Now, I was a tad disappointed by Kirstie’s Homemade Home back in the summer, but let’s put all that behind us and give the re-invented Ms Allsopp another chance. Let’s also ignore the fact that Channel 4 decided to broadcast her trio of festive programmes a little bit late in the day (as The Guardian put it: “who’s got time to blow their own glass baubles in the next fortnight?” indeed…), and focus on the content instead.

I have to say I was pleasantly surprised – kind of. I did think the bauble-blowing episode in programme one was a bit pointless and very expensive at £20 a bauble, considering this was supposed to be a homemade Christmas that DIDN’T involve spending loads of money. Also, I’m not sure how relevant her trip to Liberty was to be honest…similar to the visit she paid to her parents’ palatial but ghastly home in the first series, this was obviously intended to show Kirstie ‘finding inspiration’ but I couldn’t really put my finger on WHAT she gained specifically…apart from deciding the glaringly obvious: that she wanted her home to look Christmassy and lovely. These niggles aside, there were some good ideas in the first programme; salt dough decorations ARE cheap and fun to make with the kids; making Christmas cards with a lino-cut is cheap-ish and easy to do; and I thought the tips from VV Rouleaux’s Annabel Lewis were simple and effective – particularly the pretty ribbon rose idea.

What bothered me (apart from the incessant introductions and conclusions, which take up half the programme…) was the wreath-making. It’s all very well for Kirstie to skip around her woodland ‘garden’ in the depths of Devon gathering free holly and festive greenery, but for the millions of us who live in cities, or country dwellers who don’t have big gardens or their own wood, this is NOT practical. I can’t see myself gathering baskets of fresh holly on Clapham Common without getting a stern ticking off from the Lambeth park warden. And, there were quite a few mentions of the name ‘Meadowgate’, which, incidentally, she rents out for £2000 a week as a holiday house. Hmmm. Here are some behind the scenes shots from food stylist Sharon Hearne-Smith’s blog:

I thought the second episode about homemade gifts was the best show yet – chutney, soaps (although they took 6 weeks to dry out so way too late for this year but HEY HO let’s not nit-pick), sewing stockings and teddy bears – all these are practical ideas. The third episode, focussing on Christmas cooking and entertaining, was OK, too. Yes, there was an interesting but pointless visit to Parable, where owner Nigel Parker makes amazing candles using moulds taken from wallpaper printing rollers – not easy to replicate at home – but at least we were shown how to make tealight candles in a silicone cupcake tray, instead. The cracker making instructions were good, and the cookery ideas were simple but achievable. All in all, I think Channel 4 has improved the show – Kirsty didn’t drive a 4×4 gas guzzling Land Rover while lecturing us about eco-chic recycling this time, and most of the ideas were thoroughly do-able, providing you have the time. But, one question remains: who was doing her make-up? Why was she plastered in it in some scenes and totally bare-faced in others? The vampy red lipstick and luxurious Russian fur hat combo was possibly a step too far for a ‘frugal’ series, but I’ll try not to let this bug me too much. After all, it IS Christmas. – Ellie

Greg Dyke, the former BBC director-general, has launched a scathing attack on the UK TV establishment, calling for the BBC Trust to be abolished and condemning James Murdoch’s recent criticisms of the BBC.

Labelling the BBC a “500 pound gorilla”, Dyke said “quite a lot of us did warn that this system of governance [the BBC Trust] wouldn’t work at the time it was created”.

 He added: “The truth is the Trust is unduly slow and bureaucratic, expensive to run and creates inbuilt conflict within the organisation. It has left the BBC without a supportive board or chairman and the Director General without the “cover” any chief executive needs.”

Dyke believes “logically Ofcom should become the regulator of the BBC” but he added that an “of-PSB” could be created and take responsibility for regulating the BBC, Channel Four and any other public service broadcasters.

Meanwhile, Dyke did not relent when reviewing the state of the rest of British TV. Referring to James Murdoch’s now infamous attack on the BBC in his MacTaggart lecture at the Edinburgh TV Festival, Dyke said Murdoch’s assertion that the BBC operated as a state sponsored media was “laughable”.

He said: “James finished his lecture by saying ‘the only reliable, durable and perpetual guarantor of independence is profit.’ That has to be a joke coming from someone running an organisation where every single one of its 175 newspapers around the world supported the war in Iraq. Where’s the independence there?”

However, Dyke did state support for Murdoch’s plan to start charging for content online. He said he agreed “with a lot of what James said in his MacTaggart. He is right about the threat of piracy, I hope News International’s bold move in charging on the internet works and pays off.”

In a wide-ranging speech on the state of the UK media sector, Dyke warned that Five’s future was uncertain. He said that Five has “no real chance “of surviving as an independent channel, adding that it is “just a matter of who buys it or who it merges with and when”.

