I was thinking of a good way to introduce this video..

Here’s my best go.

I found an old Sisters of Mercy CD in a draw the other day. It was “Vision Thing”. So I ripped it and started to listen to it again (after probably 20 years! eeek).

I was particularly interested in a track called “Ribbons” so I decided to look on YouTube to see if there was a video to go with.

There are ‘live’ videos that are quite good.

Then there is this version.... Which escapes description.

Please watch and provide your own via the comments system.

Tags: sisters of mercy, ribbons, singing, terrible

I just caught Alistair Darling on the Politics Show getting a proper drumming down by the interviewer. It was a performance worthy of Jeremy Paxman.

Poor old Alistair Darling had a little panic session, which was pretty good.

But the part of the interview that really shocked me was that he had to pay for rates in the number 11 AND at his home on Edinburgh (where his family lives). What, like EVERYBODY who has two homes has too. I mean his FAMILY live in his Edinburgh house and use the services there and HE lives in number 11 and uses the services there.

Am I missing something?

Just what is it about politicians? Doesn’t his £180k+ salary doesn’t cover that!

Barclays are going to pay out £5 million in bonuses. What did A.D. think of that? Well, he stated that NO bonus would be paid out to anybody who was involved in the failure of Royal Bank of Scotland.... {pause} “unless there was some contractual agreement”. What, like an employment contract then? *Ahem*

Talk about paper tiger....

Tags: Alistair Darling , rates, tax

Newsnight ran an amusing (for me) story about campaigners in the US marching on Washington.

Now their main target was coal, which isn’t the cleanest of fuels to burn.

But what amused me most was that they arrived by car and they were all dressed from head to foot in man-made fibres. All derived from oil. Not to mention the plastic hard hats, loud speakers, laptop computers and mobile phones. So it’s a sort of “OK for them, not for others” kind of march.

Then “ethical man” took a trip to Texas at 55 mph on a train that only reduced his carbon footprint by 18%. Eeeek

Tags: climate, climate change

I have just been looking at an online survey.

The results of which are;

Which of the following describes your current employment situation?

1. My work place is currently making redundancies and I fear losing my job in the near future 12%
2. I am newly unemployed - within the last 3 months - but NOT claiming job seeker's allowance 4%
3. I am newly unemployed - within the last 3 months - and I am claiming job seeker's allowance 2%
4. I have been unemployed for more than 5 months and have been claiming job seeker's allowance for 5 or more months 4%
5. None of the above 78%

You’d imagine with all the talk of doom and gloom on the horizon that the results would be a foregone conclusion.

However, here are the results.

1. 12%
2. 4%
3. 2%
4. 4%
5. 78%

So that’s nearly 80% of people who are in work who have no worries about loosing their job. That kind of flies in the face of the general prospective somewhat. But then I always do get the impression that no news travels faster or LOUDER than bad news. The anti-climax of the Swine Flu pandemic being a perfect example.

If you watch the Fox news reports from the US, you’d be more than

Tags: Recession

Why are members of Parliament so greedy? I’m serious...

I love the fact that they are hiding behind the concept that they didn’t break the roles (just bend them like a wet stick) by claiming for just about anything they felt like.

They are missing the point.

The fact that’s enraging the British public is that fact that MP’s are making the claims in the first place. Previously, MP’s salaries were kept private. The fact is that we all know that anyone in the cabinet or a senior member of the political party of their choice is going to be paid OVER £100,000 a year.

So if you are on that income, why do you think it is justifiable to claim EVEN more tax payer money purchasing items that the rest of the population not only consider luxury items, but also matters of personal choice.

For example, just how can £2,000 on a flat screen television be justified when a £100 shows the same program. The fact that ALL the cost of the TV for anybody else would come out of their salary doesn’t appear to dent the zealous nature to which MP’s seem to have claimed for just about everything. Mortgage payments, interest on loans and even food!

It’s no wonder Hazel Blears has the ability to drop a cheque down for £13k when the rest of us would struggle; she’s simple got no domestic expenses to pay and her salary should be considered to be total profit.

All of which means that her £100k+ salary is actually closer to £160k if you include all the expenses that she and MP’s like her claim.

The whole thing absolutely disgusts me and I think something dramatic needs to happen to put an end to this gravy train. At present they are all trying to come up with new ‘rules’ as to how to pay expenses.

But the solution is just blatantly simple.

1. You convert the currently quarter used Old Admiralty Building near Horse Guards Parade into accommodation for MP’s. It’s not as though the area isn’t ‘secure’ enough and conversion costs (if kept to 4* hotel standards) would be LESS than a year of MP expenses.
2. Only allow travel costs as expenses. The rest would be provided by the ‘Hotel’. Food, TV’s etc. etc. etc.

