"...the clocks were striking thirteen..."

I've just been surfing the channels, and happened to come across the Big Brother final, and it's down to the last three, who are some chap called Olly, who I've never heard of, some dappy twat called Dappy (last seen losing a fight with a horse), and Jim Davison... 

Surely, there is something wrong with the world when the least worst option for a winner is Jim Davison?

Part of me thinks I should actually have watched more of this series, as various people have said it was quite good. And I have watched several series of the show in the past... but as with every series it does somewhat stretch the definition of "celebrity" with the usual collection of has beens and never weres... It does seem that in this ever changing world in which we live in any talentless half wit can be a celebrity. 

I long for the old days. When we had proper celebrities. 

Like Keith Chegwin.

Or Keith Harris and Orville.

Or that bloke who did the dodgy microphone routine...

"...I'm as blank as a fart..."

It's funny the things that come in to your mind as you're sat in front of an empty screen with a cursor blinking at you. And, then, what it can spark. Typing the quote above instantly draws me to Twin Peaks, but I think I should hold off on the Peaks stuff for the time being as there'll be lots of that later in the year, once we get to Feb 24th, and the subsequent Blu release a few weeks later. With FWWM deleted scenes. 

Trouble is with these blog posts, I know all the things I should say... but it's so hard and I'm not sure I want to, anyway. 

On a different day...

...which, of course, links back to yesterday; when, I was mad. And quite prepared to give up everything. Which is an intriguing notion; to give up everything. We accumulate so much stuff in our lifetime, but of how much worth is it? The things we build up just act to constrain us, when we should be able to just not worry. Does it matter that so much money has been sunk in to the piles of DVDs, Blus, books, etc? Heck; in terms of books I've already bought more than I'll ever get around to reading on my Kindle, and that's so beautifully compact. After all, it's the content that matters, not the pieces of dead tree...

...but imagine if one of those pieces of dead tree happened to be a first edition, first printing of Catcher in the Rye? One of the ones that had the picture on the back, before JDS got it removed. That would be worth having. Especially if signed. But... I've not got one of those, and to buy one would be such silly money it's not worth thinking about. 

You could buy me one, if you like... 

"...it was twenty years ago today..."

Well, actually, it wasn't it was more like 20 and a half years ago today. In any case, I don't recall the exact date, but we're talking late June/early July 1993...

That was when I first heard Heavenly. 

It was on the John Peel show over the Glastonbury weekend. At least, I think it was. That's what my memory tells me anyway. And memories are, as we know, perfect; just ask all those people who saw Bugs Bunny at Disneyland... 

So, he's about to play this song, and he's trying to decide how it's meant to be said; the title on the sleeve says it's "P.U.N.K. Girl", and he's undecided as to whether or not he should say each letter of P.U.N.K. individually, or as the word "Punk"... and he plays the song, and I am enraptured by it. Enraptured. 

That was when I first heard Heavenly. 

I heard it again once more on his show, and decided I must buy the song. (Incidentally; I'm also pretty sure on one of these shows I also heard the stunning Blue Eyes Deceiving Me, by Even as we Speak.)

A couple of weeks later, I'm in Swindon in HMV, and flick through a box of 7 inch singles on the counter, and BAM! There it is. A single copy of P.U.N.K. Girl, by Heavenly. I had to buy it. I recall also looking for Blue Eyes Deceiving Me, but they didn't have it. What they did also have, though, was a 7 inch of Her Jazz, by Huggy Bear; which, at the time, I had heard about, but hadn't actually heard, so I bought that, too.

Oh, that Heavenly 7 inch... I played it so many times. The a-side was just bliss. And the b-side, Hearts and Crosses, was so heartbreakingly sad. And there was a time when I figured that even if I never heard another song by Heavenly that this single would in itself be a perfect snapshot of the bad.

But, soon I found more; cassettes of a couple of their albums in HMV and Our Price... it seemed so normal then, but looking at music shops these days I do wonder that if Sarah Records were around today would they even be able to get their music in HMV? With the internet, would they even need to?

Soon after this, in 1995, came There and Back Again Lane, the final release, a 21 track CD compilation, from Sarah Records. Track 2 was a Heavenly track; Atta Girl... and I was blown away. It's a song that so very quickly wormed its way in to my head to become my favourite ever song; an accolade it holds to this day.

This was all just the start, and Heavenly sort of became Marine Research, which sort of became Tender Trap. And back further Heavenly had, sort of, previously been Talulah Gosh... oh, such joy. 

At the core of all of these bands is the beautiful voice of Amelia Fletcher, who could, frankly, sing I Wish I Could Fly, and make it sound beautiful. Heck, when John Peel did a carol concert one Christmas, the Marine Research contribution transformed In The Bleak Midwinter from a song I'd always thought a bit dull to a think of great, great, beauty. 

Frankly, if you've not bought any stuff by these bands, you're missing out. I'd suggest starting with;

• This Is Heavenly. (Compilation with most Heavenly singles on.)
• The Decline and Fall of Heavenly. (8 Tracks of sheer perfection.)
• Marine Research; Sounds From the Gulf Stream. (Actually, probably the best of the list. Really.)
• Talulah Gosh; Was It Just a Dream? (Compilation of pretty much everything they did...)

And if you don't like these, then you have no soul!

Oh, and the answer to Peel's question; you spell it out! :)

"...I'm not looking for a New England..."

The only thing I want to post today is this quote I very recently came across from George Bernard Shaw;

"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man."

Makes perfect sense. Maybe I should start being more... unreasonable...

"...with great power..."

Talk of the impending Fantastic Four reboot fills me with a sense of dread that, once again, we're going to get the blimmin' origin story again. You see, this is one of my bugbears about superhero movies; more often than not each one is the blimmin' origin story, either for its hero or its villain, and really, it's getting tiring...

I'd like to see more movies in which we dispense with the origin, and just get down to the business of telling a good story. We don't need to know how they got their powers, how the hero's parents were occupied and all that David Copperfield kind of crap.

For example, I grew weary with the most recent Spider Man film which, once again, told us the origin story we'd already seen only a few years before. Fine, if you're rebooting, then reboot; just recast, and get on with the latest story. We didn't need to see Peter being bitten by the radioactive/genetically modified spider again. We all know it. 

Take James Bond... every time he's recast we don't feel the need to go back to the beginning again. And, heck, in his case we just jumped straight in, and didn't even get anything involving a Bond near the start of his career until the 21st film. Also, the films don't bother giving us a load of guff about how the bad guys turned bad.

Yet, superhero films feel the need to do this all the blimmin' time...

Sometimes you just want the baddie to spring up, with no backstory, and just cause chaos and anarchy. Which is, of course, what happens in The Dark Knight with The Joker. BAM! He's there, chaos reigning, and it's great. We don't need to know where he comes from, and the fact that we never find out is great. 