However, he predicted good fortune for Channel 4, which is searching for a new chief executive to replace Andy Duncan. He said new chairman Terry Burns “will add a degree of stability at an unstable time” but warned the big challenge for Channel 4 “will be to work out what Channel 4 is and what it’s for in the new world”.

http://www.brandrepublic.com/BrandRepublicNews/News/973254/Greg-Dyke-calls-end-BBC-Trust-questions-James-Murdoch/?DCMP=EMC-DailyNewsBulletin

I was truly shocked tonight when I turned on Channel Four and seen a program called “Ten years younger: Bus Pass Challenge”. I often watch the original ten years younger as some of the results you see are amazing. However, I found it hard to believe that this program was actually going to show an O.A.P receiving all kinds of plastic surgery in order to make themselves appear younger. Well, I was right as this is exactly what was happening. The show featured two older ladies, 64-year-old Marie and 72-year-old Betty who were both unhappy with their appearance. A lifetime of sun-worshipping without wearing protection, along with smoking around 140 cigarettes a week had left Marie with skin like leather and a face with more crinkles than a pack of McCoys. Betty on the other hand was just looking for a bit of a make-over and a few fashion tips.

Marie received eye bag removal, a face peel, a face lift, a nose job and a set of sparkling new veneers. I may have missed a few procedures, however there’s only so many images of sawing, burning, pulling and bleaching I can look at without feeling sick. Whilst Marie was going through this hell, Betty was enjoying a new haircut and a new wardrobe. The end results in both cases were very impressive. They both looked at least 15 years younger than they had done before the miracle team had worked their magic. However, who actually wants a granny who has teeth brighter than those of Tom Cruise or a forehead which lacks the ability to frown. Nothing gives me a giggle more then when my granny sees me before a night on the town and her face says it all. So I for one would think my granny had lost her head if she suggested any kind of plastic surgery.

Elderly UK consumers are increasingly choosing to have cosmetic surgery, a leading private healthcare company has claimed. According to Dr Sneh Khemka of Bupa, the most popular procedure among patients over the age of 60 is bletheroplasty, which is chosen by around 30 per cent of elderly patients. “Bletheroplasty is a reduction of the saggy eyelids people get at the bottom of the eyes,” Dr Khemka explained. Around 28 per cent of patients opt for facelifts, while female breast reduction (eight per cent) and tummy tucks (six per cent) are also popular, the associate medical director revealed. (Private Healthcare UK). These figures astonish me. How many men and women with a bus pass are contemplating plastic surgery?

I believe that we should all grow old gracefully. A healthy diet, some gentle exercise and in general looking after your body is all you need to have a happy retirement. The only exception is if someone requires reconstructive surgery, perhaps after an accident or the removal of a breast following surgery etc. In general I think we are becoming far too obsessed with the way we look and the way we think we should look. I can accept young people having boob jobs or nose jobs or whatever takes their fancy as it is becoming more popular. . However, I urge all the grannies out there to stay put. We love you the way you are, whether you are carrying a bit of weight, have a head full of greys or have to take your false teeth out every night before bed. You are the nice cuddly grannies we have grown to love! So if you feel the need to spruce yourself up a bit, then take Betty’s advice and head down to Boots in the direction of the make-up counter.

Donatella Versace- Old and beautiful? You decide!

Put yourself in a fictional universe where everything’s gone a bit nutty. Now picture Matthew Broderick’s head on a pike.  Does that do it for you? It’s there as a result of his dangerous driving conviction, if that helps? How about Winona Ryder getting her sticky fingered hands cut off for shop-lifitng, streamed live and gruesome online? Or Lily Allen being beaten to death with her own iPhone for crimes against twittering?

Ok, the last one may be a bit of a stretch, but if this kind of celebrity capital punishment does it for you, maybe you should check out “The Execution of Gary Glitter“, a docu-drama broadcast this week on Channel 4 and still available online. It’s set in an imaginary Britain, where public pressure has led to the reinstatement of the death penalty for crimes of murder and child abuse, as well as widening the powers of the police in detaining suspects and pursuing their conviction. When Gary Glitter is extradited from Vietnam to face fresh charges in London, he becomes the first person to face hanging in over forty years.

As far as celebrity snuff goes, it’s top notch, but unfortunately that doesn’t seem to have been the intention. Written, produced and directed by Rob Coldstream, it claims rather to engage the audience on topics of capital punishment and how modern society deals with its most reviled offenders. Worthy subject matter, no doubt, and the real world celebrity court cases of R. Kelly and Roman Polanski could just be enough to back up the premise, but it fails miserably in the realization. 