In my mind this would be the only way we could guarantee that those individuals who puts themselves forward to represent us in Parliament are doing it for purely valid reasons and not to get themselves on the expenses gravy train.

It’s telling that a number of prominent MP’s who had valid cause to have chosen to claim expenses chose not too. Perhaps we should keep those individuals as MP. And as for those who claimed for absolutely anything they could get away with; lets make sure they loose their seats.

Tags: members, parliament, greed

Long before LOST hit the screens Damon Lindelof and Carlton Cuse worked on another TV show together. With Carlton as EP, Damon acted as script chief.

You may or may not be surprised to find out that the show in question was none other than Nash Bridges, staring Don Johnson.

Now, while “The Don” has yet to make an appearance in LOST (unless he’s the smoke monster) quite a few “Bridges” favourites have turned up; and in some less than subtle roles.

So, in no particular order...

1. Cheech Marin

While LOST fans will recognise Cheech as being the recurring character of Hugo 'Hurley' Reyes’ father. David Reyes. You might remember the story of the car they planned to rebuild together. Only for David to pull another fast one and leave. Hurley and his father a close now. But this runs a close second to the relationship Cheech has with fellow Police Inspector Nash Bridges, when Cheech played Insp. Joe Dominguez.

2. Daniel Roebuck

Daniel Roebuck was a recurring character in Nash Bridges, playing the Richard Bettina a man promoted to the level of his own incompetence.

He’d pop up from time to time making life a merry hell for all in SIU department, especially Nash Bridges.

However, at NO SINGLE POINT did he explode. No, that was left to LOST where poor old Roebuck played the ill-fated Leslie Arzt. Talk about a bum role.

3. Jeff Perry

Of course, Daniel did in fact get a couple of episodes out of lost. Better than poor old Jeff Perry. After spending five years playing unlucky in love Inspector Harvey Leek he then goes on to be the erroneous target of hate for James “Sawyer” Ford. James shoots Jeff, playing a character called Frank 'Sawyer' Duckett, believing he is the original Sawyer who is responsible for the murder-suicide of his parents. Sadly, for all persons around, James is wrong.

4. Patrick Fischler

Now Patrick Fischler makes a nice change. In that he’s playing a very different character than that previously encountered “in the Nash”. In N.B. Patrick plays comedy distraction homosexual Pepe A very camp but well organised associate of Nash..... and then you wonder why Nash was divorced twice.

Meanwhile, Patrick plays nasty “gets what he deserves” weasel Phil in Lost; and brilliantly creepy as well. Good for him for making it past two episodes.

5. Brad William Henk

Quick one here, mainly because I’m short on details. But Brad played a 2 episode character called “P.J. Pollard” in Nash Bridges.

But right now he’s got a far more significant part as he’s playing Bram in LOST which makes him particularly interesting for the series to come.

6. Mary Mara

Mary Mara played the tough but funny Inspector Bryn Carson in Nash Bridges. I seem to remember she cropped up a few times; which was cool.

In LOST, she pops up in a couple of episodes called Jill... and I have to be honest and saying I have absolutely no recollection of her. Sorry Mary

7. Andrew Divoff

As I don’t have a Nash Bridges show for comparison, I thought I’d go for a nice picture of him instead.

In LOST he plays the seemingly indestructible Mikhail Bakunin. I seemed to loose track of how many times Mikhail was “killed” before eventually being blown up with his own hand grenade.... or was he?

In Nash Bridges I’m afraid it was a simple single episode “nut job” role of an individual called “Blackbeard”. Can’t remember if he had an eye patch (and parrot) for that role or not. Guessing not.

Tags: Lost, nash bridges, carlton cuse, Damon Lindelof

So, series five of LOST has come to an end and a lot of people have suggested they have a pretty good idea of what the ending is going to be. Indeed, during the official LOST podcast, executive producers Damon Lindelof and Carlton Cuse suggested that the last episodes and the first episode of series six will be enough information to solve the mysteries behind LOST.

But what could be the result of this? Clearly the series will need to get it’s skates on in order to maintain a sense of mystery and yet tie most of the loose ends up and that could mean some disastrous short cuts. The sort of plot conclusions that would make George Lucas* or Alan Garner* proud.

(* personal choices there).

So... queue Alan “Fluff” Freeman and start the music for my current top three worst case scenarios. Ta-da-da-dum-dee-dum-taa-da-da-daaaaa.

