One of the great advantages of the various subscription services is that they open up a back-catalogue of films that I missed for various reasons, and never quite felt I could justify getting on DVD. On the other hand, one of the great perils of this is that you can get sucked into watching a film out of a sense of completeness, despite knowing going in that it's going to suck.
"Transformers: The Last Knight" is the worst film I have ever forced myself to sit through. Indeed, it's worse than any of the turgid nonsense that I've started but abandoned halfway through. It is a masterpiece of awfulness.
Hell, it doesn't even qualify as "so bad it's good" - to achieve that it needs to be laughably awful, but this film is so po-faced and deadly serious that it's almost impossible to find levity. (Although the bit where it is revealed that Stonehenge was at the dead centre of Pangaea did raise a derisory laugh.)
I would suggest that this abomination is an insult to my childhood, but "Dark of the Moon" thoroughly salted that earth. So instead I'll note that it is an insult to my fond memories of Patrick Dempsey's oh-so-nuanced performance in that comparitive masterpiece.
All that said, I did have a little grudging technical admiration for it: surely it takes a very special kind of genius to produce a film so abjectly terrible on every level? And that did leave the film with one, miniscule, redeeming feature - it ends with a mid-credits scene that promises yet more to come. Can even they produce a film yet worse that this? Perhaps not, but they must try!
Unfortunately, it turns out that "Transformers 6: You Thought the Last One Sucked" has been cancelled due to audiences finally coming to their senses. Which means we'll never know.
Tuesday, February 25, 2020
Sunday, February 23, 2020
Alternatively...
While I'm on the subject of football, yesterday I was listening to Radio Clyde as they were discussing the obvious failings of the SFA compliance authority. During the course of the discussions, one of the pundits suggested putting together a named panel of experts to judge things, in the hope that using such big, respected names, would help with matters.
The counter-argument was that anonymity of that board was absolutely essential because if they were named they wouldn't be safe in West Central Scotland.
That may be true. But if it really is, it's time to ban football, because that sort of poison is something we absolutely should not be humouring. The game, its authorities, the clubs, and the fans really should be put on notice: no more pussy-footing around: clean your collective act up, or you're done.
The counter-argument was that anonymity of that board was absolutely essential because if they were named they wouldn't be safe in West Central Scotland.
That may be true. But if it really is, it's time to ban football, because that sort of poison is something we absolutely should not be humouring. The game, its authorities, the clubs, and the fans really should be put on notice: no more pussy-footing around: clean your collective act up, or you're done.
Rangers Management Woes 2020
For the second year in a row, Rangers entered the winter shutdown having won over Celtic. They've enjoyed a winter break of crowing the shift in dominance over their rivals. For the second year in a row, they've then utterly collapsed in the weeks after the winter shutdown, such that the league is over by Easter in every way but the purely mathematical.
The Rangers board now have a very difficult decision to make. Next season Celtic will be going for 10-in-a-row, a feat that has never been achieved and may never be equaled. (Though Scottish football is so poor I guess you can't really say 'never'.) That means that Rangers must win the league next season, and indeed the board will no doubt throw everything they have at that challenge.
But the big problem is that if the manager changes in the close season, it's a really big ask to get to grips with everything that's going on, learn the dressing room, identify and bring in the required new players, and win the league. If they're going to switch the manager, the sooner they do it, the better.
So I think the board really need to consider very carefully: are they going to trust Steven Gerrard with this most important of seasons, or do they make the switch? And if the answer is that they make the switch, they should do it now. Never mind the Scottish Cup, never mind Europe, the absolute priority for the club is stopping 10-in-a-row, and if they are to make the switch, their best chance for the new manager to succeed is to make the switch now.
#8: "Raw Spirit", by Iain Banks
The Rangers board now have a very difficult decision to make. Next season Celtic will be going for 10-in-a-row, a feat that has never been achieved and may never be equaled. (Though Scottish football is so poor I guess you can't really say 'never'.) That means that Rangers must win the league next season, and indeed the board will no doubt throw everything they have at that challenge.
But the big problem is that if the manager changes in the close season, it's a really big ask to get to grips with everything that's going on, learn the dressing room, identify and bring in the required new players, and win the league. If they're going to switch the manager, the sooner they do it, the better.
So I think the board really need to consider very carefully: are they going to trust Steven Gerrard with this most important of seasons, or do they make the switch? And if the answer is that they make the switch, they should do it now. Never mind the Scottish Cup, never mind Europe, the absolute priority for the club is stopping 10-in-a-row, and if they are to make the switch, their best chance for the new manager to succeed is to make the switch now.
#8: "Raw Spirit", by Iain Banks
Wednesday, February 19, 2020
Day 50: Update on Goals
We've reached day 50 of the year, so it's time for the first update on my goals for the year.
2020 actually got off to a flying start on all but two fronts. Unfortunately, those two were the ones that were most vexing to me, so I was actually fairly downbeat. And then my progress on other fronts started to stall...
2020 actually got off to a flying start on all but two fronts. Unfortunately, those two were the ones that were most vexing to me, so I was actually fairly downbeat. And then my progress on other fronts started to stall...
- Books: In a leap year, by day 50 I should be at 8.2 books read. After a really fast start to the year, I've managed to drop slightly behind - I'm still working through book 8. I do have a second book in progress, so I'm not quite as far behind as it otherwise might seem, but I am still slightly behind.
- Weight: This seemed to start brightly, with fitness being my theme for January. But it slumped into a huge morass, largely due to everyone else heading to the gym in January, and so the end result has been disappointing. Damnit.
- Blogging: By day 50 I should be on 16.39 posts here and 8.2 on the Imaginarium. I'm actually ahead of that target on the Imaginarium, but I'm quite a bit behind here. On balance I'm behind, but only slightly.
- Work: This is the other area that has started really badly. I can't say more than that.
Wednesday, February 12, 2020
The License Fee
I see that the BBC license fee is a hot topic once again. Unfortunately, since last time the discussion came up I've had rather a change of heart, and as such am finding it rather hard to justify.
As far as I can see, there are two arguments that get put forward for the license fee: that the BBC represents good value for money, and that the BBC is a public good.
Well, I have some sympathy with the argument that the BBC is good value - between the various TV and radio channels, particularly CBeebees, and iPlayer, that's an awful lot there for a decent price.
Except... I fail to see how it being good value is a justification for demanding people pay for the service in order to watch any live TV, backed by a threat of jail. Yes, maybe I agree that it's good value, but I don't see how that means I should force you to pay for it?
The other argument, that the BBC is a public good, is a much stronger argument for compelling people to pay. (Though personally I'd rather the payment be taken from direct taxation, which could at least theoretically be progressive, rather than a regressive fixed payment.)
My problem with the "public good" argument is that my trust in the BBC to report the news in an impartial manner was shattered in 2014, and their coverage of the 2019 election did nothing to reinforce it (quite the opposite, in fact). Too much of their coverage is politics-as-soap-opera, when they're not busy reporting on postal vote results (which is a massive no-no).
Unfortunately, that lack of trust rather demolishes the "public good" argument for the license fee.
Where does that leave us? Well, if the BBC did go for a subscription model, we actually would pay for it. Unless, that is, they really did get rid of CBeebees (as mooted today). But lose that, and I'd save the money.
