Hello peoples. This is a post about music. Music is a things that is similar to sound except more tolerable than listening to others around you talk about their lives. This list is a little bit more butchered than I would have liked and a few artists who made some amazing Pop music this year (Kelis, Alphabeat, Joe Worricker and Sky Ferreira, I'm sorry) were just squeezed off the list. Yes, I am also aware it's November but I doubt the new Westlife album or Susan Boyle's spoken word edition of 'The Very Hungry West-Lothian Caterpillar' will shake anything out of place when they're released.
11. Kate Nash - Paris
Probably the best thing on her sophomore album 'My Best Friend Is You'. Shame her choice of singles was a little odd to say the least. Kudos to her though for not simply writing another albums worth of 'Mariella' and 'Foundations'. She was also supported on tour by the hilarious and amazing Brigitte Aphrodite who's 'Dance With A Stranger' EP is worth your attention.
10. Fiona Apple, the Punch Brothers and Jon Brion - So Sleepy
This is some sort of charity thing where established artists sing the songs of young upstarts. Well done young upstarts. Fiona is back in earnest early next year.
9. Avi Buffalo - What's It In For?
This song and this band are so hopelessly cool you should feel utterly inadequate to click the play button. They're so laid back that they have no concept of acts so contrived as clicking.
8. Sia - Never Gonna Leave Me
Sia's 'We are Born' is one of the best albums of the year. This is a fact. All you may have seen of it is the cover art on the adverts for that absurd new iPod nano. 'Never Gonna Leave Me' is vaguely reminiscent of Motown girl groups if they were a bit more bisexual, Australian and had a rocket shoved up their arse.
7. Tunng - Hustle
One of those songs that sounds really happy but is about something utterly awful. I mean not 'Jenny, Again' awful but still not very nice. Thank you very much to my mate Paul for dragging me to see them live. Yes their female vocalist really is that short.
6. Evelyn Evelyn - Elephant Elephant
Amanda Palmer is doing a side project eh? She's going to become a faux-Victorian circus conjoined twin act with another singer/songwriter? What could possibly go wrong? Result: Possibly the catchiest little ditty in ages and a live show that has to be seen to be believed.
5. I Blame Coco feat. Robyn - Caesar
Angry. Pulsating. Masochistic. And it has Robyn in it. Brilliant.
4. Hurts - Wonderful Life
A hyped band who are actually as good as people say they are. 'Wonderful Life' sounds like exactly the kind of stuff you'd expect Tears for Fears to be doing in 2010 if they were,... um.. Mancunian and mates with Kylie Minogue.
3. Joanna Newsom - Good Intentions Paving Company
I've still probably not listened to all of Joanna's TRIPLE album 'Have One on Me'. There's 3 discs and her average track length would make James Cameron impatient. Still, this is likely the best thing on it.
2. Manic Street Preachers feat. Ian McCulloch - Some Kind of Nothingness
Every time the Manics seem to be about to drop of the radar of popular culture, they do something utterly brilliant. Last time it was a return to Holy Bible melodrama, this time it's their new, bigger, busier take on Stadium rock. And there's a lot of gospel choirs. In an awesome way, not in the X Factor way. Actually, I bloody love an X Factor gospel choir.
1. Robyn - Dancing On My Own
A heart, covered in glitter and blood, being trod on in the depths of a club. Robyn effortlessly mixes personal tragedy and a banging tune so well, you'd have to stop dancing for five seconds just to deal with how epic the emotion behind the rhythm is. A career high.
Sunday 7 November 2010
Saturday 30 October 2010
Suggestions to Improve Question Time
All hail the mighty Dimblebot ( seriously, check out @dimblebot)
I love Question Time (BBC1, Thursdays, 10:35pm). It's an institution. Like the Queen's speech. Or a mental hospital.
The problem with Question Time, is it's a little entrenched in itself. A few party politicians will come out with varying levels of eloquence. Some very good (Caroline Flint, Ed Davey, William Hague), some very bad (Tessa Jowell, Susan Kramer, David Willetts) and some so unabashedly in love with the party line they seem to lack individual personality or capability past that of a Dictaphone (Baroness Warsi, Sarah Teather and far too many Labour ministers for my liking). There might be a token comedy historian, such as Starkey with his odd facial expression like Doc Brown witnessing a newt molesting the delicate earlobes of Prince Charles, a random celebrity who will almost always be useless (Will Young's 'Leave Right Now' became increasingly appropriate over his hour on air, and some 'professional' who has 'insight' and by 'insight' we mean 'is usually an arrogant bellend'.
