More views of - or before - Cambridge Film Festival 2012
(Click here to go directly to the Festival web-site)
11 May
Work in progress… - beware of a bumpy landing !
I have just read a review of Troyka’s debut album in 2009, which maybe I can import into this blog – it appears on the BBC web-site, and was written by Martin Longley.
If I can, I hope to draw on it to make some comments about the panel discussion (plus Q&A) that took place under the title ‘Music journalism in the 21st century’. It comprised four male contributors, amongst them the jazz critic of The Times (broadcaster Alyn Shipton (@AlynShipton), who also chaired the session), The Financial Times*, and the deputy editor of Jazzwise.
The fourth (who had written for The Birmingham Post) was the only one prominently introduced as blogging (and, yet, who talked fairly little about his blog, other than the freedom that it gave him to write about what he wanted, when not earning a living) :
All wanted to peddle a message of ‘If it was good enough for me…’ and ‘I had to work my way up’, littered with boasts of their writing and editorial skills and like kudos. In a way, of course, the typical defensive speech of those occupying posts that they don’t intend – wish, maybe ? – to vacate : Don’t bother to climb the greasy pole – if you do, I’m the resident bear at the top, so mind your neck !
Therefore predictable, and predictable that they would ‘take a pop at’ those whose blog postings extend beyond, as the case might be, the 375-, 500- or 1,000-word limits to which they have to work, or whose content (they believe = opinion ?) is not a review, but opinion.
It’s as if they (wildly ?) assume that the bloggers couldn’t do what they do – and write a 500-word review to deadline – to save their lives, just because the bloggers choose to do something else, for whatever reason – and, if people read what bloggers right instead, who is to say that they are wrong (except that it might endanger further the position of those paid to pen tight, tidy, and possibly tired traditional accounts of gigs or releases).
So much for the chaff. The grains were the usual ‘tips of the trade’ of Someone I’d once met said… or They asked me if I’d stand in when X was sick, and I’m still there 300 years later, the positive face of the negative slant previously given :
They approached me because they knew me, they only knew me because I do this sort of thing, and I only survive doing this sort of thing because I’m brilliant, which they wisely recognized.
I laugh, but it’s just like Hollywood stars (whether in their own eyes or not) who tell an audience :
I met Tom Hanks two years before, and then we were out of contact, but he rang me out of the blue when I’d just finished in The Cherry Orchard off Broadway and said he wanted me for the part of Scrooge
[Hanks did not happen to mention that he had not got Mel Gibson or Hugh Grant to take the part, or that Hanks’ agent had suggested approaching The Star because (if it genuinely was Hanks’ ‘shout’), at least, of industry-driven Factors a, b and c - more likely, The Star knew all of this, and this is the agreed concoction for the PR world that is ‘celebrity’ interview…]
Continued… (not in this posting, maybe in order not to offend the critics’ tender sensibilities !)
End-notes
* Or was it The Sunday Times ? (I didn’t take notes, and I forget which.)
If you want to Tweet, Tweet away here
Saturday 11 May 2013
Friday 10 May 2013
Mind what's going on ?
More views of - or before - Cambridge Film Festival 2012
(Click here to go directly to the Festival web-site)
10 May
Not sure what was going on there, as it was the Adebowale report on the Met and mental-health patients...
If you want to Tweet, Tweet away here
(Click here to go directly to the Festival web-site)
10 May
And where is this media launch, @paulfarmermind, and of exactly what... ?
— THE AGENT APSLEY (@THEAGENTAPSLEY) May 10, 2013
Oh, I see... I was misled by the word 'policing' in that Tweet, @paulfarmermind, which gave me hope that their role was being examined.
— THE AGENT APSLEY (@THEAGENTAPSLEY) May 10, 2013
Not sure what was going on there, as it was the Adebowale report on the Met and mental-health patients...
If you want to Tweet, Tweet away here
Thursday 9 May 2013
Stephen Fry on depression
More views of - or before - Cambridge Film Festival 2012
(Click here to go directly to the Festival web-site)
10 May
It all started with this Tweet :
It sparked off :
And :
And - am I being quite reasonable ? - then :
Perhaps because I have lately disputed the common claim that mental ill-health isn't like a broken leg, which people can see - in my posting Mental ill-health is exactly like a broken leg !