The whole set-up is completely outlandish, relying on a set of conditions so tight and specific they fail to ring true. What’s hardest to swallow are the massive changes to British law, in particular the Metropolitan police’s new ability to prosecute seemingly anyone for crimes committed in foreign territories, disregarding like a playground bully any authority or interest of foreign governments.

Coldstream has tried to cover this up with the standard docu-drama methods, talking heads and archive footage to blur the lines between fiction and reality. It works well in places, especially when authentic Glitter, fresh out of prison from his 1999 conviction, breaks down in front of a media sharktank. His blubbering makes for uncomfortable, conflicted viewing, as does the heavy reliance on footage from the 2002 Soham murders. In the latter case especially though, you can’t help feeling a tinge of exploitation, as Coldstream constructs his entire narrative from a sparse and selective retelling of the horrific events.

Through scripted interviews, Coldstream uses talking heads to drag up every possible facet of the problem, as actors bleat and attack each other over everything from human rights to class divide. The passion is clearly evident, but at the unfortunate cost of clarity. The celebrity variants do equally little to add to proceedings, as Anne Widdecombe preaches charmlessly on the existence of evil, an excitable Gary Bushnell shouts from the cheap seats and Mirada Sawyer offers the perspective of a music journalist inexplicably assigned to the highest profile court case of the young century. Each is under the yoke of Coldstream’s formulaic courtroom script, trotted out in turn to patronize the audience. No, no, Glitter taking the witness stand while everyone gasps isn’t an enormous cliche, it’s actually really clever and quite a big deal. Etc. Etc. Throughout, you’re left to wonder what exactly has motivated these people to get involved, but under no illusions that it had anything to do with social advocacy.

This overbearing condescension is endemic, in a narrative that claims to know the answers but certainly isn’t telling. What we’re left with is not so much an exploration of social policy as a particularly shouty snuff film, an ugly and charmless mess of an affair, lacking in both integrity and relevance. If there is one redeeming feature however, it’s Hilton McRae’s performance as Glitter. I’m not sure how many actors can claim “dole queue clown” and “aging Ming the Merciless” among their signature looks, but however big the Glitter look-alike casting call was, they struck gold with McRae. He gives an compelling performance of Glitter’s vulnerability and dwindling defiance, as the convicted popstar faces into his final days. If you are into celebrity snuff, and you need an excuse to watch this truly awful docu-drama with your friends, Hilton McRae provides an excellent cover. Failing that, call it research.

‘The Execution of Gary Glitter’ aired Monday 9th november on Channel 4, and will be available for a limited time on 4oD.         http://www.channel4.com/programmes/the-execution-of-gary-glitter/4od

(This TV Review originally appeared on Totally Dublin’s website, November 09. Words: Padraig Moran (c) 2009)

3D is huge at the moment. Almost every animated movie in the cinema these days is watched with a pair of 3D glasses, with Pixar recently remastering Toy Storys 1 & 2 in the format. Over the last year, a crop of horror sequels and remakes have been given the 3D treatment, and next month it’s set to get even bigger with James Cameron’s space epic Avatar, the most eagerly anticipated film of the year. Next year, special 3D televisions will start to come on to the market, with Sky launching the Sky 3D channel through it’s Sky+ HD service.

These are the Channel Four 3D glasses available to pick up for free from Sainsbury's

Next week, Channel Four gets in on the act, with a week of 3D programmes which you can watch with a pair of glasses you can pick up for free from Sainsbury’s. Unlike Sky’s state-of-the-art system which uses Circular Polarized 3D (similar to the system used in the cinema), Channel Four is using the more basic anaglyphic ColorCodeViewer 3D, which uses blue and amber filters. While the effect isn’t as amazing as with polarised glasses, it’s still good and most importantly you don’t need to buy a brand new television set to use it. So, what treats do Channel Four have lined up for us over the week? Let’s have a look…

The Paul O’Grady Show

The week kicks off with a few 3D moments throughout Monday evening’s Paul O’Grady Show.

Monday 16 November, 5pm on Channel 4

The Queen in 3D

This promises to be quite astonishing. In 1953, a pair of young film makers named Bob Angell and Arthur Wooster made a 3D colour newsreel of the Queen, entitled “Royal Review”, taking in her journey to the Coronation at Westminster Abbey and various other events including the Queen watching the Derby at Epsom, hosting  a garden party and a taking a trip on the Royal Barge on the Thames. This two-part documentry will tell their story and show the incredible footage they made, as well as three other 3D films also commisioned by the BFI for the Festival of Britain, including “Sunshine Miners” which shows the rebuilding of post-war industrial Britain with vast machines turning farmland into coal mines, which should be quite a sight in 3D .

