Eurovision: The Story of Fire Saga

This was one of those films that really highlights the benefit of these subscription packages - there's no way that I would have paid to go see this film, but when I saw it included in my Netflix subscription it definitely became something I was interested in. And it was a really good choice - it's been a long time since I've laughed so much at a film.

This is a comedy starring Will Ferrell and Rachel McAdams, which as the name implies is built around the Eurovision Song Contest. I'm not going to say any more about the plot than that, though it's almost sufficiently redundant to the silliness - you've seen it several times before with some near variations.

The film it actually reminded me of most was "Blades of Glory", which is probably no surprise given the presence of Ferrell in both.

There's actually not much more to say than that, except that it was nice to see so much of Edinburgh featuring in the film. I especially liked the shots of that well-known Edinburgh landmark, the Hydro (which is traditionally in Glasgow).

And yes, Graham Norton is in the film, doing just as he does at Eurovision every year. He's probably the best thing about the modern Eurovision, and he's great here.

(This is also a film with a really good trailer, in that it gives a good flavour of the film without using all the best material. Which means that you can watch the trailer and know easily whether this is a film for you. It certainly won't be for everyone, and won't suit every mood, but it's worth two minutes to check out a trailer, I would have thought.)

In Between

This afternoon I re-watched the "Voyager" episode "Flashback". I'm not a fan of "Voyager" by any means, but this is very definitely one of the best episodes, though it does suffer, once again, from showing hints of the show I would much rather have seen - Captain Sulu commanding the Excelsior. Oh well.

But it did occur to me that, given the state of "Star Trek" at that time, a full seven-season, 154-episode show may well have become very tired, very quickly. And that's assuming they could even afford to recruit the key actors required.

But it does occur to me that not every show needs, or indeed benefits from, that sort of massive multi-season approach. And, indeed, there are some cases where the show would have been improved by committing to a smaller, fixed run - "The Handmaid's Tale" and "Picard" immediately leap to mind as examples.

Of course, that's where a somewhat-underused format comes into play. A seven-season "Sulu" show was probably never going to fly. But what about a four-episode mini-series? (Likewise, I would very much like to see a "Doctor Who" mini-series starring the Eighth Doctor...)

For some reason, the mini-series seems to be deployed for adaptations of novels and not much else. (I entirely understand why it's used for novels, of course, given the limited source material. It's the "not much else" that surprises me.)

Anyway, that's what has been on my mind today. Or at least for the past couple of hours.

#30: The Stone Angel, by Margaret Laurence (a book from The List)

Malaise

On Saturday I finally got caught up on all my tasks, found myself with a little free time, and thought I'd get on with one of the things I'd said to myself I'd do during lockdown... and promptly decided, "nope". After spending so much time in front of a PC all week, I found I just couldn't be bothered at all to sit and do so at the weekend. (Nor, indeed, could I face sitting watching some TV or a movie. Basically it was screens that I was burnt out on.)

Which was a bit of a bummer, since the chances of me getting some more free time any time soon are extremely small. So I guess that project just isn't going to happen.

I do have one more thing that I (well, actually LC) wants to get through during lockdown, and that doesn't require a lot of time. So maybe I'll make some progress on that this weekend. But I wouldn't count on it!

#29: "50 Literature Ideas You Really Need to Know", by John Sutherland

A Matter of Style

My latest book is "50 Literature Ideas You Really Need to Know", which is rather interesting. Yesterday I came to the section on "Style", which suddenly crystallised something I had been aware of but hadn't been able to really grasp.

The relevant sentence reads, "The most durable thing in writing is style, and style is the most valuable investment a writer can make with his time." (That is itself a quote from Raymond Chandler.)

As I mentioned once before, some years ago my grandfather wrote his life story. Once he had completed it he sent it out to the various branches of the family, at which point I spent some hours reading through it, and what surprised me about the work was that while the events of the story were of interest for themselves, and while the story was written in good, functional English, it was all surprisingly underwhelming. Given grandad's education, his career, and the fact that he was extremely well read, it was somewhat surprising that the whole thing wasn't, well, better.

Chandler, of course, neatly explains all that in a single sentence. The issue is that style isn't something that you either have or don't have; it's something that a writer develops and builds with practice. As such, it does indeed require an investment in time. (And, since writing the story of a long life is a significant undertaking, it has the same constraint as 'quality' in a software system - it's not something that you can add later. It needs to have become second nature, so that it's built in. Which means it really needs that investment of time.)

Grandad, for all that he was very well read, and for all that he was an educated man, had spent his life as an educator, not as a writer. He simply hadn't made that investment in time required to move beyond "good, functional English" to something more stylish.

And that's why his life story, while interesting to the family for the events that it recounts, felt somewhat underwhelming.

(Lest I be thought uncharitable, I should also note that at the time he wrote his life story, grandad was already into his eighties and in fairly poor health. So, really, the fact that he was able to produce it at all was rather remarkable. I just thought it was worth noting the revelatory moment I enjoyed yesterday evening when so much became clear.)

Back to Normal

For the past week or so there has been a formatting error on the blog, showing the sidebar at the bottom of the page. That was due to an HTML error on my part. Hopefully it's fixed now...

#28: "Sharpe's Company", by Bernard Cornwell

Space Force

When I heard about a new comedy parodying the newest branch of the US military, starring Steve Carrol and created by the guys responsible for the US version of "The Office", I was certainly interested. When I heard it was coming to Netflix I started looking forward to it in earnest. I've since watched all ten episodes... and I'm afraid it's not really worth bothering with.

I should first note that the first two episodes are very much worth a watch - the first to establish the scenario and characters, but then the second is very funny indeed.

Unfortunately, after that one the series seems to run completely out of ideas, and goes into a holding pattern of recycled plots, character moments that seem to come straight out of the nineties, and not much else. (It also doesn't help that Trump really isn't a laughing matter any more.)

Given the reviews, I find it really hard to believe that this will be renewed. Even if so, it would require some major rework before I could recommend giving it a go. The gag ratio is just far too weak, that one episode excluded. Which is a real shame - it had such potential.

#26: "Sword of Kings", by Bernard Cornwell

#27: "Call for the Dead", by John Le Carré

Dear 2020, I was just joking...

A million years ago, back at the end of March, I noted that the current situation had a few parallels with the old show "Crusade". I signed off by noting that the show was cancelled, and so the answer to "what happens next" was "either I don't know... or worse."

Given the direction 2020 has taken in the last few days, I'm suddenly rather concerned that we are in fact heading for cancellation, as the lethal cocktail of incompetence and malevolence that we seem to have collectively voted for starts to take effect in earnest.

Good luck everyone. Here's hoping someone resets the timeline soon.

Experimental Cookery 2020, Addendum: Cottage Pie

A couple of months ago my Experimental Cookery was shepherd's pie, taken from Hugh's "Love Your Leftovers". Since then we have had roast beef a couple of times, and so yesterday with the leftovers I made a cottage pie. This is, of course, almost exactly the same, but made with beef instead of lamb.

And it was fine, but we both definitely preferred the shepherd's pie. There wasn't anything wrong with the cottage pie... it just wasn't as nice.

(The other thing I would note is that while Hugh recommends aiming for 1kg of meat, making up any shortfall with leftover veg, I think I'm inclined instead to recommend about 700g, made up to the kilo with veg. That seemed to me to give a better balance between the flavours. But maybe that's just me.)

And that's all there is to say about that, really. It was blog-worthy... but only just.