last day of the david bowie calendar

greetings

just one of them posts what pretty much does what it says on the box. or in the title, look you see, for those mindful of being accurate if not pedantic. 

this year (2025) and last (2024, fact fans) saw me have on the go (so to speak) a David Bowie calendar. not the "official" one off of his Estate, but rather a somewhat independently produced one. bootleg, i suppose. curiously in both instances the "unofficial" calendar featured considerably better images than the official one. from what i recall i have, over the last 24 months (!) shared the odd picture of it here and there. no, i am not adding links. 

alas there is to be no trilogy (or hat trick) of this. frequently has it been that i have visited the same shop where these came from. it is not so much that they don't have the same style Bowie calendar in as it is they don't have any. on dear. i asked the staff if stock was coming and they suggested apparently not. 

with some reluctance i considered, if not contemplated, getting the "official" one, so as to maintain the new trend of a Bowie calendar. for this i visited HMV and the only ones (calendars) they had on offer were ones of (why aye man) Newcastle United or Iron Maiden. so, no. 

yes, i am quite aware that i could have ordered any sort of Bowie calendar "online", but no. if an item is more complex in shape or size (dimension) than a letterbox, which a calendar is, it seems far too perplexing for any postal delivery system to handle these days. plus Royal Mail, and other delivery firms, seem to forever be taken by surprise by Christmas and the higher volumes. i am someone that still prefers to go to an actual shop and get stuff.

merrily i do have a calendar for the year ahead (2026). as an unexpected (and very welcome) gift for Christmas my (known) children have got me one. no, it is not a Bowie one as such, but all the same a most agreeable one. it should with some ease meet any and all requirements i may have in regards of knowing what date it is. 

right, that would be that, then, for this and posts for the year that is this year (2025). many thanks for stopping by for whatever reason it is you did!

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

yearning year

hello there

and so, it would see, i did indeed make it through the year. well, more or less, look you see, or perhaps kind of just about. few ("less") are the days that remain of this year for fate to dictate that i do not, but presently if not momentarily i have. 

not entirely sure why i bother with this "year in review" sort of thing. i cannot imagine all that many are too concerned about what i did (or did not) care for during the year. also it's not like i have experienced all that much of what was available (films, albums and what have you) to be in any position to declare something to be the "best". still, as we are ultimately creatures of habit, here we are. 

quite likely that i should have put a warning about the above selfie (sorry), but then again it is rather shadow in nature, as is the way of the (disappointing) "psychedelic" camera app thing. another one turns up at the end, somewhat clearer too, so there's a warning. 

so......

music

from what i can tell, or rather remember (recall) it was so that i only purchased 3 (three) new, as in released in the year 2025, tapes. oddly actual tapes too, but yes i did buy the conventional compact discs of each. they all (i think) came with signed stuff too. 

best, or my personal favourite? that would be, by some distance, Antidepressants off of Suede. one could reasonably suggest this was determined before i even heard it i, i suppose, such is the nature of bias. a really, really good album, just not quite the devastating masterpiece the previous one, Autofiction, was. ultimately this one felt like "a step sideways" from that, as if they were trying to once more make something of the same "feel" rather than explore more. 

as for the other tapes pictured above, well, Critical Thinking off of Manic Street Preachers turned out to be a Manic Street Preachers album. i think they have reached a point where they do "this" purely as they would have no idea what else to do. by no means is it bad, and i wouldn't say they are "past it" or a spent force. anything they do shall be an automatic purchase. moments of greatness shall still come. 

three albums in and i am still unsure what, exactly, Inhaler are supposed to be beyond a decent rock band. perhaps that's it, that is all, yet they express a wish to be somewhat bigger. so far they haven't unleashed anything likely to challenge things from the past as being the dominant stuff in rock. chances are that yes, if there is a further (4th) album off of them, i shall get it. 

in respect of music from the past (rather than the future), or if you will re-issues, again the argument presented itself that all the truly great music has been created. various Now re-issues remind me that i grew up at a time of extraordinary creativity in pop. the Listen Like Thieves album off of INXS was a welcome re-release, with the record offering a tantalising glimpse of a band ready to be confident enough to take on the world and make it listen, which they very much did with the Kick album which came after that one. 

easily my favourite re-release was, as pictured, yet another copy of Welcome To The Pleasuredome off of Frankie Goes To Hollywood. i have no need for any more editions of the album, but the bonus disc was (is) superb. surprisingly generous, as it certainly showcases the highlights from the more expensive multi-tape (disc) set. one would think "this is it", surely there can be no more from the Frankie catalogue they can find to release, but us Frankie fans have said this before. 

health

long ago was it that i determined i should not consult any medical practitioner for anything. all that would happen, i presumed, was that i would get told to quit smoking and lose weight and that would make everything all better, no matter what the actual ailment or dismemberment. 

much of the first quarter of the year had me taking as a given (and quite a few links to posts shall come in from here on out) that my only medical consultation for the year would be the apparent need to try and sh!t in a box for some test or other. it turned out that i needed further medical intervention. 

feels quite curious to write this next bit and feel, at best, ambivalent, but when this, in this rather dramatically titled post recalls, all happened i really did think it was closing time, that at last i was to be no more, this was "it". not so. part of me does indeed wonder if it was really worth the effort of keeping me around, and i have every confidence there exists a number who would answer "not really". 

should you have clicked on the link in the previous paragraph and (for some reason) wish to know how the rest of it panned out, well, here you go with some links. here are the tender steps to recovery, doing all sorts of test and doing what i must to keep going. then there was progress with it all, as well as getting some insights into how the world sees things. finally, for now, there was remarkable progress made. next update, allowing for me making it that far, shall be due late February or early March, and that would be in 2026 for clarification. 

