Closer - Joy Division - Album Review
Thirty years is a long time in music, and it can be an important stretch of time for not just bands, but whole genres. Given the amount of music that has come and gone since 1980, it's remarkable that 4 blokes from Manchester whose highest charting single was #13, and who only produced two albums can be still considered one of the most important bands in history. Joy Division are of course, and its why their music, fronted by the hurting lyrics of the late Ian Curtis, is still listened to today, and held in such high regard.
Joy Divisions strength never was in their individual musical ability. Bernard Sumner only took up guitar because he didn't want a 'real job,' and his playing style hasn't altered since. Steve Morris is vastly more talented on drums, and Peter Hook saw the lack of a bonified lead guitarist as his cue to leave teeth-rattling basslines at the forefront of the bands music, so why are they still so highly regarded? It couldn't have just been Ian Curtis, when he committed suicide, New Order then went on to be one of the biggest bands in the world, arguably outstripping Joy Division. What Joy Division were able to do however (for these purposes, Joy Division = with Ian Curtis, New Order = without) was combine the sparse guitar, metronomic, endless drumming and bone-rattling bass with a wonderfully awkward singer of someone who clearly had more on his mind.
While debut album Unknown Pleasures had this in spades, Closer's message couldn't have been more clear (with hindsight) than if he'd pulled out a razorblade in front of the rest of the band and went to town on his wrists. Written at a time when things in Curtis' life were reaching a point so intense no-one should ever have to deal with, the words completely mirror his feelings, and offer a frightening insight into his mind. There's not a song which doesn't touch on his life and the problems in it, and only Joy Division could provide the musical backdrop which made the album so powerful and hard-hitting. Opener Atrocity Exhibition starts with a haunting view of what the pressure of fame can do to you, and from there Closer covers all the bases. You have depression, the issues with him cheating on his wife, battles with epilepsy and a generally bleak view on life. And despite the dark subject matter, Closer manages to be something close to a perfect album, and one of the most beautiful pieces of art ever commited to record.
In terms of a progression for the band, Closer is immense. It sounds more grown-up than Unknown Pleasures. the addition of synths give the band an extra dimension and help the songs sound more haunting. That they could go from UP to Closer in a year is astounding, most bands today take 5 years to come close to such a leap forward. The most prevalent example of the synths is in closing track Decades, which is possibly the darkest song on the album, but still has an outro that you could listen to endlessly. Other songs like Colony and Twenty Four Hours however hark back to the days where Joy Division sounded like they were playing as if their lives depended on it, and these tracks don't sound out of place at all.
Closer is an album that is over 30 years old. Joy Division is a band that ended over 30 years ago. Ian Curtis is a musical genius who died over 30 years ago. Let not the amount of time or the automatic hero-worship points that suicide committing musicians get attributed, Joy Division are one of the 5 most important bands in musical history, and Close is the perfect example why.
==================================
Next week, Night Work by Scissor Sisters
Sunday 27 June 2010
Monday 21 June 2010
Bi-jove!
As i've not put reviews out in ages, i'll get back into with something that should've been done mid-May. Seeing as there's nothing decent out currently, i'll look at albums that celebrate a milestone of being released. This week, we have Binaural from Pearl Jam, as it's something i've been listening to a lot recently. Closer by Joy Division'll follow at some point, probably the week after next.
Binaural is Pearl Jam's 6th album, which is remarkable when you consider that album #1 was released in 1991, and Binaural out in 2000. One thing you could (and still can) count on PJ for at that point was for their albums to be, if nothing else, solid, and easily top albums of the year in which they were released. Binaural, despite what critics and sales may indicate, was no different.
Binaural didn't produce any great singles, or any classic songs for which PJ are remembered like they are for others, but there's certainly enough quality on here to define a band. Eddie Vedder suffered bad bouts (if it occurs in such a manner) of writer's block whilst making this album, but when you listen to the full thing, you can't understand how. He contributes the words to 8 of the 13 songs present, including all the stand-out moments. The rest of the band are as wonderful as ever, proving that they can move out of their old comfort-zone of grunge, experimenting with different genres and recording methods (hence the name of the album). Despite the difference in genre, most of the songs sound like they came about the old-fashioned way, through jam sessions.
As mentioned, lyrical prowess is a key featyre of Pearl Jam's work, and it's not any less-so here. From Breakerfall, a tale about a womans unrequited love, to Nothing as It Seems, a song which draws infulence from Pink Floyd with distorted guitars dripping off it, and lyrics from bassist Jeff Ament about a difficult childhood life. Sleight of Hand is a true moment of genius. Another track with hazy guitar effects, the story told is both poignant and relevant to a mass audience, which is part of Pearl Jam's draw to so many loyal fans. Other stand out points include Soon Forget, written by Vedder in one go and featuring music solely from a ukelele, which draws on one of the favourite Pearl Jam influences: homelessness. Gods' Dice, Light Years, Insignificance, Grievance and Of the Girl are all also easily up there with the bands best work.
Binaural can be seen as a pivotal event in Pearl Jam's history, as the tour for this album spawned the bands bootleg collection, which still runs strong to this day. Done by recording a lot of the bands live shows and making them into CD's available for purchase on their website and at gigs, it allows fans to get affordable access to the bands music. 72 such bootlegs were released between 2000-2001 during the tour for Binaural, setting a record for most albums debuting in the Billboard 200 chart in America at the one time. Pearl Jam are the only band to do such a series of releases (so far as I know, feel free to correct me) and it shows a fantastic dedication to their fans, and how grounded they have remained despite their fame. That each show costs $9.99 (£6.70) as a digital download is remarkable, especially in this current climate where money seems to be the only motivation for making music.
If you don't listen to Pearl Jam (your loss), then I don't recommend listening to Binaural first. Do it properly, start at Ten and work your way through. Just know, that by the time you get to Binaural, the brilliance wont let down for a second.
(PS: Sorry for the title. I was really, really stuck)
Binaural is Pearl Jam's 6th album, which is remarkable when you consider that album #1 was released in 1991, and Binaural out in 2000. One thing you could (and still can) count on PJ for at that point was for their albums to be, if nothing else, solid, and easily top albums of the year in which they were released. Binaural, despite what critics and sales may indicate, was no different.
Binaural didn't produce any great singles, or any classic songs for which PJ are remembered like they are for others, but there's certainly enough quality on here to define a band. Eddie Vedder suffered bad bouts (if it occurs in such a manner) of writer's block whilst making this album, but when you listen to the full thing, you can't understand how. He contributes the words to 8 of the 13 songs present, including all the stand-out moments. The rest of the band are as wonderful as ever, proving that they can move out of their old comfort-zone of grunge, experimenting with different genres and recording methods (hence the name of the album). Despite the difference in genre, most of the songs sound like they came about the old-fashioned way, through jam sessions.
As mentioned, lyrical prowess is a key featyre of Pearl Jam's work, and it's not any less-so here. From Breakerfall, a tale about a womans unrequited love, to Nothing as It Seems, a song which draws infulence from Pink Floyd with distorted guitars dripping off it, and lyrics from bassist Jeff Ament about a difficult childhood life. Sleight of Hand is a true moment of genius. Another track with hazy guitar effects, the story told is both poignant and relevant to a mass audience, which is part of Pearl Jam's draw to so many loyal fans. Other stand out points include Soon Forget, written by Vedder in one go and featuring music solely from a ukelele, which draws on one of the favourite Pearl Jam influences: homelessness. Gods' Dice, Light Years, Insignificance, Grievance and Of the Girl are all also easily up there with the bands best work.
Binaural can be seen as a pivotal event in Pearl Jam's history, as the tour for this album spawned the bands bootleg collection, which still runs strong to this day. Done by recording a lot of the bands live shows and making them into CD's available for purchase on their website and at gigs, it allows fans to get affordable access to the bands music. 72 such bootlegs were released between 2000-2001 during the tour for Binaural, setting a record for most albums debuting in the Billboard 200 chart in America at the one time. Pearl Jam are the only band to do such a series of releases (so far as I know, feel free to correct me) and it shows a fantastic dedication to their fans, and how grounded they have remained despite their fame. That each show costs $9.99 (£6.70) as a digital download is remarkable, especially in this current climate where money seems to be the only motivation for making music.
If you don't listen to Pearl Jam (your loss), then I don't recommend listening to Binaural first. Do it properly, start at Ten and work your way through. Just know, that by the time you get to Binaural, the brilliance wont let down for a second.
(PS: Sorry for the title. I was really, really stuck)
Wednesday 9 June 2010
Things I Have an Opinion On #20
Big Brother
A culmination of the PlayStation Network being down for maintainence and my exams being over mean I am back blogging! Now I have no distraction, hopefully I can get back into it and satisfy the 6 people who actually read the things. As such, I find it fitting my return to complaining on the internet will coincide with something which has been complained about since it first started, and that is the name now synonymous with reality television, "Big Brother."
Big Brother should not be known purely for being a television programme. Most people who watch it would vaguely be able to tell you where the name comes from, what it means, or what is symbolises. The name is derived from one of the greatest books ever written, "Nineteen Eighty-Four" by George Orwell. In this, Big Brother is the symbol for the leader of the Party, who hold government. Who Big Brother is and where he is based is never known, and the ultimate goal for all people of Oceania is to simultaneously love and hate Big Brother, and act upon his every word. In this sense, the telly programme has been fantastically accurate, as the saps who go in follow every whim of whoever sits and dreams up the rules, and it has been both loved and hated by the public since its inception at the start of the last decade.
I personally have never watched an episode outwith the launch shows, mainly because I have a brain. While it may have been interesting originally, it soon changed as the years went past, becoming a horrible metaphor that developed with society, only here, it was broadcast to us 24 hours a day. Farce is the only word that can really describe what has resulted however, as the people on show are simply desperate for a bit of fame, and as they have no discernable talents, they feel that being on this stupid programme and flashing some skin will get them somewhere. Has it? Can even the most ardent BB anorak remember people outwith the winners? I doubt it, and that's why I feel sorry for the people on this and the people who watch it. People whose lives are so mundane that they have to watch people cooped up in a house for 3 months (that's how long you'll have to put up with this one) have to be one of the most depressing groups you could imagine.
Like most normal people, i'm glad that the series that starts this evening is the last. Even though it may have been a good idea at first, it lost its mojo long ago, and it ending means that i'll be able to watch E4 without seeing adverts for it and the 83 spin-off shows, I wont have to watch DAVINA MCCALL shouting at me, and I wont have my Scrubs interuppted.
A culmination of the PlayStation Network being down for maintainence and my exams being over mean I am back blogging! Now I have no distraction, hopefully I can get back into it and satisfy the 6 people who actually read the things. As such, I find it fitting my return to complaining on the internet will coincide with something which has been complained about since it first started, and that is the name now synonymous with reality television, "Big Brother."
Big Brother should not be known purely for being a television programme. Most people who watch it would vaguely be able to tell you where the name comes from, what it means, or what is symbolises. The name is derived from one of the greatest books ever written, "Nineteen Eighty-Four" by George Orwell. In this, Big Brother is the symbol for the leader of the Party, who hold government. Who Big Brother is and where he is based is never known, and the ultimate goal for all people of Oceania is to simultaneously love and hate Big Brother, and act upon his every word. In this sense, the telly programme has been fantastically accurate, as the saps who go in follow every whim of whoever sits and dreams up the rules, and it has been both loved and hated by the public since its inception at the start of the last decade.
I personally have never watched an episode outwith the launch shows, mainly because I have a brain. While it may have been interesting originally, it soon changed as the years went past, becoming a horrible metaphor that developed with society, only here, it was broadcast to us 24 hours a day. Farce is the only word that can really describe what has resulted however, as the people on show are simply desperate for a bit of fame, and as they have no discernable talents, they feel that being on this stupid programme and flashing some skin will get them somewhere. Has it? Can even the most ardent BB anorak remember people outwith the winners? I doubt it, and that's why I feel sorry for the people on this and the people who watch it. People whose lives are so mundane that they have to watch people cooped up in a house for 3 months (that's how long you'll have to put up with this one) have to be one of the most depressing groups you could imagine.
Like most normal people, i'm glad that the series that starts this evening is the last. Even though it may have been a good idea at first, it lost its mojo long ago, and it ending means that i'll be able to watch E4 without seeing adverts for it and the 83 spin-off shows, I wont have to watch DAVINA MCCALL shouting at me, and I wont have my Scrubs interuppted.
Wednesday 2 June 2010
I Think Gary Glitter Just Blew a Nut
Originally posted on 12/4/10
Final Fantasy XIII - PS3 Game Review
As far as my experience of playing RPG's goes, it's not wonderful. It's only ever been Pokemon for me, and lets be fair, a Game Boy screen isn't exactly the same as a next-gen console, and in terms of credability, there's quite a difference. Pokemon is a franchise that spawned just about every form of media (one of the films was on channel 2 the other day, fuck me, so awful), while Final Fantasy is one of the more socially questionable things to enjoy, going by what I hear from them. I've never played one before, being put off by the concept of there being more than one game that by the name states the first should be the last, but as it was the only thing to rent, I decided to give #13 a go.
From the moment I put the disc in I knew it was a bad idea. The game starting in some strange floating planet that's got fighting, with some wee twerp with blue hair, another twerp with hair that looked like fire and a crappy body warmer all led by an 8 ft tall guy in a trench coat with this irritating wee bit of hair between his eyes hanging from his bandana that whatever the circumstances never seems to move. This big chap is of course Snow, someone whose cheeky confidence you're supposed to warm to throughout. Alrighty then.
On to another story thread (with no warning) and we have a burd who's apparently a soldier, although the hot-pants she had on made me slightly suspicious as to which army she was with. Add to this the fact her name is Lightning and that she looks like Kimi Raikkonen, you know she's going to be someone that you can admire. She was paired with the token black guy, who is completely in no way a racial stereotype and will not die at any point in the game (none of them do I don't think), but he may as well be wearing the "I-die-or-turn-evil-t-shirt." You can imagine the kind of awful lines he's going to hit out with too. Don't forget that a small bird lives in his afro that he frequently talks to.
If you thought these 3 were bad, then it gets worse. Snow decides to get a rag-tag bunch of misfits together to fight the evil oppression (don't even ask, i'll come back to that later) and in the process, some burd (who we later find out is called Nora, rather hilariously) dies. That would be fine, were she not the mother of the saddest, most pathetic example of a human being I have ever come across both in gaming and in real life. Rather horribly, he's called Hope. Despite being so pathetic he probably cries if he steps in a puddle, he is still able, like all the characters, to pull a boomerang out his arse (literally) and fight stuff ranging from giant robotic bulbasaurs to something called a "Ushumgal Subjugator" without a moments thought, then going back to being weedy, un-fit and pathetic. Fantastic consistency.
There is hope for.... Hope however, as he's accompanied by a small ginger burd called Vanille, who like everyone has questionable clothing. Her lack of clothing however is made up for by the fact that she is the most ridiculously over-the-top enternally optimistic little freak to ever have been imagined by human kind. I am honestly at a loss for how to describe her, she's so.... irritating it beggars belief, and with her Australian accent (christ knows how we get Australian accents here) it just gets worse as the game goes on. Not to mention that any time this burd isn't speaking she's making horrible little giggly moans and groans, and you start to think that this game is designed by the kind of oddballs who normally make people like this with tentacles going up her vagina.
The opening sequences of the game don't exactly fill you with much hope if you were expecting something good, going down some very linear and very samey corridors fighting indentical enemies all the way through is rather boring, and it lasts for quite a while. In fairness, this never really changed throughout the game, only the scenery really changes, granted there's a few ridiculous bossfights as I mentioned earlier, but there's not much variety. This is apt however, as there's not much variety in the fighting system. It's turn based, and like good ole Pokemon, you start out with a few moves, and as you defeat more and better enemies you get more and better attacks. The only problem with this is the agonising wait for your hit meter to fill up so you can use them again, while whatever you're fighting with is beating the shit out you with attacks that would normally make a human disintegrate. There are things you can do, such as discern the attributes of your enemies (yawn) or use items, like potions, to re-fill you health.
This awful fighting system is buoyed slightly with the introduction of "Paradigm Shifting," where you can change what type of attacks your party members will carry out. This can get quite annoyinh when you've only got two people (see Lightning/Hope) and you have to change non-stop in order to keep yourself alive while still putting up a decent fight. In one boss battle where I only had Lightning and Hope, it took me 21 minutes to finish, only to be told rather smugly that the recommended time was 8. Unless I was missing something quite drastic, the game was talking out its arse, which does get quite wearing after a while. It is slightly more bearable when you can go up to 3 fighting party members, but this is even more irritating as you can't choose who you control, nor who else fights with you at any given moment. This means that all the upgrades you put into a character to make them your (only) really good medic are wasted if they're not fighting. That and the leveling up system is absurd, winning battles gets you points to put towards upgrades, but the upgrading takes place in this weird thing called the Crystarium (or something, I never payed much attention to it) which looks like a cross between the movie Tron and a pack of pastel-coloured crayons. It's utterly pointless as well, simply a few drop-down menus would have done the exact same job and made you want to vomit less.
On the subject of looks, one thing that the makers can be commended for is imagination. While the majority of the game takes place in what are essentially giant corridors, the background to these is spectacular if ridiculous. You shift from lush green grass lands to war-torn cities to giant blue forests to a crystalised ocean. For some odd reason you get flashbacks everynow and then which take you to "The Seaside City of Bodhum" where you get to learn about the characters (BORING) backstories, even getting to play Snow as he runs after his poor fiance once she's found out she is a l'Cie.
What now follows is an attempt at making sense of the uttely awful story into something that could provide reasons for anything that 've so far witnessed:
There are two worlds, Pulse with one floating aboive it called Cocoon
Cocoon is inhabited by big robots called Fal'Cie
Fal'Cie's can turn people into l'Cie's by giving them a mark
If they l'Cie complete their focus (even though they don't know what it is), they gain eternal life
Makes sense, sort of. Only problem is that everyone in Cocoon hates people from Pulse, particularly l'Cie, they have a guerrila corps army specifically designed to deal with them. I think that's everything, the only problem is that none of this is clearly explained, Even the flashbacks explain buggar all, and only set out to make the characters more annoying and less identifiable with. Honestly, even with my playtime (which I think was around 14 hours), I didn't give a rats arse about anyone, the entire world of Cocoon (I think that's where it is) could blow up and I wouldn't even be pissed that the ending was crap, only happy there was one.
Whatever the end result of all of that is I don't know (I think i'm just past halfway), but I do have some praise for Final Fantasy 13. Despite all of its glaring failures, facepalm moments and dialogue that will make you ashamed language was invented.... I grew to like it. I don't quite know what it was, be it simply a desire to finish, a desire to see how bad it got or a begrudging admiration for it... but I would consider buying it. Although my experience in the field is limited, it does seem like a good example of a JRPG, and i'd quite like to finish it, so you could say I enjoyed it. Maybe even liked it.
Final Fantasy XIII - PS3 Game Review
As far as my experience of playing RPG's goes, it's not wonderful. It's only ever been Pokemon for me, and lets be fair, a Game Boy screen isn't exactly the same as a next-gen console, and in terms of credability, there's quite a difference. Pokemon is a franchise that spawned just about every form of media (one of the films was on channel 2 the other day, fuck me, so awful), while Final Fantasy is one of the more socially questionable things to enjoy, going by what I hear from them. I've never played one before, being put off by the concept of there being more than one game that by the name states the first should be the last, but as it was the only thing to rent, I decided to give #13 a go.
