Showing posts with label Facebook. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Facebook. Show all posts

Friday, 19 January 2018

I'VE HEARD ABOUT THIS "INTERNET"

I’VE HEARD ABOUT THIS “INTERNET”

I've heard about this internet about which you speak
I've heard it's full of naked folk and body parts playing hide and seek
I've heard it's full of news-based lies and just made up assumptions
Perverts hiding in plain sight and incognitos lacking any gumption

I've heard about this Twitter place about which you speak
I've heard it's all photographs of food and thoughts to make you shriek
I hear its full of shouting fools declaring such stupid opinions
That you begin to wonder if they’re all the government’s fawning minions

I've heard about this Snapchat site about which you speak
I've heard it's all about teenagers sharing pictures of their butt-cheeks
I’ve heard they’re sending home-made porn but just for fifteen seconds
Which is a long time for a teenage lad  - that’s what my sister reckons

I've heard about this Facebook thing about which you speak
I’ve heard its full of the self-absorbed and those who attention-seek
I’ve heard it’s full of kittens, unicorns, rainbows and ugly babies
As well as adverts aimed at single men sent by very dodgy ladies

I've heard about this Instagram about which you speak
I’ve heard it involves photos at which you might actually want to peek
I’ve heard you can make it work quite well if you’re clever with hastags
So strangers “Ooh!” and “Aah!” and you get comments from sarcastic wags

I've heard about this Pinterest about which you speak
I’ve heard it’s where the gullible park links to the many things they seek
I’ve heard it’s full of walls of stuff that people really would like to sell
Though whether much of it is any good is so very hard to tell

I’ve heard about the YouTubes and the eBays of which you speak
You mention your website after every bloody show in your TV doublespeak
Some try to tell us that this internet is a link to many wondrous things
Others maintain it’s the devil’s playground encouraging a multitude of sins

So I've heard about this internet about which you speak
I've heard it's too distracting consuming much of every week
I’m told it’s causing untold miseries and short attention spans
Though I was told that by the Daily Mail who aren’t its biggest fans



MAWH, January 2018


Wednesday, 9 November 2016

TRUMP WINS 9/11/16


Bedtime, November 8th:

I fear what I'll find
By the dawn's early light...

Humanity...
I'm counting on you
To do the right thing
(Don't know why) -
Do not let me down*

Dawn, November 9th:

When you wake up
Realise the world has
Indeed gone quite mad

And...

In the words of
The great thinkers of the age
Dark times, but this struck me as being rather wry..
Have to "deal with it"

CN: You're watching this horror too then....

MH: Like a car crash... Yet can't take my eyes off it...

CN: He's doing well in Pennsylvania too... this is hideous....

MH: Fear will get you a long way...

MH: Just called Florida for DT...
"Women For Trump" (Jesus...!)

CN: Just heard :- (This is hideous

MH: "Women For Trump" (Jesus...!)

CN: Wisconsin going to the dark side....

MH: Do you think America would ever have voted for a woman...?
The glass ceiling might slam down for generations...

CN: Oh god... what is wrong with "people"?
You cannot fight the power of
the mindless sound bite :-/

MH: (...)**

MH: Well, I refuse to let them buy my book...

CN: He's 16 votes away...

MH: You cannot fight the power of the mindless sound bite :-/

CN: ...and "Drain the Swamp"

CN: ...whatever that means

MH: Arguing against the empty rhetoric of a slogan like "Make America Great Again" (or for that matter "I want my country back") always makes you sound like you somehow don't... Even when what you really want is something better than the slogan suggests. But these slogans rapidly become the chants of the mob and drown out any further debate...

SM: Was Jerzy Kosinski years ahead of the game with Being There? Is Trump a 21st century Chauncey Gardner

MHonTW:
Why does reporting from Las Vegas
always look like going over to
ask for the votes in Eurovision?
MHonTW: Why does reporting from Las Vegas always look like going over to ask for the votes in Eurovision?

MHonTW: "...may be decided by a few thousand people in a handful of states..." is nonsense when they've all already voted you know BBC News

MHonTW: Looks like it's all over for the least worst option...

GS: Nellie the elephant packed her truck and trundled out of the circus, off she went moaning trumpity trump, trump, trump trump...

MH: The head of the herd was calling, far, far away...

Tw: Look America, I love you dearly, but I hope you'll understand when I withdraw my tourist dollars for a few years...
(I know "You Wont Be Missed!")

MHonFB: So, Don... Your place in history is secure, your picture will go on a banknote, your face will be carved on a mountain... Now, if you could try to keep quiet and try not to do any real damage...

