alexsarll: (manny)
2009-11-13 01:57 pm

Chance

It can't be good for Camelot that the week the price of Euromillions goes up by a third is also the week after the biggest UK wins ever (and why on Earth did the winners all go public? Surely they gain nothing from so doing, while making themselves targets for begging letters at best and kidnappers at worst?). Obviously, when you look at the maths then that extra 50p is a negligible investment and the prize is still more than ten million pounds. But, if you look at the maths, you don't play the lottery. It's all about what seems like a tiny enough sum of money to drop in order to take the chance of the fates smiling on you. And two quid, I think, crosses that line, especially in a week when the fates look so stingy compared to last week.

E4's 'young offenders get superpowers' show Misfits is off to a promising start; between this and No Heroics it looks like, on TV as in comics, it needs us to show the Yanks how to do superheroes properly. Though worryingly, the two shows look set to semi-crossover next week with an appearance by Nathan Barley/The Hotness as a rapey policeman. If the police getting younger is a sign of ageing, how much more so when it's TV police being played by the erstwhile epitome of youth foolishness? Like No Heroics, Misfits also looks to have a nice line in in-jokes, with the first episode based around the Wertham Community Centre.

Inez Holden "became a great friend of George Orwell, whose first meeting with Anthony Powell she engineered in 1941. A dinner party involving Orwell and HG Wells, in whose shed she once lived, was less successful. Wells afterwards sent Orwell a note urging him to 'read my early works, you sh1t'."
- from the end credits of Bright Young People

Good Night, And Good Luck: good film. In its loving (and very cigarette-heavy) recreation of the not-so-distant past it has something of Mad Men about it, as well as sharing one cast member - but a lot less of the moral ambiguity. The story of Edward R Murrow's campaign against McCarthyism is one of those rare, straightforward tales of a hero, a man who was in the right place at the right time, did the right thing, and succeeded. A brilliant cast, not all of whom I expected (it was George Clooney's project so I knew he'd be there, but Robert Downey Jr surprised me, and lots of the others are people you recognise as having given good work before but can't quite place). It did leave me wondering, though, how McCarthy ever managed to be taken seriously enough to start his reign of terror - they use archive footage rather than an actor, and he comes across as an unhallowed blend of Gordon Brown, John Prescott and Fred West.
The story of Murrow's triumph is framed by a speech he gives when winning some award or other, in which he expresses his fears for the future of television, worries whether information will survive or whether consolation and distraction will prevail. Which made it rather awkward that it screened at the same time as Generation Kill, a show whose truth I think he would have loved if he'd been able to follow it, meaning I had to use the bugginess that is 4OD to soldier through my weekly dose of Iraq clusterfvcks.

The one upside to the demise of the Observer Music Monthly (reported on a CMU update which doesn't seem to be on their website) is that at least it's taking Observer Woman Monthly down with it.
alexsarll: (bill)
2009-04-07 01:56 pm

Pub etiquette horror

Monday night at the Salisbury: I am the first member of my quiz team to arrive. At the bar is a top financial pundit of my acquaintance, in the same position. We spot two adjacent tables and grab both, sat on the bench, chatting. I realise this is slightly irregular, but what comes next is still a shuddering breach of all canons of boozer behaviour. Three peons* turn up, and attempt to sidle into the end of one of the tables.
Us:"Sorry, we've each got a team coming for the quiz, we're going to need both tables."
(True: we ended up with 14 people between the two)
Peons: "This is our table, we just went out for ten minutes for a fag."
(Untrue: I had been there at least ten minutes by this point, m'learned colleage for 15)
Us: "Well, you can't just all wander off, then come back and reclaim your table."
Peons: "I beg to differ, but hey, I don't want to get in a fight about it."
Exeunt peons, muttering.
Now come on, that's not how pubs work, is it? Later I was briefly left minding both tables, while one lot were smoking and another buying drinks. But I was there, and so were various tokens of table taken-ness: drinks, books, coats. On Friday, after accidentally walking out of London, when I decided that I needed some food as well as a pint, I did leave my table unattended to order - but that was in a beer garden with spare tables a-plenty, and I left my 2/3-full pint *and* my book on the table, just to be clear.

Also annoying me on Monday: plot holes. Primeval merely required some of its characters to be uncommonly stupid (why did Dr Ethnic not think to ask who Helen was, or mention the woman she'd bumped into in the street after her pass turned out to have been stolen by a dead man? Why did nobody else think to show Dr Ethnic a picture of their arch-enemy as part of her induction briefing?), and tried to get too many genres into one show - on top of the usual dinosaur time-travel malarkey, 45 minutes gives you time to do either a story in the style of an MR James haunted house yarn, or the one with Jason Flemyng as an acknowledged tough cop cliche, but not both. But James Blish's third Cities in Flight book, Earthman, Come Home...well, the other three are all circa 130 pages long, and this is 230, and the length doesn't suit it, and it shows. The first one's a prequel, following a couple of strands through the stagnating Earth of fairly soon and showing us how in spite of that, humanity gets into space. The second is a bildungsroman, one Shanghaied spacer finding his way around the world of the stars in the manner of an early Heinlein. This one...it has more scope, more daring, more sense of what life is like in Blish's stars. It has prescient things to say about depressions in hi-tech societies, and a communication method which looks suspiciously like Twitter. The dubious gender politics, and the heteronormativity, I can forgive. Even the explanation of why pirates died out on Earth, asinine as it looks in the face of Somalia and the South China Sea, I can overlook. But the basic principle of these stories is that Earth's cities have become spacefaring itinerant labourers, trading on their inhabitants' technical know-how, with each city propelled through space by a Macguffin called a 'spindizzy'. Whose principles are so simple that even after Earth's government tried to suppress it, it was independently rediscovered by accident.
These endlessly resourceful space-faring technologists, who can take a whole planet for a joyride, can't manage more than a short-term jury-rigged repair on their own engines/life-support/way of life.
Now, if that were intended as a comment on the world of now, where we all rely on devices so far beyond our practical repair capabilities as practically to invoke Clarke's Law, then fair enough. But if so, no hint of that whatsoever. It's just a mechanism to get the protagonists to where the story needs them, and it will not do.

I always loved Charlotte Bronte's comment that "Miss [Jane] Austen being, as you say, without "sentiment", without poetry, maybe is sensible (more real than true), but she cannot be great.'' But I was still gladdened to discover yet another writer far better than Austen demonstrating similar wisdom: '"What is all this about Jane Austen?" demanded a baffled Joseph Conrad, writing to HG Wells. "What is there in her?"' If Wells did respond with anything more than a shrug, I think I'd rather not know about it.

Finsbury Parkers - or at least those of you on the Islington side of the street - apparently our MP is an associate of Holocaust-deniers. Fun.

*Just so we're all clear here - one of them's a white rasta.