From the moment I put the disc in I knew it was a bad idea. The game starting in some strange floating planet that's got fighting, with some wee twerp with blue hair, another twerp with hair that looked like fire and a crappy body warmer all led by an 8 ft tall guy in a trench coat with this irritating wee bit of hair between his eyes hanging from his bandana that whatever the circumstances never seems to move. This big chap is of course Snow, someone whose cheeky confidence you're supposed to warm to throughout. Alrighty then.
On to another story thread (with no warning) and we have a burd who's apparently a soldier, although the hot-pants she had on made me slightly suspicious as to which army she was with. Add to this the fact her name is Lightning and that she looks like Kimi Raikkonen, you know she's going to be someone that you can admire. She was paired with the token black guy, who is completely in no way a racial stereotype and will not die at any point in the game (none of them do I don't think), but he may as well be wearing the "I-die-or-turn-evil-t-shirt." You can imagine the kind of awful lines he's going to hit out with too. Don't forget that a small bird lives in his afro that he frequently talks to.
If you thought these 3 were bad, then it gets worse. Snow decides to get a rag-tag bunch of misfits together to fight the evil oppression (don't even ask, i'll come back to that later) and in the process, some burd (who we later find out is called Nora, rather hilariously) dies. That would be fine, were she not the mother of the saddest, most pathetic example of a human being I have ever come across both in gaming and in real life. Rather horribly, he's called Hope. Despite being so pathetic he probably cries if he steps in a puddle, he is still able, like all the characters, to pull a boomerang out his arse (literally) and fight stuff ranging from giant robotic bulbasaurs to something called a "Ushumgal Subjugator" without a moments thought, then going back to being weedy, un-fit and pathetic. Fantastic consistency.
There is hope for.... Hope however, as he's accompanied by a small ginger burd called Vanille, who like everyone has questionable clothing. Her lack of clothing however is made up for by the fact that she is the most ridiculously over-the-top enternally optimistic little freak to ever have been imagined by human kind. I am honestly at a loss for how to describe her, she's so.... irritating it beggars belief, and with her Australian accent (christ knows how we get Australian accents here) it just gets worse as the game goes on. Not to mention that any time this burd isn't speaking she's making horrible little giggly moans and groans, and you start to think that this game is designed by the kind of oddballs who normally make people like this with tentacles going up her vagina.
The opening sequences of the game don't exactly fill you with much hope if you were expecting something good, going down some very linear and very samey corridors fighting indentical enemies all the way through is rather boring, and it lasts for quite a while. In fairness, this never really changed throughout the game, only the scenery really changes, granted there's a few ridiculous bossfights as I mentioned earlier, but there's not much variety. This is apt however, as there's not much variety in the fighting system. It's turn based, and like good ole Pokemon, you start out with a few moves, and as you defeat more and better enemies you get more and better attacks. The only problem with this is the agonising wait for your hit meter to fill up so you can use them again, while whatever you're fighting with is beating the shit out you with attacks that would normally make a human disintegrate. There are things you can do, such as discern the attributes of your enemies (yawn) or use items, like potions, to re-fill you health.
This awful fighting system is buoyed slightly with the introduction of "Paradigm Shifting," where you can change what type of attacks your party members will carry out. This can get quite annoyinh when you've only got two people (see Lightning/Hope) and you have to change non-stop in order to keep yourself alive while still putting up a decent fight. In one boss battle where I only had Lightning and Hope, it took me 21 minutes to finish, only to be told rather smugly that the recommended time was 8. Unless I was missing something quite drastic, the game was talking out its arse, which does get quite wearing after a while. It is slightly more bearable when you can go up to 3 fighting party members, but this is even more irritating as you can't choose who you control, nor who else fights with you at any given moment. This means that all the upgrades you put into a character to make them your (only) really good medic are wasted if they're not fighting. That and the leveling up system is absurd, winning battles gets you points to put towards upgrades, but the upgrading takes place in this weird thing called the Crystarium (or something, I never payed much attention to it) which looks like a cross between the movie Tron and a pack of pastel-coloured crayons. It's utterly pointless as well, simply a few drop-down menus would have done the exact same job and made you want to vomit less.
On the subject of looks, one thing that the makers can be commended for is imagination. While the majority of the game takes place in what are essentially giant corridors, the background to these is spectacular if ridiculous. You shift from lush green grass lands to war-torn cities to giant blue forests to a crystalised ocean. For some odd reason you get flashbacks everynow and then which take you to "The Seaside City of Bodhum" where you get to learn about the characters (BORING) backstories, even getting to play Snow as he runs after his poor fiance once she's found out she is a l'Cie.
What now follows is an attempt at making sense of the uttely awful story into something that could provide reasons for anything that 've so far witnessed:
There are two worlds, Pulse with one floating aboive it called Cocoon
Cocoon is inhabited by big robots called Fal'Cie
Fal'Cie's can turn people into l'Cie's by giving them a mark
If they l'Cie complete their focus (even though they don't know what it is), they gain eternal life
Makes sense, sort of. Only problem is that everyone in Cocoon hates people from Pulse, particularly l'Cie, they have a guerrila corps army specifically designed to deal with them. I think that's everything, the only problem is that none of this is clearly explained, Even the flashbacks explain buggar all, and only set out to make the characters more annoying and less identifiable with. Honestly, even with my playtime (which I think was around 14 hours), I didn't give a rats arse about anyone, the entire world of Cocoon (I think that's where it is) could blow up and I wouldn't even be pissed that the ending was crap, only happy there was one.
Whatever the end result of all of that is I don't know (I think i'm just past halfway), but I do have some praise for Final Fantasy 13. Despite all of its glaring failures, facepalm moments and dialogue that will make you ashamed language was invented.... I grew to like it. I don't quite know what it was, be it simply a desire to finish, a desire to see how bad it got or a begrudging admiration for it... but I would consider buying it. Although my experience in the field is limited, it does seem like a good example of a JRPG, and i'd quite like to finish it, so you could say I enjoyed it. Maybe even liked it.
Things I Have an Opinion On #19
Originally posted on 9/4/10
The news that AOL has put Bebo up for sale.
I've put this blog off for a while, for two reasons. Both laziness and enkoying watching the hypocrisy of the sayings from people in my lifestream. First thing, find me an article which said it was being closed down last night. Better yet, one that says it's being shut down now. Can you? No. AOL says that if there's no buyer by the END OF MAY then it will be shut down. A whole month and a half there for people with no access to calendars.
I've never liked AOL. I never liked this advert: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g35-39XZIhk, the burd with the dress that showed the internet scared me, and I hate watching old episodes of Friends and seeing a thing at the bottom of the screen at the end saying AOL Keyword: Friends, who cares about your shite AOL Keywords? My hatred of AOL intesified when as a complete computer noob, I was subjected to their shite browser and log-in service, the annoying sound of dial-up and the idiotic option to have Alan Partridge tell me if I have e-mail or not. Scratch that, he was amazing. But still, AOL is shite.
No wonder then that they buy a website for 850 million in 2008 (a good time for bebo, my peak of profile views came in June of that year) and less than two years want to flush it all down the pan, what a pile of shite. Granted, Bebo is losing users but that simply brings up the question, why?
It seems they've all pissed off to Facebook which in my opinion is astounding. Asking a friend today (Barry McAuley, if you want to scold him) what was so much better about it, and he said that you can "like" statuses. Fantastic. In this internet-centred world where the English language is going to pot, the best feature of a website is something that allows you to not bother even writing that you appreciate what someone says, simply clicking a button that tells the person such. Outstanding. As anything that butchers the already crippled medium of proper communication makes me want to vomit, you can pretty much say I detest the core values of facebook already.
Why do I have it then you ask? Because everyone else does. However, what I fail to see is how it is this centre-point for so many people, with people claiming omg fb addiction! (i'm looking at you, Samantha Jones. Seriously, no-one cares) and me constantly being offered free gifts in Farmville. Look, I tried Farmville, it's shite. If I want to play games on a screen, i'll do something that doesn't involve growing fucking crops for a non-existant people. Nor do I care about the sort of groups I see, stuff titled "that moment when you're asleep but you think you're falling and you wake up and you realise that you were asleep," coupled with the volume of Sickipedia jokes that get passed off as original material. Why? What is so wonderful about this that you had to do it on Facebook rather than the Bebo sites that just about everyone had? Is it the pretty blue stripe at the top as opposed to the black one?
On the matter of page design, Facebook is simply another tool of the NWO to make everyone identical. Do you want an individual colour scheme on your home page? Bebo says yes, have whatever you like! Make your own shitey ones proclaiming love for someone who'll dump you in a week if you please! Facebook says no. You're not getting one, and all your page font will be irritatingly small and turn everything into your list of telly programmes/music into hyperlinks. Outstanding. As a skin-maker (a very poor one, by my own admission), I like personalising my page with whatever I feel strongly about at the time (although I never made an In Rainbows one annoyingly), I like knowing that when someone (most recently Dominique, although Cogan and Conner like to send me mean things occasionally) bothers to go on my page or leave a comment that they will see a picture of a road in Billings, Montana, or that they will see Chris Stewart or they will see Radiohead in all caps. Facebook, no dice.
Bebo's been good over the years. Providing both a platform for my thoughts and a platform for stalking, paedophilia, the failed Colony of Comedians, secret communicae and many a heightened discussion between me and many others, all you Facebook snobs cannot deny that it's been good to you, and that it's ironic that everyone saying "wow lol, bebo's still here, does anyone care?" (Laura Moore this time, was David's chocolate starfish delicious? Just so you know, this has put paid to both Kirsty Black and Dylan McCrones ability to eat Milky Way Magic Stars) has simply proven that despite your claims, you still care about bebo on some level if you've came back to mock its demise.
Well, I think i've said all I have to say on this matter. As Bebo's future is uncertain, I shall now be doing what I told myself I would do ages ago (I think its creation date is Sep 09), and actually using a blog website to put out my thoughts.
http://theunreasonablevoiceofreason.blogspot.com/
Suscribe, enjoy and consider yourself with a heartfelt thank you from me if you're ever taken time to read anything i've put out here. Take note that from now on on Bebo, I will again be ripping off Craig Johnstone and posting my true feelings on just about everything.
The news that AOL has put Bebo up for sale.
I've put this blog off for a while, for two reasons. Both laziness and enkoying watching the hypocrisy of the sayings from people in my lifestream. First thing, find me an article which said it was being closed down last night. Better yet, one that says it's being shut down now. Can you? No. AOL says that if there's no buyer by the END OF MAY then it will be shut down. A whole month and a half there for people with no access to calendars.
I've never liked AOL. I never liked this advert: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g35-39XZIhk, the burd with the dress that showed the internet scared me, and I hate watching old episodes of Friends and seeing a thing at the bottom of the screen at the end saying AOL Keyword: Friends, who cares about your shite AOL Keywords? My hatred of AOL intesified when as a complete computer noob, I was subjected to their shite browser and log-in service, the annoying sound of dial-up and the idiotic option to have Alan Partridge tell me if I have e-mail or not. Scratch that, he was amazing. But still, AOL is shite.
No wonder then that they buy a website for 850 million in 2008 (a good time for bebo, my peak of profile views came in June of that year) and less than two years want to flush it all down the pan, what a pile of shite. Granted, Bebo is losing users but that simply brings up the question, why?
It seems they've all pissed off to Facebook which in my opinion is astounding. Asking a friend today (Barry McAuley, if you want to scold him) what was so much better about it, and he said that you can "like" statuses. Fantastic. In this internet-centred world where the English language is going to pot, the best feature of a website is something that allows you to not bother even writing that you appreciate what someone says, simply clicking a button that tells the person such. Outstanding. As anything that butchers the already crippled medium of proper communication makes me want to vomit, you can pretty much say I detest the core values of facebook already.
Why do I have it then you ask? Because everyone else does. However, what I fail to see is how it is this centre-point for so many people, with people claiming omg fb addiction! (i'm looking at you, Samantha Jones. Seriously, no-one cares) and me constantly being offered free gifts in Farmville. Look, I tried Farmville, it's shite. If I want to play games on a screen, i'll do something that doesn't involve growing fucking crops for a non-existant people. Nor do I care about the sort of groups I see, stuff titled "that moment when you're asleep but you think you're falling and you wake up and you realise that you were asleep," coupled with the volume of Sickipedia jokes that get passed off as original material. Why? What is so wonderful about this that you had to do it on Facebook rather than the Bebo sites that just about everyone had? Is it the pretty blue stripe at the top as opposed to the black one?
On the matter of page design, Facebook is simply another tool of the NWO to make everyone identical. Do you want an individual colour scheme on your home page? Bebo says yes, have whatever you like! Make your own shitey ones proclaiming love for someone who'll dump you in a week if you please! Facebook says no. You're not getting one, and all your page font will be irritatingly small and turn everything into your list of telly programmes/music into hyperlinks. Outstanding. As a skin-maker (a very poor one, by my own admission), I like personalising my page with whatever I feel strongly about at the time (although I never made an In Rainbows one annoyingly), I like knowing that when someone (most recently Dominique, although Cogan and Conner like to send me mean things occasionally) bothers to go on my page or leave a comment that they will see a picture of a road in Billings, Montana, or that they will see Chris Stewart or they will see Radiohead in all caps. Facebook, no dice.
Bebo's been good over the years. Providing both a platform for my thoughts and a platform for stalking, paedophilia, the failed Colony of Comedians, secret communicae and many a heightened discussion between me and many others, all you Facebook snobs cannot deny that it's been good to you, and that it's ironic that everyone saying "wow lol, bebo's still here, does anyone care?" (Laura Moore this time, was David's chocolate starfish delicious? Just so you know, this has put paid to both Kirsty Black and Dylan McCrones ability to eat Milky Way Magic Stars) has simply proven that despite your claims, you still care about bebo on some level if you've came back to mock its demise.
Well, I think i've said all I have to say on this matter. As Bebo's future is uncertain, I shall now be doing what I told myself I would do ages ago (I think its creation date is Sep 09), and actually using a blog website to put out my thoughts.
http://theunreasonablevoiceofreason.blogspot.com/
Suscribe, enjoy and consider yourself with a heartfelt thank you from me if you're ever taken time to read anything i've put out here. Take note that from now on on Bebo, I will again be ripping off Craig Johnstone and posting my true feelings on just about everything.
Throw as Many Stones as You Like
Originally posted on 4/4/10
Dirt - Kids in Glass Houses - Album Review
This can be a very annoying task on occasion. Normally i'm full of things to say about whatever it is i'm reviewing, be it reluctant praise or unbridled contempt, but this week i'm so stuck I don't even have a title. I have a lot to say about Dirt, but i'm still undecided on whether I like it or not.
Kids in Glass Houses' first album was annoying for me in a lot of ways. Not least that I spent �14 on it and hated it on first listen, but there was more than that once i'd heard it a few times and got to see it fully. While it was by no means perfect or as accomplished as it was capable of being, there were decent songs, even it most of the better ones were quite samey or had awful lyrics (see Easy Tiger, where the chorus is lucky to contain words). Moving on to their second album, most bands in this situation improve, create more fully-fledged songs and gain a lot of credility in doing so (see Max�mo Park). Kids in Glass Houses appear to have bypassed this however, and simply ripped off anything vaguely emo in the past 3 years. When I put the CD in for the first time, my immediate thought was "i've heard this album this year" as opener Artbreaker I (they cleverly put Artbreaker II at the end) uses the same intro as The Consequence by You Me At Six. This rather sets the tone for the rest of the album, with some awful screaming and some crap lyrics "Fumble with the stranger in your bed/Fuck yourself into the record books instead" (not exact but it could work), and couple this with two horrendously awful duets featuring the burd with the bean-do out The Saturdays and New Found Glory, a band who I have to hate on principle, and you're getting towards an album that's so bad it makes you ill.
On those two duets, Undercover Lover is so vomit-inducing it should be outlawed under public decency laws, and Maybe Tomorrow is a classic example of what to do when you realise a record is failing; throw in some backing vocals that chant over a chorus to add some depth. Unfortunately, they only serve to show how shallow the song and the rest of the album is. Everything on it seems to be done to a paint by numbers kind of scheme, with no real imagination in any of it. It's competant certainly, but it's certainly not remarkable. Aled Phillips' (what a rock star name) voice is also very often completely unable to sing the songs here, see The Morning Afterlife which is that wee slow number that bands like this put on to show they have the depth to sing a tender ballad, only for it to blow up in their face. It combines strings with screaming for christ's sake. There's no progression here from the last album, there's nothing original or vaguely unique that you could listen to and think 'this band are going places.'
Credit where it's due, there are stand-outs. When it's not dying in a sea of fringes and whining, moments like Matters at All, Hunt the Haunted and The Best is Yet to Come sprout up. These are the things that give you some vague hope that KIGC will avoid becoming one of about 20 bands going around that you hate. Because ultimately, if you'd just heard this album for the first time, you would assume that they're one of those awful bands like Madina Lake or We Are the Ocean who should just be rounded up and shot. As mentioned though, there are moments that make them worthy of your time, even though you'll wish you weren't listening at all. For this band to have any hope they'll have to hope their prophecy comes true, and that the best really is yet to come.
Dirt - Kids in Glass Houses - Album Review
This can be a very annoying task on occasion. Normally i'm full of things to say about whatever it is i'm reviewing, be it reluctant praise or unbridled contempt, but this week i'm so stuck I don't even have a title. I have a lot to say about Dirt, but i'm still undecided on whether I like it or not.
Kids in Glass Houses' first album was annoying for me in a lot of ways. Not least that I spent �14 on it and hated it on first listen, but there was more than that once i'd heard it a few times and got to see it fully. While it was by no means perfect or as accomplished as it was capable of being, there were decent songs, even it most of the better ones were quite samey or had awful lyrics (see Easy Tiger, where the chorus is lucky to contain words). Moving on to their second album, most bands in this situation improve, create more fully-fledged songs and gain a lot of credility in doing so (see Max�mo Park). Kids in Glass Houses appear to have bypassed this however, and simply ripped off anything vaguely emo in the past 3 years. When I put the CD in for the first time, my immediate thought was "i've heard this album this year" as opener Artbreaker I (they cleverly put Artbreaker II at the end) uses the same intro as The Consequence by You Me At Six. This rather sets the tone for the rest of the album, with some awful screaming and some crap lyrics "Fumble with the stranger in your bed/Fuck yourself into the record books instead" (not exact but it could work), and couple this with two horrendously awful duets featuring the burd with the bean-do out The Saturdays and New Found Glory, a band who I have to hate on principle, and you're getting towards an album that's so bad it makes you ill.
On those two duets, Undercover Lover is so vomit-inducing it should be outlawed under public decency laws, and Maybe Tomorrow is a classic example of what to do when you realise a record is failing; throw in some backing vocals that chant over a chorus to add some depth. Unfortunately, they only serve to show how shallow the song and the rest of the album is. Everything on it seems to be done to a paint by numbers kind of scheme, with no real imagination in any of it. It's competant certainly, but it's certainly not remarkable. Aled Phillips' (what a rock star name) voice is also very often completely unable to sing the songs here, see The Morning Afterlife which is that wee slow number that bands like this put on to show they have the depth to sing a tender ballad, only for it to blow up in their face. It combines strings with screaming for christ's sake. There's no progression here from the last album, there's nothing original or vaguely unique that you could listen to and think 'this band are going places.'
Credit where it's due, there are stand-outs. When it's not dying in a sea of fringes and whining, moments like Matters at All, Hunt the Haunted and The Best is Yet to Come sprout up. These are the things that give you some vague hope that KIGC will avoid becoming one of about 20 bands going around that you hate. Because ultimately, if you'd just heard this album for the first time, you would assume that they're one of those awful bands like Madina Lake or We Are the Ocean who should just be rounded up and shot. As mentioned though, there are moments that make them worthy of your time, even though you'll wish you weren't listening at all. For this band to have any hope they'll have to hope their prophecy comes true, and that the best really is yet to come.