Of course, you will now cite the whole Two Face thing, but it's a rare occurrence of an "origin" tale actually working (although I'd take issue it's not a pure origin story, and is more of a plot point) given that it absolutely ties in to one of the films themes being "you either die a hero or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain", which is exactly the arc Harvey Dent goes through in the film. It works.

There are other exceptions I could cite; but I just find myself growing weary at the constant retelling of the same stories. 'Cos with the origin stories you either keep them faithful to the original comic stories we know, or you change them beyond recognition. If you change them... what's the point? 

"...it's the final countdown..."

I suppose in a way I'm returning to the problem of yesterday; a ticking clock rapidly approaching the time of the night by which it will be too late to keep up with the whole one post a day malarkey. Looking at my list of things I should blog about when I can't think of anything to blog about, I see there's ten items on the list. But I don't actually feel like yakking on about any of them, which does rather defeat the purpose of the list in the first place...

We are, as a whole, very good at making lists. Take "best ever" lists, for example... we all do it, we make our lists of the best of a particular thing. Take this list of the best five palindromic words;

1 - racecar
2 - boob
3 - rotor
4 - redder
5 - madam

It's clearly the best ever palindromes, and anyone that argues is just a fool. Or is it just some random list compiled by a mad loon? Who knows... 

The thing is we all look at lists generated by magazines, newspapers, and websites and scoff at the glaring omissions. I mean, how many lists of best horror movies ever included Halloween 3; The Season of the Witch, which is absolutely brilliant!

But, who is to say that list is right or wrong? How was it generated? Just because only a few people have seen a particular film doesn't mean it's less good than one that every's seen. It just shows that a movie had better distribution or better PR. 

Lists then have a stifling effect in that they generate the sense that, really, you should have seen a particular film, just because people think you should. I mean, clearly you should all have seen Muriel's Wedding, but that's a given. 

And then there's the

"...it is happening again..."

Sometimes these posts are really lengthy. Other times like today, there's only one thing worth saying.

Today, this is that Ray Wise, who played Leland in Twin Peaks says the forthcoming Blu Ray set will have the deleted scenes from the movie on it...

I believe the expression is;

YOU BEAUTY!!!

"...I've been thinking..."

Last week I read something very odd... it was an interview that Grant Morrison did last year talking about the ending of Alan Moore's Batman story, The Killing Joke;

"No one gets the end,” the writer says, “because Batman kills The Joker. [...] That’s why it’s called The Killing Joke..."

Hang on a minute...? What? I'm sorry, but I'm going to have to take umbrage here... No-one gets the end...? I remember getting The Killing Joke fairly soon after it was published, and to me it was always quite clear that once the Joker's told the asylum joke, and the pair of them laugh that Batman killed the Joker... 

Yes, it occurs off-panel, and yes it's done in such a way that it could be read another way if you were so inclined. But, really, I'd thought the death interpretation would have been by far and away the prevalent opinion. The sudden cessation of laughter would surely point to that, too?

I mean, the whole thing kicks of with spiel from Batman in which he explicitly states that the only way the relationship between the pair of them will end is if one of them kills the other. I mean, how more obvious could it be that it's ending with the Joker's death? 

It's, really, the only logical explanation for the ending. Batman kills the Joker... 


I mean, whatever next; Gwen Stacey's not dead?

"...nothing else matters..."

Of course, the trickiest thing about this "writing a post a day" malarkey is that some days I'll not really have a clue what to write. Yes, I have a list of things that I could write about, but I'm not really inspired by any of them right now at this moment. And in any case, there is another thing I need to write that's somewhat more important, and unlike the daily stuff I write on here it'll get more than one draft, and it'll make a lot more sense - hopefully - than many of the things here. 

You see, today I am somewhat uninspired. I have an urge to write something, but no real notion of anything to actually write. And, given that I need to put something here that's really a bit of a problem. Now, you might be thinking here "hang on a minute; what's the fool wittering on about; he's clearly writing something." But, no... this is just a load of old waffle. 

And, again some might say that hey... no change there, then, but at least the other waffle had a purpose. This is me putting one word after the other and hoping they make sense. I guess that's true of all writing; it's one word after the other, each hoping to make some sense when read in order. Sometimes it works, other times it doesn't, and it's often when there's a bit of distance between what you've written and when you go back and read it that you can adequately judge whether it's any good or not.

Yesterday, I went back to reading a bit of a story I'd written a few months ago. It's really just a single scene that is a snapshot of one of the characters. Re-reading it there were several places I really winced at the poor phrasing, and instantly thought "oooh, no, that's gotta change". But then there were moments in it that made me think "yeah... that's spot on!" So, I changed a few bits, and left some as it was and ended up with a scene that's a bit better than it was.  Really, I've no idea how it fits in to the overall scheme of things, or even if it'll even end up in the finished thing, but it does help to give me a handle on this character. Oooh, people will hate him. And rightly so.

Whether this is the right way to write, I don't know; getting a great moment, writing it, and then working out how that scene fits in to the greater picture. I do keep doing this. There's another story for which pretty much all I've written is one scene (well, there's a few other bits and bobs, but this scene is about 75% of what's written). This one I know will end up in the finished thing, as it's a pivotal moment; if you're talking classic three act structure it's the bit at the end of act 1. And for this one I'm pretty sure I have at least half the thing mapped out in my mind. Although I've no idea where it ends, there's several possible ways, but the way I see it the more I write of this one, the more of an idea of how to end it. The characters... ah, they're coming to life in my head a bit more, I'm starting to understand them and how they'd react, and when they'd be sensible, and when they'd do daft silly things, and when they're put through the wringer, and... oh, it is exciting. I'll probably change my mind several times how it ends, but when the time comes I'll know it's right... 

Now, enough of this waffle, which I think eventually found a point, I've got other things to write...

"...and when you get the chance..."

There is an expression that I really dislike, which is "guilty pleasure"; it's almost an apologetic kind of expression in that it signifies that although you are getting a great deal of pleasure out of something, you really shouldn't be. Which is a nonsense as a TV show, or a song, or a movie that gives you pleasure should be celebrated, not apologised for.

Some might say that the film I'm going to talk about today would be a guilty pleasure for me... sod 'em. It's a movie I love to pieces, and is probably my favourite film of the Nineties. (Although at times the Twin Peaks film and Lost Highway put up a decent scrap for that title.) It also happens to be the finest film ever to be made in Australia. And, today a glorious blu ray of the movie finally finished its long journey from Australia to my house... the film is, of course;

Muriel's Wedding

I think it's a mark of how much I love a film by how many copies of the film I have. Put it this way; I have three DVDs of Muriel's Wedding, and now a blu ray. There's only one other film which I have four copies of (3 x DVD, 1 x blu), and that's Blue Velvet...