This cycle continues with varied levels of blandness and is only usually offset by a truly barmy panelist going off on one. A good example of this is the Apprentice's resident mare, Katie Hopkins, then standing as an independent MEP, going all Tea-Party and calling for elitist, free-market higher education. The Lib Dem on the panel, if I remember rightly, was horrified. How shit changes. One could also mention Nigel Farage, a man who, if he was any more sure of himself, would have to go around dressed as a textbook or Mary Beard who seemed to be channeling a Hogwarts divination professor.
So what can be done to 'mix it up' and make politics all exciting for the kiddies? Here are a few of my suggestions but feel free to leave your own.
1. Based on twitter reactions to the debate, halfway through the show, the least popular panelist is taken to stand in the middle of the studio. David Dimbleby then pours a bucket of slime over their head. Everyone returns to their seats and the show continues as normal.
2. Conservatives and Liberal Democrats have to share seats, OR, their seats are taped back to back so only one can speak at a time. They must then fight for dominance.
3. Background dancers. Everyone loves them on the X Factor.
4. When David calls on audience members he should use vicious personal attacks. No more 'You there, in the purple sweater!' and a bit more 'You there, with the hideous acne and last season's River Island cardigan behind the woman with the bad 80's perm!'
5. One edition every year to take place in an aquarium, so even if the debate is dull we can still comment on the marine life in the background. Magnificent.
6. If the show falls on Halloween, or the 13th of any given month, Paxman gets to host it.
7. If tuition fees are going to be brought up over and over, maybe get a Student representative on the panel for a bloody change! (Yes, that one was actually serious. I'm shocked too.)
Anyhoo, those are some ramblings. I am off to go do useful things like... read up on European Law. Because I hate myself.
The problem with Question Time, is it's a little entrenched in itself. A few party politicians will come out with varying levels of eloquence. Some very good (Caroline Flint, Ed Davey, William Hague), some very bad (Tessa Jowell, Susan Kramer, David Willetts) and some so unabashedly in love with the party line they seem to lack individual personality or capability past that of a Dictaphone (Baroness Warsi, Sarah Teather and far too many Labour ministers for my liking). There might be a token comedy historian, such as Starkey with his odd facial expression like Doc Brown witnessing a newt molesting the delicate earlobes of Prince Charles, a random celebrity who will almost always be useless (Will Young's 'Leave Right Now' became increasingly appropriate over his hour on air, and some 'professional' who has 'insight' and by 'insight' we mean 'is usually an arrogant bellend'.
This cycle continues with varied levels of blandness and is only usually offset by a truly barmy panelist going off on one. A good example of this is the Apprentice's resident mare, Katie Hopkins, then standing as an independent MEP, going all Tea-Party and calling for elitist, free-market higher education. The Lib Dem on the panel, if I remember rightly, was horrified. How shit changes. One could also mention Nigel Farage, a man who, if he was any more sure of himself, would have to go around dressed as a textbook or Mary Beard who seemed to be channeling a Hogwarts divination professor.
So what can be done to 'mix it up' and make politics all exciting for the kiddies? Here are a few of my suggestions but feel free to leave your own.
1. Based on twitter reactions to the debate, halfway through the show, the least popular panelist is taken to stand in the middle of the studio. David Dimbleby then pours a bucket of slime over their head. Everyone returns to their seats and the show continues as normal.
2. Conservatives and Liberal Democrats have to share seats, OR, their seats are taped back to back so only one can speak at a time. They must then fight for dominance.
3. Background dancers. Everyone loves them on the X Factor.
4. When David calls on audience members he should use vicious personal attacks. No more 'You there, in the purple sweater!' and a bit more 'You there, with the hideous acne and last season's River Island cardigan behind the woman with the bad 80's perm!'
5. One edition every year to take place in an aquarium, so even if the debate is dull we can still comment on the marine life in the background. Magnificent.
6. If the show falls on Halloween, or the 13th of any given month, Paxman gets to host it.
7. If tuition fees are going to be brought up over and over, maybe get a Student representative on the panel for a bloody change! (Yes, that one was actually serious. I'm shocked too.)
Anyhoo, those are some ramblings. I am off to go do useful things like... read up on European Law. Because I hate myself.
Monday 25 October 2010
10 Minutes in Heaven?
WELCOME TO HELL, my name is Monica and I'll be invading your personal space whilst pulling increasingly off-putting faces
I love Masterchef: The Professionals more than all its other incarnations (except for Australia) aside. This woman is why. Despite resembling Halle Berry's much homelier sister, inside her beats the heart of a true sociopath.
