Freeview - an example of a lack of planning

Once again I have had to return my Freeview box in order to accommodate another shuffle of channels. While a retune is understandably necessary if the transmitters alter their frequencies this piecemeal operation should have been rendered unnecessary from the beginning and I'll explain why.

Firstly it's always easy to render judgements and opinions in hindsight; as a result I will present those facts that were known or assumed at the time the system was set-up and proceed from those:

Read More >>

Nitpicky language

I've been watching BBC's the Great British Menu in bulk 5, episodes at a time. Amazing how much rubbish can be removed - I've turned 2.5 hrs into 1.5 by fast-forwarding through the "this is what we're doing this year"'s the "and these are all the ingredients I'll be using"'s and the "and this is how how chefs did something regarding this year's brief"'s. Oh and the format's still a mess given the supposed goal, but I'll stop digressing.

Last week we had the North East; or Nor Feast as it was called. I've no problem with accents switching "th" for "f" or droppin' end sounds, they're simply diverse sounds and one is really no 'better' than another, but the question that kept being asked was

"Do you think this is a dish what will make the judges laugh?"

Ouch. Try this "Do you know what is wrong with that sentence?". Both "Do" and "What" are questioning terms and I can split my query into "What is wrong with that sentence? Do you know?". Now try it with the chef's question "What will make the judges laugh? Do you think this is a dish?" Nonsensical. It could be saved by "What will make the judges laugh? Do you think this is such a dish?". But that's not really what the question was about. The chef was not asking what will make the judges laugh only if this was a dish that could cause them to do so. It wasn't two questions it was merely one presented in an inaccurate form.

Yes, yes regionalism, but it's sloppy, causes an upset to my English parsing, and is unnecessary.

Oh I suppose it could have been worse; he could have been asking "Do you think this is a dish what you could make perfect for a hundred guests?"

The problem with 'realistic' fantasy

As mentioned in my previous entry I managed to catch-up with both "Death Valley", "The Walking Dead" and "Monsters". As you may infer I like this sort of thing, the trouble is I really have to disengage certain reasoning aspects of my brain to enjoy them. Namely the parts that comprehend the laws of physics and biology; and the part that doesn't assume that all world governments are staffed by morons (which I admit is a little harder to switch off).

Why do I name these types and not the "Iron Man" "Batman" type of films? Because I know they take place within a specific universe that allows this. Both Marvel and DC have magic; what's an ultra-thin metal that can withstand the actions of a whip that can cut through a F1 car compared to that. These other types seem to try to take place in our universe where the premise of the action is the only 'weird' thing to happen.

Read More >>

End of the holidays

I'm back, miss me? I managed to spend so much quality time with the television over this period, not that there was really that much being broadcast. Instead I took the opportunity to catch up on some things I'd recorded. I therefore managed to watch the end of season 1 of "Death Valley"; season 2 of "The Walking Dead" and the film "Monsters" that I recorded last Christmas! Oh and yeah managed to squeeze in some time with my family too :-)

Of the poor quality stuff that was on over Xmas I was lucky to have "Have I Got News for You" on series link as they'd snuck it on a day early. I recorded "Charlie Brooker's 2012 Screenwipe"; and just managed to spot "Kull the Conqueror" wow that was cheesily bad. I noted that "Up" was on, but I've always seen the synopsis and the trailers and thought "Meh". However upon switching over in the middle of a catch-up fest I caught it a few minutes in during the fast-forwarded life scene and quickly rewound and hit the record button. Damn you Pixar and your emotion grabbing.

I did manage to get out of the house um thrice. The first time to visit Stourport and my first visit to the Olivaceous Deli which opened on the 11th November... 2011. Yeah it's just in the wrong place for me to 'pop-in', but it's definitely somewhere I'll now be making time for.

The other times were to Kidderminster to buy a colander, the handle fell off the old one Xmas Eve. Then again for some water filters; whoo-hoo so Christmas-ey :-)

Anyway a new year and the world didn't end through either Mayan prophecy, fiscal cliff, or Eurozone meltdown. Then again train fares are going up 4% and Berlusconi wants to be Italian Prime Minster again so there's still plenty of time for an Apocalypse.

