fobbed off. they assured me that the services would not be "proper fully on" until 11:59pm, or if you will a minute before midnight. as i could recall them saying something (vaguely) like that i went fair enough, but did ask them to explain how the statement "it's go time - your broadband service is up and running" was meant to be interpreted as "no it is not". they had no answer. 

on to the next day, then, and guess what. if you guessed that it was still going from a blue ("aqua") light to a deeply unpleasant flashing orange one, you are correct. here is some video of it. 

further they also sent me a bill for my direct debit, which included a £30 "delivery" and/or "connection" fee. a fee i was assured, and they record the calls, would be waived, as it was an enforced change, for there was no f*****g way i would have knowingly and willingly chosen EE. 

yes, then, i called once again, mostly to ask what (the f***), exactly, they were doing charging me for something they unequivocally said i would not be charged for, but also to mention that the connection was still not working. obviously they were not interested in discussing the incorrect charge, just all excited about how it (the internet) wasn't working. cutting some of the fat for you and they said they would send an engineer out "as soon as possible", which was a trifle tricky with my verk requirements. surprisingly they were somewhat (at least partially) sympathetic to news that i might have had to get an arm amputated on the Saturday morning, so arranged for a chap to come out Saturday afternoon. with the requisite assurances that he would totes mend it, which of course turned out to be bullsh!t.

exactly how well did the engineer visit go? not. i spent somewhere close to 2 (two) hours on the phone to some particularly useless b@st@rds at EE on Saturday night, gave it a rest on Sunday and then, mostly because of the right f*****g mess the useless ones made on Saturday, spent even longer on the phone to them on Monday night. observe the call duration time on the below screenshot. 

what the engineer did was (more or less) exactly what they had me do. you know, the usual sh!t of switch it off and then back on, unplug it, plug it back in and reset it. so he came out to do what i had gone done and agreed there was an issue. apparently, in the name of efficiency, they have to have one of their engineers come and do this before they can "escalate" it to the tw@ts at "Open Reach", for the issue is their cables and they need to fix it. these would be the cables that worked perfectly fine for north of five years before they "made a change" to switch to EE. 

i am going to trim some fat (waffle). surprisingly the useless b@stards i spoke to Saturday were not entirely so, for they managed (somehow) to arrange for a "4G mini hub" to be sent and delivered on Monday as an "interim" solution. alas, it turned up with no ethernet (no idea how you pronounce it either) ports, so i cannot connect my verk stuff, and it was not activated. so, i called asking how (exactly) i connected it to the pastel black router so i could do what i needed with the internet, and also could they make it work. 

no and (indeed) no. at first they claimed it would "only" activate on Wednesday. i asked them what was the point of sending it as an "interim" and (admittedly impressively quick) solution if it was not going to work for 48 hours. this i likened to seeing someone on fire, presenting them with a fire extinguisher and assuring them not to worry, i would be back in a couple of days to fill that up for them. much of the eventually north of three (3) hour phone call was spent breaking them down until they confessed yes, they had sent me a dud "4g mini hub". brilliant. 

presently, then, i have two (2) pieces of sh!t from EE, with neither of them having any inclination or interest at all in connecting to the internet. for some reason they are now sending a third (3rd), which for poetics i am inclined to call a third turd from them. by the way, it was a lovely touch of them to try and sell me a different service during the call, one which would have cost double what i am already paying for not getting with no assurance it would work, since they have to fix that which they have busted first. which is only going to potentially happen in a week or so. 

how and i uploading (publishing) this? they have given me 250GB of data on my phone and shown me the magic of "tethering" my phone to my PC. no use for the verk device i really (urgently) need to connect, so they are still going to be paying me daily compensation, but it will do for now. 

every time i call EE (and this is far too frequently) i get told they are the UK's "best" or "leading" network. i truly fear for who(m)ever uses the second place one in that race, presumably their means of connecting to the internet involves sh!tting in your own hands and then clapping. which, on the basis of my experiences, might be more effective than what EE offers. 

