showtime, kid

hi there

well, the only thing i haven't really neglected in this old blog this month is to mention in passing that i seem to be neglecting to do updates this months. whoops, apologies, etc, and a hello to whoever it is that for some reason said i should have more pictures, less words here. thanks i think.

this weekend saw, at an interesting hour, James return to the stage once again. this was the first play he has done as part of the drama group at "big school" and he was, as you can imagine, quite excited about it!

we were very eager to see him acting once again - parental bias probably excludes any validity in our rating of him, but no matter for what is important to us is that he loves doing it! and he certainly seemed to enjoy doing the play early on Saturday morning!

and when i say early, i mean the stage shows started at 8am! i have no idea at all why James' school believes absolutely everything should start as early as possible when they do stuff on weekends, but that's the way it goes.

William rather enjoyed watching James do his thing too, especially as James had a most magnificent monkey costume on!

and, as you can see (sort of), James loved being up on the stage once again too!

i say sort of because, once again, the quality of these pictures is not as high as it could be. oddly, the blueberry phone thing is not at fault this time. i was making a video of it to send around the world, right, and thus could not operate the normal camera too. as Michele had her hands over full with William, screen grabs it is!

the day was somewhat overcast and a touch wet, but after James had finished his performance it was time to walk back to the car. for this James decided to take the rather more scenic route, knowing that William likes to see everything there.

it gave me the chance to take some film for the family of James' school, so why not take that path?

it always happens this way - i do not have the "normal" camera at hand, just as i manage to get a few images where the two of them are more or less looking the same way! these screen grabs are OK i suppose, but i do wish i could get "proper" pictures of them looking this way!

i wouldn't want to spoil too much of the viewing for those about to get the video of the play, but these images are taken when James was giving a review of his performance in the play. not long after the next picture was when William decided to go on one of his missions, and charged into a classroom to see what was happening!

returning to the play itself, it was a touch brief at about 10 minutes long, but James and all the other children were fantastic. i gather a much longer play is planned for later on this year, which we are all, needless to say, very much looking forward to!

after the show, it was very much time for an indoors day, it being wet and grey outside!

hope you all had an ace weekend!


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

fake photos from France......?

hi there

there's been an awful lot of fuss today surrounding a French magazine and certain pictures featuring a lady they claim is called Kate.

i, like i will wager a few million others, went to have a look at these pictures on the internet. it does not take much more than a glance at them to clock they are rather clever, clearly staged fakes. sorry for anyone who thinks they are real, and sort of well done to the presumably third rate publication that for a brief while became the best known magazine in the world.

how do i know they are fake? other than, and this is even allowing for the "ultra telescopic lens" apparently used, the tell-tale signs are right there. if you apply the "Bigfoot Rule" to the pictures it's fairly obvious.

what is the Bigfoot Rule? well, there's some famous, or if you will infamous, footage of a Bigfoot wandering around in America. it's a fairly convincing film at a glance, right up until this happens.

yep, that's Bigfoot, mooching around most human-like, turning around to have a look at the camera to make sure they get a good shot before he wanders off again. had those who made that film not thrown that in i dare say they would have convinced a good deal more people.

on that note, how very fortunate that this "Kate" should be kind enough to sit and face the hidden camera so often.

yes, all of the "interesting bits" have been edited out of these pictures. i do not need the nudity aspect to illustrate my point - sorry, back off to google you go if that's what you are looking for!

if the above picture does not convince you that this is a (so-so) lookalike hired to pose, i then invite you to consider looking at the next one.

how thoroughly decent of "Kate" to turn and look at the camera (a long way away, but more on that later). how convenient, too, that you see just enough to assume it is her, but just enough of her face is obscured by some sort of railing. it's also impressive that she gave the camera a "special holiday smile". note how her mouth in the picture above curls to the left. in every other picture of her smiling you will note it usually curls to the right.

it's also fairly impressive that, whilst on holiday, her neck seems to shorten and her chin changes shape.

aah, they can't be fake, you say, as William is in the pictures. yes, of course, there are plenty of "Kate" impersonators but none of William? 