Any thoughts, anyone ? Stephen Fry has (apparently)...
@theagentapsley Well I was speaking for/patronising myself actually.
Well, after Tony and Control, there's always that get-out, @stephenfry...
More here now...
If you want to Tweet, Tweet away here
(Click here to go directly to the Festival web-site)
10 May
It all started with this Tweet :
Beautifully put by @stephenfry about #depression - please RT if you agree that this is amazing: twitter.com/otrbristol/sta… #mentalhealth
— Off The Record (@otrbristol) May 8, 2013
It sparked off :
@theagentapsley Do you think it’s something that can be spotted by physical signs?
— Off The Record (@otrbristol) May 8, 2013
@theagentapsley Agree with that - there are some tell-tale signs when you look into somebody’s eyes.
— Off The Record (@otrbristol) May 9, 2013
And :
@otrbristol @theagentapsley I think people who have experienced it themselves are much more likely to pick up on signs others would miss..
— Fiona Malpass (@FionaMalpass) May 9, 2013
@theagentapsley @otrbristol I don't think absolutely anyone can learn, but certainly a lot of others could with enough training and practice
— Fiona Malpass (@FionaMalpass) May 9, 2013
And - am I being quite reasonable ? - then :
Maybe I'm perverse, @otrbristol, but I don't want a friend called to do what @stephenfry says is 'kind, noble and good' - I'd feel insulted.
— THE AGENT APSLEY (@THEAGENTAPSLEY) May 10, 2013
Why insulted, @otrbristol ? As someone who'd dropped a crutch would, if picking it up weren't just plain decency, not blessed by @stephenfry
— THE AGENT APSLEY (@THEAGENTAPSLEY) May 10, 2013
Perhaps because I have lately disputed the common claim that mental ill-health isn't like a broken leg, which people can see - in my posting Mental ill-health is exactly like a broken leg !
Any thoughts, anyone ? Stephen Fry has (apparently)...
@theagentapsley Well I was speaking for/patronising myself actually.
— Stephen Fry (@stephenfry) May 10, 2013
Well, after Tony and Control, there's always that get-out, @stephenfry...
— THE AGENT APSLEY (@THEAGENTAPSLEY) May 10, 2013
Sorry, @stephenfry, but this notion that depression is as the weather and - one supposes - we just live with it 'till it changeth' is tosh !
— THE AGENT APSLEY (@THEAGENTAPSLEY) May 11, 2013
More here now...
If you want to Tweet, Tweet away here
Report from Cheltenham Jazz Festival - Claire Martin
More views of - or before - Cambridge Film Festival 2012
(Click here to go directly to the Festival web-site)
9 May
I never tire of Claire Martin's (@CMartinJazz's) gigs : the quality is consistently very high, the energy and love of jazz evident (along with appreciation of her fellow musicians, applause for whose solos she always encourages), and Claire is a very worthy holder of an OBE for services to this music, not least as a regular broadcaster on Radio 3's (@BBCRadio3's) Jazz Line-Up.
I was going to say that Gareth Williams is her unfailing pianist, forgetting for a moment that she did some duo performances with the much-loved and recently departed Sir Richard Rodney Bennett, one of which I caught at Concerts at King's in Cambridge. Gareth was, however, in her quartet, along with another regular, Laurence Cottle (on electric bass), and Mark Skelton (until now, I hadn't managed to find his surname, or identify him via Google®).
Perversely, when there is something that I love, I can be a bit D. H. Lawrence and find myself looking and hearing with an unconverted companion's eyes and ears, but there was absolutely nothing to disappoint, and, unlike what I felt about a jazz Clare whose gig I left after the first set, nothing stagey or false in Claire Martin. When she referred to Sir Richard, I could sense that she was welling up, and it was poignant to be reminded that he had died on Christmas Eve, and to learn how strange it felt that the CD of Irving Berlin that they had recorded was just about to come out.
It must be a good few years ago that I was joshing around with Claire and Gareth after they played at Anglia Ruskin University's Mumford Theatre (something about my being the only person with a pen when others, too, wanted a signed CD, and I also wanted to get Gareth to buy the CD of his that I had bought), and I know that how she is on stage is how she is - as some would say, no front.
