The gallery for next Saturday's oddball episode is now up at the BBC site. RTD is back on writing duties and pictured is Peter Kay as Victor Kennedy.
I'm a bit scared about this one and not in the usual way ...
Tuesday, 13 June 2006
Doctor Who - "Love & Monsters" gallery up
The gallery for next Saturday's oddball episode is now up at the BBC site. RTD is back on writing duties and pictured is Peter Kay as Victor Kennedy.
I'm a bit scared about this one and not in the usual way ...
Nationalism v Pluralism
It's a while since I made a post that wasn't groin induced or "Doctor Who" related so forgive the culture-shock ... normal service will be restored later.
Anyway this is an intellectual itch I have to scratch as it will only get worse in the coming weeks. I nearly posted on Doctor Vee's blog on a related subject last week (my firewall disallowed me then). But it's not just the World Cup related shite/hype- it began with Gordon Brown's absurd 'Britishness' speech at the beginning of the year, and I say that as a reluctant unionist (I do wish there was another word for that). Also hovering in the same vague orbit have been the issues over choosing a national anthem for Scotland, the recent crass HMS Illustrious stunt and warnings from Scottish tourism chiefs that anti-English feelings are losing us cross-border trade. You'll have to bear in mind I am not a tribal sort and even when I am it's so laidback it's almost flat-out so all the rest of my post is in that context. I'm a live and let live, agree to differ type. There seems to be a festering quest for national identity, attached to empty symbolism, surely only pointing up some communal insecurity. The issue with the anthem is a good starting point here - why this repeated aching for one ? So that one more thing can be obliged of us, whichever one of the diverse options wins out. I for one would sit in stone-faced defiance if "Flower of Scotland" got the nod (if asked my vote is for "A Man's a Man for A That"). And that's just it - tribalism demands totems with which to beat people, and yet civil society is ever more diverse and pluralistic. We won't all conform by default any more, and equally that's why ludicrous ideas like 'Britishness' are doomed to fail - who's the more 'British' - a Muslim in Shetland, a drag queen in Swansea, a Salford scally or a Marxist in Derry? Would even these four people agree on a definition. I doubt it. Even Scottishness is dubious given my example - Shetland is so very far removed in spirit from say Fife, whatever your religion. And I live in Fife (though born in Perth) so am I a Fifer? A 'central Scot'? Who can say? Again though, tribalism demands labels and conformity. It's not something I'm comfy with, even the 'gay' label doesn't really say much about me (as my earlier post on a BBC3 documentary proved). The fact I post links to gay porn here would actually tell you more without me even using the word. But that's semantics really.
Some churchy types have lately tried to use the word relativism in a perjorative way (much as the American right use 'Liberal' as a slur) as the shrinking world - in communications terms - continues to underline that no one faith, philosophy or sneaky means of propogating them is going to be 'win out' any more. It's a shame the nationalists haven't quite realised the parallel yet - notably the boorish nationalists in the blunt ends of our press. The media should be in a position to defuse, but so often further inflame or trample our sensibilities. "The Sun" is a textbook example, not just for obvious reasons but for the fact it slyly produces different print editions but is stuck with just one website (it's the one with the flag of St George plastered on it). Hence us clever Scots can witness the unlovely spectacle of the two-headed hack beast as the Scottish print edition rails at the very English jingo-ism so carefully egged on by the website.
So where am I on this? Which team am I supporting? I'm not. If I have the misfortune to be have to watch a whole 90 minutes of this World Cup tedium (highly unlikely short of hospitalisation) I'll support the team with the best looking players, which is only logical and appropriate for me if rather too relative for most people (I do think they should play in just jockstraps, socks and boots - it would widen the appeal greatly and I'd tape every match).
