tell you that you're eighty, but brother you won't care

howdy pop pickers

just earlier this week (as opposed to later next) i had an episode with the radio. or moment, or indeed incident, look you see, whichever is the appropriate wording. this is something which i have noted occurs with greater frequency as i make do with whatever time i have left in this world. taking as a given that the only radio station left which plays a decent music mix and does not have too many annoying ads (just promos for their own stuff) is Radio 2, increasingly i am becoming aware of why having a CD player in any sort of vehicle is important. 

it would be normal for these episodes to feature specific djs (or presenters, or whatever they call themselves these days. influencers, probably. mostly, it happens when Zoe Ball is testing the patience of her employment on the basis of "well, you all said anything would be better than Chris Evans", or when that renowned Alan Partridge parody act, Jeremy Vine, elects to discuss a subject which he is ill equipped to do. sure, there's also those minor incidents if it happens to be one of the twelve (12) weeks of the year that Steve Wright isn't on holiday and is in the mood to sing the songs "better" than the original artist. and on the same note, when they decide that someone like Craig Charles is a perfect, like for like stand in for Steve Wright (who apparently needs a lot of holidays) and he bombards audiences with his raga boombastic funk overload. 

this incident (episode, or whatever) was not related to the above. as it happens, it happened on the show hosted by the nice lady who is on after five (5), or her equally nice stand in. anyway, she asked someone or other who had called in, for some reason which escapes me , if they knew what was the number one single forty years ago this week. 

as the person what phoned in hummed and haaaa-ed about what it could be, so to did i. mostly i was trying to work out when forty years ago was. before i could work it out, the nice, non-Zoe, non-Jeremy, non-singing mode Steve said that it was Ashes To Ashes by David Bowie. i said no, that can't be right, that was number one in 1980, not forty years ag.....oh, fu.....dge (or similar), 1980 was indeed forty years ago, now that i think. 

maybe this Einstein fellow had a thing with his "theory of relativity" stuff. distances away from time do feel all so weird and disjointed, non-linear if you like. for me the 80s feel really, really close (and that might i yield be down to my preference for what music i listen to), the 90s a distant, long time ago mostly forgotten memory, and did the 00s even happen. or some of the 10s. surely it is not me who experiences such distortions, but with my limited social circle (according to someone i know, no one actually likes me, quite the opposite as point of fact) i really rarely have the margin to discuss such things. hence me writing here. 

so, Ashes To Ashes. i am publishing this incident or episode here and now, for at the time of this appearing "live" on the internet (whatever that is), this is the very last day (by GMT) (and that monk made calendar) that the single was number one. it was toppled, at the least, by a splendid song by an exceptional band. 

whether famously or infamously, Ashes To Ashes of course had all sorts of connotations. of relevance here, however, is that it was the at the time second number one single off of Bowie. the only other (that i am aware of) was Space Oddity, so of course, ha ha ha, Bowie only got to number one when he sang of Major Tom (until Let's Dance etc). 

did i do anything special to commemorate the impromptu yet factual 40th anniversary celebrations of Ashes To Ashes being a number one single? back in the days when the charts meant something, for they were based on sales and not theoretical assumptions pertaining to "streaming"? not really. well, yes, the radio got turned up a few notches, and indeed i did sing along with the song, since they did play it on the radio after the previously mentioned exchange between radio show host and person calling in. no, it was not me calling in. 

right, time, either reading this or writing it, is probably better spent listening to Bowie. if that sentence makes any sense, which i think it does. kind of. oh. 

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

is this the world we created, what did we do it for

hi there 

normally (or usually) around this time of any given month i would unleash my often misguided but sometimes (hopefully) useful musings on whatever two books i have most recently read. alas, there is to be a delay in this, look you see. mostly that would be down to the length of the second (of two) what i am reading, but also time has unexpectedly not been available to read. 

just as soon as i have finished the second of two books (the most recent Stephen King to appear in paperback, and it is typically long), i shall gather together my thoughts and comment here. for now, though, let me instead regale you once again with tales of what a right mess we have made of the world, and how things used to be better. 

hotels have a great deal in common with air travel. this is not in a good way. where once they were pleasant, luxuriant treats to be looked forward to and very much enjoyed, now they are nasty, abject, hideous experiences, to be avoided and used only from vital necessity. both have been transformed into cheap money grabs, run and operated in a way to make the lives of those unfortunate enough to use them as expensive, uncomfortable and miserable as possible. 

the few perks that once came with having to stay in a hotel, even in the present day, have now gone forever, it seems. a stay in a hotel, for instance, normally secured me a good couple of weeks (sometimes months) supply of fancy shampoos in miniature bottles, as well as 50p shaped and sized bars of soap. now you just get a dispenser in the shower what is (believe me) bolted on, so you can't take it with you. 

and now, as you can see quite clearly in Commodore 64 mode above (and in non Commodore 64 mode below, if you insist), one of the other bonuses of needing to stay in a hotel has gone. you could, in glorious (maybe even hedonistic) days gone by, leave a hotel with as many free towels as what you could find in your room and/or fit in your case. now, no more, it seems. 

yes. they have gone ahead and introduced some sort of electronic tagging to towels provided in hotel rooms. i imagine (no i did not try it) they emit some sort of warning if a guest, or similar such patron, of a hotel attempts to leave after "accidentally" mistaking six or seven towels for items of clothing and packed them up to take them home. 

many theories, both of a conspiracy and perfectly valid nature, speak against just how technology is being used today. a lot of it is against the tracking and tracing abilities one can use it for, as well as covert or overt monitoring. usually i would just ignore such theories, as they are of little interest to me. how foolish i was to do so, for i would have been warned, had i paid attention, that the day was coming when you didn't even get one single free towel as a thank you for staying at a hotel no more. 

it is possible, i suppose, that the label is a fake, a ruse sewn on to persuade guests not to try to take the towels. who, after all, would spend good money on making a towel wi-fi enabled? but, no, i decided against testing out if it was real or not. life has enough embarrassments and humiliations as it is without courting such; so f*** their towels if they don't want me to have one of them. 

right, anyway, with that out of my system, yes, i think i will take another pill and go for a nice lie down. perhaps i shall do some reading whilst there. 