The alternative is for the BBC to take action to restore trust. Which means several things: most importantly, they'd need to replace the existing complaints procedure with a fully transparent process that is seen to work. It probably means that Question Time needs to end. It certainly means that their review of the papers needs to go - our print media are overwhelmingly biased, as is their prerogative, but that means that the BBC can't just follow the agenda that they set. And it would require a fairly extensive change in staff, especially in Scotland. They need to change, and they need to show that they've changed.
I'm not holding my breath for any of that. Instead, I fear we'll see the BBC try to shift further to the right, in order to appease a Tory government that hates them, and in doing so squander any last vestiges of support they have from the other side. And then, when the Tories choose to wield the axe, there won't be anyone who laments it.
As far as I can see, there are two arguments that get put forward for the license fee: that the BBC represents good value for money, and that the BBC is a public good.
Well, I have some sympathy with the argument that the BBC is good value - between the various TV and radio channels, particularly CBeebees, and iPlayer, that's an awful lot there for a decent price.
Except... I fail to see how it being good value is a justification for demanding people pay for the service in order to watch any live TV, backed by a threat of jail. Yes, maybe I agree that it's good value, but I don't see how that means I should force you to pay for it?
The other argument, that the BBC is a public good, is a much stronger argument for compelling people to pay. (Though personally I'd rather the payment be taken from direct taxation, which could at least theoretically be progressive, rather than a regressive fixed payment.)
My problem with the "public good" argument is that my trust in the BBC to report the news in an impartial manner was shattered in 2014, and their coverage of the 2019 election did nothing to reinforce it (quite the opposite, in fact). Too much of their coverage is politics-as-soap-opera, when they're not busy reporting on postal vote results (which is a massive no-no).
Unfortunately, that lack of trust rather demolishes the "public good" argument for the license fee.
Where does that leave us? Well, if the BBC did go for a subscription model, we actually would pay for it. Unless, that is, they really did get rid of CBeebees (as mooted today). But lose that, and I'd save the money.
The alternative is for the BBC to take action to restore trust. Which means several things: most importantly, they'd need to replace the existing complaints procedure with a fully transparent process that is seen to work. It probably means that Question Time needs to end. It certainly means that their review of the papers needs to go - our print media are overwhelmingly biased, as is their prerogative, but that means that the BBC can't just follow the agenda that they set. And it would require a fairly extensive change in staff, especially in Scotland. They need to change, and they need to show that they've changed.
I'm not holding my breath for any of that. Instead, I fear we'll see the BBC try to shift further to the right, in order to appease a Tory government that hates them, and in doing so squander any last vestiges of support they have from the other side. And then, when the Tories choose to wield the axe, there won't be anyone who laments it.
Friday, January 31, 2020
So Much For That
My "theme of the month" didn't really amount to anything - due to the gym being so exceptionally busy in January my ability to get properly stuck in proved to be very limited; I didn't actually get started on the diet properly; and no other areas got even slightly addressed (although they were in a pretty good place to begin with).
So that's basically a write-off.
So that's basically a write-off.
A Black Day
Today was never going to be a good day. Even at its best Brexit was never going to be a good thing, and in delivering it in the manner they have the Tories, under both May and Johnson, have unleashed all the worst impulses of this country. It is an entirely self-inflicted wound that represents a tragic dimunition of the UK on the world stage.
But there was always one slight hope: with the horrors of Brexit unveiled, at least the need for Scottish independence was becoming clear. And, indeed, the most recent poll showed that a majority of Scots now backed independence. So when Nicola Sturgeon let is be known that she was going to make an announcement on the subject, there was at least some hope - maybe she was finally ready to grasp the thistle and go for a referendum.
But, no. One utterly underwhelming announcement later and... the dream is dead. Scotland will not be independent in the foreseeable future, and maybe not ever. We're done.
And with that, I think I've now voted in my last election. If the SNP don't stand for independence, they don't stand for anything useful; I won't vote Green for a few reasons that I won't discuss here; and every other party sits some distance under "Don't Vote" in my ordered list of preferences.
So, a black day indeed. EU membership, gone; the dream of independence, gone; and democracy dead to me, all in the space of 24 hours.
But there was always one slight hope: with the horrors of Brexit unveiled, at least the need for Scottish independence was becoming clear. And, indeed, the most recent poll showed that a majority of Scots now backed independence. So when Nicola Sturgeon let is be known that she was going to make an announcement on the subject, there was at least some hope - maybe she was finally ready to grasp the thistle and go for a referendum.
But, no. One utterly underwhelming announcement later and... the dream is dead. Scotland will not be independent in the foreseeable future, and maybe not ever. We're done.
And with that, I think I've now voted in my last election. If the SNP don't stand for independence, they don't stand for anything useful; I won't vote Green for a few reasons that I won't discuss here; and every other party sits some distance under "Don't Vote" in my ordered list of preferences.
So, a black day indeed. EU membership, gone; the dream of independence, gone; and democracy dead to me, all in the space of 24 hours.
Wednesday, January 29, 2020
Doctor Who I'd Rather Watch
I'm not entirely sure what to make of Sunday's episode of "Doctor Who". I think the root cause of my dissatisfaction is that I managed to be exposed to all the big spoilers ahead of time, which meant that I was mostly waiting to see the big event, and not really caring about the rest.
As an episode, it was actually quite clever - the reveal of the buried TARDIS intercut with the memory reset was very well handled; the idea that the Judoon were following a fugitive who turned out not only to not be the obvious candidate, but instead someone really unexpected was genuinely clever; and the dropping of so many tantalising mysteries was positively delicious.
But...
I mentioned once before that my big problem with "Star Trek: Discovery" is that while what we have is fine, it opens by showing us something I'd almost certainly prefer to watch instead. Much the same is true here, but moreso: I'm now really not a fan of the current incarnation of the Doctor, so when presented with an alternative with a commanding presence (rather than that of a befuddled supply teacher), and unburdened by the drag factor of three Companions I really don't rate... yeah, I'd much rather watch that.
(Incidentally, the internet gave the impression that Jo Martin's performance was somehow transcendent in the episode. It wasn't. She was absolutely fine, but I'll file under "Doctors with Potential" for now.)
My other issues with the episode were three-fold. Firstly, I thought the B-plot with Captain Jack and the Companions was a waste of time. Basically, it existed to get a message to the Doctor (beware the lone Cyberman), but framed it in a whole lot of gurning and bad dialogue. Sorry, not a fan.
Secondly, there were the Judoon. They're a cool concept, and have a really nice visual design, but they've just never really grabbed me. I'm inclined to think that they really need more time to develop some sort of personality, and perhaps more fully embrace the bounty hunter side to their presentation (rather than "trigger happy cops for hire"). But using them as the hired muscle for the real bad guys is a very good idea.
But thirdly, and mostly: so much bloody talking. Again, we have a scene that should have had actual tension, this time with a literal countdown, and when it expires we don't see everything spring into exciting action!... we instead get another pointless round of talking. GET ON WITH IT!
(I did feel a little sorry for Thirteen later in the episode when she kept being told to be quiet by the others... but only a little. Frankly, this whole incarnation could do with a lot less talking.)
So...
All in all, I think it was an okay episode - not quite as good as last week or the series opener, but better than the middle two weeks.