...now you may think it's a daft thing to have four copies of Muriel's Wedding, but this is why; I bought the UK DVD, but that was a 4:3 open matte copy of the film. So, I wanted a widescreen version, and bought a US DVD. That was widescreen, but not proper widescreen; non-anamorphic so it was 16:9 in a 4:3 window. Black bars all over. So, then the Australian DVD, which was proper anamorphic widescreen, and with extras.

So, when I saw there was a blu ray coming soon... I just had to have it. And, oh, boy does it look beautiful. The Oz DVD was good quality, but this... oh, looks lovely.

The thing is, it is a truly great movie. It has a script that sizzles as much as the prawns they have at the Chinese restaurant, and it really makes you care about all the characters. It is a script that is absolutely honed to perfection. You really get a feel of who the characters are, very quickly, from very brief snippets of dialogue. Take this brief exchange between Bill Heslop (Muriel's dad), who's a town councillor, and a delegation he's trying to impress;

"You've done a lot for the people of this town."
"Who told you that?"
"You did!"

That sums him up in a nutshell. And I could cite so many other examples of other characters captured so quickly. I do think one of the generally unsung performances in the film is that of Jeanie Drynan who plays Betty, Muriel's mum; there are moments where she's saying nothing, yet you can read exactly what she's thinking. Just look at her when Bill goes "Deirdre Chambers; what a coincidence!" Really very good indeed. 

The script and great performances are what elevates this above the standard rom-com fare. I could spend an ice age quoting bits of the script, or telling you about great scenes, the "punch the air" moments, the Waterloo moment... ah, there's so much to love about this film. And there are moments that'll just break your heart...

Really, if you've never never seen it, you should. There's plenty that wouldn't even bother watching the film because of what they think it's like. It's not like most Hollywood rom-com type of films; it's so much better, and deeper, than them. It's by some distance the best in its genre. 

And the soundtrack's laden with Abba songs... 

I just love it to bits...

"...the summer seemed to last forever..."

I recall reading a quote a few months back, which I think was from the final episode of the US version of The Office. It went like this;

"I wish there was a way to know you were in the good old days before you left them."

And it was one of those simple quotes, that with hindsight seems so blindingly obvious that it seems impossible that it's not something everyone has always thought forever. 

When were your "good old days"? A year ago? Five years ago? Ten years ago? That quote challenges you to think... what if the good old days are actually happening right now? We all reminisce about the times we had that were great, but we just don't always recognise them when they are happening. There's various parts of my life I look back on and think "yeah, those were good times"; but at the time they just seemed like normal life.

Life has a habit of doing that to you, its extremes can somehow become the norm. Heck, even when there are bad things happening to you it becomes the norm. Although when you do have moments that can be deemed the bad times, you do really know them; and then you end up thinking it'll never end. But it will. It always does. 

I'm sure there was a point to all this, but for the moment it's escaped me...

"...the power of Christ compels me..."

Well, it was either that for a header or "Your mother sucks cocks in Hell"... :)

I figured, this being the 18th post of the year, and that "18" is one of the BBFC's cinema certificates that I'd jibber jabber on about movie classification and censorship, given the recent announcement of forthcoming changes...

Now, I'm broadly of the same opinion as the good Dr Kermode when it comes to this area, in that at the 18 certificate it should be permissible to show any content on the screen, so long as no laws were broken in the making of the film. Then, every lower classification is about rating, and where to place a film. And that's where the arguments often sit. 

One of the things that some have got their knickers in a twist about is that at the 15 certificate there will be an increased level of "very strong" language. This, basically means, there'll be more "fucks" and "cunts" in 15 films. Some have said how this is a disgrace, polluting the minds of those who are still children, etc, etc, etc... Hmm. I'm sorry; but the only way you could show me a 15 year old that doesn't know the words "fuck" or "cunt" would be if you found them hiding in a cave on Mars with their fingers in their ears...! (Yes; I nicked that line from Niles.) The movies are hardly going to be a corrupting influence in this respect...

At the other end of the scale they're going to be tougher at the lower end of the scale as well, being much tougher with the milder swears at U. I'd actually say they should be tougher with the 12a certificate; "fuck"s are permitted there, but I'd say they shouldn't be. If it were a hard 12 certificate, with no-one under 12 in there then I'd say, yeah, probably okay. But the "a" makes it more problematic as younger children are permitted in to the cinema (with an adult). You get some parents taking very young (probably too young) kids in to 12a films...

There have even been people who say that the BBFC shouldn't be all touchy feely and asking the public their opinions, and that they should just enforce whatever rules they see fit with an iron fist. Or, basically, a desire for the bad old days when James Ferman was in charge of the board; a time when the entire range of policies they had were based completely on Mr Ferman's whims. The BBFC has improved in leaps and bounds since he left, and in becoming more open, and by consulting with the public on a regular basis, they ensure that the decision they make are broadly in step with both public opinion, and don't lead to bizarre decisions.

Yeah, there'll be some classification decisions people don't agree with, but you don't get things like the nunchuk ban, or the endless refusal to even look at The Exorcist for video classification, or continued bans of horror movies that look so very tame next to the likes of Saw, and so on.

The BBFC aren't perfect, but they are much better than they used to be. 

"...and you know what I mean..."

So, it's the 17th day of the year, and the 17th post of the year. I guess there'll come a day when I miss a day, but I've no idea when this will be. I do worry, though, that if I miss a day I'll lose the impetus of writing posts.

You only have to look at my previous blogging history to see how infrequently I posted before. I'd always meant to blog more often, but other things got in the way; life has a habit of doing that. I mean, 17 posts this year so far. And then before that 17 posts in the whole of 2011, 2012, and 2013 put together. But during much of that time I did have rather more important things to deal with. Life getting in the way...

And I guess keeping on slogging away with the blogging will only mean that the quality of this toss will get better; unlike some other stuff I write these posts are, mostly, just splurged straight from my brain to the screen. There's usually some editing done, but only minor stuff. Occasionally, as well, I'll get a good way in to writing a post and think it a load of tosh. Yesterday's brief Twin Peaks blog was the second thing I post I wrote; the first about how I came to stop watching 24 was almost completed before I decided it was a pile of piffle and needed replacing. 

I guess some of you reading this will think that this post should have served the same fate... but like I say, these posts are just the odd splurges of my brain worming their way on the the screen, and not anything that's pored over to ensure that every word is correct. 

Other stuff, the stuff I'm not posting daily, the stories mostly aren't like this. I pore over them, trying to make sure that they've not only got the correct words, but that every one means what I want it to mean. Oh, the sentences I've rewritten a dozen times. The single scenes taking days, nay, weeks to get right. It's torture. Maybe I should take the same approach with these; just splurge it all out, leave it, and then edit. But I find it hard to let something lie with elements I dislike. I don't mind if, well... when, these posts are imperfect, but the stories... they gotta be spot on. 