Your Own Advice is Always What You Should Go By
Originally posted on 28/3/10
Keep Calm and Carry On - Stereophonics - Album Review
I think this'll be the last time I go on about opening singles. Purely because I shouldn't have the nerve to do it for an album that came out last year, and because i'm getting bored of it myself. Keep Calm and Carry On is Stereophonics' 7th album, and while I have 3/7ths of them, they all seem to follow the same formula. Fairly catchy lead single, with a fairly similar album but with a few hidden gems. KCACO follows this up, and while Innocent is a decent song, it's one of those lead singles which is simply a mask for a far superior album that follows it. Even the lead song, the imaginitively titled She's Alright, is something which hides a much more enjoyable labour that's been recorded here.
For 7 albums, musically there's not been much change. Granted they bothered to include the extra guitarist as a band member this time, so there's a bit more depth on some tracks which would have been weaker otherwise. There's some new area explored, the weird electronic sounding Beerbottle which coupled with a decent set of lyrics makes for a decent song. Closer Show Me How makes good use of the piano as well, and shows that Kelly Jones' voice can be used in all its harshness for something soft and heartfelt. Overall though, if you're looking for something new musically, don't bother. They've found their style, stuck with it and managed to stay successful off of it.
Lyrically, i've never set much by Stereophonics. Aside from most of them being indecipherable, there's very often few which have meaningful ones (to me at least). For KCACO however the boat's been pushed out, and once you get over hearing "She's Alright" about 80 times, you get some good stuff. There's stories told in Beerbottle and there's heartfelt and downright beauty on offer in Show Me How and Could You Be the One. I was truly taken aback by some of the words thrown together here, and as I said, the man with a girls names voice gets to show some level of emotion other than raspy strained anguish, and he's actually able to pull it off. As a result, this album has more depth than previous efforts (or, the ones i've heard). Where they can go from this I don't know, but if they keep calm and carry on the way they are then they wont go far wrong.
I never bought this album when it came out as Innocent seemed so bland it was beige, but i'm glad I got it now. A fantastic album, which while cementing Stereophonics' place as Wales' 2nd best band, is completely worth your time, and will keep their reputation going.
Keep Calm and Carry On - Stereophonics - Album Review
I think this'll be the last time I go on about opening singles. Purely because I shouldn't have the nerve to do it for an album that came out last year, and because i'm getting bored of it myself. Keep Calm and Carry On is Stereophonics' 7th album, and while I have 3/7ths of them, they all seem to follow the same formula. Fairly catchy lead single, with a fairly similar album but with a few hidden gems. KCACO follows this up, and while Innocent is a decent song, it's one of those lead singles which is simply a mask for a far superior album that follows it. Even the lead song, the imaginitively titled She's Alright, is something which hides a much more enjoyable labour that's been recorded here.
For 7 albums, musically there's not been much change. Granted they bothered to include the extra guitarist as a band member this time, so there's a bit more depth on some tracks which would have been weaker otherwise. There's some new area explored, the weird electronic sounding Beerbottle which coupled with a decent set of lyrics makes for a decent song. Closer Show Me How makes good use of the piano as well, and shows that Kelly Jones' voice can be used in all its harshness for something soft and heartfelt. Overall though, if you're looking for something new musically, don't bother. They've found their style, stuck with it and managed to stay successful off of it.
Lyrically, i've never set much by Stereophonics. Aside from most of them being indecipherable, there's very often few which have meaningful ones (to me at least). For KCACO however the boat's been pushed out, and once you get over hearing "She's Alright" about 80 times, you get some good stuff. There's stories told in Beerbottle and there's heartfelt and downright beauty on offer in Show Me How and Could You Be the One. I was truly taken aback by some of the words thrown together here, and as I said, the man with a girls names voice gets to show some level of emotion other than raspy strained anguish, and he's actually able to pull it off. As a result, this album has more depth than previous efforts (or, the ones i've heard). Where they can go from this I don't know, but if they keep calm and carry on the way they are then they wont go far wrong.
I never bought this album when it came out as Innocent seemed so bland it was beige, but i'm glad I got it now. A fantastic album, which while cementing Stereophonics' place as Wales' 2nd best band, is completely worth your time, and will keep their reputation going.
Things I Have an Opinion On #17
Originally posted on 28/3/10
Lewis Hamilton
Ever since the boy wonder came into Formula One, there was an air of expectation about him. Someone who'd won races for fun throughout his career, and could be the first good British sportsman in a long time. Everyone was happy. So was I, I enjoyed his driving style when he first started, he was unlucky to not win the championship in his first year, and then he was extremely lucky to win it on the last corner the following year.
Next season, it really went downhill. Aside from his irritating American accent that he's picked up, as well as his annoying older woman who smacks of someone who doesn't have the faintest idea what's going on, dear Lewis showed that even as someone in his 3rd year in the sport, that he's an impressionable wee twerp. If you're unaware of what happened in Melbourne with Trulli, then allow me to summarise:
Trulli in front of Hamilton.
Yellow flag waved, no overtaking.
Past yellows, Hamilton passes Trulli
Hamilton is told by engineer to let Trulli through.
Trulli goes through.
This was done with the sole intention of reporting Trulli and getting him disqualified. As this is a rather unsporting move, Lewis and his engineer decided to keep shtoom about it all. Unfortunately however, someone forgot to tell them about the wonder of team radio, so the audio clip of their conversation became public knowledge, name dragged through the mud, etc. I didn't care in the slightest, until I saw poor Lewis' grovelling apology: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zJ-drYnTMKA
What an absolute pile of shite. "Oh no look at me, i'm the world champion of my sport at 21, i'm on 15million a year and all of thius made me want to quit."
Hold on a minute. You do not quit when you are 21, making 15 million a year, get a fucking grip you big personality-bypassed lump of wood, grow a fucking pair and get a reality check. There was none of this shite when you were trying to run Alonso off the track and the team was telling you to hold back, now it's all the teams fault? Essentially a bigger boy made me do it? Fuck right off, you should have even the faintest clue about how to act in a situation like this, otherwise you shouldn't be allowed out of the house on your own.
If you thought this wasn't nauseating enough however, this very weekend he's again shown what an immature prat he is. Giving it burnouts in the middle of an Australian street, then shiting himself when the polis turned up. Hiding from the camera when he's getting questioned, and then stating that he's worried his reputation is damaged. Know what all this makes me think? I miss Kimi Raikkonen. Someone who actually acts normally when being the attention of tons of money and tons of burds, and can actually drive a car well. None of this caring about public image crap, you turn up to racr a car, nothing else.
I realise that the media circus which has become integral to Lewis' career (has he ever made you want to switch to a Santander account, or use Vodaphone incidentally?) but he needs to remember how to be a normal human being in there, because he's quickly turning into one of the most irritating people on the planet. He needs to loosen up, and just enjoy being an ultra-rich 22 year old.
Oh and he was crap today. Jenson FTW!
Lewis Hamilton
Ever since the boy wonder came into Formula One, there was an air of expectation about him. Someone who'd won races for fun throughout his career, and could be the first good British sportsman in a long time. Everyone was happy. So was I, I enjoyed his driving style when he first started, he was unlucky to not win the championship in his first year, and then he was extremely lucky to win it on the last corner the following year.
Next season, it really went downhill. Aside from his irritating American accent that he's picked up, as well as his annoying older woman who smacks of someone who doesn't have the faintest idea what's going on, dear Lewis showed that even as someone in his 3rd year in the sport, that he's an impressionable wee twerp. If you're unaware of what happened in Melbourne with Trulli, then allow me to summarise:
Trulli in front of Hamilton.
Yellow flag waved, no overtaking.
Past yellows, Hamilton passes Trulli
Hamilton is told by engineer to let Trulli through.
Trulli goes through.
This was done with the sole intention of reporting Trulli and getting him disqualified. As this is a rather unsporting move, Lewis and his engineer decided to keep shtoom about it all. Unfortunately however, someone forgot to tell them about the wonder of team radio, so the audio clip of their conversation became public knowledge, name dragged through the mud, etc. I didn't care in the slightest, until I saw poor Lewis' grovelling apology: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zJ-drYnTMKA
What an absolute pile of shite. "Oh no look at me, i'm the world champion of my sport at 21, i'm on 15million a year and all of thius made me want to quit."
Hold on a minute. You do not quit when you are 21, making 15 million a year, get a fucking grip you big personality-bypassed lump of wood, grow a fucking pair and get a reality check. There was none of this shite when you were trying to run Alonso off the track and the team was telling you to hold back, now it's all the teams fault? Essentially a bigger boy made me do it? Fuck right off, you should have even the faintest clue about how to act in a situation like this, otherwise you shouldn't be allowed out of the house on your own.
If you thought this wasn't nauseating enough however, this very weekend he's again shown what an immature prat he is. Giving it burnouts in the middle of an Australian street, then shiting himself when the polis turned up. Hiding from the camera when he's getting questioned, and then stating that he's worried his reputation is damaged. Know what all this makes me think? I miss Kimi Raikkonen. Someone who actually acts normally when being the attention of tons of money and tons of burds, and can actually drive a car well. None of this caring about public image crap, you turn up to racr a car, nothing else.
I realise that the media circus which has become integral to Lewis' career (has he ever made you want to switch to a Santander account, or use Vodaphone incidentally?) but he needs to remember how to be a normal human being in there, because he's quickly turning into one of the most irritating people on the planet. He needs to loosen up, and just enjoy being an ultra-rich 22 year old.
Oh and he was crap today. Jenson FTW!
JLUAAFOWYSNGOMTDDAPITS
Originally posted on 21/3/10
JLS - JLS - Album Review
Let's get one thing straight, I hate this band. I hate them and everything the represent. I am only reviewing their first (and only) album as Martin decided to bring up the JLS/Muse mud-slinging (not a debate, as a debate has two sides), and even i'm fed up of it. As such, this completely objective review will once and for all provide a fair view of it.
Normally when I review an album I make comments on progression from previous work, vocals, lyrics and instrumental talent. Obviously, I can't do any of those for this, so we'll have to look at it differently. While boy band pop is a perfectly legitimate music genre, albeit one that should've followed acid house's example and died in the 90's, JLS manage to rip-off all the best aspects (or, least bad) of it, combine it with some modern r'n'b beats and production and still manage to sound like something that Robbie Williams circa Rudebox would have rejected for sounding too cheesy. By looking at pretty much every song title, you will be able to guess what the song will be like. Nor does it help when they're all pretty much the same. Beat Again manages to be something of a standout, but that's like saying Hitler was a standout member of the Nazi party. Given that you could take the choruses and verses from it, rearrange them in any order and still have something that sounds exactly the same, you get the point i'm trying to make. There's zero imagination, nothing particularly distinguishing, and by the end you couldn't pick out anything particularly memorable about what you just wasted the last three minutes of your life on.
I talked about opening singles and what they can say about an album last week, a type I never mentioned was the lead single that is track #1 on the album. Very rarely do these ever turn out to be more than masks for a bad album, the only one I can think of that is safe is An End Has a Start by Editors. Not surprisingly, JLS hides behind Beat Again, albeit in the manner of a fat 7 year old using a lamp-post in a game of hide and seek. The following song is the following single, the wonderfully bland Everybody in Love, which is so beige i'm surprised the video wasn't shot in a nursing home.
While i'm at videos, I should elaborate on another reason I hate these types of bands. Aside from the fact they're all identical, they may as well just be put up on giant screens at their "concerts." From the various videos going around, i'm yet to see one where JLS actually sing live. I do see the reasoning behind this however, because they sure can't sing on the record, why bother embarassing yourself by doing it live? Aside from the odd strained harmony, there are no 'good' voices. There's also the odd burst of auto-tune, which always does nothing but raise the quality of a record. The absurd pitch changes wont distract from the toe-curling-ly awful lyrics though, stuff so cheesy even the French would turn their nose up at it. Everything seems to be aimed at the hearts of the young and impressionable, and while you'll hate society while listening to this because you know people will actually accept the lyrics, you're cheered by the fact that when they get over their crush on OMGASTON or OMG.......whoever else is in it, that they might find music with substance to base their lives around.
I hate music like this. Mainly because it isn't music. None of it is real. These 4 scrubs came second in a talent contest to a burd with a big nose, yet have gone on to be arguably more successful than her. I implore you, please stop buying crap like this. Please stop voting for all of these reality tv shows, particularly anything that has Simon Cowell's bored drawling smirk over it. While JLS are so forgettable even while you listen to them that you know within 6 months at most they will have fallen out of the public's consciousness completely, there will always be something else cookie-cutter to replace them. It is a sad indication of the world today that music with such little depth, with all the substance of the atmosphere of the moon, can manage to be bought by over one million people. It is not music, and should be treated as such. Ultimately, the album is the equivalent of chewing gum, something that gives you a very artificial burst of goodness at the beginning, then after about 30 seconds goes bitter and leaves you desperately aching for a bin to spit it out into, then searching for something worthwhile to clean the taste out of your mouth with.
JLS - JLS - Album Review
Let's get one thing straight, I hate this band. I hate them and everything the represent. I am only reviewing their first (and only) album as Martin decided to bring up the JLS/Muse mud-slinging (not a debate, as a debate has two sides), and even i'm fed up of it. As such, this completely objective review will once and for all provide a fair view of it.
Normally when I review an album I make comments on progression from previous work, vocals, lyrics and instrumental talent. Obviously, I can't do any of those for this, so we'll have to look at it differently. While boy band pop is a perfectly legitimate music genre, albeit one that should've followed acid house's example and died in the 90's, JLS manage to rip-off all the best aspects (or, least bad) of it, combine it with some modern r'n'b beats and production and still manage to sound like something that Robbie Williams circa Rudebox would have rejected for sounding too cheesy. By looking at pretty much every song title, you will be able to guess what the song will be like. Nor does it help when they're all pretty much the same. Beat Again manages to be something of a standout, but that's like saying Hitler was a standout member of the Nazi party. Given that you could take the choruses and verses from it, rearrange them in any order and still have something that sounds exactly the same, you get the point i'm trying to make. There's zero imagination, nothing particularly distinguishing, and by the end you couldn't pick out anything particularly memorable about what you just wasted the last three minutes of your life on.
I talked about opening singles and what they can say about an album last week, a type I never mentioned was the lead single that is track #1 on the album. Very rarely do these ever turn out to be more than masks for a bad album, the only one I can think of that is safe is An End Has a Start by Editors. Not surprisingly, JLS hides behind Beat Again, albeit in the manner of a fat 7 year old using a lamp-post in a game of hide and seek. The following song is the following single, the wonderfully bland Everybody in Love, which is so beige i'm surprised the video wasn't shot in a nursing home.
While i'm at videos, I should elaborate on another reason I hate these types of bands. Aside from the fact they're all identical, they may as well just be put up on giant screens at their "concerts." From the various videos going around, i'm yet to see one where JLS actually sing live. I do see the reasoning behind this however, because they sure can't sing on the record, why bother embarassing yourself by doing it live? Aside from the odd strained harmony, there are no 'good' voices. There's also the odd burst of auto-tune, which always does nothing but raise the quality of a record. The absurd pitch changes wont distract from the toe-curling-ly awful lyrics though, stuff so cheesy even the French would turn their nose up at it. Everything seems to be aimed at the hearts of the young and impressionable, and while you'll hate society while listening to this because you know people will actually accept the lyrics, you're cheered by the fact that when they get over their crush on OMGASTON or OMG.......whoever else is in it, that they might find music with substance to base their lives around.
I hate music like this. Mainly because it isn't music. None of it is real. These 4 scrubs came second in a talent contest to a burd with a big nose, yet have gone on to be arguably more successful than her. I implore you, please stop buying crap like this. Please stop voting for all of these reality tv shows, particularly anything that has Simon Cowell's bored drawling smirk over it. While JLS are so forgettable even while you listen to them that you know within 6 months at most they will have fallen out of the public's consciousness completely, there will always be something else cookie-cutter to replace them. It is a sad indication of the world today that music with such little depth, with all the substance of the atmosphere of the moon, can manage to be bought by over one million people. It is not music, and should be treated as such. Ultimately, the album is the equivalent of chewing gum, something that gives you a very artificial burst of goodness at the beginning, then after about 30 seconds goes bitter and leaves you desperately aching for a bin to spit it out into, then searching for something worthwhile to clean the taste out of your mouth with.
Things I Have an Opinion On #16
Originally posted on 21/3/10
The proposed "panic" button for Facebook
If you're unaware of how Facebook works (although no-one is, since everyone seems to think it's > than Bebo, which it isn't) then you can post updates from your profile in the manner of Twitter but being able to play games. People are able to comment on this, as well as clicking a button to "like" said update. As every good needs an evil (see Yin/Yang, Jedi/Sith, Me/Coldplay), this should follow the youtube method of commenting and allow you to dislike as well. It doesn't, and while there are groups on Facebook trying to get new buttons (the sooner we get a That's What She Said button, the better), it'll never happen.
This week however, there have been new proposals, put forth by the Home Secretary no less. Quite why he should be commenting on a social networking site is beyond me, but he feels there should be a "panic" button that people can click to alert police of potential paedophiles. Stuff like this makes me want Anarchy in this country, because i'd only ever vote Labour, and if they have these kinds of muppets in office like Alan Johnson, then there's no hope really. Imagine the scene:
15 year old girl logs in
15 year old girl has one friend request
Friend request from 17 year old boy
Friend request added
*3 months*
15 year old girl agrees to meet up with 17 year old boy 300 miles away from where she lives without telling anyone
The two meet
17 year old turns out to be 31 year old guy
Guy rapes girl
Guy kills girl
Now, imagine it with a panic button
15 year old girl logs in
15 year old girl has one friend request
Friend request from 17 year old boy
Friend request added
*3 months*
15 year old girl agrees to meet up with 17 year old boy 300 miles away from where she lives without telling anyone
The two meet
17 year old turns out to be 31 year old guy
Guy rapes girl
Guy kills girl
No difference. And why? Because if there is a girl as stupid as the hypothetical one above, then she will be so starved of attention she will unquestioningly agree to meet up with this fellow, and not go near a panic button. This whole move smacks of shutting the door after the horse has buggared off, as people have inexplicably suffered the fate described above, and rather than actually try and educate people on how to know when they're in danger, the government have made a lovely cop-out. Besides, if you ask me, if you're dumb enough to meet up with someone in the manner posted above, then you deserve taken off this mortal coil before you cause a powercut by trying to slide down some power cables like Cole from inFamous.
If the button were to be placed there, then fantastic. It could well stop paedophiles, and save the lives of the great brainwashed, but as with anything on the internet, it will be used for nefarious purposes. Say you want to play a joke on a friend.... click! he's a paedo! Say you're one of those irritating girls who changes their best friends every week, click! your ex BFF's a paedo!
Quite rightly, Facebook has given the idea a resounding "naw," and will carry on about its business as normal. Who knows what the government will poke its nose into next. Whatever that is and whenever it comes, I hope i'll not be showing my under-developed breasts to some fat man having a cheeky trouser wank.
The proposed "panic" button for Facebook
If you're unaware of how Facebook works (although no-one is, since everyone seems to think it's > than Bebo, which it isn't) then you can post updates from your profile in the manner of Twitter but being able to play games. People are able to comment on this, as well as clicking a button to "like" said update. As every good needs an evil (see Yin/Yang, Jedi/Sith, Me/Coldplay), this should follow the youtube method of commenting and allow you to dislike as well. It doesn't, and while there are groups on Facebook trying to get new buttons (the sooner we get a That's What She Said button, the better), it'll never happen.
