Bad Wolf will #savetheday

To begin this, a confession.  I am a whovian.  Since the restart of Doctor Who, I have seen all the episodes, all the specials.  I quote it in normal conversation whenever I get the chance.  I search for it on pinterest and tumblr.  I even went to see the 50th anniversary prom in the royal albert hall.

So surprisingly enough, I was excited for the 50th anniversary special.  Who saw that coming?  I didn't go to see it in the cinema due to other plans, but I was excited.  The return of David Tennant and Billie Piper sent the fan boy in me racing.  The concept of the war doctor appearing and the story of the time war was great.  Paul McGann reprising his role for the short of teh nigiht of the doctor got me even more pumped.  4 Doctors already?

But how were they going to use 10 and Billie?  Their storyline was complete, with the human doctor trapped in the parallel world with her.  How could they add to that?

In the end they didn't and I was very glad they didn't. They came up with a new fun way to include Billie. The concept of the "moment" having its own intelligence was brilliant, and that being in the form of what would matter most to the user was great.  But what was really interesting was that the most important person in all of the doctor's life was the Bad Wolf.

The most important person in all of his lives?  We know that the doctor has been married and had children.  We know that he marries River at some point in his future (different to the mother of his child).  We know he loved Rose, Clara is the impossiblel girl who saves him throughout his life, and has seen his grave, Donna was his best friend when he needed one, Sarah Jane he sees in multiple regenerations and all the other companions have touched him in more ways than we ever saw.  And this isn't even begining to think about the TARDIS when she took human (?) form.

But the Bad Wolf was the most important person throughout his history.  She who only existed for that brief time just as he regenerated from 9 to 10.  Who made it that Jack couldn't die, turning him into an impossible thing.  Who defeated all the Daleks, the first he had seen since the time war.  Since he thought he had ended it, killing his own race as well as all of his enemies. And I think this is why Bad Wolf, not Rose or anyone else was the most important person in all his lives.  She was there, at the time he saw the return of the aleks and saved him.  She gave him hope that there are better things out there, and that if theh Dalkes didn't all die during the time war, maybe not all the time lords did too.  Maybe, just maybe, he could once again set foot on Gallifrey.  Hope came to him that he may be able to go home.

That this is how the episode ended too makes me think this may be the case.  He's going where he has always been going, where everyone always goes.  He's just taking a longner route than them.  But he still is ging home.  Because of the Bad Wolf.

Becoming the Trainer

Last winter in the build up to Reading half marathon, I spent numerous weeks helping one of my friend train for it.  I didn't mind hte idea of it, I waas training myself and by doing that I got to do longer runs, and at a forced slower pace than normal, which was good for me.  And this year I get to do the same, with a different friend for a different race.

When I tarted doing it last year, I had only been running for about 9 months.  Maybe less.  I started after the Reading half the year before.  I'd been out, watched, cheered and then it got me thinking, why not.  I had always been one of the more active fitter people out of my various groups of friends, but after moving here I was suddenly not.  Everyone it seemed was going to the gym, or doing something and I was feeling a bit unhealthy.  I think more than anything it was the shame of that which drove me to pick up a pair of trainers and head out the door.  I started with the simple of goal of doing the half marathon the year after.  I had 3 times in mind, one that i would be disappointed if I took longer than, one that I wanted to do and one that I would be thrilled if I managed.  They were quite spread out, andwent from very challenging to something I should have been able to do from day one.

When the autumn rolled round I entered a couple of races to see how I was coping.  Henley and Gosport came and went and I suddenly had to changee my goals.  I'd done Henley in 97minutes, when my top target was 90.  Suddenly that wasn't quite so out of the question, but it was still going to proof difficult.

It was with the confidence from this that I started helping my friend train.  She had one main goal which was to complete the cursed thing.  As time goals went, she would have loved to been able to do it 2hrs 6 - steady at 6 minutes per km.  It doesnt sound much, but trying to keep going at a solid pace which is as fast as you can for voer 2 hours?  It is not an easy thing to do, even if you think that pace is slow.  It is something that is personal, not one sizee fits all.   So my goal in this was to try and seee to it that they could run the whole thing, not get scared by the distancee, and hopefully be able to run at a constant pace.

