Land of The Sausage Tree

catch up

2005-10-18T11:13:00.000Z

Not many DVD's worthy of mention recently Tarzan 2 was funny for the kids, Coach Carter was okay but slightly too worthy for my likely, but the documentary on the extras was good. I Heart Huckabees was insane and I still am unsure what my view is. Downfall was interesting but not as good as I had heard, my history degreed wife enjoyed it and spent most of the film explaining various bits of information about the characters that were not covered by the film. Bruno Ganz, playing Hitler was fantastic, although for some reason reminded me of Tony Hancock, which didn't help.

Garden state I liked, and despite it's protestations of coolness and youth appeal it is nowt but a romantic comedy (I will watch it again though). It had some great scenes and looked pretty good. Natalie Portman was excellent but the true star however was zach Braff who wrote, directed and starred in this film. Definately one to recommend, and the soundtrack was pretty good too.

I have been watching newish comedy drama thing on BBC1 called Love Soup. It not original, but it made me laugh. It has some very funny moments and makes for a light entertaining hours viewing. I also kept an eye on More4 the new channel from the people that brought you Hollyoaks. Nothing much appealed to me (other than the long awaited new series of The West Wing), but I did catch the Daily Show, an American news satire that is generally 30 minutes of anti-bush comedy (think Michael Moore with talent and less dodgy facial hair). It was funny, but the single minded approach to it will probably wear a bit thin after a while, so it's probably one to dip into now and again rather than watch every episode. Also saw the first of the double bill Season 6 opener of the West Wing, it regained some of the ground lost in season 5 by injecting some humour that had been sadly lacking.

After a fun week of pitching stories for the doctors surgery sitcom the group are now moving onto outlining. After a little apprehension (that i was the worst writer in the group) I am now getting into this project and am working on my outline. The plan is to mirror the american sitcom style of an A story backed up by and B (and possibly C) story that are linked more by a them than by the plot of the whole episode. I have done this before for a script and it worked quite nicely but it took some doing. It certainly beats the amount of paperwork I have been reading for a School Governors meeting. Still you have to do your bit for the community, nobody else seems to want to (I even missed the charlton fulham game last night to attend the meeting). Apathy is obviously the in-thing (I am just as guilty juding by the lack of updates recently).

Hotel Rwanda

2005-09-29T14:43:00.000Z

After yet another week without DVD's I have now switched to another provide and we start again.

Starring Don Cheadle and Sophie Okonedo, Hotel Rwanda, is the true story of Paul Rusesabagina, the go-to guy at a posh hotel in Kigali (the Rwandan capital). It is set during the Rwandan genocide than ran from April to July 1994. In this the majority ethnic group in the country (the Hutu) systematically wiped out around 500,000 of the minority Tutsi's. This went on under the noses of a powerless UN peacekeeping force (led by Nick Nolte in a fictional role largely based on the commander of the real UN force Romeo Dallaire). When the massacre's start following the shooting down of the Rwandan president's plane large numbers of Tutsi's descended on the hotel believing it to be a safe haven because of the foreign guests. Initially they were right but following the withdrawal of both the foreign nationals and the vast majority of the UN peacekeepers there future was uncertain. Rusesabagina and the more well-connected guests used their contacts and the contents of the hotels wine cellars to persuade and bribe their way to safety.

This film is great in that it tugs at the right emotions but the script is a bit laboured in places. Despite that the actors make a great attempt at making it work, and they just about pull it off. The main thing I disliked was they way it appeared to condense down the time the killing went on for. The film has to jump to make it a reasonable running time, but the way it is presented makes it seem like the killings did not go on for long, this actually detracts from the achievements of Rusesabagina in keeping the people alive.

It is an emotional and interesting look at a modern catastrophe that could have been avoided had the UN and it's member states (the US and France in particular) not dragged their heels and shut their eyes to the goings on in the former Belgian Colony. For a very full picture of that time check out the report at Human Rights Watch

Cadogans Rating: A walls banger, it was good but not fantastic.

