viewer discretion is required

greetings

well, consider me somewhat confused. and bewildered, look you see. either someone has quite a peculiar grudge against me, or Jim Bowen (or Simon le Bon), or i have written things which had decidedly unintended consequences. 

not so long ago - on my birthday, as it happens - i got some stern warnings off of that there google what makes this blog possible. quite a number of emails arrived, telling me that someone had flagged certain posts what i gone done for content. to my surprise the google agreed with this, and have put said posts behind a warning that the posts might cause some distress, or offence or what have you. 

this really took me by surprise. whereas i would not (by any means) suggest this blog is intended for families to sit around to read together, i do make it all family friendly. apparently i have not gone done with this as much as i had thought. oh. 

anyway, no doubt some of you shall be curious as to what caused all the upset. can i provide links to the supposedly offending posts? sure, here you go, but please remember viewer discretion is required. 

Jim Bowen

More Jim Bowen

Simon le Bon

And A Bit More Jim Bowen

congratulations to who(m)ever has taken it upon themselves to try and stop people reading whatever it is what i wrote. let me know if there is actually anything naughty in the above; i certainly do not read my own writing. 

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

washing day, wash your troubles away

hello

indeed it is a shame we have to play, look you see, to conclude the song lyric. and bonus points for you if you identified the song. but, for now, yes, of course, yet another documented visit to a car wash facility. 

no, not much new here. same car wash i have become a regular, if not frequent, patron of, and of course it is all presented in the greater good and glory of Commodore 64 mode. 

as you can (kind of) see in the above, a not too unreasonable day to be getting a car wash thing done, with the weather being nowhere near as tempestuous as it could be. wow, i just wrote that complex word right the first time, with no red line of please correct me. 

yes, of course there's a bit of that animated gif stuff action for you to enjoy. presuming anyone is still looking, for i believe it's 3 (three) or so years i have been doing posts like this and there has not been what you would call a lot of variation in them. 

far be it from (or for) me to presume you need any form of narration, but to confirm any lingering suspicions you have, yeah, the above shows them big wet flippy floppy soapy soft brushes doing their thing across the windscreen. by thing i believe i mean washing and cleaning it. 

to try and pretend to mix this up a bit, or add some variety, i believe mostly i picture the passenger side window of the car was experience. perhaps i am (quite) mistaken and often i do the driver side. anyway, here's the driver side, for a change. yes, some animated footage of this too, below. 

getting the usual stuff out of the way, and of course our friends in America, as well as them voulez vous, sacre bleu twats in France, would say no, no, non, un-oui, surely that is the passenger side i am showing. no, it is not. don't blame me that you built your cars backwards and drive on the wrong side of the road. go petition your council, or government, or whatever. it's never too late to change, except for instances where (or when) it is indeed too late to change. 

sure, here's that animated gif video thing of the above what i think was suggested as coming. 

whilst it's not my place to say, i do believe i didn't do an all that bad job of capturing the brushes moving along in this one. probably not the best ever car wash video what i have done, for the ones where the water rushes over the windscreen are quite class (in a trippy way), but still not bad. 

right, well, no promises but i shall certainly try to think about making the next post rather more interesting. or at the least less car wash. 

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

can't say that i was surprised when you broke the ties

howdy pop pickers

well, there's every chance that i should (perhaps) be writing of some other matter today (with today being the day it is published, look you see), but no. this is a subject that's been a part of my life, if you will close to my heart, for just north of 50% of my life to date. so yes, with more images than i can write of, but of course this all concerns Medazzaland off of Duran Duran. which indeed i have had speaks about before, but hey, i do repeat myself from time to time to time. 

it's not like i don't play this album on a fairly frequent basis. whereas i have quite a lot of tapes, or discs should you prefer to be correct, there are some albums which i go back to a lot. this is certainly one of them. most recently it is has had a lot of play on my stereo because i have a new copy of it. weirdly it was so that quite late last year (2022) the album finally had a proper release in the UK (and Europe, and other parts of the world), some 25 years after it was recorded and, in some places, released. 