Aliens did it

The magnetic anomaly and time effects are the result of a crashed alien spacecraft. Either actually the island itself or trapped under the island.

All the Egyptian mythology in the show is a result of the fact that these are the same aliens that brought civilisation to the Egyptians and Mesopotamians. Jacob and his rather evil friend would be a couple of individuals previous thought to be gods by those ancient people.

Incidentally, the statue on the island looks closest to being Sobek; he’s crocodile headed and carries an Ankh.

Sobek’s in charge of water. But according to various sites, Sobek has a four in one job. He’s a fourfold deity, representing the four elemental gods Ra (fire), Shu (air), Geb (earth) and Osiris (water).

Sobek, so legend tells, is good guy. Best buddies with Horus (Horace?) and Osiris. As such, not very good friends with Set.

It’s a Mythological location - But not purgatory, obviously!

So, rather than it being purgatory, which has been heavily denied since day one* it is something like the River Styx and the Island is the piggin’ boat.

Let’s face it. How else are you going to survive a plan crash like that!

*Having said that, in the Official Lost Podcast it was also denied that ACTUAL time travel was going to appear in the show and that statement was made totally false by season five.

It’s not reality - It’s virtual

This would be the sort of ending that would create riots outside the Disney lot, but it’s not without precedent in the television/film industry.

To my recollection we have:

• The BBC series Red Drawf has done variations on the theme at least three times
• Abre los ojos (re-shot as Vanilla Sky)
• Cold Lazarus
• The Prisoner episode “Living in Harmony” and even “A,B and C”

All of which have protagonists experiencing a virtual reality world without realising it.

They all die

My daughter came up with this one. It’s the Etch-A-Sketch ending to the show. Basically, every body who has “issues” resolves them and can therefore moves on to whatever ethereal plane of existence they feel like.

Like the film “The Survivor” in which Robert Powell mysteriously survives a plane crash in order to resolve the cause of it... only to then suddenly turn up burned to a crisp where he really started out, in the pilots seat.

So that’s the first batch for now.

Tags: Lost, Worst ending, Worst, sobek, egypt, spaceshit, aliens

This has to be one of the most spectacular images show on the Daily Mail website.

Sadly, no, it’s not a sun-spot. It is in fact the Space Shuttle that is transiting the Sun. At present the Space Shuttle is doing some repair work on the Hubble Space telescope.

It’s an incredible picture, made more so by the fact it was taken by Parisian amateur astronomer Thierry Legault from site just south of the Kennedy Space Centre in Florida.

Tags: space shuttle, sun

Perhaps somebody could explain this to me.

But why exactly do members of parliament think that it’s perfectly acceptable to claim the expense (£2100 in one case) for plasma TV’s? If I tried to claim the cost of a 42” plasma against the company I could very well have HM Revenue and Customs asking very pertinent questions, and rightly so.

But for reasons that are totally beyond my understanding, members of parliament appear to think that it’s totally acceptable to claim tax payers money to pay for TV, home cinemas, garden work, swimming pools and so forth.

Hazel Blears stands there on television saying that she is going to pay the Inland Revenue (you can assume she meant HM Revenue and Customs) the equivalent money that would have been paid. But the reality is, without fiddling the expenses system, that would be money that SHOULD have been paid to the HM R&C. So she’s doing nobody any bloody favours! If anything, she is edging her bets in case there is a criminal prosecution.

My biggest problem with all this is that, this is a woman who’s salary is over £100,000 and yet she feels it’s perfectly acceptable to then go on and further claim for luxury items ON TOP of her salary. It is absolutely disgusting and I sincerely hope that this is one Salford MP who’s going to loose more than her electoral seat!

Tags: MP, expenses, parliament, hazel blears

I read today on the BBC website that ex-minister Elliot Morley is repaying some £16,000 he was paid on expenses he mistakenly claimed for a mortgage he didn’t have.

The story goes on to explain how the mortgage was repaid but he continued to claim for another 18 months before being made aware of the error.

So you wouldn’t notice £800 was still ending up in your bank account.

What appals me most about this, if it was somebody cheating their benefits, they’d be pilloried and heading for jail.

Tags: MP, claim, expenses, members, parliament, minister

For some reason I ended up watching some documentary about Myalgic encephalomyelitis. I’ve not enough knowledge on the subject to make any opinion.

But what struck me was how a sufferer managed to equate the level of depression following certain treatments. One made her about 40% less depressed; whilst another made her about 50% less depressed.

Just how the heck can anyone work that out? I don’t know about you, but I don’t think I can tell if I’m 10% less happy one day to the next.