it seems that this "William" has the same changes as "Kate" does on holiday, for he changes not only the parting of his hair but the area affected by balding too. he also strikes me as being somewhat shorter when on a break.

and, like Kate, how fortunate that he should turn to look at the camera and smile.

i must applaud the use of the railings / balcony fence. it's very clever how the two of them for the most part crouch or lean down to be partially covered by it.

this use is shown off in the next picture. it is of course very common for recently married couples to sit as far apart as possible, just as it is exceptionally common to sit on either side of the only covered part of the railing or balcony wall.

they might have got away with being much more convincing with these pictures if they simply had not included this last, hilarious and clearly giving the game away final picture.

this has to be the single most "convenient" picture of the lot. "Kate" bending over and pulling her pants down so "William" can apply some cream, just at the perfect angle for the long lens camera?

there's also the small matter of the hugely poor quality of these pictures. i don't care how "ultra long distance" the photographer was away from them, technology being what it is allows digital, pristine pictures to be taken from considerable distances. the reason these are grainy is because they've deliberately been made to look that way. helps cover up any tell-take signs of fakery, you see.

the reports are that the Royal couple will sue if these pictures turn out to be genuine. i think it is safe to say that the lawyers will not be troubled, then.

good luck to the French magazine who no doubt paid a fortune for these - no doubt the circulation of it is well up today, a pity people would appear to have been fooled into thinking what it was they are looking at.

unless it's a scumbag photographer,

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

EDIT / UPDATE : the scumbag that took these pictures - a woman, no less and certainly no less scummy as a consequence, has come forward and said that whilst she took pictures of the two, they were in their full costumes at all times. hmn, perhaps my suspicions of these being "fake" are as a result of them being doctored?

one september wednesday

hey there

a most peculiar item appears to have arrived at verk today. i am uncertain as to who the item belongs to or for what end it has been brought in, but all the same it has provided an exceptional photo opportunity.

behold, if you will, an image of me wearing the item in question. this picture could well be my new profile picture over on that grand social network which seems to be causing Wall Street dealers to be a trifle miffed presently.




what do you think? i'm not the best person to consult on what look does and does not suit me, but for some reason i believe this set of "bunny ears" complement the image i try to project to the world.

that said, they do seem to suit my chief mechanic, Jayson, a good deal more than they do your humble narrator.




if you are wondering, i did indeed take these pictures myself with that blueberry thing. my usual personal photographer, Trigger, seems somewhat unavailable today. i am rather impressed that the pictures, as a consequence of this, look almost decent. perhaps the decision i took to have a bit of an experimental clean of the lens on the blueberry has not been the disaster i feared.

more as and when i have it!


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

The Dark Knight Rises (in a glowing review)

hi there

well, this is a review i was not expecting to write for a couple of months. i was pretty much resigned to having to wait for the DVD of The Dark Knight Rises at the end of November. as luck would have it, we had the chance of a babysitter for one night only - thus, off to the cinema we went to see it!

as it was released in July i would dare to imagine that the 1 (one) billion or so who have already been to see it have no need for a review, and further one would imagine my review isn't going to say to anyone "rush to see it". that said, a few have asked for my comments on the film, and these would be comments i am delighted to give.

a short, spoiler free review for you would be that it gives all to the audience that Batman Begins and The Dark Knight did, with this final chapter in Christopher Nolan's telling of the Batman story being an outstanding film. if for some reason you have not seen both (and i do mean both) of the films mentioned there, do not try and watch this one without doing so.

whereas i will try to preserve as many of the secrets of the film as i can, a *** SPOILER WARNING *** should be considered to be in place for everything after the film poster below.

the starts eight years to the day from the end of The Dark Knight. this particular day has become known as "Harvey Dent Day", a public holiday in Gotham to mark the death of a man whose legacy was to radically change the city, in appearance for the better. to mark his death, politicians apparently rushed through "The Dent Act", a law which allows them to detain without bail or trial anyone suspected of being involved with organized crime. the streets are relatively clean, then, but at a cost.

this cost is exposed in the figure of Jim Gordon, one of the few who know the truth of Harvey Dent's death and his true legacy. he clearly wrestles with the idea that 'the Batman', the true hero and saviour of Gotham, has had to flee as a felon whereas Harvey Dent is celebrated as a hero, the fact that he tried to murder Gordon's children kept a secret.