Before Sunset

2005-09-15T14:17:00.000Z

After a delay caused by a short holiday with the family to Disneyland Paris (thoroughly recomended) and a fire causing delays with DVD delivery, I am back. We start again with Before Sunset. This film is the sequel to 1995's Before Sunrise. Ethan Hawke and Julie Delpy reprise their roles as Jesse and Celine respectively. After last seeing them bidding each other farewell nine years ago in Vienna, we see them meet up again in Paris, where Celine Lives and Jesse is promoting a book based on the events all those years ago in vienna.

Jesse and Celine originally agreed to meet up six months after splitting up in vienna, and now we find out if that meeting ever took place and what has happened to them since. The set up is slightly contrived but works. The beauty of the movie is in the reality of the exchanges between them. There is a marked contrast from the first film which was full of the optimism of youth, this has all gone now. Both characters are trapped in the lives they have made for themselves and every scene in the film helps to bring that home. We could have had scenes with various Parisian landmarks in the background, but instead we get dark cafe's, alleyways, boats, cars, small apartments. Every scene has the two protaganists confined in some way.

The acting is fanatastic as is the directing of what are some very long scenes, I guess it helped than Richard Linklater (the Director) wrote the script along with Hawke and Delpy. They are all completely in tune with the characters and with each other. It is clear to all the Jesse and Celine are perfect for each other, but every exchange they have is subtly and silently subtitled with "...but we know it will never happen". They skate around one another delightfully like real couples do, unsure what to be open about and what to keep hidden.

If the first film said that all you need is love, then Before sunset says the same but in a slightly resigned way, as if suggesting that whilst all you need is love, sometimes you are not going to get it. Those who have seen the first film should see this, those who haven't should see that first to get the full benefit of this one. Thoroughly recommended.

Cadogans Sausage Rating: An organic sausage served tapas style: A quality sausage designed for sharing with your chosen companion.

Nothing - then three come along at once

2005-08-24T14:51:00.000Z

Apologies for the delay. A frenetic weekend has caused me to take a while to catch up. It was a three film weekend interrupted by the family and the footy. It was good to see the mighty addicks demonstrating an ability to pass the ball, and 21 shots, Christ it used to take six or seven games to rack up that many. However for more of that check out All quiet in the East Stand or Forever Charlton. Me I review films not football. I reserve my footy watching for practising swearwords and singing pointless songs.

First up is Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow. It was the first film in ages I did not finish. Style wise it was fantastic, the dark brooding look of old black and white movies. In short it looked fantastic, however as listening to interviews with Jordan demonstrates, just because it looks good doesn't mean it is. I liked Gwyneth Paltrow and Jude Law in the Talented Mr ripley (despite the book being far far superior) but in this they was awful. Part of me thinks the script was deliberately written to be very cliched, but the majority of me thinks it was rubbish. G and J did great impressions of trees in the quest for wooden acting and Giovanni Ribisi was and actor waiting for a part to materialise (perhaps it was lost in all the blue screen shenanigans). The plot was about some mad scientist deciding that the world was ending so he build a big rocket to re-enact Noah's Ark. G and J had to stop him with the help of Angelina Jolie and her flying Aircraft Carrier.

The worst thing about it was that I really don't know who the film was aimed at, it tried to be a bit dark, which would turn off the youngsters, but it was too silly to engage the adults. It could have been fantastic. It wasn't. There is talk of a sequel, hopefully it will fulfill the promise that the atmospheric looks warrant the reviews on IMDB and other places seems the reveal a love/hate thing going on. It appears if you are a fan of those old black and white sci-fi serial shows (Flash Gordon springs to mind) you will 'get' this movie and understand that is what the script and acting are as they are. I can accept that view, but just because something is a homage or even a parody of another genre does not mean you cannot bring is slightly more up to date to make it have a widespread appeal. Otherwise it appears to be just artistic masturbation full of in jokes and little else.

Cadogan's Rating: An undercooked Quorn Sausage. Fake, and not very well cooked, could be so much better than the real thing. A shame

Second was the Sky showing of Around the World in 80 Days. Steve Coogan (him of Courtney Love fame)still trying to escape the shackles of Alan Partridge. I expected little, and was surprisingly impressed. It was a Ronseal movie. It did exactly what it said on the tin. It was squarely aimed at families and it hit home time and again. It was silly, it was funny, it was well acted. Okay it's not going to win an Oscar but it made me laugh. It had some good set piece scenes. The old woman jumping over the wall was very funny. The combination of Steve Coogan and Jackie Chan worked like a charm with Coogan's mad inventor.