So this was a lovely set from Claire, and no matter that I knew much of the content as the repertoire from her long list of CDs on the Linn label - not utterly in the same way that I can listen without tiring to Bach's great Mass in B Minor (BWV 232) or the great Handel arias, but it did not hurt to have heard Claire sing 'Love is a necessary evil' or 'Cheek to cheek' (her tribute to Sir Richard) before, or to learn that a song or two was by James Van Heusen*.
With someone who loves the songs that she sings in the way that one knows that Claire does (one feels it tangibly), and who can swing them this way or that as fits the occasion, a gig is a chance to meet old friends, be it the amazing finger-quickness of Gareth or of her other unfailing choices of collaborators, or the songs themselves, which, as she picks them as well, are full of goodness and freshness.
I see that Claire is doing a tour with a quartet of cellos, the Montpellier Quartet from Brighton, and I am just sad that I cannot be back in time to catch that particular date near me...
End-notes
* I recall now that, not for the first time, Claire mentioned the singing of Julie London - must have a look at the content of the link that I've just put there...
If you want to Tweet, Tweet away here
(Click here to go directly to the Festival web-site)
9 May
I never tire of Claire Martin's (@CMartinJazz's) gigs : the quality is consistently very high, the energy and love of jazz evident (along with appreciation of her fellow musicians, applause for whose solos she always encourages), and Claire is a very worthy holder of an OBE for services to this music, not least as a regular broadcaster on Radio 3's (@BBCRadio3's) Jazz Line-Up.
I was going to say that Gareth Williams is her unfailing pianist, forgetting for a moment that she did some duo performances with the much-loved and recently departed Sir Richard Rodney Bennett, one of which I caught at Concerts at King's in Cambridge. Gareth was, however, in her quartet, along with another regular, Laurence Cottle (on electric bass), and Mark Skelton (until now, I hadn't managed to find his surname, or identify him via Google®).
A great set from @clairemartinjazz at #cheltjazzfest - a songful, joyful, heartfelt, playful show all with Messrs Williams, Cottle & Skelton
— THE AGENT APSLEY (@THEAGENTAPSLEY) May 5, 2013
Perversely, when there is something that I love, I can be a bit D. H. Lawrence and find myself looking and hearing with an unconverted companion's eyes and ears, but there was absolutely nothing to disappoint, and, unlike what I felt about a jazz Clare whose gig I left after the first set, nothing stagey or false in Claire Martin. When she referred to Sir Richard, I could sense that she was welling up, and it was poignant to be reminded that he had died on Christmas Eve, and to learn how strange it felt that the CD of Irving Berlin that they had recorded was just about to come out.
It must be a good few years ago that I was joshing around with Claire and Gareth after they played at Anglia Ruskin University's Mumford Theatre (something about my being the only person with a pen when others, too, wanted a signed CD, and I also wanted to get Gareth to buy the CD of his that I had bought), and I know that how she is on stage is how she is - as some would say, no front.
So this was a lovely set from Claire, and no matter that I knew much of the content as the repertoire from her long list of CDs on the Linn label - not utterly in the same way that I can listen without tiring to Bach's great Mass in B Minor (BWV 232) or the great Handel arias, but it did not hurt to have heard Claire sing 'Love is a necessary evil' or 'Cheek to cheek' (her tribute to Sir Richard) before, or to learn that a song or two was by James Van Heusen*.
With someone who loves the songs that she sings in the way that one knows that Claire does (one feels it tangibly), and who can swing them this way or that as fits the occasion, a gig is a chance to meet old friends, be it the amazing finger-quickness of Gareth or of her other unfailing choices of collaborators, or the songs themselves, which, as she picks them as well, are full of goodness and freshness.
I see that Claire is doing a tour with a quartet of cellos, the Montpellier Quartet from Brighton, and I am just sad that I cannot be back in time to catch that particular date near me...
End-notes
* I recall now that, not for the first time, Claire mentioned the singing of Julie London - must have a look at the content of the link that I've just put there...
If you want to Tweet, Tweet away here
Wednesday 8 May 2013
Anything you can do...
More views of - or before - Cambridge Film Festival 2012
(Click here to go directly to the Festival web-site)
8 May
In some places, like The Barbican, they have those stylized figures that tell you where you need to be - if you are lucky, and manage to decipher the trail of almost Belisha-like beacons that bear them.