This week however, there have been new proposals, put forth by the Home Secretary no less. Quite why he should be commenting on a social networking site is beyond me, but he feels there should be a "panic" button that people can click to alert police of potential paedophiles. Stuff like this makes me want Anarchy in this country, because i'd only ever vote Labour, and if they have these kinds of muppets in office like Alan Johnson, then there's no hope really. Imagine the scene:
15 year old girl logs in
15 year old girl has one friend request
Friend request from 17 year old boy
Friend request added
*3 months*
15 year old girl agrees to meet up with 17 year old boy 300 miles away from where she lives without telling anyone
The two meet
17 year old turns out to be 31 year old guy
Guy rapes girl
Guy kills girl
Now, imagine it with a panic button
15 year old girl logs in
15 year old girl has one friend request
Friend request from 17 year old boy
Friend request added
*3 months*
15 year old girl agrees to meet up with 17 year old boy 300 miles away from where she lives without telling anyone
The two meet
17 year old turns out to be 31 year old guy
Guy rapes girl
Guy kills girl
No difference. And why? Because if there is a girl as stupid as the hypothetical one above, then she will be so starved of attention she will unquestioningly agree to meet up with this fellow, and not go near a panic button. This whole move smacks of shutting the door after the horse has buggared off, as people have inexplicably suffered the fate described above, and rather than actually try and educate people on how to know when they're in danger, the government have made a lovely cop-out. Besides, if you ask me, if you're dumb enough to meet up with someone in the manner posted above, then you deserve taken off this mortal coil before you cause a powercut by trying to slide down some power cables like Cole from inFamous.
If the button were to be placed there, then fantastic. It could well stop paedophiles, and save the lives of the great brainwashed, but as with anything on the internet, it will be used for nefarious purposes. Say you want to play a joke on a friend.... click! he's a paedo! Say you're one of those irritating girls who changes their best friends every week, click! your ex BFF's a paedo!
Quite rightly, Facebook has given the idea a resounding "naw," and will carry on about its business as normal. Who knows what the government will poke its nose into next. Whatever that is and whenever it comes, I hope i'll not be showing my under-developed breasts to some fat man having a cheeky trouser wank.
And While You're At It, Tear Down Any Proof This Ever Existed
Originally posted on 14/3/10
Tear the Signs Down - The Automatic - Album Review
Opening singles from albums can be interesting things. They can be the one good song that a band actually produces, put out first so that the hype surrounding that will generate more album sales (see Fireflies - Owl City). They can be a taster of things to come, the first single masking wonders in greater quantities (see Smokers Outside the Hospital Doors - Editors.) The Automatic have been a band who managed to fulfill the latter criteria with their first two albums. With Recover from Not Accepted Anywhere (even though Monster got them noticed), and Steve McQueen from This is a Fix, The Automatic delivered singles that were representative of the rest of the album, and it was good. That was why, with Interstate being the first from the third album Tear the Signs Down, that I was worried. Interstate is awful. A boring chorus indescernible from the rest of the song, coupled with absolutely no energy or good riffs found before.
But perhaps it could be one of those other types of lead single, the one that's a sort of cover for an album that's far superior listened to as a whole?
Alas, no. Like Day & Age by The Killers, from the very first note of opener Insides, you know this isn't going to be good. A song that's bland when you're being kind, it simply sets you up for the rest of the album. There are absolutely no standout tracks on it, no standout moments even. Something like List that finishes with a weird string section just smacks of running out of ideas, and you can tell they're low on imagination throughout the rest anyway. From a vocalist in Rob Hawkins whose singing, whilst being a bit 'moany' at times, was once strong and angst-ridden, this is woeful. Take the chorus of Sweat Heat Noise (poor grammar as well as music). Here is something which is evidently supposed to be strained to emphasise the feeling behind it, all he ends up doing is sounding like his balls are in a machine vice. It's whiny claptrap, and something that deserves no place on an Automatic album.
This lack of energy could of course be explained by the lack of Alex Pennie, a man who described himself as "an annoying little man screaming on our record." Self deprecation aside, don't let his guest appearance on Never Mind the Buzzcocks fool you. He added the oomph to this band that gave them an edge over the synth-indie acts that were boring everyone to death in 2006, he gave them something different that hooked you in. While he wasn't in the band for 2008's best album This is a Fix, he had been there when a few songs were written, so there was still some of his spirit. The inclusion of a 2nd guitar for album #3 however seems to have taken away a dimension rather than added one, as all you get is tuneless droning. This is not the band that won so many hearts with their previous work.
An example of how generic the music is comes with closer, Tear it Down. In Heavy Rain, there is an instance in the prologue where you can turn on a CD player, and have it play what is essentially a 20 second loop of nameless music, like you get in The Sims. The intro to Tear it Down sounds exactly like this. Don't forget a song like High Time, something which is probably supposed to be a departure from the rest of the album, but ends up just sounding out of place, boring and outright weird.
Ultimately, Tear the Signs Down is awful. I had high hopes for this album being one of the best of 2010, and it has failed like Matthew Jones in an advanced physics exam. It is a disappointment, and without a doubt, not what this band are fully capable of.
Tear the Signs Down - The Automatic - Album Review
Opening singles from albums can be interesting things. They can be the one good song that a band actually produces, put out first so that the hype surrounding that will generate more album sales (see Fireflies - Owl City). They can be a taster of things to come, the first single masking wonders in greater quantities (see Smokers Outside the Hospital Doors - Editors.) The Automatic have been a band who managed to fulfill the latter criteria with their first two albums. With Recover from Not Accepted Anywhere (even though Monster got them noticed), and Steve McQueen from This is a Fix, The Automatic delivered singles that were representative of the rest of the album, and it was good. That was why, with Interstate being the first from the third album Tear the Signs Down, that I was worried. Interstate is awful. A boring chorus indescernible from the rest of the song, coupled with absolutely no energy or good riffs found before.
But perhaps it could be one of those other types of lead single, the one that's a sort of cover for an album that's far superior listened to as a whole?
Alas, no. Like Day & Age by The Killers, from the very first note of opener Insides, you know this isn't going to be good. A song that's bland when you're being kind, it simply sets you up for the rest of the album. There are absolutely no standout tracks on it, no standout moments even. Something like List that finishes with a weird string section just smacks of running out of ideas, and you can tell they're low on imagination throughout the rest anyway. From a vocalist in Rob Hawkins whose singing, whilst being a bit 'moany' at times, was once strong and angst-ridden, this is woeful. Take the chorus of Sweat Heat Noise (poor grammar as well as music). Here is something which is evidently supposed to be strained to emphasise the feeling behind it, all he ends up doing is sounding like his balls are in a machine vice. It's whiny claptrap, and something that deserves no place on an Automatic album.
This lack of energy could of course be explained by the lack of Alex Pennie, a man who described himself as "an annoying little man screaming on our record." Self deprecation aside, don't let his guest appearance on Never Mind the Buzzcocks fool you. He added the oomph to this band that gave them an edge over the synth-indie acts that were boring everyone to death in 2006, he gave them something different that hooked you in. While he wasn't in the band for 2008's best album This is a Fix, he had been there when a few songs were written, so there was still some of his spirit. The inclusion of a 2nd guitar for album #3 however seems to have taken away a dimension rather than added one, as all you get is tuneless droning. This is not the band that won so many hearts with their previous work.
An example of how generic the music is comes with closer, Tear it Down. In Heavy Rain, there is an instance in the prologue where you can turn on a CD player, and have it play what is essentially a 20 second loop of nameless music, like you get in The Sims. The intro to Tear it Down sounds exactly like this. Don't forget a song like High Time, something which is probably supposed to be a departure from the rest of the album, but ends up just sounding out of place, boring and outright weird.
Ultimately, Tear the Signs Down is awful. I had high hopes for this album being one of the best of 2010, and it has failed like Matthew Jones in an advanced physics exam. It is a disappointment, and without a doubt, not what this band are fully capable of.
Things I Have an Opinion On #15
Originally posted on 14/3/10
The video for 'Telephone' by Lady Gaga and Beyonce
As I need something to occupy me until the Grand Prix is on iplayer, and my English dissertation is much less inviting, i'll share my thoughts on the latest abhorrant clip from the worlds must bland popstar.
Since the invention of MTV, music started to go down the pan. Very rarely has the music video actually been used for any purpose beneficial to the music on store, often the video serves only to show some flesh in a desperate attempt to shift some more records from whatever cookie-cutter shite is the heart-throb of all fat 12 year old girls everywhere. There have been classic videos. Foo Fighters have a knack for doing good videos, Thriller by Michael Jackson is always a classic, and Pulp always had good videos, even if some were a bit odd.
Unfortunately however, for every good story told through a video/song combinatin (Stan by Eminem and Dido just came into my head), there are at least 10 band and unimaginitve songs with even more bland and unimaginitive videos to go with them. One Shot by JLS springs to mind, where one of the band members comes to the fore, doesn't even sing a word, simply pulling down the collar of his ill-fitting t-shirt to expose his pecs (remiscent of the photo of Rafferty from the party before last incidently). Fantastically arty, i'm sure you'll agree.
The level of tastelessness possible in videos however was not only surpassed, but obliterated in 2009, when 'Just Dance' hit our every sense. A wonderfully bland song that when I first heard it screamed 'get Gwen Stefani back in No Doubt,' accompanied with a video where Stefani Germanotta (I can't keep typing Gaga, sorry,) had on a rather bland hairstyle and outfit by her standards. Even still, it was rather revealing, and what she did whilst wearing it was suitably revolting, much like her nose when you see a close-up of her in the video.
Next up was.... Poker Face? Oh look, it's Just Dance with different words. Seriously, there is no difference.
Then came Bad Romance, admittedly the catchier of her songs, but still as boring and similar to the others as the rest. Germanott's solution? Take off more clothes in the video! Writhing around this time with what looks like white tape and a weird wig, backed with the kind of dancers who hadn't seen work since Luke threw the Emperor into the middle of the Death Star.
Now however, even dear Steffani has surpassed herself. Evidently she has some form of ADD, as even with record sales through the roof and a live tour which draw the starry-eyed and mindless in their droves, she has produced a 9 and a half minute video which rather than, as the length would suggest, tell a story, simply serves to prove that had this bint been around 20 years ago, she would have been sectioned under the mental health act. From the start, you know it's not going to be the most meaningful thing when she is clinging on to the inside of a jail cell wearing only nipple tape, see through stocking-y things and some pixels to cover what modesty she has left. (The best thing is, she's completely still while doing this, probably to make it easier to pixelate her penis). Moving on from this, her usual ensemble of mental outfits are on show, including a pair of specs adorned with lit fags (which she wears whilst a woman from the prison she's in who looks like Bourne villain feels her up), police tape and only police tape, some weird American flag thing, a bra and pants whilst accompanied by 5 clones dancing in a prison corridor, and the thing at the end that looks like a huge mosquito net. Oh, and she uses diet coke cans as hair rollers right before she starts singing.
So, what purpose does this serve? There's some sort of turgid Themla and Louise story rip-off, were Germanotta helps Beyonce poison her wank boyfriend, and they run away. Quite why the requires the stupid outfits and 3 minutes at the start before any singing comes in, or indeed why it's been paired with this song, which is a suitably bland piece of garbage, even by her standards. In my opinion, that's why it's been garnished with this piece of filth called a video, in order to sell it to the vapid dregs of society who still suscribe to this bint, claiming that she's an icon. She is not an icon. She is an utter fruit, who I want off my telly.
In short, this video simply proves the point that the video as a supplement to the art form is music is a redundant argument, as this is nor a supplement to the song, nor is the video art. It is purile filth, something that would make even the staunchest anti-feminist woman raise an eyebrow, and the kind of thing that even sex offenders would find hard to watch. Get this woman locked up, before she puts the video of her last gynaecology appointment with her next single.
The video for 'Telephone' by Lady Gaga and Beyonce
As I need something to occupy me until the Grand Prix is on iplayer, and my English dissertation is much less inviting, i'll share my thoughts on the latest abhorrant clip from the worlds must bland popstar.
Since the invention of MTV, music started to go down the pan. Very rarely has the music video actually been used for any purpose beneficial to the music on store, often the video serves only to show some flesh in a desperate attempt to shift some more records from whatever cookie-cutter shite is the heart-throb of all fat 12 year old girls everywhere. There have been classic videos. Foo Fighters have a knack for doing good videos, Thriller by Michael Jackson is always a classic, and Pulp always had good videos, even if some were a bit odd.
Unfortunately however, for every good story told through a video/song combinatin (Stan by Eminem and Dido just came into my head), there are at least 10 band and unimaginitve songs with even more bland and unimaginitive videos to go with them. One Shot by JLS springs to mind, where one of the band members comes to the fore, doesn't even sing a word, simply pulling down the collar of his ill-fitting t-shirt to expose his pecs (remiscent of the photo of Rafferty from the party before last incidently). Fantastically arty, i'm sure you'll agree.
The level of tastelessness possible in videos however was not only surpassed, but obliterated in 2009, when 'Just Dance' hit our every sense. A wonderfully bland song that when I first heard it screamed 'get Gwen Stefani back in No Doubt,' accompanied with a video where Stefani Germanotta (I can't keep typing Gaga, sorry,) had on a rather bland hairstyle and outfit by her standards. Even still, it was rather revealing, and what she did whilst wearing it was suitably revolting, much like her nose when you see a close-up of her in the video.
Next up was.... Poker Face? Oh look, it's Just Dance with different words. Seriously, there is no difference.
Then came Bad Romance, admittedly the catchier of her songs, but still as boring and similar to the others as the rest. Germanott's solution? Take off more clothes in the video! Writhing around this time with what looks like white tape and a weird wig, backed with the kind of dancers who hadn't seen work since Luke threw the Emperor into the middle of the Death Star.
Now however, even dear Steffani has surpassed herself. Evidently she has some form of ADD, as even with record sales through the roof and a live tour which draw the starry-eyed and mindless in their droves, she has produced a 9 and a half minute video which rather than, as the length would suggest, tell a story, simply serves to prove that had this bint been around 20 years ago, she would have been sectioned under the mental health act. From the start, you know it's not going to be the most meaningful thing when she is clinging on to the inside of a jail cell wearing only nipple tape, see through stocking-y things and some pixels to cover what modesty she has left. (The best thing is, she's completely still while doing this, probably to make it easier to pixelate her penis). Moving on from this, her usual ensemble of mental outfits are on show, including a pair of specs adorned with lit fags (which she wears whilst a woman from the prison she's in who looks like Bourne villain feels her up), police tape and only police tape, some weird American flag thing, a bra and pants whilst accompanied by 5 clones dancing in a prison corridor, and the thing at the end that looks like a huge mosquito net. Oh, and she uses diet coke cans as hair rollers right before she starts singing.
So, what purpose does this serve? There's some sort of turgid Themla and Louise story rip-off, were Germanotta helps Beyonce poison her wank boyfriend, and they run away. Quite why the requires the stupid outfits and 3 minutes at the start before any singing comes in, or indeed why it's been paired with this song, which is a suitably bland piece of garbage, even by her standards. In my opinion, that's why it's been garnished with this piece of filth called a video, in order to sell it to the vapid dregs of society who still suscribe to this bint, claiming that she's an icon. She is not an icon. She is an utter fruit, who I want off my telly.
In short, this video simply proves the point that the video as a supplement to the art form is music is a redundant argument, as this is nor a supplement to the song, nor is the video art. It is purile filth, something that would make even the staunchest anti-feminist woman raise an eyebrow, and the kind of thing that even sex offenders would find hard to watch. Get this woman locked up, before she puts the video of her last gynaecology appointment with her next single.
Things I Have an Opinion On #14
Originally posted on 12/3/10
Formula One Season 2010
'09 was a big year for F1. What with the economic downturn and the subsequent buggaring off of all the money from the sport, various methods were suggested to sort out the money problems. The lovely budget cap was brought up, and proved to be so catastrophic that the championship almost broke away altogether. Couple this with the near death of Felipe Massa (probably the scariest thing i've ever seen in sport), the cheating of Lewis "I am the cult of personality" Hamilton, the horrible affair from Renault about Piquet Jr. crashing and the increasingly daft rule changes proposed by Bernie, and there was doubt that the sport would be recognisable after the turn of the decade. Luckily, the seasons downpoints were more than outweighed by its success stories. The sheer crapiness of McLaren and Ferrari led a new series of teams to come to the fore and perform well. Red Bull, as led by the Australian David Coulthard and Sebastian Vettel, Brawn, who were lucky to even be there and Force India, who were lucky to do anything. All of this culminated of course in dear Jenson winning the world championship, having two British WC's in a row (christ only knows when this has ever happened anywhere).
Moving into 2010, and it's all change again. Drivers have gone, drivers have moved, drivers have came in and of course, drivers have came back. There follows a run-down of each team and what I think they can realistically expect from this season:
McLaren: Coming off an extremely disappointing season, McLaren will be looking to get right back to the front of the field. There were strong results toward the end of 09, and they will be hoping that the combination of two world champions will help keep them competitive. They're been right at the top of the practice timesheets in Bahrain this weekend, and will be expecting to stay there. Their car had better do well, as it's too ugly to be admired for anything other than performance.
Expected finish
Constructor - Top 3
Hamilton - Top 5
Button Top 5
Mercedes: Or Brawn GP, Mk II. Lets be fair, all eyes will be here tomorrow morning at qualifying. Michael Schumacher is 41, and apparently was bored with not boring everyone, so has come back. It'll be interesting to see how he does paired with Nico Rosberg, who has always been someone who i've never thought has lived up to his potential. Unless he starts off quickly this season, expect him to end up like Nick Heidfeld without the neckbeard.
Expected finish
Constructor - Top 3
Schumacher - Top 3
Rosberg - Anywhere
Red Bull: Last year was their best chance to win a championship IMO. Their improvement towards the end of the year was fantastic, and Vettel was arguably the most consistent driver throughout last year. Mark Webber cannot be counted out, although he'll have to start strong so the team doesn't focus on Baby Schumi too much.
Expected finish
Constructor - Top 5
Vettel - Top 3
Webber - Top 5
Ferrari: If you thought that McLaren would be the ego battle with two world champions, think again. Massa is one of the most naturally gifted drivers when on form, and Alonso's raw desire to win coupled with his ability will get Ferrari back on course. Whether they will be able to handle the two of them remains to be seen however.
Expected finish
Constructor - Top 5
Alonso - Top 5
Massa - Top 5
Williams: An interesting driver choice this season, perennial number two Rubens in with a complete noob, which is always an interesting combo. Rubens could provide guidance for The Hulk being blooded in F1, as both have proven that they're good drivers in their own rights. Whether they can maintain their pace for a whole season remains to be seen.
Expected finish
Constructor - Top 10
Barichello - Top 10
Hulkenberg - Finish with points
Renault: Arguably the team most affected by problems last year with Symonds and Briatore getting the heave, Renault have struggled to make a car that has proved competitive in testing. A shame for Kubica, who's one of the top drivers in the field, and was heavily linked with Ferrari at one point. Going in with Nose is F1's first Russian driver, and if i'm honest I know heehaw about him, so I can't comment.
Expected finish
Constructor - Respectable
Kubica - Top 10
Petrov - Respectable
Force India: One of the strongest teams at the end of last year, with two very young and promising drivers. Liuzzi and Sutil both have track records of making Takuma Sato-esque mistakes however, so they will have to be consistent along with the car to get anywhere this season. Look for them to challenge for a win and a few poles.