The plot follows loosely the original Jules Verne classic, with Coogan as Fogg attempting to win a bet by traveling around the world in 80 days. In a time without jet engines this is no mean feat. He is assisted by Passpartout, played by Jackie Chan, who has also robbed the bank of England and seeks to return his spoils to his homeland of China. On the way they pick up a bit of eye candy in the shape of Monique La Roche (played by Cecile De France) an artist slash cloakroom attendant. Together avoiding an incompetent policeman and a band of rampaging Chinese warriors they seek to return the items pilfered from the bank and win the bet.

There are some killer lines in the film none more so than: "You had me at the nipples". Delivered by Mark Addy (The Full Monty) as a captain of a steamship. For those of you with kids looking for something to do on a wet afternoon, look no further. There is stuff there to amuse all of you.

Cadogan's Rating: A hot dog at the seaside. You know exactly what it is. You know the quality is not top notch, but in the right place, at the right time, it is just what the doctor ordered.

Finally Is The Interpreter. Set in the UN and starring Nicole Kidman and Sean Penn this movie pitches itself at the cerebral end of the thriller market. There are a few action sequences, but it relies very much on the quality of the script and the acting to move it along. The jury is out on the script but not on the acting.

The film manages to be both predictable and confusing in equal measure and relatively unbelievable in places. Kidman plays Sylvia Broome who originated in a fictional country in Africa (Appeared to me as if the intention was to draw parallels with zimbabwe) but now works at the UN as a Interpreter. She overhears a plot to assassinate the leader of her home nation and reports this, she then gets embroiled in the plot and we learn more about her background and that of the Agent protecting her (A role performed with distinction by Sean Penn).

The plot drifts along revealing more about Sylvia's background but not much else, the other characters are fairly two dimensional. The script feels a bit under-done, a draft or two more and the tension could be ratcheted up a notch and some of the more confusing aspects of the plot made easier to deal with. The lack of character development means you care little about what happens to these people (Sylvia included) and the ending is very poor. There is an alternative ending available on the DVD which present a more clean cut ending but again it is a bit wishy washy. The film attempts to make a political statement and diplomacy being the way, but never quite hits home and appears to be unconvinced by it's own arguments at times.

Cadogan's Rating: An Organic supermarket own brand sausage - It tries to be right on and tasty but never quite makes it.

Football Factory

2005-08-18T10:05:00.000Z

To celebrate the start of a new season following the addicks I watch Football Factory directed by Nick love. Now I expected to be shocked as the nearest the average Charlton fan gets to violence is when the someone tuts loudly because the old bloke in front stood up to adjust his travel rug, thus obscuring his view of the proceedings on the green stuff (although I am looking forward to the first home game of the season as it looks as though we may be capable of some decent attacking football this year).

Football Factory is an adaptation of John King's novel of the same name. It follows one Tommy Johnson (didn't he play for Derby County?) a Chelsea hooligan (that's the ones in Burberry rather than the old fellas in the red coats) who's empty life is enlivened by the desire to crack a few heads on a Saturday afternoon. After dipping his wick in the wrong inkwell he gets on the wrong side of some Millwall thugs (the word thug possibly superfluous here) which leads to some dark dreams of him getting a taste of his own medicine under a bridge.

Tommy's date with destiny, in the guise of a cup tie between Millwall and Chelsea is the main story going on, but there is plenty of other subplots to unravel before the 87 minutes is up. We have the old guys getting ready to emigrate. The past it hooligan trying to prove he can still cut it. The young lads trying to prove themselves amongst their peers. There is a lot going on in this despite the short running time. Other films should take note, you don't need to be three hours long to make your point.