In other places, foreign languages, other figures (faces in Café Rouge, as I recall), and sometimes still 'Ladies' and 'Gentlemen'. For no very obvious reason, elsewhere it is the claim that the toilet itself is 'male' or 'female'.
All very well in itself, but this labelling of segregated facilities (plus there are disabled* ones, which tend not to differentiate as to which sex may use them) makes one wonder whether labelling a toy as for boys means very much - after all, we will surely all have experience of desperation at a huge queue having women entering 'the male toilet', and no one is yet baulking at clothes being in sections for 'ladies' fashions' or 'gents' clothing'.
What gain, then, in not telling a three-year-old girl that she should simply ignore societal notions, if she wants to play with something whose marketing targets it at boys ? Will she not already have learnt to face this world of inequality, where the make-up and perfume department of Boots and of department stores makes it abundantly clear that these products are for her sex ? - can a boy justly infer that, although there are now products that are called male perfumes, essentially his choice is limited to a tiny range of 'aftershaves' ?
Some would have us believe that not labelling, say, a bead art set as 'for girls' would not only have the boys who don't already ignore such tosh (and play with what they want) flocking to do likewise, and they would then go on to do the jobs thought of as feminine, and vice versa : Read the debate on the blog of someone claiming to be Sam Candour, and see what you think...
End-notes
* 'Disabled parking', to me, always sounds like somewhere that would be a parking space, but it has been shut off, i.e. the adjective seems to denote the status of the parking itself (versus 'enabled').
If you want to Tweet, Tweet away here
(Click here to go directly to the Festival web-site)
8 May
In some places, like The Barbican, they have those stylized figures that tell you where you need to be - if you are lucky, and manage to decipher the trail of almost Belisha-like beacons that bear them.
In other places, foreign languages, other figures (faces in Café Rouge, as I recall), and sometimes still 'Ladies' and 'Gentlemen'. For no very obvious reason, elsewhere it is the claim that the toilet itself is 'male' or 'female'.
All very well in itself, but this labelling of segregated facilities (plus there are disabled* ones, which tend not to differentiate as to which sex may use them) makes one wonder whether labelling a toy as for boys means very much - after all, we will surely all have experience of desperation at a huge queue having women entering 'the male toilet', and no one is yet baulking at clothes being in sections for 'ladies' fashions' or 'gents' clothing'.
What gain, then, in not telling a three-year-old girl that she should simply ignore societal notions, if she wants to play with something whose marketing targets it at boys ? Will she not already have learnt to face this world of inequality, where the make-up and perfume department of Boots and of department stores makes it abundantly clear that these products are for her sex ? - can a boy justly infer that, although there are now products that are called male perfumes, essentially his choice is limited to a tiny range of 'aftershaves' ?
Some would have us believe that not labelling, say, a bead art set as 'for girls' would not only have the boys who don't already ignore such tosh (and play with what they want) flocking to do likewise, and they would then go on to do the jobs thought of as feminine, and vice versa : Read the debate on the blog of someone claiming to be Sam Candour, and see what you think...
End-notes
* 'Disabled parking', to me, always sounds like somewhere that would be a parking space, but it has been shut off, i.e. the adjective seems to denote the status of the parking itself (versus 'enabled').
If you want to Tweet, Tweet away here
Tuesday 7 May 2013
A word about legacies, cultural, scientific or otherwise
More views of - or before - Cambridge Film Festival 2012
(Click here to go directly to the Festival web-site)
7 May (revised, 2 October 2020)
A legacy, for all that people like to use the word when someone famous dies, just means a type of gift – specifically, a gift made on death, i.e. by will, and, unlike a devise (q.v.), typically money (if not an item of personal property).
To that extent, it is right to think of a legacy as a gift that relates to a person’s death, but it would only, say, be a true legacy if Richard Attenborough died, and he had decided to leave millions to fund the future of The Royal Court (a general legacy), or some valuable artwork, which it hangs (or stands) in its foyer (a specific legacy (or specific bequest)).