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

how to clean (and presumably clear) your (ahem) rear.....

heya

it would be both reasonable and fair to suggest that 2020 shall be remembered for many things, but not all too fondly. well, that is if anyone survives the year to have such memories, look you see. at present, or if you like at best, chances of survival for us all seem to reside in that 50/50 category generally tended to be favoured by turf accountants and other such bookmaking entrepreneurs. 

but, let us not spread any further negative waves. or spread any further negative plague like stuff, if at all possible, please. instead, let us consider one of the (admittedly few) positives of the year. how about the now tres fabulously wealthy who had the vision to buy shares (for our friends in America, i believe you call this "stock options") in toilet paper manufacturer businesses prior to, say, the second month of this most eventful year? 

anyone who did so shall now be, i would imagine (for i am no expert), fabulously wealthy. to have owned or held any sort of financial stake in a toilet paper manufacturer this year would rank you up there, in bank balance matters, with people what bought (at the time) virtually worthless shares in Apple (the sinister tech one, not the record label) during the 90s and held on to them. or, indeed, bought shares ("stock options") in that online bookstore in the late 90s, or even that thing where people share cat pictures, and get angry with people they are "friends" with on it, in the 2000s. 

under no circumstances to do i begrudge them their sensational wealth, or anyone who has obtained such by fair, legitimate means. that can include hard work as much as it can include degrees of luck, fortuitous timing or bizarre co-incidence. if so many of us spent considerably less (perhaps none at all) time counting other people's money and just worried for our own lot in life, this place would probably be a lot better. 

on a more personal level, i honestly don't (usually) give all that much time to considering matters which relate to toilet paper. if i had to list some sort of requirements, or expectations, that i have in place for the stuff, then it would be that it is available as and when needed, and that it is functional. as the principal, go out and get the shopping designated person for our clan (rather me be out there than anyone else if it all of a sudden goes Max Max 2, for i have long since wished to wear them smart trousers with the flaps at the back anyway), normally i would, when supplies are running low (which was for a lot of people earlier this year), go and buy some more of the brand and style which the rest of the family seem to have a preference (or proclivity) for. 

normally i would just grab the best pack of preferred brand and style available, with the best pack being defined as the one which is on special offer at the time of shopping. i believe the only instance of me ever paying full price for a pack was late April or early May, when the toilet paper market was reaching some level of stability , but discounts were suspended as the makers had to somehow fund making 50 or 60 new factories to produce more to meet new demand levels. 

having never ever had reason to do anything other than consider price, manufacturer and style, it had not occurred to me to look at what else might be on the packaging. which is how come the above is new to me, at the least. for all i know they have printed this stuff on the packs for years, but i have simply failed to notice it. although i do not see not being aware of this as a failure. 

my philosophy, which i have not always been an ideal exponent of, is that there is no such thing as stupid questions, for if you know not then ask, but one must be careful not to give stupid answers, for then you in shame make people scared to be inquisitive. but, that said, i would have thought (assumed) it likely to be the case that anyone going off to buy toilet paper would by that stage already have at least a rudimentary, basic concept of how it all works. 

credit, of course, where it is due. should this information guide have been of some value, or indeed use, then please do not thank me, direct your gratitude towards them what made it, andrex. 

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

spiny norman

 hello there

there are those of you who are, as it were, in the know, look you see, that shall know full well this title can only refer to something of the world of the hedgehog. i cannot recall if i have used this title before. at a guess, yes, probably, since i have now done (considerably) north of four thousand (4000) posts here. 

on one evening, recently in the past (rather than yet to come), i had reason to be out in the garden. during, as i mentioned, the evening. the concern which had me there was me making ever such a spectacular success of quitting or at the least cutting down considerably on cigarette consumption related matters (smoking). 

during this, i had one of those startled gasp moments, but one i am keen to stress was of pleasant surprise rather than any element of distress. for, as you may well have concluded already, the hedgehog which resides in our garden had made a quite rare, into a spot of light appearance. 

i say the hedgehog who lives in our garden, but my suspicion is that this is but one of a family of hedgehogs who have made a (hopefully, i trust) happy residence. either than, or this hedgehog has a remarkable ability to change size from time to time. which, actually, would make sense with the name spiny norman. 

just what's the deal with the name spiny norman for a hedgehog? full tilt credit for Monty Python, in particular (as in specifically) the Ethel The Frog sketch, concerning as it does the Piranha Brothers. as for some reason i cannot find a (trusted) link to the entire sketch, let me leave it to you to seek and search out more if you are of a mind to be interested. 

my concern, as wonderful as it was to see spiny norman (or one of the spiny norman clan), was about why, exactly, he (or she) had ventured so close to the house, and remained in light. usually, in my experience, they prefer to dwell untroubled in the shadows.

we have had an awful lot of really, really hot weather of late. i have tried to ensure that ample water is always available in suitable bowls around the garden, and do indeed place out some of the smart looking hedgehog food what Tesco sell. the latter is possibly unneccessary, though, as there was one time i saw spiny norman (or clan member) eating, and became aware of why, exactly, we seem to be entirely untroubled by slugs. 

at the great risk of me doing that "disneyfication" thing where one attributes entirely human emotions and actions to the wildlife, my fear is that there is not enough food or water for spiny norman (and clan), and that the presence so close to the home and so visible was to prompt more. let me make increases in such then, with particular emphasis on water, just in case. 

right, so, yes, then, comma enthusiasts and everyone else, let me go and make certain that there are plenty of devices around the garden which may hold water. my assumption is that this would be what hedgehogs, and indeed the birds who frequently visit, drink. alas, i am not sure that i have much else to offer them.

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

badge of honour

heya

an unexpected gift turned up for me then, look you see. one that was quite surprising, as is also the discovery that with this brand new format of doing posts on this blog (or "blog posts") now has decided to not allow me to centre pictures nicely. cheers for that. 

what turned up for me? the title is your clue here, or rather tells you probably all that you would directly need to know. indeed, someone kindly, and initially in an anonymous way, sent me a badge. not just any badge, though. it was a badge what left me totally and utterly confused as to who, or what, it was, or meant. 

i have every confidence that the clarity of Commodore 64 mode means there is no need for me to explain what it is. that and the fact that there is a non Commodore 64 mode image below. but, for the sake of a narrative, it is a picture of a young lad with "Gonch" written on it, or maybe it was that was the name of the young lad. 

no, i had absolutely no idea who or what this was. rather than just "google it", i threw the matter to the wilds of social media, and some (very good) friends quickly advised me that this is in fact a character called Gonch off of Grange Hill, which was a popular show when we were kids. another friend also shared a link to something called an urban dictionary to show what the term gonch meant, but alas i was not brave enough to click on it. 

eventually the patron of the badge stepped forward. no less a higher ranking member of our society that the viscount of stockton, the marquess of tees valley and the incumbent (but secret) chairman of this sage group what is fighting the plague purchased it for me. it is such generosity for which he is noted, and is a credit to the aristocracy and the ruling classes. 

yes, he was a little distressed (and possibly somewhat disheartened) to learn that i had absolutely no idea who this was. he conceded, however that in retrospect it might have been a good idea to select a badge of one of the more rather well known characters off of (or out of) Grange Hill. on further reflection, he could not actually recall what inspired the purchase in the first instance. 

so indeed, this badge is now mine, and i can assure you it has taken a most prestigious and prominent place in my significant badge collection. 