I am not sure how I feel about the film. The fight scenes are well shot and realistic enough (I saw enough when I ran a pub a few years back) and the acting was believable, Danny Dyer in the lead role was very good. The problem was that whilst there was a lot going on there was not real depth to it. It was a shallow empty movie, although I think that was deliberate. The only character I felt was strangely likeable was the thieving youngster, Zeberdee. He was not a nice guy. He bullied those he could, sucked up to those he couldn't and was generally a nasty piece of work. The think that appealed was his honesty, you got exactly what you expected from him. There was no ambiguity, you got that with the other characters. The violent husband and hooligan who ran a florists. The lead male who lived for violence but looked after his grandfather.

Overall, I enjoyed the film. I am not sure enjoyed is the right word. Experienced is probably a better way to describe it. I don't think I was meant to like it, I think I was meant to either wonder whether people like that really exist or use it to reminisce about their own days on the terraces. I fell somewhere between those two opposing views. I never really experienced violence at football, but I know people who did, and I know people who are like that now (only these days they fight when pissed up in the town centre on a Saturday night rather than at the football). My only clear feeling about the film is that, given a few different choices, I could have been involved in that sort of life. I come from a broken home in a shit-hole council estate where being 'hard' is a badge of honour to most people, but I didn't go that way. Seeing a film like this makes me glad about that.

Cadogan's Rating: A cold sausage sandwich. The sausage is a few days old from that BBQ you had at the weekend. You know you shouldn't indulge but the vague risk pushes your adrenaline buttons to give you a bit of a buzz.

Buongiorno, Principessa!

2005-08-15T11:08:00.000Z

About halfway through the utterly fantastic Life is beautiful I had to swap DVD players and remove to my spare room as Mrs Cadogan was not really liking it - her eyesight is bad and she was struggling with the subtitles. When firing up the disc in the other player I discovered a dubbed english version of the film, after about two minutes I swapped back to the native Italian - this film just did not work when dubbed.

The film was written by, directed by, and starred Roberto Benigni. It was also the first film to have made me both laugh and cry in a very long time. It does not feel as if it was made at the end of the 90's. The set-pieces involving the stealing of his friends hat and egging his love rival bring back memories of old Silent movies and are fantastically acted and directed. The first half of the movie is unashamedly optomistic and romantic (even when the anti-semitic feelings are referenced they are laughed off). The second half showing Guido (Roberto Benigni) and his young son (played by Giorgio Canterini) as they try to survive life in a concentration camp. Guido attempts to avoid the true nature of their captivity by persuading his son that it is all a game. This leads to one of the funniest and most touching scenes in the film. Newly arrived at the camp, they are visited by the camp guards who seek an italian who speaks German to translate the rules. Guido takes on the task and translates the 'rules' to his son to ensure the illusion of a game is kept up.

This film is not presented as any kind of realistic assessment of life in the camps, but presents a fantastic view of what a parent will do to protect their child. Some people will criticise the film for it's view of the holocaust, but ignore them. Do not watch this film as a historical statement, watch it for it's glass is half-full optimism, watch it for the set peice slapstick comedy, watch it for the look on Guido's son's face when the tank comes round the corner, but most of all watch it for the sheer joy of seeing a movie that will pull at all the right emotional strings.

Cadogan's rating: Espositos peppers and onion sausage - a slightly unusual way to present the sausage but the quality is fantastic and the end result leaves you satisfied.

Lost in Life

2005-08-12T09:20:00.000Z

Those of you eagerly awaiting my next review will have to wait a bit longer. I haven't quite finished the masterpiece that is 'Life is Beautiful', but should do soon. The reason for not finishing was finding time in my busy schedule to finish a short script for the sitcom trials (based very loosely on Twelth Night), and also to watch the much raved about new Drama 'Lost'.

It is typical US drama.Lots of characters on the periphery that will pop in and out of the main plot to reveal their secrets as the episodes proceed. It seems at first glance to bear some similarities to William Golding's classic 'Lord of the Flies' (you probably read it in school). Hell, they even have a fat guy who seems a bit naive (cf. Golding's version - Piggy). It all got a bit Jurrasic park with the noises in the Jungle which bodes well for a bit of strangeness in future episodes.