Monica rules over the first 10 minutes of any given episode with her 'skills test'. A 10 minute challenge of technique before a chef is even allowed on the same continent as Michele Roux Jr, let alone to cook for him. These challenges used to be sort of.... reasonable. Fillet a small fish and cook a bit of it. Butcher a chicken and make a mayo. Then they went ever so slightly bizarre as Monica demanded 10 minute souffle and for entire pastry concoctions to be presented to her. For spatchcocked chickens, for tempura ortolan, for entire salmons to be pureed into an ice cream and for someone to make a leprechaun jus.
The challenge itself is the least of the contestants' worries. Whilst they try to retain their dignity Monica starts gurning and she never really stops. This woman redefines the reaction shot with all the grace of a barn owl with electrodes attached to its nethers. Wide eyed, head tilted and utterly bemused.
It still isn't over for the poor contestants. Oh no, the poor bastards still have to have their 10-minute slow-cooked shoulder of lamb tasted and judged. Whilst lovely Greg tries to be reassuring and talks about flavour, Monica has invented a whole new scale for culinary judgment: how close she would allow any given dish to get to Michele Roux Jr.
Examples may include:
'I would show that to Michele but not let him eat it.'
'I would never show that to Michele unless forced to by some demonic order.'
'I would allow Michele to gaze upon your dish from afar with binoculars and to smell it.'
'I have made a restraining order for your cooking against the proximity of Michele.'
'If Michele was on holiday in a different continent, I would allow him to become aware of the existence of your dish'.
In summary. This woman is a genius. Or evil embodied. The jury is still out.
Monica rules over the first 10 minutes of any given episode with her 'skills test'. A 10 minute challenge of technique before a chef is even allowed on the same continent as Michele Roux Jr, let alone to cook for him. These challenges used to be sort of.... reasonable. Fillet a small fish and cook a bit of it. Butcher a chicken and make a mayo. Then they went ever so slightly bizarre as Monica demanded 10 minute souffle and for entire pastry concoctions to be presented to her. For spatchcocked chickens, for tempura ortolan, for entire salmons to be pureed into an ice cream and for someone to make a leprechaun jus.
The challenge itself is the least of the contestants' worries. Whilst they try to retain their dignity Monica starts gurning and she never really stops. This woman redefines the reaction shot with all the grace of a barn owl with electrodes attached to its nethers. Wide eyed, head tilted and utterly bemused.
It still isn't over for the poor contestants. Oh no, the poor bastards still have to have their 10-minute slow-cooked shoulder of lamb tasted and judged. Whilst lovely Greg tries to be reassuring and talks about flavour, Monica has invented a whole new scale for culinary judgment: how close she would allow any given dish to get to Michele Roux Jr.
Examples may include:
'I would show that to Michele but not let him eat it.'
'I would never show that to Michele unless forced to by some demonic order.'
'I would allow Michele to gaze upon your dish from afar with binoculars and to smell it.'
'I have made a restraining order for your cooking against the proximity of Michele.'
'If Michele was on holiday in a different continent, I would allow him to become aware of the existence of your dish'.
In summary. This woman is a genius. Or evil embodied. The jury is still out.
Next week, Nick Clegg will be a flying monkey
You may cut our hospitals, our schools, our councils and our charities. You can take benefits from the needy, put education out of the reach of thousands and gut the industry that forms the core of our communities. But know this, you will never take the sky from us.
Oh shit.
Oh shit.
Sunday 24 October 2010
In defence of Katie Waissel and some other peons
I hate 'controversial' TV talent show contestants. They rarely live up to their end of the bargain and the reason they are usually such 'hate figures' is because of utterly nonsensical tabloid campaigning and often bizarre levels of sexism. Case in point:
Katie 'totally bloody evil' Waissel
Breathy voiced chanteuse Katie has been much maligned for her, vicious, evil ambition which is currently set at 'pop' but may well be adjusted to 'wipe out Senegal in a nuclear holocaust' at a moment's notice. Oh, don't get on the wrong side of this one... she'll rip your spleen out, force-feed it to Louis Walsh and sexually assault the nearest budgerigar. Hell, the Daily Mail even published an article claiming she may in fact be of a satanic origin.
Katie's crimes seem to be the following:
Let's now look at this man.
Matt has also been in a band. His band have released material. He has painted and decorated things. He is a 'lad' and seemingly the under-seasoned love-spawn of James Morrison, Jamie Oliver and a dog whistle. He is as ambitious as Katie but not slagged off. This could be because he likes to wear a hat on his head and not a colander. Some part of me can't help but wonder that a guy trying to 'make it' is an ambitious, hard-working bloke. A woman trying to make it must be some sort of sharpened harpie. Yes, I know that this is hardly a complex feminist ideology but it sure as hell makes for some easy headlines...