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

six videos

heya

so yes, indeed, i have watched another 6 videos (discs), look you see. actually have more than a few that i very much wish to watch soon, but figured rather than doing yet another "mega" post it would be best, if not preferable, to throw assorted musings about them thus far at the internet. and why not.

no, of course i don't particularly feel like my views on films, or anything, are "oooh, listen to me, i know my stuff" in terms of value. we are, however, all here now, so might as well make the best of it. indeed, as you shall note from the below picture, there was (considerably) more Russell Crowe than i had realistically (ever) intended to watch. 

how, overall, were the six (6) films? just realised that's a fairly pointless question to have posed, as they are somewhat different (if not wildly so) in style. none of them was particularly "oh wow, this is quite class", one was "erm" and just the further one (1) was complete sh!t. but, well, moving on. that is moving on but with an obligatory ** POSSIBLE SPOILERS AHEAD ** warning. 

i actually can't recall the provenance of my copy of the video (disc) of The Nice Guys, which is indeed a film people have been urging me to watch for several years now. likely i got it down the market as part of the "3 for £2" selection, although i really rather suspect it was off of a charity shop, where it might or may well have been 3 (or 4) for £1. does it matter? 

quite likely the "best" of the ones i have watched of late, which is something of an ominous sign. i mean i could see why so many people thought it was good (great, in fact) and i kind of did enjoy it. there was, however, the distraction of this being very much a Shane Black film, and one which was extremely similar to another Shane Black film, the (vastly) superior Kiss Kiss Bang Bang. as good as Russell Crowe and Ryan Gosling are they are not Val Kilmer and Robert Downey jnr good, at least not so far as they were in that one from, i think, 2005. 

the "similar but different" plot and characters meant i often lost focus, to tell the truth. it isn't always bad to rehash something that worked, but if you are going to do that then you have to be really, really careful not to let the audience for the new one think of just how much better the original spin on it all was. on the one side it was, for an example, a bit "oh" when one clocked that Joaquin Phoenix's oscar winning turn in Joker was effectively him rehashing the character he played in You Were Never Really Here from a year or so before, but then Joker was a vastly superior film. i really rather suspect (or think) Nice Guys started off as an idea for a (much wished for) sequel to Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, or at least as another film Shane Black could make with Val and Robert. so then yes, i get why for a decade or so people have been saying they should have made a sequel to this one too. 

for some reason i think i have actually watched Vault Of Horror within the last ten (10) years, give or take, as some of it was vaguely familiar. yet much of it was not. possibly because i can remember seeing the exact trailer for Cannibal Holocaust that is on this disc and being as surprised (again) that so much of what made the film infamous (and an easy thing for the censors to ban) was on display. provenance is my preferred video (disc) market stall, i believe i paid £2 for it.

anyway, as for this film itself, it is one of those "anthology" things which was peculiarly popular for horror stuff in the 70s. suppose it kind of  has been revived, what with the V/H/S films doing pretty much the same job. this one follows the generic pattern of several similar anthology horror films from the 70s, which is a group of apparent strangers are by chance drawn together and share some macabre story. 

each of the stories (i think five in total) are quite punchy short, being some ten to fifteen minutes in length. as in they were clearly an interesting story but not, alas, of enough substance or interest to turn into either a full tilt film or a 30 to 45 minute tv episode. not that, from what i recall, something like Tales Of The Unexpected was on the go when this one was made. 

but is it any good? kind of. easily the best of the stories is the one what has Curt Jurgens in it as a magician seeking out new (exotic) tricks. probably the main draw is that it has Tom Baker not being Dr Who in it, and his section is a reasonably decent spin on The Portrait Of Dorian Gray or what it was called by him what was dead clever with words. no, i have no idea what "extra" is on the disc, for it brags that it is "complete and uncut". i did not see anything (certainly no nudies) which struck me as something the censors would get in a fettle about. anyway, it holds interest whilst watching, but isn't a film anyone is going to argue as being a great or all time classic. 

it's close on a quarter of a century (!) that Master And Commander The Far Side Of The World has existed as a thing. at no point whatsoever in all that time have i had the slightest interest in seeing it. then a colleague (actually a good friend) exhausted quite some time explaining how good it was. not long after that i saw it on offer in a charity shop for all of 25p, so went yeah, why not. 