MHonTW: This morning's result does not, of course, mean that every other "mad as a box of snakes" point of view is now perfectly acceptable...
Oh, for the love of...

Because
"Celebrities react to Donald Trump victory"
is all that really matters...

MHonTW: Suppose it's rather awkward for TM the PM to have to congratulate someone for becoming leader after an actual election...

MHonFB: So, America, you're prepared to put up with any lunatic just as long as they've got a winkle...?

The above represents some of my personal lowlights from a very frustrating late evening and early morning on Social Media, (with their own contributions from several reliable sources - you know who you are)

*They did (!)
**Speechless, in other words

Wednesday, 7 October 2015

THE "THREE LITTLE WORDS" DEBATE

I indulged in a bit of banter yesterday. I haven't really done much in the way of banter since those days around the kitchen table back in Levenshulme in the nineties, and I found it all rather fun. It went like this:

MH: The sheer contempt, horror and fear instilled in you by those three little words: "Fancy Dress Party"

MH: Just as worrying, another three words: "Black Tie Event"

CN: Team Building Activity

MH: Good one :-)

CN: Business Networking Opportunity

CN: Family Fun Day


MH: "Have Your Say" (this could become a "thing" you know) ;-)

CN: Office Christmas Lunch

MH: :-) :-) :-)

MH: "Light Entertainment Programme"

CN: Ice Breaker Questions

MH: Yike!

CN: Round Robin Letter

MH: Fine Art Installation

MH: Shared Accommodation Only

CN: :-O

CN: Meet and Greet


MH: What's your story?

CN: Old School Reunion

MH: (Serious ouch!!!)

MH: Who's going first?

MH: Use Chemical Toilet

MH: (and the kicker) "Conservative Party Policy" ;-)

CN: The Sun Says

MH: Daily Mail Headline :-)

CN: No offence, but

MH; and its stablemate "I'm only joking!"

CN: Theresa May Speech

MH: We'll call you

MH: It'll be fun

MH: Experimental Theatre Production

MH: Sink or swim

MH: Consult financial adviser

MH: Automated call system

MH: Phone home immediately

MH: Read out loud

MH: What d'you think?

CN: Constructive feedback session

MH: Ooh yes... Aargh!

MH: ...and "group development day" frown emoticon

MH: There's also "look after this"

MH: ...and "Can you just...?"

MH: Anyway, having come to the conclusion that ALL phrases are, quite frankly, terrifying, I suppose that I'd better just crawl back under my rock.

However…

AH: Business planning meeting

MH: :-)

AH: hated them - always lead to redundancies and closures. Should have been called Unbusiness Planning Meetings

MH: Rationalisation and downsizing :-(

AH: Nope - piss poor management and knee jerk reactions.

MH: Both qualify ;-)

MH: And TBH I'm really not fond of ANY "management speak" - it seems to indicate purest gittage

AH: At least we are on the same page and singing off the same song sheet.

SR: Blue sky thinking….

MH:. And its evil cousin "That's totally awesome!" ;-)

MF: I do have a wide selection of you need one!!

MH: This does not surprise me ;-)

SP: Dresscode: smart casual. You can have one or the other not both buddy

MH: Or, in my case, only the second ;-)

MH: Thanks for the banter, folks. You know, I don't think that I've had a proper bit of banter since I left Levenshulme back in '97... Just a bit of fun (except for the initial ones which are, of course in deadly earnest! - Just remember these golden rules --- 1: Wear fancy dress over the age of about 10 and you look like an idiot; 2: Wear a tux and you look like an evil idiot. Remember these and you'll be fine) :-)

Later...

MH: Dammit, CN, in all that discussion about horrific "three little words" options, I managed to miss out "I Voted Tory" (!!!) - (Not me personally, you understand, just the expression…!) :-)

CN: We also forgot "IDS"

MH: Slaps forehead (My own, not his. Although…)


Tuesday, 16 December 2014

HAIR TODAY

One of the things about getting to my great age, and having a FizzBok account, (however under-used and under-friended it may be), is that, because they know just how old I am, and when my birthday is, or was, occasionally "targeted" adverts like this one appear from time to time, just to make me feel really special… or to remind me that time's crucible has be in its hot, shiny bowl…

It really must be my age, I suppose…

After all, how many gentlemen of a certain age can actually claim not to have at least a thinning, if not totally non-existent thatch upon their noggin, or at least be troubled by the vaguest possibility of the "chimp's arse" effect that can be going on up there without us even being aware of it.