But I have another view on the bigger arguement ie asking 'what team are you supporting' in the first place. That's the actual problem, not what anyone answers. No-one should be obliged to answer, judged on the 'right or wrong' answer, or blame the respondant for any resulting controversy - it's the questioner's responsibility for asking. Politicians would be the exception to that rule of course. My favourite response so far was from author Ian Rankin when asked by the Sunday Times Scotland as one of a panel of 'sleb Scots: “I have no views on the World Cup. I’ll be watching Big Brother instead.” And good on the paper for printing it rather than ignoring what is actually a valid and widely held view both sides of the suddenly iron border. My stance comes from 3 layers of niggle, which covers my deep disdain for both 'nationalist camps'. Firstly it's assumed by advertisers and the media that I'm interested in the first place (I'm not). Then the general UK thrust is that I'm supporting England (I'm not), followed by the general Scottish thrust which is because I'm Scottish even if I'm not interested I'm supporting anybody but England (I'm not). Of course it's also generally assumed that the last of these is directly caused by the combo of the first two. Having lived in England myself (admittedly in cosmopolitan London) and having noted the behaviours of other ex-pats like Ken Bruce and Carole Kirkwood the lazy tendency to think everything is the way it is in your own locale is the failing ie weather spells, school terms. Note 'locale' not country - it may only be a radius of 30 miles. Maybe it's a form of 'going native', but it's incompetent rather than malicious and happens equally in Glasgow or Edinburgh with things like slang or bank holidays. Basically they know not what they do - everyone around them hasn't picked them up on it either. Plus there is probably an over-prevalance of partial football fans in postions of power in the media, so they get all fired up with their peers and the failing goes to ludicrous extremes. Witness BBC News 24 covering the England team merely arriving at the airport for their flight out with all the minutae and reverance of a state occassion. Again this happens in Scotland most of the time, rather than for special tournaments - note the ring-fenced 'sports' (read football) bulletin on 'Reporting Scotland' even when there's nothing actually happening . The Scots certainly are over-sensitive - no-one would have a problem with Saltire-flying in the Home Counties even now - the same cannot be contemplated in the reverse situation and that shows us up. Both should be able to fly their own flag if they want to (though I think it's generally exhibitionist and juvenile). I can't understand why you'd fly another flag than your own or have to be privately patriotic in another country. Not everyone in Scotland is Scottish just as not everyone in England is English. Deal with it. Thankfully we're not yet quite as silly as the Americans are about our flags.
Both the monomania being broadcast from England and the schadenfruede so ingrained in Scotland piss me off. And actually the latter pisses me off more, partly because it makes me ashamed to be Scottish and partly because it is premeditated and malicious in many cases. Sure it's not racist not to positively support England, but to randomly back whatever opponent going is borderline. A particular instance that incensed me in so many ways happened during Euro 2000. Our local 10 screen cinema megaplex had just opened in Dunfermline. On their opening weekend, England were playing their 'Auld Enemy', Germany, in the tournament. Pandering to tabloid sensibilities, he cinema bosses decided they'd give free entry (or half-price or similar) to anyone turning up on the day wearing a German strip. Remember this was a CINEMA on it's OPENING WEEKEND. It was as daft as it was offensive - the cinema was the most likely sanctuary for non-football fans and some of them may well have been English - not the best move for customer relations. Unusually, I was luminous with rage and had I had the money and retail knowledge I was going to turn up in an England strip and see what happened then. Fortunately I was not the only complainant and by the actual day they lamely decided to extend the offer to anyone wearing any football strip - still completely irrelevant to their core business but a climbdown all the same. They've never tried any such 'cunning stunt' again. The recent warnings from the tourist industry chime with this experience. Football-phobic people in England may be desperately looking for a sanctuary too.
On the other hand, had I been part of the HMS Illustrious crew obliged to take part in the 'England Expects' stunt I would have been equally mutinous. That was outrageous and irrelevant, more so from an employer striving to celebrate diversity. That went against all principles of respecting diversity for the sake of a cheap tabloid photo-oppportunity.
But these noxious phenomena are hopefully on the wane. Recently inept campaigns such as Mars have also found to their cost that you can't push all our consumer buttons at once because we're not all the same and you better remember that. I'm boycotting all World Cup related brands for the duration of their sponsor campaigns for that reason. Not because I'm anti-English, but because I'm anti-football.
It's not just that I'm being ignored as a Scot, it's because I'm being ignored as being 'not effing bothered' as well as upset with being branded somehow unpatriotic by always hoping Scotland never gets anywhere near a World Cup. You would guess correctly that 1994 was my favourite World Cup where no British team qualified - oh bliss! That way there's less sport on TV and less of the tartan hype that surrounds it here. Again this is a completely logical line to take for me. Oh and maybe we shouldn't have national teams so that politicians can't wrap themselves in the 'right' flag as has happened this year, and can only end in tears. They can split them internationally by zodiac sign perhaps - that way no-one's going to risk assuming allegiances.
Lastly I think I've found a pub in Dunfermline without a TV so anyone like-minded nearby can feel free to ask me for the whereabouts.
