i went back to the doctor to get another shrink

howdy pop pickers

rock musicians and pop stars kicking off about stuff what is not to do with vibes is hardly anything new, look you see. in the sixties they protested stuff like the vietnam war and restrictive drug laws, and in the seventies they protested stuff like restrictive drug laws and other things. by the eighties, of course, for reasons not clear it was determined that the likes of Sting, Bono, Jim Kerr and to a lesser extent Bruce Springsteen should be allowed to direct how the world worked on every level, be it political or ecological or what have you. that went ever so well, as can be seen in the perfect world we now have. 

did this happen historically? yes, probably. no doubt Beethoven got irked by something - perhaps the treatment of deaf people with boss hair in his time - and no doubt all them what wrote hymns got upset about something or other. so no, nothing new. 

every now and then, mind, one gets to see a musician kicking off about something or other that one would not immediately expect them to. like, for instance, this headline i saw, where it seems that Pete and Roger are a bit concerned with how the invisible war on the new plague is going. 

i was like, yeah, ok. to be fair, health concerns are a massive issue for The Who. for many, many years they have put all sorts of time and effort into the Teenage Cancer Trust which they are patrons of, and well done and full credit to them for it. also, Roger Daltrey has been a lifelong apologist for The Krays, failing to comprehend why they were ever sent to prison as they only "ever really killed their own sort". 

they, Pete and Rog, The Who, are very, very far away from being alone in being concerned about coronavirus or covid or whatever they are calling the plague this week. but why, exactly, the BBC has elected to make their concerns headline news is baffling. i mean, true, in the highly unlikely event that they had said something positive about plague then yes, probably, that would be noteworthy enough to be the main story. but that The Who consider it all to be a pile of sh!t is, well, the standard view. 

yet this could be the turning of a tide, i suppose. often i have expressed the theory, wish, ambition or ideal that Roger Daltrey would punch, square in the face, anyone who failed to purchase his magnificent records, or anyone who spoke ill of the vibes of The Who. should be apply this approach to the plague, well, i expect the invisible war against it shall be won very, very quickly. 

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

the suicide squad

hello there

all of a sudden, and unexpectedly, i seem to have an interest in watching films once more. for a short while i simply could not be @rsed, look you see. don't think there was an issue or anything wrong, just doing other stuff. but, of late, i have watched a fair few. 

perhaps i shall pass comment on a few of them as we go here, but for the sake of the headline (or title) for this blog, it seems to make sense to go with the "most recent", or the one hoisted out there as a blockbuster. which would be, as the title says, The Suicide Squad. which is not Suicide Squad sans the "the" part of the title, as that was a different film. well, similar but different. this one is a sequel, of sorts, and also it is not. 

be warned, for it is extremely likely that there are **** SPOILERS AHEAD ****. a lot of this would be down to me not being entirely sure of just what i watched, or knowing much of the background of any or all of it. still, for a quick review, it was relatively entertaining and surprisingly graphic. not graphic as in based on graphic novels or whatever, but graphically violent. 

what's the plot? right, well, yes, this could be where the wheels really start to fall off this post, as i don't rightly know. i think, much like the original or first (or earlier) film of a quite similar name, it's a kind of quasi variation on The Dirty Dozen, but with comic book ('graphic novel') characters in it instead. there seems to be a whole bunch of DC comics "expanded universe" villains in prison, right, and they get offered (some) time off of their sentences if they agree to go on what amounts to suicide missions, hence the team name, now that i think. 

in this particular edition, or incarnation (variation, perhaps) of such, off a whole bunch of such types that i really don't know or recognize (except Harley Quinn) go off on a "top secret" mission to battle some military regime or other and destroy a building in which there is a massive space alien. oh, yes, more on the latter later. 

the start was particularly strange, if not unusual. unless i am missing some elaborate joke or similar, i believe that "subvert expectations" was on the go. first thing i saw was Michael Rooker, and i thought class, he is boss him, this should be good. also, Boomerang, a character from the first one was in it, which was a surprised, as he got twatted to death from what i remember. no matter, smart, said i, as i really liked him. and then both (there was a spoiler warning earlier) got killed off, in the case of at least one of them, again.  oh. 

mostly, or for the most part, all of this film felt like it was a big massive excuse just to have that quite class Idris Elba fellow run around swearing a lot and twatting people in a most impressive way. neither of those are particularly bad things, as such, but not quite what i was expecting. mindful of how i really was not sure what to expect from it. except something about Sylvester Stallone (that one) playing a talking shark or something. which yes, he did, it turns out, so i heard right. 

the biggest surprise for the film, for me, was the little amount of time that Harley Quinn was in it. my basic, rudimentary understanding was that her character was the "star" of the piece, as she almost was with the first and then with the "standalone" Harley Quinn film (what i did not see). no, she's kind of hovering around as a 'central' character, but it seems mostly to be the Idris Elba show. 

frankly, i am not sure i could tell you much of anything of the characters. not sure if we, the audience, are supposed to be aware of their origins, etc, or if it simply isn't supposed to matter. i mean, yes, i was watching and saying "that one guy looks a bit like that twat off of the wrestling", and sure enough it was John Cena. also, him what was in Doctor Who was in it, with test tubes or something in his head. the most memorable character is probably the talking shark, in truth. 

other films that i have watched? well, Dad suggested Dark Waters, which is based on a true story, and that was very good indeed. looking for something not taxing to watch saw me try Zombieland 2 or whatever it was called. i really liked the first, and this one felt very much like it was all the jokes and gags they cut from that first one jazzed up into a film. further zombie viewing took the form of Army Of The Dead or whatever it was called, i think that, but the name sounds wrong and certainly doesn't seem to reflect the film. it was kind of Aliens meets Dawn of The Dead meets, inexplicably, Ocean's 11, and it kind of worked all right, but nearly three hours of it was too much. 

back to The Suicide Squad and my overall observation would be how times have changed. i checked, and double checked, the blu ray box. yes, this only has a "15" certificate. which reflects a distinct change in direction from them at the BBFC. they were right censor happy twats in the 80s, and for a lot of the 90s. and for a lot of the 00s. how this sailed through is a mystery.  