Gordon is ready, at a fundraiser being held at Wayne Manor, to deliver a speech which will reveal the truth of what happened that night. at the last minute, though, he believes it is a story to save for another day, and puts the planned speech away.

perhaps the figure lurking atop of Wayne Mansion was felt by Gordon, and that's why he opted to leave the truth buried.


watching the celebrations from afar is Bruce Wayne. we are led to believe that Wayne has become a recluse for at least half of the eight years since the death of Harvey Dent, not having been seen in public for at least three years. hobbling from "skiing" injuries, he casts a sad, depressed figure.

he does, however, do his best to spring into action when he catches a thief, posing as a waitress, stealing something of exceptional value to him. whereas he is unable to stop her physically, he seems to be mentally rejuvenated by something else she takes.

highly interested in why the thief took the other item that she did, we soon see Wayne return to the world of detective work.

 

with the evidence left behind he soon works out that the identity of the thief is Selina Kyle, a somewhat notorious and frequently caught cat burglar.




whereas finding her shall be quite straightforward, Bruce Wayne, easily slipping back into the Batman persona, becomes intrigued to see that Ms Kyle is linked to someone called Bane, a notorious terrorist and one of the most wanted men in the world.




Bruce heads off back into the world to play cat and mouse, or if you will bat and cat, with his thief, leaving Alfred to investigate and find out as much as he can of this Bane character. Alfred doesn't have to do too much digging, however, to discover that Bane for unknown reasons seems to be making his way to Gotham.

with Jim Gordon, ahem, unavailable as a consequence of the above and no one in the police force prepared to believe that the world's most wanted terrorist is Gotham bound, a rookie cop called Blake steps up.



Blake has, for some time it seems, been quite aware that the true identity of the Batman was one Bruce Wayne. he forces a confrontation with Wayne, and pleads with him for the return of the Batman.

does that happen? well, there would not be much of a film if it did not. the above is more of a premise than a plot, i suppose, and that's more or less where i intend to leave it. the rest is a discussion of the merits of the film, so if you skipped over the spoiler warning above, blame only yourself.

the dynamics of this film are, frankly, astonishing. time and again, it seems, Christopher Nolan has an exceptional gift in taking ensemble casts, a fanciful premise and the weight of requirement from a thus far pleased but difficult to keep pleased fan base, adding them all together and making a film that is as breathtaking and brilliant as much for its character and drama as it is for its unprecedented spectacular scenes of action.

a key to understanding the film is accepting that it is as much of an "equal sequel" to Batman Begins as it is a continuation of The Dark Knight. the box office made it clear that many only saw the second film (the box office for the second film surpassed the total of the first in one single day), those who did not seek out the stunning original on DVD might struggle with this.all three films do, however, belong on the shelf of any sort of film lover.



if we look at the characters in the film, well, perhaps the most sensible place to start would be one Christian Bale. we've had two films, however, to discuss the merits of his performance (there are many) as well as observing the flaws (there are none). it strikes me, then, as the next best person to speak of is the one who for some reason all the fuss surrounded - Anne Hathaway as Selina Kyle.



for some reason lazy journalism still flourishes, and the idea of a "female lead in a superhero movie" is a concept that most writers cannot but help harp on. how it is the fault of Christopher Nolan that so few other writers and film makers develop all their characters properly is strange, and one imagines he is somewhat bemused by the attention given to one strong character in a film filled with them.

yes, Anne Hathaway is stunning in the film, playing the part to perfection in both the action and more dramatic moments of the film. a superb slice of casting for a well written part. at no point in Nolan's trilogy, however, has the director condescended to make a female character either the token love interest or symbolic damsel in distress. the character of Selina Kyle is no different.