Expected finish
Constructor - 20+ points
Liuzzi - Respectable
Sutil - Respectable
Toro Rosso: I hate this team. They serve no purpose, and their drivers are ugly. I hope they fail
Lotus F1: An interesting driver lineup for a new team with Jarno Trulli and Heikki Kovalainen, Lotus have a chance this year if they can get a good car on the track. Kovalainen however has always been a disappointment in my eyes, not doing much on great teams like Renault and McLaren. Trulli also is one of those drivers who's been around for years yet never actually done anything, but his experience should help the new team stay in the competition.
Expected finish
All 3 - double figures in points
Hispania Racing Team: One of this years "piss-take" teams, as driven by an Indian fellow and Bruno Senna. The name ain't going to save this mob however, I don't think they'll be doing too well this year.
Expected finish
They'll be happy to get points
BMW Sauber: A team i've always had a soft spot for, although with Pedro de la Rosa driving they're not likely to do squat. Kamui Kobayashi however showed last year for Toyota that he can drive out of his skin and do very well, so he could well keep the car afloat this year.
Expected finish
Double figures in points for constructor and drivers
Virgin Racing: Led by Richard Branson. May they fail and rot in hell. Their car's ugly too.
With the new teams, drivers and rules, 2010 will be one the best F1 seasons yet. If you're not a fan, I highly suggest tuning in to see some of the finest racing ever witnessed.
Formula One Season 2010
'09 was a big year for F1. What with the economic downturn and the subsequent buggaring off of all the money from the sport, various methods were suggested to sort out the money problems. The lovely budget cap was brought up, and proved to be so catastrophic that the championship almost broke away altogether. Couple this with the near death of Felipe Massa (probably the scariest thing i've ever seen in sport), the cheating of Lewis "I am the cult of personality" Hamilton, the horrible affair from Renault about Piquet Jr. crashing and the increasingly daft rule changes proposed by Bernie, and there was doubt that the sport would be recognisable after the turn of the decade. Luckily, the seasons downpoints were more than outweighed by its success stories. The sheer crapiness of McLaren and Ferrari led a new series of teams to come to the fore and perform well. Red Bull, as led by the Australian David Coulthard and Sebastian Vettel, Brawn, who were lucky to even be there and Force India, who were lucky to do anything. All of this culminated of course in dear Jenson winning the world championship, having two British WC's in a row (christ only knows when this has ever happened anywhere).
Moving into 2010, and it's all change again. Drivers have gone, drivers have moved, drivers have came in and of course, drivers have came back. There follows a run-down of each team and what I think they can realistically expect from this season:
McLaren: Coming off an extremely disappointing season, McLaren will be looking to get right back to the front of the field. There were strong results toward the end of 09, and they will be hoping that the combination of two world champions will help keep them competitive. They're been right at the top of the practice timesheets in Bahrain this weekend, and will be expecting to stay there. Their car had better do well, as it's too ugly to be admired for anything other than performance.
Expected finish
Constructor - Top 3
Hamilton - Top 5
Button Top 5
Mercedes: Or Brawn GP, Mk II. Lets be fair, all eyes will be here tomorrow morning at qualifying. Michael Schumacher is 41, and apparently was bored with not boring everyone, so has come back. It'll be interesting to see how he does paired with Nico Rosberg, who has always been someone who i've never thought has lived up to his potential. Unless he starts off quickly this season, expect him to end up like Nick Heidfeld without the neckbeard.
Expected finish
Constructor - Top 3
Schumacher - Top 3
Rosberg - Anywhere
Red Bull: Last year was their best chance to win a championship IMO. Their improvement towards the end of the year was fantastic, and Vettel was arguably the most consistent driver throughout last year. Mark Webber cannot be counted out, although he'll have to start strong so the team doesn't focus on Baby Schumi too much.
Expected finish
Constructor - Top 5
Vettel - Top 3
Webber - Top 5
Ferrari: If you thought that McLaren would be the ego battle with two world champions, think again. Massa is one of the most naturally gifted drivers when on form, and Alonso's raw desire to win coupled with his ability will get Ferrari back on course. Whether they will be able to handle the two of them remains to be seen however.
Expected finish
Constructor - Top 5
Alonso - Top 5
Massa - Top 5
Williams: An interesting driver choice this season, perennial number two Rubens in with a complete noob, which is always an interesting combo. Rubens could provide guidance for The Hulk being blooded in F1, as both have proven that they're good drivers in their own rights. Whether they can maintain their pace for a whole season remains to be seen.
Expected finish
Constructor - Top 10
Barichello - Top 10
Hulkenberg - Finish with points
Renault: Arguably the team most affected by problems last year with Symonds and Briatore getting the heave, Renault have struggled to make a car that has proved competitive in testing. A shame for Kubica, who's one of the top drivers in the field, and was heavily linked with Ferrari at one point. Going in with Nose is F1's first Russian driver, and if i'm honest I know heehaw about him, so I can't comment.
Expected finish
Constructor - Respectable
Kubica - Top 10
Petrov - Respectable
Force India: One of the strongest teams at the end of last year, with two very young and promising drivers. Liuzzi and Sutil both have track records of making Takuma Sato-esque mistakes however, so they will have to be consistent along with the car to get anywhere this season. Look for them to challenge for a win and a few poles.
Expected finish
Constructor - 20+ points
Liuzzi - Respectable
Sutil - Respectable
Toro Rosso: I hate this team. They serve no purpose, and their drivers are ugly. I hope they fail
Lotus F1: An interesting driver lineup for a new team with Jarno Trulli and Heikki Kovalainen, Lotus have a chance this year if they can get a good car on the track. Kovalainen however has always been a disappointment in my eyes, not doing much on great teams like Renault and McLaren. Trulli also is one of those drivers who's been around for years yet never actually done anything, but his experience should help the new team stay in the competition.
Expected finish
All 3 - double figures in points
Hispania Racing Team: One of this years "piss-take" teams, as driven by an Indian fellow and Bruno Senna. The name ain't going to save this mob however, I don't think they'll be doing too well this year.
Expected finish
They'll be happy to get points
BMW Sauber: A team i've always had a soft spot for, although with Pedro de la Rosa driving they're not likely to do squat. Kamui Kobayashi however showed last year for Toyota that he can drive out of his skin and do very well, so he could well keep the car afloat this year.
Expected finish
Double figures in points for constructor and drivers
Virgin Racing: Led by Richard Branson. May they fail and rot in hell. Their car's ugly too.
With the new teams, drivers and rules, 2010 will be one the best F1 seasons yet. If you're not a fan, I highly suggest tuning in to see some of the finest racing ever witnessed.
Things I Have an Opinion On #13
Originaly posted on 11/3/10
Curriculum for Excellence, and the increasing decline in the way the future of our country is being handled. Oddly, the SNP come in for some flak too.
Are you Scottish and Currently in 3rd year at secondary school? Congratulations! You are among the last people to be educated properly. If however you are younger and if you are, well done for being intellectual enough to want to read this, your future will be governed by horrible education reforms which will serve purely to provide you with the most basic of human functions, with wonderfully unspecified education until you get to 4th year. You will learn to be a Responsible Citizen (listen to the song of the same name by The Automatic, live by it, you'll be fine), a Confident Individual (with no way to be confident about the choices you make in your life), a Successful Learner (despite never having learned anything) and an Effective Contributor (despite having nothing worthwhile to contribute).
Remember 5-14, where you were assessed as A through F for stuff like language, maths and various things? All gone. Replaced with a pile of gibberish that can be read here: http://www.ltscotland.org.uk/curriculumforexcellence/index.asp
Basically, from Primary 1 to the end of 3rd year of secondary, ie 10 years, you will not be assessed. Instead, you will be bombarded with outcomes that you probably wont even know you're getting assessed on, in ridiculous things as being able to work together and be a good team player (basically, the old four outcomes). What a pile of shite. As if the country wasn't screwed enough with the amount of people schools are churning out leaving in 4th year with no qualifications, nothing to offer society other than a name on a dole sheet or filling a cell. At least with CfE, you can have skills to go with your no qualifications, making you more likely to become a binman when you've been forced out of school because by the time you get to 4th year there's nothing there to help you. Remember sitting your standard grades? Nothing. All gone. To be replaced by absolutely heehaw. While foundation SG's weren't exactly the most promising of award, it could be the only thing some people could get. What now, you have people who are too, for whatever reason, unable to learn, and so get forced to stay in school until 18? My year had plenty of such delinquents, and i'm happy they're gone, as i'm sure they are too. Keeping the people whose future does not lie in academics in school will not benefit anyone. Teachers will suffer because they have to spend time with people who are less likely to benefit. The pupils who can benefit will have less time and so benefit less, and the poor screw-ups who would rather be out either stabbing folk or doing drugs will feel as if their time is being wasted, become restless and unruly, and cause more undue fuss than they do now.
If you haven't seen them, may I suggest the following "Downfall" parodies:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43OFjvTiNDg (Latest Developments)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VfBgImjQDhw (Assessment)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FcaFHcvUG68 (The SQA)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGPmZXC3wYY (Glow)
and of course, the CfE song: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfKKJ1Btmpg (I think my English teacher is in that video)
While side-splittingly funny, these videos are a worrying glimpse of the future, as they're all completely accurate. Teachers will be unable to teach, which is all they want to do. I've yet to talk to a teacher who thinks the CfE will be a success, and as you can see from the comments on those videos, there are a number of reasons. Aside from the horrible teacher problem now in that there are far too many teachers out of work because there were too many training spots open, and subsequently they got reduced drastically, prospective teachers (myself included) will be put off by this. If you want to teach, do you want to do it because you have a passion for whatever field it is you would teach, you have wisdom you wish to pass on or because you want to work in moulding the future of our nation? If it's any of those or more, then forget it. You wont be able to, you'll be too busy making sure people don't fall off their unicycles whilst writing an essay on Burns, because as it's Scotland as run by the SNP, Burns, Burns and Burns will be the only thing approved by them.
Speaking of the SNP, it's all their fault. I can't wait until the election so I can get that fat wank Alex Salmond the hell out of running my country. While they may have good intentions of doing everything their own way to show that Scotland is different from the rest of the world, it's not done very well. Think Tony Mowbray in charge of Celtic. Going in with good intentions about how something should be done, but ultimately failing catastrophically because he doesn't cover the basics. Mark my words, the SNP and the CfE, like dear Mogga, will fail, and the country will take years to recover.
And all the while, i'll be teaching Gatsby to every year I get....
Curriculum for Excellence, and the increasing decline in the way the future of our country is being handled. Oddly, the SNP come in for some flak too.
Are you Scottish and Currently in 3rd year at secondary school? Congratulations! You are among the last people to be educated properly. If however you are younger and if you are, well done for being intellectual enough to want to read this, your future will be governed by horrible education reforms which will serve purely to provide you with the most basic of human functions, with wonderfully unspecified education until you get to 4th year. You will learn to be a Responsible Citizen (listen to the song of the same name by The Automatic, live by it, you'll be fine), a Confident Individual (with no way to be confident about the choices you make in your life), a Successful Learner (despite never having learned anything) and an Effective Contributor (despite having nothing worthwhile to contribute).
Remember 5-14, where you were assessed as A through F for stuff like language, maths and various things? All gone. Replaced with a pile of gibberish that can be read here: http://www.ltscotland.org.uk/curriculumforexcellence/index.asp
Basically, from Primary 1 to the end of 3rd year of secondary, ie 10 years, you will not be assessed. Instead, you will be bombarded with outcomes that you probably wont even know you're getting assessed on, in ridiculous things as being able to work together and be a good team player (basically, the old four outcomes). What a pile of shite. As if the country wasn't screwed enough with the amount of people schools are churning out leaving in 4th year with no qualifications, nothing to offer society other than a name on a dole sheet or filling a cell. At least with CfE, you can have skills to go with your no qualifications, making you more likely to become a binman when you've been forced out of school because by the time you get to 4th year there's nothing there to help you. Remember sitting your standard grades? Nothing. All gone. To be replaced by absolutely heehaw. While foundation SG's weren't exactly the most promising of award, it could be the only thing some people could get. What now, you have people who are too, for whatever reason, unable to learn, and so get forced to stay in school until 18? My year had plenty of such delinquents, and i'm happy they're gone, as i'm sure they are too. Keeping the people whose future does not lie in academics in school will not benefit anyone. Teachers will suffer because they have to spend time with people who are less likely to benefit. The pupils who can benefit will have less time and so benefit less, and the poor screw-ups who would rather be out either stabbing folk or doing drugs will feel as if their time is being wasted, become restless and unruly, and cause more undue fuss than they do now.
If you haven't seen them, may I suggest the following "Downfall" parodies:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43OFjvTiNDg (Latest Developments)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VfBgImjQDhw (Assessment)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FcaFHcvUG68 (The SQA)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGPmZXC3wYY (Glow)
and of course, the CfE song: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfKKJ1Btmpg (I think my English teacher is in that video)
While side-splittingly funny, these videos are a worrying glimpse of the future, as they're all completely accurate. Teachers will be unable to teach, which is all they want to do. I've yet to talk to a teacher who thinks the CfE will be a success, and as you can see from the comments on those videos, there are a number of reasons. Aside from the horrible teacher problem now in that there are far too many teachers out of work because there were too many training spots open, and subsequently they got reduced drastically, prospective teachers (myself included) will be put off by this. If you want to teach, do you want to do it because you have a passion for whatever field it is you would teach, you have wisdom you wish to pass on or because you want to work in moulding the future of our nation? If it's any of those or more, then forget it. You wont be able to, you'll be too busy making sure people don't fall off their unicycles whilst writing an essay on Burns, because as it's Scotland as run by the SNP, Burns, Burns and Burns will be the only thing approved by them.
Speaking of the SNP, it's all their fault. I can't wait until the election so I can get that fat wank Alex Salmond the hell out of running my country. While they may have good intentions of doing everything their own way to show that Scotland is different from the rest of the world, it's not done very well. Think Tony Mowbray in charge of Celtic. Going in with good intentions about how something should be done, but ultimately failing catastrophically because he doesn't cover the basics. Mark my words, the SNP and the CfE, like dear Mogga, will fail, and the country will take years to recover.
And all the while, i'll be teaching Gatsby to every year I get....
It'll Get You More Than Six Inches, Even if it is a Dream....
Originally posted on 7/3/10
Heavy Rain - PS3 Game Review
For each generation of gaming consoles, there are games that define them, just as there are games that define genres. This is nothing new. What happens very rarely is the game that comes along that both defines a generation and creates a genre of its own. As such, Heavy Rain is a game so innovative that it could be a gaming yardstick by the time the PlayStation 5 is being released.
For a game where the sole method of control is quicktime events, the level of immersion present in Heavy Rain is something I have never come across in my years of gaming. Aside from the fact that I hard to start the game from scratch as it refused to go into the Blue Lagoon for me, the story present is one that, while never the same twice as it's affected by your actions, captivates you and takes your breath away.
Basic premise is that you alternate between 4 characters, all trying to find the mysterious "Origami Killer," a rather warped individual who drowns children in rainwater. When you think about it, that name is garbage, as the kids aren't killed by origami, merely left with a small piece of paper art when their body's dumped on a wasteland. But either way, the media needs a name, so you end up with that. Your characters are Ethan Mars, whose son has been taken by the killer, Scott Shelby, a private investigator looking into the case, Madison Paige, a journalist who's a nosey cow and Nahman Jayden, a drug addict FBI agent. While some characters are more likeable than others, there's no questioning the levels of depth present in each of them. When you're controlling the characters you can hear their thoughts about certain issues, which allows you to guage how you're going to act with them. Just about everything can be interacted with, and as I said, everything makes a difference. Do you want to send your kid to bed at 7 with no dinner? Or do you play by the schedule his bitch mother made you write up in the kitchen? Either way, the story carries on regardless, and it's this that keeps you captivated. Hell even having everyone die keeps the game going, although I imagine that it'd be over pretty quick when you do. Whatever path you choose, you will continue to be drawn in, finding yourself caring about the characters so much you take every blow with them. The acting is top notch, surprising considering it's not actually people in it but pixels.
Graphically, this is to humans what Gran Turismo is to cars. While most games can have things that look like people at a glance, Heavy Rain requires you to stare at them for a bit before you realise it's not real. As the name implies, there's a lot of water present, be it falling from the sky trying to drown Shaun or dripping off Madison's supple bosom, and again, it's impeccable. The level of detail is outstanding, and while it's caused some problems that led to me downloading a patch before playing the game despite getting it before the release date, on the whole, there were no real glitches. The rest of the craft in building the game is equally impeccable, so much so I honestly believe more games like this being made could lead to there being an Oscar category for games, as well as them being a more advanced medium for telling stories. While in this case it'd be a bit difficult seeing as the story is different depending on how you play, some sort of recognition is deserved, as the story present eclipses even that of BioShock, the best story i'd ever come across in a game.
In terms of criticism you can throw at it, there's not much. Using quicktime events for everything isn't as boring as you'd think, you even get your reaction time right up to scratch as you desperately try to keep folk alive as well. Re-play value is going to be a bit thin as well, seeing as whatever you do will be different from the way you know the story to go. Either way, if you go into Heavy Rain with no hang-ups and just want to enjoy it, it will draw you in, and will provide you with an experience unlike just about any other you've ever had.
Heavy Rain - PS3 Game Review
For each generation of gaming consoles, there are games that define them, just as there are games that define genres. This is nothing new. What happens very rarely is the game that comes along that both defines a generation and creates a genre of its own. As such, Heavy Rain is a game so innovative that it could be a gaming yardstick by the time the PlayStation 5 is being released.
For a game where the sole method of control is quicktime events, the level of immersion present in Heavy Rain is something I have never come across in my years of gaming. Aside from the fact that I hard to start the game from scratch as it refused to go into the Blue Lagoon for me, the story present is one that, while never the same twice as it's affected by your actions, captivates you and takes your breath away.
Basic premise is that you alternate between 4 characters, all trying to find the mysterious "Origami Killer," a rather warped individual who drowns children in rainwater. When you think about it, that name is garbage, as the kids aren't killed by origami, merely left with a small piece of paper art when their body's dumped on a wasteland. But either way, the media needs a name, so you end up with that. Your characters are Ethan Mars, whose son has been taken by the killer, Scott Shelby, a private investigator looking into the case, Madison Paige, a journalist who's a nosey cow and Nahman Jayden, a drug addict FBI agent. While some characters are more likeable than others, there's no questioning the levels of depth present in each of them. When you're controlling the characters you can hear their thoughts about certain issues, which allows you to guage how you're going to act with them. Just about everything can be interacted with, and as I said, everything makes a difference. Do you want to send your kid to bed at 7 with no dinner? Or do you play by the schedule his bitch mother made you write up in the kitchen? Either way, the story carries on regardless, and it's this that keeps you captivated. Hell even having everyone die keeps the game going, although I imagine that it'd be over pretty quick when you do. Whatever path you choose, you will continue to be drawn in, finding yourself caring about the characters so much you take every blow with them. The acting is top notch, surprising considering it's not actually people in it but pixels.