'Cos when they're finished they gotta be perfect... 

...now, back to the cafe, and that scene. 

And no... no spoilers. 

"...it is happening again..."

Through the darkness of futures past,

The magician longs to see,

One chants out between two worlds,

"Fire, walk with me".

I crave Twin Peaks. Oh, so constantly. I still recall when I first saw it. I'd heard about it when it was first on the telly, but felt no inclination to watch it. I'd not heard of David Lynch at the time, and the main thrust of the show "Who killed Laura Palmer?" held little interest as I'd made the assumption it was pretty much a standard detective show and at the time such shows held little interest to me. It is possible there was a time I was more wrong about something, but I can't think what it was.

Then, one day, there was something rubbish on one of the other channels, and I started to surf. Well, as much as you could say switching between four channels was surfing... and on to BBC2 and Twin Peaks it was. The first thing I saw was a girl screaming, which cut to a shot of two men sat, cross legged, in front of a fire. One man was debating which, of two, accounting books he should burn; the one with the true accounts, the other with false accounts. He seemed quite concerned by it all. The other did seem to care a jot which was burnt; all he cared was that his cheese pig wasn't burnt. 

This seemed most odd to me. I didn't have a clue what it was about, but it drew me in. And before I knew it, I'd seen the whole episode. I watched the next weeks, and continued to watch, ending up loving the show to pieces. True, there were many things that didn't make sense; it turned out I'd started on the tenth episode (second of season two), so I'd missed out on lots. There were several things that only really had significance when I was able to catch up with the episodes I'd missed. I certainly wish I'd seen it all from the start.

I've seen it several times since, bought the whole thing on VHS, bought the season 1 box set on region 1 DVD, and region 2, and bought the complete set as well. Meaning there's some episodes I've bought four copies of. 

And, in a couple of months, it'll be time to get the fifth copy of some of these episodes as the whole thing's out on Blu Ray... ah, the joy of seeing Twin Peaks in full in HD. The movie looks great on Blu (at least the Australian version does), so to have the full run of episodes would be great. 

There remains the question as to whether it will have the deleted scenes from the movie on it. This is likely to be the last time we get to see any "new" Twin Peaks material. These scenes that have been teased to use over the years have had a huge amount of expectation built up; these are scenes deleted not because they were bad, but just because the movie needed to be cut down, and they were diversions from the main story. Ah... to see one more scene with Jack Nance...

"...I want more than I can get..."

I can't seem to stop buying Blu Rays and DVDs. Sometimes this isn't too bad, when it comes to things I either know I'll watch immediately, or at least relatively soon. Or even if it's an upgraded copy of a loved film (for example, at this very moment winging its way from Australia is a Blu Ray of the greatest movie of the 1990's...).

But looking at my shelves, and knowing there's about a third more in boxes squirreled away, I know there are many DVDs and Blus that sit on the shelf, completely unwatched. 

I cast my mind back to when I first got a DVD player, and the first thing I ordered from Amazon; it was a DVD box set, at a bargain price, of the classic TV drama I, Claudius. That box set sits, on the shelf, unwatched. I could try to make a list of everything unwatched, but I think I would despair... and that wouldn't even take in to account the cases where I've watched the main feature, but the extras remain unwatched...

There are many such DVDs and Blus scattered throughout the years...

Yet, there are plenty which I do watch quite soon. The trouble is working out which is likely to be which, in advance, and to only buy the ones I know I'll watch...

"...wearing a bit thin..."

There was a time, back in the day, when I was fascinated by the rumours surrounding missing Doctor Who episodes. Heck, over a decade ago I wrote a splurging mess of an article about the topic. I'd always meant to update it, but other things got in the way, and eventually it fizzled out.

But I still kept  up with all the rumours...

Then, something changed, and I can pinpoint the exact moment it did so. 

It was the explosion of the so called "omnirumour". A big collation of a number of seemingly disparate rumours drawn together to form one mutant gestalt whole. A collation of rumours that made it impossible to get at the truth. to be fair, it did kind of creep up on me as I'd had my eye off the ball for a while. Other things getting in the way, see... 

And if it had just been the rumour, that would have been one thing, but the sheer amount of bile that's been spewed on internet forums has been overwhelming, and I've largely stopped looking at missing episode threads. I do occasionally dip a toe in the GallifreyBase thread, and then take the toe out again; and that's one of the saner places out there . The only place I look at regularly is the FaceBook group. But, I have dipped my toes in a couple of other places, and would have felt less unclean had I dipped said toe in to untreated sewage. 

The thing is, there was some truth to the omnirumour; nine episodes of Doctor Who were returned in 2013. The biggest recovery ever, as I recall. But hey, this isn't enough; the omnirumour says there's 90ish episodes recovered still to be announced. Never mind being grateful that these nine episodes are back, people are getting agitated that there was no announcement concerning the whole of this alleged haul.

Which, of course, presumes the whole of the omnirumour is true.

And there's the key thing... are there further elements of this that are true? Frankly, we just don't know. This rumour includes not only further recoveries by Mr Morris, the chap who found the nine episodes last year, but also from several private collectors who seen to have decided en masse to send in their episodes... What's true, what isn't? Who can tell.

The thing I'm sure you're all wondering is what I think; I just don't know. I hope there's more, but I'm certainly not going to get all stressed worrying about whether there are further episodes, or whether posts on the internet can be parsed to read in a different way to what they appear on face value. If there are people feeding deliberate misinformation in order to protect confidentialities, or because of contractual obligations, or non-disclosure agreements, or a pact with the Devil himself, then so be it. I just don't care. I genuinely wouldn't give two hoots if someone were to lie to my face. Right now, at this time, I just don't need to know; chances are all of you reading this also don't need to know. At least, not until the BBC decides that the time is right...

If there are any more, that is. 

It is worth remembering that when the nine episodes were announced, it was a matter of moments before we could download them from iTunes. If there are more episodes can you just imagine the excitement of the BBC announcing that The Underwater Menace is now complete, and if you head over to iTunes that you can buy it, now. That would be so exciting. I'd buy it in a shot.

Mind you, this alleged haul of missing TV supposedly contains something like 6,000 cans. Or is it 8,000? Or 64,000? Gah! I expect by the time I next summon up the strength to dip a toe in it'll be half a million cans... and it'll probably all be duplicate copies of The Space Pirates episode 2...

"...V nz lbhe sngure..."

One of the questions that is constantly debated on the internet is this; at what point is it acceptable to discuss elements of a TV show, or a film, or a book, or a comic considered to be a "spoiler".  Seeing this mentioned by one of my friends on FaceBook today has got me thinking, so... today I'm talking spoilers. 