for some reason the notorious "fanboy" brigade got their knickers, those that are washed by their mothers who they still live with, in an incredible twist over the fact that at no point is Catwoman called "Catwoman" in the film. no, she isn't. i cannot for the life of me recall a scene in the movie where calling her that would have made it better, which is presumably why the name is not used, just strongly implied. i would say get over it, but there's nothing to actually get over.

i bring up the above because these rather sad, nerdish and almost certainly self-appointed "it should be the same as the comics" defenders didn't really complain with the re-imagining of The Joker in the previous film, and nor did they argue with the re-imagining of Bane in this one.




whereas i am led to believe that Bane had a high level of intelligenceas well as brute strength in the comics, i presume it was nothing at all as equal or ferocious as presented here. lest we forget, too, that the only other time he was put onscreen was in Batman & Robin, where he was presented as a bumbling idiot and, indeed, a sidekick to a sidekick. top job done by the Nolan brothers with creating from that one of the most memorable screen villains in living memory. and yes, i mean he is on Frank Booth / Hannibal Lecter levels of memorable.

the character requires something more than muscles and a mask, which is presumably why the short, stocky Tom Hardy was cast and duly worked out. worked out a lot, i should say. just as Christopher Nolan said "casting Batman is easy, it's a man in a mask. the key is casting Bruce Wayne", so too he had to choose wisely for Bane. from behind a mask he can act only with eyes and hand gestures, and boy does he act.

for reasons i am trying to avoid for spoiler-ish reasons, Bane is to all intents and purposes the dark variant of The Dark Knight. he is "Batman gone bad" if you will. famously other films have tried this as the third part of a trilogy and have fallen truly flat - Superman and Spider-Man being your examples. here it works as Bane has a character beyond just being "a nasty version of the goodie".

whereas Christopher Nolan was adamant that there was not to be the slightest reference to The Joker in this film out of respect to Heath Ledger, it's inevitable that Bane will be compared to the previous villain of the piece by audiences. in my view, he stands equal in that regard simply by not trying to mimic, recreate, outdo or underplay the part. Bane is a character in his own right and should really be viewed as such. its unlikely that Tom Hardy shall trouble Oscar voters in the same way that Heath Ledger did, but that takes nothing at all away from the performance.

there is, alas, one for want of a better term "underplayed"character and performance in the film. this, surprisingly, comes from Gary Oldman as Jim Gordon. Yes, that Gary Oldman, the one who can usually instantly make any film watchable purely by being in it.



even with two hours and forty minutes of film it's inevitable that some points of interest would fall by the wayside and it's sadly the case that it's the character of Jim Gordon that does here. this idea of his inner turmoil about having to condemn the man who saved his family whilst celebrating the man who nearly killed his family has "Gary Oldman acting masterclass" written all over it. this is a Batman film, though, not a Jom Gordon one.

that said, one could reasonably have expected more of Gary when given some key moments. in the final meeting with Batman, at which point The Dark Knight effectively tells Jim not only who he is but why he is, a truly beautiful, tear to the eye moment is somewhat belittled by Gordon's flat reaction.




a great, poignant moment is somewhat undermined, then, by the last actor in the world who you would think of when considering "who could give a poor performance of an important line here".

on the subject of poignant, the star of the show? other than Christian Bale? well, step forward Sir Michael Caine.




Michele disagrees with me here, but for me the thread that sows the plot together and tells the story is Alfred. Michael Caine gives one of his greatest performances of all time in what looks likely to be his last performance in the part. his delivery of lines is note perfect, and he is as emotional as he is threatening as and when the scene requires it.

whereas it's unlikely the Oscars will recognize Tom Hardy and Gary Oldman has effectively underacted his way out of any sort of consideration, here's hoping that Sir Michael gets another Oscar for the performance here. he really is that good in this.

applause too, of course, for Jospeh Gordon-Levitt as Blake. quite a brilliant performance, but one i feel it's best you discover for yourself. as for the rest of the cast, what a delight to see Matthew Modine back on the cinema screen - i think i have seen him all of twice since his stellar performance as, oddly, Joker in Full Metal Jacket.

there is of course someone else involved in the film that should get mountains of recognition, but probably shall not - even though he was at least nominated for The Dark Knight.