Derren Brown Presents the 3D Magic Spectacular

Derren’s recent “Events” series was a little hit and miss, but he has enough of a track record to prove he’s a great entertainer. Here, he hosts as some of the world’s top magicians join him on stage to perform dazzling trickery in 3D, along with some archive clips. Expect playing cards to fly in your face, and all sorts of other 3D gimmicks in what should be a spectacular show.

Flesh for Frankenstein

When we think of 3D, we often think of 1950’s horror B-movies, one of a number of gimmicks producers would use to get people into the cinema in the face of the increasing popularity of television. This, however was from a couple of decades later, directed by Paul Morrissey and produced by Andy Warhol (it was indeed marketed in the US as “Andy Warhol’s Frankenstein”). An offbeat take on the  Frankenstein story, the famous doctor is given fascistic overtones as he tries to build a super-race by making the perfect male and female from parts of corpses. With some quite graphic horror and plenty of naughty bits, this is definitely the weirdest offering of the week.

Friday the 13th Part III

A more mainstream horror movie, part of the early-eighties 3D renaissance that also gave us Jaws 3-D and Amityville 3-D, this was originally intended to be the closing part of a trilogy, attempting to end the Friday the 13th slasher franchise in 1982. Seriously. Nine films and a TV series later, we know the idea by now – Jason turns up in his trademark hockey mask and terrorises a group of teenagers camping in the woods.

The Greatest Ever 3D Moments

Channel Four loves a good countdown show, this one looking back at the ten (yes, just ten) greatest three-dimensional moments from cinema and television should be great fun. But does this also mean we’ll see Stuart Maconie and David Quantick in 3D, and if so, do we really want that? Really, do we?

Hannah Montana & Miley Cyrus: Best of Both Worlds Concert

Every theme week is going to have a weak link and here it is. The Jonas Brothers make an appearance for good measure. If this was shown on the previous Sunday to open the week, a think a lot of people would be tuning in just to see how it looks, but by the end of the week I think we’ll have had our fill of 3D. Exciting as it is, I don’t think I’ll bother with 3D Miley. But, something for everyone, right?

As well as these programmes, there will be 3D videos sent in by viewers shown during continuity junctions, and some more 3D pop performances and interviews during the weekend’s T4.

A cantora Madonna desembarcou na segunda-feira (09-11) no Brasil,
onde deverá permanecer até quinta-feira (12-11). Esta passagem ocorre
menos de um ano após a turnê Sticky & Sweet, que aconteceu em dezembro
e passou pela capital carioca e São Paulo. Ela vai visitar algumas
comunidades do Rio para averiguar possíveis locações
para um documentário que tem a parceria de Madonna, do Channel Four
e da BBC. A película pretende retratar crianças e jovens que superaram
a miséria através da música e da dança.

LEIA MAIS NOS SITES
:: SORTIMENTOS.COM >> http://www.sortimentos.net/?p=3884
:: GEBBEG >> http://gebbeg.com.br/?p=7084

.

I have to say, I am rather excited about 3D week on Channel Four!

If all the gadget pundits are to be believed, 3D TV is the next generation of how we watch television in our own homes, and it’s not as far off as some of us may have thought!

With respect to this, Channel Four are having a 3D week, where we, as viewers at home, will be able to experience 3D images coming from our own television sets! It’s like the ultimate technology preview!

3D week starts from 16th November 2009, and although many of the shows featured are not really to my taste (the Coronation one looks good, as does Friday 13th Part III), I want to try and watch all of them to get a real flavour for what’s to come. I do like that they have put on a real mix of show genres so that we can see how each type would work with 3D, and that it’s not all scary horror movies etc.

To participate in viewing these shows, all you have to do is pick up a free pair of glasses from selected Sainsbury’s stores (click HERE to locate your nearest branch) and then tune in to the programmes you want to watch.

Note the amazement on my face people, note it!

Pioneering TV in my opinion, and, perhaps wrongly, it’s not from the BBC, who seemingly hadn’t the forsight to do something adventurous such as this earlier! Could you imagine if they made their current LIFE series in 3D?! It’s spectacular at the moment… but BBC documentaries in 3D would be truly amazing! Good on Channel Four!

For tips on getting the best 3D effect on your TV, click HERE.

I am having a 3D TV party at my house on Monday evening with a few friends, I soooo can’t wait!

Oh, and I love the trailer (apart from the blurry 3-d bit at the end, which plays havock with my contacts heh!)

Misspelling the Myth

Researchers for the BNP must be glued to the telly this week, albeit with the volume turned way down and their own prejudice doing the voiceovers. Otherwise, those bleeding heart liberals at Channel Four might actually make some sense, with their lofty aims of debunking the myths around racial superiority, and science’s controversial use to support such claims.