(Oh, and for avoidance of doubt, just in case; for the purposes of this article I'll be using rot13 for anything that could be considered a spoiler. Just in case... yes, even that moment in The Empire Strikes Back. rot13.com to decode the spoilers...)

There are a number of schools of thought on this matter. Well, really, three. Or four.

1 - Sod it, just discuss anything, at any time, even if it's stuff that hasn't aired yet. Spoil, spoil, SPOIL!

2 - As soon as something has been screened/released it's fair game for discussion of all elements. If you haven't seen it yet, that's your bad.

3 - Wait until a reasonable amount of time has passed, by which time pretty much everyone interested should have seen/read it, and then discuss freely. 

4 - You must never mention any element which could constitute a spoiler. Ever. 

Now, not all of these schools of thought are created equally... the first one is clearly a load of bobbins as the vast majority of people don't want to be spoiled in advance of seeing/reading something. There are some who are not bothered by being spoiled, but these are very much in the minority. And they 

The fourth is also problematic, as it would mean that you could never mention, for example, that in The Sixth Sense Oehpr Jvyyvf vf abg bayl zreryl qrnq, ur'f ernyyl zbfg fvapreryl qrnq. Or that in The Empire Strikes Back vg gheaf bhg gung gur ovt onq thl va gur ovt uryzrg, Qnegu Inqre, vf ernyyl gur sngure bs gur yrnq tbbq thl, Yhxr Fxljnyxre. 

Talking of this latter spoiler, only a few weeks ago I was talking to my son and daughter about Star Wars, and I happened to mention in the general conversation that Inqre jnf Yhxr'f qnq; and she exclaimed with quite some shock, "Jung? Qnegu Inqre vf Yhxr'f qnq?" She just didn't know this, and I felt really bad for spoiling it for her...

The thing is, to us oldies, stuff like that is just part of our modern culture, and we forget that for these young whippersnappers it's all new stuff. To us it's a part of our childhood; to them it's something new...

I'd always have tended to be of the opinion that the second option was the correct one; after all, it's been aired, and if you've not seen it well, that's on you. You can't expect the world to wait for you to catch up. Certainly there have been times when I've not seen an episode of Dr Who on transmission and I've deliberately avoided going on the internet until I'd seen it, lest I be spoiled. Then, there is also the argument that if you've got time to be faffing about on the internet, going to places where you may be spoiled, then you have time to watch the damn thing in the first place. 

But then I have also erred on the side of caution. For example, yesterday on FaceBook, I posted the following, after having seen the latest Sherlock;

"Now that was unexpected... not the CAM thing, as you could see his fate coming a mile off, but that bit right at the end... do we have to wait another two years?"

I thought that made the point I was trying to make, without giving away anything I would consider a spoiler. Anyone that had seen the episode would know exactly what I was talking about. But those who hadn't seen it wouldn't really have a clue. It gives away nothing. If I had said (and this does contain epic spoilerage);

"Abj gung jnf harkcrpgrq... abg gur PNZ guvat, nf lbh pbhyq frr uvf sngr pbzvat n zvyr bss nf vg jnf znqr boivbhf gung Fureybpx jnf tbvat gb chg n ohyyrg va uvf urnq, ohg gung ovg evtug ng gur raq... jvgu Zbevnegl pbzvat onpx... vf ur ernyyl fgvyy nyvir? qb jr unir gb jnvg nabgure gjb lrnef gb svaq bhg?"

That would have been completely different. 

In the world we live in now there will be more and more people who watch programmes later on catch up services like the iPlayer; there's all sorts of shows that are having large numbers of viewing added to ratings via iPlayer. True, some of these will be repeat viewings, but a large chunk will be people watching for the first time. 

So, I tend to operate along the lines that I expect to be spoiled if I go on to FaceBook; so if I've not seen an episode of a TV show I'll just not go there until I've seen it. It's not hard. And I'll not visit specific parts of forums either. But, I'll know that the spoilers are out there, and really it's not for others to not spoil, rather for me to avoid them.

However, I'll also try not to spoil things myself, and I'll often err on the side of caution; on FaceBook, I'll be vague. On forums I'll use spoiler tags. Here on the blog I'll use rot13. 

Because, on the internet, where your posts are open for many to see, it's hard to ascertain who has and hasn't seen something. If you're having a chat, face to face, with friends it's very easy for someone to say "ooh! not seen that yet!" if there's danger of talk leading to spoilers. You can't do that on the net. I mean, I bet there's people here who don't yet know that npghnyyl, guvf rapelcgrq grkg qbrfa'g unir n fcbvyre naq vg'f bayl urer sbe zr gb frr vs crbcyr npghnyyl cnl nggragvba. Vs lbh unir qrpbqrq guvf, chg n pbzzrag fnlvat "V ybir jbzongf." 

So, basically, when it comes to spoilers, I think it's best to invoke Wheaton's Law; don't be a dick. 

"...all good things..."

As I get older I find one of the things that annoys me more than anything is waiting for things. I seem to spend more time waiting for a thing, or at least thinking about waiting for a thing, than experiencing it. And it does get tiring, as often the waiting of a thing can just build things up in your mind and make it overwhelming; especially if it's waiting for something bad to happen. 

Even when you look at what should be relatively inconsequential things like waiting for a new episode of a TV show (The Walking Dead, I am looking at you*), or the next issue of a comic (see previous brackets). I guess, though, it does build up anticipation as I just know that if someone were to wave a magic wand, and the remaining eight episodes of the current season of The Walking Dead were to arrive on my hard drive by magic, I'd splurge through the whole lot in one, joyous, emotional, heart breaking, shocking, six hour session...

But then the wait for the next season would be even greater, and the impact of the cliffhangers lessened a little by their instant resolutions. 'Cos half the appeal of a good cliffhanger is spending some time working out how they're going to get out of that or what the impact of a twist will be on a plot. 

I guess it needs time to brew in the mind. 

So, maybe waiting isn't too bad...

...but then what if a double decker bus crashes in to me tomorrow...? 

Oh, I dunno... 

* - also see Game of Thrones. The TV show for which they have just released a 15 second trailer advertising the screening of a full length (however long that might be) trailer for the fourth season. A trailer for a trailer? Strewth!

"...it's good to see you smile again..."

Yesterday's post made me think of one of the most under-rated bands I can recall; A House. They were a band that should have been massive, but never achieved the success they so richly deserved. They're largely forgotten about, which is a real shame. 

I did want to link to the video of Take It Easy On Me, but I can't seem to find it anywhere. To my mind, that was their best song, but appears to be nowhere to be found on the internet. So, instead, Here Come The Good Times...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CffUxd_RMYU

If you happen to come across any of their albums, especially I Am The Greatest, you should buy them They may even be on iTunes. I haven't checked. Prices of the CDs are silly money on Amazon at the moment, and only one (I think) is on their MP3 store. 