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

i've nothing much to offer

howdy pop pickers

oh. wow. right. no, sorry, that's not the start, i am just a bit puzzled. after quite a few years they have gone done changed the way that one creates these posts for these blogs, look you see. this is my first time doing one with this "new way", so bear with me. yes, the writing off of me shall forever be truly appalling, but i do like to try and make the pictures look smart. 

so, with a sense of the unexpected and a disproportionate level of fanfare, the "complete" soundtrack for the dire, indeed woeful film Absolute Beginners has been released for the first time on CD in a "full" version. if they say so, that's fine. i'd not bothered even looking for a CD of it before, to be sure, but presumably some sort of variation of it existed. 

what's this all about, then? i am loathe, if not reticent, to turn this into an article with bashes the film Absolute Beginners, for i am certain that many such articles already exist. the one redeeming feature of the film - just - was the soundtrack. and, even then, when one says "soundtrack", what the mean for about 90% of that statement is the number two charting titular title song off of David Bowie. 

indeed, yes, it is so that if it were not for the presence of (ahem) three (kind of) Bowie songs on this set, there is every chance i would have precisely zero interest in owning either this fancy new release, or any such release, except the one i already had. maybe. from what i recall, and i could well be mistaken, the mix of Have You Ever Had It Blue? by The Style Council is unique to the soundtrack. or it could have been out on a 12" at some stage, but anyway i don't have it beyond the soundtrack. 

above (if i have somehow fluked to clock how this new formatting all works) is my tape copy of the soundtrack, then, next to the shiny new still sealed CD. i have had the tape for somewhere north of 30 years, during which time i have kept it in perfect condition and mostly ignored it. as in, seldom if ever feeling obliged to play it. very much the same fate awaits this CD incarnation of it all, except i probably do not have 30 years left for this world. but, you get the idea.

let the record reflect that yes, this post counts towards me not writing something of Bowie every month, at least once a month, which i said i would not do no more after doing all of his albums month by month for a while. a lot of month in that last sentence. 

yes, i feel harsh and cruel to say it, but a brutal truth is that Bowie's title song is just about the only thing one can salvage from anything pertaining to the film Absolute Beginners. this sprawling, sweeping, beautiful elegant work of wonder is one of the strongest of many examples of genius (no matter what Charlie Watts says) that mocks the common myth of how Bowie "just did rubbish" in the 80s. from what i recall, it was only  the fiddly 3" CD single you could get the full version of the song in a digital format, so the release of the soundtrack entire is welcome, since the CD single generally changes hands for a lot more than the cost of this set. 

and the cost of this set? a moderate south of £10 price helped sway me to buy it. had i waited a few days, though, i could probably have got it for even more south, as the price of it has fallen very quickly indeed. too late, it seems, have people clocked that there is an extremely limited market for this release. i would imagine they will be even more disappointed if they attempted to re-release the actual film in any format, and find that even less ("fewer") people than was so at the time are even curious. 

should that picture come out clear, well, that's a comparison of the tape release to this "full" CD release. from what i can work out, the "extras" are one joined up bit being split into two, and then one extra "moment" of Absolute Beginners, not performed by Bowie. no hidden gems lurked to make the set at all attractive, then. 

what about the two Bowie songs on the Absolute Beginners soundtrack what are not called Absolute Beginners? they are not very good, at all. first off, That's Motivation probably works marginally better in the context of watching the film, being sung as it was (or is) with Bowie jumping around on a massive typerwriter (i did say the film was bad). Volare is a kind of interesting vocal off of him, but also it does sound very much like the sort of thing you would reasonable expect to hear on that album they unwisely and inexplicably let Peter Wyngarde record. 

gathering all of Bowie's legally available recordings in an actual, non-downloaded format is a bit expensive. as in, no one has enough kidneys or similar organs to sell to fund it. should you be determined to get them all, well, these are two tracks which only (so far as i am aware) exist on this record, and here they are for south of £10. but i would be rather baffled to learn of anyone wishing to hear either of them more than just the once. maybe a second time to make sure that it was all that it seemed to be on the first play. 

how about i give in to temptation and spend a little time sh!tting on the film? ok. a lot have suggested that this film somehow "destroyed" what little there was of the British film industry in the 80s, for it swallowed up all the money and made none. that's harsh and unfair, for many excellent films, be they entertaining or of artistic merit (or both) were indeed made, and made money. what the issue is, i think, in retrospect, was just how vehemently this film was rammed down everyone's throats. all of the media was you should watch this and you should appreciate it and you should like it, no matter how bad it was. and it really, really was bloody awful. whatever merits the original novel had were lost in the film. 

bizarre decisions surrounded the film. up front, at some point they had a choice. either they could make an accessible, entertaining film with artistic merit and social commentary, or they could hire Julien Temple to turn it all into some Julien Temple thing. they went with the latter, of course. casting people who apparently could not act was not an inspired move, either. it's not even remotely an interesting step on watching the actress-singer-multiple rock star wife trajectory of Patsy Kensit's career, either. my abiding memory is that the first ten or so minutes, a big "opening number" thing, is so headache inducing that you are reluctant to watch more than that. 

and Bowie's part? just about ten minutes, and seems to do what he was asked and leaves it there. very much an instantly forgettable screen part. Bowie's mid-80s film choices were fascinating. he was "too busy" to play Zorin in A View To A Kill, but was magically available for this, and Labyrinth, two films where he got to sang and retained the all important licensing rights to the songs what he done in them. history would have been different if someone had thought to make a James Bond film with a singing and dancing villain in it. 

one piece of rock legend is that when Bowie recorded the song Absolute Beginners, he asked the musicians assembled to hold on, as "Mick was coming by", and he recorded Dancing In The Street with him (and the musicians), ahead of Live Aid. unsure if it is true or not, but i would rather spend my life believing that it is, as that's just excellent. 

so, Absolute Beginners features one classic Bowie track, two obscure Bowie songs, a great number from The Style Council and some "not really their best or reflective of their stuff" material from Ray Davies and Sade. there is also the small matter of Patsy Kensit singing on it. for me it was worth getting, but knowing that i am highly unlikely ever to play it again (certainly never in full), i am a bit stuck when it comes to suggesting anyone else may wish to consider doing similar. wisely, as hinted at here, they have loaded the booklet up with images of Bowie rather than, say, any of the film cast or too many of the other artists. at least them what put this together are quite aware of the only strong selling point the release has. 

well, dig what you dig, and it would be an interesting surprise if any of this has been of any use to anyone. but, bonus if some of it was surprisingly interesting. 