Luckily for me, of course, despite all of the increasing salt amongst the pepper, that particular effect hasn't yet come into play, and neither has the also much-feared Charlton combover, even though my forehead does seem to get more expansive every time I look.

I fear that the full-on "potato head" may be just a few scant years away…

There are several problems that I have with this particular advert however, and not only because it seemed to have been directed at me as if they were trying to tell me something.

The first problem is that, with his orange top and his "shaven-headed" look, he looks to me just like a Guantanamo detainee which, in marketing terms at least, I don't imagine is much of a selling point unless you do happen to have some ambitions towards that particular sort of lifestyle choice.

Secondly, (and I admit that this could just be my eyesight, or the way that I happen to have first looked at the pictures), I get the distinct impression that, rather than giving the gentleman in question a full head of hair, they've just tattooed little dots onto his scalp to simulate hair growth and, indeed, give the "look" that their might still be follicle heads up there in the dust bowl…

Now, I'm not the world's biggest fan of tattoos anyway, but the thought of someone sticking needles into my scalp, and of having to live with the consequences until, hopefully, a ripe old age, whilst still resembling what my Dad might have termed a "Bovver Boy" back in the day, really isn't going to persuade me, either.

Or, I start to think to myself, maybe it's some kind of plastic film. A "skull cap" that you put on like those hats that Ming the Merciless used to wear back in the old "Flash Gordon" serials, only printed with lots of little dots instead of the whole "Evil Emperor" full on jet black effect.

With my ability to sweat, itch and generally crumple anything I wear, I fear that wouldn't make for a good look, either.

Finally, and perhaps most disturbingly of all, the person in the photograph also just happens to resemble someone I used to work with which is freaking me out in several ways, not least because he's either not aged a day in a decade, or he's moved over into the blunt end of male modelling in a manner that meeting the real person might never have suggested to anyone, I imagine.

Look, I know that the appearance of youth is just about everything to everybody nowadays, but honestly, do try to have a little more dignity, my friends, before the madness overwhelms you.

Or just wear a hat…

Tuesday, 9 September 2014

CONTROVERSY (OR NOT)

You know, I fretted buckets that a weekend blog posting that I wrote last weekend might prove to be ever so slightly "controversial" amongst my chums. I worried for days beforehand about whether or not it was appropriate or not, only to find that no bugger actually read the bloody thing...

Generally speaking, I don’t often go out of my way to be deliberately controversial as such. Sometimes it just sort of “happens” when I’m trying to be whimsical in that way that only I seem to understand.

And sometimes it simply doesn’t work anyway, given that I generally flitter through life being much ignored, overlooked, and unloved.

Sometimes I make a quite innocent remark, only for it to be massively misinterpreted and get me into a whole heap of trouble, and, on occasions, I just suffer from an almost impossible to predict crassness and tactlessness that I maintain was more about unfortunate timing and unlucky coincidences than anything deliberate.

After all, I ought to know better.

For example, I know that the England (and Wales) Cricket Team have been making a spectacularly poor show of playing the recent one-day series against India, but the commentary on Test Match Special that I have enjoyed for years has been significantly tainted by the occasional presence on the team of a recently added summarizer who is, quite frankly, spoiling it for me with his jibes and comments and generally irritating manner.

Being a creature of the modern era, at least in some ways, I have been onto several social media platforms to express my irritation at his continued presence, albeit in a slightly abstract and whimsical manner, only to have all of my opinions ignored by just about everyone.

And then an innocent enough exchange – or at least I thought it was – about fund-raising opportunities got me into a whole heap of trouble when the easily offended brigade chose to point out a particular unfortunate coincidence (about which I had been previously unaware) over something I wrote in a failed effort to amuse someone…* 
Maybe you could sell one of your players...?
Well… you wouldn’t have to sell off ALL of him or her, obviously… I mean, presumably most of them have viable organs…? Obviously the livers probably aren’t much of an option, but there must be a spare kidney or two knocking about…? ;-)
Ironically, when a friend of mine had a similar sounding experience recently, I sent him a personal message which included the following…
Here’s one of those timely reminders that you can write what you like (whatever it was), but you can never predict how it’s going to be interpreted… and the possibilities of people taking offence about something that comes completely out of left-field are extraordinary…
Perhaps sometimes I should listen to myself a bit more.

Of course, we are living in times where people will keep on “reckon-ing” in public, and so we all probably need to be a little more careful about the things we say and write, but, equally, we can’t all predict what everyone’s personal circumstances might be at any given moment, or how anyone might react to something that everyone else might see as being utterly harmless.