a brief(ish) history, then. the nineties were a strange, peculiar time for Duran Duran. unexpectedly, early on in the decade, they reached Rio levels of heights again, be it in the charts or people's hearts, with the frankly brilliant Ordinary World single. the album which followed (of name either eponymous, self titled, untitled or, commonly, Wedding Album) was also excellent. and then they did a covers album which was called Thank You that got (harshly and unfairly) slated, and then came recording this album that i am speaking of.

the image above is off of the Out Of My Mind video, which i think was the first "taste" of new material from the band. it featured on the soundtrack for The Saint, which wasn't a bad film at all. i can recall seeing just a snippet of the video, specifically part of it which the above featured, and said to myself that Simon le Bon was wearing possibly the greatest shirt ever made. should, in unlikely circumstances, i be required to pinpoint the start of my infatuation with this album, this is it. 

not much went well with the journey to get Medazzaland to the point of release. biggest issue was, perhaps, John Taylor quitting shortly after recording sessions began. which meant yeah, Duran Duran was now either just 40% of the original (to 1985) line up, or 66% of Arcadia plus that Warren dude who joined Duran in 86. also 0% Taylor presence, whereas "prime" Duran Duran was 60% Taylor. 

going full tilt Spinal Tap is what happened next, then. a decision was apparently taken to simply erase most of what John Taylor had recorded and press on. some accounts, mostly from Warren Cuccurullo and there's no reason to doubt the veritas of it, say that they pressed on with material not even intended for Duran Duran, but rather a Warren and Nick side project. with two singles not producing much in sales, label EMI released the album in the USA and Japan only, where it didn't do well, so didn't release it anywhere else. they rather chose to tear up Duran's contract, gave them full ownership of the master tapes and rights to Medazzaland, and told them to f*** off. 

presented above are the two (2) different versions of the compact disc, then. to the left is the most recent (2022) release, to the right is the USA version. which i paid HMV £18 for. by no means is this too clear in the above image (sorry), but the covers are different. for a start, look at the image of Warren, diagonally below that of Simon. and top right for that matter. the text is weirdly the same but different. and also absent is 'Duran Duran' crossed out in the bottom right. more on that just now, and a bit later on with other artwork oddities. 

since the band haven't really spoken too much about the record - yet, importantly, have never denied it exists - it's really, really difficult to tell of they either went "f*** it let's just go full tilt with whatever" or went with a quite deliberate quest to subvert. i would suspect the former soon became the latter. every clue to this is there in the original artwork, with the band name crossed out. as in, it is us but it isn't us sort of thing. who knows, perhaps one of their biggest influences, noted this and recalled it when seeking out ideas for the artwork for The Next Day. 

no, then, they didn't just take old, unused compact disc stock and shove it in new packaging. the disc surfaces are quite different. original version is the one at the bottom; i would like to think that the new version is pink as a homage to the pink CD case the original release came in. 

a second single, in some parts of the world, turned up in advance of the album. which was Electric Barbarella, a nod to the well famous origins of the band name. perhaps this is just me being a weirdo or whatever, but i immediately found this compelling. the strange, weird and furious passion for an emotionless (and clearly sexual) relationship expressed in the song resonated with me quite possibly more than it should have. plus, that video for it. nice to see the boys could still get banned off of MTV when trying to push boundaries, so to speak. 

timing was a big issue with this album, making it all the more subversive in ways likely not intended. making it quite and perfectly clear that there's never been a whisper of a word that the song was in any way about her, well. had the song Electric Barbarella been released at the time intended in the UK, its release would have been around the time well known Durannie Princess Diana died. ever eager to get the wrong story to press, no doubt dodgy newspapers (you know which one in particular) would have gone wild with the "princess of my dreams" line. 

aside from that possible connotation, there's the song Michael You've Got A Lot To Answer For. this was a lyric off of Simon for his friend, Michael Hutchence. sadly it was only a short while, i think a few weeks, after the record was released that he died, giving the song an entirely different possible meaning. one certainly not intended, or even thought possible. 