My one reservation was the leading man (Matthew Fox) seemed a bit too earnest for my tastes, I'm sure there will be some skeletons in his cupboard as things progress but he's way too much of the All American guy for me at the moment - especially with those oh so random cuts on his cheeks. The second episode was far superior to the first as they began to delve into the characters themselves, the moment when they discovered how long the French Woman had been wittering on for was very well done, not sure about the polar bear though, possibly too strange for me. It is series linked on my sky plus and will keep me going till Season 6 of the West Wing starts. whilst thinking about it I realise how little UK programming I actually watch. There is:

Extra's - Because it is pretty good

Eastenders - Because the wife likes it, and to be honest it can be amusing in places, and also because I would love to write an episode

Recently I watched the excellent Murphy's Law.

Other than that my UK output tends to consist of Sport, news and Documentary's (Top Gear, Coast, football - back at last, that sort of thing), and the odd Radio 4 comedy on my way home (The Hudson and Pepperdine show is very good, and I am enjoying the new comedy with Alan Davies playing a dog), as it is good to be stared at by commuters when you let out the odd snort of laughter on a rush hour train.

Is British Telly really that poor? Or is it that US output is just far far better?

A New Dawn - First up is Hostage

2005-08-08T09:56:00.000Z

I'm fed up with writing about writing and other stuff. So since signing up to a DVD rental scheme I will review what I watch. A give it a sausage rating. The higher quality the banger the better the film. Let's get the ball rolling with Hostage (2005) starring Bruce Willis and Kevin Pollak among others.

Bruce proves he has versatility by showing he can act with hair, and lots of it. We first see him lying down all scummy looking. I thought he was a tramp, but actually he is Frank Talley, a hostage negotiator. He is very soon to have a very bad day at the office which leads to him taking a job as a small town police chief to get away from the typical Hollywood feelings of guilt. Although this being Hollywood he will very soon have to face his fears again (well it would be a bit boring if he just sat at his desk for the next 90 minutes wouldn't it?). Some local chavs are rolling round in their car (looking rather like the Toyota Pickup that was destroyed by BBC's Top Gear a few series back) and decide to upgrade to some middle class MPV. Unfortunately they pick on the wrong school run gas guzzler and end up taking the family of some crooked accountant (Kevin Pollak - ably demonstrating his acting ability by spending most of the film unconscious) hostage.

Cue Frank. "Washed up ex-hostage negotiator to the set please". He quickly hands over command and gets some food. However it turns out that in this house is an overdue DVD that the store want back - and they want it back tonight - so by taking Frank's family hostage (although after seeing her teen angst in the early parts of the film you might actually want the bad guys to off his daughter) they force him to confront his fears, save the kids and give the bad guys what they want.

It all works out okay in the end - the bad guys get killed and the families get reunited. This is not a bad film. The opening credits were stunning, the plot fizzed along and Brucie was pretty good as Frank. However the thing that got to me was that I never quite got to the required suspension of disbelief level to accept the plot. First we have to believe that Frank is not only a Hostage Negotiator but also a former SWAT team member. Then that he is able to hide one of the hostages post-rescue, in an ambulance for a large amount of the movie, in some bushes, with a semi-naked paramedic. Finally that he is able to wipe out a load of fake FBI agents and then any remaining baddies, swan off into the sunset in a stolen ambulance leaving the no longer unconscious Kevin Pollak on his own surrounded by dead bad guys.

In short it was good harmless fun, but nothing more.

Cadogan's Rating: Richmond's Irish Recipe - A good spicy sausage but deep down you know it is still a low-end product that will repeat on you in a couple of hours.

&lt;br&gt;

How Much Difference Did It Make

2005-07-15T12:57:00.000Z

Some people might take offence at this, for that I apologise. I think the whole two minutes silence and vigil was, in my humble etc, a waste. All week we have been hearing how we should get back to normal, show the bombers that they can't win. Tell me what is normal about standing quietly for two minutes in the street? What is normal about traffic voluntarily coming to a standstill in London? What is normal about Richard Madeley preaching to a crowd of people in Trafalgar square telling us not to be angry? I have one answer.

Nothing.