Mr Christopher Nolan, and i am aware that Martin Scorsese is still active, is currently the greatest still alive director of films right now. Paul Thomas Anderson comes close, but the phrase "In Nolan We Trust", adopted by fan films everywhere, is valid.

it speaks volumes of the respect he has earned that Warner Brothers basically let him make the film the way he wished to. they must have been eager to simply recyle The Joker and everything else they assumed made The Dark Knight a success, and indeed pleaded with him to make it is this horrid "3D" format. he refused both, and thankfully Warner backed him when it would have been just as easy to sack him and replace him with a stooge of a director. he paid them back with an "ambiguous" ending to the film of sorts, one that says "look, i'm done, but you can either pick up where i left off for you or simply start again". 

one can only hope that Warner, like they did with Kubrick, continue to back the remarkable vision of Christopher Nolan in regards of whatever he decides to do next. whatever it is, it shall surely be a film that they can be proud to have their name on.

of all the things that impressed me in The Dark Knight Rises , Nolan's insistence that "if it isn't plausible or possible then it isn't in this film" stands firm. i was rather concerned when i saw some sort of flying tank in the trailers.....

...but as it turns out the parts in the trailers are more or less the only times one sees it in the film. i am sure the technology of it is possible, but an over-use of it might have led to the film being seen as rather "gimmicky".



 
*** SPOILERS FINISHED ***

overall, The Dark Knight Rises is a brooding, epic homage to despair, isolation and the concept of finding the will to rise and be better than your circumstance. that this is true of the protagonist and the antagonists of this film alike shows off the sheer skill and ambition Christopher Nolan brought to the project. this film and the two before it are of certified must-see status.if you have seen the other two and have yet to catch this one, do try and get to a cinema before its run ends. i am sure it will look impressive on high-end, big TV sets, but this is one of those movies that reminds you that when made properly films are indeed always better in the cinema.

i am not sure when i will get to a cinema again, so the next movie review could well be more out of date than this one! that said, thank you very much indeed for reading this!


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

The Amazing Spider-Man Spider-Sense Electronic Spider Guitar

hi there

wow, a bit of delay between posts again - sorry about that!

the boys were, over the weekend, exposed to the ways of their Uncle Richard. this, for reasons best known to their Uncle Richard, meant that as a consequence they were exposed to selected musical moments in film. for the most part this was The Beatles' celebrated but rarely seen Let It Be concert film, as well as some sort of Donnington gig by AC/DC.

as a consequence of what he saw, William took quite a shine to this thing called a guitar. a consequence of that was that we needed to get him a guitar. not just any guitar, mind. oh no.

William wanted the guitar known as The Amazing Spider-Man Spider-Sense Electronic Spider Guitar.




yes, sorry, low quality pictures once again due to the fact that i only had my blueberry on me. i will get a proper phone with a decent camera or a halfway decent blueberry with a marginally better camera one of these days!

whatever is lacking in the quality of the pictures does not, i can assure you, translate into a lack of quality in the guitar, or if you will geeee-tarrrrr. it is one of the most excellent things that i have ever seen and indeed played with. it makes super class noises, and even has a distortion / reverb / whatever it is called handle.

William, to his credit, is quickly developing a smart "do not mess with me" guitarist look.




yes, that is James you can see in the background. he's more concerned with rugby news than guitars these days, it has to be said.

what baffles me about this guitar is that i do not understand just what it is that makes this either a Spider-Man or a Spider-Sense guitar. to the untrained eye it seems to be a pretty conventional toy guitar with "Spider Man" written on it.

it is possible, of course, that i simply missed any or all of the "director's cut" versions of the Spider-Man films that showed Spidey tackling a range of inventive villains by means of deploying his trusty Spider-Sense Spider Guitar. perhaps eventually some kind soul will point me in the direction of where to find a variant of any of the films that should feature such footage.

in the mean time, though, William is just happy bashing away at it, and as you can see is even contemplating having a go at playing with his teeth!




i will try and do some more posts "soon". sorry, just rather busy at home and indeed at verk!