Graphically, this is to humans what Gran Turismo is to cars. While most games can have things that look like people at a glance, Heavy Rain requires you to stare at them for a bit before you realise it's not real. As the name implies, there's a lot of water present, be it falling from the sky trying to drown Shaun or dripping off Madison's supple bosom, and again, it's impeccable. The level of detail is outstanding, and while it's caused some problems that led to me downloading a patch before playing the game despite getting it before the release date, on the whole, there were no real glitches. The rest of the craft in building the game is equally impeccable, so much so I honestly believe more games like this being made could lead to there being an Oscar category for games, as well as them being a more advanced medium for telling stories. While in this case it'd be a bit difficult seeing as the story is different depending on how you play, some sort of recognition is deserved, as the story present eclipses even that of BioShock, the best story i'd ever come across in a game.
In terms of criticism you can throw at it, there's not much. Using quicktime events for everything isn't as boring as you'd think, you even get your reaction time right up to scratch as you desperately try to keep folk alive as well. Re-play value is going to be a bit thin as well, seeing as whatever you do will be different from the way you know the story to go. Either way, if you go into Heavy Rain with no hang-ups and just want to enjoy it, it will draw you in, and will provide you with an experience unlike just about any other you've ever had.
Things I Have an Opinion On #12
Originally posted on 1/3/10
2010 Olympic Winter Games
In the build-up to these games, there was more than a little controversy. You can use this: http://2010observers.bccla.org/censorship-gallery/ if you'd like to see the absurd censorship levels exercised in the Vancouver area. Couple this with a distinct lack of snow, rumours of the over-spend on the budget making Holyrood look like a bargain, and it wasn't looking too good. Now in a Winter Olympics, the first thing I was always going to care about was the hockey, so we'll deal with that first. Of the entire Colorado Avalanche roster and prospects, 4 people went. Paul Stastny for USA, Peter Budaj for Slovakia, Ruslan Salei for Belarus and Jonas Holos for Norway. While you could say it reflects poorly on the team that we only have 4 Olympians that are with us now, it should help us for the remaining 20 games, and the players who went gave a good account of themselves. Holos was outstanding for the Norwegians, and I look forward to seeing him suit up in burgandy and blue in a few years. Budaj never played, but Slovakia almost made the final, and for someone who is such a team player, you can guarantee he would've been a key part of them getting so far. Salei was just coming back from a knee (or back, I could never remember) injury, so anything he did was good to see, although I was convinced he was right-handed when I saw my first Belarus game, but evidently not. Stazz was a different kettle of fish however, as while he was within a goal of a gold medal, and played most of the time with Zach Parise and or Patrick Kane, I wasn't overly impressed with him. It was nice to see hockey on the telly again though, as I could actually see where the puck was, rather than using a stream at around 600px that dies whenever I sit in a different position in my chair. This of course however leaves you at the mercy of the two eejits that the BBC have to commentate on hockey, Brent Pope and Bob Ballard. Ballard is the worst kind of play-by-play commentator, the kind of someone who uses wee bits of slang thinking it'll make him appear knowledgeable to people who know nothing. It may well do, but for people like me, it just seems stupid. That and he cannot for the life of him pronounce "Pavelski." Note: It's spelled phoenetically. Other gems from him these Olympics include:
"If the USA had ten Brian Rafalski's, they'd be set"
"Nash, to Crosby, unfortunately for the Canadians they don't have Stills and Young"
"Miller's a bit wiry, he looks like he could do with a good feed"
"Brian Burke is a bit more outspoken than Ron Wilson"
Pope must've felt left out however, giving it: "Toronto is the Mecca of global ice hockey in the NHL"
For the final, when it was the only thing on and they had to cover it, you had to laugh behind the thinking for presenter allocation. In the studio we had Steve Cram, some Canadian burd who won a skiing gold a few years back and Matthew Pinsent. Pinsent apparently watched hockey in Turin and "got right into it." Riiiiiiiiiiiiight. That'll be why you said that "The Canadians level of patriotism about these games has even reached that of the Americans." Almost as good as Steve giving it "The Canadians almost feel as if they invented ice hockey" in his dulcet Geordie tones whilst poring over the morning papers.
Embarassing coverage aside (I could've done a better job), the competition as a whole was fantastic, with a final worthy of any competition. Only problem was Sindey fucking Crosby scoring the winner. While I daresay it'll be mostly non-hockey fans who read this, please don't view this wee twerp as the face of the NHL. He jumps people from faceoffs: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c53DZ9iHrJE, he sucker-punches: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4wqR17KrLKw and ever since he came into the league 4 years ago, has bitched and moaned about EVERYTHING. That he is being used as the face of the league world wide and while I realise it's not all down to his doing, I, and just about every hockey fan is sick of it. There are better players and better role models who could and should be used to market the game worldwide (see; Matt Duchene: http://www.milehighhockey.com/2010/2/23/1322799/make-mine-duchene)
All-in though, it was a tournament that we can be proud of. Just get rid of OLE OLE OLE after goals, airhorns and Canadian hockey fans in Canada. And get the NHL to Sochi in 2014, or better yet, get Gary Bettman out a job!
There were other sports at the games, and one of them I fell in love with was curling, something that Britain are actually good at (supposedly). Aside from the eye candy on offer (see Eve Muirhead, Sweden, 3/4 of Russia and whoever was playing lead for Denmark), it was a sport that was fairly easy to pick up, considering i'd never seen a game of it before. The strategy and planning involved was fascinating, and while some say it's not a sport (i've heard it described as bowling with strategy, and not a sport because pregnant women can do it) I think it was outstanding, although I would have liked at least one medal for Britain from it.
What really stood out for me this time however was the commentary. Featuring Steve Cram (who, to his credit, knew what he was talking about) and Rhona (Colin Hendry) Martin, I have never been as entertained in my life. I'm fairly sure that they've started pumping as a result of their partnership, and their exchanges were like nothing you've ever heard. For instance, the use of the word "guddle" by Rhona. Steve, being Geordie, had no idea what she was on about, and required an explanation, him saying he thought she had been saying "girdle." Both cringeworthy and hilarious in equal measure. As was them talking about things like where to go for lunch, whether the king of Norway would partake in a Mexican wave, and just general off-hand comments. Some of their guests were an absolute treat as well. Despite following it almost religiously for the last two weeks, I missed Wayne Gretzky being there. I did get to hear Carl Lewis talk about running for 15 minutes however, and in the mens playoff between Britain and Sweden, dear Paula pissypants Radcliffe. When the Brits were faced with a lot of Swedish stones to be removed, Paula, in one of her regular 15 minute intervals with which to share her though, remarked "they should just spin one round and knock everything out." Quite. Aside from the faults, it was still enjoyable to watch, and i'll be right behind all the chookters throwing stones down a sheet of ice in 4 years.
For a country with poorly thought-out presenter/commentator distribution for a winter games, you wouldn't expect many medals. Our skaters were lucky to get anywhere, our bobsleigh team failed miserably, our curlers choked, our snowboard cross burd hurt her shin and the figure skaters never did too well. Our only medal came from the skeleton, basically a tea-tray on skates going down a huge chute. Looked like tremendous fun, and our gold came from Amy Williams, beating a rather tasty German burd into 2nd. Not bad for someone from a country with no skeleton track, although we probably could have got more medals.
All-in-all, despite its faults, you'd have to say that the 21st Olympic Winter Games were a success. They also taught us that hockey is something else that women shouldn't be allowed to play. Boy was that awful.
2010 Olympic Winter Games
In the build-up to these games, there was more than a little controversy. You can use this: http://2010observers.bccla.org/censorship-gallery/ if you'd like to see the absurd censorship levels exercised in the Vancouver area. Couple this with a distinct lack of snow, rumours of the over-spend on the budget making Holyrood look like a bargain, and it wasn't looking too good. Now in a Winter Olympics, the first thing I was always going to care about was the hockey, so we'll deal with that first. Of the entire Colorado Avalanche roster and prospects, 4 people went. Paul Stastny for USA, Peter Budaj for Slovakia, Ruslan Salei for Belarus and Jonas Holos for Norway. While you could say it reflects poorly on the team that we only have 4 Olympians that are with us now, it should help us for the remaining 20 games, and the players who went gave a good account of themselves. Holos was outstanding for the Norwegians, and I look forward to seeing him suit up in burgandy and blue in a few years. Budaj never played, but Slovakia almost made the final, and for someone who is such a team player, you can guarantee he would've been a key part of them getting so far. Salei was just coming back from a knee (or back, I could never remember) injury, so anything he did was good to see, although I was convinced he was right-handed when I saw my first Belarus game, but evidently not. Stazz was a different kettle of fish however, as while he was within a goal of a gold medal, and played most of the time with Zach Parise and or Patrick Kane, I wasn't overly impressed with him. It was nice to see hockey on the telly again though, as I could actually see where the puck was, rather than using a stream at around 600px that dies whenever I sit in a different position in my chair. This of course however leaves you at the mercy of the two eejits that the BBC have to commentate on hockey, Brent Pope and Bob Ballard. Ballard is the worst kind of play-by-play commentator, the kind of someone who uses wee bits of slang thinking it'll make him appear knowledgeable to people who know nothing. It may well do, but for people like me, it just seems stupid. That and he cannot for the life of him pronounce "Pavelski." Note: It's spelled phoenetically. Other gems from him these Olympics include:
"If the USA had ten Brian Rafalski's, they'd be set"
"Nash, to Crosby, unfortunately for the Canadians they don't have Stills and Young"
"Miller's a bit wiry, he looks like he could do with a good feed"
"Brian Burke is a bit more outspoken than Ron Wilson"
Pope must've felt left out however, giving it: "Toronto is the Mecca of global ice hockey in the NHL"
For the final, when it was the only thing on and they had to cover it, you had to laugh behind the thinking for presenter allocation. In the studio we had Steve Cram, some Canadian burd who won a skiing gold a few years back and Matthew Pinsent. Pinsent apparently watched hockey in Turin and "got right into it." Riiiiiiiiiiiiight. That'll be why you said that "The Canadians level of patriotism about these games has even reached that of the Americans." Almost as good as Steve giving it "The Canadians almost feel as if they invented ice hockey" in his dulcet Geordie tones whilst poring over the morning papers.
Embarassing coverage aside (I could've done a better job), the competition as a whole was fantastic, with a final worthy of any competition. Only problem was Sindey fucking Crosby scoring the winner. While I daresay it'll be mostly non-hockey fans who read this, please don't view this wee twerp as the face of the NHL. He jumps people from faceoffs: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c53DZ9iHrJE, he sucker-punches: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4wqR17KrLKw and ever since he came into the league 4 years ago, has bitched and moaned about EVERYTHING. That he is being used as the face of the league world wide and while I realise it's not all down to his doing, I, and just about every hockey fan is sick of it. There are better players and better role models who could and should be used to market the game worldwide (see; Matt Duchene: http://www.milehighhockey.com/2010/2/23/1322799/make-mine-duchene)
All-in though, it was a tournament that we can be proud of. Just get rid of OLE OLE OLE after goals, airhorns and Canadian hockey fans in Canada. And get the NHL to Sochi in 2014, or better yet, get Gary Bettman out a job!
There were other sports at the games, and one of them I fell in love with was curling, something that Britain are actually good at (supposedly). Aside from the eye candy on offer (see Eve Muirhead, Sweden, 3/4 of Russia and whoever was playing lead for Denmark), it was a sport that was fairly easy to pick up, considering i'd never seen a game of it before. The strategy and planning involved was fascinating, and while some say it's not a sport (i've heard it described as bowling with strategy, and not a sport because pregnant women can do it) I think it was outstanding, although I would have liked at least one medal for Britain from it.
What really stood out for me this time however was the commentary. Featuring Steve Cram (who, to his credit, knew what he was talking about) and Rhona (Colin Hendry) Martin, I have never been as entertained in my life. I'm fairly sure that they've started pumping as a result of their partnership, and their exchanges were like nothing you've ever heard. For instance, the use of the word "guddle" by Rhona. Steve, being Geordie, had no idea what she was on about, and required an explanation, him saying he thought she had been saying "girdle." Both cringeworthy and hilarious in equal measure. As was them talking about things like where to go for lunch, whether the king of Norway would partake in a Mexican wave, and just general off-hand comments. Some of their guests were an absolute treat as well. Despite following it almost religiously for the last two weeks, I missed Wayne Gretzky being there. I did get to hear Carl Lewis talk about running for 15 minutes however, and in the mens playoff between Britain and Sweden, dear Paula pissypants Radcliffe. When the Brits were faced with a lot of Swedish stones to be removed, Paula, in one of her regular 15 minute intervals with which to share her though, remarked "they should just spin one round and knock everything out." Quite. Aside from the faults, it was still enjoyable to watch, and i'll be right behind all the chookters throwing stones down a sheet of ice in 4 years.
For a country with poorly thought-out presenter/commentator distribution for a winter games, you wouldn't expect many medals. Our skaters were lucky to get anywhere, our bobsleigh team failed miserably, our curlers choked, our snowboard cross burd hurt her shin and the figure skaters never did too well. Our only medal came from the skeleton, basically a tea-tray on skates going down a huge chute. Looked like tremendous fun, and our gold came from Amy Williams, beating a rather tasty German burd into 2nd. Not bad for someone from a country with no skeleton track, although we probably could have got more medals.
All-in-all, despite its faults, you'd have to say that the 21st Olympic Winter Games were a success. They also taught us that hockey is something else that women shouldn't be allowed to play. Boy was that awful.
All I Ended Up With Was Snow
Originally posted on 28/2/10
Heavy Rain - PS3 game first impression....
My copy has frozen. As such, i'm going on hiatus until it's patched (again) and I can finish it and comment on it properly.
Heavy Rain - PS3 game first impression....
My copy has frozen. As such, i'm going on hiatus until it's patched (again) and I can finish it and comment on it properly.
Things I Have an Opinion On #11
Originally posted on 26/2/10
The best kinds of salmon
Salmon is the common name for several species of fish of the family Salmonidae. Several other fish in the family are called trout; the difference is often said to be that salmon migrate and trout are resident, a distinction that holds true for the Salmo genus. Salmon live in both the Atlantic (one migratory species Salmo salar) and Pacific Oceans, as well as the Great Lakes (approximately a dozen species of the genus Oncorhynchus).
Now that wikipedia's had its say, lets see what kinds of salmon there are for you to see and eat, and ultimately, which is best.
Salmon are one of the most dogged an determined animals in the world, and this is most evident in their breeding methods. Typically, salmon are anadromous: they are born in fresh water, migrate to the ocean, then return to fresh water to reproduce. However, there are rare species that can only survive in fresh water. Folklore has it that the fish return to the exact spot where they were born to spawn; tracking studies have shown this to be true but the nature of how this memory works has long been debated. Salmon eggs are laid in freshwater streams typically at high latitutes. The eggs hatch into alevin or sac fry. The fry quickly develop into parr with camouflaging vertical stripes. The parr stay for one to three years in their natal stream before becoming smolts, which are distinguished by their bright silvery colour with scales that are easily rubbed off. It is estimated that only 10% of all salmon eggs survive to this stage. The smolt body chemistry changes, allowing them to live in salt water. Smolts spend a portion of their out-migration time in brackish water, where their body chemistry becomes accustomed to osmoregulation in the ocean.
There's obviously different kinds that live in the different oceans in the world. Salmon is a popular food. Classified as an "oily fish", salmon is considered to be healthy due to the fish's high protein, high Omega-3 fatty acids, and high vitamin D levels. It's actually one of the few fish that I can stand eating, as it doesn't reek and it doesn't feel as if you're eating a bit of fat from the Chinese that's been left too long in the fryer. Smoked salmon is another popular preparation method, and can either be hot or cold smoked. Lox can refer either to cold smoked salmon or to salmon cured in a brine solution (also called gravlax). Traditional canned salmon includes some skin (which is harmless) and bone (which adds calcium). Skinless and boneless canned salmon is also available. Bear in mind that the pinker the salmon, the healthier it is, and therefor safer and tastier to eat. Of the companies to produce canned salmon (the one I have most frequently, if I have it at all), John West is the best one to get. Generally very tasty, and supposedly they don't source their salmon from farms which over harvest the fish. You should get that one!
The best kinds of salmon
Salmon is the common name for several species of fish of the family Salmonidae. Several other fish in the family are called trout; the difference is often said to be that salmon migrate and trout are resident, a distinction that holds true for the Salmo genus. Salmon live in both the Atlantic (one migratory species Salmo salar) and Pacific Oceans, as well as the Great Lakes (approximately a dozen species of the genus Oncorhynchus).
Now that wikipedia's had its say, lets see what kinds of salmon there are for you to see and eat, and ultimately, which is best.
Salmon are one of the most dogged an determined animals in the world, and this is most evident in their breeding methods. Typically, salmon are anadromous: they are born in fresh water, migrate to the ocean, then return to fresh water to reproduce. However, there are rare species that can only survive in fresh water. Folklore has it that the fish return to the exact spot where they were born to spawn; tracking studies have shown this to be true but the nature of how this memory works has long been debated. Salmon eggs are laid in freshwater streams typically at high latitutes. The eggs hatch into alevin or sac fry. The fry quickly develop into parr with camouflaging vertical stripes. The parr stay for one to three years in their natal stream before becoming smolts, which are distinguished by their bright silvery colour with scales that are easily rubbed off. It is estimated that only 10% of all salmon eggs survive to this stage. The smolt body chemistry changes, allowing them to live in salt water. Smolts spend a portion of their out-migration time in brackish water, where their body chemistry becomes accustomed to osmoregulation in the ocean.
There's obviously different kinds that live in the different oceans in the world. Salmon is a popular food. Classified as an "oily fish", salmon is considered to be healthy due to the fish's high protein, high Omega-3 fatty acids, and high vitamin D levels. It's actually one of the few fish that I can stand eating, as it doesn't reek and it doesn't feel as if you're eating a bit of fat from the Chinese that's been left too long in the fryer. Smoked salmon is another popular preparation method, and can either be hot or cold smoked. Lox can refer either to cold smoked salmon or to salmon cured in a brine solution (also called gravlax). Traditional canned salmon includes some skin (which is harmless) and bone (which adds calcium). Skinless and boneless canned salmon is also available. Bear in mind that the pinker the salmon, the healthier it is, and therefor safer and tastier to eat. Of the companies to produce canned salmon (the one I have most frequently, if I have it at all), John West is the best one to get. Generally very tasty, and supposedly they don't source their salmon from farms which over harvest the fish. You should get that one!
It's Not New Order, But is it New?
Originally posted on 21/2/10
Acolyte - Delphic - Album Review
A city's musical legacy is one of the biggest curses that can befall an up-and-coming band. As such, a band from Manchester that uses synths is forever doomed to be called New Order's predecessors. Just like any Mancunian band that combines 3 guitarists and as many chords with bored, drawling vocals is as likely to be called the next Oasis and is subsequetnly doomed to failure. In many cases, comparisons like this are akin to saying that Kyle Lafferty must be like George Best because they're both Northern Irish.
As such, Delphic are a band who of course draw influence from New Order, who wouldn't, but ultimately end up creating with debut album Acolyte that was released in January sometime something that can stand up on its own two feet, proudly showcasing the bands ability to make brilliant dance/rock crossover music. Even though i've only had it on a few times, the one best thing that can be drawn from it is that singles Doubt and This Momentary, while both brilliant, are by no means the strongest on the album. When you hear the title track, a 9 minute long instrumental and you hear how it morphs from beginning to end, starting off small and quiet with the odd ping from the guitar and then it rushes up to a crescendo which will make you dance and wish it'll never end. Delphic seem to have gotten this dancing business down, as there's hardly a moment where you can't imagine yourself in a club somewhere with the filthy beats on offer pulsing through your veins.