Anyway, before we forget other controversial folks, the Jedwards and Anne Widdecombe's of this world, we must not forget the few contestants who brought it on themselves. Par example:
Katie's crimes seem to be the following:
- Being a bit kooky and therefore hard to relate to than say, the damp moppet of personality that is Rebecca Ferguson
- Having actually tried to get into music before and having made heinous 'career steps' such as minor record deals, doing gigs or writing songs
- Daring to have a panic attack when set upon by dozens of gurning X Factor fans, clutching their Heat magazines and monster munch grab bags, in an overly crowded Top Shop.
- Wearing a fucking awful colander on her head in week 1 of the live shows (actually, that one there is NO defence for)
Let's now look at this man.
Matt 'home cooked dinner' Cardle
Matt has also been in a band. His band have released material. He has painted and decorated things. He is a 'lad' and seemingly the under-seasoned love-spawn of James Morrison, Jamie Oliver and a dog whistle. He is as ambitious as Katie but not slagged off. This could be because he likes to wear a hat on his head and not a colander. Some part of me can't help but wonder that a guy trying to 'make it' is an ambitious, hard-working bloke. A woman trying to make it must be some sort of sharpened harpie. Yes, I know that this is hardly a complex feminist ideology but it sure as hell makes for some easy headlines...
Anyway, before we forget other controversial folks, the Jedwards and Anne Widdecombe's of this world, we must not forget the few contestants who brought it on themselves. Par example:
Emily 'I'll cut your eyes out, yeah?' Nakanda
Ah yes, the tweenage songstress with a passion for hyper-violent happyslapping who was kicked out of X Factor in 2007. There's a hate-figure (though according to UN reports the UK is awful for stereotyping children in the media as thuggish little ASBOs so I am aware I am not currently being part of the solution, though I am illustrating a wider point about hate figures) if you need one, who might actually deserve some of the hate.
Ambition is not a crime. Being weird is not a crime. Assault is. So is wearing a colander on your head.
There. Context. Lovely.
Ambition is not a crime. Being weird is not a crime. Assault is. So is wearing a colander on your head.
There. Context. Lovely.
Sunday 19 September 2010
What the Chuck?
Sorry I've not updated in forever. I can't say I'm too bothered however as I'm almost certain only 5 people have ever read this.
Aaaanyway. I want to talk a bit about a show that I desperately tried to avoid. Being as, a lot of my generation are, big fans of Whedon, I have often followed members of his creative team and casts in their other projects. Sometimes the payoff is magnificent: Wonderfalls, Battlestar Galactica, Greg the Bunny, hell even that one episode of Glee where Artie does some pretzel-fuelled dream dance.
Sometimes though, the connection is so tenuous or the show so rubbish (Point Pleasant... most of Tru Calling) one feels to go down that rabbit hole a step too far. So the notion 'Hey Alex! Have you seen that comedy drama where a nerd becomes a spy featuring the guy who was Jayne on Firefly being all surly and right wing?' was not of vast appeal. I was off on holiday to Egypt, needed some entertainment for the flight and decided to treat myself to season one of Chuck.
I should be clear, Chuck is not life changing. I don't feel the need to get a 'WWCD' bracelet or to allow the show's lexicon to infiltrate my idiolect. No-one is going to jump off a tower to save the world, there will be no serial killers in a hospital and (I would be stunned if) the cast running into the battlefields of WWI to turn into a field of poppies. What Chuck is, is soup. Cholent. Stew. Tagine, if you're a bit foreign. Its warm, cosy and well written enough to be 'non-trash' but really doesn't scale the heights of genre and wit that it could if paired with a slightly more creative team. But the constant callbacks to classic Bond films and video games are just delightful. There is, however, a problem.
This woman.
Yes, you might ask 'As a gay Jewish man, what problems might you have with this almost offensively Aryan woman?'. And I would respond by calling you racist. You would say it was just a joke. I would say that was uncool. You would learn something. We would hug. The world would move on a braver and fairer place.
The woman pictured is Chuck's love interest and mentor in the ways of the CIA, 'Sarah Walker'. Or Sam. Or whatever the hell her name turns out to be really. The thing with Sarah is, she is simply too perfect to both men and women at once. She exists on a level of impossible that I find excruciatingly annoying. Let's use 'gender stereotypes' to help us examine this:
Woman: Wow. Although she's tough, clever and independent, she has opened herself up to love. I know she's had issues with her parents so it makes me glad to see her in a healthy relationship and realising that her career choices, although important, don't always need to be the main focus of her life.
Man: She is blonde and has breasts.
Still like Chuck, but four seasons in and I wonder if I will ever like Sarah.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