But a huge amount depends on the resolution to the various mysteries... and most importantly the big one.
There are big spoilers from here on out. If you don't want to know, skip to the last paragraph.
So, the big mystery is that "Ruth" turned out to be a new incarnation of the Doctor. Further, the assertion is that she must be a past incarnation, and yet Thirteen has no memory of her. What can that mean?
Well, canonically there is, just barely, space for a new incarnation - in "Time of the Doctor" Eleven noted that Ten had used an extra regeneration but kept his face... but it's always possible that he was just wrong. So maybe the spare hand doesn't count, and that gives one more.
But when? It seems to me there are three possibilities: apparently, there's a tiny window between Two and Three since we don't actually see the transition. Alternately, we don't quite see the War Doctor turn into Nine either (Ecclestone said "no", and Moffat felt they therefore couldn't quite show him). So there's a gap there.
But there's a third possibility: we know from "Day of the Doctor" that he can, apparently, revisit old faces. So maybe Doctor Ruth was spawned off any of the previous incarnations, did her stuff, and then returned to the old form. My preferred candidate would by Eight - after all, he does look markedly different between his two appearances. (Of course, that difference can also be explained in four words: "I got a haircut"!)
However, there's one other possibility that should not be discounted: maybe she's the next incarnation, and is lying about not remembering being Thirteen for... reasons. Indeed, maybe we'll see her backstory unfold in flashback over the next five/fifteen episodes, culminating in a double regeneration - Thirteen regenerates to Doctor Ruth, while Doctor Ruth regenerates into Fourteen. Or something.
The one explanation I won't accept is that she actually fits in before the First Doctor. Canon is mutable, but it should be treated with respect.
And here's the rub: if this had come out during the heady days of the Tenth or Eleventh incarnations, my response to it all would be very different. After the end of the first season of the restart, RTD had built up a very significant amount of goodwill, and I was therefore willing to take an awful lot on faith. Likewise the first few years of Moffat's tenure. But much of that faded during the Capaldi years, which I really didn't enjoy so much, and has now been expended almost entirely by the previous few years. So I'll wait and see what the answers are, but I'm not going to just take it on faith that Chibnall is going to pull it off.
So that's where we are. For the first time in a long time, I find myself eager to see the next episode, or more likely episodes. "Doctor Who" had, frankly, become a chore, and this changes that... somewhat. I just wish I was looking forward to the next episode more in hope, and less in fear at what they might do.
#4: "Mythos", by Stephen Fry
#5: "The Red Tent", by Anita Diamant (a book from The List)
Incidentally, both of these are very good reads, and highly recommended. Neither is quite a candidate for book of the year.
As an episode, it was actually quite clever - the reveal of the buried TARDIS intercut with the memory reset was very well handled; the idea that the Judoon were following a fugitive who turned out not only to not be the obvious candidate, but instead someone really unexpected was genuinely clever; and the dropping of so many tantalising mysteries was positively delicious.
But...
I mentioned once before that my big problem with "Star Trek: Discovery" is that while what we have is fine, it opens by showing us something I'd almost certainly prefer to watch instead. Much the same is true here, but moreso: I'm now really not a fan of the current incarnation of the Doctor, so when presented with an alternative with a commanding presence (rather than that of a befuddled supply teacher), and unburdened by the drag factor of three Companions I really don't rate... yeah, I'd much rather watch that.
(Incidentally, the internet gave the impression that Jo Martin's performance was somehow transcendent in the episode. It wasn't. She was absolutely fine, but I'll file under "Doctors with Potential" for now.)
My other issues with the episode were three-fold. Firstly, I thought the B-plot with Captain Jack and the Companions was a waste of time. Basically, it existed to get a message to the Doctor (beware the lone Cyberman), but framed it in a whole lot of gurning and bad dialogue. Sorry, not a fan.
Secondly, there were the Judoon. They're a cool concept, and have a really nice visual design, but they've just never really grabbed me. I'm inclined to think that they really need more time to develop some sort of personality, and perhaps more fully embrace the bounty hunter side to their presentation (rather than "trigger happy cops for hire"). But using them as the hired muscle for the real bad guys is a very good idea.
But thirdly, and mostly: so much bloody talking. Again, we have a scene that should have had actual tension, this time with a literal countdown, and when it expires we don't see everything spring into exciting action!... we instead get another pointless round of talking. GET ON WITH IT!
(I did feel a little sorry for Thirteen later in the episode when she kept being told to be quiet by the others... but only a little. Frankly, this whole incarnation could do with a lot less talking.)
So...
All in all, I think it was an okay episode - not quite as good as last week or the series opener, but better than the middle two weeks.
But a huge amount depends on the resolution to the various mysteries... and most importantly the big one.
There are big spoilers from here on out. If you don't want to know, skip to the last paragraph.
So, the big mystery is that "Ruth" turned out to be a new incarnation of the Doctor. Further, the assertion is that she must be a past incarnation, and yet Thirteen has no memory of her. What can that mean?
Well, canonically there is, just barely, space for a new incarnation - in "Time of the Doctor" Eleven noted that Ten had used an extra regeneration but kept his face... but it's always possible that he was just wrong. So maybe the spare hand doesn't count, and that gives one more.
But when? It seems to me there are three possibilities: apparently, there's a tiny window between Two and Three since we don't actually see the transition. Alternately, we don't quite see the War Doctor turn into Nine either (Ecclestone said "no", and Moffat felt they therefore couldn't quite show him). So there's a gap there.
But there's a third possibility: we know from "Day of the Doctor" that he can, apparently, revisit old faces. So maybe Doctor Ruth was spawned off any of the previous incarnations, did her stuff, and then returned to the old form. My preferred candidate would by Eight - after all, he does look markedly different between his two appearances. (Of course, that difference can also be explained in four words: "I got a haircut"!)
However, there's one other possibility that should not be discounted: maybe she's the next incarnation, and is lying about not remembering being Thirteen for... reasons. Indeed, maybe we'll see her backstory unfold in flashback over the next five/fifteen episodes, culminating in a double regeneration - Thirteen regenerates to Doctor Ruth, while Doctor Ruth regenerates into Fourteen. Or something.
The one explanation I won't accept is that she actually fits in before the First Doctor. Canon is mutable, but it should be treated with respect.
And here's the rub: if this had come out during the heady days of the Tenth or Eleventh incarnations, my response to it all would be very different. After the end of the first season of the restart, RTD had built up a very significant amount of goodwill, and I was therefore willing to take an awful lot on faith. Likewise the first few years of Moffat's tenure. But much of that faded during the Capaldi years, which I really didn't enjoy so much, and has now been expended almost entirely by the previous few years. So I'll wait and see what the answers are, but I'm not going to just take it on faith that Chibnall is going to pull it off.
So that's where we are. For the first time in a long time, I find myself eager to see the next episode, or more likely episodes. "Doctor Who" had, frankly, become a chore, and this changes that... somewhat. I just wish I was looking forward to the next episode more in hope, and less in fear at what they might do.
#4: "Mythos", by Stephen Fry
#5: "The Red Tent", by Anita Diamant (a book from The List)
Incidentally, both of these are very good reads, and highly recommended. Neither is quite a candidate for book of the year.