plot wise it's a fairly interesting thing, for despite the huge, massive scope of the move the story itself is quite small and basic. a hopelessly outsized and outgunned British ship has to take on a bigger, more better armed French one. think the last space battle off of Star Trek II The Wrath Of Khan spread out over 2 (or so) hours. 

technically the film is flawless. as one might (reasonably) expect from Peter Weir this is cinematography and pacing perfection. the same, too, is true of a superb cast, with Paul Bettany in particular being superb. yes, "the Crowe" is quite good too. it's just got that odd thing going on where it's not exactly great or enthralling, yet somehow retains interest to keep watching. everything about it feels like one of them films they frequently repeat on television and when you switch it on you find yourself stuck watching it, even though you are telling yourself no. 

you all saw the spoiler warning, yeah? for me it (more or less) fell apart with the first bit of the ending. and do not read the rest of this paragraph if you haven't seen it yet intend to. i am not sure which was the least plausible to accept - that they just happened to have all the paint and signwriters on board required to "disguise" the ship, or that the French (even by their standards) would not recognise the ship that they had recently put all them cannonball holes in. that said, though, the "twist" in the second part of the ending was brilliant, and perhaps it is that end note why people left it thinking it was a really decent film. a review i read after said that the film was "basically showing someone (Crowe) who was very good at his job", which is spot on. but also a bit like going and seeing The Empire Strikes Back and being blown away by how excellent a business administrator Lobot was. 

unlikely that i have watched The Beastmaster since, in a surprising move, Dad took me and Richard to see it in, what, 1983 or 1984 or around then. surprising or unexpected, as Dad really never has been keen on the cinema, and neither i nor my brother can recall ever expressing a wish to see this one. oh well, off we went, and whereas i could not for the life of me remember much about the film, i of course have come to hold fond memories of time with father and brother. 

certainly i do not remember the really, really excellent bits from this version, the "director's cut". what we got taken to see at the cinema (probably the Odeon) was an edited "PG" family friendly version of it. this one has two scenes of nudies, with one of them being full tilt too, if you don't blink, and some slightly more graphic violence on the go. of particular interest in the nudies scenes was the very agreeable topless scene of Tanya Roberts, who(m) went on to be in A View To A Kill. quite poor (and mean) of the film distributor and the BBFC to have colluded and denied us such a magical moment in cinema for a few years, if not decades. no, i wasn't all excited (or as excited) as that "yes yes yes this is excellent, brilliant, class, woo hoo" moment with Deborah Shelton out of Body Double (and, i think, Dallas) when i for some reason watched Circuitry Man II, but still. 

not a very good film, if we are honest. mostly (or for the most part) it's a rip-off (or "homage") to the eternally excellent Conan The Barbarian, with a quite similar but toned down plot idea. Rip Torn turns up in it as a kind of quasi-sh!t version of Jame Earl Jones, and a very ripped (muscular) Marc Singer, who(m) would go on to be class in V, is the titular Beastmaster. which means he can control a hawk or similar bird, a tiger painted to look like a panther and a couple of ferrets. whilst it was very pleasant to have this on the tele one Sunday afternoon as summer gave way to autumn i really don't think this is one i shall watch again. nor, for that matter, will i go looking for the sequels. or sequel if they only did the one for it.  

teenage me (moi) would be very pleased to know that fifty something me is still watching Schwarzenegger films on an, all things being relative, about frequent basis. however, teenage me might be somewhat disappointed that, outside of the eternal excellence of Commando, i am not inclined to think they are the greatest things to ever be things. 

much like Terminator 2 (see above link) there's been all sorts on that "internet" thing saying how "brilliant" (etc) True Lies was or is, all in celebration of some random number anniversary of it. could only half remember it, had picked up a copy down the market (pretty sure as one of 3 for £2) some time ago and decided to give it a go again. 

