Tuesday 29 June 2010

Britton's Got Tarrent

Yes, it is the ITV show in which the former day-time television host kidnaps the primetime quiz-show favourite, and for his return wants her career back. Hang on, I think I may have got slightly confused. Britain's Got Talent, the ITV show in which a couple of Geordie presenters lark about behind a curtain while three television 'personalities' judge the 'talent' that the general public of 'Britain' have, in order to provide an 'entertaining' show. Actually, I think the former sounds much better now...
Okay, so I am three weeks late with this blog about Britain's Got Talent, but it goes to prove how dedicated I have been to my studies; which have now finally finished - for now. Anyway, due to it being a while ago, my memory slightly fails me, so I shall my best.

Let us start with the winners. A acrobatics group called Spelbound who consisted of numerous young boys and girls to numerous young men and women. They were okay, but I was not keen on them. Everyone else thought they were brilliantly talented and were more than worthy of winning the big spot at the Royal Albert Hall. I feel there is too much consistency with the whole show itself. First year - Paul Potts (not the evil dictator - that's a different spelling) the bad-toothed opera singer won. The second year, Diversity, a group of dancers won and now Spelbound, a group of people performing a routine won. That is two slightly similar acts in the past two years. We don't have a great deal of talent really do we?

My two favourites to win the competition this year were either Twist And Pulse, two male dancers who combined street dance and comedy, or Paul Burling who was an impressionist. They both got into the final, which is a first for the two acts I liked to make it to the final. It was a more diverse final though, with the obvious few dancers, the few singers, an impressionist, a dancing dog and a drummer.

Something (well, one of many factors) which I found very annoying about the live shows of Britain's Got Talent is all the camera angles. Now, imagine you are trying to watch people dance and every 5 seconds they change the camera angel so you miss bits of the dance. They do wide shots so you can see the audience, but you can barely see the act performing if you squint. The flying camera angles which go from one side of the studio to another are just as irritating. You are trying to watch something and you can't because the director believes it would be idiotic to have the same camera angel throughout the performance. You would not go and watch a school performance and spend the whole time running around the hall to get a variety of angels, so why do it when we're trying to watch a dog dance? I just found that utterly ridiculous.

I have also concluded that the show is just inefficient. The show is mainly just dancers and singers, with the occasional novelty act which will never win. Well, considering ITV already have a singing show called 'The X-Factor' which you may have heard of, it seems pointless putting singers on Britain's Got Talent. So, the first change would be moving all singers to the X-Factor auditions. The second change would be changing the name of the show to 'Britain's Got Dancers' because that is the main brunt of the good performances to be honest. Of course, now that you've turned this into a dancing show, ITV's 'Dancing On Ice' can be scrapped because you don't want to show too much dancing on one channel. Also, now that it has been turned into a dancing show, the novelty, useless acts can no longer be apart of the show. However, the solution for this is just sending all other applicants to either Brighton Pier or The Circus, and then ITV can replace 'You've Been Framed' with occasional footage from Brighton Pier and The Circus. Sorted!

What is next for Spelbound now that they won Britain's Got Talent? Not a lot I don't suppose once they have done their performance at The Royal Albert Hall. Paul Potts performed there, got his teeth sorted, released an album and now we have not heard of him since. Diversity done their performance infront of the Queen, one of them became a judge on a Sky talent show and the others are occasionally seen in adverts on the Telly. My suggestion to Spelbound is once they've done their royal performance; they should try and audition as the Hitler Youth in a stage show, because they would be perfect. If Hitler were alive today and he saw them performing on Britain's Got Talent, he would have been so happy.
A nice short(ish) blog to ease you back into my regular blogging. Next blog, unless I have a change of heart, will be about Doctor Who and whether I did enjoy it in the end.

P.S. I'm aware Keith Chegwin Tweeted 'Britton's Got Tarrent' a few weeks ago, but I thought it up before him, however, I am not claiming I was first person to ever think it up, I'm just saying I'm better than Keith Chegwin.

Sunday 6 June 2010

They Cancelled Corrie!

Unless you are a hermit who has absolutely no contact with anyone and your TV, Radio, Computer and Phone all broke this week, you will be aware that in Cumbria on Wednesday 2nd June 2010 a man shot many innocent people in Cumbria, killing 12 people, including his twin brother and injuring many more before turning the gun on himself. It is very sad when things like this happen, but unfortunately these are crimes no-one can predict and therefore cannot be stopped.
This event also coincided with ITV's ‘gripping week of television’, in which crazed mad-mad Tony, escapes from prison to seek revenge. By Tuesday he had taken 2 people hostage and shown them a gun, but the episodes on Wednesday, Thursday and Friday all got postponed because the gun gets used. Yes, how unlucky were ITV. This was going to be the week when they unveiled how brilliant their programs are in High Definition with Britain's Got Talent concluding and an exciting week on Corrie, but because the storyline in Corrie very slightly reflected an awful event that happened in real life, got ruined.