Wednesday, January 15, 2020
Experimental Cookery 2020: Sausage & Bean Supper
Another one from "One Pot Wonders", this was a vast improvement over last week's failure. And it was ridiculously easy, too - combine several things in a roasting tin, bake for a while, mix the rest in a bowl and then pour over the tin, and then bake again.
The only thing I will change next time is to reduce the amount of squash included. And that was a result of reducing the recipe from 4 people to 2-and-a-bit, coupled with not really having a use for the other half. Oh, and one more thing I guess: this takes 50 minutes to bake, so it's not really one for a Tuesday evening.
But it was a success, and another option to add to the repertiore, which is always nice.
The only thing I will change next time is to reduce the amount of squash included. And that was a result of reducing the recipe from 4 people to 2-and-a-bit, coupled with not really having a use for the other half. Oh, and one more thing I guess: this takes 50 minutes to bake, so it's not really one for a Tuesday evening.
But it was a success, and another option to add to the repertiore, which is always nice.
Tuesday, January 14, 2020
Experimental Cookery 2020: Classic Turkey Burgers
This one comes from "The Handcrafted Burger", which is a book LC bought me for my birthday last year and which I've never quite managed to use until now. My previous effort at turkey burgers is one of my major cookery disasters, so I was somewhat apprehensive about these, but also hopeful that they'd turn out better.
The short answer is: they did. These were simple and easy to put together, although I remained a little apprehensive about the amount of moisture in the burgers. But they cooked up really well. At least these ones looked like turkey burgers!
Taste-wise, they were pretty good. I think in future I'll want to reduce the amount of lemon juice significantly, as they was by far the dominant flavour, but otherwise I have no complaints. And I'll certainly be having these again. (That said, I don't think these are ones to batch prepare, as in the case of the beef, lamb, or venison burgers we have. I'll see when we cook up the spares, but my gut feeling is that these are best prepared and eaten right away.)
And that's that. I'm actually in a bit of a vein of new meals - there will be another Experimental Cookery tonight, so expect another update soon. Hopefully, I'll find something else to blog about before too long.
#3: "The Next Person You Meet in Heaven", by Mitch Albom (an early contender for Book of the Year, though my feeling is that if this is the peak then it probably means 2020 is not a banner year for reading. It was really good, but not that good.)
The short answer is: they did. These were simple and easy to put together, although I remained a little apprehensive about the amount of moisture in the burgers. But they cooked up really well. At least these ones looked like turkey burgers!
Taste-wise, they were pretty good. I think in future I'll want to reduce the amount of lemon juice significantly, as they was by far the dominant flavour, but otherwise I have no complaints. And I'll certainly be having these again. (That said, I don't think these are ones to batch prepare, as in the case of the beef, lamb, or venison burgers we have. I'll see when we cook up the spares, but my gut feeling is that these are best prepared and eaten right away.)
And that's that. I'm actually in a bit of a vein of new meals - there will be another Experimental Cookery tonight, so expect another update soon. Hopefully, I'll find something else to blog about before too long.
#3: "The Next Person You Meet in Heaven", by Mitch Albom (an early contender for Book of the Year, though my feeling is that if this is the peak then it probably means 2020 is not a banner year for reading. It was really good, but not that good.)
Thursday, January 09, 2020
Experimental Cookery 2020: Spiced Sausage Gnocchi with(out) Warm Kale & Bean Salad
Following hot on the heels of the Macaroni Cheese comes the second Experimental Cookery of the year. This one comes from Jamie's "15 Minute Meals", and indeed took close to the fifteen minutes. Though I only really did half of it - rather than serving the warm kale and bean salad I instead served with just some peas, beans, and mangetout.
This was a nice, pleasant meal to produce, and was very tasty. Despite producing considerably more than we really needed, LC and I ate almost all of it, which is always a good sign. (Funsize rejected it completely - she seems to be going through a phase of refusing any and all food I cook for her. Though it turns out I hadn't actually intended to give her this at all - my food planner recommended chicken instead.)
The only minor adjustment I would make to this would be to slightly reduce the amount of fennel, which is rather strong taste that I'd be inclined to tone down. Otherwise, we'll no doubt be having this again - I was well pleased with the result.
#2: "Dragon of Icespire Peak", from Wizards of the Coast
This was a nice, pleasant meal to produce, and was very tasty. Despite producing considerably more than we really needed, LC and I ate almost all of it, which is always a good sign. (Funsize rejected it completely - she seems to be going through a phase of refusing any and all food I cook for her. Though it turns out I hadn't actually intended to give her this at all - my food planner recommended chicken instead.)
The only minor adjustment I would make to this would be to slightly reduce the amount of fennel, which is rather strong taste that I'd be inclined to tone down. Otherwise, we'll no doubt be having this again - I was well pleased with the result.
#2: "Dragon of Icespire Peak", from Wizards of the Coast
Wednesday, January 08, 2020
Experimental Cookery 2020: Macaroni Cheese
For Christmas I received a copy of the Hairy Bikers' "One Pot Wonders", and so yesterday's meal was the first foray into this book.
On the positive side, this was pretty quick and very easy to put together, and it was certainly a boon having only a single pot to wash up afterwards (even though I didn't do that washing up, I should note).
Unfortunately, the results were not ideal. We found that the meal was surprisingly bland. We also found that the quantities were off - as far as I could tell, they used about twice as much pasta as the meal really should have had. This meant we were left with a fairly large amount of not-very-tasty pasta that is going to end up in the food waste bin, which isn't great.
I do think I could probably adjust this one for better results, by reducing the amount of pasta, and adjusting both the quanitities and type(s) of cheese. However, I'm not sure I'll bother - we prefer Lorraine's method and that's not too much effort, so maybe we'll just stick with that. We'll see - convenience does certainly have it's advantages...
On the positive side, this was pretty quick and very easy to put together, and it was certainly a boon having only a single pot to wash up afterwards (even though I didn't do that washing up, I should note).
Unfortunately, the results were not ideal. We found that the meal was surprisingly bland. We also found that the quantities were off - as far as I could tell, they used about twice as much pasta as the meal really should have had. This meant we were left with a fairly large amount of not-very-tasty pasta that is going to end up in the food waste bin, which isn't great.
I do think I could probably adjust this one for better results, by reducing the amount of pasta, and adjusting both the quanitities and type(s) of cheese. However, I'm not sure I'll bother - we prefer Lorraine's method and that's not too much effort, so maybe we'll just stick with that. We'll see - convenience does certainly have it's advantages...
Tuesday, January 07, 2020
The Next Labour Leader
I'll keep this short because I'm really not paying much attention to the Labour leadership contest. The reason for that is that I believe it genuinely doesn't matter who they pick: they're not choosing our next Prime Minister here. The successful candidate won't be the next Tony Blair, or even the next John Smith; if they're lucky, they'll be the next Neil Kinnock - the person who loses the next several elections but does eventually lay the foundations for future success.
The next Labour Prime Minister is somebody we haven't heard of yet, and quite possibly someone who hasn't entered Parliament yet.
The next Labour Prime Minister is somebody we haven't heard of yet, and quite possibly someone who hasn't entered Parliament yet.