A week long documentary series, in the attention grabbing style and format that Channel Four has made all their own, is aiming to dismantle these fallacies. Entitled Race: Science’s Last Taboo, five separate documentaries will offer insights ranging from historical ‘human zoos’ to the contemporary trend of cosmetic de-racialization surgery. It’s undoubtedly contentious subject matter, even taking into account the channel’s provocative agenda and none-too-shiny slate in the area of racerepresentations, but programme makers are insisting that these questions must be faced head on, in the increasingly fraught political environment of a multi-cultural society.

It’s in this spirit that Rageh Omaar opened the season, with his documentary Race and Intelligence: Science’s Last Taboo. With an open and honest approach, he picks up an area of scientific research that he claims has resurfaced decade after decade of the twentieth century, examining whether there actually is a hierarchy of intelligence among the races. Bluntly put, does being black mean you are less intelligent than if you had been born white or asian? Of course not, cries popular thought and western democracy, you shouldn’t even ask such a thing. But Omaar persists with the question for very valid reasons. Like it or not, scientific evidence continues to appear that in the eyes of certain scientists, proves this very theory. What Omaar attempts, is to examine and contextualize this data, providing a much needed background and depth of argument that destabilizes these beliefs. Furthermore, he tackles what he sees as the culture of silence and political correctness around such controversial viewpoints, which perversely allows such myths to persist. By ignoring the slander, we cannot disprove it, but rather leave it intact, readily available to far-right margins that would appropriate it to their own agendas. Reclaiming the question, he believes, holds more potential than offhandedly condemning it.

With this in mind, he sets out across several continents, seeking out experts on both sides of the argument. Unfortunately, his efforts are hampered by the self-policing of such an inflammatory discourse. After several career-damaging controversies over the last few years, scientists who support racial hierarchies proved for the most part unwilling to be interviewed. What results is that Omaar, though equipped with a reassuring abundance of professionals against the suggestion, has to make do for the pro-racialization side, with a comparative smattering of already controversial fringe figures, with little to lose by voicing their extreme opinions. Making the best of it, Omaar hears out their viewpoints with restraint, even when their flimsy and indirect evidence and pseudo-racist arguments amount to little more than cries of ‘prove me wrong!’.

But while Omaar displays a talent for drawing his subjects out, and allowing them the freedom to speak their own minds, his impartiality is at times frustrating. No-one he interviews is ever directly challenged, with Omaar’s counter-arguments held back for the didactic segues that link interviews, propelling and carefully steering what is ultimately a closed narrative. It becomes, as perhaps it was always destined to be, a personal journey, and more of a sociological editorial than a scientific documentary.

These flaws, if they can even be considered as such, aren’t entirely damning however. Omaar does achieve greatly here, in drawing attention to several inherent problems with the ways in which we as a society both conceive and quantify intelligence, as well as highlighting the bias of standardized IQ tests and the dominance of an educational system that by it’s very design is ill-equipped to treat everyone fairly. As one professor points out, standardized testing can better discern “whether you mom drives a Volvo than [it can] your supposed intelligence.”

Overall, you’re left with the feeling that this is an enormous and sprawling subject, which is fully engaged with, could merit an entire series all it’s own. As it stands however, Omaar has produced an admirable, intelligent and inspiring piece of work, which has the potential to both educate in the face of recession rocket-fueled jingoism, as well as encouraging understanding along socially constructive lines.

The ‘Race: Science’s Last Taboo’ season continues until Tuesday 2^nd November, with a particular highlight promising to be ‘The Event: How Racist Are You’ on Thursday 10pm, on Channel Four.

All of the documentaries are available for viewing, for a limited period here

(This TV review originally appeared on Totally Dublin’s website, October 09. Words: Padraig Moran (c) 2009)

The usually excellent Dispatches series goes for a cheesy, CSI-style documentary, written in that tedious breathless style, suggesting that something very violent is about to happen, but then nothing does…

Bits about Blackheath at 2 minutes 43 seconds in.

Guardian review of the programme here. Angry activist review here.

1. Age.
2. Love.

The End is Nigh

In its twilight, Big Brother has become like truly bad modern art. There is a vague and shifting concept applied to a set of variables, a process that never seems or feels as if it will end, and an appalling amount of post-rationalization when it comes to justifying the finished product. On finale night, as Davina McCall fawned (and almost visibly aged with the effort), she seemed not only to be trying to convince the winning housemate of her own worthiness, but also the viewing public at large. She was flanked by psychologists and sycophants, who lined up to gush about why fame hungry wannabe Z was a worthier winner than fame hungry wannabes X or Y. In Big Brother it seems, there can be no wrong result. After all, it’s the public that vote, the public that decide, so to suggest they got it wrong would undoubtedly undermine a key element of the show. As in painting or sculpture (but for very different reasons), there is no wrong answer. But just like most modern art unfortunately, however good or bad, the public have become disinterested.