"...hope everything is alright..."

Amongst the many half formed ideas for books rolling around in my head is one called 1989. You can guess the year in which it's set, but that's as much as I'll say about it as it is just a collection of half formed ideas at the moment... the thing is, 1989... that's now 25 years ago. 25 years since I first heard The Pixies, and that's scary. 

I remember seeing them, first of all, on The Chart Show which (for those of you reading this that are too young) was a TV show comprised entirely of music videos; a mixture of new releases, specialist charts, and the main chart. These days anything you want is on YouTube. Back then this was a weekly treat, as exciting as - heck, I'll be frickin' sacrilegious here - more exciting than Top of the Pops. You'd get things on here that would never get near TOTP. I mean, when did you ever see Eardrum Buzz by Wire, or Take It Easy on Me by A House, or Hypocrite by Lush on TOTP?

The Chart Show was a show that introduced me to so many new bands, and new songs, that I'd not heard before. I do sometimes think that in this day and age where you can get everything at your fingertips people just end up going for the same old thing time and time again.

Don't get me wrong; The Chart Show itself wasn't some kind of perfect show in which every edition was chock full of stuff I loved. They played a heck of a lot of crap that I couldn't stand. But there was always the excitement, that after this dull ol' song there'd be something just wonderful next. 

As I said, anything you want is on YouTube, is this Indie Chart from March 1989 possibly the very first time I experience The Pixies...? Shivers down the spine...

And I guess this post is an ideal illustration of why this blog's called "digression", as when I started it I intended to just write about Doolittle, and it ended up being more about The Chart Show. I guess that's the way it goes sometimes...

"...I'll crack something across his canister.."

Danny Dyer was always one of those actors I'd not really paid that much attention to. I'd seen him in a few things, and enjoyed them. But he was never someone I'd paid that much attention to. Then, I started listening to the Kermode and Mayo film podcast, and suddenly my awareness of Mr Dyer rapidly increased. To say that Dr Kermode is not fond of My Dyer is somewhat of an underestimate... the scathing reviews of each new film... the impressions... all paint a picture of Mr Dyer that is, somewhat, less than flattering. 

So... the news of his appearance in EastEnders as Mick Carter, the new landlord of the Queen Vic, didn't exactly fill me with enthusiasm.

That is, until I actually saw him on screen. 

We're now three weeks in to his appearances, and I'd say he's slotting in to the show just perfectly; he just seems perfectly cast as the cheeky chappy now in charge of the Queen Vic. It seems he has found his niche. He's settled in so well, so quickly, that it's already hard to think of the show without him. 

Already in interviews he's saying that he intends to stay for the long haul; referring it as "doing a 20 stretch". And, I hope he does stay.

"...my life's as good as an Abba song..."

So, I just finished writing an epic blog post about torrenting TV shows, and re-read it and thought... oh, what's the point? Luckily there's something else very exciting to talk about, and it is this; the Prince Charles Cinema in London is having a couple of singalong screenings to one of the most under-rated movies of all time; 

Spiceworld; the Movie.

(The ad actually notes that it's "screening monthly", so fingers crossed there's more to come than just the two screenings, Jan 10th & Feb 28th, thus far advertised.)

Now, yes. You did read that first paragraph correctly, Spiceworld is one of the most under-rated movies of all time. It is one of those movies that is just so much fun that every time I watch it, and I have seen it many times, it just makes me smile throughout.

The important thing to remember about Spiceworld is to judge it for what it is. It's essentially a series of set pieces, structured around a wafer thin plot, in order to showcase the Spice Girls' songs. It's not intending to make a serious point, it's not going to change the world, it's not looking for a new England (oops, went a bit Billy Bragg there), it's just out to entertain and amuse.

And it does it so very well indeed. It's got a host of great set pieces, with a wodge of killer lines; I think Jools Holland probably gets the best line when, commenting on a performance notes "That was absolutely perfect... without actually being any good at all." And the whole of the supporting cast is great as well, with Richard E Grant hamming it up like a good 'un, Roger Moore's almost channeling Ambassador Kosh at times with the ambiguity of some of the things he says... but I think the best actual performance in the film is Bill Paterson, who's the owner of a cafe the girls used to go to. But then he's great in anything. 

The plot, for what it's worth, really does just link the set pieces, as the girls go from TOTP to a fashion show, to dance camp, to meeting aliens to (almost) meeting Gary Glitter... and I say almost, as in between when the film was completed and when it was released, Mr Glitter was arrested for having paedo pics on his computer, so his appearance in the film was cut. But the main bulk of this sequence, where the girls sing Leader of the Gang remained. 

And talking of cuts, for some reason when Elton John has a cameo near the start of the film they went and cut his best line. Look, see;

And the spectacular sequence in which a double decker buss leaps the gap on Tower Bridge as its sides raise just has to be seen to be believed...

There was a DVD of the film released some time ago, but it's a fairly disappointing release containing diddly squat in the way of extras. I would love it if a Blu Ray could be released with a decent pile of extras. Deleted scenes; Elton as above, I doubt Glitter's would be included. It's on YouTube if you're interested! A behind the scenes documentary would be good, even if it's just modern day talking heads reminiscing. And a commentary on the movie by all five girls... I mean, come on... that'd be brilliant. I'd buy it in a shot!

I just love the film to bits. In fact, I'd probably go so far to say that as I'm sat here typing I think it's probably the second best film of the 90s....

"...I've been dreaming of a time..."

So, today and yesterday I watched The 7:39, a two part drama on BBC1 about a man and a lady who meet on a train and, somewhat inevitably as it's a TV drama, end up embarking on an affair... 

It's the sort of thing I'd probably normally not watch, but I was drawn to it as it starred David Morrissey. Now, Mr Morrissey is one of my favourite actors around at the moment, so you could put him in anything and I'd watch it. Around him there was a great supporting cast as well, with Sheridan Smith playing the other passenger, Olivia Colman as DM's wife, and Sean Maguire as SS's fiance. 

The thing is, as enjoyable as it was, it was all somewhat predictable, hitting each of the story beats you'd expect at the time you would expect it. That's not to say it was bad, far from it; it's just that it was unexceptional. The performances were all solid, especially Mr Morrissey, but I just hoped for a bit more. Something to surprise. 

Trouble was, I kept thinking back to Holding On, which was one of the first things I can remember seeing Mr Morrissey star in; in that he also played a married man who embarked on an affair with a younger woman he meets in a random scenario. In the overall scheme of that show it was a relatively minor (in terms of screen time) plot thread, but I felt a greater impact from that plotline than The 7:39. 

Like I say, not bad; just not great. 

"...you stop looking into mirrors..."