it has been peculiar being aware of my body changing without necessarily feeling it, should that make any sort of (vague) sense. some would indeed argue that i am incapable of any feeling at all, and this i find rather difficult to argue. all i know for certain is that weight has fallen off me and i seem to be, on a medical level at the least, feeling just fine. but that feeling is precisely how i would describe what i was just moments before the spectacular crash. 

of course i am exceedingly grateful to those who initially propped up my falling system and then have ensure i remain a going concern. yes, it may well be that i am at peace with the idea of the majority of my life being behind me (rather than ahead), but i do try and be present in the moment, not fearing what, or how little of it, awaits before me. for those of you who are pleased, delighted or happy that i remain a going concern, be it from care or convenience, thank you. 

reading

honestly i have kind of lost a bit of interest in this. maybe it's a bit like with music and i have a sense that every truly great book i am going to read is one that i have already read. not sure that makes all that much sense, but i suspect you get what i mean. 

with my penchant for (usually) waiting for the paperback being what it is i do not believe i read a book in 2025 that was first published in that year. from memory the first book off of the former Sonia backing dancer not to be set in a retirement community was rather agreeable. enjoyable, predictable and quite comfortable reading. 

should for some reason i need to pick the "best" book i read in the last twelve months then with little hesitation i would say it was The Blue Hour off of Paula Hawkins. yet another impressive novel from quite a gifted writer. indeed i could waffle on here, but go on, another link for you to my comments on it after i had read it. 

yes, i am still actively reading, by the way. every morning, when i have to apply that cream to my feet, i get in a chapter or two. currently reading a lengthy (as in north of 500 pages) one, so any future post on two books that i had gone done read will be a while off. 

gigs

fortune smiled on me once again and i got to experience some excellent live music. of particular fun was, or were, the two (2) tribute band things i got to see, being Fleetwood Mac and Rolling Stones ones. the latter not featuring a homage to Ronnie Wood, but an unexpected tribute to the solo career of Bill Wyman. 

picking a "favourite" if not "best" gig of the year is somewhat challenging. likely not Ocean Colour Scene supported by Kula Shaker, purely due to the - by any level of tolerance - pig ignorant, obnoxious audience the venue forever seems to attract. getting to be front row centre for Holly Johnson would be quite the easy pick for "best" of course. then there was the magnificence of KillerStar at the 100 Club, which was one hell of a night. 

but, at the risk of accusations of courting controversy with the dozen or so (give or take) people likely to read this, i am going to go right ahead and say that my choice of "best" gig of the year was Primal Scream. sure, their most recent album, like the two (or three) before it, was not that good, but by my word it is so that Bobby Gillespie live is incredible. 

as to why this might now be a "controversial" view, well, it may well be that chances to see them again will be a trifle limited. here is the most recent bit on "what happened" on the BBC website, and from there you can work backwards. how do i "address" it, or even bother? whereas i "get" what the intention was, it was an ill-advised thing they went and did at the XTRNMTR celebration gig. yes, Bobby (for he is essentially the band) can cite "freedom of expression" on it. but what people who claim "freedom of expression", or more commonly "freedom of speech", often forget or casually overlook is that there is indeed a price for that, which is you must be prepared to accept (or take) responses and reactions to what you say and/or do. 

by all accounts the best gig i didn't go to (and yes i did try for tickets) was Oasis. delighted to hear that it was a spectacular success, and nice one for all them that got to go. 

cigarettes

yes, yes, smoking is quite (or possibly) very bad for you, and you should either never ever start smoking or if you do then you should seek help in quitting as soon as possible. 

with that disclaimer out of the way, i was delighted to (at last) find some of these Top Gun cigarettes that i had looked for over the last few (3 or 4) years. they did not disappoint at all, and i am for all sorts of reasons very grateful to the person who led me to them, and some other stuff. 

films

absolutely no doubt at all that my favourite film of the year was Superman. i was reluctant to see it at first, doubting the idea of going all the way up to arriving at the cinema. very glad that i did, a tremendous, warm, feel good experience. 

i have pictured the video (disc) of it below with Fantastic Four : Whatever, but that's purely as i picked them up for the boys for their collection. no way was Fantastic Four : Look It Has Pedro Pascal In It And Everyone Loves Him So They Won't Notice It's A Dull Film close to being one of the best i saw this year. not even interesting enough to be called pedestrian. 

think the film i was most surprised to enjoy was F1 or F1 The Movie, as i believe it is (formally) called. was always going to be generic, paint by numbers stuff, but my word did they make it very well. i regret, so far, not seeing Sinners, as it looked ace. chances are i shall watch soon. for another positive i was suitably entertained by Spinal Tap II, even if attempting a sequel to a much loved established classic felt like a hiding to nothing. 

mostly a lot of "disappointment" with films, really. i was hoping that at least one of Mickey 17 and Death Of A Unicorn would be quite class, but not so. both had interesting, intriguing ideas (or premise) but were just dismal experiences. sadly The Naked Gun also fell way short. it had one or two genuinely funny moments, but too far and few between. who(m)ever made it and decided that the "coffee" running gag was worthwhile need not work in films again. 

final selfie warning for you all. 

right, that's just about that, then. quite a bit of other stuff, of course, happened during the year that was the year 2025, but now is not the time or the place for such. as in no, i can't be bothered to write all that much more for the moment. 

i, as ever, offer my thanks to you, be it someone i know or an entirely random internet stranger, for taking the inexplicable time taken to read whatever it is that i put here. 