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

dogging with my dad......

hi there

you are, i trust, familiar with the phrase "you get what you ask for". failing that, the saying "be careful what you wish for" is something i am sure you have heard before. well, as it happens, i am now rather familiar with the warnings of those two sayings.

in a post a couple of days ago i mentioned that i was surprised by the lack of pictures from my Dad in New Zealand, based on his usual ways of sending a couple of thousand pictures every day. i suggested that he had learnt this trick from Gillian, who is also reluctant to send pictures from that fine land. my Dad has responded to this in his own, perhaps unusual style. here is the picture he sent me.

Dad informs me, and i am not in any sort of position to doubt him, that this is a pair of sea lions. further, they are engaged in a bout of particularly interesting singing, for it is their mating season. i understand that he's quite excited and interested by this "dogging" business that he discovered not so long ago (in New Zealand, a few minutes before deciding he really wanted to live in New Zealand), but i suspect this is either going a bit too far, or he has thus far not quite grasped the accepted limitation on the definition of what is and what is not "dogging".

that he mentioned he has taken some 10,000 pictures recently (a figure that the veracity of must be beyond doubt) and this - this - is the one he chooses to send on does not come as any great surprise.i'm not 100% sure exactly what other mating seasons there are in New Zealand, but i have a feeling that i will be all too familiar with them before long.

i suspect i shall be a touch wary in opening any future emails from him.


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

driving licence

hi there

i mentioned in the last post that the family fun day had a display and presentation from the traffic department, but more or less left it at that. well, that's because there are so many pictures and stories from it that, with my editorial hat on, it seems to warrant its own post.

it famously took me five attempts and just about all of the patience of my dear friend Allan to get my driving licence (or "license" for our American friends). i was quite keen, then, to see how the boys handled learning the rules of the road, in particular with regards to the satisfaction of the traffic officers.

a major gripe in this country tends to be how long it takes to go and book a driving test. James and William had no such issues at all, i am happy to day. they simply went up to the gazebo, handed over their names and were promptly given both helmets and their choice of vehicle.




after that, it was off out on to the open roads (kind of) to display how they had paid attention to the officer and were thus obeying the laws of the road. there was, as it turned out, some rather mixed fortunes in this regard.

the officer explained that you must come to a stop at zebra crossings and stop signs in order to let pedestrians and other vehicles pass. James apparently considers this one to be the best of all traffic rules.




James interpreted the above rule as being that one had to stop at zebra crossings and stop signs until someone had actually passed. James was reasonably patient in this regard, as long as you define "reasonably" as ten or so seconds. after that, he was shouting for Mummy to get a move on and cross over the road so he could carry on driving!

sticking to the left hand side of the road was another important lesson, as too was the fact that you should only pass a vehicle to the right of them. James adopted this one with relative ease. William? not so much.




whereas James went round and round obeying all the rules, William kind of just went wherever it was that amused him to go, and was sure he would be getting their by any means available. i would like to think that i take James' considered, slow and steady approach to driving, but certain members of my family have pointed out that William's vast talent for crashing vehicles into less than obvious obstacles is something that he seems to have got from his Daddy.

as for James' admirable slow, steady and obey the rules approach, William kind of indulged this for a little while but soon, and rather visibly, got bored with it.




James does liken his younger brother to a velociraptor. why? small, fast, can be deadly and most importantly tends to learn very, very quickly. whereas William was entertained enough following James around for a lap or two, he soon worked out that it would be even more entertaining if he simply just built up a bit of speed, crashed in to James and knocked him out of the way!




any chance at all of this being limited to one, isolated incident was gone forever when William worked out that if one of the children fell off their vehicle of choice then a traffic officer would come rushing to the scene to investigate. this pleased William a great deal, and meant that James was to get involved in a good deal more accidents for the remainder of the day.




i do rather like this next picture. the traffic officer, bless him, did his best to explain to William that accidents are unfortunate incidents and ones that you should try to avoid having, not actively go about creating. full credit to William for looking like he is listening and taking on board what the officer is saying, but i am sure you can guess what happened as soon as James was back on the bike!




at the end of their session, the boys were congratulated for their excellent efforts and both awarded their (OK, in fairness "mini") driving licences. yes, that's right - on the first attempt and despite being involved in shall we say several accidents. i guess the testing criteria has got just a touch easier since i went and did my licence!

well, as i'd like to hope you have worked out, the above all rounded out a most wonderful day out! many thanks indeed to the traffic department and everyone else who made the day fantastic!