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

four films

hi


so, i've watched a few more films, then. four, look you see, hence the title. actually, possibly more than four, but these are the ones i can remember.

all of these are what they call netflix endeavours, or films what i saw on this service. generally it is quite rare for me to use this; i just pay for it as the rest of the family somehow have more time available than i do to watch it quite frequently. which is no issue at all. in complete honesty, i am also one of them types what switches on netflix and seems to spend ages just browsing for something to watch, rather than committing to picking something.

with good fortune, then, at least 50% of the four what i can (mostly) recall watching were at the suggestion of a good friend who had seen them. the other 50% were, i think, picked up on from online comments, or one of them just looked interesting. and it was.

even more good fortune was that not one (or further) of the films turned out to be beneath the threshold that is "good". as in, better than "not bad", and of course well away from "a complete and utter waste of time". this is no bad thing at all. early on, netflix was notorious for making most excellent series types of things but oddly very poor films. it would seem that this has now been corrected, and "netflix original" appearing on a film credit is no longer an instant reason to be wary of what lies ahead.

provenance of some things seems to be quite an interesting thing for a few of you. well, the below are not done in any discernible order, just as the images cropped up for the nifty collage what i made for the start of this. which, granted, might be interpreted as a discernible order.

my reasons for watching some film, one that i knew just about nothing of substance about, called Girl On The Third Floor was that it kept cropping up in comments (here and there) on the internet.  generally the view was that it was quite good; that it featured some genuinely disturbing and scary moments.

once upon a time i was quite a horror film fan, but for some valid reasons had not watched all that many of late. for a start, they tend not to be suitable for all the family, and one must be mindful of young children walking into a room when an entirely inappropriate, possibly damaging, scene is on. also, the ones they make these days seem to have a, well, different focus and feel to what i watched for many years. not, maybe, better or worse, but all the same holding little appeal.

plot? a bloke called Don arrives at a run down (yet clearly intended to be great and lavish) house, intent on fixing it up so that it provides a suitable home for him, his pregnant wife and as a consequence of the latter description their (presumed to be) first child. he has some most peculiar conversations with the locals, with a number of unexpected bits of information (and odd things to ask of a stranger) cropping up. it soon becomes clear that Don is a particularly unlikable, shady sort of person with a bit of a dodgy background. that he cannot be trusted becomes quite clear when temptation is put before him and there is little resistance. but what damage shall this temptation do........

ostensibly this is all something akin to The Amityville Horror, or maybe Poltergeist, with rather more graphic visuals thrown in and all of the sensibilities of the morality warning of Fatal Attraction heavily stirred in to the plot. some of the slowly paced start feels like padding (or even waffle, maybe), but ultimately pays off when you find out why it was structured so. indeed there are some strong visuals of a(n) horrific nature, and some unsettling moments. they are not, however, ones that i would suggest particularly linger in the mind or haunt you for much after watching it all. maybe it's some who watched it and described it as profoundly disturbing had a guilty conscience, or other such reason to be troubled by what was reflected as they saw.

a lot of the praise for the film seems to centre on someone called CM Punk, who is the lead actor. i had a vague awareness of the name prior to watching, but was not too fussed with who he is. people what do all that WWE wrestling thing tend to have mixed fortunes when making the move to acting, for it is simply not so that many become The Rock, or Rowdy Roddy Piper in They Live. i would say he gives a solid enough acting performance, and it was in retrospect most impressive that a wrestler should appear in a film where his character has a marked absence of any of the "talents" or skills of that wrestling background. mostly, though, and sorry to not go into details, i would say that the even more impressive performances came from all of the female leads.

i had no idea such a thing as The Old Guard existed until a friend mentioned it to me in a way that suggested i would be aware of it, and they gave it a moderately glowing review. this prompted me looking it up, quite liking the sound of the premise presented, and opting to give it a go.

plot? a band of soldiers who are technically immortal (they have remarkable powers that let them heal quickly, or come back to life when seemingly killed by death, but can also apparently at random die and stay dead) roam the world (for hundreds of years, maybe more) as some sort of quasi guardians. every now and then they get a calling to intervene and save a life, or to make sure someone or other survives, apparently based on a future knowledge that their existence shall be of importance to the world eventually. the team, ostensibly lead by the presumed eldest of their kind, 'Andy' (Charlize Theron), are faced with a double dilemma when we are introduced to them. whilst their apparent esp abilities which let them "connect" with others who share their ability alerts them to the first "new" person of their ilk being in the world, there is someone who has worked out who (and what) they are, and seeks them out for reasons which are not immediately clear, but might probably not be all that savoury.

the above is, of course, laced with some very fancy, exceptionally gratuitous and wonderfully entertainingly excessive scenes of graphic, violent action sequences to showcase their immense prowess at doing so. at heart this is a quite thrilling, suspenseful action film, and works very well as such. one of the only issues is that, despite all of the infinite possibilities the concept would naturally make you think exist, there is a very finite and limited number of things what one can do with immortals, at least in terms of constructing a story. usually you have to undermine the premise to do so, which is to say if you are creating a threat for an immortal, the only plausible one is mortality.

not sure (to state the obvious, since i have no idea who all of you are) about you, but for me, whenever the concept of immortals is mentioned as a movie theme, it is Highlander which comes to mind. this film does indeed borrow many of the general concepts, and one or two direct scenes. a most direct example is when the latest member of the immortal fraternity (KiKi Layne) discovers that she can't quite die. her expulsion from her platoon in Afghanistan (or similar) is an almost shot for shot recreation of when McLeod got booted off of his Scottish village for coming back from the dead.

but still, if you assume that genuinely fresh and new film stories are very difficult (it is not what you steal, it is how you use it), this is wonderfully entertaining and perfectly accessible. i didn't know it was based on some sort of comic book (graphic novel) thing until after i saw it, and to be as honest as ever i simply don't care how "faithful" an adaptation it is or it is not. my interest was purely in the film being watched in itself.