illustrating my surprise is the (in the greater good and glory of Commodore 64 mode, of course) scene of Harley Quinn getting quite roughly tortured. yes, it's "comic book" and "fantasy" but also rather graphic. my basic understanding was that the BBFC came down particularly harsh on any films showing women or children being tortured or subjected to sustained brutality. it seems that stance is now quite relaxed. perhaps i am getting old, or what have you, but i have no clue if this is for better or worse. for a measure of change, if this is considered "15" material now, it will be interesting to see what further gets tolerated a decade or so on from now. 

no, in answer to the main, obvious question. absolutely none (as far as i could see) of the regular, better known DC comics heroes or villains turn up in this. no Batman, no Joker, etc. i seem to recall that Superman got a brief mention, something or other about being shot. effectively, then, for a casual watcher of these comic book super hero things, this was kind of the equivalent of at some point between 71 and 79 The Beatles saying there were going to play together again, but only stuff what Ringo had done. so, one or two highlights, but ultimately an act which would have audiences saying you what? 

right, the "big bad" of the film (ostensibly, or in theory). which is a big massive, f*****g stupid looking starfish space alien. here it is, sort of, presented in Commodore 64 mode. for clarity it's the one in the below which is not Idris Elba. 

just about the time this big, f*****g stupid looking space alien starfish got free and started wandering around was when i felt i had seen enough of the film. but, yes, i watched it all, and of course, well, guess who wins the "final battle". actually, less than 24 hours after watching it, i cannot recall how, exactly, it got twatted one. but it did. 

this film isn't a sequel, prequel, remake, reimaging or anything, then. it's just been turned out for a bit of fun, one suspects, or in the hope that it will make a good deal of cash. somehow Warner Bros are struggling to work out ways to make huge amounts of money off of all things DC, especially compared to Disney with their Marvel stuff. which is weird, as the DC characters are a lot better and considerably more established in the minds of people. 

how, exactly, i ended up watching this was that the boys had been to the pictures to see it, really liked it, the blu ray was on special at Tesco, i picked it up for them and figured i might as well have a gander before handing it over. undoubtedly they shall enjoy watching it again; i believe once was quite enough for me, thanks. although yeah, the shark was quite class. 

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

discover romford

owright geezer

so, cor blimey gov, i've been dahn sarf in that fhakkin lhaandhaan, innit, look you see. pretty much everything you may have heard, imagined or simply made up (if that is not to imagine) is probably true and then some, with particular emphasis on cars and associated vehicles of the road. despite having an extensive and exhaustive public transport system - they have more buses and trains there than the rest of the country combined - they really, really like cars. as in, i believe in one day i saw more cars on one stretch of road than i would see in an entire week in a different (proper) part of the country. 

this made life kind of somewhat interesting, and difficult, for me. i was there for verk, as it happened, and quite a part of that is, you know, driving. as it turned out, the only thing they are more passionate down there about than cars is limiting what roads you can drive on, or when, and all at a cost. frankly i am not too surprised about them congestion and emission charges, for pollution with all them cars must be a nightmare. goodness knows what that squatter mayor does with all the coins. 

but, anyway, enough, momentarily, of my plight with the joys of driving down there. little wonder, mind, that when they do them shows of london (innit) like EastEnders, all the people do is shout at each other. it must be quite distressing to sit in so much traffic. moving on then, and romford. 

i ended up in that romford place, of essex (i believe) rather more by default than design. no, i certainly would not have chosen to visit the place myself, but verk asked, and i consented. to go back briefly on the just momentarily stated claim, after my first day of driving in the place i kind of regretted it, but soon got the hang of it. if by soon you understand 2, perhaps 3, days. 

yes, i did indeed see quite a few strange, peculiar things there. as one would. but, alas, i wasn't really there to take pictures of such observations. the one (slightly) above, however, was well worth documenting, i think. of course, if something is worth documenting, then one should do it properly, like what i have gone done, in the greater good and glory of Commodore 64 mode. 

just what, exactly, have i documented (or captured) here? precisely what it looks like. that is some dummy or mannequin (actual, not film) head, under some tarpaulin, along with a rudimentary door mat sort of thing, celebrating the football (association) club west ham united. yes, that's the west ham of the east end of london (innit). well, i did warn it is a strange place. 

no real surprise, to be sure, that abandoned shopping trolleys (trollies) were profligate across all of what i saw of london (innit). well, if people can have cars but they are simply too expensive to drive around, or actually driving to the shops is prohibited, then the people of the city are going to do shops via walkies, and taking the trolley home is a lot easier, i would think, than carrying it. yes, i suppose they could get one of them famous "black cabs" of london, but they are frightfully expensive. 

from what i could work out, romford and a great deal of essex (essential and auxiliary) was, were or is a significant manor or turf for west ham support, a catchment area of sorts, i suppose. quite likely this is all down to the native population of the place being ardent communists, and the football club using the treasured hammer and sickle off of the soviet union as their logo or emblem. rather paradoxical, it is, how people of london tend to be red commie types, yet the city is home to the largest display and proceeds of capitalism at its most ferocious. maybe it is because so much money is generated there than the people can indulge the whimsical cash is free concepts associated with ultra left wing mantras. 

what do people "do" with shopping trolleys (trollies) down there? i have no idea. probably, it is so, like in normal, proper parts of the country, eventually they end up being traded in at scrapyards for cash. except possibly not. strangely, for purposes of verk, i had to go past such an establishment there. it did not go well at all. quite a ghastly, quasi frightening place, and i shall not return. quite menacing and threatening, it all was. my suspicion is that any "business" type person anywhere near london (innit) feels like they have to act, or put on a front, like a Kray or similar villain. 

did i happen to pick up a london (innit) trolley to bring home with me? no. well, it's not really a practical thing to take away and pack to drive a few hundred miles, is it. other than there being quite a few branded waitrose, which i believe is a posher, needlessly more expensive version of a proper supermarket, i couldn't really see all that much difference between them trolleys what they have there and the ones we have here. believe it or not, it is not like i am expert in the subject. 

right, well, that's about all i have got for you on this subject. if that. for any sort of advice if you had to be in romford, or essex, or london (innit), generally it would be do all you can to experience the place without needing to drive in it, or take any sort of responsibility for any sort of vehicle. i have little choice but to disregard my own advice on this one, but please heed the words and learn from my plight, if not benefit in an overt or direct way. 