Infinitely more worthwhile than Friday’s BB finale however, was e4’s decision to follow it with a rescreening of Charlie Brooker’s “Dead Set”, the 2008 spoof that takes this decade’s resurgence of the zombie genre and overlays it on the everyday workings of what was once “the most watched house in Britain”. The action focuses on a Danny Boyle inspired London, about to be overrun by undead zombies intent on chewing the face off anyone living. In a none too subtle yet compelling metaphor, large portions of this bloodthirsty populace turn their attention on the Big Brother house, where the housemates still reside, unaware of the chaotic panic behind the two way mirror. That is until our ballsy heroine bursts in. Kelly, a blood-spattered researcher for the show, is like a cross between Lara Croft and Lily Allen. She has boyfriend trouble and a horde of flesh eating TV execs hot on her tail. To make matters worse, her only chance of survival rests with a handful of Big Brother contestants.

Though it may sound schlocky, the device works, aided by strong acting, a knowing script and good-handed, suspenseful direction courtesy of Yann Demange. E4’s decision to show it on the same night as the BB finale is also in itself interesting, as it may be an intentional flagging by Channel Four of its designs to divert freshly freed up reality TV funds into more innovative and artistic models of programming.

What makes “Dead Set” such a success however, is what a wonderfully tongue in cheek send up of the reality format it turns out to be. The slaughtering of real life former housemates in the green room is gleefully gory, but no more so than their earlier, awkward conversations, where contestants of differing vintages try to tiptoe around the fact they have no idea who each other are. Playing herself, Davina McCall’s end is similarly camp and gruesome, as she is chewed up and left slumped and bleeding against a drinking fountain, a symbolic end perhaps to the genre of ‘water cooler TV’ that shows like Big Brother once dominated. Her second, zombie death is even more satisfying, gratuitously speared through the head as she attacks housemates with a vehemence you suspect she may have always secretly harboured.

More brutal than these post-modern human casualties however, is the send up of the concept and format of Big Brother itself. The fictional housemates are instantly recognisable as well-sketched characters, each performing roles and conventions that would be familiar to any BB viewer. Brandishing their idiosyncrasies as cutlasses, the housemates bitch, bully and backbite their way through the early scenes, in the single-minded search for fame. When later confronted with the sight of the walking undead feasting on corpses just beyond the compound wall, one bleatingly asks if this means “we’re not on telly anymore?” In fact, so faithful is “Dead Set” to its inspiration, that all we’re missing here are the overlaid bird and airplane noises, as zombified housemates feast on each other’s entrails just out of shot.

Most astutely, Brooker has perfectly captured the relationship between housemate and the omnipotent authority that exudes from the walls. Whether they acquiesce completely, or try to ostentatiously display their own intelligence by trumping Big Brother’s manipulations, we are always left with the feeling that these are people who are at the mercy of an unstoppable machine, which they can never fully understand or escape from. On Kelly’s entrance, this core relationship is neatly underlined. Believing her to be a new housemate, the others fall into by now familiar patterns. “Do the public like me, how am I coming across?” asks the composite Grayson, little aware that the man behind the glass now wants far more than an autograph.

These relationships between watched and watching take a sinister shift as the programme progresses, as the housemates remain trapped in the compound, with zombified Big Brother fans and staff roaming the adjacent hallways and control rooms. The visual style here comes into its own. Video screens and monitors dominate the mise-en-scene, as staring zombies eye the bloodstained pixels of the living, with murderous intent. For their part, the living find it hard to face up to such an unreal reality, having been infantilized for so long by the totalising hand of the programme, and the pressures exerted upon BB contestants to be the perfect versions of the public who are watching them. As the walls between watched and watching between to blur and come down, both physically and metaphorically, the show takes on an inevitable and terrifying energy. Tonight’s apocalypse, you begin to realize, will be televised.

In its heyday Big Brother was iconic, a watershed moment in TV democracy, that introduced a whole generation to the wonders of witnessing a live televisual moment that felt almost universally relevant. But recent years have seen the show diminish, and become ever more self referential, to the extent of even recycling the late Jade Goody back into the system as a bona fide celebrity, with disastrous consequences. With art imitating life regurgitating art in a circular motion here, maybe Channel Four could take some notes from “Dead Set”, on how to make next year’s final series go out with a truly bloodthirsty bang.

Are you in a bromance? No.  Probably not.  More than likely you have absolutely no idea of what i am talking about.  Well it is term that has swept the world following the release of I Love You Man. Before we go any further I will lay my cards on the table.  While many other critics will go on incessantly about how wonderful Paul Rudd was in the film I couldn’t disagree more.  He is ok.  He plays more or less the same role he has played in every film or tv show he has been in.  I.e. Paul Rudd pretending to be sad, or my favourite Paul Rudd pretending to be happy (he struggles with this one).  However it is the brilliant Jason Segel who deserves all the credit and shows himself to be a comic actor who has the potential to take Hollywood by storm over the coming years.  With my views upfront I feel comfortable to continue and tell you what I think about this film.