Starting from about half distance we went for weekly runs, gradually growing in distance up to just a couple of kms short of the full distance.  We rarely went at the full pace, because the thought wass that the race efffect, having a rowd cheering and the adrenaline going, and people to try o catch would help spur on.  This is something I had found hugely helpful in Henley; I think it saved me about 8 minutes.

The race came and went, and she finished, frustratingly a little bi outside of her target time. I'd managed to shave another 5 minutes off my own time, aganisingly close to my initial ridiculous goa, but it wasn't to e in the end.  There's always the next one anyway.

Bu I was hugely proud of her.  I spent months helping (or so I like to think) and to see someone achieve something they didn'tt think because of that is hugely rewarding.  May even have been more so for me than for her, but I doubt that.  I can't explain the feeling, it was just fantastic.

And now i get to do it all over again!  I get to see someone go from the fear of half the distance, to hopefully completing it, and maybe even getting the time that they want.  When it is something that doesn't come quite naturally to people, being able to help them achieve it is such a great feeling.

I just hope that i am actually helping!

Gravity and the weight of expectation

On Monday I went to the cinema for the second time this year (the last thing I saw was the first part of the hobbit, complete disappointment, but that's a  different blog and alpha papa, a fun romp but nothing special). We saw gravity after hearing a huge amount of hype for it over the previous month, ever since it was released in America. But how did it live up to it?

I had tried to avoid too much of the build up. I didn't hear any spoilers, just that I should go see it. I kind of knew it was a disaster movie, but that was about it.

Let's start with the things that were brilliant about it. Visually it was phenomenal. This is over film that it really is worth going to see on a big screen and in 3D. The only other 3D film I've seen was Alice in wonderland and this used it significantly better. It used it very well and the zero gravity effects were done very well. The other part that really stood out to me was the soundtrack. This is anaaspext that I rarely praise, but here it is well deserved.The use of silence is very powerful and very applicable. Sound doesn't travel in space. And the chances are the engines would be off so they wouldn't make any noise even if it could be heard. Attention to detail like this was very good throughout.

Next we come to the things that were not so good.  I feel bad slamming this film because ultimately I did enjoy it and found myself invested in the characters and storyline.  Howeverthe plot itself wasn't great.  Once you accepted that it was a disaster movie that was all that you needed to know.  Someone stranded in space then had to find a way back to earth. There's not much more that could happen.  My other main criticism is that George Clooney only seems to play one character.  It seemed that it worked here but it could have been a lot more. Sandra bullock was good enough, but I think talk of an Oscar is a bit premature when you think of performances that have gone unrewarded.  I'm looking at you Di caprio.

I thoroughly enjoyed the film and an glad that I went to see it.  Watching it in cinema is likely to be a huge improvement on watching it at home on the TV.  But I don't think I'll buy the dvd when it comes out.  It didn't fully live up to the hype.  The plot just wasn't as good as the visual. Otherwise it would be as out of the world as it's setting.

the wrong side of the law

So I started watching the wire today. Firstly, three episodes in it is fantastic. It looks like it is going to be an amazing series and all the good things I've heard about it are well deserved. but the concept of it got me thinking.

I don't think this classes as a spoiler but the wire is about the drugs scene in Baltimore as seen from both sides of the law. I've just finished sopranos (also a very, very good show) which is about the Mafia in new H Jersey. Similarly, breaking bad has just finished to huge acclaim and that was, to the best of my understanding, about crystal meth. I've not seen it yet, but it is very high on my list of things to watch.

Like i said the combination of these three for me thinking. What is it about illegal activities that we find so intriguing as a viewing public. Whyare we so fascinated with the law and breaking it?

Honestly, I'm not sure what the answer to this is. I guess it's because it'sthe unknown and the forbidden.  People like things that are bad for Erm. We see it in what we do what we eat and many aspects of our lives. It's why there are things that are universally accepted as guilty pleasures. And why we don't care about them.

It's not just in TV. Look at the top films and you will always find things that are outside the law. Mafia. Drugs. Murder. The godfather. Trainspotting, pulp fiction. Great films about things that most people are completely distant for. I'm guessing it's escapism of some form, but people are always after some way to look at a different life from their own.

This happens to me as much as anyone i'm sure. I find them really absorbing and always want to watch more. But does it bother me?  Hell no!