As it is, with the death of Ray Harryhausen, we are being urged to remember – if we ever knew that he had anything to do with it – his work on Star Wars, for example, but calling that a legacy cannot be even a figurative way of talking about what he did in his life :
1. Self-evidently, Harryhausen made that contribution decades ago,
2. Equally self-evidently, people built on it in the following months and years, and
3. Harryhausen's death did not make a gift of this and all the other things that he did for cinema, but, rather, it is a tribute or a memorial to him for people to be made aware of them
And why else do I question talking about a legacy per se ? Well, unlike a person who is free to refuse to accept a legacy or to give it to someone else, the contribution made by this director is more or less in the past – we can restore his or her films and hold retrospectives to re-evaluate them, but we can even do so when that person is alive (e.g. Tony Garnett at the @BFI), without waiting for death.
That embodies another reason that X’s legacy is the wrong way to think about it. If X leaves a gift, X specifies what the gift is, for it to go to A, and what A receives is – bad will-drafting apart – what X intended. So-called legacies in cultural, scientific, artistic worlds aren’t like that, because A. A. Milne and Tove Jansson did not choose to be remembered for their work for children, and that is more like treasuring some contributions and forgetting others.
In summary, Harryhausen probably did not try to choose what will be remembered, and film buffs urging this or that on us is more like a bossy treasuring, a curatorship of his life and (perceived) achievements, rather than a legacy.
If you want to Tweet, Tweet away here
(Click here to go directly to the Festival web-site)
7 May (revised, 2 October 2020)
A legacy, for all that people like to use the word when someone famous dies, just means a type of gift – specifically, a gift made on death, i.e. by will, and, unlike a devise (q.v.), typically money (if not an item of personal property).
To that extent, it is right to think of a legacy as a gift that relates to a person’s death, but it would only, say, be a true legacy if Richard Attenborough died, and he had decided to leave millions to fund the future of The Royal Court (a general legacy), or some valuable artwork, which it hangs (or stands) in its foyer (a specific legacy (or specific bequest)).
As it is, with the death of Ray Harryhausen, we are being urged to remember – if we ever knew that he had anything to do with it – his work on Star Wars, for example, but calling that a legacy cannot be even a figurative way of talking about what he did in his life :
1. Self-evidently, Harryhausen made that contribution decades ago,
2. Equally self-evidently, people built on it in the following months and years, and
3. Harryhausen's death did not make a gift of this and all the other things that he did for cinema, but, rather, it is a tribute or a memorial to him for people to be made aware of them
And why else do I question talking about a legacy per se ? Well, unlike a person who is free to refuse to accept a legacy or to give it to someone else, the contribution made by this director is more or less in the past – we can restore his or her films and hold retrospectives to re-evaluate them, but we can even do so when that person is alive (e.g. Tony Garnett at the @BFI), without waiting for death.
That embodies another reason that X’s legacy is the wrong way to think about it. If X leaves a gift, X specifies what the gift is, for it to go to A, and what A receives is – bad will-drafting apart – what X intended. So-called legacies in cultural, scientific, artistic worlds aren’t like that, because A. A. Milne and Tove Jansson did not choose to be remembered for their work for children, and that is more like treasuring some contributions and forgetting others.
In summary, Harryhausen probably did not try to choose what will be remembered, and film buffs urging this or that on us is more like a bossy treasuring, a curatorship of his life and (perceived) achievements, rather than a legacy.
Has all that 'excitement' about the proper way to note #Thatcher's passing itself just passed off - as if it had been nothing ?
— THE AGENT APSLEY (@THEAGENTAPSLEY) May 7, 2013
If you want to Tweet, Tweet away here
Report from Cheltenham Jazz Festival - quintets contrasted
More views of - or before - Cambridge Film Festival 2012
(Click here to go directly to the Festival web-site)
7 May
Two quintets comprising trumpet, tenor saxophone, piano, bass and drums, those of Dave Douglas (trumpet) and Ravi Coltrane (sax), but there the similarities ended, and not because of the lead instrument.
Douglas had a special guest in the form of singer Heather Masse. Opinion was divided as people left at the end whether she even had ‘a jazz voice’, despite being his ‘favourite singer’.
The note that Masse introduced came after an edgy opener that had been made so by exploiting the queasiness of the semi-tone, followed by another that drew further gravitas from discord between wind and reed. It did not seem a good – because not jazz – note, exposing both her rather ‘straight’ delivery and the rather limited quality of the arrangements (the defects did not seem likely to be unrelated).