I Love You Man is all about Peter Klaven (Paul Rudd) as he prepares for his wedding to Zooey (Rashida Jones).  The sad thing for Paul is that he has dumped all his male friends over the years due to his various relationships with different girls.  Now that he is getting married he doesn’t know what to do about getting a best man.  He doesn’t feel comfortable asking his father or his brother as they are very different from him.  After hearing Zooey’s friends talk about him becoming a clingy husband after the wedding he decides he needs to find a new best friend and best man at his wedding.  This leads to several “man dates” which all go horribly wrong.  He is about to give him until one day he meets Sydney File (Jason Segel).  After a few meetings they realise they have a lot in common and quickly become very close.  However their closeness threatens to ruin his relationship with Zooey.

The story of the film is terrible.  I would have loved to have watched the pitch the creators gave to Dreamworks.  ”We’re going to make a film about a man who goes on man dates so he can find a best man for his wedding.  It is going to star the pale guy who married Pheobe in Friends, whose name no one can remember or cares about.  And will be directed by the man who directed the biggest comedy disappointment of 2004 Along Came Polly“.  Show me the money.  No.  Don’t get me wrong the film is funny and very pleasant to watch.  But you can’t help but think this is the stupidest thing I have ever paid to watch.  This is the thing about the film.  It is pointless.  You know what is going to happen at every stage of the film.  You know what decisions each character will make.  Even worst you feel like Deren Brown with talent, as the last 20 minutes are so obvious you can say every single line before it happens.

Possibly the worst thing about the film is Rashida Jones.  She is exceptionally irritating.  Normally I would put the blame on an average script.  However it is not that.  She is just annoying.  You can’t understand why they are dating let alone getting married.  Frankly I find it hard to believe someone as annoying as that would actually have a boyfriend, even friends is pushing it a bit.  The way she has played the character you feel as if she has bought her friends on ebay and is paying them a handsome fortune to care about her problems.  Again I would usually stop myself and put it down to one off performance.  But having seen her ruin Channel Four’s excellent NY-LON I am starting to think that Quincy Jones should stop paying off Hollywood casting directors and allow Rashida to return to a place more fitting of  her limited talents, waitressing in cafes.

Paul Rudd is OK but is unremarkable.  As previously mentioned Jason Segel is excellent.  Anyone who has seen his other film roles such as Forgetting Sarah Marshal or his appearance in the hit US comedy How I met your mother will have had a glimpse of his talents.  He can write and act.  What sets him apart is that he is likeable.  Not in a sappy annoying way.  He has a certain on screen charisma that is hard to ignore.  He is also helped by excellent comic timing and a comfort in front of the camera.

Overall, it is an enjoyable film.  It is hardly Kubrick, but it is funny and will keep you laughing throughout.  It does get a bit silly and annoying at times, but you can at times forgive it because Jason Segel will do something that will make the previous ten minutes of boredom seem worthwhile.

6/10 – an 8 when Segel is on screen.

With Sky News still pursuing a leadership debate between the major parties it is time to give my opinion at what type of format they would take, who would be involved and what channels they would be broadcast on. I would suggest that there are three main debates on three different channels, all on terrestrial television. All three major parties would take part, so this means Gordon Brown from Labour, David Cameron from the Conservatives and Nick Clegg from the Liberal Democrats. The reason for including Clegg is simple, like it or not his party hold nearly ten percent of parliamentary seats, run numerous councils throughout Britain and his party could influence (directly or indirectly) who wins the election. The scheduling of such debates would be quite easy, say three consecutive Wednesday evenings at 8pm.

I would propose that the first debate takes place on the BBC, is near live (to have a safety mechanism for libelous comments) and is ninety minutes in length. A town hall format would be applied, with each leader getting two minutes to answer a question from the audience, plus a chance for a short rebuttal once all three leaders have spoken. Each question would have a designated period of ten minutes as not to dwell on one question too long. This format is basically a modified version of what the BBC broadcasts every week for Question Time but I would favour Jeremy Paxman over David Dimbleby to host as Paxman would be better at getting the leaders to give answers to the questions asked.

For the second debate I would propose a simple three leader debate on Channel Four, which is live and lasts for two hours inclusive of commercials. This would be a closed debate not in front of an audience where the questions would be asked by the host. The two minute plus rebuttals format of the first debate would remain, however the debate would allow the ability for topics to be covered in greater detail (for example the economy), with multiple questions being asked on the same subject punctuated by the commercial breaks. That would mean a total of five or six topics would be covered in total, which would be enough for all three leaders to set out their policies on the most important election issues. Jon Snow would host the debate as he is the recognized face of news on the channel.