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

pollution pledge five years on

owright geezahs

it is of the case that, on quieter moments of an evening, i can be found perusing older (as opposed to future) news periodicals from select london boroughs. this can be quite, well, boring, to be honest, but every now and then a little, mildly interesting, look you see. for this little foray, or excursion, into things off of london (innit) from the past, i had a gander at an edition of the prestigious fulham chronicle, dated 29 November 2016. so, yes, five years ago. 

we have a tendency to think of protests in and around london (innit) concerning traffic, pollution and all that sort of stuff as a fairly recent thing. not so. at least, once, previously, other action was taken to try and draw attention to the perils of such. but it was not always so that people chose to glue themselves to trains, or motorways for that matter. instead, they simply asked people not to pollute so much. 

that's quite a nice story, that is. i am not sure on the science, or my mathematics, but going on that article, just north of fifty (50) people agreeing (in principal) to switch off their engines when stuck in traffic means that over one thousand (1000) people in fulham, and hammersmith, are not dead. 

my guess is that the relative success of the above was not really built on, now that london has a low emission zone and ultra low emission zone in it, as well as the much loved congestion charge. unless, of course, them schemes are just a cash grab by that squatter mayor they have momentarily. 

no, nothing else to add to this, really. except a wish that people would just ask others to be excellent to each other, rather than gluing themselves to things what are transport related. 

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

helicopter at night

heya

i was pretty much minding my business whilst having reason to be outside momentarily, look you see, when i noticed a sound and a light in the sky. well, it would have been peculiar for such to be on the ground, or if not peculiar then not really too noteworthy. 

what it all was is, of course, a helicopter. otherwise, or if it were not so, then the title of this post would not make much sense. curiosity took some hold, and i thought it might be interesting to see how a predominantly black helicopter, flying across a mostly (pastel) black sky, came out in the greater good and glory of Commodore 64 mode. 

not as precise or as clear as it could be, to be fair, but all the same i am reasonably happy with how it all came out. as to which of them quasi dots in the sky is, or was, the helicopter, i am actually not so sure. but, perhaps you are quite skilled at seeing details in Commodore 64 images and have no need for me to speak of which one it is. certainly it is there, though. 

just what was the helicopter doing? i mean, as in other than flying, or sort of hovering? absolutely no idea. from that which i could see it was quite mostly black, had no copper (constabulary) markings, and no sort of flashlight or spotlight thing. yet it was hovering in a way which suggesting methodical and certainly implied officially. 

there's some reluctance in sharing the above, which of course is one of them animated gif things. yes, of course in the greater good and glory of Commodore 64 mode. although there was (so far as i am aware) just the one helicopter in the sky, them dots make it look like at least three (3) things were up there. so perhaps some sort of ufo or similar enthusiast will grab the above and showcase it as being proof of alien visitors, or similar. 

yes i am kind of curious as to what the helicopter was up to. usually (normally) i am not one for immediate suspicion, or conspiracy stuff, but it was rather strange to see one lurking with some intent, yet no signage or any such markings as to say who it might be at the controls. 

a bit better, that one above. you can see the sort of off-white (cream or bone) and black dash in the strange murky orange colour what Commodore 64 mode threw out as the helicopter was directly above me. yes, ok, fair enough, perhaps i should have taken a "regular" picture of the helicopter as some form of frame of reference, but that might have set off the flash, either distracting the pilot, or drawing attention to myself. the latter is of course slightly paranoid, but. 

considering some of the incidents, which i would rather not discuss, that i was quite close to being involved in, a single sliver of doubt roams in my mind that in some remote slight way this thing was there for my benefit. but no, i suspect that if someone were seeking me they would do so in a more direct way, not hover round in one of these helicopter things.

one final look, then, above, in that there animated gif format of Commodore 64 mode. this one looks even more kind of quasi ufo, so have fun if you wish to believe in such. 

so, if this is someone seeking me out for whatever reason that (probably) cannot be good, then i may not be around to write much more. however, if this helicopter was nothing to do with me, well i guess i shall be free to put some more observations here. eventually. 

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

london, briefly

now then

as it happens, or turns out, i was quite briefly in the centre (of sorts) of that there london (innit) place, look you see. whereas i don't have anywhere nearly as much as i had thought or expected to tell as a tale from being there, probably enough exists to vaguely justify this post. or at the least as much as any post here has ever been of reason to be. 

so, my time down there, in that there london (innit) place, involved a fair bit of public transport. trains, mostly but the odd bus. for some sort of vague notion of potential, possible historical significance, i kind of suspect that, maybe, it is worth noting how them down there are all "dealing" with this invisible war on the new plague, or if you like the efforts to combat coronavirus. 

certainly, though, i not so much propose or intend but actually will commence with a transport related image prior to this sojourn. 

that is indeed me, moi, on a more northern based train. yes, indeed, truly i am wearing one of them face mask things what them what do all the science stuff believe to have a degree of assisting abilities in winning the invisible war against the new plague. my understanding, and to partially address the great misunderstanding of them, is that these face masks are not worn to protect you from the dreaded plague per say. no. one wears them to prevent spewing forth this airborne plague on the off chance you are infected. so, the point would be to cease the spread, not directly prevent the wearer from getting a case of it. 

one thing which has, or had, been decidedly noticeable up in the north, so to speak, is a kind of quasi abandoning of all this (that) mask business, and other measures. people have or had become rather comfortable that the war has been won, or are simply bored. which meant that i was one of the few who still chose to wear the requested mask, be it on public transport or in shops. 

not so much down in that there london (innit), i observed on my short stay. but yes, first, of course a selfie outside of that kings cross train station place. 