Cancel the TV licence

At work we've have a TV aerial and in the past it's been used to watch live broadcasts so of course we had a licence. Except we don't do that now so time to cancel it. Four menu options through the phone queue and I'm asked for either the reference number or the licence number.

The reference number is only 4 characters long so it's not that.
"Is there a ten digit number?" I'm asked by the operator
"Yes the licence number which is difficult to read due to the perforation running through it"

Yep the change of details tear off slip at the bottom of the form runs right through the licence number on the other side. Anyway we run through the totally pointless security questions as the answers are printed at the top of the form and cancel the licence. However first I have to listen to what we can't do.

We can't watch or receive any live broadcasts on a television, mobile, computer, console or any device...
"Yes we can't watch any live broadcasts" I interject before she names every possible thing that could receive them.
An enforcement officer might call to check on this and if they discover that we are watching television we could be fined up to £1000
"No we can be fined if we watch live broadcasts; we can use a television to watch something than live broadcasts; that's rather badly phrased" I reply
"Um"

Hey I'm just saying there's nothing stopping me from watching a bought disc or catch-up on a television. The act of watching a television is and of itself not denied me; likewise "television" and "live broadcast" are not synonymous.

Merlin - The Death Song of Uther Pendragon

As a series Merlin has to me always been a little switch-brain-off and enjoy, but there's always been enough depth to hold my interest. With the latest run I wondered if it had jumped the shark?

A two-parter to start a new season is fine and can act as a hook to get someone to watch the second part and then onwards; in this instance I really didn't care what happened.

As a story the core elements needed to be told, we needed Mordred re-introduced, but the way this was told was execrable. By the middle of the two-parter we were jumping between five locations in a frenetic "meanwhile" which sacrificed the character depth that has been a mark of this series. There was also the over-reliance on computer imagery.

It's always been a little cheap, but it's gotten away with it by cuts. So for example we get to see Merlin call the Dragon and we get a long-shot of the landing, we get the odd close-up of the Dragon's face for expressions and switch between Merlin's and the Dragon's point of view same continuous scene but never long enough to note how bad the imagery is.

In this episode (spoilers) we get a little too much of the baby dragon, but far too much of the "Key". That was just dire work. Bad animation, terrible lip-syncing and the big joke being that this manifestation was necessary. Hell have the Key be a Druidic prophecy carved into a wall and buried in an earthquake; have Merlin accidentally deflect the fire breath of the dragon onto the wall and melt it away before he had a chance to read it. But no we got a blue glowing elf.

But wait the title of this entry is "The Death Song of Uther Pendragon" and that's because this one episode undid all the harm the previous two had caused me. Character-driven storyline, tightly focused directing; simple effects - this is how it should be done. My one minor niggle is this would have been best suited for next week closer to Halloween. I simply couldn't fault this episode.

The new 2012 Doctor Who opening sequence

I was told to watch out during the new opening credits for Doctor Who for some sort of surprise. The only thing I noted was the the "Doctor Who" logo had Dalek 'bumps'. Hmm okay.

This week's episode "Dinosaurs on a Spaceship"... same logo, but with reptile skin. Ah subtle; I like it.

Women's Olympic handball

Watching the handball. The Norwegians with the red flag are playing in white, the South Koreans with their white flag are playing in red.

Very confusing  :-)

Hunt hoarse

Watching the BBC this morning they questioned Culture Secretary Jeremy Hunt regarding the uptake of sports in schools and he started by apologising for the hoarseness of his voice as he'd been cheering on (UK gold-winner) Andy Murray.

Ting went the connections in my head. Didn't he say something very similar last week on GMTV that he was hoarse due to shouting on (UK gold-winner)  Sir Chris Hoy (or at least some cyclist)?

Is this a new tactic? When being interviewed in a negative situation start with a name-drop of a recent UK gold winner? Can anyone provide further examples?

Olympic cycling

Just watching the cycling. What the hell is going on? We seem to have two groups, but they keep switching between the two with little comment. The commentators themselves have stated they're getting no information about the race order.