Never fear Coronation Street fans though, instead next week is going to be the ‘gripping week of television’ instead, in which they are somehow going to try and show two weeks’ worth of episodes in the one week. I am going to be fed up of Coronation Street by the end of next week I think. Anyway, this blog is not supposed to be me moaning about Coronation Street not being on this week, it is instead supposed to be a giant moan at the media - yet again.

You can ask ANY leading psychologist and they will tell you this kind of coverage on tragic events like this actually fuels many similar attacks. We live in a society where the media love to sensationalise every piece of news they come across, whether it is the BP oil spill and Barrack Obama having a moan at them or if it is Adrian Chiles leaving the BBC for ITV, they have to make it attention grabbing. News like a mass shooting is matched with dramatic music, big swoosh’s as text runs across the screen and journalists looking sternly down the camera while stood in front of the crime scene with same police tape showing behind them. This makes mass murdering appealing to any possible serial killers.
Every news report about the 'rampage', as they like to call it, starts with a dramatic shot of police officers walking around the crime scene. It looks exciting and thrilling. Then they try sequence the events which happened, in this case they separated the attacks into three different phases. I honestly do not see why they need to do this. What good is coming from the news telling us where he was at certain times and how many people he had shot at each scene? This is only because we now have 24 hour news, meaning they have too much time fill up with useless information.
Then they have to talk to eye witnesses to get a perspective from an inbred idiot of what happened. Of course, we learn nothing we did not already know from these eye-witness accounts because the media has gotten to them first. They have watched the news already, so instead just start repeating what the newsreader had previously said, just with a bit more slurring and less coherent. With any eye-witness account of an event like this, there has to be mobile phone footage of the murderer holding a gun, or indeed driving through country roads. These are shaky and of bad quality, and these, along with the idiot talking with fear in his voice, trigger something in a unstable mind who is watching the news as if it were a religion, and beginning to froth at the mouth at the thought of the blood.

Then in an attempt to make everyone become full of empathy and sadness, they name and show pictures of the victims looking happy. This is done with such dignity which should be applauded as they are announced as bland as possible. However, they read the names out slowly, and it makes the name become slightly imprinted on the listener’s memory, and with each name you can hear the beat of gun. However, in the unstable mind of the one or two viewers, this begins to sound like a triumph, and each name being read out slowly sounds like a triumph.

Also, the media are strangely keen to uncover the reasoning for this outburst of bullets in the direction of unsuspecting and innocent people. Rarely have I read or listened to any report on the subject of these killings without the question of 'Why?' being shouted like a vicar giving an emotional sermon in church about the devil and his sins. 'Why did the 52-year-old taxi driver shoot 12 people dead in Cumbria before shooting himself on Wednesday?' 'What were the triggers for Derrick Bird's murderous outburst?' Time after time these questions are being shouted at us, while the media slowly uncover facts like him being probed over tax issues. Continuously, there is this question of 'Why?' and again, in some mind in the country this is all triggering something which could end in more attacks.
I do not want to sound as if I am trying to preach to you blog readers that the media are the cause of these kinds of attacks, because they are not. Certainly, they are not helping the issue, but it is to do with the individual who has some kind of mental problem. I can offer you numerous case studies of this being the case. We all remember the shootings in a German High School, where a teenage shot his own peers and teachers, before turning the gun on himself a few years ago. This was covered in pretty much the same way by our media as these Cumbria shootings are.

The attack at the German High School came soon after all those High School shootings in America, which seemed to happen quite a few times at different school in a small amount of time. Their media, yet again, covered each story in pretty much the same attitude as our media did then and now - in fact, probably worse. We all know how emotional American's can get about this kind of thing and they have a history of sensationalising every negative event in their country and with religion always being the key. These are prime examples of the media trying to cover a big news story for the public, but sensationalising it make it sound like an extraordinary and history making event.

Obviously, the media should cover these stories as the public do have a right to know about these events. Sure, the media should be sure to constantly emphasis how terrible and life changing this event is. I just think they need to cover these kinds of stories with a bit more care, and shouldn't fill an entire half hour news show on this one event. I personally think dramatising and sensationalising everything is just going to make events like this a more common occurrence, and do we want a world with spontaneous killings like in Grand Theft Auto?