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

ashes to ashes

g'day

every two years or so i am compelled (if not obliged) to contact the constabulary. by that i of course mean the police, look you see. well, it is the police i call, and then someone called the "independent office for police conduct" (or similar). my call to the police is, of course, for the rather (or relatively straightforward) matter of having the current England Test squad arrested for treason, based on their (inevitable) abject performance in The Ashes. the call to the "IOPC" (or whatever) is to establish why, exactly, the police are not arresting them because of the obvious act of treason of their own accord. both instances inevitably, and incorrectly, lead to me being accused of wasting police time and the suggestion that i should perhaps review my sense of perspective on such matters. 

should you be (for some reason) interested in my plight with respect to this, here is a link to a post in which i outlined the definition of treason. it makes it quite clear that the England Test squad are guilty of this, or at the least need to be investigated for it. quite an indictment on the sorry state of our once proud nation that we now dismiss acts of treason as "trivial". 

nonetheless (or regardless, whichever sounds posher), i have heeded some of the feedback (and police caution) from previous instances. it is of course that we, England, have once again surrendered The Ashes, but in this instance all the more humiliatingly so, with the First Test taking all of two (2) days to complete. initially my view was that the whole f*****g lot of them wanted locking up, but i have agreed to modify this. 

yes, i do (indeed) appreciate that two (2) Tests of The Ashes remain, with the first of the remainder starting as and when this appears online. quite irrelevant, though, since the series is lost. i shall not be at all surprised if it finished 5-0, just as the legendary Glenn McGrath has predicted. certainly he predicts that scoreline for every Ashes series, but there is no faulting his "why would you ever back your own side to do anything but win" logic. 

here, then, for anyone interested (which won't be many), is what i expect to happen in terms of the consequences for the dismal failure of the squad. these have been discussed and debated with some people, as i shall comment as we go.

firstly, and prior to them returning home in disgrace, the entire squad shall be sentenced to a work in a specially re-opened penal colony quarry for a period of four (4) days. my recommendation is that Port Arthur is used for this as that had the reputation for being the most harsh and brutal.

limiting this to just four days is, i feel, generous and a tremendous act of leniency. it is of course a very specific amount of time. as in the squad managed to "lose" The Ashes in 11 of the 15 days of play. my view is that being chained up smashing rocks with hammers for four days is quite fair since the squad declined to use those four days to play cricket. 

a number of people have suggested that i cannot demand "each and every one of them" be arrested for treason. this is on the basis that some of them "tried". well, they didn't try hard enough, did they? don't come at me with the "just one player can't make a difference alone" line either - i refer you to Botham's Ashes, 1981. or, arguably, any Ashes series in which Shane Warne played. except 2005.

still, i don't want to seem unreasonable, and so in recognition of his scoring a century - something that the Australians vowed to prevent him from doing - Joe Root is to be appointed, anointed or whatever it is you do as the new Duke of York.

my eldest (known) son queried this decision, citing that the name and reputation of the most recent holder of this title isn't all that great. i pointed out that just because (at least) one holder of an important office was bad does not dictate that all are. this i illustrated with numerous examples of absolutely p!ss poor representatives appointed as Prime Minister, President, Mayor of London and England Cricket Captain, countered with good, decent people previously having the role. he agreed.

it was around this point of my outlining what should happen to the (traitorous) England squad that Dad suggested "surely" Ben Stokes should be excluded from punishment. really? no. one would reasonably have assumed he would have resigned in shame at losing a Test in two (2) days, or failing that be fired in disgrace. such is the depth to where standards have slipped. 

to maintain the idea of being "reasonable", it is so that i have determined that Jofra Archer should be instated as eighth (8th) in the line of succession to the throne. for clarity this would be to replace the present incumbent person in that position, rather than to (further) demote them. 

granted, this is purely symbolic, as there would be little chance of him ever actually being king, bar a rather bewildering sequence of events. but, to be fair, his efforts in The Ashes were mostly "symbolic", with any value (i am reluctant to outright say positives) his performance showed making little difference. 

what about the rest (remainder) of the squad? yes, of course i fully expect them to be arrested for treason. it has, however, been pointed out to me that assuming they would immediately be found guilty and subsequently sentenced is a little harsh. also it goes against my own ethos (or whatever) and indeed the spirit of fairness. so they can all go on trial. 

not just a regular trial, of course. so as to ensure they are treated fairly, with any (quite frankly likely to be preposterous) claims of not being guilty of treason get considered correctly, a special court shall be convened. a court that i have a hard time believing does not already exist for heinous, evil crimes against cricket, to be honest. four (4) judges shall be appointed to hear the case, and these judges shall be Sir Geoffrey Boycott, Sir Ian Botham, Sir Steve Waugh and Sir Ricky Ponting. if it is that the last two there are not actually knights of the realm, well, they should be. 

obviously it is so that these 4 (four) are players i would without question trust to fairly and reasonably assess the "defence" which the squad shall (laughably) put forward and judge accordingly. they are players associated with both excellence and appreciating the importance of The Ashes. indeed they would appear to be two (2) qualities this Ashes squad fall somewhat short on. 

right, there you go. it was suggested to me that i should be more reasonable, or grounded, in my views on failure in The Ashes and i have been so. highly unlikely that the consequences i have put forward will be accepted or acted on, but it would be nice if they were at least considered. 

be fair dinkum to each other!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

mending a busted switch

hello there

granted, no, this isn't the most festive post i have gone done, look you see. however i thought this may well be of some (vague) use to someone out there. it isn't really meant to show off my skill and prowess, and nor is it intended as a celebration of my vast talents. should you elect to interpret it all that way, though, well that's up to you. 

quite likely the word "mending" is misleading there, for what happened was that i replaced a (very much) busted switch. a light switch, since you asked, which was busted. exactly how it came to be busted is not something i can immediately explain, but would guess it was down to wear and tear. nothing lasts forever. 