Oh and the "Peloton" is coming up, what the hell is that?

How much of a bungle is this? We see an "attack" by one of the cyclists and the commentators state "we don't know which group he was in".

Total shambles from those in charge of providing the coverage.

Olympic opening ceremony

Watching at the moment. I can see why Danny didn't want any commentary. What a load of twaddle and inanity coming from all three of them! Really spoiling it. Okay did need a little in place of a program of events, but still really bad.

Ceremony better than I expected though. Really liked the rings, Churchill statue during Bond sketch was well cheesy though. Did laugh at Rowen Atkinson.

By the way why are the announcements being made in French first? [Update - because apparently it's traditional; something the commentators who were being paid to inform us failed to inform us about despite whittering on about things we could quite clearly see]

Typing this while the countries do their walk, commentators wibbling on. "I don't want to spoil the surprise but those copper kettles will play a part later" so you've just spoiled the surprise you twonk.

Well someone in the back office has earned their keep in the "locate some facts about every country" department.

Okay more commentary from Trevor Nelson seriously I'm just holding my head in my hands every time I hear him trying to interject some fact.

[Update - Oh yeah]

Some women kisses some man; not her boyfriend

[From the news studio]

Tom: Breaking news some women in Los Angeles has been caught kissing some man; who isn't her boyfriend! Why are we even bothering to cover this Tom?

Tom: Well Tom turns out that all involved are famous so we'll turn to Tom who is live with a fan. Tom.

Tom: Thanks Tom I'm here with a fan of the celebrities in question, how do you feel?

Fan: I can't believe that Bella would do this to Edward after all the things they've been through together.

Tom: I thought their names were Kristen and Robert?

Fan: Huh?

Tom: Back to Tom in the studio.

Read More >>

Just make the cheque out to...

Anyone recall the The New Statesman episode where Alan B'stard talks about his new charity "Central Amazon Spiritual Healers" with all donations being made out to CASH for short.

This morning on the BBC Breakfast the old cycle of "too much/not enough salt in out diet is killing us" featured a spokeswomen from the "Consensus Action on Salt and Health". No really, even their website happily displays the acronym for all to see.

Really folks are you sure someone at the naming meeting wasn't just having a bit of fun and had to quickly pretend they meant it when the others took them seriously. I mean it is rather horribly contrived; I mean I understand why you wouldn't want CSH and ASH is taken but why not Consensus Action on Salt Intake or Helpful Advice on Salt and Health both pot and twitter friendly.

Milk production

It's an obvious concern for farmers who have seen the price they receive drop in order to allow supermarkets to keep fooling customers that they're the cheapest, but I'd like to add another concern to the mix:

Is "Britton" a company I don't know about? Someone's gone to the trouble of having this poster printed which obviously wasn't done on a standard printer and no-one throughout the process stopped to point out that's not how you spell Britain.

Time to watch the game, but first

I briefly tuned in to watch the Wimbledon final, or to be precise the male Wimbledon final as it seems to share that same quirk as most sports in that the female version is of less interest to the mainstream media and I had no idea when that was (or is). BBC coverage started at 12:55 so I was quickly watching the two men bat a ball across a net... no of course not the match proper doesn't start until around 2pm.

In all seriousness is there any one out there thinking - "Gosh they jumped straight into this match a bit quick what I really need is an hour's preparation with interviews, historical footage, large amounts of speculation and (what appeared to be) an elegy on a tennis ball"?

We've been getting it for football for ages and I've seen it for athletics, but what's the point? If you're a fan of the game you probably already know all the stuff they're going on about; if you're not you probably don't care; so who's it all for?

Daria

Monday morning I was flicking through the electronic TV guide for the Viva channel (21 on Freeview) to check if they'd switched to later seasons of South Park from the repeats of the first season. As this was the morning and I couldn't be arsed to use the time jump buttons I simply scrolled through the channel through to 10pm.

It was therefore pure luck that I was paying attention as the word "Daria" flashed past at the 6pm mark. "wait did that say Daria?" Indeed it did and hey now it was the very first episode too. Hell yeah series is damn well linked to record.