for another (poorly pictured, sorry) comparison between the original release and (at time of writing) most recent release, the booklet is more or less the same. just the quality of paper used on the new version is better, or at the least heavier. some sort of polaroid art (and Nick Rhodes i am looking at you here) adorns the new inner cover. curiously on the new print it is virtually impossible to read, or work out, what the song titles are. hard to believe this is anything but deliberate. 

yeah, far too many pictures uploaded here for this, so here's a look at the back cover for both to date versions of it. once again slight differences exist, yet the most striking is the uber subversion on the go. 

certainly, yes, indeed, that is the celebrated Rio album art cover they have vandalised, or some may well say desecrated. quite a straightforward way to say "don't expect what you had before here", really. what interests me the most is how they have tackled the "mid price" sticker what came on some CDs, apparently adding to it. seems to me to be something about the singer? but by far the biggest difference is that on the new version (to the left) "accept" is crossed out, "expect" is not. on the original (to the right) both are. other writing looks different too. i am sure this means something, even if it's that they lost the original artwork and had a bash at recreating it. lads, you could have photocopied my version. 

just why do i love this album so much? actually not sure "love" is correct. what it does do, in unequivocal terms, is strike a chord with me. this it does on some levels i am aware of, some that i pretend i am not aware of, and others than i know to be true but cannot quite understand why. obviously and of course the record is not about moi, but yet i feel at times it reflects my life up to that point, and over the years it feels as though it was a map i followed. whether i should have or not. how very bizarre and strange that it should be a virtually discarded Duran Duran album which affected me so. 

my understanding is that another version of this album is due, possibly this year. one of them "special edition" things, likely containing a few extra tracks. of what they might be, well, there's Saint Or Sinner off of the Out Of My Mind single, and Ball & Chain off of the Japan only version. but who knows what other bits of tape Nick and Simon and, indeed, Warren have from the sessions. maybe even John kept some bits to throw into another variation.just so there's no doubt, of course i shall purchase it. even if it is exactly the same as either of these releases. 

by the by, or as an aside (or what have you) the album they did after this one, Pop Trash, was not quite so good, but still rather unfairly overlooked. for a start there's one truly amazing number on it, the single Someone Else Not Me, which makes it worth checking out alone. 

right, that's that for this. no of course there's no proper review of the actual album i tend not to do things like that. but i shall be listening to it again, and again, so long as i have time left. 

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

exquisite relief

greetings

so yeah, no, i would not think this is at all an appropriate post to publish on the day (or evening) of the date today, 14th February. which is Valentine's Day, look you see. but then again, who are we to judge in this current, or present, world which i barely understand? any number of people out there may well find all of this the height of romantic stuff, who knows. obviously not me. 

oh but where to begin, or if you will commence. at the start i suppose, but not quite so. maybe something akin to a slight (general) prologue before the business end.

moving on, then, i was, for a concern i would wish not to disclose, in an area of London (innit) one would consider either posh or simply expensive, depending on your perspective. both, really. how much of each, exactly? as far as i was able to ascertain, very. what them people pay in rent, or mortgage, costs for a month would likely cover between six and eight months of the same for people living in normal, proper parts of the nation what have a considerably different (note i didn't say better, but still) sense of perspective. blimey. 

anyway, whilst there (and you can probably guess the direction of this from the above image) i was caught short. which is to say i needed to spend a penny. you know, in urgent desire (and pressing need) for a gypsy kiss (p!ss). options for such were somewhat slightly limited, but scanning around revealed that what i had taken to be some office, or fancy flats, was a hotel. nice one. with innocence in i went, on the assumption that i could just ask and surely they would allow. 

when i walked in and felt carpet what is even posher than what Fortnum & Mason have beneath my booted feet i went "oh". looking around i could not help but notice several (f*****g) expensive looking statues and sculptures beautifying the place. not to mention a fair few millions of pounds of art on the walls. right. believe you me the "class system" remains alive and well in this nation, and everything of the place said "you, urchin, do not belong here". but, like, it was going to get very messy in the trouser department very quickly, so boldly i asked if i could use their bathroom facility and the reception concierge type, what probably earns a month that i do in a year, consented and directed me. 