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

one september saturday

hi there

at the weekend we had the honour of being invited to attend a family fun day being held by various essential services from the city. this is of course a great idea, and it turned from an idea into a wonderful, indeed brilliant, day out.

we got to listen to and see displays from the police, the traffic department (more on them later. much, much more), the fire brigade and the paramedics, as well as the rubbish men talking of recycling. on top of that there was a wonderful puppet show aimed at teaching children the dangers of strangers and inappropriate touching.

the boys paid attention to all of these, i am happy to say, but as you can imagine they were rather more keen on the "fun" elements of the day!

i think the place they spent most of their time was on a rather excellent beach football pitch. we are not known for our beaches here, but the one made at the park was most excellent!




thankfully or just by chance there was two balls on offer, meaning that James and William were not fighting about playing with just the one!

whereas James was well away kicking the ball about, William's technique on sand needs a little work. in his efforts to kick the ball as far as James can he did end up kicking a great deal of sand in the direction of his eyes!

as mentioned above, the fire brigade were there too. and yes, they brought a fire engine with them. across time and across the lands i have yet to meet the lad who is not enamoured with the sight of a fire engine; James and William are certainly no exception.




i look at that picture above and think yeah, right, this is not the last time that the two of them will be standing around, one of them swigging a can and the other wondering what to do next!

actually, James looks like he is intending to jump off the fire engine, if he can get away with it. this reminds me of an interesting first for him recently - he got a demerit at school. why? well, James assures me that it was not actually for "climbing on to the wall near the library and jumping off it", instead it was simply for "not knowing that you are not supposed to climb n to the wall near the library and jumping off it". that's an excuse i would have been proud of!

when he worked out that jumping off it would probably get him in trouble, the novelty factor of the fire engine soon wore off for James, but not really for William. he was far too interested in all the buttons, levers and taps on it, and very much wanted to have a go at some of them, in particular the ones that would produce a great deal of water when activated!




sorry, we spent most of our time playing and listening to be bothered about taking Grandad levels of pictures, so this next one is the last one for now! that said, a fair few more will follow very soon, so do pay attention as to what is behind what you see in this next one!




that, i suspect, is the biggest see-saw the boys have yet got their hands on, and as a result it was one they were reluctant to let go of!

the differences between the two boys is there to see, really. whereas both enjoyed it, James seems to be holding on for dear life, whereas William is stretching out, attempting to make himself more aerodynamic or something in the hope of going higher and faster!

we had, as i said, a most excellent day out! thank you to all the services who made the day possible!

yes, one more post on this particular day coming up shortly!



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

Love Me Do

hi there

50 years ago it was, if you for some reason are unable to work it out, 4 September 1962. by a quirk of the way of the calendar, much like 4 September 2012 it was a Tuesday. something happened on this day back then that you kind of really, really hope something similar is happening right now. what happened is one of those rare things that truly changes the world - for the better.

what was it? four young men, for the first time together, walked into a recording studio called Abbey Road and recorded five or six songs.




pedantics shall point out that versions of the band had indeed been in a studio before, but today marks the 50th anniversary of The Beatles as the world knows them recorded together.

yes, sure, "popular" music had been recorded before - Eddie Cochran, Buddy Holly and indeed The King, Elvis Presley, had in two of those cases had their full careers and lives cut short by 1962. it was The Beatles, though, that changed things.

all of a sudden, music and the musicians that made it could seem like the be all and the end all of lives, particularly of course "teenagers". the 'Beatlemania' phenomenon was like nothing before it but would become the way of music. those with the good looks and outstanding music would come to have their pictures hanging on the walls of millions of bedrooms, their records on even more turntables.