Monday, January 06, 2020
Theme of the Month: Fitness
It's unlikely that I'll have a theme for every month this year, and there's a good chance that I may repeat a few. However, for the month of January, I'm very definitely setting a theme, and that is fitness. This is motivated by my repeated failures to lose any significant weight over the last several years, coupled with not really getting started on the fitness programmes I've had set up at the gym. Still, we'll need to see how it goes - simply setting a theme doesn't actually mean it's done.
I've made something of a start on the theme this afternoon, with my first trip to the gym of the year. It went okay, but wasn't spectacular - there will be a fairly long period of building up the routines until they cover all of the programmes I was given. But that's fine.
But there's more to fitness than just going to the gym. Another part of it will be fixing my diet, which has been excessive for too long. (That starts tomorrow; due to a family birthday it doesn't make much sense to start today.) And then there are other aspects of fitness: mental, emotional, psychological. Not to mention a more general fitness in my lifestyle - a general tune-up of finances, another round of decluttering, and so forth.
So it's going to be a busy few weeks. But a worthwhile one, I think.
#1: "Lethal White", by Robert Galbraith (J.K. Rowling)
I've made something of a start on the theme this afternoon, with my first trip to the gym of the year. It went okay, but wasn't spectacular - there will be a fairly long period of building up the routines until they cover all of the programmes I was given. But that's fine.
But there's more to fitness than just going to the gym. Another part of it will be fixing my diet, which has been excessive for too long. (That starts tomorrow; due to a family birthday it doesn't make much sense to start today.) And then there are other aspects of fitness: mental, emotional, psychological. Not to mention a more general fitness in my lifestyle - a general tune-up of finances, another round of decluttering, and so forth.
So it's going to be a busy few weeks. But a worthwhile one, I think.
#1: "Lethal White", by Robert Galbraith (J.K. Rowling)
Wednesday, January 01, 2020
Books of the Year 2019
As part of the end-of-year round-up, I can once again present a list of books read in the past year.
Here is the list:
The book of the year goes to "The Falcon of Sparta", by Conn Iggulden, which I enjoyed from start to finish. The most disappointing book of the year, by a long way, was "Not Wanted on the Voyage".
And that's that. As discussed previously, the goal for 2020 is once again to read 60 books. I'm not setting any sublists, as pretty much all the series I've been following have now come to a stop - there may be the occasional new volume in some, but not enough for a full sublist.
Here is the list:
- "Dark Sun Campaign Setting", by Richard Baker, Robert J. Schwalb, and Rodney Thompson
- "802.11 Wireless Networks: The Definitive Guide", by Matthew S. Gast
- "Version Control with Git", by Jon Loeliger & Matthew McCullogh
- "The Business", by Iain Banks
- "Book of Swords, Part I", edited by Gardner Dozois
- "Game Angry: How to RPG the Angry Way", by Scott Rehm
- "Creature Codex", by Kobold Press
- "Pathfinder: Rise of New Thassilon", by Greg A. Vaughan
- "Dead Air", by Iain Banks
- "100 Classic Stories", by Miles Kelly **
- "Pathfinder: The Dead Roads", by Ron Lundeen
- "Book of Swords, Part II", edited by Gardner Dozois
- "The Skaar Invasion", by Terry Brooks
- "The Steep Approach to Garbadale", by Iain Banks
- "The Magician's Nephew", by C.S. Lewis * **
- "Pathfinder: Eulogy for Roslar's Coffer", by Jason Keeley
- "Darien: Empire of Salt", by C.F. Iggulden
- "Forever and a Day", by Anthony Horowitz
- "Anna Karenina", by Leo Tolstoy *
- "Transition", by Iain Banks
- "The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe", by C.S. Lewis * **
- "Doctor Who: Wit, Wisdom and Timey-Wimey Stuff", by Cavan Scott and Mark Wright
- "Pathfinder: Last Watch", by Larry Wilhelm
- "Book of Spells, Part I", edited by Gardner Dozois
- "Dark Sun Creature Catalogue", by Richard Baker and Bruce R. Cordell
- "Marauders of the Dune Sea", by Bruce R. Cordell
- "Pathfinder: Gardens of Gallowspire", by Crystal Frasier
- "The Horse and His Boy", by C.S. Lewis * **
- "The Crow Road", by Iain Banks
- "Morgrave Miscellany", by Keith Baker and Ruty Rutenberg
- "In the Skin of a Lion", by Michael Ondaatje *
- "Moon Over Soho", by Ben Aaronovitch
- "Pathfinder: Borne by the Sun's Grace", by Luis Loza
- "Book of Spells, Part II", edited by Gardner Dozois
- "William Shakespeare's Star Wars: Jedi the Last", by Ian Doescher
- "Clan of the Cave Bear", by Jean M. Auel *
- "Colonel Sun", by Kingsley Amis
- "Prince Caspian" by C.S. Lewis * **
- "The Falcon of Sparta", by Conn Iggulden
- "Pathfinder: Midwives to Death", by John Compton
- "The Secret Life of Bees", by Sue Monk Kidd *
- "Pathfinder: The Emerald Spire Superdungeon", from Paizo Publishing
- "The Verdant Passage", by Troy Denning
- "The Voyage of the Dawn Treader", by C.S. Lewis * **
- "A Legacy of Spies", by John Le Carré
- "The Crimson Legion", by Troy Denning
- "War of the Wolf", by Bernard Cornwell
- "The Silver Chair", by C.S. Lewis * **
- "The Amber Enchantress", by Troy Denning
- "The Last Battle", by C.S. Lewis * **
- "Nightflyers", by George R.R. Martin
- "Babe, the Sheep-Pig", by Dick King-Smith **
- "Not Wanted on the Voyage", by Timothy Findley *
- "The Mystery of the Three Quarters", by Sophie Hannah
- "The Obsidian Oracle", by Troy Denning
- "Children of God Storybook Bible", by Archbishop Desmond Tutu **
- "The Cerulean Storm", by Tory Denning
- "Fantasy Mapmaker", by Jared Blando
- "Shiang", by C.F. Iggulden
- "The Bourne Identity", by Robert Ludlum *
The book of the year goes to "The Falcon of Sparta", by Conn Iggulden, which I enjoyed from start to finish. The most disappointing book of the year, by a long way, was "Not Wanted on the Voyage".
And that's that. As discussed previously, the goal for 2020 is once again to read 60 books. I'm not setting any sublists, as pretty much all the series I've been following have now come to a stop - there may be the occasional new volume in some, but not enough for a full sublist.
Tuesday, December 31, 2019
My Year in 2019
As we get to the end of 2019, I find myself not quite sure what to make of it. It has felt like a bit of an "in between" year - 2018 saw some big beginnings and endings, and we know that there are further big transitions coming, probably in 2020, but 2019 seemed mostly to be about anticipation. It's been an odd one.
Anyway, time for the traditional round-up...
My Year in... Blogging
In 2019 I formalised my sort-of goals from 2017 and 2018, and set myself a target of posting 120 times here and 60 times on the Imaginarium. I achieved that, so am fairly happy with it. However, I did find at times I was posting mostly for the sake of building a post count - the topics could perhaps have been a bit more inspired.
My Year in... Work
2019 had a really rocky start, to the extent that I seriously considered quitting several times in February. However, I eventually got to grips with my new project and the new technology (well, new to me), and was able to start making some significant impact, to the extent that the year has ended exceptionally well, and the year overall counts as a major success.