Les Miserables

Last night I am very glad to say that I went to see Les Miserables at the Queen's Theatre on Shaftesbury Avenue.  Before this I hadn't seen any stage or film production of it, but I had read the book.  As with every adaptation of a book there are bound to be differences; characters changed, scenes missing and the like.  I mean how do you turn a book that's almost a thousand pages long into a show that's short enough to expect people to sit through?

Now obviously, as with all reviews, this is hugely subjective.  But I thought they did a terrific job.  The amount they had to cut out didn't detract from the story, it just gave more information on the background of a few people, most notably the link between Marius and Thernardier.  This is just added depth to the brilliant work of Victor Hugo, but is far from essential.

Again, with two different versions you will always get different interpretations of characters.  This is exaggerated in my view for Eponine.  When I read the book I saw her as a little bit hopeless, hardly saying anything, but the musical had her as a much stronger person.  Its also hard to be so quiet in a musical!  I like her a lot more in this version, and she had one of my favourite songs in On My Own.  Marius I found to be a smaller character in the stage show, although I did still really like him.  I just would've liked to see more of him at the barricade as that was my favourite scene of his in the book.

I'm also ashamed to say that I found Gavroche to be just a bit too annoying in the show.  I know he's an arrogant little kid so I should be annoyed by him, but it was worse than I thought.  On the contrary I much preferred Jaevert in the show.  Which is impressive as I really liked him in the book too.  Probably my favourite character in the show version.

The biggest change of all is the in Monsieur Thernardier.  He and his wife provide light relief in the show, which is kinda needed, but in the book he is much more evil and threatening to the happiness of Jean Valjean and Cosette.  Again this is just added depth to the story, but I thought it was useful in adding to the menacing air of it.  But that is something that the rest of the show does enough, and it needs some comic moments, which he delivers with aplomb.

Finally, I can't finish without discussing the staging.  The rotating section made it really easy to convey the thoughts of two sides of a divider, be it the garden fence or the barricade.  And the staging for the barricade was just fantastic, I remember seeing it come on stage for the first time and saying that it was just cool.

Brilliant show.  Now can't wait to finally let myself see the film.

British Sport Revisited

Just about two years ago, I wrote about the state of British sport.  I argued that despite what people were saying we were doing very well for a country of our size.  Right now I feel vindicated.

This summer is still mid way through the sporting season, but if we look back at it and last year we see some great performances and results.  Wiggins.  Froome.  Cavendish.  Murray.  Rose. Donald.  Westwood.  McIllroy.  Clarke.  Ryder Cup.  Lions.  Ashes.  Button.  Hamilton The Olympians and Paralympians.  The list of winners goes on and on.  Last year was a great year for British sport, and this year is carrying that on.

Let's start with the Tour de France, as this year's Tour finishes today it's a topical subject.  Having gone 99 years without a British winner for the general classification, in fact no one even on the podium, we look to be set for a second winner in a row.  Last year Wiggins blew everyone away on the time trials, while showing that he can climb as well, with the help of his lieutenant Froome.  This year it's Froome showing what he can do, leaving his rivals on the climbs.  And in case we forget in the excitement of the Maillot Jaune, Mark Cavendish has moved up to joint 3rd on the all time list of stage victories, the highest placed sprinter.  And he'll be looking to make that his own on the Champs Elysees going for a sensational 5 victories in a row there.

Next let's have a look at tennis.  Two years ago I was defending Murray as a world class player who had done exceptionally well, even if he hadn't won any majors.  Well now times have changed.  He's moved from 4th to 2nd in the world rankings.  Has Olympic gold and two majors, beating Federer and Djokovic in finals.  If you're going to break into the elite club of major winners, you have to beat some good players, and he has done more than that, beating some of the most successful players in history.  Djokovic's unbeaten run is something I never thought I'd see, and Federer's record speaks for itself.    The depth isn't there in the men's game to back him up, and in the women's Robson and Watson are coming through nicely, but not quite at the level they can be yet.  Of course they are still young, and this is hugely promising.  Robson especially looks like she could become a major feature on the LTA tour.