the expense of the place was certainly not spared in the bathroom either. all of it, as you can see if you so wish in the below (yes, we've got a video), was rather well crafted and designed. undoubtedly it is so that never have i used such an expensive urinal before. even the music gently playing in the bathroom appeared to have been curated. wouldn't be at all surprised to learn that they had commissioned him what does the shows and that, Lord Webber, to especially select pieces of music to play whilst members of the gentry conducted their business. 

i of course thought of Spiros. hence the video, really. this was filmed and sent to him to ask if he had ever been in there to make some short term yet mutually beneficial friendship arrangements. he responded that no, he had not, but intended to visit it quite soon. my hope would be that he finds the experience a spectacular success, and also that he refrains from sharing any details. 

do i have any plans not for bathrooms (as such) but for Valentine's Day? not really. in the rather fine words of the minstrel (Bowie), all i have is my love of love, and love is not loving. perhaps i am best left to speculate, postulate and consider the idea of romance, for i know not how it is done no more. my experience would be that in slaying a dragon it is all too easy to become the dragon yourself. oh. 

leaving that aside, i trust that if you did do something (or other) for the day today, it was most excellent, and boss. also, should you find yourself in need of some relief like what i experienced in this, then may it have been in totes amazing surroundings like this what you gone done it. please do not feel any need to share such, but then again, go ahead if that is your will. 

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

statues

heya

it is with some slight surprise that i find myself (or moi) honouring my commitment to bring at least one observation of football related statues here at least once a year quite so early on. but what is one to do when they see such, look you see. there would be little sense in causing a delay to presenting these images until later in the year. 

for a slight, somewhat minimal change, these statutes this time, for there are more than one, were not found near a football stadium. also, it is far beyond the remit of that particular sport which gets celebration here. enough, momentarily, of my words, here's one picture. with a warning that the quality of images are not too great, but we shall get to that. 

with respect to the football element, you might (possibly) be able to work out that one of the statues is of Sir Bobby Moore and another is of Sir Alf Ramsey. this is, of course, in celebration of a certain tournament win in 1966. yet also celebrated (to the right) are paralympic legend Beverly Gull and boss rugby player Jason Leonard. more details are a mere click (here) away. 

not just football heroes (or icons) celebrated, then, but rather a wider tribute to key sporting legends who hail from the Barking & Dagenham region of London (innit). yes, i have been, of late, spending quite some time down there, which means several observations from the place shall follow in posts after this one. 

the somewhat poor(er than usual) quality of these image is a result of me taking them whilst in a moving vehicle. perfectly legally, i shall have you know, for i was in the passenger seat, leaving the driver, or if you will pilot. quite handy that these statues were visible from one of the six or seven roads on which one in London can actually still drive on, what with the bonkers mayor there blocking off as many as he can purely for cyclists. i will trust the people of London shall do the right thing when they are asked if they would care to vote for him again. 

as to where these statues are, well, i guess they are in Barking and Dagenham. that must surely have been so, i just failed to observe any signs. in respect of proximity to any form of stadium, i seem to recall, or at least think, that they were not all that far away from the celebrated "London Stadium", which existed for the 2012 Olympics and has since become home to West Ham United, which is indeed a football concern. one that Sir Bobby was, of course, associated with. 

your next question may very well be of what i thought about Barking and Dagenham, but i suspect this was answered above, if only in a tacit way. sadly i had no opportunity to stop off and soak in the culture and atmosphere of the place, for i urgently needed to go and look at a place where at least one of the Kray twins shot at least one person who broke the unwritten rules. or possibly a written one, or just happened to look at them funny. i know, i know, only killed their own sort, etc. 

oddly, though, Dagenham is probably quite famous around the world for a number of reasons. for a start, improbably, two (quite) different songs called Dagenham Dave have been recorded and released, one off of The Stranglers and one off of Morrissey. also, back in the 90s, a company called Dagenham Motors sponsored West Ham, so everyone saw them on their shirts. that was before so-called premier league clubs got sponsored by [TEXT REMOVED ON LEGAL ADVICE] and gambling firms. 

right, well, until the next time.........