These kinds of killings are almost impossible to predict and in reality, are rather uncommon in the UK. The fact that this killing spree was not planned and was purely spontaneous after something triggered in his mind to do such an awful thing. Now the new ConDem Government want to enforce tougher rules against guns. I can't see this helping in the slightest bit. The more you restrict people from having guns; chances are the amount of gun crimes will increase. Restricting what kind of guns everyone is allowed to own just because one man lost the plot and killed a few people, is not necessary. Maybe the police should just be more prepared for attacks of this nature. We've already heard on the news how it took police three hours to find him - and by then he had shot himself. That is what needs changing - not the rules against guns.

I also think that cancelling Coronation Street was a step too far as well. This is a prime example of ITV trying to be as politically correct as possible and trying not to offend anyone, because they know we live in a very PC Country and people are easily offended. Sure, in the episodes which have been moved to next week will include a gun and two people being killed, but this is in a soap where everything that happens is almost completely taken away from the real world. I really do think it is a shame that we live in a PC World (shut up, I do not mean the computer shop, I do mean 'a Politically Correct World) where we must tip toe around every subject in society, just in case we make some person cry. I blame the media and the 27,000 people who phoned up to complain about the Ross/Brand fiasco nearly 2 years ago. I hope they are happy with what they have done to our lives.

Everyone's first reactions to this story are of being distraught and completely upset by it. Mine? It didn't affect me at all; in fact I am not even sure I cared in the slightest bit. You see, I had been drinking; two bottles of Champagne at a friend’s house, and the news was announced to a drunken me by some woman on the CBBC channel reading the news. Whether it didn't affect me because I was drunk or because CBBC carefully white-washed over how awful this event was, I will never know.

Anyway, that brings an end to my rant about the media. Hopefully, I am completely wrong about it all and there will be no repeat killings this time. Also, just because I can and it makes me sound brilliantly kind, my respects go to those families who were affected by the loss of someone special at the hands of Derrick Bird, even though I know none of you will ever read this...

Friday 4 June 2010

It's ConDem May

I return, and I am writing fit. A pun in my very first sentence in my first blog for almost a month -  I have returned. Personally, I would say May 2010 was possibly the worst month of my life thus far; what with getting Chicken Pox, missing an important exam, cancelling my University application and of course turning 18. However, May 2010 has been quite a poignant month in the history of our country, with elections being held and the voters sticking two fingers up at politics – metaphorically or course.

'The country is going to the polls' was the popular phrase used by journalists for the days leading up to 6th May. I could make a joke about Poland, but I feel it is too easy. The public essentially had three main candidates to choose from. For Labour, they had the increasing unpopular Gordon Brown, who seemed to be stretching his neck skin. The Conservatives had David 'Dave' Cameron who shouted for change so many times, I was starting to think he wore nappies and always needed them changing, or there were increasingly popular Liberal Democrats and Nick Clegg who 6 weeks ago had an unrecognisable face.

In the lead up to the election, three televised leader debates were held. Something quite popular in America, and in an attempt to make the UK a bit more of a democracy, they were tried over here. They became quite popular and indeed helped Nick Clegg to becoming popular. The first debate was shown on ITV and concentrated on the domestic affairs of our country, in which polls suggested Clegg won. The second debate, shown on Sky News, was about the international affairs of our country and mainly focused on the wars we are participating in – Clegg also won this one. The third was shown on the BBC the week before the election and concentrated on our economy, with each suggesting ways to help our country to get out of debt. Clegg, indeed, won the third debate as well according to polls.
David Cameron and Gordon Brown spent most of the debates arguing between themselves while Nick Clegg stood there watching with a slightly smug look upon his face. I didn't particularly listen to what they had to say much, and infact I just studied their body language to see how they were coping. Clegg seemed to cope fine with the pressure of the audience and the heat of the spot lights. Cameron too seemed to cope with it all reasonably fine, apart from the fact he became rather sweaty and his forehead not only became shinier, but also seemed to grow. I never noticed before the debates he was slowly turning bald. Gordon Brown seemed to cope the same way he normally does under pressure, by bumbling everything he said more than Gareth Gates on Pop Idol many moons ago. I noticed he has very large ears and a lot of excess skin around his neck. He also seems to suck his teeth and intake air half way through his sentences, much like you would expect an angry rabbit would who was blowing up a balloon. Gordon Brown also created a slogan unwillingly in the debates.

Obviously, Gordon Brown and his team of PR ‘experts’ realised how popular Nick Clegg was becoming and how the audience seemed to always be agreeing with him. From this I presume the phrase 'I agree with Nick' was created. Rarely did a sentence fall from Brown's lips that did not start with the words 'I agree with Nick'. I essentially ended up feeling very sorry for Gordon.