Which, if you had told me in February, I would not have believed, but am very glad of.
My Year in... Health
There has been no change here, so that's good.
My Year in... Gaming
Sadly, 2019 has been a let down on the gaming front. The work game continues apace, which is quite nice, and just enough to keep me in touch with the hobby, but it really doesn't scratch the itch. I can't see any prospect of 2020 being any better, for various reasons, but I'm inclined to consider 2021 to be a crucial year - if I don't get some 'real' gaming in by then it's probably time to consider that hobby ended.
My Year in... Band
This has been fine, but somewhat uninspiring. It does what I need it to do, but it doesn't do anything more than that.
My Year in... Resolutions
As always, the wrap-up of annual goals, and setting of goals for next year, are handled in another post.
My Year in... Travel
Unusually, we started this year in another country, celebrating Mum's birthday in France. We then added a second trip to France, for a week in the summer. That was nice, especially seeing Funsize spending time with her cousins.
My other ventures abroad were with work - a day trip to Amsterdam and back and a two-day trip to Copenhagen.
As a family, we took a few days holiday in Banff, and then made another trip to England - we spent a few days in Alnwick, just in time for it to get flooded, and then travelled further south for a belated 40th birthday party.
The major thing I wanted in most of 2019 was to avoid getting on a plane - 2018 had been crazy, and the start of 2019 was likewise quite busy, so I was keen not to go too far. But the last few months have given me a little cabin fever, so I'm keen to venture further afield at some point in 2020. Mostly, I want to see the sun!
My Year in... Faith
There's very little to report here. We've continued to settle in our new church. I had to turn down an opportunity to join one of the committees, as I felt I just didn't have the time. Funsize continues to be made extremely welcome.
I do find myself a little concerned about the numbers in the congregation, which seem to have dropped recently, and also about youth work, which is a permanent problem for much of the Church of Scotland. Though it is a fairly academic concern, since I really don't have the means to actually do anything to change it.
My Year in... Sadness
When Grandad passed in 2018, there was a glimmer of hope that this might give Grandma a hint of more life - so much of her life had been bound up in the care of his last days, so there was a hope it might be a burden lifted. Sadly, it was not to be, and Grandma fairly quickly went downhill quite steeply. That has been difficult to watch, even from afar, with no prospect of meaningful improvement.
My Year... Overall
As I said, this has felt very much like an "in between" year. We've moved forward from the big changes of 2018, but we also know that there are further big changes to come, so we've been kind of stuck. 2020 looks like it will probably be the year when those various changes actually come about, and so I expect it to be another very busy year. But, hopefully, it will be a good one.
As always, this will be my final post on this blog for the year, so I'll take the opportunity now to wish anyone still reading a very Happy New Year when it comes. Thanks for sticking with me!
Anyway, time for the traditional round-up...
My Year in... Blogging
In 2019 I formalised my sort-of goals from 2017 and 2018, and set myself a target of posting 120 times here and 60 times on the Imaginarium. I achieved that, so am fairly happy with it. However, I did find at times I was posting mostly for the sake of building a post count - the topics could perhaps have been a bit more inspired.
My Year in... Work
2019 had a really rocky start, to the extent that I seriously considered quitting several times in February. However, I eventually got to grips with my new project and the new technology (well, new to me), and was able to start making some significant impact, to the extent that the year has ended exceptionally well, and the year overall counts as a major success.
Which, if you had told me in February, I would not have believed, but am very glad of.
My Year in... Health
There has been no change here, so that's good.
My Year in... Gaming
Sadly, 2019 has been a let down on the gaming front. The work game continues apace, which is quite nice, and just enough to keep me in touch with the hobby, but it really doesn't scratch the itch. I can't see any prospect of 2020 being any better, for various reasons, but I'm inclined to consider 2021 to be a crucial year - if I don't get some 'real' gaming in by then it's probably time to consider that hobby ended.
My Year in... Band
This has been fine, but somewhat uninspiring. It does what I need it to do, but it doesn't do anything more than that.
My Year in... Resolutions
As always, the wrap-up of annual goals, and setting of goals for next year, are handled in another post.
My Year in... Travel
Unusually, we started this year in another country, celebrating Mum's birthday in France. We then added a second trip to France, for a week in the summer. That was nice, especially seeing Funsize spending time with her cousins.
My other ventures abroad were with work - a day trip to Amsterdam and back and a two-day trip to Copenhagen.
As a family, we took a few days holiday in Banff, and then made another trip to England - we spent a few days in Alnwick, just in time for it to get flooded, and then travelled further south for a belated 40th birthday party.
The major thing I wanted in most of 2019 was to avoid getting on a plane - 2018 had been crazy, and the start of 2019 was likewise quite busy, so I was keen not to go too far. But the last few months have given me a little cabin fever, so I'm keen to venture further afield at some point in 2020. Mostly, I want to see the sun!
My Year in... Faith
There's very little to report here. We've continued to settle in our new church. I had to turn down an opportunity to join one of the committees, as I felt I just didn't have the time. Funsize continues to be made extremely welcome.
I do find myself a little concerned about the numbers in the congregation, which seem to have dropped recently, and also about youth work, which is a permanent problem for much of the Church of Scotland. Though it is a fairly academic concern, since I really don't have the means to actually do anything to change it.
My Year in... Sadness
When Grandad passed in 2018, there was a glimmer of hope that this might give Grandma a hint of more life - so much of her life had been bound up in the care of his last days, so there was a hope it might be a burden lifted. Sadly, it was not to be, and Grandma fairly quickly went downhill quite steeply. That has been difficult to watch, even from afar, with no prospect of meaningful improvement.
My Year... Overall
As I said, this has felt very much like an "in between" year. We've moved forward from the big changes of 2018, but we also know that there are further big changes to come, so we've been kind of stuck. 2020 looks like it will probably be the year when those various changes actually come about, and so I expect it to be another very busy year. But, hopefully, it will be a good one.
As always, this will be my final post on this blog for the year, so I'll take the opportunity now to wish anyone still reading a very Happy New Year when it comes. Thanks for sticking with me!
End of Year Update on Goals
At the end of last year I set myself four goals. This was then complemented with a To Do List that in time became, effectively, a fifth goal. As we near the end of the year, then, how did those shape up?
- Books: I completed book 60 with three days to spare, and have read 13 books from The List this year. However, many of those 13 are re-reads, and I did not complete the British part of The List as I had intended. That's a mixed fortune, but I'm not too despondent about it - The List now contains 33 unread entries, 4 from the British side, 31 from the American (and 2 on both).
- Weight: This is failed, but... I'm now set up with a fairly aggressive schedule at the gym, so I'm hopeful of getting this moving in the new year. Maybe - I've been saying that for years.
- Blogging: This is a clear success - I completed 60 posts exactly on The Imaginarium, and passed my target here with a little to spare.
- Redecorate the Study: This was completed in October. I would quite like to get a new curtain for the room, but it's not urgent - we never close it anyway, so it would be purely decorative. A second clear success!
- The To-Do List: This was likewise completed. Further, I reached a point where I didn't really have any major tasks to add, never mind several in order to warrant a list. So that was good.