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

all is with a twist now

hi there

it was once, so, that the Oreo was a thing of mystery to us here in England. and, presumably, the wider or the entire of the UK, but i can't speak for all of it, look you see. many of us wondered what it was like, for we never got them here in the 80s. or 90s. at least not early 90s. they got referenced on them tele shows that our friends in America made and permitted broadcast of here, and of course they got themselves the honour of being referenced by Holly Johnson in Americanos. quite likely that them fancy posh shops in London (innit) imported them for the lah-de-dah brigade back then, but you couldn't get them on the shelves in the normal, proper parts of the country. 

now, of course, they are profligate. i have no idea when all of this happened, but at some stage in the last one quarter of a century someone elected to allow who(m)ever makes these Oreo biscuits to carpet bomb all of the nation, meaning you can buy them in very nearly every shop in the land. which, if we are to be honest, isn't all that bad, for it turns out that they are pretty decent. obviously not as good as proper British biscuits, but still, you know, not bad. 

but of course well does not get left alone. it seldom (if ever) does in this world. when there's a decent product, or thing, someone somewhere takes a decision to make a "twist" on it. back in the 80s this would be a marketing type taking that direction. you know, some ponytailed, horn rimmed glasses, power tie wearing coke snorting mother f*****r. i don't believe such decisions are left to anyone quite as intelligent as that no more; they rather have some spotty kids on computers look at what stupid thing is "trending" on "twitter" and base business decisions on such whimsical nonsense. 

this is how we now have "Oreo Twists" in our world. absolutely no one (with precision) was demanding, since no one simply asks or suggests in this world, that they shove extra things into the standard Oreo. but, they gone done it anyway. oh, no, i am not against it as such, but it should be noted that my purchase of these was based more on how they were cheaper ("cost fewer") that regular ones, and i was of a mind to enjoy a biscuit or two (or the whole pack) with a cup of tea as i sat alone in hotel, contemplating my era of exile. 

as it happens i am quite partial to caramel (and who isn't) so i was looking forward to these. oh, for the purposes of anyone interested they do other "twists", i think one was strawberry or similar. well, as you can see in the above, the biscuits (or "cookies", as our misguided friends in America call them, and it is worth remembering that they don't use the word fanny properly) don't quite look in real life like they do on the packet. oh. further, although they have kind of a caramel taste, it is a pretty bland one. 

how likely is it that i shall have these again? not out of the question. sure, if i feel like some biscuits, they are on the shelf on special, bought. but rather unlikely that i shall go out of my way for them. 

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

quantum of scent

greetings

for the last two years or so i have, and not that this shall be of all that much interest to anyone, been fairly, if not reasonably, loyal to Versace as a brand or supplier of aftershave. eau de toilette, though, i do believe the fancy posh name for it all is now. just something that makes you smell nice(r), look you see. quite recently though it is so that i've sort of kind of mixed it up a little. 

i am, in truth (and honesty, if different), a bit of a one for buying branded items what are not really relevant. what does that even mean? best example is probably procuring my mug collection over the years. they are mugs, and serve a purpose no matter what is on them, yet still it remains that what coins i have will be attracted to buying ones with certain, key words or images on. 

so it was likely, or inevitable, that, in my three quarter life crisis (should i even make it that far) i was going to end up making use of this. 

but not in a way you may think. it was not "oh, class, James Bond aftershave, let me buy and use". it so happens that the first bottle i purchased was a gift for young William, who pleased his father greatly by expressing an interest in the James Bond films. he then proceeded to adopt an interest in smelling nice, so got him a bottle. 

no, no no, i didn't swipe his gift. rather it is so (of course) that i went and purchased my own. this was partially as it smelt rather pleasant, but also it was going off the shelves and was further going cheap. i believe i spent some £10 on this. admittedly that's not "cheap cheap", but is a compatible price for when i purchase, say, Versace Blue Jean in a 75ml bottle on special for £15. mathematics makes that same difference. 