a predictable (yet great) enough final comment is, of course, the star of the film. Charlize Theron is as excellent here as she has been in, well, just about any film i have watched that i can recall seeing her in. one truly talented actress, or "female actor", or "actor", whichever is the correct term of reference to use in the present time.

when scrolling through netflix, i momentarily hovered over a film called The Platform. it sounded interesting, as in the premise seemed to be exceedingly Harold Pinter, or if you will pinteresque. on watching it, the film turned out to be very Harold Pinter indeed. none more so. in fact, i would say that if it were so that Harold Pinter were still with us and had the idea for The Platform, then early on he would have abandoned writing it for being far too Harold Pinter.

if you are wondering who or what a Harold Pinter was, an incredibly gifted but seemingly perpetually angry playwright. so far as i am aware, no picture exists of him smiling, and he seemed to forever have a scowl of contempt. most, if not all, of his plays featured people being restricted or confined (often physically and in a metaphorical way), with some act of brutality, barbarism of violence being the ultimate path taken. he was not a man, it seems, who in his writing placed any great value at all in the merits, decency or reason for existing of people in general. when one gives consideration to how the world, or society, that we have all somehow managed to create or exist, well, it can be quite complex just to dismiss his apparent outlook as being more pessimistic than it is realistic.

so, anyway, The Platform. the plot concerns a mystery structure, presumed to be a prison but entirely possibly a place people bewilderingly volunteer to be. it's a vertical structure, going for an unspecified height or, rather, depth. two people occupy each floor, with each being allowed to bring one item. daily, food is placed on a platform at level zero, and moves down. so, the higher up you are, the more likely you are to get food. the lower, the more likely you may be to starve.

yes, indeed, there is a (degree of) predictability to the outcome of this. i have little doubt that you could take an educated guess at some of the incidents which happen in this premise; i did and they do. how well executed, then, it all is becomes the most important aspect. and, even apparently or seemingly dubbed into English off of the original Spanish, it is brilliant.

i am really not inclined to say too much of the detail. but, for general comments, this is incredibly well made, the acting is superb and it is a film which shall remain in mind for quite a while. this is a disturbing work, or rather more of a thought provoking one. well, some thoughts can disturb. an excellent film, then.

finally of these four, then, would be Eurovision. i wasn't going to watch this, despite my love of the tournament on which it is based, because it clocks in at north of two hours. generally speaking (or even strictly) any comedy film that stretches beyond ninety minutes is perhaps trying to be something else. once again, though, a good friend said it was really ace, and that i should give it a go.

plot? an Icelandic lad (Will Ferrell) dreams of championing the Eurovision Song Contest on behalf of his nation. he wishes to do this with his lifelong friend (Rachel McAdams) who is also possibly his sister or step-sister, for evidently his father (Pierce Brosnan) has fathered a formidable number of children in the small, remote fishing village. the dream is of course met with contempt and scorn, and he is shot down at every opportunity for a variety of reasons which may spoil the plot. but, of course, he persists in reaching for his dream.

ultimately, Eurovision or if you like Eurovision The Story Of Fire Saga is a so-called "feel good" film which genuinely has the ability to make one feel good. well, it did me, at the least. my initial concern was correct, mind - the film is too damned long. you get, say, 100 minutes of well paced entertainment, but there is a jolt for the last 20 or so and interest wanes. make the most of the first 100, then.

this film would be "not half bad" if they just had done the easy thing, which would be to stick Ferrell in silly, Icelandic themed outfits, do that thing with his face and speak with a funny accent. happily, it goes much further, and the entire cast is superb. a shout out in particular to whoever it was playing the Russian entrant for the Eurovision Song Contest. maybe i am hitting some midlife homoerotic patch, for i am not ashamed to confess i fell a little bit in love with him; he looked like he was auditioning for the part of Simon le Bon in a Duran Duran film and he would absolutely be perfect for the part.

should you be someone who has very little, or limited (as in f*** all) interest in all things Eurovision, i would suggest you might still get value out of watching. the humour is in abundance, and very little of it is reliant on an understanding (or appreciation) of the wonderful contest.

right, then, that would be that. i suppose i inadvertently watched four films from four reasonably different styles, or genres. not deliberate, more of a happy, fortunate accident. as it makes it possible that there is every chance that at least one of my sets of comments might be of interest to someone, well, happy days.

thanks as ever for reading, and enjoy whatever you elect to watch!




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

eleven miles in a volkswagen passat

hello there


if there is one thing which i don't particularly enjoy writing about on this blog, that would be car reviews. and yet i do them as and when reason allows. this, look you see, is for the benefit of anyone curious about the details of a specific kind of car, as seen (and subsequently documented) by someone who isn't all that interested in the subject.

before you read any more of this, you may wish to make yourself aware of the provenance or style of my view on cars. for that, you can by all means have a look at this review, or even this one, with the latter being a fair bit more recently.

right, then. this one. as you may have worked out from the title, this is a review of a volkswagen passat. whereas i would not wish to speak in any great detail of how i came to drive it, or for just as indicated eleven (11) miles, well, i did drive it. this was a fairly new, reasonably out of the box variation, with the number plate giving every indication that it was this year's (2020) model, and it had south of ten thousand miles on the clock. south of eight thousand, too.

my general understanding and (let us be honest) appreciation of a car is that it is a convenient, relatively efficient (allowing for planetary damage) means of getting to various locations you may want or need to. mostly, though, i see a car as a way to listen to quality vibes, quite close to the correct volume for such, as you go about getting to where you need to.

the above gives an immediate reflection of all that is wrong with the passat, and indeed a terrible number of so-called "modern" vehicles. i speak, of course, of the lack of a CD player, or tape deck. for some reason them what make cars (and similar) are of a mind that physical format music in vehicles is now obsolete; that we, the people, are happy to listen to the wireless, or "stream" stuff, or plug phones and what have you in to the car (or whatever) for vibes requirements. and that latter, as i shall get to, fails miserably on this car anyway.

you may well have detected a suggestion of a sense that me and the passat did not work out ever so well. this is correct. my understanding was that volkswagen was a german company, and remains so to this day. to be certain, or to be sure, i did one of them "google" things, and indeed yes, i was correct, volkswagen is a german company. which makes the passat even more really peculiar, for it is probably the single most french thing i have ever encountered.

above is the driver side of the car if you happen to be in a country which drives on the proper side of the road. many of you are not quite so blessed, though, and shall see the above as the passenger side, or whatever one would call such. i think in some instances that is called "shotgun". yes, the design is all sleek and stylish and other such nonsense, rather than making it all look like a car.