quite a rare non-Commodore 64 mode picture there for you, just for the interest of anyone who for some reason wished to see me as i am in the more or less present day. indeed, yes, that is the i am assured entirely legit levi's jacket what Zama got for me off the back of Jozi taxi rank, with his view being that it would be "perfect" for them English winter weather conditions. debatable. 

generally speaking, it is not unreasonable to suggest that we, the people, see matters on the news concerning london (innit) and assume, or take it as a given, that what is broadcast represents, or reflects, the place entire. a common and all too easy trap. to this end, one sees all sorts of anti-vax, anti-lockdown, anti-anything you've got marches, protests, etc on the news, all happening in london, and so assimilating this information as it being profligate. not so. 

more observations momentarily, but for some reason one or two of you may wish to see a few seconds, i believe five (or 6) or so, of me sat on the tube train thing. well, if that be so, here you go. 

indeed i am not looking at my most beautiful or magnificent there, but there i am. and here we are. 

for the most part, as in overall, it is the case that, on what i saw, the people of london (innit) are very much keen and eager to advocate the mask wearing life. it's a bit like that thing where people say it is one of those mirror cases, but that fails to observe how a mirror works. whereas in the north it feels quite like just one or two actually still wear masks, down south ("dharn sarf"), it is just a couple not wearing them. mind, how much of that is the invisible war on the new plague and how much of that is inspired by the ludicrous number of cameras down there, well, i leave up to you. 

how is it, exactly, wearing one of these masks for a prolonged period of time, and in a relatively confined space? awful. my understanding is that they are not supposed to be worn for all that long, but on train travels across the land (and back), i had one on for north of two hours and just shy south of three (3) hours. not pleasant, no matter how necessary, and something i have no wish to have a repeat experience of any time soon. 

there is my "do it yourself" plague test thing a while after returning from london (innit), so as to allow a certain level of time for virus incubation (yeah, i saw Alien) and ultimately to check that i was as infection free as a test could tell. oddly, despite this being in the greater good and glory of Commodore 64 mode, i believe you can make out the singular line by "c", meaning i tested negative. 

some conversations in that there london (innit) place gave every indication that the incumbent mayor of london, the squatter who has the position via being (just) least worst, made it "mandatory" to wear masks on all forms of public transport. well, be that as it may, if there was a significant kick off against it down there, i really fail to see how they might enforce such. the sense i got, or have, is that the people of that curious place are wearing them as a genuine act of trying to get on top of this coronavirus business. perhaps i am wrong, but that was the sense i got. 

anyway, yes, more from any future travels and that what i do, as and when such happens. 

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

oh good, more trade federation negotiations

heya

so, a trailer has come out, or been released (or "dropped", look you see) for The Book Of Boba Fett, the latest effort from Disney to extract coins from Star Wars. a task which you would think is quite easy and straightforward, but somehow they keep making a right proper mess of it. 

early signs are, mindful that all we have is a 2 (two) minute trailer, that the mess shall continue. i mean, up to now they have got it all perfectly correct and right with Rogue One then The Mandalorian, kind of all right with aspects of The Force Awakens and bits of Rise Of Skywalker, then rather dreadfully dull with The Last Jedi and Solo. i gave up on Bad Batch after six or so episodes, sorry. 

based on the short, borderline irrelevant screentime the character had in the Star Wars films, it is quite ludicrous that a highly popular cult has built up around Boba Fett. i suppose it is the aesthetics of the character, or the absolute 'badass' (in American) he appeared to be without ever showing it. there was always some potential for him to crop up in a kind of intended for a more mature (as in older, not grown up) audience thing, and in fairness The Mandalorian delivered that in abundance. 

now we have a trailer for a Boba Fett thing in its own right, The Book of Boba Fett, and my first reaction is one of being decidedly underwhelmed. after watching it again (then once more for luck) i can say that i remain underwhelmed. any kind of optimism i have resides in the vague hope of them deciding to do an entirely misleading trailer. i doubt this is the case. 

various degrees of Boba Fett "fans" exist. the most vocal are, of course, them what live in Momma's basement in the likes of Wisconsin (or whatever), who absolutely had better ideas for all Star Wars films and cannot believe that neither George Lucas or Disney ever called them, offered them a billion dollars (give or take) to go make the "perfect" film. other, more well balanced ones, exist, too. a thing in common across all of them would be a wish to not hear Boba Fett say something like "i am not a bounty hunter", for that is at odds with how we know him to be. guess, then, what the first words of Boba Fett are in this trailer.......

oh, f***. are we really going to go down this "subvert your expectations" sh!t again, are we? because that worked ever so well for Last Jedi. you know, when ultra Jedi Luke Skywalker was no longer a Jedi and was not something interesting at all. 

quite a lot of the trailer would appear to focus on Boba Fett holding various discussions and negotiations. sure, there are hints of him doing some serious, top level twatting, but for the most part it seems they want to focus on how excellent Boba Fett is at sitting around a table talking to people about things of stuff. because, you know, what everyone loves the most of Star Wars is them bits off of Phantom Menace when the senate debated things, and all them crazy trade federation negotiations. 

again, this could or might be a ruse, and this series turns out to be a whole load of swashbuckling action fun as it should be. but then why not reveal so in the trailer, i wonder. for the life of me i cannot think of anyone who would have seen Boba Fett and said "i bet that character would be well proper smart sat with others at a table talking", but Disney would appear to have found someone who did say that and employed them to create this. great, just great. 

certainly nothing would bring me more delight than to be entirely wrong, that this is going to turn out to be a really smart, top notch series. for that to happen, they shall have had to go to quite extraordinary lengths to cloud it with this trailer. 

frankly, i suspect, or think, perhaps Boba Fett should have been left as a secondary character. whatever cult following he picked up in the Star Wars films was enhanced by having him in The Mandalorian as a key but far from essential, central or primary character. let's have him sit around and talk a lot does not strike me as a particularly interesting way to take the character. 