In golf we have a flood of success.  In recent years Rose Clarke McIllroy and McDowell have all won majors.  McIllroy Donald and Westwood have all held the top spot in the world rankings.   Westwood is placed ominously two clear going into the final round of this year's open, hoping to break his duck after so many near misses.  And then there's the Ryder cup, admittedly Europe not Britain, but winning of 5 of the last 6 is huge.

England have faltered in recent years in their bid to be the best cricket team in the world.  Even saying that they are narrowly 3rd in both test and ODI rankings, 5th in T20 and are very well placed in the 2nd Ashes test having won the 1st.  Australia aren't the force they once were, but the ashes is always special, and matters so much to both teams.  Anderson is one of the premier pace bowlers in the world,  Swann the equivalent for spin, and Cook and Trott some of the best, most consistent batsmen.

The recent Lions tour gave a lot of people renewed hope in the team.  For something straight out of the amateur era, it is going to struggle to make the transition to professionalism where the relations and understanding of the players is so important.  Having lost the previous three series they needed to show that they still should exist, with players able to cope after a long hard season.  And I'm so glad to say that they did, winning the final test in some style, and George North getting one of the great Lions tries in the first test.

Then we come to the Olympics and Paralympics.  65 and 120 medals respectively, with 29 and 34 of them gold.  3rd in both medal tables, and in a combined one we would be sat in the same place.  But it wasn't just the quantity of medals, it was the manner that they were won, and the way the whole country got excited.  A lot of world class performances rewarded justly.

We're only a small nation.  But we have some great sportsmen.  We should be proud of what they have achieved and hope that they can carry it on for a long time to come.

summer or winter?

Earlier today I saw this tweet:

@timlovejoy: Don't get too angry with me, but is Summer sport better than Winter sport?
Case for: you do get more variety and we do win lots of stuff... Now

This got me thinking, because its an interesting question. What do I prefer and what are we best at?

Trying to split into different disciplines is difficult to start with. Football and rugby union are winter sports but they have big summer components too. Lions tours, world cups, euro championships and  then transfer window. These are possibly my personal highlights of the two sports, despite how much I enjoy them normally, with the lions to the fore. After those we have sports that are year round, but get a bit more focus during summer months. I'm thinking golf and tennis, with more majors in the summer and more coverage. And there's the reverse of football and rugby - cricket is summer but there are winter tours too..

To make it simpler I'm going to split sports this way.

Winter: football, rugby, hockey, cross country
Summer: cricket, cycling, track athletics, tennis, golf

I feel bad splitting it like this. I play hockey, and rugby us my favourite s msport to watch. But out of the sports that have components in both seasons I prefer their summer components. Winter sports, but their summer season. Tricky, and that holds for tennis and golf too.

This is before we even start talking about the big events. Olympics and commonwealth games are both summer only. Yes there are winter Olympics, but both myself and the country as a whole are much more interested in the summer version. I feel bad about that hut skiing as a sport to watch just isn't a big deal in the uk. Ski Sunday was nice to have, but didn't get the views.

However winter does have it's plus side. The football and rugby seasons have the excitement that comes with matches every week, and have the highest viewing figures because of that. Football is the national sport and with all the matches in winter it keeps people talking about what happened and what's coming for 9 months.

One factor that I've not covered yet is gender. I feel bad for the incoming stereotyping and apologise if I offend anyone. Out of the sports I listed the only ones that have decent women's coverage are athletics (both winter and summer) and tennis. And the tennis coverage is mainly in the summer. Coupled with Olympics and commenwealths being the dominant coverage for athletics, summer is a lot better for following female sport.

For me everything points to summer sport. Which I find a bit odd as I always assumed that winter sport was the main season. The things you realise when you sit and think about things!

I before e except after c

I saw something on BBC breakfast yesterday that I thought was quite interesting. An english professor has said that we shouldn't worry too much about spelling and punctuation as language naturally evolves, and we should let it do so.

Now, I always thought of the written word to be a representation of the spoken word, and it follows from that as the sound changes, so the spelling follows suit. From that point what was said is perfectly valid, and there are words in common use now that would never have been dreamt of just a few years ago. In much the same way words and phrases are fashionable. I remember "random"  being in vogue, now it's epic and legendary.

But I disagree with him about spelling and grammar being unimportant.