Lyrically, it's not actually that bad for a dance album. Normally with a band who embrace the synthesiser so openly you'll get maybe two lines to a chorus repeated over and over, but that's not the case here. There's actually coherent sentences, and the crooning voice of.... the guy who sings sounds as homely as your wallpaper. It's nothing particularly distinctive, but it's not boring either. It's also a voice that can go well with either the dance or rock stuff, it transfers well and never sounds out of its depth.
A fairly short review this week, but Delphic are a band with no frills. They make a good tune, stuff that you can dance to and sing along to, and it's surely a candidate for album of the year.
Acolyte - Delphic - Album Review
A city's musical legacy is one of the biggest curses that can befall an up-and-coming band. As such, a band from Manchester that uses synths is forever doomed to be called New Order's predecessors. Just like any Mancunian band that combines 3 guitarists and as many chords with bored, drawling vocals is as likely to be called the next Oasis and is subsequetnly doomed to failure. In many cases, comparisons like this are akin to saying that Kyle Lafferty must be like George Best because they're both Northern Irish.
As such, Delphic are a band who of course draw influence from New Order, who wouldn't, but ultimately end up creating with debut album Acolyte that was released in January sometime something that can stand up on its own two feet, proudly showcasing the bands ability to make brilliant dance/rock crossover music. Even though i've only had it on a few times, the one best thing that can be drawn from it is that singles Doubt and This Momentary, while both brilliant, are by no means the strongest on the album. When you hear the title track, a 9 minute long instrumental and you hear how it morphs from beginning to end, starting off small and quiet with the odd ping from the guitar and then it rushes up to a crescendo which will make you dance and wish it'll never end. Delphic seem to have gotten this dancing business down, as there's hardly a moment where you can't imagine yourself in a club somewhere with the filthy beats on offer pulsing through your veins.
Lyrically, it's not actually that bad for a dance album. Normally with a band who embrace the synthesiser so openly you'll get maybe two lines to a chorus repeated over and over, but that's not the case here. There's actually coherent sentences, and the crooning voice of.... the guy who sings sounds as homely as your wallpaper. It's nothing particularly distinctive, but it's not boring either. It's also a voice that can go well with either the dance or rock stuff, it transfers well and never sounds out of its depth.
A fairly short review this week, but Delphic are a band with no frills. They make a good tune, stuff that you can dance to and sing along to, and it's surely a candidate for album of the year.
Things I Have an Opinion On #10
Originally posted on 20/2/10
European football qualification requirements
In a week where a playoff for the 4th Champions League spot in England has been brought up and it was announced that from 2011-2012, only the Scottish champion will get a crack at the Champions League, and even then after going through 3 qualification rounds, you have to ask, what has happened to the competition that was revamped to prevent elitism in European club football?
Initially, the format for the European Cup was to include the champions of each league in Europe from the previous season, as well as the current holders if they were not already in it. This format allowed truly the best teams in Europe to test themselves against each other, and allowed tournaments such as the Cup Winners Cup and UEFA Cup to flourish, with big teams who'd finished 2nd in their league contesting this. This was a perfectly fair format for everyone, as it allowed the smaller teams to get a crack at Europe, with teams like Aberdeen and Dundee United doing well. However, it was changed to the current Champions League format, where, based on UEFA's good old coefficients rating, up to four teams from a country can qualify. So in reality, the 4th best team in England or Spain can play in the Champions league. Seems a bit unfair to me. As such, the UEFA cup's popularity has declined such that it has became the same format as the CL, and the Cup Winner's Cup has been disbanded altogether.
Seeing that the 7th best team in England could potentially make it to the Champions League was the final straw for me however, as this has completely undermined the point of the competition. Such a format will never happen thankfully, but that it was even thought of is cause for concern. As is Scotland, a country which in the last 7 years has seen two clubs reach European finals, and seen many a venture into Europe past christmas. The Scottish champions, whoever they may be, do not deserve to play 3 qualifiers to get to the Champions League. The system has declined and became so elitist that it has descended into farce, as everyone simply craves the easy money of the Champions League, and no-one seems to notice that limiting the places available would increase domestic competition, and boost the status of the Europa League (or whatever it may be called).
My proposed system follows:
UEFA has 53 national associations which fall under its jurisdiction. If you were to take the champions from each league, you would have 53 teams which could split up thus:
12 groups of 4, 1 group of 5
Have each team play each other home and away, as is the current format.
Have the top two teams in each group go through, giving you 26 teams.
To get to a last 32, the remaining 6 places go to the runners-up in their group who have the best points to games ratio. If teams are tied, go to goal difference etc, the basic tie-breaking rules applying.
The last 32 will be played knock-out, home and away, as is the current format of the Europa League after christmas.
Does this not seem awfully simple? And get back to the whole point of the European Cup, that it is contested for by Europe's best individual teams, rather than the best countries' teams?
The Cup Winner's Cup could be reinstate to allow clubs a further opportunity, though there could be problems if teams are already in another competition. Someone else could work that out.
As for the UEFA Cup, 64 teams, the 53 runners-up of the UEFA league plus the 12 best 3rd placed teams going by the poxy coefficient ratings. This would allow the UEFA Cup to regain some form of prestige, and make all domestic leagues much more exciting, as winning the league would be much more beneficial, rather than being able to finish 4th and still get in to Europe's premier competition.
This will never happen obviously, as the money involved will make the big teams too afraid to risk giving it up, but it would be better for football.
European football qualification requirements
In a week where a playoff for the 4th Champions League spot in England has been brought up and it was announced that from 2011-2012, only the Scottish champion will get a crack at the Champions League, and even then after going through 3 qualification rounds, you have to ask, what has happened to the competition that was revamped to prevent elitism in European club football?
Initially, the format for the European Cup was to include the champions of each league in Europe from the previous season, as well as the current holders if they were not already in it. This format allowed truly the best teams in Europe to test themselves against each other, and allowed tournaments such as the Cup Winners Cup and UEFA Cup to flourish, with big teams who'd finished 2nd in their league contesting this. This was a perfectly fair format for everyone, as it allowed the smaller teams to get a crack at Europe, with teams like Aberdeen and Dundee United doing well. However, it was changed to the current Champions League format, where, based on UEFA's good old coefficients rating, up to four teams from a country can qualify. So in reality, the 4th best team in England or Spain can play in the Champions league. Seems a bit unfair to me. As such, the UEFA cup's popularity has declined such that it has became the same format as the CL, and the Cup Winner's Cup has been disbanded altogether.
Seeing that the 7th best team in England could potentially make it to the Champions League was the final straw for me however, as this has completely undermined the point of the competition. Such a format will never happen thankfully, but that it was even thought of is cause for concern. As is Scotland, a country which in the last 7 years has seen two clubs reach European finals, and seen many a venture into Europe past christmas. The Scottish champions, whoever they may be, do not deserve to play 3 qualifiers to get to the Champions League. The system has declined and became so elitist that it has descended into farce, as everyone simply craves the easy money of the Champions League, and no-one seems to notice that limiting the places available would increase domestic competition, and boost the status of the Europa League (or whatever it may be called).
My proposed system follows:
UEFA has 53 national associations which fall under its jurisdiction. If you were to take the champions from each league, you would have 53 teams which could split up thus:
12 groups of 4, 1 group of 5
Have each team play each other home and away, as is the current format.
Have the top two teams in each group go through, giving you 26 teams.
To get to a last 32, the remaining 6 places go to the runners-up in their group who have the best points to games ratio. If teams are tied, go to goal difference etc, the basic tie-breaking rules applying.
The last 32 will be played knock-out, home and away, as is the current format of the Europa League after christmas.
Does this not seem awfully simple? And get back to the whole point of the European Cup, that it is contested for by Europe's best individual teams, rather than the best countries' teams?
The Cup Winner's Cup could be reinstate to allow clubs a further opportunity, though there could be problems if teams are already in another competition. Someone else could work that out.
As for the UEFA Cup, 64 teams, the 53 runners-up of the UEFA league plus the 12 best 3rd placed teams going by the poxy coefficient ratings. This would allow the UEFA Cup to regain some form of prestige, and make all domestic leagues much more exciting, as winning the league would be much more beneficial, rather than being able to finish 4th and still get in to Europe's premier competition.
This will never happen obviously, as the money involved will make the big teams too afraid to risk giving it up, but it would be better for football.
Things I Have an Opinion On #9
Originally posted on 17/2/10
JLS, and any music artist who got famous from a reality TV show
In a blog completely unrelated to recent events, i've decided to explain once and for all why music is going down the shitter.
Radiohead guitarist Ed O'Brien said recently that creativity in music is being sacrificed for money making: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/8477675.stm and the man is right. Why do people listen to music? The primary reason is to be entertained. As such, stuff like The X Factor could be seen as music for the 21st century, purely based on entertainment and nothing else. But that undermines the very reason music was invented in the first place, to be creative. There is nothing creative about the artists who got famous from TV shows. None of them write their own songs, none of them are particularly memorable, and they could come of a production line for all the difference that exists between them. Everything that is churned out by the happy smiling goliath that is The X Factor is swallowed up by the equally happy smiling mindless drones of the people that this drviel is aimed at. Remember when I said that the album is dying? It's because people no longer have the attention span to devote 40-50 minutes a day to giving a band the time to listen to what they can do. Everything is geared towards the one crap song ala Beat Again, which sticks in your head for a week until the next manufactured drivel comes along to win the hearts of unfortunate saps who don't know any better. There's no feeling behind it, absolutely nothing that makes you think the people behind the noise care about what they're doing.
Rage Against the Machine proved that not everyone is a drone. While the concept behind it wasn't exactly wonderful, ie everyone buy the one thing with the sole purpose of beating some tranny Geordie whose name i've already forgotten, at least they're a real band, and the music is real and has a real message. Any other band who was ever beaten to a number one spot by some rent-a-tune from a TV programme is always going to be infinitely better than what beat them, and further proof that the chart system is both completely irrelevant in judging the musical ability of an artists, but scarily and sadly representitive of the population today. If you have ever bought a single from one of these people, you are wrong. If you have ever bought an album from one of these people, you are wrong. If you have ever been to see one of these people in concert, you are wrong.
JLS, and any music artist who got famous from a reality TV show
In a blog completely unrelated to recent events, i've decided to explain once and for all why music is going down the shitter.
Radiohead guitarist Ed O'Brien said recently that creativity in music is being sacrificed for money making: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/8477675.stm and the man is right. Why do people listen to music? The primary reason is to be entertained. As such, stuff like The X Factor could be seen as music for the 21st century, purely based on entertainment and nothing else. But that undermines the very reason music was invented in the first place, to be creative. There is nothing creative about the artists who got famous from TV shows. None of them write their own songs, none of them are particularly memorable, and they could come of a production line for all the difference that exists between them. Everything that is churned out by the happy smiling goliath that is The X Factor is swallowed up by the equally happy smiling mindless drones of the people that this drviel is aimed at. Remember when I said that the album is dying? It's because people no longer have the attention span to devote 40-50 minutes a day to giving a band the time to listen to what they can do. Everything is geared towards the one crap song ala Beat Again, which sticks in your head for a week until the next manufactured drivel comes along to win the hearts of unfortunate saps who don't know any better. There's no feeling behind it, absolutely nothing that makes you think the people behind the noise care about what they're doing.
Rage Against the Machine proved that not everyone is a drone. While the concept behind it wasn't exactly wonderful, ie everyone buy the one thing with the sole purpose of beating some tranny Geordie whose name i've already forgotten, at least they're a real band, and the music is real and has a real message. Any other band who was ever beaten to a number one spot by some rent-a-tune from a TV programme is always going to be infinitely better than what beat them, and further proof that the chart system is both completely irrelevant in judging the musical ability of an artists, but scarily and sadly representitive of the population today. If you have ever bought a single from one of these people, you are wrong. If you have ever bought an album from one of these people, you are wrong. If you have ever been to see one of these people in concert, you are wrong.
Not Quite in Rapture Anymore....
Originally posted on 15/2/10
BioShock 2 - PlayStation 3 game review
In terms of living up to previous installments, this game was always going to be The Phantom Menace to the Original Trilogy. Kid A to OK Computer. This is Hardcore to Different Class. As such, you obviously dive headlong into BioShock 2 with high expectations, given the sheer class of the original and the trailers/excerpts we've seen of the follow-up. Obivously it'll focus on someone different than BioShock, as the chap you played in that has since went to the surface and lived out a happy enough life for a product of Rapture. So now, you're a Big Daddy, and the premise of the story is that you're fighting through Rapture to find your Little Sister.
BioShock 2 takes a lead from GTA in terms of weapons, as, like before, you can carry a drill, a rivet gun, a .50 cal machine gun, a spear gun, a grenade launcher, a camera, a hack tool and a shotgun, with no visible encumberment of your person. Weaponry is one of the few points where the original is bested, as weapons like the spear gun and drill are pieces of brilliance, and being able to fire plasmids at the same time helps make combat more entertaining. It's also necessary, as the splicers are tougher and there's some new ones, and being able to spam them with everything you've got certainly comes in handy. Your opponents in Rapture are pretty much the same except harder to kill, and the Brute Splicers are downright annoying. Where 2K have outdone themselves however is with the Big Sisters. The shriek from these things when they turn up is the scariest thing that happens to you in the game, because you know that you're going to get battered about, and the damn thing ain't going to stop screeching until you give it what for. What helps here however is a Hypnotise plasmid, which makes your enemies attack each other. Really handy when you get nearer to the end and have to fight two of them at once.
As it's over ten years since civil war broke out in Rapture, and it's been left unmaintained, you can understand it'd be in a bit of a bad state. There's more water in it for instance, and as the ocean is getting back in, there's coral everywhere. This is one of the sticking points of the game and the most obvious, as the colour everywhere ruins the atmosphere. A city in ruin at the bottom of the Atlantic Ocean should not be brightly coloured, it should be dank, it should be barely lit and make you feel like it's going to fall apart if you step too heavily. Fortunately this was rectified at points however, as you can still see the former grandeur of what was created purely as a haven for the creative minds of the world. There is a level where you can see how Rapture was built. Big no-no. To build a city at the bottom of the ocean in 1946 is infathomable, but in BioShock, you never questioned it. BioShock 2 however feels the need to describe how it happened, and if you thought that it wasn't believeable before, you may as well just turn off the console now. Andrew Ryan's boat floated the foundations out to sea, plopped them in and hey presto, instant city. Fantastic, there goes that illusion. There are less locations too than the first game, none of them as iconic as the originals.
Given that in BioShock you put Ryan's head in with a golf club and Fontaine got stabbed to death by Little Sisters, you were going to need new enemies and characters. Main antagonist is Sofia Lamb, a social troubleshooter brought in when Rapture started to go down the tubes, who somehow has made the splicers listen to her, and directs everybody to try and kill you. She also happens to be the natural mother of the Little Sister you're trying to find. Well, nobody said this was going to be easy... She gets quite wearing after a while however, as she refuses to listen to reason, and while neither Ryan nor Fontaine listened to reason, they didn't not do it (wtf?) for the whole game. Lamb just gets irritating about three hours in. You see, what she wants to do is put the whole of Raptures' peoples' abilities in to one person. A bit hard considering there's about three sane people left you would have thought, as well as being completely fruitless, because it had been tried before, and failed. The example of this was a chap called Gil Alexander, who is now a blob living in a tank. Fantastic characterisation, it's right up there with Jar Jar Binks. He makes about as much sense as JJB, and silly characters like this are not what Rapture is about. People can be insane, and you would expect them to be, but psychotic insane, not insane like Jim Carrey in The Mask. Other folk pop up, like Grace Alexander (racist) and Stanley Poole (a scummy journalist who did something bad to you), and you have the choice of killing them, but you really don't want to. Mainly because they're so bland and one dimensional you take pity on them. There's also a chap called Sinclair who follows you around with a crap Southern accent, and you don't see him, at all. He pops up once at the start, then hides for the rest of the journey, ordering you about. There's no depth to any of the characters, the only one that you care a jot about is Eleanor and even then she only appears for half an hour at the conclusion. A lot of the characters feel very poorly thought out, and nothing compared to the high standards created in game number one. Only plus point here is that Eleanor's hot when she's all grown up.
There is one explanation for the poorer parts of the single player however, and they lie in the multiplayer. Multiplayer works in games like COD. They have the formula down, with stories that take you in (or the Infinity Ward games do) while still managing to give you a multiplayer experience that will have plenty of people playing COD4, when it came out over two years ago. So what do 2K do? Exactly the same.
You have ranks, 40, and you get promoted when you get more adam (points) from games for kills and objectives.
You get new weapons, plasmids and tonics as you level up.
Game modes include team deathmatch, free for all, domination and capture the flag
How original. While the mulitplayer is fun, it's not necessary. Games don't have to have multiplayer, especially not a game that's so focused on the single player experience as BioShock should be, and ultimately, the BioShock 2 multiplayer takes away from what should have been a masterclass in game-making. Multiplayer is not the only or the worst thing about this game, but it is a large contributing factor towards it, and proves that it's not needed on all games.
Too conclude, i'm torn. BioShock 2 is by no means brilliant, but it's not as bad as I thought it was when I first played it. Maybe there's more depth to it than the first play, because it seems to be better the second time of playing the single player. I hope it does, because as a series of games, BioShock has the potential to be up there with the best.
BioShock 2 - PlayStation 3 game review
In terms of living up to previous installments, this game was always going to be The Phantom Menace to the Original Trilogy. Kid A to OK Computer. This is Hardcore to Different Class. As such, you obviously dive headlong into BioShock 2 with high expectations, given the sheer class of the original and the trailers/excerpts we've seen of the follow-up. Obivously it'll focus on someone different than BioShock, as the chap you played in that has since went to the surface and lived out a happy enough life for a product of Rapture. So now, you're a Big Daddy, and the premise of the story is that you're fighting through Rapture to find your Little Sister.
BioShock 2 takes a lead from GTA in terms of weapons, as, like before, you can carry a drill, a rivet gun, a .50 cal machine gun, a spear gun, a grenade launcher, a camera, a hack tool and a shotgun, with no visible encumberment of your person. Weaponry is one of the few points where the original is bested, as weapons like the spear gun and drill are pieces of brilliance, and being able to fire plasmids at the same time helps make combat more entertaining. It's also necessary, as the splicers are tougher and there's some new ones, and being able to spam them with everything you've got certainly comes in handy. Your opponents in Rapture are pretty much the same except harder to kill, and the Brute Splicers are downright annoying. Where 2K have outdone themselves however is with the Big Sisters. The shriek from these things when they turn up is the scariest thing that happens to you in the game, because you know that you're going to get battered about, and the damn thing ain't going to stop screeching until you give it what for. What helps here however is a Hypnotise plasmid, which makes your enemies attack each other. Really handy when you get nearer to the end and have to fight two of them at once.
As it's over ten years since civil war broke out in Rapture, and it's been left unmaintained, you can understand it'd be in a bit of a bad state. There's more water in it for instance, and as the ocean is getting back in, there's coral everywhere. This is one of the sticking points of the game and the most obvious, as the colour everywhere ruins the atmosphere. A city in ruin at the bottom of the Atlantic Ocean should not be brightly coloured, it should be dank, it should be barely lit and make you feel like it's going to fall apart if you step too heavily. Fortunately this was rectified at points however, as you can still see the former grandeur of what was created purely as a haven for the creative minds of the world. There is a level where you can see how Rapture was built. Big no-no. To build a city at the bottom of the ocean in 1946 is infathomable, but in BioShock, you never questioned it. BioShock 2 however feels the need to describe how it happened, and if you thought that it wasn't believeable before, you may as well just turn off the console now. Andrew Ryan's boat floated the foundations out to sea, plopped them in and hey presto, instant city. Fantastic, there goes that illusion. There are less locations too than the first game, none of them as iconic as the originals.