it was the light switch for my bathroom that gone went busted, if that matters. one morning, after a shower (apologies for the mental image) i went to switch it off. off it went, but something didn't feel quite right with it. sire enough when i tapped it again the switch bit fell off. oh dear. 

my immediate sense of options were to either report it in to the letting agent types for my lodgings in this era of exile or to contract a professional electrician. the former would likely involve a wait of weeks, if not months, to bring back the wonder of off and on (and off again) lighting, the latter would almost certainly bring about a cost of around £75 - £100. another option was to do nothing, but not so much in the hope it would heal itself, but because there was something (slightly) interesting on the radio about "showering in the dark" being a trend, with the claim being it was "healthy" or something. none of these options held all that much appeal, alas. 

can't think why anyone would wish to see such, but there you go. above is some video (of course in VHS mode) of me in some futility pressing the busted switch. yes the switch had fallen off, but i kind of quasi wedged it back in to see if a "that will do" solution was possible. no, it was not. 

ultimately, if not eventually, i went with a slightly different option. this was to jolly well have a ruddy good go (or words to that effect) at mending (replacing) it myself. no, i did not do it "blind" as such. first off i had a look at some videos online and established that, with some care, it was a reasonably straightforward thing to do, mindful that it was a basic, (importantly) plastic single light switch. after that i called some people who are rather good at doing things like this. they confirmed it was straightforward, that they had every confidence i could do it but also, kindly, offered to pop over and if not assist then just basically do it. with such a safety net, or back up, in place, well, off i went to have a go at it. 

first off, of course, was purchasing a new switch thing. again, i must stress this was a like for like plastic one. should you wish to replace or fit a "metal" switch, that is something you really need a proper electrician to do for you, as it has to be "earthed" and what have you. plastic simply laughs in the face of any electricity that tries to run across (or over it), whereas metal does not. with regards to cost i made use of one of the leading (or rather prominent) DIY / hardware stores here and the price was just a little over £2.50. 

with the new switch ready to go the first thing to do is make sure you switch the power off. pictured above is the "fuse box" for my lodgings, a device what has the proper name of "consumer unit". just to stress the importance of this, make sure you switch the f*****g power off before you start. don't go poking around any electrical wires that are on or "live". it will not end well at all. 

as to how you switch the power off, well, there are 2 (two) options. your fuse box / consumer unit, taking as a given it is professionally installed and correctly set up, should be quite clearly marked up, indicating what switch does what. if you are feeling reasonably confident (which i was) it should be sufficient to just switch off the relevant supply, which in my case was the lights. indeed i did leave other lights on before i switched off (if that makes sense) to make sure the light circuits were all indeed off. should you not be all that confident, and there is no shame in such, then rather put that main switch off, which will shut down all the power in your own lodgings (or home). if you go with that then make sure all sensitive items like televisions and computers are off. 

i shall assume (or presume) anyone reading this for practical assistance has also looked at some videos on how to do it (change a light switch). this is all meant as a "supplementary" to such ones. just about all of the videos i watched showed me how to do it (so to speak) in a way that turned out to be correct, but still a written guide is somewhat helpful. 

very much of use in said videos was the tip to "take pictures". this is something one presumably does with the camera welded to their phone, rather than on a traditional film camera that would require needing to get developed. see, some of the modern world is useful. the images show what wire goes where, so you can just put them in the right place on the new switch. for most modern (done in the last 30 or so years) wiring the correct colour coding should be in place, with brown being live and blue being neutral. so, if the pic is no good (or you forgot to take one), the diagram with the new switch should show where "L" and "N" go, or it may well be marked up on the switch. 

just what, exactly, happens if you get the wires the wrong way (or if you like incorrect) was around? nothing good. a "best case" scenario would be that nothing happens, as in the switch doesn't work and there is no harm done. more likely is a "reverse polarity" or what have you, which is a path that either leads to an electric shock or a sort of "fizz fizz bang" thing with a nasty "pop" explosion and fire. again, then, i draw your attention to the idea of contacting a qualified electrician if you have any sense of doubt or uncertainty. whilst it may seem like a "simple, quick and cheap" job, the risks of doing it wrong can be fairly significant. 

nope, absolutely no idea why i included the above picture. oh, actually, yes i do. the copper bits protruding there are the ones that need to be screwed in (so to speak) to the relevant section on the new switch. please note copper only. don't get any of the plastic covering in there, with enough heat going through the supply they will melt. also make sure they are screwed in nice and tight (so to speak). a loose connection is likely to see it not work proper, or could cause "arching" which is another fire thing. 

let me emphasise this again - i only undertook this one as it is the most basic (i am reluctant to say easiest) "electrical wiring" job one could do at home. on a par with changing a plug, although every now and then that can be fiddly. if this were a "double" light switch i may have been more reluctant to have a go, and i certainly would not have tried a plug socket. electricians might be expensive but they exist for a reason. 

pictured above is the new light switch, which is working just fine. i felt no need to do any video of the light in the bathroom working, or (for that matter) a video of what i might be doing in there. some things are best left not considered. the only "glitch" really was the new screws that came with the new switch were just a bit too short, so i simply used the old (existing) ones. 

righty-right, that's pretty much that. any words of caution or what have you have, i believe, been said frequently enough. good luck if you have a similar situation and give it a go!