It has never been easier to spell. Spell checkers are everywhere. Predictive text works. You can even go and use a dictionary. With all these tools, incorrect spelling strikes me as lazy. And learning to spell is useful beyond just spelling. It gets people learning which I think is invaluable. With everything standardised, changing how words are spelt seems wrong. I like that twelfth has an F and phlegm a G.

With grammar I feel the same. You don't have the ease of spell check equivalents (at least good ones) but it's easy to find grammar laws online. I admit I overuse commas, and to a certain extent semicolons, but I think they're great. I don't want to lose them or possessive apostrophes. I actually take joy doing formal writing and using them properly.

One thing that is possibly worth including in this is the use of the right word in certain situations. I can't remember being taught when to use less and when to use fewer, but I learnt and it now bugs me when the wrong one is used. Things like that I feel should be taught, but if enough people use it wrongly, language will evolve and it will become acceptable. That doesn't mean I have to like it though.

Clearly all spelling and grammatical errors here are purely intentional and ironic...

Pray for Boston

There are no words.

What happened yesterday in Boston was utterly terrible. The very worst aspects of mankind was on show and I wanted to apologise for humanity. Two explosions, one incendiary device and a reported 5 others that didn't go off. 8 separate devices. The scale,  the disregard for human life is staggering to me. It's just sickening. And targeting the end of a marathon,  a great feat of endurance, overcoming what your body thinks is impossible. There are no words.

I think I may have felt this more than some because of the marathon. The people finishing it were around the 4hour mark,  when a large chunk of the 27000 would be looking to finish it. I've not run a lot compared to some,  and only halves not full marathons, but I felt a kindred with the runners. I know the sweat blood pain and tears they put themselves through. They're very similar to me in many ways and I can't believe they were targeted like this. There are no words.

Another reason why this has disturbed me is because of London. London's marathon is this Sunday. I've been there for the past two years supporting and would have been stood in the equivalent place to the first explosion in Boston about 3:30 into each of the previous races. Had this occurred at either of them I may not be here. I'm lucky, not one of the poor victims who have lost lives and limbs. There are no words.

But in the midst of the tragedy there was stories showing the good side of man. 1000families opened their homes to stranded runners. People ran towards the explosion instead of away in fear because they wanted to help. People gave what they could, from their own blood. It shows what man can do in a crisis and how he can meet it. There are no words.

Pray for Boston

FC by the FC

I recently watched the French connection and ultimately it left me disappointed. However, looking back on it,  I have been a bit harsh. Yes it had some flaws, but I looked at it with over 40 years of cinema advancement. I'm enjoying thinking about it more than I enjoyed it first time round!

First off, I have to address a major flaw ; the soundtrack. Countless times during the film any possible tension was ruined by almost comically bad music telling you it was going to be tense. This isn't something you can blame on age as a lot of older films have fantastic soundtracks. It seems a small thing to talk about, but it ruins many good films. My other complaints are the ending seemed confused. 2 or 3minutes less and it would have been brilliant, but as it was it just got a bit confused. And the other thing was the pacing of the plot in the first half, but this may have been a consequence of it being a true story.  It went very slow,  then big lump of plot in a single scene.

That apart it was actually better than I gave credit for. Things that seemed cliché weren't when it was new,  and I didn't credit this. The chase scene must have been groundbreaking and the interaction with the characters outside the main 2 cops was a lot of fun. A favourite scene was the subway one trying to follow alain, which was a lot of fun.

Overall it is a good film,  and I think I will enjoy it more the second time provided I watch it right. If only it had a better sound track...

Backdated 4 - Lions Watch!

Mid 6nations is the classic time to start picking a lions squad. Only it's never that simple. England will be expected to make up a large section of the squad but Gatland will no doubt pick plenty from Wales. Scotland have been better than expected this season and the iris are missing plenty who'd expect to make the plane. So my squad:

Front row
Last tour the Welsh lads made all the headlines,  but they've not been In the same format this year. That said you can't discount their class.  Dan Cole and cian healey look nailed on,  and from scotland I always like Ross ford and euan murray. Dylan Hartley and tom youngs both make a case.  For me murray Cole healey jenkins Jones ford Hartley Rees.  Youngs unlucky but just too soon. Might bolt

Second row
English and scottish both look strong here. The players missing from ireland and Wales want in too based on  class. Launchbury lawes and gray look to be the future,  but you ignore hines parling oconnell and wyn Jones at your peril.  For me the 3 young guns, oconnell if fit and hines. Tough on parling