it is so, of course, that Disney owns it all, and shall do as they jolly well please. yet, no, but how they keep making a mess is a mystery. take, for instance, Solo. all they had to do was have Han and Chewie running away from Boba Fett for two hours, and there's a top three Star Wars film. instead, no Jabba, a back story that is at odds with what was always told it as being, and very little of what made Han Solo who he was in the first place, flying about. 

of course i will be watching this show, and indeed Kenobi, for which the trailer is also probably already released by now. but my expectations are decidedly lowered, thanks. 

live long and prosper!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

alone on a platform, the wind and the rain

howdy pop pickers

well, what do you know. them what do all of those Now compilations (tapes, records and compact discs, look you see) have successfully extracted (several) more pennies from me. as it happens, they have tried to extract more than they presently succeeded with, but i have resisted the completion impulse. 

as has been documented here, on this blog, over the last few years, they have - in some cases for the first time ever - been issuing the original Now That's What I Call Music sets. from one to ten is the plan, with it being that the tenth is out quite soon (at least at time of writing). several valid complaints exist concerning these re-issues, ranging from omitted tracks (licensing, and not wanting to include one off of Gary Glitter) all the way to incorrect versions of some songs appearing, different mixes and that. yet, overall, a lovely waltz down memory lane. or a refreshing of existing playlists. 

not content with taking money from me (and others) with those re-issues, them what do the Now set (i believe, or suspect, EMI, but don't hold me to that) have come up with another set of 80s reissues. these would be the Yearbook series, which oddly started with 1983. sure, that is the year a Now set first came out, but one would have thought they might have decided to address the three (3) 80s years not covered to kick it off with. no matter. here we are. and where we are is at the second volume, 1984.

i elected, or if you like opted, not to purchase the first of these Yearbook releases, being as it was an as mentioned 1983. far, far too much of it was simply Now one and two, and the bits on the set which were not off of them had very limited appeal. yet i bought this edition, despite just about all the songs on it what i really, really like being owned several times over, and not much (if anything) on it being stuff that i felt was lacking. ultimately it came down to the fact that i felt there would be something quite, very, actually wrong with me if i didn't purchase a set celebrating the magnificence of the year in muic that was, is and always shall be, 1984. 

various comments and articles around the internet thing state, claim or declare that 1984 was "the greatest ever year for pop", or music in general. foolish, i say, is the person who tries to definitively state that of any year between, say, 1962 and 1999. it all pretty much went to sh!t after that, so any answer which commences with a 2 is immediately wrong. but still, what a year. Frankie Goes To Hollywood were at number one for about 25% of it, Duran Duran were the biggest thing in the world, Spandau Ballet mostly kept out the way, Wham! and George Michael were confidently established, films were spewing out iconic songs all over the place and, in the end, we believed that we could change the world entire via one remarkable song. add to that U2, after some 4 years of plugging away, started to make a mark, along with an alternative / indie scene so gifted and talented that it forced itself into the mainstream and well, what a year it was. 

the year that it was is almost covered by this set. not quite, for no set could do that, unless someone somewhere does an insane multiple disc set of every song off of that year. pretty much every genre what came to the fore in the year is represented, i think. sure, i would probably have included something off of The Smiths here, but all on does the job, even if i am not too thrilled by some of the ones included. disc three, for example, is unlikely to get played ever again, now that i have played it once. 

ostensibly, or essentially, this is quite Now That's What I Call Music 4, with a few borrowed from 3 and, inexplicably, 2, and then a few others added in. i consider 4 to be my favourite of all time, and remain baffled that, both at the time and when the CD issue came out, it has always been the poorest selling set from the series. go figure. 

my understanding is that a few of my gripes are what one calls the "Mandela effect", where you remember things differently from how they actually happened. i am not sure such is radically true, for a few things included here as 1984 are of debate. yes, i would always welcome a celebration of Frankie Goes To Hollywood, but there is no denying that it was 1983 when it got released and, so far as i recall, topped the chart. true, sure, during 1984 it climbed back up to number two, behind Frankie's second single and second number one Two Tribes, but still. also, i would suggest that the offerings from The Style Council and, in particular, Paul McCartney here were 1983 releases. for some reason i believe the same is true for White Lines, but if Grandmaster Flash says his magnum opus is 84, so be it. 

some debate, too, over the inclusion of Drive off of The Cars here. true, yes, it absolutely was a 1984 release, but i suspect many of us associate it permanently 1985, when it was used to such dramatic effect during Live Aid. i believe it charted higher then, due to association, than was the case on original release. but no, i am not going to research such things, that would be silly and not me. 

curiosity does make me wonder (somewhat) about the absence of Queen, who had become massive once again in this year, after the Hot Space shenanigans. perhaps they, them what make these sets, felt there would be too much "duplicate" stuff, as the band were covered on the regular Now sets. but then, it is so that this set is stating itself as a 'yearbook' for 1984. 

for the debate on "greatest year" for pop, i certainly do remember 1984 fondly. a strong case to argue would be that it was a "defining" year; one in which things changed. go back on decades and one can easily argue that 67, 68 (maybe) were the years that "pop" was clearly not a transient thing, that it would remain, prevail and be accepted as art. off the top of my head, 76 would be the next kind of landmark year, with the coming of punk and disco to the mainstream once again changing things. 

how did 84 change it all? well, sure, up until then we had had synth on the go, thanks to the New Romantics, but a look at the songs here says that it was then when it stopped being a novelty and started being an actual, proper instrument. sexual identity became a "player" in the pop chart, more than it had ever been before. creativity felt like it was reaching a tangible peak. oh, never mind, don't try and spend needless time explaining, just feel it, listen to the vibes. 

chances of me buying other volumes? limited. this one i hummed and haaahed over for a bit, actually putting it back on the shelf at one stage, but then buying it when Tesco gave us some voucher or another. now that i have it and have played it, not sure it was all that wise to get. having picked up all the Now reissues, this was an excess, an indulgence, really. pretty sure all i want from 85 and 86 i shall already have, but open to seeing what they may lure me in with. 

in respect of that bit i mentioned of 1984 ending with some view that somehow music could change the world, i draw your attention to the last track on the last disc. quite a thing, it was, to see virtually every pop star bar Frankie head into a studio together to make that. sure, there were others which followed, but in terms of a record, i don't believe that has ever been topped. 

do i endorse, or suggest, purchasing any of these Yearbook things? again, it was frightfully silly of them, with a blank canvas, to not go back to start with 80, 81 and 82. but, here we are. should it be that for some reason you are keen on 80s vibes compilations, yet refuse to purchase the Now That's What I Call Music re-issues, then yeah, these sets shall do might fine. mind, i suppose most people these days just do streaming or what have you. 