I have no objections to people paying their respect, but am I the only one who can reconcile Ken Livingstone telling us to get back to normal and then telling us to stand on the street for two minutes and then coming to Trafalgar square to tell the bombers that they won't win. Make up your mind. The pictures in the papers were quite stirring I'll admit but far from normal.

I've never seen the point of these silences. Companies fall over themselves for these worthy causes but far fewer give staff time for silence on 11/11 (or 11/11 for you Americans).

I had this very same argument after September 11th at the company I worked at. They practically ordered people to take part in the silence, yet the previous year when I asked to close down the helpdesk for 2 minutes on the 11th November I was told it was not possible. I just feel that people are taking part in these respectful silences purely because politicians and the media say they should.

From my office window yesterday I could see people outside, it was all quiet and the number of people taking photos on their mobiles was stunning. How many of those people out there were actually paying their respect? I bet a large number were rubber neckers watching those taking it seriously and capturing it on their phones for posterity, or simply sneaking an extra fag break in the sun.

Me, I paid my respects to those who died by doing what I always do on a Thursday at midday. Namely having a cup of coffee and doing some work - no brainwashed extremist is going to stop me carrying on like nothing has happened. Do you think you and others standing for two minutes in silence is going to stop the same brainwashed extremists setting off other bombs? Is it even going to make them think - we achieved nothing? However if they saw us all getting on with it as if nothing had happened I am sure they would be more than a little confused.

You Acheived Nothing

2005-07-08T09:13:00.000Z

You achieved nothing

We still came to work today
by tube
by bus
by train

We still spoke to our workmates
The Christians
The Jewish
The muslims

We are still friends

You achieved nothing

Sweaty Smudges Destroy Credibility

2005-06-24T09:41:00.000Z

Writing is not easy when you're sweaty. The ink tends to smudge. Being a techy by day you'd think that maybe i would use a computer, but I find that difficult initially. for some reason I am less creative when typing my thoughts straight into Word. Even this post was written in long hand first off. For me, despite being a quick typist, I can still write more quickly then I type. This is useful as I do a lot of writing on the train too and from work. Although in this weather I just can't do it, so mostly this week I have been reading books about cryptography (codes for the simple folk), got into this when doing some research into digital signatures. it is very interesting and those who like those Su Doku puzzles that have sprung up everywhere may also be interested in some of the techniques used to break codes.

I have a different sort of reading to do this weekend as the bible for the team sitcom is published so I need to digest that over the weekend. I look forward to it. Gives me time to get away from my sports shorts entry which is suffering from my usual paranoia post first draft. That paranoia being, the thought that is's a pile of donkey bollocks. It possibly is as I am still not 100% that the story really works. I may do a quick draft of my WW1 Christmas day truce football match idea, just to see if the alternative is any better. A month to go though so all should be well in the end.

Sadly I missed out on a shortlist for the BBC last Laugh (see here for reasons for that), part of me still holds out hope for a longlist letter, but not much of me. Still it was an interesting exercise, and the sour grapes (although some of what has been said makes sense in a JFK conspiracy theory kind of way) from some on the BBC messageboard about it is hilarious. What makes it funnier is that most of those on it are probably old enough to know better. Still it takes all sorts. I have never been one to get too worked up over people's views of my work. Okay if people say it's shit you feel like throwing yourself (or them) of the clifton suspension bridge (it's quite a good view on the way down I would imagine), but that lasts only a few minutes and then you realise that either they know nothing or what you wrote is shit. Celery, as they almost say in France.

What's In A Name?

2005-06-15T10:37:00.000Z

After a nice week at Center Parcs I have got back on track with my sports shorts entry. I am pretty clear on where I am going with my script, and hope it will be something different to the sort of thing most people will submit. As part of the planning stages I was trying to come up with the names of the three characters. It took me some time. In my writing I have always felt that the name of the character is very important. Okay it’s only a name but it needs to ‘fit’.

Would Only fools and horses have been the success it was if Del-Boy was called Brian? Would Fawlty Towers have got the same response if it was run by Simon Fawlty? Okay those names don’t ring true mainly because of the success of the aforementioned shows, but my point is that your character names need to sound right.

For instance would you expect a character named Veronica Carlisle to be a beer swilling, working class, Ladette? Probably not - in fact a google search reveals her to be a Croquet player.