one of the places where they don't drive on the correct side of the road (if i recall right) is over in america. this must be a particularly sad burden on them, adding to their existing, well documented plight with lots of other matters. i highlight the americans in particular as another basic understanding (well, i lack the capacity for anything beyond basic) i have of them is that they have a most curious disposition, if not inclination, towards scatological and urinary related descriptions of stuff. how fortunate for them, and unfortunate for volkswagen, for i dare say that our friends in america would call this car the "p!ssant" rather than the passat. whatever one of them ants is.

somewhere in the past (as opposed for it to yet happen) there was a quite famous car review. in it, whoever did it silently observed one side of a car for quite a while. they appeared deep in thought, and were not disturbed. when satisfied with their thoughts, they walked around the car to give due consideration to the other. immediately the response was "oh no, they have done the same thing on this side too".

behold, then, for the above picture is proof entire that both sides of this car look relatively the same, which is to say that the faults exist on either. i would agree that a car with two different looking sides could be considered peculiar, but for those who like to hedge their bets (if that is right, or is it edge their bets?), for the passat if they had designed two vastly different looking sides, they would then have had every chance of at least 50% of the car being decent. an opportunity missed.

just about the only basic aspect of the design, i am sure you shall agree, which they have got even vaguely right is that the car is white. a very good friend, indeed he who taught me to drive, once taught me that if you have any value invested in a car, then always get a white one. nicks and scratches and damage are part of life on the road, alas. if you have any other colour car repairs shall always show, for they cannot match the age of a shade. white, however, is just white.

what about driving the car? that would be, i suppose, the main (conventional) purpose of making use of a car. as it turns out, it was not so that they made doing this in any way easy. i was given no warning that the modern ways of this particular vehicle stretched right the way to this being one of them "keyless" cars. i spent some time trying to work out how to get the key to pop out of the fob thing, and in doing so noticed that there was no ignition thing anyway. you have to, and this is symptomatic of our dumbed down world, press a button for it to start.

for those interested, the "start" button is upper top right, kind of, near the gearstick. surely it must be so that generations who taught people how to hotwire cars, or know how cool it looks to start a car with a key, shall lament this very sorry state of affairs.

much of what is wrong with the passat is visible in the above. there is no conventional or traditional handbrake, just some meaningless "flip" switch. and i do mean meaningless. for some reason whoever made this car decided that the car would know where and when to deploy a handbrake, not the driver of it. this is what happens when you allow the apple mentality, where everyone accepted apple would retain complete icontrol over whatever idevice you paid a lot of money for, to become normal. it isn't. presumably the future is one which is free of handbrake turns, then.

another glaring fault is found at the upper top right, across from the "start" button. earlier i mentioned how car makers think all want to plug in devices for vibes. it would also be that people plug in things like sat nav devices, or stuff to be powered or charged. whereas there is such a thing as a universal form of USB port for such, the passat, for some inexplicable reason, only has a "micro" USB port for you to plug stuff into. great, that is. much like how all EU television and video equipment has to have a sh!tty scart port because the french like it, well, as i (also) (or further) said earlier, everything about this car is exceedingly french, mon amis.

doesn't the car come with a built in sat nav, though, to address one of the things one might wish to plug in to the car but cannot because of the bonjour sacre bleu decision to have a micro USB port instead of a proper one? yes it does. i cannot show you a picture of it, for it only activates whilst driving, but here above is an image of the dash display screen where it would come up.

it really is an awful, rubbish, unfriendly and cumbersome satnav. to start with, when you type in an address - say, a street or perhaps a postcode - it immediately turns it into co-ordinates, you know that longitude and latitude stuff, and warns you that the place it thinks you mean is "off road". so it does not confirm you have entered it in right. one has to just hope it is correct.

going further, it is woeful in adjusting or being helpful. should you miss a turn, or simply cannot take the one it wishes for you to, it doesn't recalculate an alternate route, completely ignoring how it might be that you can't go down a road that is closed off (we always have roadworks at the moment). what it does instead, right, is just repeatedly shout "make a u turn now, make a u turn now, make a u turn now" at you. great, thanks for that.

yes, that's the driver seat above, although if you are viewing this in a place where they don't drive on the proper side of the road, that is what you would consider the passenger seat. no, it is no more comfortable than it looks. as in, it is exceedingly uncomfortable to sit in. the basic shape and dimensions suggest that they had in mind as future drivers six to eight year olds who were not at all fussy about such matters.

should you be at a point where you believe that, surely, there is no more folly, well, there is. for reasons i cannot begin to understand as being justified, this is one of them "new" seats what you can heat. i believe this is a common thing for cars now. why? just, why? who is it that has complained so much about their @rse being cold as they drive that heated seats in cars is now a thing? surely the great minds of our world who figured out how to make the chair in a car a little bit warm would have been better deployed solving (or resolving) any of the many other more pressing issues we face in our life? i mean, was it all, "well, we could have a look at fixing this corona plague thing, but look, a nice warm seat"?

that's the "main dash" display thing, then, with the date and the mileage deftly edited out with the blink of an eye, for such is not your concern. i have left the time, for you could have worked that out anyway, going on the (at least she tries and isn't Chris Evans (the sh!t British one not the excellent American one)) Zoe Ball Breakfast Show being tuned in. nice, at the least, that they left the car for me with Radio 2 on.

anything much wrong with the dash? not really, if you simply rather ignore it. for me, one of the most important things about driving is to concentrate, and not be distracted. all these new cars thrown ludicrous amounts of information at you all at once, or at least try to. just let me see the basics, please, without needing to press buttons again and again to get close to what i am looking for.

would i in any way, shape or form recommend or endorse the volkswagen passat then? have a guess, if you like, but no. the only possible reason i would buy one is if i had an insane amount of money, and there was someone i did not like, and somehow if i bought this for them they would be compelled, if not forced, to drive it. i am quite sure this was the only reason the car was manufactured in the first instance.

go on, then, yes, there is one redeeming feature. whilst it does not forgive all of the other matters, the boot is massive. should for some reason you wish to store two medium build adults in the boot of a vehicle, then you can do so with this. would they be comfortable? in considering the circumstances in which two people would be in the boot of a car, as reasonably so, in truth. certainly they would be more comfortable there than, say, sat in one of the half seats placed in the front of the car.

is the ability to store bodies in the back of a car important to me? not in any way, shape or form. i have no idea who you have been speaking to so as to contemplate such a question, but such claims are false, made of jealousy and spite in equal measure.

hope this as been of some use, or assistance, to you. should you be going to buy a new car (brand new or partially used), then i would suggest you ask the car dealer to show you a volkswagen passat. when they protest, and suggest showing you an actual, proper car, insist that they show you a passat. if they do, point at it, say "not that one", and move on to looking at cars which might actually be worth buying.