We do, from time-to-time, need to be careful about the things we say, of course we do, but should that mean that we all have to walk on eggshells all of the time, just in case we upset someone, however unexpectedly or unintentionally…?

In the end, it seems, it might be better if we all just shut up about everything I suppose, but I suspect that’s precisely what the “joy vampires” would prefer…

* This never actually happened, of course (because almost nobody actually gives a damn
about anything I might have to say), but I'm using it as an example of the kind of thing
that does happen from time-to-time...

Thursday, 15 May 2014

THE RED FLAG OF FRIENDSHIP


The constant delays over completion on mum's flat means that the sad little posting that I've composed to mark that less-than-monumental event keeps getting postponed, and instead I have to keep dredging up nonsense like this from the dark depths of the "Drafts" File to fill the void, in the misguided belief that it's "better than nothing" although, to be fair, and despite what is alluded to in the text, this sort of thing happens fairly regularly, so it's never really going to be utterly irrelevant...

I’m fairly sure that nobody else struggles with this kind of dilemma. After all, if you’re sensible enough to be reading this, then you’re obviously the sort of very sane, very rational kind of human being who would never be filled with such doubts or concerns, but, whilst you get on with your sensible existence, it seems that, perhaps rather sadly, the author is not that kind of human being at all.

The dilemma is a little part of the world of social networking which probably doesn't trouble anybody else at all, but one which causes me no end of angst and paroxysms of doubt and anguish as I have lengthy internal debates as whether to click or not to click.

You see, it all comes down to those little red flags which indicate that someone wishes to “friend” you on a social networking site. I’m sure that the obvious, rational thing to do is just to click “accept’ or “decline” and get on with your life.

But that simple choice, for me, is where it starts to get complicated.

After all, in the first instance, is it a name that I recognise? This is not always the case. After all, I’m quite capable of forgetting someone’s name within nanoseconds of being told it, so the chances are that, if I did know you twenty years ago, I would still struggle to dredge your monicker from the slurry and sludge of my mind.

If it is a name that seems vaguely familiar, it is then possible that they know other people that I also vaguely recognise but have drifted away from for various reasons and might not want to re-establish links with.

Also, are they likely to be the sort of person who is likely to fill my life with all sorts of banal nonsense that I’d rather not know about?

Or do I recall them having extreme and radical points of view which I’d rather not be exposed to…? This particular issue always, always, means immediate banishment to the realms of “not following” in order not to upset them by the extreme guillotine of the “unfriend” option, but has the added advantage of keeping me relatively sane and away from all of their nonsense and the endless stuff about which I really do not care.

Also, these flags exist in a kind of quantum state.

The mere observing of the contents within and underneath them means that the flag itself vanishes as if it has never been and, if you are like me, and get distracted into other thoughts and activities, out of sight can inevitably mean out of mind, and that request can lurk there unnoticed for months until the next friendship request pops up and I then see the other one still lurking there accusingly and forgotten.

How long, then, is too long in such situations…?

Yes, in my case, such requests are usually several months apart, because I really am that unpopular and forgotten about. You might not believe it, with your own massively successful and sociable existence, but you’re just going to have to learn to deal with it like I did, and just accept that you’re reading the words of a social outcast, a pariah, and a misanthrope of the first order.

HAHAHAHAHAHA-HAHHHHH!!!

Recently I made the mistake of trying to do some “social networking” via the Kindle whilst I was in bed not trying to sleep and shredding my body clock, and this is never a good idea. My main problem involves the fact that the touch-screen seems to be getting ever less sensitive to my chunky old fingertips, perhaps because of the thin film of finger-deposited grease is playing havoc with the connections.

So, there I was, busily trying to find a way to rotate a photograph which had orientated itself in the wrong direction when all hell broke loose and screens started jumping about all over the place, and, amidst the chaos of trying to wrest control back from HAL again, I must have inadvertently hit an “accept” button which had been lurking there for a while, because, when stillness and calm returned again, I suddenly appeared to have one more “friend” than I’d had previously…

Well, this simply would not do, especially given the length of time involved, so I then had to get up and get myself to a keyboard which was attached to an operating system which connected a format of that website that I at least vaguely understood and, after sorting out precisely who it might be, tinker with my timelines and settings and get things back onto an even keel before the ghosts got into the machine and the gremlins awoke.