what, or how, does it smell of? good question. the packaging gives away no secret of what the scent is, save for a brief mention of blackberry. presumably not the phone. if i were to guess, one of them sort of kind of "wood" fragrances is present, be it cedar or sandal. that seems to be in all of them. well, the really at least halfway decent ones. yet which Bond is this supposed to smell of? 

purely for fun, then, i thought it might be quite nice (and give me something to write of) to consider each of the "proper" presentations of James Bond on screen to date and see which one creates a sense of what this aftershave evokes. and for some reason my blog thing has uploaded the images in the reverse order of what i wished for. oh. 

so, anyway, starting with Daniel Craig, who was of course the most recent actor to play the part. and why i wished his to come up last. oh well. no, i don't think it, as in this aftershave, is based on him (or his portrayal). whereas he was most excellent in the role, with Skyfall in particular being one of the best ever Bond films. that said, for some reason the films what he gone done were all obsessed with having James Bond getting his head kicked in. so, surely, any aftershave based on him would have quite a heavy sweat and blood odor of it. which this doesn't have. 

one James Bond actor it certainly isn't based on is puffy bum bum nancy boy Pierce Brosnan. just, no. yes, he was in one (1) good Bond film, Goldeneye, but otherwise he was terrible in a series of terrible, terrible movies. at no stage was he ever convincing in the role, simply as he looked and acted far too much like a softie to have plausibly seen active military service.

there's just no practical or viable way for this aftershave (eau de toilette) to have been inspired off of him. it would have had to have been a very soft, bland, basically water thing. a shame, really. Pierce had excellent pre and post Bond careers, but he was just never right in the role. they should never have offered it to him, can't blame him for accepting. 

it would be excellent if the aftershave thing was based on Timothy Dalton, the actor what got most f****d over playing the part. he was a beauty boss actor for the part him. sadly his debut The Living Daylights was somewhat "different" from the usual and a bit tricky to follow. the second of his, Licence To Kill, they would not let them make it as "dark" or violent as they wanted, yet what came out proved a bit too dark and violent for many. lawyers and what not delayed a follow up and eventually that was that. 

exactly how a Timothy Dalton inspired James Bond aftershave would smell would be very interesting. for me, as you can no doubt work out from the above, the strong scent of being f***ed over would be applicable. surely each and every one of us has had an experience of this, which is being f***ed over. that may well make it problematic to base an aftershave on, for surely it had a different smell for each of us. 

right, now we are talking. whereas it would be silly for anyone to state, suggest or argue (but they do) who the "best" Bond was (is), each of us has a favourite. and mine of course is Sir Roger Moore, most probably as that is the James Bond i grew up with. plus, you know, he was in the one what Duran Duran did one of them best themes ever for. also, he did a Bond what a Beatle did a theme for. unlikely to ever happen again, as you don't see who(m)ever gets the part next demanding that Ringo be contracted to do the song. 

of all the potential Bond candidates for who(m) this fragrance drew inspiration, i would suggest Sir Roger is the most likely. the aftershave hints at a sense of the exquisite and luxurious; the dapper gentleman lifestyle what one would reasonably associate with this fine fellow. but, sadly, i don't think so, for it was far too cheap an item to be of Sir Roger. any aftershave based upon or inspired by Sir Roger would cost many thousands of pounds, so as to ensure no peasants or riff raff (like, for instance, me) could get it. 

certainly i am including George Lazenby here, even if he was rather foolish, in retrospect, to decline to play the part more than once. a strange thing is that we, the people shall always say he was only Bond in just the one film, yet don't follow up and state that it was a really, really, really, really good one. sure, true, longer than it needed to be, but if you haven't seen it for a bit (or ever) i would strongly suggest checking out On Her Majesty's Secret Service. perfect afternoon viewing, it is. 

anyway, no. there is no chance that this aftershave was based on the G. just as he was famously only Bond once he is famously Australian, unless that was all a bit of an urban legend. let us assume it is not so, and he really is fair dinkum. to keep with that, and to honour and respect it, such an aftershave would need to smell of eucalyptus, bush fires and that tingling metallic like iron taste one gets when they are drowning in their own blood after being bitten off a lethal spider. 