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

rift with the raf

hello


as a general rule, it would be fairest and (hopefully) true to say that i do all that i can to veer or steer well away from any matter which is trouble, or likely to cause some silly bother. unfortunately, it is so that, look you see, one ends up in such anyway. often when care is perhaps not taken as much as it might have been to avoid such.

which is how i came to be - briefly - detained and questioned by no less a body that the respected RAF. and i would up front like to stress that this was all an unfortunate misunderstanding.

so, i was merrily motoring along, like, as i do, for verk. they give me an address, i go to that address. quite simple. yes, as i drove to a certain, particular address, i did indeed note signs warning me of an RAF base. i took it as this meant that there would be a turn off for it somewhere up ahead, and it would not be where i was going. for, surely, no one would send me to a highly restricted area with absolutely no warning of such.

oh. that is a thought i have had frequently about things, and have shared such with some select people as i have made my way through life. there are people, some with whom i correspond with to this day and others who i may well not have spoken to (so far) this century), that may well associate me with such a phrase. not that i have it trade marked or anything.

in this instance, the "oh" was muttered as i found myself parked in front of some hefty barriers, staffed by some hefty military types, as well as select members of our constabulary. they asked for the details of my appointment to be there, and my clearance certificate, as it seemed they were not expecting me. no, i said, no prior clearance (although generally prior would be a given for anyone cleared) and no formal appointment as such. my intention was to wax lyrical about how, for verk, i generally have a free hand to manage where i am and when. unfortunately, chance did not permit me to do so, as i was instructed to go, accompanied, to an office.

how much of what i can tell you of that office is uncertain. there is probably some sort of official secrets act thing that i have agreed to, in a tacit way. but, in short, it wasn't at all intrusive. they just did one of them full body scans of me, checked my temperature (presumably for plague), and requested minor details such as my driving licence and other, full and complete details of me and my life. as well as asking what the f*** i thought i was playing at, being there unannounced.

the latter was asked of a uniformed gentleman who seemed quite cross. indeed, if one sought the personification of what quite cross means, it would be him. he was quite gruff and short with me, perhaps understandably so for he had a suspected intruder on his hands, but what caused me to raise an eyebrow was when he elected to deal with a ringing telephone by picking up said telephone and ripping the cord out of it. i am unsure if he was having a bad day in general, if i had made it a bad day, or this was his natural way of doing things.

eventually, i left. well, i was told (in no uncertain terms and with no margin for doubt) to leave. also, i was encouraged to never, ever return, or "else". but, i took some selfies anyway, especially as, at the start as you can see, when i was ringing in to verk and explaining that there might be one very minor and quite unforeseen issue with this particular task.

yes, much like with traffic cones and trolleys, as far as i am concerned much of the RAF is technically "mine", as it is so for other fellow citizens, for we have funded it with taxes. but, well, i was not inclined to argue, or even raise, this point. they could, after all, have put one of them planes in the sky, fired one of them heat seeking missiles at me and claimed i was a "legitimate strategic target".

do i have any interest at all in trying to repeat the above, but next time with a naval base? if the opportunity arises, and i am still prone to putting far too much faith in the clarity of instructions received and my sat nav, then maybe.




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

electric cider fusion transistor rave party

hi there


it is so that people are once again commencing, or reconvening if you like, to engage in the sorts of things what they would usually have done. that is, done prior to all of this plague business, which prompted an invisible war and some precise, clear instructions as to how to fight it.

lots of different people quite liked to do lots of different things, either alone, in solitude by choice or default, or in groups. i suspect that listing all of them would be a very tedious thing for me to do, and no one would read it so it would be quite silly and pointless. rather, then, let me concentrate on the one thing i saw what i presume some people like to do.

which, apparently, is to climb or otherwise engineer their way into a reasonably stable but all the same potentially volatile electric substation thing, bringing with them some industrial strength cider to enjoy.

whereas i would never (ever) profess to be expert, or particularly widely read, in the knowledge and the ways of the magical miracle of electricity distribution, i do have a basic, fundamental and indeed rudimentary appreciation of the fact that it is somewhat dangerous. or, rather, it can be dangerous, but they take great measures - large fences with piercing spikes on the top, say - to ensure people are kept safe and are advised, in an overtly tacit way, to keep a distance for any of the life troubling aspects of it all.

at this point i feel obliged to stress the obvious. unless you are trained, qualified, licenced, authorised or are for reasons of employment are compelled to do so, then you should not be approaching one of these electric network things. to do so would be dangerous, and indeed f*****g stupid. beyond blowing yourself up, you are likely to knock out the electric supply to many, many fine people who have no wish to have the flow disrupted, and you will probably start a fire or two.

but, or and yet, here we are. someone did precisely the above, and did it with that cheap, about £1 a litre cider, too. quite remarkable really. i confess that i cannot help be fascinated by the mindset which says "let me go get some cheap cider, go somewhere quite dangerous that i am not supposed to be, and drink it all". there was this one bloke i knew of who, every morning at around 8am, would visit a local retailer and purchase one loaf of bread and one two litre bottle of cheap cider. it was so that the staff of the shop referred to him as being the equivalent of a village idiot, but i am not convinced. he, after all, seemed quite happy with his lot in life, even if that appeared to be one bereft of the means of washing stains from garments.

cider drinking in less than conventional, more unusual locations seems to be quite a thing at the moment. just recently i was driving along a motorway of some significance. during this drive i observed some members of the constabulary remonstrating with a gentleman. generally it is so that pedestrians are encouraged not to walk along motorways unless there is some good reason for such. i do believe, however, that the constabulary were called to intervene in his stroll specifically as he appeared to have a few cans with him. whereas i am sure there is some enjoyment in walking along, decking some cider as cars whizz past you at formidable (and mostly legal) speeds, it really isn't something i would imagine is encouraged or tolerated.

so, if you wish to enjoy a few drinks, be it cheap, industrial strength cider or something closer to the more refined end of the alcohol spectrum, please give every consideration to doing so in a reasonably safe and not particularly dangerous location.