Have any of you caught the drama ‘House’ on five. It started last week and I was impressed by it. An interesting premise even if the characters do seem a bit formulaic (although they may develop further as the series progresses).

Thanks, footy and chat-up lines

2005-06-02T15:00:00.000Z

Firstly thanks to inspector sands for adding the link to this blog. I am sure all the Charlton fans heading this way will be mighty confused, but hey, so what – you never know john Sullivan may head this way.

For those of you eager to exercise your scripting muscles five live are running their sports shorts competition again this year. I will be having a go, didn’t enter last year but have some good ideas gestating at the moment.

On the train home a couple of days ago I heard what was quite possible the worst chat-up line ever. Some lads (they were younger than me anyway) were chatting to some likely ladies and flirting like it was going out of fashion. They were talking quite loudly so my respectfully low IPOD volume did not drown them out. One of them came out with the fantastic line:

“so what’s your favourite sausage then?”

I was stunned but noted it down. This brings me to the point of this anecdote. Do you make note of things people say that you think you might use in your scripts? I do all the time, I have a whole file full of random lines and facts that I have heard which I thought might come in handy. I used to try and be discrete about it, but have given up. The people I work with take some small amount of pride from the fact that I have included some of their words in a script. I have yet to find use for the sausage line, but I will.

To satisfy those finding themselves here via all quiet, it is good to see the addicks have signed a player early in the summer rather than leaving it till the last minute. Hopefully it means an end to the mind numbing boredom that is 4-5-1.

This may be the last post for a week or so as I am off to sunny Suffolk for a week, if I can get a mobile signal I will try emailing a post or two but don’t get your hopes up.

Bank holiday Feeding Frenzy

2005-05-31T11:00:00.000Z

After a weekend offline I return to see message board madness has descended on writers dock. It is many years since I moderated messages boards for AOL yet nothing changes. Someone reacts to a post from another member and the fit hits the shan. It’s all fun till someone loses their rag.

The weekend away from my pc gave me the chance to view both ends of the televisual spectrum. At the mass culture end was Friday nights ‘Johnny Vegas – 18 Stone of Idiot’ and at the high culture end was ‘Lost in Translation’.

Johnny Vegas, probably best known as the fat bloke who turns up pissed at awards ceremonies, has finally been given his own show. Now whilst I am sure the novelty will wear off damned quickly this show was one of the funniest things I have seen in a while. It was rude and crude, but ideal for the Friday night time slot it has been given. I was not so sure of the audience who seemed a little bit sycophantic and less real than their host. Ray Winstone was a fantastic guest and the bit at the end of part one where they were shouting at bloke at the other end of the ear piece (I am sure there is a technical term) was fantastic. The shopping channel stuff was good, but dragged on a bit. A similar criticism could be levelled at the speed dating stuff – although this was also very funny. I always wonder how much of Johnny Vegas is an act and how much is genuine mental illness/drink habit. I suspect it is the former that is very much in the majority and that he is a gifted performer to make people think it is the latter. I may be wrong. What’s your view?

Sunday night Sky made its first showing of Sofia Coppola’s ‘Lost in Translation’. My wife normally judges the quality of a film by it’s body count but I managed to persuade her to watch. She was impressed. I was impressed. This film was beautiful. That’s the only way to describe it. The film had a colour all of its own. It reminded me of the light you get when outside just before a thunder storm. Where everything is slightly darker than normal yet seems much more interesting because of it. I recommend it to all and sundry. It was warm, funny and proved that despite what Billy Crystal might think, you can be friendly with someone of the opposite sex without screwing them (Although I got the impression that Scarlett and Bill felt it was something that they would be interested in trying). I think this film is one that will improve with multiple viewings as I am sure there were lots of things going on in the background that could be missed first time round – I kept noticing red lights blinking in the background for instance.