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

forgotten cinema : ruthless people

heya

i think it's been quite some time since i gone done a "forgotten cinema" post. no, i am not going to search here for the last instance, look you see, for all that matters (i would suppose) is here we are. and where that is (here), exactly, is with the film Ruthless People. yes, i have been trying to watch only films what i have not seen before, but chance came to watch this one again. probably (or most likely) for the "first" time in close to 30 odd years, if not longer. 

whereas it's not unusual (with apologies to Mr Jones of Tom) for a film to turn out to be better than you remember it is reasonably rare for a film you remember as being really good to seem even better than that when revisited. such is what happened with Ruthless People, i am delighted to say. fondly i could recall watching this one several times, mostly on a 14" portable tv via a video i had shamelessly pirated off of a rental copy. 

plot? a sleazy, unscrupulous businessman (Danny DeVito) is planning to kill his wife (Bette Midler) so as to inherit a vast fortune (despite already being filthy rich) and be permanently with his mistress. unbeknownst (obviously) to him his mistress and her boyfriend (Bill Pullman, making what i believe was his film debut) intend to blackmail him. before he (DeVito) can kill his wife a young couple (Judge Reinhold and Helen Slater) kidnap her, threatening to kill her if the ransom is not paid. and so of course he has no intention of paying the ransom........

quite possible i have given away more than i wished in that summary, and i apologise if this is (even by my usual standards) somewhat vague. i would rather anyone chancing on this post and seeking a superb comedy, perhaps lost in the mists of time, watch and enjoy it. this was one fiendishly funny film and has somehow, despite being totes 80s in style, held up over the years. 

just what makes Ruthless People so good? it is a "perfect storm" of an outstanding cast, a complex yet straightforward plot, superb pacing, a quite frankly hilarious script and excellence in filmmaking. appreciating that someone somewhere will find the whole premise "offensive" or just too dark to be funny, it really is a comedy masterpiece. 

lots and lots of credit to Danny DeVito. i believe (or it's my understanding) that when he saw the finished film he feared his career was over, only to be pleasantly surprised by the good reviews and very decent box office. his character in this film is deviously evil, and perhaps served as an inspiration for other short, rotund (or if you like plump) characters being used to convey evil comedy genius, such as George out of Seinfeld and of course Cartman out of South Park. 

despite wishing to avoid spoilers as far as possible, here's an example of DeVito in action, presented of course in VHS mode. this is a "throwaway" scene not crucial to the plot, but (at least as my humour finds it) illustrates the comedy gold in the film. a warning, though, for the clip features some adult language and what have you. 

but know that all of the cast are superb. it's "easy" to forget how big Bette Midler, for example, was in the mid to late 80s. thinking on it, between this, Down & Out In Beverly Hills (which i now wish to watch again), Beaches and a few others, she gave great performances and (as far as i am aware) helped make movies which made money. 

each and every one of the "supporting" characters (actors and actresses) have been cast to perfection and work wonders with a brilliant script. allowing for the fact that i have just clearly singled out two it really is that all of the people in this give stellar performances. 

how this film came back to my mind is a series of chance finds. firstly, and i was surprised that i'd never owned it before, i found a copy of the soundtrack on tape (actual) still sealed for all of 99p in a charity shop. an instant purchase, of course, even if i haven't gotten around to opening it. then, more recently, i found the video (disc) down the market as part of a "3 for £2" deal. no, i can't remember what else i picked up with it, mostly just wanted this one of course.

above is the clearest image what i could gone done do of the tracklist of the tape. yes, that is actual, real Mick Jagger (that one) doing the theme, a theme which musically sounds a bit like the theme off of another beloved 80s film, Weird Science. of interest to some would be the Bruce Springsteen track which, once upon a long ago, was "rare". the song was only a b-side (i think the Glory Days single) but has featured on a couple of box sets since, and, well, there's no "rare" or "hard to get" music now, not in this day and age of "internet". 

much of the reason i found Ruthless People so funny on re-watching came from the bits i had forgotten about. like, for instance, the "hidden" gags, or what get called easter eggs i suppose. as this was made by the people what did Airplane! and Top Secret! (with some of them going on to do The Naked Gun) there are some absurd, hilarious background jokes. also (again, at the risk of spoilers) i had completely forgotten about one or two "sub plots" in particular the accidental blackmailing of a detective.....

yet i also revelled in scenes i remembered well. like, for instance, the below video (indeed in VHS mode for you) of what i call the "speaker scene". with again a warning that some "adult" language features. so don't press play if that sort of thing upsets you. 

quite likely that i have, once again, uploaded (or added) far too many pictures (and videos) for what words i have to offer in regards of the film. bit stuck with that expressed wish not to say all that much of the plot or what happens. oh dear. 

just how would anyone interested in Ruthless People go about seeing it in the present day? well, whatever day it is you read this. i would imagine it is "online" somewhere, with some streaming service or other having it. or one of them less ("fewer") that official sites having it available to borrow. i would as you may well expect recommend a physical copy of it. obviously VHS preferred, but the disc, from a quick search, seems reasonably easy to pick up. 

not at all sure how easy a physical copy of the soundtrack is to find. i did not check on that, alas, and yes i am only adding that bit in here so as to put some extra words in. 

right, that's about that. i really do have no idea at all who(m) actually reads what i do here, doesn't appear to be much in the way of my family or (limited number of) friends. for a rare instance, though, i do quite hope this catches the random attention of someone and, as a consequence, they either enjoy a great comedy film or enjoy watching it again. 