I’ll be 8% more informed if you could drop me a quick email to let me know how this all works. Thanks.

Tags: percentage, emotional

Just a minor rant-ette this evening on the subject of those “so called” zero devaluation purchases suggested by everything from Bargain Hunt to bloody Autocar.

I was just reading a little article that suggested that a car that cost £70,000 brand new 20 years ago has not devalued because it’s now work £80,000. Palpably this is the most stupid thing I’ve ever heard. But it might not be quite so obvious, so let me explain using a very, very simple example.

In 1989 it was possible to purchase a brand new, modern looking three bedroom house in the Astley area for around £80,000. Today, a similar house is likely to cost you £170-£200,000. So has Astley because the Riviera? No. Has the cost of bricks sky rocketed in the last 20 years? Nope.

Fact is, that £80,000 in 1989 is the equivalent of £170,000 in 2009 because of inflation. Or to put it another way, the purchasing power of the £1 has decreased by 50%.

Put this into perspective and the once £70,000 Lancia Hyena would cost the equivalent of £150,000 in today’s terms. The fact that it now costs £80,000 actually identifies that the car has actually lost 50% of its actual value; and not retained the 100% as claimed in the Autocar article.

If you purchased a car for £50,000 in 1989 and it is not worth £100,000 today, then you have a car that’s retained its value. Anything more than the £100,000 is an increase in value.

Don’t believe me? A loaf of bread in 1989 would set you back around 40 pence. Today the price of a loaf of bread is around the £1.20 mark.

Its a similar argument to those who purchase a house and in 30 years time think they’ve made a fortune because it was £50,000 new and now costs £300,000. Sadly, they’ve not realised that total cost, when you include currency devaluation.

Tags: zero devaluation, Inflation

Following the recent success of the old BBC TV series, now US film “In The Loop” I decided to have a quick look on IMDB to see what else is on the cards.

Sadly, it’s worse than I imagined. They are going to make a film version of “Edge of Darkness” with none other than Mel Gibson in the role Bob Peck played on television.

Oh, dear why.

Tags: edge of darkness, bbc

BBC’s “Breakfast” show have just interviewed David Aaronovitch about his latest book “Voodoo Histories: The Role of the Conspiracy Theory in Shaping Modern History”.

Now, I’ve not got the book. So what I’m commenting on is just the interview. But, I hope the book’s got a lot more ‘facts’ than his interview did.

I hate to run the guy down, but he mentioned and laughed about a couple of “well known” facts that really don’t stack up.

For a start, I’m not sure the widely held consensus IS that Bush blew up the Twin Towers on September 11th. From what I can gather, I believe the widely held understanding by most conspiracy theorists is that the terrorists were allowed to carry out the attacks. They (not I) would site such facts as the number of times the FBI were pulled off investigations into the perpetrators. The point is that Mr Aaronovitch started by stating an untruth and then worked up from there.

“They” (being conspiracy theorists) also believe in the moon landings being faked. He then told a story of a person he worked with and how they surprised him by saying they believed the landings were all staged.
“|t all sounded like a plot from a 1978 movie.” by which I believe he is talking about Peter Hyams “Capricorn One”. When in fact, if Mr Aaronovitch had done as much research as he had claimed, he would have discovered that the film was in fact partly inspired by Bill Kaysing’s 1974 book (and subsequent controversy) “We Never Went to the Moon: America's Thirty Billion Dollar Swindle” - Essentially the first book suggesting the landings were faked.

Incidentally, I don’t think the landings were faked. But the idea that people are automatically deluded idiots for having another opinion; that’s a little arrogant.

I noticed on the cover of the book is a picture of John F. Kennedy. Be interesting to see if he writes that the US Government proved there was no conspiracy when in fact the opposite is true. Really? I hear you all cry.

Well, the “The House Select Committee on Assassinations”, established in September 1976, came to the conclusion that JFK was assassinated as a result of a conspiracy. Don’t believe me? Follow the following links;

An easy link to Wikipedia’s write up.
The official US Government archive version.

That’s the problem with facts, get in the way of a bloody good dishing down.

Tags: david aaronovitch

I was sent a link to this video; with the phrase “Is this a real crash”.



It was an interesting question. Because apart from the fact the driver nearly stops the car dead before hitting the wall, we have the actions of the pedestrians.

Firstly, despite looking in the direction of the Ferrari; the person who is ‘glanced’ doesn’t bother to move at all out of the way.