The final debate would be a live head to head debate hosted by Sky News but simulcast as well on Five. Again it would last two hours inclusive of commercials, and would be an closed debate in front of an audience where the questions would be asked by the host. The running theme of two minute plus rebuttals would carry on as to provide continuity between the debates. The leaders would pair off against each other in half hour sections, with Cameron taking on Clegg first, then Brown taking on Clegg, and finally Brown taking on Cameron. Three questions would be asked in each section, with the public seeing how the leaders directly contrasted on their policy and their communication skills. Adam Boulton could host the debate, but in light of Brown’s distain at his questioning the day after his conference speech I would draft in Sir David Frost if he was available to appease Labour. Another possible host would be Alistair Stewart if ITV/ITN were prepared for to release him for the one off event.

A debate between the smaller parties should happen as well, if only on the internet or a free to air satellite channel such as Current TV. I would limit the amount of parties to five as any more would interrupt the flow of the debate. Regional debates should be held in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland and screened as Question Time specials by the BBC to allow for maximum exposure.

Labour have suggested that the leaders of various departments should have their own debates, but clearly this would just be a ploy to get Alistair Darling to face off against George Osborne. I don’t feel a public desire to see this and it would create five or six extra debates, many of which few would actually take the time to watch.

It’s my personal opinion that if Brown decides that he wants to answer Sky News’ invitation to take part in a debate he will do it soon, especially if Labour are heavily behind in the polls. If he doesn’t reply before the election is called (likely sometime in March) then there will be no debates on the terrestrial channels. Sky News may go ahead but a debate without Brown could be in breach of electoral broadcasting law.

This is one way in which Brown could have done his lottery trick last night- however if this took him a year to work this out I’d be worried for the man;).

This afternoon has brought the news that Channel Four has decided to stop making Big Brother after the next series. Now let me say that I have never watched this appallingly awful programme, and that I would rather have all my teeth out without gas than to be forced to watch it. The idea that one should deliberately select a load of disfunctional people, presumably with the help of highly paid psychologists to make sure that they would all argue all the time, and to let people watch this as so called entertainment, leaves me totally unmoved. Personally I would rather be forced to watch Eastenders, another series I detest and loath. I wonder what Channel Four will offer as an alternative. Perhaps they could consider sponsoring public executions and broadcasting them. After all the fuss about the Libyan murderer I’m sure there would be a big audience who would be prepared to watch a good public disembowelment, so long as it was shown after the time of everyone’s dinner. I shall be interested to see what nasty, cheap programme they come up with.

I thought Big Brother lost its “social experiment” relevance a long time ago, that was until I was told about this by a friend. Interesting to see the contestants’ reaction to finding out the news about Michael Jackson’s death…one of serious shock and sadness.

If only some of the media could replicate some of this, ITV’s reshowing of Martin Bashir’s “Living with Michael Jackson” was a hugely cynical approach to try and increase audience share. I hope, like me, you avoided watching it.

Infamous interview and cover from “The Word”. Rarely broadcast these days because of the libellous content and Reed’s family not wanting to tarnish his legacy further;).

David Paul Dundas também era chamado como Lord David Dundas. Realeza ele tinha, e fez muito por merecer. Fez carreira curta nas paradas de sucesso das rádios, mas foi na televisão britânica que ele se consagrou.

Mas não foi no vídeo que ele exerceu seu reinado, mas nas trilhas que ele produziu. Destaco nesse post duas das minhas preferidas, e com certeza, também as mais marcantes da sua carreira, o tema principal do Channel Four, de 1982 até 1992 e da campanha “Get Ready” da ITV em 1989:

Ouça também o tema “Get Ready” em versão apenas instrumental:

Today I received this in my inbox from 4oD:

Dear 4oD user,

We wrote to you recently to alert you to some changes to your 4oD service. We’re now only a few days away from the 4oD desktop application closing down.

The good news is that all your favourite Channel 4 programmes past and present are now available to watch for free on channel4.com. It’s really simple to use as all the content is streamed which means you won’t need to download anything before you can watch it.

If you’ve used 4oD to purchase any programmes on a download to own basis, you’ll still be able to watch these through your 4oD application from your desktop.

If you have ever entered your payment card details to rent or purchase a programme on 4oD these will be fully removed from the system once the 4oD application closes. However your customer account will remain active and you can use it to log in to other channel4.com services, such as E4.com.

We hope you’ll continue to enjoy using the new 4oD on channel4.com.

Streaming and no desktop app? I’ll probably use 4oD more – looks like Spotify and BBC iPlayer is presenting a winning argument.