Anyway this is an intellectual itch I have to scratch as it will only get worse in the coming weeks. I nearly posted on Doctor Vee's blog on a related subject last week (my firewall disallowed me then). But it's not just the World Cup related shite/hype- it began with Gordon Brown's absurd 'Britishness' speech at the beginning of the year, and I say that as a reluctant unionist (I do wish there was another word for that). Also hovering in the same vague orbit have been the issues over choosing a national anthem for Scotland, the recent crass HMS Illustrious stunt and warnings from Scottish tourism chiefs that anti-English feelings are losing us cross-border trade. You'll have to bear in mind I am not a tribal sort and even when I am it's so laidback it's almost flat-out so all the rest of my post is in that context. I'm a live and let live, agree to differ type. There seems to be a festering quest for national identity, attached to empty symbolism, surely only pointing up some communal insecurity. The issue with the anthem is a good starting point here - why this repeated aching for one ? So that one more thing can be obliged of us, whichever one of the diverse options wins out. I for one would sit in stone-faced defiance if "Flower of Scotland" got the nod (if asked my vote is for "A Man's a Man for A That"). And that's just it - tribalism demands totems with which to beat people, and yet civil society is ever more diverse and pluralistic. We won't all conform by default any more, and equally that's why ludicrous ideas like 'Britishness' are doomed to fail - who's the more 'British' - a Muslim in Shetland, a drag queen in Swansea, a Salford scally or a Marxist in Derry? Would even these four people agree on a definition. I doubt it. Even Scottishness is dubious given my example - Shetland is so very far removed in spirit from say Fife, whatever your religion. And I live in Fife (though born in Perth) so am I a Fifer? A 'central Scot'? Who can say? Again though, tribalism demands labels and conformity. It's not something I'm comfy with, even the 'gay' label doesn't really say much about me (as my earlier post on a BBC3 documentary proved). The fact I post links to gay porn here would actually tell you more without me even using the word. But that's semantics really.
Some churchy types have lately tried to use the word relativism in a perjorative way (much as the American right use 'Liberal' as a slur) as the shrinking world - in communications terms - continues to underline that no one faith, philosophy or sneaky means of propogating them is going to be 'win out' any more. It's a shame the nationalists haven't quite realised the parallel yet - notably the boorish nationalists in the blunt ends of our press. The media should be in a position to defuse, but so often further inflame or trample our sensibilities. "The Sun" is a textbook example, not just for obvious reasons but for the fact it slyly produces different print editions but is stuck with just one website (it's the one with the flag of St George plastered on it). Hence us clever Scots can witness the unlovely spectacle of the two-headed hack beast as the Scottish print edition rails at the very English jingo-ism so carefully egged on by the website.
So where am I on this? Which team am I supporting? I'm not. If I have the misfortune to be have to watch a whole 90 minutes of this World Cup tedium (highly unlikely short of hospitalisation) I'll support the team with the best looking players, which is only logical and appropriate for me if rather too relative for most people (I do think they should play in just jockstraps, socks and boots - it would widen the appeal greatly and I'd tape every match).
But I have another view on the bigger arguement ie asking 'what team are you supporting' in the first place. That's the actual problem, not what anyone answers. No-one should be obliged to answer, judged on the 'right or wrong' answer, or blame the respondant for any resulting controversy - it's the questioner's responsibility for asking. Politicians would be the exception to that rule of course. My favourite response so far was from author Ian Rankin when asked by the Sunday Times Scotland as one of a panel of 'sleb Scots: “I have no views on the World Cup. I’ll be watching Big Brother instead.” And good on the paper for printing it rather than ignoring what is actually a valid and widely held view both sides of the suddenly iron border. My stance comes from 3 layers of niggle, which covers my deep disdain for both 'nationalist camps'. Firstly it's assumed by advertisers and the media that I'm interested in the first place (I'm not). Then the general UK thrust is that I'm supporting England (I'm not), followed by the general Scottish thrust which is because I'm Scottish even if I'm not interested I'm supporting anybody but England (I'm not). Of course it's also generally assumed that the last of these is directly caused by the combo of the first two. Having lived in England myself (admittedly in cosmopolitan London) and having noted the behaviours of other ex-pats like Ken Bruce and Carole Kirkwood the lazy tendency to think everything is the way it is in your own locale is the failing ie weather spells, school terms. Note 'locale' not country - it may only be a radius of 30 miles. Maybe it's a form of 'going native', but it's incompetent rather than malicious and happens equally in Glasgow or Edinburgh with things like slang or bank holidays. Basically they know not what they do - everyone around them hasn't picked them up on it either. Plus there is probably an over-prevalance of partial football fans in postions of power in the media, so they get all fired up with their peers and the failing goes to ludicrous extremes. Witness BBC News 24 covering the England team merely arriving at the airport for their flight out with all the minutae and reverance of a state occassion. Again this happens in Scotland most of the time, rather than for special tournaments - note the ring-fenced 'sports' (read football) bulletin on 'Reporting Scotland' even when there's nothing actually happening . The Scots certainly are over-sensitive - no-one would have a problem with Saltire-flying in the Home Counties even now - the same cannot be contemplated in the reverse situation and that shows us up. Both should be able to fly their own flag if they want to (though I think it's generally exhibitionist and juvenile). I can't understand why you'd fly another flag than your own or have to be privately patriotic in another country. Not everyone in Scotland is Scottish just as not everyone in England is English. Deal with it. Thankfully we're not yet quite as silly as the Americans are about our flags.