Smug and Pompous - Damn Philistines

2005-05-26T15:39:00.000Z

Apparently I feel great satisfaction with myself or my situation. Or to put it bluntly, I am smug. Anyone who has ever met me will know that be true in some instances and very far from it in most others. Although thanks go to Prince of Persia for finding his way here to revel in my Last Laugh Mug cock-up. He/She didn't like my review of someone's script on writers dock, fair enough I suppose but saying it is pompous and smug is just easy. Why not come out a say what was wrong with the points made in the review

I suppose I am fairly smug. I’m happily married. Have two great kids. Have a fantastic job with good hours and pay. Maybe my reviews on some of the last laugh script were a bit smug. Personally I thought I was just being honest. It does seem to be a hell of a love-in at times over there. Sometimes I wonder if people are just competing for how many mutual backslaps they can issue in a day. They do appear to get it on the main last laugh site though.

I have been lucky, most reviews I have had in my writing career have been honest. They have said when things were good and (more frequently) told me where I am going wrong. You know what, because of that I am a better writer than I was when I started. Answer this question. What do you gain from everyone telling you you’re fantastic? A great satisfaction with yourself or your situation perhaps? So what would you rather be?

a) Called smug for being honest

b) Feel smug because you’re misinformed.

Of course it’s possible both of those apply to me. What do you think?

The last laugh numbers are in. Just over 4800 entries, but they won’t reveal the break down for scripts. Possibly to avoid embarrassment to writers of the less popular ones. So my fatally flawed (yet still very funny – in my smug, pompous opinion of course) entry as probably around a 1 in a 800-1000 chance of getting short-listed. Good luck to all that entered. If you were too late or have the bug check out this competition on channel 4. You have till July 15^th. I doubt I will enter as my sketch writing, thus far, has always been crap.

Go Team Sitcom

2005-05-25T09:24:00.000Z

The scriptreader crew are beginning to get their teeth into the team written sitcom. I am breathless just keeping up with the emails. I have managed to contribute a couple of my own pearls of wisdom, but they have been lost in the melee. I thought I did a lot of preperation in my writing before getting down to it, but I am in a whole new ball park now. I am convinced I can write good comedy so hopefully my contributions will be used, but I think I will be learning more than others in the group. There have been a few discussions that have degenerated slightly, but no real arguments yet. I say yet, because I am sure it will kick off sooner or later. It’s an email group, and despite us all being writers it is still very easy to get the wrong end of the stick in an email.

Over on WritersDock there has been one individual claiming to already be shortlisted for the bbc lastlaugh competition. It sounds way too early for me, but it is still possible. The excerpt of their script they posted, was different from a lot I had read but was not stand out amazing. I am now convinced that whilst my Last quango effort was funny and well structured it will not be shortlisted. I made one big cockup – namely I missed that Robin already had a mug in the first twenty minutes. It kind of ruins one of the funny bits in my next to last scene. Although someone on script reader did say that my script had the best ending of any she had read which gives me a warm and fuzzy feeling.

Over in real land for those of you in a love rut with your significant others – send a risque, rude or debauched text message informing them what will happen when you get home. It works – although make sure you send it to the right phone.

Beware of Buskers With Scissors

2005-05-23T13:36:00.000Z

Are Ipods bankrupting buskers?

MP3 players are everywhere. You know something has gone way past being a trendy item when the fat pasty women on your commuter train have one. It has now reached that point. These women have tired of rustling their carrier bags incessantly and have moved onto more technical pastimes, namely playing with their ipod mini for the whole journey (or the ipod mugme as I call it - due to the strange tendency for women who have one to carrier it in their hand all the time).

All this is besides the point. I feel sorry for the buskers. It must be soul destroying, half-heartedly playing your way through the Beatles' back catalogue only for all your 'customers' to miss it all because they have their collection of obscure Peruvian folk songs playing on random. We are ruining their lifestyle. If this was the states the buskers union would be filing a class action suit against Apple for costing them some cash. Not sure what they would do in the UK. Maybe sing louder?

My worry is we are not far away from buskers taking affirmative action. Gangs of guitar wielding anarchists roaming the Bakerloo long looking for the tell tale white headphones. One minute, there you are listening to Abba, the next some smelly pseudo tramp with a beaten up acoustic has pinned you down and cut the headphone cable. However, don't worry, the buskers mate is providing a soothing rendition of 'Paperback Writer' just to make you feel better.