- Books: The goal for 2020 is the traditional 60 books for the year. I'm not going to set myself a specific goal as regards The List, though where I find myself without a clear next choice I'll prioritize those books over others. I'm also not going to be setting up sublists for this year, as I've basically run out of ideas on that front.
- Weight: Again, the goal is the same - to end the year 20 pounds lighter than I started.
- Blogging: And, again, the goal is the same: 120 posts here, plus 60 on The Imaginarium.
- Work: This is the goal I can't talk about.
Monday, December 30, 2019
Experimental Cookery 2019: Roast Dinner Soup
For reasons of family drama (long story), I was compelled to cook a roast beef dinner last night. Naturally, there was too much, and therefore there was a significant quantity of leftovers. Fortunately, I've picked up Hugh's "Love Your Leftovers" book, which provided the source for today's lunch.
This was quick and easy - basically, put everything into a pot, cover with stock, and simmer for a bit. I actually added yet more stuff, effectively making it a "whatever's in the fridge" soup, which was fine.
The soup was okay - a good way to use stuff up, without necessarily being something I'd generate leftovers specifically so I can have it again. Though it did suffer the indignity of a double rejection - Funsize first refused the roast beef yesterday, and then the soup today. I'm also making a noodly beef lunch tomorrow, and so running the risk of the dreaded triple rejection...
And that's that. This will, of course, be the final Experimental Cookery of 2019. I hope it was worth it!
This was quick and easy - basically, put everything into a pot, cover with stock, and simmer for a bit. I actually added yet more stuff, effectively making it a "whatever's in the fridge" soup, which was fine.
The soup was okay - a good way to use stuff up, without necessarily being something I'd generate leftovers specifically so I can have it again. Though it did suffer the indignity of a double rejection - Funsize first refused the roast beef yesterday, and then the soup today. I'm also making a noodly beef lunch tomorrow, and so running the risk of the dreaded triple rejection...
And that's that. This will, of course, be the final Experimental Cookery of 2019. I hope it was worth it!
Sunday, December 29, 2019
The Rise of Skywalker
LC and I saw this on Friday. Given that it has been out of a week, I'll keep this short. There are no spoilers below.
I thought this was a good film, easily the best of the sequel trilogy. By my count it is therefore the fifth best "Star Wars" film, after the original trilogy and then "Rogue One". Though it is a long way behind "Rogue One", largely because it only works in the context of the previous two, and they serve as a significant drag factor on this film.
I felt that the various decisions that were made in this film were about the best they could be, given the constraints they had to work with - Carrie Fisher's death meant that her role had to be built using pre-recorded material taken out of context, while "The Last Jedi" had left a real mess for this one to clear up.
And that's the big problem both with this film and with the sequel trilogy as a whole: they set up several mysteries in "The Force Awakens" but didn't plan out the trilogy with all the answers. This left the team who wrote "The Last Jedi" with free rein to take all of those mysteries and just chuck them in the bin... and left "The Rise of Skywalker" to pick up the pieces. Maybe they should instead have decided on the answers beforehand?
(Actually, there's no 'maybe' about that. They absolutely should have worked out the answers before they wrote word one of "The Force Awakens". Doing that would have allowed them to actually foreshadow the revelations: "Luke's just not a farmer Owen. He has too much of his father in him," "That's what I'm afraid of.")
But that's spilled milk, and "The Rise of Skywalker" does its very best to clear it up. And it mostly does a good job. A decent end to the trilogy, and a decent end to the saga. And, much like "The Force Awakens" and "Rogue One" before it, a film that leaves me keen to get back into some version of the "Star Wars" RPG, which is another win in my book.
I thought this was a good film, easily the best of the sequel trilogy. By my count it is therefore the fifth best "Star Wars" film, after the original trilogy and then "Rogue One". Though it is a long way behind "Rogue One", largely because it only works in the context of the previous two, and they serve as a significant drag factor on this film.
I felt that the various decisions that were made in this film were about the best they could be, given the constraints they had to work with - Carrie Fisher's death meant that her role had to be built using pre-recorded material taken out of context, while "The Last Jedi" had left a real mess for this one to clear up.
And that's the big problem both with this film and with the sequel trilogy as a whole: they set up several mysteries in "The Force Awakens" but didn't plan out the trilogy with all the answers. This left the team who wrote "The Last Jedi" with free rein to take all of those mysteries and just chuck them in the bin... and left "The Rise of Skywalker" to pick up the pieces. Maybe they should instead have decided on the answers beforehand?
(Actually, there's no 'maybe' about that. They absolutely should have worked out the answers before they wrote word one of "The Force Awakens". Doing that would have allowed them to actually foreshadow the revelations: "Luke's just not a farmer Owen. He has too much of his father in him," "That's what I'm afraid of.")
But that's spilled milk, and "The Rise of Skywalker" does its very best to clear it up. And it mostly does a good job. A decent end to the trilogy, and a decent end to the saga. And, much like "The Force Awakens" and "Rogue One" before it, a film that leaves me keen to get back into some version of the "Star Wars" RPG, which is another win in my book.
A Winterval Dirge
The BBC's "A Christmas Carol" starts with a scene of a young man pissing on a grave. This is entirely appropriate, as it then spends three hours pissing all over a classic.
The second most infuriating thing about this abomination is that it is genuinely well made - the cast are excellent and play their parts well, the staging is very good, and the effects are well done. They've actually done what they set out to do very well.
And the most infuriating thing about it is that the concept is actually sound. This was sold to me as a spooky retelling of "A Christmas Carol", which is entirely appropriate - "A Christmas Carol" was the culmination of an old tradition of telling ghost stories at Christmas, and it was only as a result of that story that the new tradition of the Christmas story (and later the Christmas movie) came about. So doing a retelling focussing on the terror invoked by the ghosts is a really good idea.
But the problem is that this isn't a retelling of "A Christmas Carol", or even an adaptation of the novella, any more than was the "Doctor Who" episode of the same name - yes, there are characters in all the same places, and the archetypes are more or less present, but none of those characters are the ones taken from the novella, the plot is mangled beyond recognition, and the theme is utterly different.
Digging into some specifics, the heart of the story, and the heart of the problems of this mini-series, is Scrooge. The problem here is that they've ramped up his evil enormously, which I'm sure seemed a good idea at the time. But the material isn't actually served by making Scrooge a monster. Dickens made him a skinflint, but not much different from the businessmen and moneylenders of his day, and for good reason - the more recognisable he is to being one of us, the more powerful he is. Make him a monster, and he's not one of us, and then there's nothing we can learn from his story; make him one of us, and the lesson for him becomes a lesson for us.
Worse, not only is Scrooge a monster, he's also an imbecile. In the worst section of the mini-series, he decides to strip Mrs Cratchitt of her dignity and her agency, humiliating her in return for money for a life-saving operation for her son. He talks, at tedious length, about seeking to find some sort of "moral exchange rate" - how much money is her dignity worth? But the stupidity here is that she told him why she was doing what she was doing, and it was that that set the rate - her price was £30 because that was the cost of the operation; if the operation had been £50 the price would have been higher, or for £20 it would have been lower. So we have a deeply offensive scene built on the assumption that Scrooge is an idiot.