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

replenished refreshments

hello there

for halloween of this year, as regular readers shall be aware, i brought a tale of true terror. for those of you who might have missed it, well, here is a link, look you see. should it be so that you cannot be bothered to click (or similar), a quite short version is that i very nearly ran out of proper tea. gasp. 

yes, i have corrected that, but i thought i would create some needless suspense by starting a new paragraph to say so. but, then again, i suppose the title of the post rather gave the game away. oh. 

no, i have not replaced (or restocked) proper tea on a like-for-like basis. indeed, but of course, i have procured some more Yorkshire Tea, but not the simple, regular form of this. 

the shop which i happened to be in when i remembered that i needed tea (i forget which) had an unusual special on the go. it was so that they had the usually more expensive "gold" Yorkshire Tea, in an 80 (eighty) bag form, on offer for the same price for that number of "regular" tea bags. so, i said, or went, why not, get some of these, mix it up a bit, see if i can't see (or taste, i suppose) a significant difference. 

with a partial degree of interest i have, indeed, inspected the box to see what makes this particular incarnation of Yorkshire Tea of "gold" status. so far as i can work out, for i lost interest after a few lines, the general idea i got was that it is made off of the even more superior tea leaves (leafs) than what the regular is made out of. right. it's just that when it comes to the fags (cigarettes, Americans, and not what you think), they now use the term "gold" as someone said they can't use "lights" no more, in case someone interprets that as them being an in some way healthier smoke. 

i would think, really, that "gold" in terms of "lights" off of fags would be that "decaf" tea, which just sounds hideous. or maybe in the world of tea things like rooibos are considered that, which is not so bad as that is lovely every now and then. should you be interested in that sort of thing then you'd probably be better off reading an actual, proper web thing about tea, but thanks all the same for having a look here.

on a creative impulse, then, i went ahead and "recreated" the horror video off of the previous halloween thing when i quite nearly ran out of tea. only this time it's all a bit disney princess, for as you can see it ends with a shot of a rather relatively full box of tea bags. 

have i noticed all that much of a difference between the regular Yorkshire Tea and this "gold" variation? in truth, no. yes, having made a cup of tea (or two) from this new stash, it was a most pleasant cup of tea, but not one i immediately saw as better, or more golden, than the regular stuff. so no, i doubt very much i would buy this "gold" variation at a higher price. 

but that said, you know what, let me go and have a cup of it now, again, just to have a tester taste, see how it goes. no, i shall not report or comment on it here as such, i just fancy a cuppa that's all. 

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

walking in the air

greetings 

it has only recently occurred to me, look you see, that i have some need, or partial requirement, to make preparations of the events which come towards the end of the year. we are not so far off that week 51 / 52 axis (at least not at time of publication), where it is so that christmas is celebrated. or marked, or observed, or what have you. 

this poses a slight challenge in my lodgings within my place of exile. whilst it is certainly true that i have space in which to live, and exist with comfort, nothing of my "pad" (so to speak) says that any sort of particularly large, or regular, sized tree - real or artificial - shall stand in a sensible spot. oh. i am pretty confident, or somewhat sure, that some retailer or another will do a modest sized, as in small, one for those living in more restricted places. no, i am not sure i am all that particularly @rsed about having one up, in truth, but tradition, etc. besides, there is every chance of me (moi) being stood accused of taking the part of a grinch or grouch if i do not embrace festivities. 

as a sort of quasi interim, if nothing else then this will simply have to do resolution, of course, yes, i have gone off and purchased, or procured, some appropriate kitchen roll. 

by appropriate kitchen roll, or 'towel' as it says (which strangely one can see in the above, despite it presented in the greater good and glory of Commodore 64 mode), yes, i do indeed mean such that has something vaguely christmas themed printed on it. in this instance, that story and animated film what is popular around the festive time of year, The Snowman. which is odd, as for us in England, indeed the wider UK, or if you like the British Isles or Islands, it is really rather rare that we actually get snow at or on christmas. in passing i seem to recall it has only actually happened seven (maybe 8) times in the last one hundred years or so. 

whereas the animated movie version of the story is quite closely associated with the song what is the titular title of this post, off of Aled Jones, my vague recollection is that, at first, it (the film) had a kind of opening monologue or narration off of David Bowie. my understanding is that all versions shown since the first time it was for some reason drop that. perhaps royalties, or something. 

one issue facing my use of this kitchen towel (roll) for the festive season is that i don't particularly use all that much of the stuff. presently i have a quite large roll on the go, and my suspicion is that it shall not be used up until the new year. so, it may well be the case that this The Snowman branded one(s) shall only see use in january or february. when, in fairness, it is a bit more common for us to get snow. 