On the 6th of May, despite having Chicken Pox, I was not 18, so I could not vote. If I could've voted though, I think I would voted Lib Dem's. I've supported the Conservatives for many years, but on final reflection, it was pretty much certain that the Conservatives would get the most votes, and seeing as I had become fond of Nick Clegg like everyone else, I think I would have helped him in getting votes. Either way, when the votes finally came in, no-one had actually won. Britain was in the midst of a parliament being hung (unfortunately, not in the way one would hope for).

Then the week of arse-kissing began. Both Labour and the Conservatives spent the entire election campaign constantly demeaning Nick Clegg and his fellow Liberal Democrats, and then they ended up having control over both parties. Eventually, on the Tuesday evening following the election, during Eastenders, it was announced that Nick Clegg had chosen the Conservatives and gone into partnership with them, forcing Gordon Brown out of British Politics. We are now living in a country run be a coalition Government, made up of David Cameron as Prime Minister and Nick Clegg and Deputy Prime Minister. What a marvellous day.
Over the coming weeks they announced the final line up of the Cabinet Team and it was a wonderful mixture or Blue's and Yellow's. Then the budget was announced. I am yet to read the 12 page document (however, I do actually plan to do so at some point), but somehow the new chancellor, George Osborne has begun cutting £6Billion from our countries budget. Then, for reasons of malice, the media has begun and I am sure will continue to, tear and pick apart the coalition Government so the next leaders debate will actually be held on an episode of Jeremy Kyle. You would think the media didn't want our country to have a stable Government and would rather our country be torn apart by constant rioting and fist fighting.

As in most partnerships, each side has had to give up some important things; for example I think as part of agreement Nick Clegg has had to bin his Elton John CD. The big thing that will come from the coalition, which I am rather sadly excited about, is a reform of the voting system. The Liberal Democrats this year received the most votes they have ever had, however, they ended up with less seats than previously had. To be honest, I am very excited about this coalition, and I do hope it works and I think it would be nice them to last the entire term together, but whether that will happen, we shall have to wait and see.

Another big thing about the month of May, like April, was the disruption to air travel. Only slightly caused by the ash cloud this time, but was mainly caused by BA Staff striking. Now, I am all for freedom of speech and all that lark, but this all seems pretty darn ridiculous to me. British Airway's staff have lost their travelling privileges. I don't want to come across as sarcastic and cynical here, but BOO-HOO! I wonder if anyone has actually pointed out to them yet that the longer they keep striking, the more money their employers lose. Then eventually, they'll start to lose so much money they will fall into debt, which would then lead to one of the biggest British companies closing down and having a major effect upon our economy and of course, all the people who are striking, won't have a job at all.
Sure, it seems quite unlikely that would happen, but I don't think losing a few travelling perks is enough of a reason to go on strike. From what I understand, pilots and airline staff are not exactly underpaid. I don't know what these perks are, but I doubt a bag of peanuts costs that much on a flight. I don't know because I have never been on a plane, but I think they should just stop throwing their toys out the pram and go back to doing their jobs!

I don't think anyone can write a blog about May, without mentioning the Eurovision Song Contest either. I didn't watch much of it really, infact, I only saw two songs (one of them ours) and the final results at a friend’s house after a night out. However, our country came last place, and I cannot understand why this has to be. Sure, the guy who was singing, who I affectionately have always called 'Whatshisface' because I do not want to waste brain cells learning his name, was rubbish. He hit very few notes properly and his backing singers were just as bad. It felt as if they had never previously all sung together as they had absolutely no ability to harmonise together at all. As for the song itself; why would we even give Pete Waterman the job of writing a song in the first place? It seemed like a suicide attempt!
Granted, there is not much British music about that I am particularly fond of, but we do have some pretty good singing talent. We should get one of our professional and successful singers to perform. Why not Leona Lewis? She's not great, but she is better than a lot of crap and is quite popular globally now. Cliff Richard done it twice, in 1968 and 1973 and he was a professional then. Other countries use professional and popular singers! The cynic in me knows the reason why we will not do it though. Money.

We spent so much effort on trying to get the Olympics and our country is also praying to host the World Cup, which is/will be, millions upon millions, if not billions, of pounds spent building stadiums and hosting the tournament. However, our country cannot afford to host the Eurovision Song Contest anymore as it is seen as dead wood now, so we continually put in rubbish acts. What makes it worse is that we complained for years that the reason we never won was because it was too political, and now that the points system has been changed, so that 50% of a countries results come from impartial judges, we still lose and have no excuse other than 'We're shit!'

Anyway, that is it for this blog, reviewing the month of May. You will not have to wait another month for the next blog though, as I plan to write two more in the next week - hopefully.