So, here I find myself, dragging my way through life with another "friend" to deal with, and more electronic conversations to be negotiated. It's not that I really mind, of course - after all, it's nice to be remembered, no matter how obliquely - but now there's a whole new minefield - of who knows who, and what who might say to whom about what - to be negotiated and that's, quite frankly, bloody terrifying.

Still… Welcome, I suppose.

You know who you are…

Saturday, 5 April 2014

BRIOCHE WITH YOU




I was hoping to persuade you that this was an aerial view of a path taken during an exciting helicopter ride to make my life seem far more exciting than it actually is… but it's only a chocolate chip brioche from Morrisons...

Despite my excitement at having found them, they turned out to be a rather disappointing breakfast, to be quite honest, even though they appeared to be quite an interesting alternative option once I’d failed to find any hot cross buns to slip into the basket which marked me out to all the other trolley-pushing, child-rearing customers as being the sort of person lucky enough to still have a freewheeling, carefree lifestyle.

“Hmm…” I reasoned “The Beloved likes brioche… and she likes chocolate… so what could possibly be a better option…?”

Well, as it turned out, at breakfast time the following morning, they were deemed to be “Too spicy” and, as they were subsequently making their way to the bin having also failed to appeal at lunchtime and since dried out to an even more ghastly degree, I found myself looking at one of them and noticing that the drizzled “X” contouring over the top surface looked not unlike one of the paths meandering up and down some of the hills hereabouts and, having had that thought, I whipped out my little camera and tried to immortalise the thought.

Later on, I imagined that it would be amusing to tinker with the photograph and zoom in on it, just to see how convincing the idea might be, and then I decided that it might prove “hilarious” to “share” this thought through the platform of “social media” and so I posted it, alongside the first paragraph above, to hopefully slightly brighten their collective days

Well, it was a slow news day.

Now, obviously I was not expecting anyone to actually think that I had taken an aerial photograph of a nearby peak, because that “freewheeling, carefree lifestyle” doesn’t really involve constant helicopter flights and champagne cocktails on the verandas of the casinos in Monte Carlo (Mostly it’s basically boredom without distraction, to be perfectly frank with you) but I thought that the notion might sell the otherwise peculiar angle of the point of view.

Anyway, some people seemed to “like” my funny little photo – or perhaps they just liked the idea of a chocolate chip brioche - and that, as they say, was that. The world moved on, other news came in, and that notion slipped down the timeline and into the swill-bucket of (personal) history.

And yet…

I suppose that I’ve been unofficially - and possibly unconsciously - testing out a few parameters lately when it comes to the small matter of which kind of thing works best in whatever particular form of social media I happen to be hooked up to at the time. My own choices being TwitWorld and FizzBok and, well, here I suppose. I do also sometimes “recommend” things on “Google+” of course, but that’s rather like bellowing into a mirror, to be honest.

Big “newsy” stuff seems to work in all of the forms which I use, but daft little photographs like this one seem to get the “best” reaction in FizzBok. They might get “looked at” in TwitWorld by a couple of dozen random strangers whilst they are in the visible part of the timeline for a nanosecond, but they swiftly pass into the general gravy of the internet in the blink of a pixel.

TwitWorld itself doesn’t seem to “like” blog links either and, to be fair, despite the fact that FizzBok links seem to be the only reason some people remain aware that the blog still exists at all - as opposed to just bookmarking the link and habitually visiting - it’s never brought in a huge amount of traffic either. Also, on occasion, I don’t believe that the content is particularly “FizzBok-worthy” and prefer to let it sink or swim on its own accord without the “benefit” of broadcasting it to my tiny circle of acquaintances.

TwitWorld does seem to like my wordplay, though, if I “join in” with some of the hashtag games I play (To the tune of rarely more than six “favourites” and a “retweet”), but less so if I’m merely rambling on with some random thought which has struck me, because I don’t generally have the sort of interplay and banter with people that other people seem to have in that particular part of the interweb.

Occasionally I will barge in on a conversation which can be fun, but it still makes me feel like the bloke I always used to be when I went to parties – standing all alone in a corner and feeling that during whatever conversations I might get to have, I’m almost bound to make a complete tit of myself.

A bit like I’m doing with the blog, really, only the blog doesn’t give me the instant disapproving feedback and toe-curling embarrassment that actually talking to a real person used to do, which is, I suppose, why I persist with it.

Ah well, I guess that the quest for some kind of meaning for it all will continue until I finally bail out and lose interest again, but until then, dear reader, it’s good to have you along for the ride.

Now, is it time for breakfast yet…?