Given that in BioShock you put Ryan's head in with a golf club and Fontaine got stabbed to death by Little Sisters, you were going to need new enemies and characters. Main antagonist is Sofia Lamb, a social troubleshooter brought in when Rapture started to go down the tubes, who somehow has made the splicers listen to her, and directs everybody to try and kill you. She also happens to be the natural mother of the Little Sister you're trying to find. Well, nobody said this was going to be easy... She gets quite wearing after a while however, as she refuses to listen to reason, and while neither Ryan nor Fontaine listened to reason, they didn't not do it (wtf?) for the whole game. Lamb just gets irritating about three hours in. You see, what she wants to do is put the whole of Raptures' peoples' abilities in to one person. A bit hard considering there's about three sane people left you would have thought, as well as being completely fruitless, because it had been tried before, and failed. The example of this was a chap called Gil Alexander, who is now a blob living in a tank. Fantastic characterisation, it's right up there with Jar Jar Binks. He makes about as much sense as JJB, and silly characters like this are not what Rapture is about. People can be insane, and you would expect them to be, but psychotic insane, not insane like Jim Carrey in The Mask. Other folk pop up, like Grace Alexander (racist) and Stanley Poole (a scummy journalist who did something bad to you), and you have the choice of killing them, but you really don't want to. Mainly because they're so bland and one dimensional you take pity on them. There's also a chap called Sinclair who follows you around with a crap Southern accent, and you don't see him, at all. He pops up once at the start, then hides for the rest of the journey, ordering you about. There's no depth to any of the characters, the only one that you care a jot about is Eleanor and even then she only appears for half an hour at the conclusion. A lot of the characters feel very poorly thought out, and nothing compared to the high standards created in game number one. Only plus point here is that Eleanor's hot when she's all grown up.
There is one explanation for the poorer parts of the single player however, and they lie in the multiplayer. Multiplayer works in games like COD. They have the formula down, with stories that take you in (or the Infinity Ward games do) while still managing to give you a multiplayer experience that will have plenty of people playing COD4, when it came out over two years ago. So what do 2K do? Exactly the same.
You have ranks, 40, and you get promoted when you get more adam (points) from games for kills and objectives.
You get new weapons, plasmids and tonics as you level up.
Game modes include team deathmatch, free for all, domination and capture the flag
How original. While the mulitplayer is fun, it's not necessary. Games don't have to have multiplayer, especially not a game that's so focused on the single player experience as BioShock should be, and ultimately, the BioShock 2 multiplayer takes away from what should have been a masterclass in game-making. Multiplayer is not the only or the worst thing about this game, but it is a large contributing factor towards it, and proves that it's not needed on all games.
Too conclude, i'm torn. BioShock 2 is by no means brilliant, but it's not as bad as I thought it was when I first played it. Maybe there's more depth to it than the first play, because it seems to be better the second time of playing the single player. I hope it does, because as a series of games, BioShock has the potential to be up there with the best.
More Than Just a Shock to the System
Originally posted on 7/2/10
BioShock - PS3 Game Review
I first saw a review for this in the Daily Record when it came out for the 360 and PC originally in 2007. It got 5 stars, and from seeing the picture alone, I wanted it. It was the only thing I would ever have considered buying a 360 for, and that shows you how glowing a recommendation i'm giving it.
Fortunately however, it made its way onto a real console a year later, with the demo alone captivating you and transporting you into an underwater world that both amazes you and terrifies you. The game itself I completed in a day. While not a glowing recommendation, that was playing it continuously for a day. Like anything with a good story, BioShock draws you in and makes you lose track of time. I seriously had no idea how long had went past as I was playing this, for all I knew it could have been 1970 when the game was set.
Graphically, it's faultless. It's nothing groundbreaking, but it does everything it has to in order to work. The water everywhere is particularly well done, and adds to the feeling that all that's separating you from an ocean is a single pane of glass, the majority of which is falling apart. These graphics help the enemies come to life, from splicers (genetically deformed folk who don't like the look of you) to Big Daddies (the large chaps in diving suits on the front of the box) each of them poses a challenge to defeat, the biggest one being getting over how terrified you are when you first see them. Or, in the case of stuff like Spider and Houdini splicers, who crawl along walls and teleport respectively, when you don't see them at all.
Rapture's insane inhabitants aren't the only thing that'll dampen (sorry) your day however, as the folk who strived to create a perfect haven of creativity and progress are even more mental than the splicers.
First, a backstory. You crashland in the middle of the ocean, find a lighthouse, and go down it to find yourself in an underwater world, called Rapture. You learn it was built in 1957 (don't ask how 50's technology could construct a full city in the Atlantic Ocean), as a way of shielding the worlds best minds from censorship, allowing them to fully realise their talents.
It went tits-up however, as there were nobody to clean the toilets. As such, there's very few people left in Rapture who can possess a rational thought, and as you progress through the city most of them die anyway. From Atlas the Oirishman to Sander Cohen the Tenneessee Williams lookalike, all the characters are well acted and believeable. You start to identify with them, you realise you know people who would be like them if they were in an underwater city that went down the tubes.
Naturally, with so many people wanting you dead, you'll need weapons. BioShock takes the GTA weapon route, allowing you to carry a spanner, a pistol, a machine gun, a shotgun, a rocket launcher, a crossbow and a camera with no discernable bulk on your person. That and there's 3 different types of ammo for all but the spanner and camera. But then again, you have no feet. Plasmids however add a different dimension to fighting folk, allowing you to set people on fire, freeze them, electrocute them and even pick them up and throw them around. Each different weapon, be it mechanical or biological, allows you to fight the battle through Rapture your way, doing it however you see fit.
Story-wise, BioShock has the best story of any game i've ever played. Everything contributes to it, from the characters, to the enemies, to the setting, to the music in the background and to the fate of your character. The highest accolade I can pay the story is that I managed to construct an essay for it for my Higher English exam if it was required. It wasn't, but I could've written a damn good one. As such, the game is being made into a film (hopefully), and as I mentioned in my games of the decade list, it deserves Oscars if it ever materialises.
BioShock does have DLC. 3 extra side quests, based around the Little Sisters (i'll come to them later), you have to fight various enemies, or find weapons to get the Little Sister to safety. They add a certain dimension to play that wasn't present in the full game, as it requires you to plan out what you're going to do a lot more. Planning was necessary in the full game, but very often you could get by by simply spamming the hell out of anything trying to kill you. The Challenge Rooms however need you to think, or if you're lazy, youtube them.
Now, the Little Sisters and the moral choice system present. Remember the Big Daddies? Well they were created to protect the Little Sisters. Little Sisters were kidnapped girls (much more prevalent in BioShock 2, check somethinginthesea.com) who were implanted by an ADAM slug. ADAM was something the scientists found, which allowed them to make plasmids, which rather imaginitvely run on EVE. Follow? When you kill a Big Daddy, you have the option to kill the Sister and get 160 ADAM, or rid her of the slug and get 80, but leaving her still alive. Now its up to you how you do it, but the moral choice system here only affects the end, and only has three outcomes (although 2 are basically the same). It's not exactly wonderful, although it's supposedly improved in the sequel (which to the best of my knowledge, my copy of which is yet to be sent out), so i'll wait to see how they take that.
To sum up, while BioShock never made the best game of the last decade, it fully deserves its place in the top 5, and I strongly implore you to go and buy it now if you haven't already, and prepare to be sucked into a world that wouldn't let you leave if it had its way.
BioShock - PS3 Game Review
I first saw a review for this in the Daily Record when it came out for the 360 and PC originally in 2007. It got 5 stars, and from seeing the picture alone, I wanted it. It was the only thing I would ever have considered buying a 360 for, and that shows you how glowing a recommendation i'm giving it.
Fortunately however, it made its way onto a real console a year later, with the demo alone captivating you and transporting you into an underwater world that both amazes you and terrifies you. The game itself I completed in a day. While not a glowing recommendation, that was playing it continuously for a day. Like anything with a good story, BioShock draws you in and makes you lose track of time. I seriously had no idea how long had went past as I was playing this, for all I knew it could have been 1970 when the game was set.
Graphically, it's faultless. It's nothing groundbreaking, but it does everything it has to in order to work. The water everywhere is particularly well done, and adds to the feeling that all that's separating you from an ocean is a single pane of glass, the majority of which is falling apart. These graphics help the enemies come to life, from splicers (genetically deformed folk who don't like the look of you) to Big Daddies (the large chaps in diving suits on the front of the box) each of them poses a challenge to defeat, the biggest one being getting over how terrified you are when you first see them. Or, in the case of stuff like Spider and Houdini splicers, who crawl along walls and teleport respectively, when you don't see them at all.
Rapture's insane inhabitants aren't the only thing that'll dampen (sorry) your day however, as the folk who strived to create a perfect haven of creativity and progress are even more mental than the splicers.
First, a backstory. You crashland in the middle of the ocean, find a lighthouse, and go down it to find yourself in an underwater world, called Rapture. You learn it was built in 1957 (don't ask how 50's technology could construct a full city in the Atlantic Ocean), as a way of shielding the worlds best minds from censorship, allowing them to fully realise their talents.
It went tits-up however, as there were nobody to clean the toilets. As such, there's very few people left in Rapture who can possess a rational thought, and as you progress through the city most of them die anyway. From Atlas the Oirishman to Sander Cohen the Tenneessee Williams lookalike, all the characters are well acted and believeable. You start to identify with them, you realise you know people who would be like them if they were in an underwater city that went down the tubes.
Naturally, with so many people wanting you dead, you'll need weapons. BioShock takes the GTA weapon route, allowing you to carry a spanner, a pistol, a machine gun, a shotgun, a rocket launcher, a crossbow and a camera with no discernable bulk on your person. That and there's 3 different types of ammo for all but the spanner and camera. But then again, you have no feet. Plasmids however add a different dimension to fighting folk, allowing you to set people on fire, freeze them, electrocute them and even pick them up and throw them around. Each different weapon, be it mechanical or biological, allows you to fight the battle through Rapture your way, doing it however you see fit.
Story-wise, BioShock has the best story of any game i've ever played. Everything contributes to it, from the characters, to the enemies, to the setting, to the music in the background and to the fate of your character. The highest accolade I can pay the story is that I managed to construct an essay for it for my Higher English exam if it was required. It wasn't, but I could've written a damn good one. As such, the game is being made into a film (hopefully), and as I mentioned in my games of the decade list, it deserves Oscars if it ever materialises.
BioShock does have DLC. 3 extra side quests, based around the Little Sisters (i'll come to them later), you have to fight various enemies, or find weapons to get the Little Sister to safety. They add a certain dimension to play that wasn't present in the full game, as it requires you to plan out what you're going to do a lot more. Planning was necessary in the full game, but very often you could get by by simply spamming the hell out of anything trying to kill you. The Challenge Rooms however need you to think, or if you're lazy, youtube them.
Now, the Little Sisters and the moral choice system present. Remember the Big Daddies? Well they were created to protect the Little Sisters. Little Sisters were kidnapped girls (much more prevalent in BioShock 2, check somethinginthesea.com) who were implanted by an ADAM slug. ADAM was something the scientists found, which allowed them to make plasmids, which rather imaginitvely run on EVE. Follow? When you kill a Big Daddy, you have the option to kill the Sister and get 160 ADAM, or rid her of the slug and get 80, but leaving her still alive. Now its up to you how you do it, but the moral choice system here only affects the end, and only has three outcomes (although 2 are basically the same). It's not exactly wonderful, although it's supposedly improved in the sequel (which to the best of my knowledge, my copy of which is yet to be sent out), so i'll wait to see how they take that.
To sum up, while BioShock never made the best game of the last decade, it fully deserves its place in the top 5, and I strongly implore you to go and buy it now if you haven't already, and prepare to be sucked into a world that wouldn't let you leave if it had its way.
Things I Have an Opinion On #8
Originally posted on 7/2/10
Euro 2012 Qualifying Draw
The following is a group by group rundown of how I think it'll go and how each country will fare
GROUP A: Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Belgium, Austria, Turkey, Germany
1. Germany
2. Turkey
3. Belgium
4. Austria
5. Kazakhstan
6. Azerbaijan
Walk in the park for Germany, no really big countries as Turkey aren't what they used to be, although Belgium's defence might have got its ideas together by this point and pose some problems. Places 5 and 6 will be occupied by the -ans, although they could be potential banana skins away from home.
GROUP B: Andorra, Armenia, Macedonia, Republic of Ireland, Slovakia, Russia
1. Republic of Ireland
2. Russia
3. Slovakia
4. Macedonia
5. Armenia
6. Andorra.
Their strong showing in the World Cup qualifiers proved that the Irish can hold their own against the big teams. Russia's recent strong performances will probably tail off with Hiddink having left, but they should still hold off Slovakia. The other three countries will pose tough away trips, but shouldn't cause too many problems
GROUP C: Faroe Islands, Estonia, Slovenia, Northern Ireland, Serbia, Italy
1. Serbia
2. Italy
3. Northern Ireland
4. Slovenia
5. Estonia
6. Faroe Islands
A strong World Cup qualification should boost the Serbs before this campaign, that and I don't rate Italy all that highly. Both countries should hold off Kyle Lafferty though, so I can't see the top part of Ireland getting through. The fewer points the Faroes get, the better
GROUP D: Luxembourg, Albania, Belarus, Bosnia, Romania, France
1. Romania
2. France
3. Bosnia
4. Belarus
5. Albania
6. Luxembourg
The outcome of this group is dependant on a few things. Namely, if Adrian Mutu can stop ruining his nose long enough to play a game, and what happens with France's coaching after the World Cup. Domenech is not the man to manage the egos of the national team, so someone will have to get a boot up their arse for France to do well. Bosnia could surprise, depending on how they get on with recalling the players who quit following corruption allegations (Sasa Papac among them).
GROUP E: San Marino, Moldova, Hungary, Finland, Sweden, Netherlands
1. Netherlands
2. Sweden
3. Finland
4. Hungary
5. Moldova
6. San Marino
What is it with Holland and easy draws? It'll be ten goals both times against San Marino, who'll be happy if they score a goal. Sweden will always remain the perennial runners-up, and there's no-one else in the group who can challenge for the lead barring some big luck.
GROUP F: Malta, Georgia, Latvia, Israel, Greece, Croatia
1. Croatia
2. Greece
3. Georgia
4. Israel
5. Latvia
6. Malta
Probably the weakest overall group, but one that should throw up few surprises. Croatia and Greece will walk it.
GROUP G: Montenegro, Wales, Bulgaria, Switzerland, England
1. England
2. Bulgaria
3. Wales
4. Switzerland
5. Montenegro
Fabio couldn't have hand-picked a better group. England will walk it, Bulgaria and Wales will battle for 2nd, with Switzerland and Montengro propping up the rest.
GROUP H: Iceland, Cyprus, Norway, Denmark, Portugal
1. Norway
2. Portugal
3. Denmark
4. Iceland
5. Cyprus
CristianoRonaldoLand will not win the group, the trips to just about everywhere in Scandanavia will make them lose too many points, and they'll barely fight off Denmark for second. Cyprus will look to not get embarassed too much, maybe providing a few frights.
GROUP I: Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Scotland, Czech Republic, Spain
1. Spain
2. Scotland
3. Czech Republic
4. Lithuania
5. Liechtenstein
Well it's time to be overly optimistic again. Topping Spain is a no-no, so it'll need to be Fortress Hampden and reslient away form that gets Scotland anywhere. Lithuania could prove tricky, but the Czech Rep aren't what they used to be, so i'd hope we don't lose to them. Let's get Craig Levein a good start in his qualifying campaign by getting all the points he can from the home games, and if we can surprise Spain like the last time we played them, then magic.
Euro 2012 Qualifying Draw
The following is a group by group rundown of how I think it'll go and how each country will fare
GROUP A: Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Belgium, Austria, Turkey, Germany
1. Germany
2. Turkey
3. Belgium
4. Austria
5. Kazakhstan
6. Azerbaijan
Walk in the park for Germany, no really big countries as Turkey aren't what they used to be, although Belgium's defence might have got its ideas together by this point and pose some problems. Places 5 and 6 will be occupied by the -ans, although they could be potential banana skins away from home.
GROUP B: Andorra, Armenia, Macedonia, Republic of Ireland, Slovakia, Russia
1. Republic of Ireland
2. Russia
3. Slovakia
4. Macedonia
5. Armenia
6. Andorra.
Their strong showing in the World Cup qualifiers proved that the Irish can hold their own against the big teams. Russia's recent strong performances will probably tail off with Hiddink having left, but they should still hold off Slovakia. The other three countries will pose tough away trips, but shouldn't cause too many problems
GROUP C: Faroe Islands, Estonia, Slovenia, Northern Ireland, Serbia, Italy
1. Serbia
2. Italy
3. Northern Ireland
4. Slovenia
5. Estonia
6. Faroe Islands
A strong World Cup qualification should boost the Serbs before this campaign, that and I don't rate Italy all that highly. Both countries should hold off Kyle Lafferty though, so I can't see the top part of Ireland getting through. The fewer points the Faroes get, the better
GROUP D: Luxembourg, Albania, Belarus, Bosnia, Romania, France
1. Romania
2. France
3. Bosnia
4. Belarus
5. Albania
6. Luxembourg
The outcome of this group is dependant on a few things. Namely, if Adrian Mutu can stop ruining his nose long enough to play a game, and what happens with France's coaching after the World Cup. Domenech is not the man to manage the egos of the national team, so someone will have to get a boot up their arse for France to do well. Bosnia could surprise, depending on how they get on with recalling the players who quit following corruption allegations (Sasa Papac among them).
GROUP E: San Marino, Moldova, Hungary, Finland, Sweden, Netherlands
1. Netherlands
2. Sweden
3. Finland
4. Hungary
5. Moldova
6. San Marino
What is it with Holland and easy draws? It'll be ten goals both times against San Marino, who'll be happy if they score a goal. Sweden will always remain the perennial runners-up, and there's no-one else in the group who can challenge for the lead barring some big luck.
GROUP F: Malta, Georgia, Latvia, Israel, Greece, Croatia
1. Croatia
2. Greece
3. Georgia
4. Israel
5. Latvia
6. Malta
Probably the weakest overall group, but one that should throw up few surprises. Croatia and Greece will walk it.
GROUP G: Montenegro, Wales, Bulgaria, Switzerland, England
1. England
2. Bulgaria
3. Wales
4. Switzerland
5. Montenegro
Fabio couldn't have hand-picked a better group. England will walk it, Bulgaria and Wales will battle for 2nd, with Switzerland and Montengro propping up the rest.
GROUP H: Iceland, Cyprus, Norway, Denmark, Portugal
1. Norway
2. Portugal
3. Denmark
4. Iceland
5. Cyprus
CristianoRonaldoLand will not win the group, the trips to just about everywhere in Scandanavia will make them lose too many points, and they'll barely fight off Denmark for second. Cyprus will look to not get embarassed too much, maybe providing a few frights.
GROUP I: Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Scotland, Czech Republic, Spain
1. Spain
2. Scotland
3. Czech Republic
4. Lithuania
5. Liechtenstein
Well it's time to be overly optimistic again. Topping Spain is a no-no, so it'll need to be Fortress Hampden and reslient away form that gets Scotland anywhere. Lithuania could prove tricky, but the Czech Rep aren't what they used to be, so i'd hope we don't lose to them. Let's get Craig Levein a good start in his qualifying campaign by getting all the points he can from the home games, and if we can surprise Spain like the last time we played them, then magic.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)