But what is more dodgy is the way the person struck my the pole appears to walk faster in order to get UNDER the pole. “If you were struck on the head by a pole during a movie shoot... and it wasn’t your fault. Then call Lawyers for you now”

Worst of all... the New Your Post coverage.
“In the movie Nik Cage plays a sorcerer in search of an apprentice. In real life the Nik Cage double looks distraught after the collission.” - GIVE ME A BREAK!

Tags: nik cage

In 1990 the sequel to the much lauded 1974 mystery thriller “Chinatown” was released to a generally less than pleasing critical reviews.

Which is a little unfair, partly because while Chinatown is a good film; it’s actually not that fantastic a film. In some parts the acting and direction are positively ropey. Perhaps a outcome of the heated exchanged betwixt the director Roman Polanski and the two stars of the film Jack Nicholson and Faye Dunaway.

16 years later and Jack Nicholson is again ready to don the Jack Giddes suit to Robert Towne’s follow up “The Two Jakes”. This time around, its post war and everybody in LA is relatively prosperous. So the whole look for the picture reflects the modern and stylish times. Remember, this is the boon times for America. Sadly, this did not appeal to the “Chinatown 2” crowd and I think it counted against the picture.

The irony is that just 7 years later, the 1997 movie “L.A. Confidential” plays out this exact cinema style; only the mood has changed and it’s not carrying the baggage of the successful pre-cursor. So it’s lauded with praise for style and originality. Somewhat unfairly, looking back to “The Two Jakes”.

The fact is that “The Two Jakes” was never going to be received well, like the new Star Wars trilogy, it could never meet the expectations of the memories of the original movie. Which once again, I’d like to suggest wasn’t quite as brilliant as everybody would like to remember it.

Jake Gittes is now runs are very well off and successful investigations agency. Which makes a lovely surprise. I’m always lost of understanding how such superb private detectives Marlone, Spade etc seem to make so little money. I mean what is that all about?

Well, contrary to form, Jake operates from a superbly stylish modernist / deco building, drives a stylish convertible car and wears the very best suits money can buy. He’s also something of a war hero to boot. So, not the low at heal, dowdy Jake from Chinatown. He’s older, wiser and wealthier. Which is just as well really, because the plot has him spinning off in more directions than the script can cope with. Which now brings us to the second thing the critics hated.... that narration.

Now as a rule, I think it’s obviously better to not include narration in modern films. The idea being that it should be easier to reveal the investigation points as the film roles along. However, “The Two Jakes” suffers from a problem. It has to support two audiences. The first has seen Chinatown and when Jake hears on the wire recording the name “Katherine Mulwray”, they all get up and listen. Audience two wanted to see a detective movie and they weren’t even born when the original came out. So they need a little help... hence the narration and flashback sequences.

Having had a look at the critics comments (from IMDB) they all have nothing good to say about these features of the film. Which shows a certain level of arrogance, but there you go.

Now I have to admit that I do in fact have a certain guilty secret in having very fond memories of this film. For a start it was the date movie for a old girlfriend. Plus I absolutely loved the look and feel of the picture. None of the fashionable “paint it grim” was present, everything new and prosperous and yet still corrupt... (again, back to LA Confidential). I even like Jack Nicholson’s relaxed performance in the film. Playing it like a man who’s seen a lot of action and nothing surprises him.

There are some scenes which do grate a little. Lillian Bodine’s (Madeleine Stowe) comedy seduction of Gittes feels almost like middle aged man wish fulfilment. The earlier scene when he ‘accidentally’ knocks her out was more in keeping.

Incidentally, what the hell DID happen to Madeleine Stowe? One minute she’s in superb films such as Twelve Monkeys (1995) and “The General’s Daughter” (1999). Then she’s got a small part in “We Were Soldiers” as Mel Gibsons wife.... then... (flush) carrier down to TV movies and a recurring part in the TV show “Raines” (oddly enough with Jeff Goldbloom - her fellow star in “Earth Girls are Easy&rdquo

Bottom line:-

7/10

Tags: two jakes, jack nicholson, harvey keitel

Watch the video....



You know, the very instant he said “I’m the only one in the room professional enough.. and I’ll be careful” the bullet leapt out of the magazine on the desk and into the chamber.

WHAT A TOOL!

Tags: gun safety

They say it’s always bad sport to mock those afflicted with an over abundance of sensitivity towards nature. But what the hell! Lets laugh at a tree hugger!

Woah... no, don’t get me wrong. I love a good old oak or Scots pine as much as the next man. But this takes that affection into a whole new area. No, not a clip for “The Evil Dead”... more a clip from the “Dead Loony”.



Watch the clip and then read below....





Does it remind you of a Gwyneth Paltrow acceptance speech?

Tags: Tree, activist, loopy, mad