(And, worse, the show had already established that Scrooge understood circumstantial motivations very well, in the scene where he and Marely engaged in a bit of disaster capitalism with the mill owner. So it's not even consistent in its idiocy.)
Mentioning that scene of course brings up another big problem with the mini-series - its handling of women. There are already precious few female characters of note in "A Christmas Carol". Therefore, the mini-series of course decided to drop one. This then leaves us two: one who is dead to begin with, and Mrs Cratchitt. Yay!
Actually, I have no real objection to the handling of Scrooge's sister, either as his rescuer or as the Ghost of Christmas Present. Yes, the bit with the gun was utter nonsense, but it was a tiny flaw on an otherwise disastrous work, so I'll let it slide.
But the handling of Mrs Cratchitt was a disgrace. Not only for the stripping of her dignity and agency that I've already mentioned, but then her declaration that as a woman she could summon spirits for revenge. Because, of course, all women are witches.
Then, finally, we come to the end. "A Christmas Carol" is, of course, hugely sentimental - Scrooge is redeemed through grace, and is immediately and obviously restored back into right company.
But this is a story crafted by secularists for a post-Christian age. Which means there can be no grace, and since there was nothing done to earn it there can be no redemption. And that in turn means there can be no hope - Scrooge remains a pariah to all, with his promises to make things right being treated with nothing but scorn.
(And it's worse than that. Scrooge promises to close down his business, but what isn't mentioned is that large numbers of people depend on that business for their homes and their employment. In the best case things will be sold on as going concerns, to other businessmen who are marginally better. In the worst case, he's just made hundreds of people unemployed and/or homeless. Merry Christmas! What he should have done was keep the business going but actually made the investments he'd avoided - making his apartments safe and comfortable and charging fair rents; making his businesses safe as well as profitable, and paying fair wages. As it stands, the moral of this story is that making money is evil, and we should all live in hovels, cold and starving. Ho ho ho!)
So that's that. For the second time this year, the BBC have been roundly outclassed by a silly musical, this time by a literal bunch of Muppets. (The other was "Les Mis".) And with this they bring to an end a truly awful year in the history of the Corporation. For the first time, I'm really finding it hard to justify the license fee - "Still Game" is finished, "Doctor Who" has been poor at best for two years now, and their adaptations of classic works have fallen flat. Yes, they produce some good dramas, but this is the golden age of TV, so there are plenty of others who do that. Worse than that, their news is not to be trusted, they've had a truly disastrous election, and their political editor is awful (although, damningly, a marked improvement over her predecessor). And so I find myself hard pressed to answer the question: why am I forced to pay for the BBC as a condition for watching any TV?
#60: "The Bourne Identity", by Robert Ludlum (a book from The List)
The second most infuriating thing about this abomination is that it is genuinely well made - the cast are excellent and play their parts well, the staging is very good, and the effects are well done. They've actually done what they set out to do very well.
And the most infuriating thing about it is that the concept is actually sound. This was sold to me as a spooky retelling of "A Christmas Carol", which is entirely appropriate - "A Christmas Carol" was the culmination of an old tradition of telling ghost stories at Christmas, and it was only as a result of that story that the new tradition of the Christmas story (and later the Christmas movie) came about. So doing a retelling focussing on the terror invoked by the ghosts is a really good idea.
But the problem is that this isn't a retelling of "A Christmas Carol", or even an adaptation of the novella, any more than was the "Doctor Who" episode of the same name - yes, there are characters in all the same places, and the archetypes are more or less present, but none of those characters are the ones taken from the novella, the plot is mangled beyond recognition, and the theme is utterly different.
Digging into some specifics, the heart of the story, and the heart of the problems of this mini-series, is Scrooge. The problem here is that they've ramped up his evil enormously, which I'm sure seemed a good idea at the time. But the material isn't actually served by making Scrooge a monster. Dickens made him a skinflint, but not much different from the businessmen and moneylenders of his day, and for good reason - the more recognisable he is to being one of us, the more powerful he is. Make him a monster, and he's not one of us, and then there's nothing we can learn from his story; make him one of us, and the lesson for him becomes a lesson for us.
Worse, not only is Scrooge a monster, he's also an imbecile. In the worst section of the mini-series, he decides to strip Mrs Cratchitt of her dignity and her agency, humiliating her in return for money for a life-saving operation for her son. He talks, at tedious length, about seeking to find some sort of "moral exchange rate" - how much money is her dignity worth? But the stupidity here is that she told him why she was doing what she was doing, and it was that that set the rate - her price was £30 because that was the cost of the operation; if the operation had been £50 the price would have been higher, or for £20 it would have been lower. So we have a deeply offensive scene built on the assumption that Scrooge is an idiot.
(And, worse, the show had already established that Scrooge understood circumstantial motivations very well, in the scene where he and Marely engaged in a bit of disaster capitalism with the mill owner. So it's not even consistent in its idiocy.)
Mentioning that scene of course brings up another big problem with the mini-series - its handling of women. There are already precious few female characters of note in "A Christmas Carol". Therefore, the mini-series of course decided to drop one. This then leaves us two: one who is dead to begin with, and Mrs Cratchitt. Yay!
Actually, I have no real objection to the handling of Scrooge's sister, either as his rescuer or as the Ghost of Christmas Present. Yes, the bit with the gun was utter nonsense, but it was a tiny flaw on an otherwise disastrous work, so I'll let it slide.
But the handling of Mrs Cratchitt was a disgrace. Not only for the stripping of her dignity and agency that I've already mentioned, but then her declaration that as a woman she could summon spirits for revenge. Because, of course, all women are witches.
Then, finally, we come to the end. "A Christmas Carol" is, of course, hugely sentimental - Scrooge is redeemed through grace, and is immediately and obviously restored back into right company.
But this is a story crafted by secularists for a post-Christian age. Which means there can be no grace, and since there was nothing done to earn it there can be no redemption. And that in turn means there can be no hope - Scrooge remains a pariah to all, with his promises to make things right being treated with nothing but scorn.
(And it's worse than that. Scrooge promises to close down his business, but what isn't mentioned is that large numbers of people depend on that business for their homes and their employment. In the best case things will be sold on as going concerns, to other businessmen who are marginally better. In the worst case, he's just made hundreds of people unemployed and/or homeless. Merry Christmas! What he should have done was keep the business going but actually made the investments he'd avoided - making his apartments safe and comfortable and charging fair rents; making his businesses safe as well as profitable, and paying fair wages. As it stands, the moral of this story is that making money is evil, and we should all live in hovels, cold and starving. Ho ho ho!)
So that's that. For the second time this year, the BBC have been roundly outclassed by a silly musical, this time by a literal bunch of Muppets. (The other was "Les Mis".) And with this they bring to an end a truly awful year in the history of the Corporation. For the first time, I'm really finding it hard to justify the license fee - "Still Game" is finished, "Doctor Who" has been poor at best for two years now, and their adaptations of classic works have fallen flat. Yes, they produce some good dramas, but this is the golden age of TV, so there are plenty of others who do that. Worse than that, their news is not to be trusted, they've had a truly disastrous election, and their political editor is awful (although, damningly, a marked improvement over her predecessor). And so I find myself hard pressed to answer the question: why am I forced to pay for the BBC as a condition for watching any TV?
#60: "The Bourne Identity", by Robert Ludlum (a book from The List)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)