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

keith smashing someone's face in

howdy pop pickers

rather than publish this on the actual date on the 40th anniversary of it happening (which would be december 18, look you see), i thought i would share this a bit in advance. why? so that you may prepare some appropriate celebrations for it all. a party perhaps, or just remember the day. 

yes, then. this moment in rock history really did happen. despite the formidable reputation what the Stones have, with particular emphasis on personal and live security, someone decided it would be a jolly good idea to get up on the stage. this did not go well for them. 

many thanks indeed to whoever thought it was a good idea to share this clip with the world, via that splendid and wonderful "internet" thing. i believe it to be within the remit of "fair and reasonable use" to place it here, for it should be watched and heeded as a quite serious warning not to tangle with the Stones. in particular when they are performing their art. 

a particularly agreeable aspect of this clip is not so much Keith Richards dispensing swift justice during this gig on the Still Life tour, but an abstract moment of Mick Jagger very much with his groove on. it would, i suspect, have been quite tricky to just switch his groove off momentarily to give someone a good hiding, but anyway Keith clearly had it covered. quite a surprise that Charlie did not pop around and give a bit of a kick; equally no surprise that Ronnie and Bill kept out of it all. 

i, for one can only speak of moi, have been to at least one (1) gig every decade since the 80s. probably more in the 90s than any other time, but a few in the 00s, early bits. and more than i expected in the 20s, but here we are. the point is, at no stage have i ever even considered trying to get on the stage. my interest at being at a concert is to hear the band play, not to try and touch them or get my head kicked right through and all the way in. but, i suppose others have different values. 

certainly, and make no mistake on this one, Mr Richards can go and smack the face in of pretty much anyone he cares to and is unlikely to be questioned, let alone prosecuted. the interesting thing, or something to note, is that this particular incident would have been within a year or so of John Lennon being shot. by that point, then, anyone going near a musician of note without permission was very likely to get a good hiding. 

well, anyway, i suspect mostly that clip (and thanks once again to whoever gone done it) is more interesting than anything i could add, and tells the story well enough itself. 

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

beach is kissed by the sea

heya

a little while ago (here, a link, look you see) my midlife crisis in exile thing went somewhat full tilt, and i bought all sorts of experimental lynx (axe in some countries) deodorants. there was a promise of actually trying them and then commenting here. it has taken some time, but here we are. at least with one. 

having run out of my usual type, that "gold" one, i decided no, well yes, let me try one of these ones, but no not to buy the usual one again just yet. i gave some consideration to which of the ones i may wish to use, and eventually just used the "love" branded one on the basis of, well, it being the first i picked up. 

not a great deal on the tin to go on in regards of expectations for it, except a tie-in (i am reluctant to say endorsement as this does not feel right) with the lgbt+ community, with various messages of support and contact information for people who wish to, well, talk. dig what you dig. 

leaving aside the commendable intentions of the marketing, for anyone who seeks to help anyone in this world, life and what have you is full worthy of praise, there is the matter of what this deodorant might be like. as in, is it any good, and what sense does the scent have of the name? 

certainly, it's not bad. this lynx love one. they have done much, much, much worse, believe you me. but it is not one i would opt (or elect) to use on a frequent basis. my nose has not been calibrated or tested as such, but to me this one smelt of roses. at first. kind of. well, it seemed to smell of how everyone believes roses smell. momentarily after application, though, it kind of went to a "musk" rose smell, and this changed dramatically to a damp musky rose smell. still, not so bad, in truth. 

it's decent, and does the job. there, does that count as some sort of useful review or give any kind of helpful insight? bonus if so. yes, i shall try one or two of the others eventually. actually, i think there are only another two to go, i did not get completely out of control when purchasing.

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

eleven

hello there

so here we are, look you see. this is being published, or going live, at the most magical, mystical time of the year. at the least, sure, in rock and roll terms. 

at eleven minutes past eleven hours on the eleventh day of the eleventh month, in harmony it is so that all forms of life on the planet pause to consider Nigel Tufnel. well, some of us do that more often than then, this is true, but still, all do it at that time. 

this is, well, yes, this is spinal tap, but still, this is quite tricky. most of you, i suspect, are here for the pictures and animated things, but i do feel compelled to do some writing around them. yet what can one say of Nigel Tufnel other than admire? 

certainly, in celebration of this most excellent moment in music mythology, there are some animated things for you. here is one, for instance, below. watch, and behold, in the greater good and glory of Commodore 64 mode, Nigel perform his art. 

one, as in moi, would assume that this whole "internet" thing is filled celebrations of all things Tufnel today. i find it a bit sad that it isn't at all times anyway, but at least it should be today. 

for those who are inexplicably baffled or unsure as to why this precise moment is the moment of universal harmony for celebrations of Nigel Tufnel, it's down to the amp. he is one louder than everyone else. 

yes, you probably are better off just watching This Is Spinal Tap, again and again and again, to get a full appreciation of this. rather that than rely on me to explain it all. 

more animated ('gif') Nigel Tufnel action to help celebrate the day? of course. 

certainly, as you probably don't need me to elaborate on (but i shall anyway), the above is very much the moment Nigel Tufnel explains how all the dials on his amp go up to 11 (eleven). 

go on, then, another picture.

right, well, enough of my yakking. let's boogie, indeed, and may this post have in some way have helped or enabled you to celebrate Nigel Tufnel. 

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

fair is foul

double double toil and trouble

i am still unsure if one is supposed to take this Vine bloke seriously, or if he is deliberately provoking, or if, and i believe this one most, he is supposed to be a second rate Alan Partridge tribute act, running long past the point of being funny and way beyond any memory of it supposed to be just a parody. every now and then i tune in to his radio concern, look you see, to hear what the latest is. maybe one day a clue to which of the truth he is shall reveal itself. 

quite recently, then, this went to a whole new level. he (and i think we have to take as a given he sets the agenda for his own shows) decided to give airtime to a campaign. not just any campaign, but this one linked right here, dedicated to exonerating a few thousand people (mostly women) sentenced to death and what have you, for being witches, five hundred (or so) years ago, in Scotland. and also building some sort of memorial or statue to honour them. 

let me, for the most part, leave it to the official site (link above, also news story right here) to expand and explain on it all. and, of course, encourage you to consider supporting them; i may well end up with one of them mugs on my shelf. for here, though, it is the reaction people had to it, on air. yes, also, it has inspired me to go and rediscover my passion for MS Paint art, here below to illustrate this post. 

obviously the most prominent reaction was the predictable, ready to go "what a waste of time and money" line, as well as asking if "these people" had "nothing better to do". such as, for instance, listen to a radio broadcast on the subject so as to complain, the one that caught my interest, however, was a call or message which suggested we should not be so hasty, for as Scotland is, in the present day, witch free (mostly), some good came from this. sure, i mean, of course one or two of them what got burned at the stake might not have been witches, but greater good, etc. 

before you all kick off and say preposterous, why not cast an eye to St Patrick, and Ireland. is it not so that he is revered for driving snakes from that land, and is celebrated for doing so, proof being no snakes in Ireland? unless you take as a given that his celebration is all clever marketing. should it be so that he brought a greater good (assuming the place is better off with no snakes) to Ireland, then is it not so the same is true of them what rid Scotland of witches? 

anyway, yes, i might well follow this story. but, also, i may very well not. you are, of course, welcome to do much of the same, or something different. 