From a sentimental setting of Sibelius' hymn Be still (touching because the favourite of Douglas’ mother, whom one imagined recently deceased) things continued in this rather dull vein with a version of ‘Barbara Allen’ of all things.
It became clear that Douglas was 'dishing up' one after another of these not because he thought that people wanted to hear, but because he likes Masse and he could. It was unclear why, because even his trumpet-playing was utterly thrown into relief by that of Ralph Alessi in Coltrane’s quintet.
The dexterity of Alessi’s runs was, of course, effortless, and versatility and sonority were the hallmarks of his playing, not least when matching his instrument to that of Coltrane. By contrast, Coltrane’s sax did not give one a tingle down the spine, but it was assured, fluent and graceful (with Coltrane a little unusually taking the bell not to his right, but bending to accommodate it between his legs).
Coltrane’s other personnel were steady and even, with Luis Perdomo on piano, dazzling and perhaps a bit too expansive with the odd solo. However, despite Drew Gress’ prowess on bass, I had been far more impressed by the virtuosity of Linda Oh in Douglas’ quintet, who genuinely seemed to respond to what he was doing and to his choice of material.
Perhaps I have to be grateful to those things for inspiring what much of the audience also clearly admired in her playing, but I found that following her line was only what made what I was hearing palatable. In Coltrane’s quartet, in comparison, I was really keen to hear what Alessi and he were playing, and his bassist was not my anchor for keeping a hold on the music.
If you want to Tweet, Tweet away here
(Click here to go directly to the Festival web-site)
7 May
Two quintets comprising trumpet, tenor saxophone, piano, bass and drums, those of Dave Douglas (trumpet) and Ravi Coltrane (sax), but there the similarities ended, and not because of the lead instrument.
Douglas had a special guest in the form of singer Heather Masse. Opinion was divided as people left at the end whether she even had ‘a jazz voice’, despite being his ‘favourite singer’.
The note that Masse introduced came after an edgy opener that had been made so by exploiting the queasiness of the semi-tone, followed by another that drew further gravitas from discord between wind and reed. It did not seem a good – because not jazz – note, exposing both her rather ‘straight’ delivery and the rather limited quality of the arrangements (the defects did not seem likely to be unrelated).
From a sentimental setting of Sibelius' hymn Be still (touching because the favourite of Douglas’ mother, whom one imagined recently deceased) things continued in this rather dull vein with a version of ‘Barbara Allen’ of all things.
It became clear that Douglas was 'dishing up' one after another of these not because he thought that people wanted to hear, but because he likes Masse and he could. It was unclear why, because even his trumpet-playing was utterly thrown into relief by that of Ralph Alessi in Coltrane’s quintet.
The dexterity of Alessi’s runs was, of course, effortless, and versatility and sonority were the hallmarks of his playing, not least when matching his instrument to that of Coltrane. By contrast, Coltrane’s sax did not give one a tingle down the spine, but it was assured, fluent and graceful (with Coltrane a little unusually taking the bell not to his right, but bending to accommodate it between his legs).
Coltrane’s other personnel were steady and even, with Luis Perdomo on piano, dazzling and perhaps a bit too expansive with the odd solo. However, despite Drew Gress’ prowess on bass, I had been far more impressed by the virtuosity of Linda Oh in Douglas’ quintet, who genuinely seemed to respond to what he was doing and to his choice of material.
Perhaps I have to be grateful to those things for inspiring what much of the audience also clearly admired in her playing, but I found that following her line was only what made what I was hearing palatable. In Coltrane’s quartet, in comparison, I was really keen to hear what Alessi and he were playing, and his bassist was not my anchor for keeping a hold on the music.
If you want to Tweet, Tweet away here
Saturday 4 May 2013
Report from Cheltenham Jazz Festival – The Aristocats
A response to seeing The Aristocats (1970) - a few years on...
More views of - or before - Cambridge Film Festival 2012
(Click here to go directly to the Festival web-site)
4 May
A response to seeing The Aristocats (1970) - a few years on...
It must have been in around 1968* that I was taken by my parents, almost certainly with my sister, to see The Aristocats. I have just watched it again, with no acquaintance in between, in the Cinema Tent at Cheltenham Jazz Festival – and, yes, I had forgotten that jam-session, when the alley-cat musicians, led by Scat Cat, have let themselves into Thomas O’Malley’s pad, and so, despite the jazzy tone to some of the earlier musical numbers, I had begun not to figure why this was being shown at a jazz festival.