Back row
This is interesting. Key for me is balance. I know gatland wants a fetcher to combat pocock, which points to Warburton. I think the best 2 back rowers have both been injured recently - croft and ferris. Robshaw wood heaslip obrien Lydiate and faletau are all good players too but this a lot of players that more look like 6.5s  I'd go with croft ferris and faletau, taking wood heaslip obrien and Lydiate. Robshaw too if space allows

9s

Youngs and care.  Next

10s
Farell and sexton are the favourites.  I'd take hook for versatility and would be interested to see if there's any new ones wilkinson

12
Roberts would be favourite but not playing great this year.  Barritt will lead the defence,  Marshall may find it too soon. No scottish candidates and D'Arcy is not the player he was

13
Old master and young pretender.  Odriscoll and tuilagi. Bod possible (probable?) captain.  Tough on Davies who is looking better and better. 

Back 3
Cuthbert north and bowel will almost definitely make the trip. Ashton needs to up his defence.  Halfpenny and kearney are probable and I'd take foden. Hogg and the Scottish wings look nice too. Nice problem to have! 

Backdated 3 - The Hobbit as a film

Growing up, one of my favourite books was the hobbit. I've read it loads of times, can pick it up from anywhere and know exactly whats happening straight away, and know the full mythology. I really enjoyed the lord of the rings film, so with peter jackson now making the hobbit,  with the excellent martin freeman in the lead role, I was excited. Only to be let down.

Before I launch into a tirade, I should note that as a film it was very good. It just wasn't the hobbit, the book from my childhood that I loved.

I will admit to being a purist; I think Tolkein's words are great, and shouldn't be messed with. So the fact that a large section of the plot was changed just to elongate the film and turn it into 3 so they can get more money really offended me. The main character differs from the one in the book, and the reason for the dynamic changing within the group is also wrong. The narrative voice from the book, a fantastic part of it, which really sets the tone of it is lost, and I'm not sure its even attempted. Nothing is made about going over the edge of the wild, key from the book, and things happen on the wrong side of the edge, losing the whole raison d'etre of it.

But all of this pales in comparison to what they do to the characters. The dwarves "look" wrong, and are far too silly. Thorin is too young. Saruman, who shouldnt be seen, is far too silly and not respected, which ruins a link that is needed for the start of the fellowship of the ring. Radagast is humiliated, and shouldn't even be in the film, he's not in the book. Azog, whose being dead is pretty necessary for the book, is miraculously alive and suddenly a main character.  This is when akl thats said of him is "whose father you slew in moria", azog being the father. Its so far removed from the book its not even funny. I was so disappointed in a film that could have been brilliant.

Backdated 2 - Sorkin's Stuido 60 is Sublime

Sorkin’s supreme studio 60 on the sunset strip

Aaron Sorkin is rightly renowned for the award-winning West Wing and Social Network.  The Newsroom, his current TV show, is something I am very eager to watch, and sad that I haven’t been able to yet.  His star is likely to rise higher still with the forthcoming biopic of Steve Jobs, which will apparently be done in just 3 different scenes, each one in the build up to a major product launch.  But one show that is often overlooked and was cancelled far too early is the quite brilliant Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip.

I’ve just finished rewatching the entire series, for only the second time, and I loved every moment of it.  Sorkin’s snappy dialogue fits the setting and the back and forth between the cast is a joy to behold.  As in West Wing, he is joined by Thomas Schlamme, and the camera work has some trademarks that let you know who it is behind the camera.  There isn’t quite the “Walk & Talk” of West Wing, but there are definite marks of it.  And when something is as seminal as that, why not continue to use it?

To summarise the major premise of Studio 60, it is a behind the scenes show about a late Friday night comedy show, in the style of Saturday Night Live.  The writer and executive producer, Wes Mandell loses his rag with the FCC and the censorship of his show live on air, gets fired and two old crew members return to rescue the show.  Starring Matt Perry as head writer Matthew Albie and Bradley Whitford as executive producer Danny Tripp, their chemistry (again first seen during Perry’s guest appearances as a lawyer on West Wing) is a joy, and they’re joined by a few others from there.