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

some jingle joy

greetings

my intention, believe it or not, is to at least try and do a positive post about it being close to, if not within the time of, christmas. well, at best, perhaps one that is not overtly negative or down, look you see. this should be theoretically possible, since what i saw (and of course documented for here) was, in general, quite pleasing.

recently, rather than at some unspecified point in the future, i was out on some of my usual strolls. i am not convinced the specifics of this are relevant, but should you wish to know i was off to procure certain things and the ones i am prepared to list here are something for tea along with cigarettes (sorry). other stuff would be a private matter. during my walk to get such things i saw this. 

despite the new(ish) phone having an apparently better camera welded to it yes, i would agree if you are asking what the "this" is what i gone done saw. for clarity, then, it (kind of middle of picture) is an open top bus, resplendent with festive lighting, driving around and playing some tunes whilst Santa and some elves (or what they are called) wave at we, the people. i think that i could vaguely recall mention of it going around that night, but no i did not plan to see it. also didn't try to avoid it, hence the image.

yes, image and video. i just about managed to get the phone out and work out how to put video on for some of the songs being played. i wasn't going to bother, but then i heard the most agreeable sound of the legendary Mr Sinatra was what they were playing. 

quite lovely, that. indeed it was one of the better encounters i had that particular evening, but anything to add to that would be a story never to be told. very little enhances a shopping excursion as much as hearing some Mr Sinatra does. should for some reason you doubt that, try it.

on the bus went, with all on board waving at me and everyone else. also on went the music. i elected to do a bit more video when i heard the next song, for the one that they played next was Jingle Bell Rock. 

i would imagine there is little need for me to point this out, but yes, Jingle Bell Rock as in the song what got used as the theme for Lethal Weapon. strangely, in some unexpected yet delightful company, i got to watch that film again not so long ago, and it remains as class as ever. a film that is in the "at Christmas but not of Christmas" category, a subject on which i did a post (here you go) many years ago. as you would expect yes, that film features in that post, with "is Die Hard a christmas film" being a favourite question around this time of year. probably, if you wish it to be, is likely the right answer. 

was Santa or anyone on the bus dispensing gifts? i have absolutely no idea. as you can likely tell from the not particularly artsy "distance" shots i wasn't all that close to it. lovely if they were giving some presents to children or those in need, but if not, oh well. it was still a wonderful thing for them to go out and do. 

since i saw it on my strolls here is an image of "the tree" what they have gone done put up in the area i walk. presumably my taxes have contributed to the costs of this, which again is something that i find rather agreeable. all the fancy lights too. 

running the risk of not being positive and no, i am not "putting up decorations" in my lodgings during this era of exile. well, yes, any and all christmas cards i get do get put on display. no, though, to a tree or similar. lack of space for such, mostly, yet also it simply "doesn't feel right" when i remain in (for the most part) solitude. anyway, i can just go look at the decorations and what have you up everywhere else. 

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

just another dead tradition

ho ho ho there

my goodness there's not been all that much of christmas cheer here on this blog so far. perhaps just a reflection of where "i" kind of "am" in the world at the moment, look you see, rather than a glimpse of a decaying world entire. up to who(m)ever is reading this to determine not so much which is the case but rather which you deem the least dull. or something like that. 

anyway, as would be tradition at this time of year, a post from moi inexplicably ranting and raging about something which does not matter. which is what a good deal of the internet contains, when you think about it. in this instance, nothing major, just my usual gripe (or complaint) about the fall from grace of the celebrated christmas edition of tv guide magazines, with a stop along the way to lament that it is no longer big, impressive or important what they throw to the airwaves over the festive season. 

 

with nominal (if not token) interest i observed that the christmas editions of the tv guides were on sale. a variety of them are available, with them all equally slumped on a "this will do" sort of stand. the premium, classic and once only ones you could get titles, Radio Times and TV Times, are priced north of £6 each, whereas the "regular" magazines (which offer the same information) were south of £2. it would seem that, maybe, this particular sense of nostalgia has (finally) left me, for i did not buy any of them. yes, briefly i considered getting one of the cheaper ones "for the sake of it", but ten went (internally) no, just f*** no, i am not indulging this sentimental hygiene any further. had i purchased any variant i can assure you it would have just sat in my lodgings in my place of exile, perfectly unread and simply languishing some ignored existence until it occurred to me to throw it out. yes, it did (as i typed) dawn on me that this is pretty much a metaphor for my life. 

in practical terms these tv magazines are as an effective definition of obsolete as you could care to find. one cannot move for information in this day and age, with television broadcast information hardly kept a secret. most, if not all, televisions have a built in tv guide. then there's the internet and all them "social media" things what spread schedules, or highlights. newspapers (actual or online) also carry all the details you could want. 

then there's the issue of just how wide television options are spread. i can remember growing up in the 80s wondering just how awesome life in America must be with all the tv stations they had when us in the UK had to make do with 4 (four). now that we have hundreds of channels (plus all that streaming stuff) it's not a struggle to pick something so much as it is a fight to find anything interesting. quite a lot of things appear to be shown just to fill up some broadcasting frequency. 

not sure if the "magic" from christmas tv line ups has gone because it actually has, or if it just feels so because of my lot in life. perhaps a mixture of the two. for the former, well, the "big two" or larger four channels no longer own the train set, do they? our licence fee (and their lucrative international sales) seem to get spent by the BBC on anything but programmes, and ITV no longer has the large advertising revenue it once had. budgets are decimated, so what they can find for "big" entertainment is severely limited. a tv premiere of a "big film" from 3 or 4 years ago was one of the wonders of christmas tv. that's all gone now, modern "big films" are intentionally disposable and not really difficult to find via a variety of platforms. 

ultimately the only reason i would have possibly picked up a guide would be to engage in a rather futile search to see if the classic Chas & Dave Christmas Cockney Knees Up was being repeated. yes, go on then, here is a link to more on that. doubtful it will be on, for i think they stopped the repeats of it, for no given reason, 8 to 10 years ago. quite a shame. 

so what, exactly, shall i be watching over christmas if not any of the television offerings? probably just a couple of videos i have sat here. most i wouldn't be at all surprised to find me simply staring at some sort of dead space void, wondering for how long all of this shall progress. 