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

half a dozen of the other

howdy pop pickers


it is so that, ostensibly, the decision to issue the Now That's What I Call Music compilations on CD, with it being for the first time ever in this fancy new format for many of them, was welcomed as a very good idea indeed. this, for the most part, remains so, look you see. no matter how much they try to thwart or undermine it all with fiddled variations of the releases, and indeed now that they have elected to (in a partially forced on them way) muck about with the timing of releases.

here we are, then. the sixth volume of these re-issues, handily called Now That's What I Call Music 6, is now available. it came out on the penultimate friday of july 2020, when it was intended to be later on in the year. strange that they pulled it forward when the previous, Now That's What I Call Music 5, was pushed back a bit due to all that coronavirus stuff. well, here we are now, so let us move on. partially.

the original release of Now That's What I Call Music 6 was November 1985, which was why it made perfect sense for the plan to be to have the re-issue on CD (and tape and record) November 2020, but never mind. it was so that this was the first post-Live Aid "big" compilation. generally, or strictly, speaking, the opening track of the set, One Vision by Queen, is interpreted about being written in celebration of (Irish Sir) Bob Geldof and his extraordinary (assisted but still) achievement. some of us, though, associate the song with its presence on the soundtrack for the film Iron Eagle, which was basically Top Gun imagined as less of a homoerotic love story and lacked Val Kilmer.

from a nostalgia driven sense of sentimental hygiene, this is the last, or final, of the series i can accurately, or fondly, recall owning. my memory is of getting the lp (which yes i still have) as a Christmas present that year. somewhere i have one later volume on vinyl, although that one belonged to either Richard or Gillian originally, and i "borrowed" it, so to to speak. red cover, i think.

as has been the case, regrettably and woefully for the purists, they have played around with the songs which form the set. many of the re-releases on CD have had some omissions. one or two make a degree of sense, and here i am speaking about a Gary Glitter tune being removed. in other instances, less so. the previous re-issue, 5, for example, excluded the magnificent This Is Not America, which is strange as Bowie's people had happily allowed his stuff to appear on the other re-issues. we shall have to see how this goes with the later ones, as quite soon they shall reach the volume which should feature Absolute Beginners.

here only one song from the original is missing in its entirety, which was the duet between Tina Turner and Bryan Adams, It's Only Love (i think that was what it was called). a vague explanation for it being absent was issued, with the label saying they were unable to get clearance to use it in time for their rushed, a few months before intended release. considering that another Tina Turner song features on the set, the magnificence of We Don't Need Another Hero (Thunderdome) from the magnificent film Slightly Cheesed Off Max Beyond Thunderdome, we have to take it as a given that it was the other 50% of the duet who held up the song being included. it would strike me, then, as being accurate, acceptable and apt to refer to him now exclusively as "that twat Bryan Adams".

further folly and flaw exist, of course. it has become a sad and unfortunate standard for these sets in their shiny new compact disc format to feature the "incorrect" versions of certain songs. what got quite a few people who had the originals excited about these re-issues was the fact that, in theory, many rare 7" versions of songs would be on CD at last. alas, they have opted to be less than faithful with this. the worst crime committed in this regard (thus far) was on Now That's What I Call Music 3.  rather than use the somewhat rare mix of Two Tribes which graced the 7" picture disc of the single, as was the case on vinyl, they "just" went with the standard 7" mix. it would have been fantastic to have had the rarer version on disc, but not to be.

what about what we actually have, though, instead of constant lament of all ills that are wrong or incorrect with the release? a considerably better selection than featured on 5, but of course still nowhere near quite so good as my all time favourite Now set, the brilliant number four one.

as was pretty much the case with all volumes released from (and very much including) five onwards, the pattern followed here is that the crown jewels, the very best of the best, are all on the first disc, or for nostalgia first lp or first tape. beyond the Queen and Tina Turner tunes mentioned, one gets the song what was unequivocally the pinnacle of Feargal Sharkey's solo career, the audacious, talent showcasing number one single from Eurthythmics, Kate Bush's absolute personification of matching arty abstracts with stunning accessible pop, Elton John not being a shouty twat, the wonders of Marillion and one of the finest moments of the career of Simple Minds. and more on top of that.

by comparison disc (or tape or lp) two is not necessarily bad, but does not do well by comparison. favourites i would pluck from it are Blue off of Fine Young Cannibals, and yes, of course, the outstanding Miami Vice theme by Jan Hammer. on the disc, the Lloyd Cole song shall never ever be played by me again after i let the whole set play through once, the best thing about Arcadia was when some of the members went back to being Duran Duran and as much as i might appreciate Siouxie And The Banshees it feels just plain weird hearing one of their tunes in the middle of all this pop.

yes, i know i made a mess of the order of the above, but let me be honest about it and show as i took, rather than taking another picture. well, if they don't make the sets perfect then why is it that i should concern myself too much with such.

the above picture is thrown in here to show how annoying it is for us who have every intention of getting all the CD re-issues (i believe they are going to continue to ten) and have ideas of putting them nicely on a shelf. it's irritating when planned sequential releases (or reissues) are not uniform, isn't it? whilst i can almost understand the font variation on the first, that use of roman numerals for volume two, then regular (i think "alpha numeric") numbers for the rest is just distracting. but still, it's nice that they fiddle with the colour for some of them.

does Now That's What I Call Music 6 do a decent job of representing the late spring and summer of 1985? from what i recall of it, yes, pretty much. with compilations being big business by this stage there was a scramble to licence some artists and songs, and for 6 they bagged a fair few of the major ones. two notable absentees at the time were Welcome To The Pleasuredome off of Frankie, which was a bit too soon for 5 and presumably too old for 6, and the massive selling Dancing In The Street off of Bowie and Jagger for Live Aid. if they could have got the latter, at the least (preferably in place of Lloyd Cole), then this would have been pretty much bang, or spot, on.

with their planned, or proposed, release schedule for these re-issues now seemingly thrown out, it is difficult to guess when Now That's What I Call Music 7 shall be with us. maybe later on this year, perhaps only early in 2021, if we all survive that long. but yes, to be boringly repetitive, i shall most certainly be looking out for its release, and would have every intention of getting it. if nothing else, it shall be interesting to see if Bowie's people let Absolute Beginners appear on it, and if so what version gets shoved on.

one, or i, suspects that my expert analysis is not required to state the obvious, but it would be fair to say that this volume perfectly illustrates how it is that the Now That's What I Call Music series of compilations has survived to (well) north of 100 volumes, at least in terms of UK releases. the wide range of different styles of music is spot on perfect to lure in elements of the widest target demographic range possible. although i still simply do not understand who or what it is that ever went off to purchase Lloyd Cole stuff.



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