Wednesday, 26 February 2014

SPILT SILK


One grey morning last week, I woke up in a slightly bad mood, switched on the TV set, and was greeted with the 5:55am round of trailers for upcoming programmes. Now, because one of these irritated me so very much at such an early hour, I felt unwisely compelled to post a small but perfectly pithy rant on the first available social networking site which came to hand, one which went something like this - because I have since tweaked some of my punctuation errors with the benefit of hindsight...
That BBCTV "Silk" trailer truly is the most cringe-makingly awful thing to appear on my TV screen in a very long time (and I'd just seen the horrible "EastEnders" one on before it). 
From the "Rottweiler" reference, through some Stuke shouting, and on into the "professional not personal" exchange, it looks like the biggest load of old cliche-ridden tosh imaginable... (not that I could credit anyone involved with all that much imagination…)
Big mistake...

You see, perhaps rather interestingly, that small "rant of the morning" (which was doing little more in the great scheme of things other than distracting me from the horrors of watching the beginning of that day's "BBC Breakfast") genuinely garnered this response:
I was involved in the early development of that show! Have you ever watched it? It's crafted with a lot of love and care by some really clever and committed people!
Which is the sort of tiny event happening in my life which, as you know, would inevitably set me thinking…

And thinking will, of course, more likely than not, get me into even more trouble…

Still, no matter.

Here goes nothing…

After all, that particular person has been on my "people I vaguely knew" list for quite a few years now and this (THIS!! THIS!!!) was the first thing that I'd written that she had ever chosen to remark upon.

I guess it must have been that "lacking in imagination" barb…

And I only added that because I'd finished the previous sentence with the word "imaginable" and thought that the wordplay played well with the sentiment being expressed, which only goes to show something or other...

Ah! The perils of over-thinking your thoughtlessness...

To be honest, I am, quite frankly, astonished at this response anyway. Not because of the content (because everyone is entitled to their opinion), but simply because me and my little ways are so used to being so completely and utterly inconsequential so as to believe that nobody really cares what I might think in one way or another about anything. So, to actually get some kind of reaction, especially from someone who actually cares about the thing that I was criticising, and who also turns out to have been involved in its creation is, quite honestly, almost unbelievable...

And more than a tad embarrassing, if truth be told.

I mean... Who'd have thought it...?

Oh, I know that it's easy to criticise when you don't have to do it yourself... but, as consumers, we are, after all, allowed to dislike the things that are created for us...

"Those that can, do, those that can't… complain about it incessantly on the internet…"

…just as I know that nobody else would want to watch a television drama that I wrote, or even a TV channel that I was controller of, if such things ever came to pass in some very unlikely alternate universe.

There would be no bloody soap operas on mine, for a start, nor any "reality" shows or "talent" shows, and not all that much sport, either… So there might be very little in the way of programming at all, which would at least be an "interesting" way to run a television service, I suppose…

Now, it might very well turn out that series three of "Silk" is the most brilliant, award-winning and unmissable drama of the year, but there's still no way that I would be drawn to it by that ghastly trailer. But then again, what do I know about anything? I've never felt the need to watch "Waterloo Road" and that's won awards, and people seemed to like "Ripper Street" even though I realised that it was "not my sort of thing" after only three minutes.

The problem for me is that a lot of TV Drama these days really is a load of old cliche-ridden drivel, and I do genuinely believe that a lot of the people currently writing it must have honed their craft in the unreal worlds of soap operas and computer gameplay when it comes to notions of plotting, which is all well and good when you're dealing with audiences with the attention spans of the average mayfly, but doesn't necessarily make for good drama.

Popular, maybe, but good…?

Please…

You see, I still believe that there is a difference, and just because something is hugely popular, that alone is not enough to justify calling it good, no matter how many awards and how much adulation it might receive.

Perhaps, as a viewer, I've got to an age where I've slipped out of the all-important young aspirational professional demographic and these shows are not really meant for the likes of me, although, given the way that young, aspirational professionals are generally portrayed, often as coke-snorting hedonists dwelling in some scary facsimile of the great metropolis, I think that I'm rather pleased not to be associated with them.

Of course, when they are persuaded to comment upon or defend their art, there is a certain arrogance amongst many the broadcasting professionals (almost as much as I have myself…), and many of them are still displaying those old familiar Oxbridge superiority complexes despite the democratisation of the broadcasting business since the fusty old days of the tweed-suited, pipe-smoking brigade. This can mean that any kind of criticism, especially coming from an "inferior" intellect, is taken very personally as if, by finding their output less that magnificent, somehow you are daring to imply that they are slightly less than perfect themselves.