Through the first half of the series plot lines are set up which could conceivably last for a good 4 of 5 seasons.  Unfortunately, due to lack of rating success it got cancelled early, and you can see the rush to tie up a succession of loose ends.  It seems somewhat ironic that a show about a show where the ratings sometimes get glossed over in favour of putting out a good product gets canned for ratings.  And its a great shame, I would have loved to have seen how they would have been dealt with had time been their call.

That’s not to say that the second half of the series is devoid of good episodes in favour of finishing the plot.  Yes the final four have a lot of content in them, but they are stunningly written and performed, and the Disaster Show, featuring a cameo from Alison Janney, is great fun.

The backdrop of having to get a show ready to go every Friday night brings continual time pressure to the show, and adds an edge to it.  The constant reminder of the countdown clock in Matt’s office doesn’t let you forget it.  Remember, time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a banana.

Backdated 1 - Prometheus

Warning.  Here be spoilers!

I rarely, if ever, do film reviews, so this attempt to air my opinions on Prometheus may end up slightly haphazard.  Set in the same universe as the Alien quadrilogy, it had some stiff competition to stand up to in the two originals, widely regarded as classics, while having to cope with being expected to be far better than films 3 and 4 (which I am yet to see).  It also had the added pressure of being a prequel, and having to therefore exist as a standalone film, while setting up any future plots it chose to and adding to the mythology.

The film started with some fantastic panoramic shots over mountain tops and valleys, before focusing in on the top of a waterfall.  A humanlike figure approached, with enough difference to make him alien.  He drank some black liquid which transformed him, black patches appearing over his skin, and his body beginning to fall apart before he tumbled over the precipice, with the camera zooming into his body, down to his DNA which mutated and was ripped asunder before our eyes, before reforming.  Visually impressive, and raising questions as to what happened after it reformed, it was a very good opening teasing us with what was to come.

Unfortunately that was as good as it got.  The film seemed to suffer from a great deal of confusion, hints of ideas formed throughout but none really developed to a level where you could see if they had any scope.  There was a lack of identity, right down to what it was trying to be.  The original Alien was a horror and the sequel an action packed journey.  But Prometheus seemed to want to do both but without being able to do either well.  If it chose which path to take, and replaced some of the scenes of the opposite nature with more plot development it could have delivered a film to back up the opening visuals.

The plot in a nutshell is that archaeologists on earth had found images in 7 different ancient civilisations that all showed men looking up at larger humanoid figures pointing to the same pattern of stellar objects.  We then travel to the only known place with this system, and the only habitable location within it, and find a non-natural structure that they then explore.  Inside they separate into 2 groups, find a body with the head perfectly preserved and more of the mysterious black liquid.  One group taking the head back to the ship, and the other group end up trapped inside over night and get attacked by creatures that grow from the liquid.  We return in the morning to find them both presumably dead, one of the crew poisoned with a drop of the liquid by the ships android, and the android goes separately and finds one of the humanoids (who the head belonged to and turns out to be a form of human that we descended from) alive in a stasis chamber.  We return to the ship, have one of the supposedly dead crew attack it after being mutated, while another member turns out to be pregnant with an alien baby after sleeping with the poisoned man who gets torched to death.  After an emergency caesarean she thinks she kills it, and finds that the company founder, close to death, is on board trying to find the reason for life.  Together (with android) they go to the stasis human and ask it, only to find more black poison, wake the ‘human’ and for it to destroy the android, kill the founder and try to kill the rest.  She runs away, the ship goes on a suicide mission to stop it trying to kill everyone on earth.  It survives the crash, comes after the heroine but gets eaten by the alien baby, from which is born the alien of the quadrilogy.

Fully developed the idea of why these people came to earth (and other planets), left and why they then want to kill them could have made for a good film.  Explanation as to what happened when the ‘human’ drank the liquid in the opening, full blown action fight between the people from earth and those they go to see, proper horror with aliens of both kind lurking around the darkened corridors, all would have been an improvement on the confusion.  Unfortunately this isn’t what we got, and they just tacked the link to the universe onto it, and had no need to apart from the name.

The titan Prometheus tried to put man and god on a level.  Ridley Scott tried to put this on a level with the original 2 Alien films, missed and will be lucky if its considered on the same level as the latter 2.