Both the monomania being broadcast from England and the schadenfruede so ingrained in Scotland piss me off. And actually the latter pisses me off more, partly because it makes me ashamed to be Scottish and partly because it is premeditated and malicious in many cases. Sure it's not racist not to positively support England, but to randomly back whatever opponent going is borderline. A particular instance that incensed me in so many ways happened during Euro 2000. Our local 10 screen cinema megaplex had just opened in Dunfermline. On their opening weekend, England were playing their 'Auld Enemy', Germany, in the tournament. Pandering to tabloid sensibilities, he cinema bosses decided they'd give free entry (or half-price or similar) to anyone turning up on the day wearing a German strip. Remember this was a CINEMA on it's OPENING WEEKEND. It was as daft as it was offensive - the cinema was the most likely sanctuary for non-football fans and some of them may well have been English - not the best move for customer relations. Unusually, I was luminous with rage and had I had the money and retail knowledge I was going to turn up in an England strip and see what happened then. Fortunately I was not the only complainant and by the actual day they lamely decided to extend the offer to anyone wearing any football strip - still completely irrelevant to their core business but a climbdown all the same. They've never tried any such 'cunning stunt' again. The recent warnings from the tourist industry chime with this experience. Football-phobic people in England may be desperately looking for a sanctuary too.
On the other hand, had I been part of the HMS Illustrious crew obliged to take part in the 'England Expects' stunt I would have been equally mutinous. That was outrageous and irrelevant, more so from an employer striving to celebrate diversity. That went against all principles of respecting diversity for the sake of a cheap tabloid photo-oppportunity.
But these noxious phenomena are hopefully on the wane. Recently inept campaigns such as Mars have also found to their cost that you can't push all our consumer buttons at once because we're not all the same and you better remember that. I'm boycotting all World Cup related brands for the duration of their sponsor campaigns for that reason. Not because I'm anti-English, but because I'm anti-football.
It's not just that I'm being ignored as a Scot, it's because I'm being ignored as being 'not effing bothered' as well as upset with being branded somehow unpatriotic by always hoping Scotland never gets anywhere near a World Cup. You would guess correctly that 1994 was my favourite World Cup where no British team qualified - oh bliss! That way there's less sport on TV and less of the tartan hype that surrounds it here. Again this is a completely logical line to take for me. Oh and maybe we shouldn't have national teams so that politicians can't wrap themselves in the 'right' flag as has happened this year, and can only end in tears. They can split them internationally by zodiac sign perhaps - that way no-one's going to risk assuming allegiances.
Lastly I think I've found a pub in Dunfermline without a TV so anyone like-minded nearby can feel free to ask me for the whereabouts.
Attitude - Danny Dyer scans
Here are the pics I promised - they were a bit of a bugger to scan and a not to much variety of shots to chose from. Frankly I think AXM won the battle this month as the Dyer interview is the best thing in it (an example of why reported here) and when your other 'star names' are Alan Carr and Dannii Minogue I'm reaching for the sick bucket.Scans fron AXM to follow.
Sunday, 11 June 2006
Doctor Who - The Impossible Planet/The Satan Pit 9/10
Hmmm - not quite the 10 I was hoping to give. The second episode of the 2-parter veered off somewhat in another direction, and was a little baffling at times. Both parts had more than the normal quota of psychology going on - which worked on some occassions but went over my head at other times (maybe I need that second watch tonight).