actually what prompted me to watch it again was when i found out, by chance that i had a "rare" yet now obsolete copy of the film. this "first pressing" of it, with "widescreen" in the red banner at the top, features the uncut version of it and not the one what the BBFC ordered edits to before it was certified for release. as far as i am aware the new blu ray / "uhd" video (disc) is entirely uncut too, but still, something of a nice novelty factor to having this. from what i can work out the "cut" bits were (and again you have had a spoiler warning) when Arnie bashes the heads of two (2) dogs together to stop them shredding him, and then when he absolutely (totes) knacks someone in a bathroom. 

it's not really a case of "they could not make this film now" as it very much is one of "how they hell did they get away with this at the time, and why was it praised". some will accuse me of being "woke", whatever that is, here, but this comedy is really disturbing, along the lines of Revenge Of The Nerds looking back and going "no, hang on". you get told in this film, for instance, that Art Malik is obviously the bad guy as he strikes a woman, but Arnold Schwarzenegger is obviously the good guy since he only uses an entire secret government facility to psychologically torture his wife and then makes her go do a striptease for a stranger. mindful of it being, what 1994 or thereabouts, the world was short of "traditional" villains, but i am not sure making angry Muslim terrorists look like a bunch of bumbling idiots was all that good an idea with regards to international relations. 

didn't really expect to reference A View To A Kill twice (or two times) in this post, but also True Lies features some "sloppy" work. as in, like with Sir Roger's stunt double in his last outing, you are clearly and painfully aware that you are spending a disproportionate amount of time watching Arnie's stunt double instead of actual Arnie. 

like with Terminator 2 (see the link for Commando) i simply don't "get" the idea that True Lies somehow had mind-blowing, brilliant, "best ever" (at least at the time) action sequences. to give them (the makers and/or distributors) their own comparison, well, it was announced that True Lies was "the American answer to James Bond, only better". other than "the American James Bond" probably being more correctly seen as Jack Ryan, as good as the scenes in True Lies were they were nowhere near as good as the set pieces in Goldeneye, which was the first James Bond, you must remember, to have that right proper nancy boy play the part. 

yet there was some good (great) moments rewatchings this. i had avoided watching again because i for some reason thought the bits with Bill Paxton were awful and drawn out. not at all, he is comedy gold in it, an absolutely brilliant performance. same is true of Tom Arnold as the (somewhat) unlikely partner of Arnie. not sure what happened to him, probably some scandal. as for Jamie Lee Curtis, well, as superb as ever, but very dubious if not questionable character. 

here, with the final video (disc) of this post, is a really important lesson for any film maker types who(m) for some reason are reading this. unless you are damned (as in f*****g) certain that you have just made a film that would have made Kubrick, Scorsese and Spielberg say "wow, now we can see where we went wrong with our lesser films", do not give your film a title that provides an easy stick to beat you with. if you are going to call a film Suck, then, best you make sure it does not suck. they did not make sure of this. 

when i picked this one up at the market (£2) i was almost certain it would be rubbish. however, i asked Spiros about it, since he is a significant Alice Cooper fan (he is in it), and he said it's probably not as bad as you might think. so i watched it, and yeah, it really was as bad as i expected. 

plot wise and it's something or other about a quite bad rock band getting the gimmick of becoming vampires. it really, really does not get any better than that at all. not even by accident. oddly, they could have had one redeeming scene, for that tw@t Moby is in it, playing some obnoxious type of character. had they given him a gruesome, on screen death that would have been rather satisfactory viewing, but no they kill him off screen. not like the awful Collision Course, then, which was awful but also excellent just for that bit when Jay Leno gets his f*****g face smashed in. 

the plot is flimsy, the main cast is awful, most of the cameos by rock stars are just them standing around in a self-knowing way, no nudies i could recall, the jokes aren't funny, the limited violence and gestures of gore are dull, there's no scary bits and certainly nothing to cause a fright or squirm. pretty much avoid this one at all costs, except for the slight curiosity of Malcolm McDowell playing what could be considered a "good guy" rather than the usual villain or anti-hero. for those interested, here you go, a link to the bits of Collision Course with Jay Leno getting twatted one. 

 

as ever, absolutely no idea (at all) if any of this is of use, or interest, to anyone on the other side of the screen, but thanks all the same for reading. undoubtedly some staunch defenders of it will take to disagreement with me on True Lies, but such discourse is always polite and constructive on the internet. 

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