The attitude appears to be that, not unlike the people running the banks, they are paid very well to do this job so this must mean ipso facto that they must be the best people to do it, and, because such great minds as theirs are producing this stuff, it must be good because they say it is, and what do mere viewers like you rabble understand about it anyway?

Of course I know that there's a lot of hard work involved in making any TV show, and I also know that, just as in the movie business, nobody generally sets out to make something that's bad, even if that's how it ultimately turns out. To someone like me, the problem seems to be that a lot of what passes for drama on television and in the cinema these days is, quite frankly, bloody awful, and to find someone admitting that they've had a hand in such things and, furthermore, finding out that they might actually be proud of it in some way, is a very confusing fact to accept, because we all know that it could and should be better and we deserve to get better, and the old adage "A country gets the television it deserves…" should no longer necessarily apply.

However, since when has anyone working in TV Drama ever given a rat's kidney about what the civilians, those unwashed non-broadcasters, think anyhow? They may occasionally make a feedback programme or two, just to make themselves appear to be accountable, but the appearances of the professionals when they do condescend to appear, is always tinged with an air of smug arrogant superiority which implies that the ignorant viewer really doesn't know what they are talking about. Not only that, but most of the TV professionals I have known over the years have claimed that they rarely watch any television themselves anyway, usually before getting a bit drunk and then insisting upon playing a tape of one of their old shows to round off the evening...

The production environment is also a situation where one opinion can basically be treated as if it is almost God-like, and so much fawning and gushing goes on that it must be very difficult to be the one person in the room who can see the bilge that they are churning out for what it actually is and actually feel brave enough to say something.

The Emperor's new clothes again, perhaps…?

Interestingly there are few other professions where the rewards and awards are so profligate for just doing your job. When my Uncle Danny came up from his shift down the pit, I'm sure that he never got a round of applause or a trinket for his mantelpiece for "Best  Supporting Miner" on a shift well done.

Meanwhile I pity some of the actors involved in some of these productions because I genuinely don't know how they can find a way to bring themselves to say some of those wretched lines (I'm sure the pay cheque helps) or perform them in the way that the "Director" instructs them to.

Mind you, I am also of the opinion that it is really unwise to allow actors to speak about anything unless they're reading other people's words… (c.f. That big chap who used to be in "Casualty" appearing in court describing his attackers as being "like two hyenas bringing down an old water buffalo" for God's sake… or anything Saint Helen of Mirren might grandly pronounce upon…)

So, after all of this unreasonable ranting, what have we actually learned today, other than I have no real sense of proportion at all, and a whole bag of chips on my shoulder? Well, probably not all that much, actually, other than the fact that certain rants are best left for the blog, and people can either choose to agree or disagree with them as they like in a calm, safe and ultimately insignificant little backwater like this is.

It is still a hateful, hateful trailer, though… and, if you do happen to be the person who put it together, then I'm sorry, but it certainly wouldn't persuade me to waste an hour of my Monday evenings watching that show, and if you honestly believe that those thirty seconds are a representation of good drama and how human beings actually behave, then perhaps you're really not as good at this business as you like to think you are…

Meanwhile, my copy of Charlie Brooker's "Screen Burn" has just turned up…

I think I may be letting them off lightly…


Sunday, 16 February 2014

THAT "CGI" THING...

Ah yes, my "comedy moment of the week" from last Monday, when I spotted a building as we arrived for our meeting, made a merry quip, and decided that I really had to take a snapshot of it to share with my (not very much) wider world…

You see, it says "CGI" on the side, so I mused to m'colleague about how "real" he thought it might be.

(Of course, you need to know that "CGI" means "Computer Generated Imagery" for that to make sense, but I really ought not to have to explain that to a tech-savvy lot like you obviously are… Still, future archivists might just wonder, so it's worth having a glossary…)

Anyway, perhaps against my better judgement, it got posted, and, alongside its 22 page views and one "favourite" on TwitPic, this is how it played out in FizzBokLand, which was pretty good, I feel, for a place where things, as you are probably already aware, remain interesting for about five minutes at most until the next thing comes along to distract everyone…


MH: I don't know what, but SOMETHING about this building strikes me as being not quite real…
(4 "likes")
BH: Brilliant - May I borrow this ?
MH: Oh, steal away…
(1 "like")
BH:Cheers!
JG: It's the render….
(1 "like")
MH: We drove past quite quickly so it began to pixellate…
(1 "like") 
JG: Yeah I thought it looked a bit blocky.
(1 "like") 
IM: Gollum on reception maybe?
(1 "like") 
MH:“I’m here to see your sales manager… Could you give him a ring and…”
“A RING?!? Nobodys gets the ring… S’mine!!!! My preciousssssss…”
(1 "like")

(Popular fellow, me… Maybe "BH" had more "fun" with its alleged "brilliance"…?)