So, in a amongst all the other things I've been watching lately, I've also been rewatching Babylon 5. I'm up to the end of the first season, and there was something in the last episode that did somewhat hit me. It was something Londo said; 

"There comes a time when you look into the mirror and realize that what you see is all that you will ever be. Then you accept it, or you kill yourself. Or you stop looking into mirrors."

You see, it made me think. Is what I am now all I will ever be? Is this as good as it's ever going to get? It ties in with what I've been thinking lately, that over the last year I've largely been treading water and not really progressing with my life. Honestly, if I look at where I am now compared with where I was this time last year I really cannot see any appreciable difference. 

I think I've been coasting, just waiting to see what happens, and really reacting to things as they do happen. That doesn't make me happy, as I need to get off my arse and do things to change and improve. But it's scary. I know nothing ever lasts forever, and any changes that do come need to come from me, and not from others doing things to me. 

And then other quotes come to mind, those old quotes I may have mentioned once or twice before;

"Habit and fear of change are the worst reasons for ever doing ANYTHING."

And; 

"The first act of revolution is destruction 
and the first thing to destroy is THE PAST.
scary
like falling in love
it reminds us we're alive."

And, if I'm going to go on with this quoting thing, one from the great man himself;

"Life depends on change. And renewal."

The question is, though, what is the correct change? And what happens if all goes wrong? Ah... to just go "BANG!" (that's another quote!)... if only I could.  But a change has to come, and it has to come from me. If it doesn't, then it's yet another change imposed upon me by external factors. And I've had enough of those. 

So. I have to change...

Well, either that or stop looking in to mirrors. 

"...must be funny..."

One thing that's always been complained about, ever since I can remember, is the price of video games. Always, always, always... and it'll never stop. However, this post isn't about the cost of the likes of the latest games like GTA5 or the latest Gran Turismo, etc, no... this is about the insane prices of additional content in mobile games...

I was playing the new Angry Birds game the other day, the racing game "Angry Birds Go". This game allows you to buy new cars for real money. The game itself is free, so they've clearly got to make money somehow, so allowing people to buy additional carts is quite a nifty idea. However, the sheer price of some of these carts is phenomenally expensive. Take a look at this screen shot of one of the cars you can buy. And this is not, in any way, photoshopped;

Yes. That says the car costs £34.99. That's not imaginary in game money, it's actual real life proper money. To place this in context, a PS3 copy of GTA5 on Amazon is currently selling at £33.00

And of the levels I've unlocked, you can buy a further two more at £34.99, two at £6.99 each (advertised as "50% off"!!!), and two at a much more reasonable £1.99 each. To access all these carts would cost you £122.93. 

And that's with only half the tracks unlocked. If we extrapolate that the remaining half of the game has a similar number of similarly priced carts, that would cost you £245.86 just too access all the carts in one game! By way of comparing how ludicrous this is, you can currently buy a PS3, with GT6 and The Last of Us for £199.99 from Amazon. I know which I'd rather spend my money on...

This doesn't even touch on the other transactions in the game which allow you to buy crystals to allow you to upgrade your car quicker (you can earn these racing in the game) for prices ranging from £2.99 for 200 crystals up to £69.99 for 6500 crystals. This latter one is somewhat cheekily stated to be "Best Value". Hmm... I don't know on what planet £69.99 for a bunch of crystals could ever be described accurately as "best value"...

But, it's not just this game. There are games all over the place that have a similar pricing structure for their in game purchases. It is increasingly becoming the norm that games companies are charging such silly money for things that are only of use in the game. 

Surely a better model would be the "pile it high, sell it cheap" principle. I wonder how much more revenue would be generated by a lot of smaller transactions? Candy Crush Saga does seem to get it completely right in that every time I've come across a chance to spend money in that game, it's never been anything as like as high as £69.99. I think the highest I've seen in £2.49. I think. These are amounts that are small enough to tempt people to spend to get those extra power ups, and to get extra lives, and to get on to the next batch of 15 levels... 

To its credit, as well, you don't have to spend a single penny on Candy Crush Saga to proceed. I've done all 65 owl balancing levels and I'm up to level 225 in the main game, and not a penny spent...

This model is clearly working for them as they're churning out new levels at a fair old rate, and getting out new games. 

I'd be very interested in hearing what the justification is for these ludicrous prices for in game content...

"...a number on a list..."

So, I was having a play with the site stats, and apparently the all time most viewed post of all time is this one;

http://fatsosblog.blogspot.co.uk/2008/12/does-somebody-come-around-in-truck.html

And it's not the most viewed by a small amount, it's got just over triple the views of the second placed post. It's also the post which has the least waffling by me in it... but I must remember what Mr Eko said... :)

Oh, and to follow up on the last post; still waiting, Pixies, for something even half as good as Bam Thwok... 

"...I've been dreaming of a time..."

Now my memory's not exactly perfect, but I was thinking the other day about the gigs I went to in 2013, and I'm reasonably sure I didn't go to a single one. it's the first time since, ooh, 1997 I've not been to at least one gig in a year. Oh, some years I went to loads. Others less so. Quite a few down to single figures. Heck, even in 2012 I managed to make it to the festival. 

So that means the last band I saw live was The Cure, and the last song I've seen live is Boys Don't Cry. Which is a lie. We do. 

I don't know what the reason is for this lack of gig attendance; maybe it links in with how little new music I listen to these days. Pretty much always retreating back to the old favourites. There was a time when I'd listen to the Evening Session, and Mark & Lard's Graveyard Shift, and there'd be so many new brilliant songs. I can't remember the last time I listened to a radio show regularly. I can't even remember if Chris Evans does breakfast or drive time these days. I bet Ken Bruce still does the mornings and PopMaster, though. Ah, the shift from Radio 1 to Radio 2...

Can't recall the last time I listened to Radio 1, but then really I shouldn't; not at my advanced age. Radio 1's meant to say nothing to me about my life, it's for the young. I see so many people comment that Radio 1's rubbish these days as the music's just noise. But then that's what us oldies should be saying. Each generation has its own music. Those listening to the likes of Grime and Drum 'n' Bass will probably say the same about Radio 1 in 20 years time. That's how it should be.

So, no listening to the radio means that there's very little buying of new music. I look at the stuff I have bought lately, and it all seems to be collections and greatest hits, and so on. I can't recall the last time, for sure, I bought a CD (yeah, I know; so last century) of a new artist. I have a feeling it might have been The Brilliant Things, but that was a while ago. 

And this means no new radio, no new CDs, and thus no new bands to see gigs by... but there's still those old faithful bands around, but I've seen pretty much every band I want to see, some many times over. I've lost count of the number of times I've seen the Pixies... do I need to hear Monkey Gone to Heaven live again (and would it even be the same without Kim Deal)? I didn't even bother with the Reading festival last year as the line up consisted of bands I'd either seen before and wasn't fussed about seeing again, bands I'd not seen and wasn't fussed about, and bands I'd not heard of. Heck, I only went in 2012 (and just the Friday) because the Cure were there and they were one of those few notable bands I'd not seen before that I really did want to see. 