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

broken britain cancel culture

now then

most of this (if not all) will, i appreciate, seem like a whine. well, that or a moan, groan or what have you. ultimately, though, one can easily dismiss pretty much anything said (ever) in such a way. someone will always say "oh there's worse thing" or similar, look you see. but, on i go. 

this all relates to what most would describe as the absolute sh!tshow that is the state of trains here in England, or if you will the United Kingdom at large. overpriced and unreliable are the two main words you will hear to describe them from anyone you are brave enough to ask. in respect of the former, well, indeed, it is more expensive, with many instances to prove just how we get fleeced. from memory i can recall one person worked out it was cheaper to fly (as in on a f*****g aeroplane) from Manchester to Spain and then from Spain to London than it was to get a train from Manchester to London (innit). but no, of course such a ludicrous highlighting of the situation changed nothing. my concern here, anyway, is the latter part. the "unreliable" thing. 

pictured above, in an unusual just "normal" image mode, is a train i caught. this was the first of its kind i got on a regular journey in several months which was (more or less) on time. as in it was not delayed, cancelled outright or ran "a bit" (like to one station) and then got cancelled. for context in terms of my weekly (at least attempted) use of this service it actually ran and ran on time once (one time) in just north of 40 (forty) instances. off the top of my head i believe it has in that time been cancelled entirely at least five (5) times, possibly more. not really good enough in respect of public transport for a supposed leading country, is it? especially not when other public transport (buses) don't do the route i need to use on a sunday. 

i think what irked me more than having to shell out for a taxi (well, one of them uber things which, even when i throw in a decent tip, is £10 south of a regular taxi yet 4 times the cost of a train) is the absolutely pathetic nature of the cancellation notice. that's for you to see in the below image, one of them screenshot things what i gone done to work out, and it kind of illustrates what an absolute bag of sh!t bunch of cowards them what are somehow in charge of the trains really are. 

yes, i am sure you saw what they did there. i did too, eventually. that's just brilliant, isn't it? an entire service gets cancelled because one (1) person did not turn up for work. obviously they stick that out purely to divert your anger. the idea is that you stand there cursing and swearing the one person who did not turn up to do the job they are paid very well to do. meanwhile the real issue is that, apparently, them what run the trains are so completely and utterly f*****g incompetent at it that it just takes all of one absence to cause the service to be cancelled. normally i am against this kind of thinking but now i have reached the point where i take the view of the sooner we have fully automated trains the better. get rid of the staff that keep demanding more money for less ("fewer") work, let the machines do their thing. anything for a reliable service that lets me see my (known) children once a week, thanks. 

car? indeed getting one again would kind of solve the issue of needing to rely on public transport. however it just strikes me as (to be blunt) stupid to throw myself onto the crippling debt pile this country seems to crave for the sake of a weekly journey. it would be quite boring to go through all the astronomical costs of a car, which is quite the statement considering just how dull stuff on here i do is. some do suggest that the perpetual destruction of public transport is all deliberate, for more cars on the road means more revenue. no, then. already i meet the train people more than half way, what with the peculiar hours the service i need runs. 

reasonably, one might think, i should have been refunded for a ticket for a service that, ultimately, did not exist. alas (as pictured above) no, not to be. due to the "improved" ticket pricing system refunds for services are no longer given unless you took insurance out. more on that in a bit, since yes going forward (rather than backward) i at least looked at that one. 

beggars belief, really. we are in a world of "consumer rights" and what have you, with some fairly staunch levels of protection for us, the members of the public paying for goods and services. yet it would seem the train people (and i suppose this is a bit like them what do the water) can just take money off of us, not do their jobs and not have to give it back. whilst getting tax money. 

so, for the next ticket i decided to look at what, exactly, insurance would involve. as you can see above, the cost of insurance for my ticket would be (hang on just using a calculator) an extra 38% to pay (yes i know it is low price ticket). great. and even then it would be a refund "for certain circumstances", and a fee to pay on the refund. not really viable, is it? especially not when they exclude the train you wanted that was cancelled from a refund, saying that you could have used the ticket on a later (and impractical to take) train. 

oddly this is not the only time i have encountered just what a con some of this "insurance" business is. for those interested (strange but thank you) here is a link to the perplexing complexities of taking out insurance on concert tickets. for those not inclined to read that but still want to know, basically never ever, under any circumstances, take insurance on concert tickets as you are just giving someone money for no reason whatsoever. 

every now and then, of course, the trains do actually run as they should. and i can use it as a reason, or point of departure, to take a selfie with the eldest of my (known) children, showcasing how usure i am of which way to look with a phone thing on selfie mode. 

very much so, dear reader, would be my (fairly obvious) answer to if public transport should once again be a public owned concern. it is f*****g stupid that buses and trains run on a minimal service to maximise profits for the owners whilst they still claim government (as in our) money. using a bus to go and see my (known) children would be class, but of course the buses do not run the route i need on sundays or public holidays as it is "not economically viable". that kind of misses the point that public transport isn't meant to be about profit. 

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

player days of boba fett

greetings

over here (England, or if you will the UK, look you see) we have about a hundred (give or take) free to air television stations. well, maybe less ("fewer"), but still, a lot more than the 3 and then 4 what i grew up with. usually, or invariably, there's a variable (to be kind) level of quality to what each of them elects to screen. every now and then, mind, you stumble on a gem. well, if not a gem, then something or other of note, or partial interest. yes, this is going somewhere. 

it has now come to pass that, more often than not, at 10pm each evening i shall tune into one particular channel, the one called (i think) Together TV. why would i do such? because that's the time, and so far in my experience it is daily, they broadcast some "classic" 70s example of British (if we are honest) smut. yes, a bit of cheeky, rude, saucy cinema. extraordinarily tame by the standards of today of course, but as it happens that is what i kind of prefer. not that i am against any such filth. 