Okay, so it's not the highest comedy you'll ever have seen, and the four of only managed to entertain each other for a few moments, but it's all I've got for you this morning, so it will just have to do...



Tuesday, 11 February 2014

DRAGGING IT OUT

Because I've got my finger on the pulse about all things youthful, I was watching TV Channel "E4" the other day just to scramble their advertising demographic and confuse their marketing people. Okay, that's not strictly true. I was watching it because I actually quite like "The Big Bang Theory" (The US Comedy Show which started off being about misfit science geeks but which seems to have transformed itself into something more hopeful), and still tune in to the repeats even though we've seen most of them a fair few times now.

Well, it keeps us occupied whilst we're reheating our evening meal, and, presumably, really annoys those people trying to position the channel squarely in the "Youth TV" market and who wish that the old folk would just go away. Not unlike, I imagine, that chap who runs Radio One seemed to imply a few months ago when he suggested that he didn't want us oldies listening to his "hip and happening" (you can tell how old I am...) radio station because he wanted to keep it special for him and his mates.

"S'not fair! You grown-ups spoil EVERYTHING! Buying the same clothes as us, using the same websites... Why don't you just GO AWAY to places where old people hang out...?"

This, incidentally, may be one reason why FizzBok is apparently losing users hand over fist, by the way... It's started to be perceived as a place your mum might go for a bit of a chat. I can still remember the mind-crashing tedium of having to go with my mum to the shops when I was a small person and having to listen to her drone on and on when she stopped to chat to someone she knew who she'd just happened to bump into...

"GOD!!!"

And FizzBok is just like that...

Anyway, the point that I was going to make was that I saw a trailer for a melodramatic TV series called "Revenge" which looks godawful, and not the sort of thing that I would ever waste my time with at all, but which was about to return for its third series, presumably because one lot of revenge is never quite enough.

Now I'm sure that, for its target audience, "Revenge" hits all of the right notes, and its plots are all suitably convoluted and soap-operatic, and that its plot reveals and cliffhangers are suitably astonishing. I'm also quite certain that the massively over-acted "evil voice" scenes played by impossibly glamorous young actors all reach just the right pitch of absurdity. I'm not going to criticise any TV show for successfully entertaining its audience no matter how stupid I might personally find it. 

After all, my generation had "Dynasty" and there was seldom anything logical about its plot development, and even that, apparently, was relatively sane when compared to some of the Daytime soaps...

But...

"Revenge" strikes me as being one of those rather strange shows where an exciting-sounding idea gets pitched and the pilot is made and a full season gets commissioned and, because of the fickle nature of American television, an entire story gets told across that season to a fairly satisfactory conclusion. Then it becomes moderately successful and, because the show doesn't get cancelled, someone has to then extrapolate further not dissimilar stories to the point of absurdity to stretch the idea into a second year and beyond.

It has to be similar because you have to keep giving the audience the thing which they quite liked and which drew them to the show in the first place. Equally, it has to be different enough to keep them guessing and coming back for more right up until the repetition and ridiculousness gets so far beyond absurdity that even the most die-hard fans are saying that it is no longer the series it once was.

Book series writers can struggle with the same problem, especially if they kill off a much-loved character far too soon, and before they realise quite how popular they've become. Also, perhaps another lesson to be learned here, is that it's probably best not to pick a title like say "Escape" from somewhere if you don't want to spend the rest of your writing life working on escape stories or trying to find reasons for your now much-loved characters to keep getting locked up...

Incidentally, like during the first year of "24", sometimes the story has to be wound up after only half a season so it can still be sold even if it gets cancelled, and then another story has to be kick-started by the first, in the whole "hedging your bets over possible failure" way which can stifle or stimulate American screenwriters in almost equal measure.

The whole thing gets resolved around about episode twelve, or, if renewed, twenty-two and then there just has to be a "shocking" reveal during the season finale which either shows that "all bets are off", is a "game-changer", or rather just proves that all of the efforts of the entire season were pretty pointless after all.

A similar problem is faced with a one-idea title like "Prison Break..." You spend an entire season achieving the breakout mentioned in the title, but what do you do once you've achieved that breakout and you've got another year to fill...?

But that, I suppose, is another story.