What, then, for 2014? I guess the only way to change this is to make the change myself (a maxim that I very much need to apply to a number of other areas in my life). Seek out new things. Try them. It's the only way...

Anyhow, I'll sign off now. I just remembered I downloaded the Pixies EP2 today, and I've not listened to it yet...

"...we were quoted out of context..."

I guess that's one of the problems with writing the header to a post before you finish it. 'Cos the header's meant to at least slightly relate to what's actually in the post, and had I had a little more time I'd have gone on to talk about Sherlock, and the whole quote would have made a lot more sense. 

But, I never got around to it...

So. Other things that were good about last year in the telly;

Game of Thrones; I decided, on the spur of the moment, after having heard there was a massive outcry at the massive twist in season 3 episode 9 that I'd check out the whole show, and manage to miss the spoiler. Which, somehow, I managed to do. I splurged through 30 episodes in less than three weeks, and it was great. The agony of waiting for the next season to start is really twisting my melon. 

I found myself loving the show. It's violent, rude, and absolutely filthy, but compelling viewing. Loads of wonderful characters, and a propensity for killing them off that probably exceeds The Walking Dead (lets face it; Rick's never gonna die. At least not until the very end). I'm finding that of the characters the ones I like best are Tyrion, Baelish (oh, so slimy!), and Daenerys; although I do wish she'd hurry up and cross the Narrow Sea. Unlike the Walking Dead, though, I've not read the source material as the TV show is a much closer adapatation (within the usual lmitations) than The Walking Dead is. 

The Ocean Full of Bowling Balls; the leaking of three JD Salinger short stories was, to say the least, somewhat of surprise. Bowling Balls was the most surprising of the three, seeing as the only known copy is at a uni library in the states and security around it is tight. You can go in and read it, but they never allow copies. Maybe someone used hi-tech methods? Hidden camera, perhaps? 

Anyhow, it was a very interesting story to read, consisting of what's essentially a rough draft of some of the characters from Catcher in the Rye. Although whereas other rough version Catcher stories (I'm Crazy, and Slight Rebellion off Madison) are, essentially, early edits of Catcher chapters. the story here is not. Well, barring some references to things also referenced in Catcher such as Kenneth's/Allie's death. This one's not even narrated by Holden, rather by Vincent/DB. I don't think too much can be read in to the story, as in terms of Caulfield canon (it's not just Dr Who that yaps on about that) the canon is Catcher, and nothing else. Well, until the purported book of Caulfield short stories comes out... yes, me too; I'll believe it when I see it. Bowling Balls should only really be seen as a work in progress. For one thing, unlike the other two, it was never published. But, it is a fascinating insight to the progression of the work done in advance of Catcher.

Now, can we get some actual proper published Salinger stuff; the stuff he'd been working on since 1965. 

And, please, we're in the 21st century now; Catcher in the Rye on Kindle now, please! :)

More tomorrow, hopefully...! 

"...this is the voice of fate..."

I guess I've been lax. I look at the last time I posted here, and really it's not good enough. I keep on thinking of things to post, but never quite get around to it. If only Google or Apple or one of these TV tech types could do a thing where you think words and they appear on your blog. You'd need some kind of code word to start it off, and another to end it, otherwise every single thought you had would appear on your blog. In a way that might be quite interesting, but I suspect that if every thought a person had were to work its way in to a blog it would make for very odd reading. 

So, I have to stick with typing up this stuff. At least a post a week from now on, I think... 

As it's New Year's Day, tradition dictates I should do a look back at things I liked and disliked in 2013;

As the last post, spoilers are encoded using rot13; got to rot13.com to decipher. They're not just random letters! :)

Likes;

The Walking Dead; both the TV show and the comic. The later of which I read every single issue of this past year, all 118 issues. What I like is that the TV show, although based on the comic, takes the basics of the comics and does its own thing, so that (for example) in the comics during his big attack on the prison The Governor pubcf bss Glerrfr'f urnq; whereas in the tv show it's Urefpury jub fhssref gur fnzr sngr. There were two episodes that really stood out for me, Clear; the episode where Rick, Glenn, and Michonne head off on a mission on their own. It's really just them (plus one other character) for the duration and it's a really powerful episode. 

The other one was the mid-season cliffhanger episode, which was an episode with events in it that many people thought would have been in the season 3 finale. It's one of those episodes that changes the direction of the entire show, and provides closure to one of its most memorable characters. Well, two of the show's most memorable characters. I also loved that the final shot of the episode was exactly the same as the last panel of issue 48.

Like I say, the comics give a flavour to what's coming, and 3 key comic characters are m,aking their debut in the back half of the season. And I'm *really* hoping there'll be an episode called "Fear The Hunters"... I'm also hoping at some point we'll get to see Negan (and Lucille!) in the TV show... but I suspect, as he doesn't make his debut until issue #100, we'll be talking, at the very earliest, a debut for him at the end of season 5 (or even the mid season cliffhanger of season 6)... Question is, will his debut have as much... impact? :)

South Park; a mixed season this year. The goth/emo episode was almost as bad as a towelie episodes, and the Game of Thrones/PS4/XBox trio of episodes was dragged out by at least one episode too many (though the final payoff joke at the end was inspired!). But, this season did have one of it's very finest episodes yet. And it was surprising...

One of the main criteria for a South Park episode is generally how offensive Cartman is during the episode. Or, how offensive the episode is as a whole, leaving you saying "I can't believe they did that!" (see also; Boyle, Frankie.). However, the last episode of the season, called "The Hobbit" had almost no Cartman in it. and had very little in it that could cause offence. There's a girl in the cheerleading squad called Lisa Berger, who lacks elan and style and is thought of as fat and ugly. Through a series of events, a picture of her is Photoshopped to make her look more attractive, and all of a sudden because of this altered image, she is suddenly popular. Then, all the other girls get pictures photoshopped, and they are all popular. Despite their actual appearances being exactly the same as before; only Wendy resists.

The whole theme of the thing is handled so very well indeed; the manipulation of images to create an artificial impression that people cannot live up to. The boys here are shown as very shallow indeed, only liking the girls once they have their altered pictures being more drawn to the pictures than the real girls. Wendy is ostracised for not following the pack. And, I tell you the final scene of the episode is just heartbreaking. When the episode ended I was dumbstruck. I was expecting some final gag, some final thing to lift the mood at the end, but no... quite wonderful indeed. 

And, looking at the clock (I said clock), it's getting late, so I'll do more of this tomorrow.