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

 

gnome

hey there

as a general rule (or guide), i try not to do things what are similar in content for successive posts. for some reason i think that those of them what read this - as in you, look you see - might get "bored". or perhaps it is that i feel like i would get bored with it. don't know. but, or and, yet a recent post what i gone done has somewhat unexpectedly inspired me. 

the brief motion picture, or if you like film, what i made for halloween (2021) appears to have awakened or stirred memories of a career i contemplated. that is of being a full blown, full tilt movie maker. director, if you will. i had this on the list as a potential to do with my life, along with deliberations over being an astronaut, a gynaecologist, writer, assistant to Princess Anne, teacher and so forth. pretty much all the careers what others consider before ending up doing this and that. 

so, with the technology i have to hand, yes, i figured, why not go ahead and make a motion picture. mostly the answer to that is because i lack the time, but then i considered it some more and decided i could, if the interest remained, make it gradually. 

luck, or co-incidence, would certainly seem to be with me in regards of this inspiration. so as to contribute to the boys' celebrations and what have you of halloween, i picked up the above gnome. not just any gnome, of course, but a Poundland one. which cost £2. no matter, it seemed ideal to make a quasi suspense, thriller, romantic comedy sort of horror film with. 

obviously no, the film is not complete yet. i think the term for what stage it is at is "pre-production", for momentarily i am still working on the story, script, etc. being at such an early point of being made, however, did not stop me from starting filming. 

granted, no, sure, i mean yes, not much of how the film might develop is revealed in these provisional scenes. all two of them. but that's how a good teaser trailer works, isn't it? a teaser should give a taste, as it were, and lure an audience in. hopefully that's what is done here. 

quite a drawback is that my film is going to be one of them avant-garde, post-modernist things, as in it shall be a silent motion picture. this is all down to the fact that the Commodore 64 mode thing i use has no sound with it. well, maybe it won't be (entirely) silent, if i can work out how to dub some sound on it and if i can be bothered to do so. 

recently i happened to watch (at last) Interstellar off of Christopher "Chris" Nolan, in whom we trust. other than it being a truly magnificent film, i drew (or took) further inspiration from the experience. so yes, then, i have every intention of making some of the film in that imax format. here's a sneak peek. 

indeed it is entirely possible that Chris, or for that matter Jonathan, Nolan sees this blog and take something of a fancy to taking over this project. this would be a bit like how, as i understand it, they came to make the inspirational Interstellar. well, my initial thoughts would probably be yes, i would be agreeable to a meeting and a handover. but let's not get ahead of ourselves. 

but that said, of course i am planning ahead for the inevitable dvd and blu-ray release. to that end, i am preparing some extras, in the form of deleted scenes, alternate takes and what have you. here's one. 

more of a bit of a "blooper" scene i suppose, since yes, this is indeed some of the provisional post, or pre, production footage i did when i had the camera welded to the phone the wrong way so it came out sideways. but still, this would make for a great extra on the home video release, probably.

well, not much else i can report on this project right now. if i make any further footage that feels like it should be shared, sure i shall showcase it here. or maybe one day you will see it being advertised as coming soon to a cinema near you, made by either moi or them Nolan lads, depending on how discussions go. 

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

somebody special looking at me

howdy pop pickers

so here i am again, then. it is once more the fifth of november, look you see, and so i celebrate, remember, commemorate and reflect on how, on this date in 1991, i was fortunate enough (with a friend, and i hope she is out there somewhere doing well) to see the band tin machine perform at the Newcastle Mayfair. 

as the world at large cares greatly for rounded (or perfectly decimal) numbers, my assumption is that my celebrations this year are not without significance. should my maths be on the button, this is the thirtieth anniversary of that particular gig. no, i do not presume that any of the band do (or did) make a point of marking the date of this concert, at least not to the extent which i have. highly likely that not everyone at the gig with me does either, but i do. 

for those of you viewing this on a device which allows (or is enabled to have) video playback, as has become more frequent in my marking of the anniversary, here you go. below is another clip from the actual, as in very, gig what i was at. somehow someone (to tell the story once more) smuggled in a video camera (which were big devices then) and did a comparatively good job of recording just about the entire concert. many years later a fellow fan went to great efforts to get a copy of it to me. 

here, or rather below, for your viewing and slight listening pleasure is a song from the first half hour of the gig, the cover of If There Is Something what featured on the Tin Machine II album. something of a warning before you click - the sound and video quality from the first half of the gig is very much of bootleg quality, and perhaps not as enjoyable as other clips i have added here. 

perhaps understandably the person doing the bootlegging elected to concentrate the lens on Bowie. this should not be seen as disrespect to Hunt, Reeves or Tony, as they were (indeed are) ace, but of course all interest and focus was on the frontman. 

no, i had little or no idea that If There Was Something was a Roxy Music cover until i opened up the booklet what came with the Tin Machine II CD and noted (or if you like observed) the lyric credit for the song was Ferry, as in Bryan. yes, i absolutely did go and seek out the Roxy original version not long after, and was rather surprised. in its original form the song is about twice as long and a good deal slower paced. still good, but i prefer this one, thanks. 

once again i am uncertain if there is all that much more i can say on the subject of this gig or this band, considering how much i have written over the years. let it be so that all of you who have taken the time to have a gander at this have enjoyed the pictures and video. 

more of the same this time next year? quite possibly, if i still have the technology and devices which allow for the bootleg to be edited down into just the one song. should that not be so, well, it is not like there aren't many other celebratory posts across this blog.............

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