whereas they only have half a dozen (or if you like 6) or so such films that they rotate generally i will sit and watch whichever one is on for half an hour or so before retiring to bed for the evening. and why not, for seeing some very pleasant, lovely nudies prior to going to sleep is most agreeable. difficult to say which, exactly, of the ones they constantly show is my favourite. ultimately kind of a tie between one called Au Pair Girls and the one this blog post is about, Can You Keep It Up For A Week, as they, from what i can tell, have the most nudies in them. actually likely Au Pair Girls, as you get loads of full tilt nudies from the start, whereas you have to wait a bit for some "plot" stuff with this Can You Keep It Up For A Week one. 

somehow it took me a lot longer (as it were) to work out who(m), exactly, was the (male) lead star of this particular film. which is, as the below picture confirms, is Jeremy Bulloch. as in the Jeremy Bulloch. yes, that one. he who was, for those of us there at the time, Boba Fett. once again, yes, that Boba Fett, as in the one out of Star Wars. whereas for those comfortable in the 21st century it is now so that Temuera Morrison is Boba Fett (and a damned good one), for those of us who kind of prefer to linger in the 20th century (for it was better), it shall always be known that Jeremy Bulloch was he. 

not, in retrospect, too much of a surprise that i didn't immediately clock it was him. usually i don't see the credits of Can You Keep It Up For A Week for i know there are no nudies on offer so i nip outside momentarily for a cigarette (sorry). also, famously, Boba Fett (as a 20th century concern) always kept his bucket like helmet thing on, so it's not like you (or one) would recognise him. being as honest as i possibly can, it's also not him (appreciating he is the ostensible protagonist) that i watch the film for. 

plot? yes, there is one. i paid vague attention to it once. from what i recall it's that the fiancé of the Jeremy Bulloch character (nope, no idea on the name) refuses to get married unless Jeremy can keep hold of a job for at least one (1) week. much of the film seems to be the plight of Jeremy trying to do this, but somehow end up losing the job prior to seven days due to some sort of indiscretion, the nature of which is him ending up in quite a (very enjoyable looking) compromising sexual situation that in some way or other displeases his (brief) employer. 

honestly i had never bothered to look at the other films what Jeremy Bulloch had been in. yes, as is widely known his presentation of Boba Fett made him the third best character in Star Wars, just behind Lando and Lobot. but still, not interesting enough to see what else he had been in. now that i think, though, i really need to see what actor played Lobot and see what other films they gone done, on the off chance i have missed out on some other saucy filth. 

quite the insight into the casting decisions George Lucas made, this. or at the least the casting choices made in regards of English (or British) actors playing characters what face you never see. famously David Prowse got cast as Darth Vader based on being in A Clockwork Orange, a film which doesn't immediately suggest "space dude with laser sword", but there was no flaw in the Lucas view of "good enough for Kubrick is good enough for me". presumably, or maybe, George Lucas sat and watched Can You Keep It Up For A Week, possibly enjoyed aspects of it like i did, but he also saw the lead actor and said "you know what, he would be quite class with a bucket on his head and a missile firing jet pack on his back". this has been proven as a categorically excellent view. 

leaving aside the Jeremy Bulloch aspect for now and alarm bells rang when i once got more than half an hour or so into the film and was confronted with Richard O'Sullivan. as in yes, the Richard O'Sullivan. who, to be fair, is there right from the start of Au Pair Girls, but i had no idea he had done more than one of these "saucy" films. for my generation (born in the 70s) Richard O'Sullivan was the darling of early evening family (by 70s standards) entertainment, featuring in stuff like Man About The House, Robin's Nest and of course Dick Turpin. i had no idea at all that, and presumably our parents knew, initially the idea was to market Richard O'Sullivan as a "British John Holmes", or if you like Dirk Diggler. well, at least as far as the prudish "none of that sort of thing" sorts at the BBFC would allow, with nudies and intimacy being things they did not believe the British public should be allowed to see. 

for his role in this one (in Au Pair Girls he is just the understandably quite randy son of a wealthy business owner) he seems to play an effete hairdresser or something. think it might be a hairdresser, but the emphasis is very much on the effete part there. yes, oh yes, it is so that Richard O'Sullivan and Jeremy Bulloch do share a scene. an image of it is below, and it appears to be the point in our history at which things like "gender fluid" and "non-binary" were invented. 

just done a bit of research (unusual i know) and as it turns out this was the last film role Richard O'Sullivan did. i wonder if it was due to him feeling he had reached a peak, or zenith, and from a cinematic point of view he felt this was the way to leave his legacy. or just that he wanted to concentrate on his television career, and anyway around that time (early to mid 70s) someone thought it was a good idea to start casting Robin Askwith in this kind of role for that sort of thing. anyway, as at the time this will appear on the internet thing it is close to christmas, no doubt as usual at least one newspaper will run a story on how the much beloved Richard O'Sullivan lives in a lovely retirement home which is kind of exclusive for famous types and celebrities. 

do i recommend Can You Keep It Up For A Week? well, that's tricky. if we take as a given that the only reason i have frequently watched first half hour (or forty or so minutes) of it is the nudies, well, that's up to you to decide if that is also what you want from a film. admittedly when i have paid attention to the other parts it does seem light heartedly amusing watching, mostly from the perspective of the numerous absurd ways it turns out that Jeremy ends up in a (somewhat) compromising position. 

yet some caution is required, and not just on the off chance you are upset by even more revealing images that the carefully captured one above. if you watched, say, Empire Strikes Back and went "i really liked the way that one actor just stood around with a bucket on his head not doing much" and wished to see him (Jeremy Bulloch) do more of the same, this probably isn't what you are after. 

certainly a temptation exists to do a (sort of) quasi companion piece to this post and share more thoughts on that other film, Au Pair Girls, but Jeremy Bulloch isn't in it. maybe if i see there's a significant level of interest in this i will do one, but at this stage no plan for it.

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