many would suggest, contrary to my earlier words, that it is actually quite easy to name the "best" Bond, and that it is Sir Sean Connery. having watched a couple of his performances again recently i am not that sure. except, well, i would still say Goldfinger is the best of the lot, and certainly he remains the most iconic in the role. had it not been for he in the first films, well, who knows if we'd even be speaking of the character / role (in terms of films) today. 

basing an aftershave on Sir Sean would be a lovely idea, but it's not this one. for him it would be far more rugged, macho and direct. this thing is just far too subtle to be of Sir Sean, really. 

perhaps this aftershave (eau de toilette pour homme) is a distinct blend of the five proper James Bond actors we have had, plus some vague acknowledgement of Pierce. if i could be bothered to look it up on that there internet thing i would no doubt find some blurb of puff piece from the makers, telling me all about it. don't have time and i am not that interested. 

yes, by the way, as per the original (first) image, the aftershave element in the bottle does appear to be a black liquid. indeed William was slightly disappointed that it did not spray out like some black ink thing, but that might have caused clothing damage issues. 

once i have finished this bottle there will be some regret that it is no more, true. but for the most part i shall simply retreat back to the Versace fragrances i have found i like and, in truth, believe best reflect, or represent, my sexuality in an olfactory way. kind of. 

so far as i am aware this is quite far away from being unique, or the first such instance of a film related tie-in for an aftershave type product. but i cannot recall what any of the others may have been. 

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

posh area trolley action

hello there

no idea when i last did a post on seeing a trolley found in a less conventional placing that usual, but here we are. and it is with delight, look you see, that i only saw the one, so no headaches about what the correct or proper spelling of the plural is. 

this one i saw down there in that there London (innit) place. i was out and about, doing what i do for verk, which strictly speaking isn't spotting or looking for (here goes a plural) trollies. however, getting to see one now and then is definitely a plus. 

as it happens, i was in a fairly or reasonably affluent area of that there London (innit) when i saw this one. which is why the post has the title it does. not sure if the trolley is off of a posh place, but my understanding is that all of London does all of its shopping at something called Waitrose, a brand too expensive to have any branches (or chapters) up here in normal parts of England, so maybe. 

i would have thought there is next to no level or interest or point in a video (yes, we've got a video) of either this abandoned trolley or any other. the thing is, after all, and in fairness, just, well, parked there, or sat there if that is correct. but, considering how often (frequently) i am incorrect, if not wrong, here you go, some video. 

oddly this abandoned, or if you like repurposed, trolley makes sense. it is in a residential area of that there London place, but one plagued like so many others there, innit. sure, there are roads, but you are not actually allowed to drive on them. for reasons of verk i have spent some considerable time down there, and i would guess (or speculate) that some 40% of the roads in the place are now ones you are prohibited from driving on, unless you wish to pay a fine (£65 if paid in 14 days, don't ask how i know this but have a guess). little wonder that the people of London are so angry so often, and no shock or surprise at all that the few roads you can drive on are mad massive traffic jams. 

quite surprising, and i am (fairly) sure i have made this point before, that the people of London have allowed the incumbent, quasi squatter mayor Sadiq Khan to effectively cripple the place. he strives to make the place both difficult to live in and very easy to die by murder in. i suppose a lot of the problem is no credible opposition has been put forward. yet he seems blissfully unaware that he wasn't voted in for him, as such, rather people voted for "least worst" or simply against other candidates. perhaps as soon as he is gone London can commence rebuilding as an actual, proper functional city once more. it cannot be so that his reckless reign of damage and misery is irreparable; the city is too great. 

how likely is it that this shall be just the first trolley post of the year? as in, shall more follow? one would realistically expect so. although on a recent trip to a supermarket i found no trolleys (trollies) available at all. perhaps enthusiasm for taking them home, or to scrapyards, has returned to pre-2020 volumes. which is good and, for me in this instance, bad. 

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