Certainly it was much darker than the rest of the new series, and there were few quips on offer. My main gripe having seen the whole story was that many things were not developed or explained fully, but this is a failing of the new series generally. I would have liked more on the Ood - perhaps they can be brought back at some point. They made an entrance as a faux terror thanks to a communication failure, but once possessed by the beast they were only there to run from or despatch. I'm sure I was not the only one to feel a twinge of regret when the Doctor informed what was left of the Sanctuary base crew that the Ood had all died on the planet.What made the lack of background more stark was the teasing lines the Beast used to describe all the characters - how did Toby manage to remain a virgin and just what did Jefferson do to his wife? I also felt there was scope for a secret or two about the Doctor himself.
Satan was the star of the show, whether embodied by Will Thorp as the doomed Toby or by the giant CGI horned beast - this was mainly down to the voice of Gabriel Woolf, whose tones scare the crap out of me every time. Probably the creepiest two scenes were in "The Impossible Planet' - first where the Beast initially makes himself known to Toby, then later when a possessed Toby kills Scooti. These were probably some of the scariest moments in the whole canon in fact. Less scary as such but equally memorable was Rose's radical despatch of Toby on the rocket (ironically much the same way as Scooti, sucked into space after Rose blasts the windows and undoes his seat-belt). 
Rose again showed herself here to be resourceful and heroic, with or without the Doctor. The Doctor meanwhile spends much of the time in an orange spacesuit, which must be difficult to emote in. But the way he so casually bumps into the previously lost TARDIS in the pit was a bit too convenient, as was it's traction properties.The pace of the story was incredibly fast, always having you on the edge of your seat and packing in lots of action and dialogue. Murray Gold's score matched wonderfully too. So, because of the gripes, only a 9 - but it's a flawed classic all the same.
Thursday, 8 June 2006
Wednesday, 7 June 2006
Doctor Who - Satan
The "Daily Record" printed this pic of Satan from Saturday's conclusion to the current 2-parter. I don't regard this as a spoiler as he was already seen fleetingly in episode 1 (if you were paying attention).
Though CGI, he looks rather marvellous.
Tuesday, 6 June 2006
Saturday, 3 June 2006
Doctor Who - The Impossible Planet
Oh my god! (in joke)
It's another two parter (second of three this series) so I'm with-holding my full review again but I'm very positive so far. It got me right back to some of the studio bound Hinchcliffe era especially "Planet of Evil" and "Robots of Death" and we even have the voice of Sutekh as the voice of a very similar 'beast'. If anything this added the sophistication of "Alien' to the mix as well. And I already think the Ood are one of the most gloriosly un-lovely creations since the Zygons, plus Will Thorp is a horny devil ... so to speak.
Attitude v AXM, June 2006
It's a hard call with who's got the goods this month. Cover stars are Danny Dyer and Nicholas Hoult (both recently of this parish) and I'll be posting more pics from each set soon ...
Friday, 2 June 2006
Doctor Who - "The Idiot's Lantern" 9/10
Apologies for my delay with this one - I've been 'distracted' this week.
As someone who was disappointed by Mark Gatiss' effort last year (more for the Doctor's involvement, or rather lack of it) I was ready to give a second chance. This was more like it!
Although the main plot was fairly run-of-the-mill it was all done splendidly - Euros Lyn has well deserved the prize of directing this year's Christmas special. The guest cast, notably Maureen Lipman's literally contained cameo as 'The Wire', Ron Cook as the tortured Mr Magpie and Rory Jennings as 'stand-in companion' (for an indisposed Rose) Tommy Connolly completely delivered.
Perhaps surprisingly the gratuitous inferences about Tommy's inclinations did annoy me a bit but he looked sweet enough to eat (don't worry he's actually 23). Jamie Foreman as bullying dad Mr Connolly was a bit one-note for me though.The 50s designs were excellent, especially Mr Magpie's TV shop and the street party recreation, even if it looked just a mite too multiracial for Muswell Hill 1953. The fate of those who'd been fed on by 'The Wire', which included Rose, was a simple but creepy blank face.
Before her zapping, Rose is in fine form.
Her relish of duping Mr Connolly as she and the Doctor masquerade as Her Majesty's Inspectors was refreshing, reminiscent of Doctor 4 and Romana 2. I also liked her part in getting a reluctant Tommy to chase after his departing Dad - a sentiment which has personal parallels for Rose. The Doctor is again required to quickfire gags about Kylie one minute and seethe with rage the next. Unlike many, I like this volatile aspect of this Doctor and Tennant's competence at performing it.
Not scripted, but I also liked the irony of Maureen Lipman's part actually being filmed at Ally Pally while the Ally Pally-set finale on the transmitter aerial was done somewhere in Wales. Both these elements were hugely convincing.
So it's a 9 from me again.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
LinkWithin