I always tried to catch the show when it was on 'normal' TV, but it wasn't well placed and this was before catch-up and recording stuff involved voodoo rituals to work correctly. I could resort to a poor sidebite and say this is "The Simpsons with edge" but that does neither show any justice.

Re-watching it after 11 years how does it stand up? To me it's still as good if not better. It's not a laugh-out-loud show more of a thoughtful smile.

For those who missed out. Daria is a smart non-conformist with a popular dumb-seeming younger sister, a high-powered business mother and a frenetic father. Characters are well-fleshed out including what would be ancillary characters and that's out of the starting gate.

There's so much subtly going on - the self-esteem teacher who can't recall his pupils names. A teacher giving a psychology evaluation test who sarcastically over-emphasises Daria's name when she gets it wrong (Dara) and is corrected before returning to the incorrect version. Daria's mother who upon being informed Daria may have self-esteem issues exclaims "How can you have esteem issues? We're always telling you how great you are what's is wrong with you!"

So much implied at it's simply a show to sit back and enjoy. Oh and we may finally be getting a Region 2 release on DVD

The Great British Menu messes up again

I saw the final rounds for the starter and fish dish this week on BBC2's "Great British Menu" and was flabbergasted by the change implemented.

It seems they've cottoned on to the same thing we the viewers have in that some of the dishes being produced aren't up to scratch and therefore it is pointless to waste the judges time by tasting them again.

By itself this might seem a good change, but it comes at a price of the suspension of disbelief for me at least. The two central tenets of the show is that it is a regional competition and that they are choosing a menu. Of course come the final decision they start cherry-picking the dishes, but this codifies that.

If you're going to start picking now, why not pick earlier? I've seen dishes getting perfect marks from the presiding chef judge that the trinity of judges never get to even taste due to poor accompanying dishes letting down the entire menu.

The joke is that this entire 'competition' from the get-go has been set up to determine who has the best menu, who is the best chef, but the end result is about setting out the greatest dishes possible.

To me this final change just rams home how pointless the previous rounds were in regards to the final output.

Prioritising the news

This morning the lead news story for RT was the G8 conference, the Eurozone being likely to dominate talks with the downgrading of 16 Spanish Banks by various amounts and of Greece to CCC rating.

The BBC's and ITV's lead news story - parents to get lessons in parenting.

Pfft finance- booooring!

BBC's Great British Menu - Johnnie Mountain

I haven't been watching series 7 of BBC2's "Great British Menu" despite having seen most of the previous six series - why? Well the previous six were all shown at 18:30; an ideal time for me - get home; eat while watching Eggheads (I know how uncouth to eat and watch TV at the same time) then settle back for the Great British Menu.

This series they decided to show at 19:30.

Read More >>

Julian Assange and The World Tomorrow

So I take it everyone tuned in for Wikileaks co-founder Julian Assange's new political chat show "The World Tomorrow"; no? Big surprise. I only knew about it because I've gotten into the habit of switching over to Russia Today.... sorry RT as they've restyled themselves as, in a morning simply because they seem to make a habit of reporting items not covered by the mainstream channels of the BBC and ITV. Also because it can be as funny as Fox News at times in how desperately they pretend they have no bias while at the same time producing obviously biased shows.

In the case of this show Assange interviewed Hassan Nasrallah head of Hezbollah classified by the UK and USA (as well as others) as a terrorist organisation despite being a part of the official Lebanese government. Regardless of your views as to whether such a person should have their views given media coverage RT's coverage the next day of the other media's response was highly amusing.

The biggest performing seal was good old Fox news and RT showed clips of presenters and guests stating that Assange was a traitor; had committed treason and had broken numerous US laws. This made a double whammy of hilarity as Assange is Australian (and therefore doesn't fall under US jurisdiction) and they were discussing the Wikileaks 'scandal' rather than this show.

What would be fun is for both channels to set aside a dedicated show pointing out all the flaws and out of context 'news' displayed by the other. Maybe then we'd get an balanced and unbiased news report :-)