it was not just popularity that The Beatles brought. their music, a variant of skiffle and considered to be disposable, trivial entertainment, soon attracted praise, careful consideration and appreciation from critics and classical ("proper", if you will) musicians alike. this "noise" that seemed to attract fleeting attention from the young simply would not go away, disposable popular music transformed into an art form in the hands of The Beatles and their peers.

one of the songs recorded on this day 50 years ago was Love Me Do. i remember seeing a documentary on Liverpool and it showed this song as part of a new phenomenon - fans at the Kop End of Anfield sang it in unison during matches. sadly the songs sung now at Anfield and beyond tend not to be as melodic or pleasant, but at least it all started with the greatest of intentions.




oddly, i've had the 'Red' best of set from The Beatles on in the car recently. William simply can't get enough of them, insisting that i rather put "Daddy Music" on instead should i have a different disc in. that The Beatles ended some 3 or so years before i was born puts an odd spin on "Daddy Music", although in fairness i would refer to them as being my Daddy's music too!

pretty much any day is a good a day as the next to give The Beatles a spin, but if you've not played them for a bit, well, why not today?


from me to you,
be excellent to each other!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

the worst film in the history of cinema?

hi there

well, i haven't seen the debut film of someone or something called The Oogielovess. then again, it would appear that hardly anyone else has.

for all the great artistic statements made in cinema, let us never lose sight of the fact that it is a business, and thus the greatness of a film tends to be measured by money. in that measurement, then, a film called The Oogieloves In The Big Balloon Adventure is the worst film ever made.




the claim on the poster is a rather interesting one. in retrospect, the claim that it is from a "marketing visionary" reveals a most unusual interpretation of the word "visionary", for the film took all of an average of $47.00 (forty-seven) from cinemas showing this film. and it was not for want of cinemas showing it, for it was released at over 2,000 cinemas last Friday. 2,160 cinemas showed it, if you wish for precision.

ouch is the word that springs to mind. as i said, i have not seen it, but from what i have seen in regards of images this Oogieloves thing looks like it would be great as a children's TV show. why instead it was launched as a major motion picture is beyond me.

that is to assume that this marks the debut of the Oogieloves. if there's a TV show of them i have not seen or heard of it, which is most unusual considering we have youngsters that this would presumably be aimed at.




it's a bit strange that if the "marketing visionary" behind this was given enough money to make a film we don't have a Teletubbies or Thomas The Tank Engine film. both of those, it is fair to say, are established and indeed fondly thought of around the world already, making some visionary marketing a doddle.

needless to say, like perhaps quite a few others, i am rather keen to see this film, just to see if it as bad as the money suggests!


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

one september sunday

hi there

 whoops, i see we are nearly 3 days into September and i have not done much in the way of updates here. sorry, been busy! i oddly have a stack of things to post here, the least of which certainly isn't a review of Frankie's new Sex Mix collection, but i just have not got to it.

speaking of things not got too, it would appear that my Dad has caught "New Zealanditis" in respect of email. ever since he went to that fine land all of a sudden he does not send a barrage of emails as we are all used to. it must be a trick that Gillian has taught him.

that said, i did get a barrage of emails from him today. they were, in fairness, mostly an impressive list of new CDs and DVDs he has asked me to get for him. there was, however, a couple of pictures too. like this one, since i mentioned Gillian. and yes, Grant enthusiasts, he does feature, along with Katie and Daniel!

that's a brilliant picture! thanks very much indeed for sending it on! i am going to assume it was professionally done, which will no doubt lead to a comment from Dad about how he took it.

Grant enthusiasts will also no doubt greatly appreciate the other picture that Dad sent along today. there is not all that much i can say about it, besides that it seems Dad has really got the hang of how things are done in NZ.

the somewhat scary thing is that Dad no doubt took the above picture as he was off investigating this "dogging" business, something that he saw on his last holiday to New Zealand, which was right around the time he decided all of a sudden that he wanted very much to live there. exactly what "dogging" activities he expects to find in a field full of sheep is beyond me and, quite frankly, i am not asking him.

well, there you go for now! hopefully i will get the rest of the stuff i have sat here that is marked "would look good on the blog" up quite soon!


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