As it is, it is a great little film, and, although animation techniques are considerably different now for much of what is produced (so there would not necessarily have been the need to make scenes such as that jam-session at the expense of the budget for such clear and focused images throughout the film), it does not feel dated – and, yes, it was Walt Disney. No doubt it has been restored, but, as this is not a film festival, I am unsure whether I need to look in the festival handout that I picked up for more details.
What was probably lost on me as a boy is that the cats need not be cats and that this is not really a film about cats (or cats and humans) at all…
23 May - Now continued, with some thoughts penned in a station waiting-room earlier
The cats are, of course, cats in the swinging, jazz sense, and there is the fable of the much-loved and attractive Duchess (Eva Gabor's voice) being Lady to Thomas’ Tramp** (Phil Harris' voice), by putting aside her wisdom and prejudice about ‘alley-cats’ after they have played and bantered together, and he has – after his fanciful promises – assumed care for her and her kittens.
Duchess' home-life, the epitome of the idea of self-improvement through music and the other arts, resembles that of a grande dame, wanting her children to acquire taste and poise, and not hiss and scratch, as Berlioz wishes to do with his sister. Of course, it is, on another level, charming fantasy that a kitten can play the piano by bounding back and forth on the keys, but it is there for the contrast between the sedate family sing-song and the raucously lively – and beautifully put-together – jam-session.
Duchess, being the best kind of Duchess, appreciates the musicianship and sees all that is good in Thomas and his friends Scat Cat and the others (and, maybe, we wonder what her past was, and who was father to her kittens for her to suppose so badly of the alley-cats) : this is, after all, not plumbing the depths of Shakespearean characterization, but good fun, but with a bit of a message about not taking Edgar - or any of the others - at face-value.
(In fact, the only ones who can be taken in those terms are Abigail and Amelia, the waddling, unflappable British geese, and, once they have served their purpose of route-marching the party to Paris to rescue their sozzled uncle, they are given no further part.)
The Old Lady is given a portrayal consistent with her remaining in the background, worrying about what has happened, and generally being benign, along with her amiable lawyer-friend (who seems to have the geniality of the goose-uncle to a T). As already mentioned, the care and attention to high-quality imagery is in the jazz scene, whereas she is sketchily drawn, roaming the mansion, so that we are distanced from her grief, and can rest it instead in Roquefort, the mouse, whose quivering voice is so brilliantly done by Sterling Holloway.
The tussle at the end is about Edgar fighting for what he wants, and the animals showing that, by working together, they can overpower and defeat him. A wholesome account of the nature of good and evil, which leaves little room, except at a comic level, to understand Edgar’s desire not to have his life dominated after his mistress’ death by her menagerie – again, this is not Corneille, and, beyond understanding his motivation, we are not invited to enter into such things.
At heart, setting aside the misery and self-destructiveness in the genius of many a twentieth-century jazz musician, the wish to be ‘in’ and play a horn so that people want to listen :
Ev'rybody wants to be a cat,
Because a cat is where it’s at
End-notes
* Actual date 1970.
** Another Disney, from 1955.
If you want to Tweet, Tweet away here
Thursday 2 May 2013
Who's excited - about what ? ! (Or Predictions about I'm So Excited ! (2013))
Who's excited - about what ? ! (Or Predictions about I'm So Excited ! (2013) (Los amantes pasajeros))
More views of - or before - Cambridge Film Festival 2012
(Click here to go directly to the Festival web-site)
3 May
Who's excited - about what ? ! (Or Predictions about I'm So Excited ! (2013) (Los amantes pasajeros))
To judge by a still that I saw earlier, Pedro has just camped up The High Life even more and made a feature of it (in both senses)...
— THE AGENT APSLEY (@THEAGENTAPSLEY) May 2, 2013
If you don't know what The High Life is - whatever the title lyric says - that's not extraordinary...
I like the way that, in his review, Empire's critic, David Hughes, has alluded to the running joke in Woody Allen's much misunderstood Stardust Memories (1980) :
An unshakeable tolerance for high camp and lowbrow humour may be required to fully appreciate Almodóvar's broad, bawdy comedy - even for fans of his early, funny films.
As I read the rest of Hughes' review (a tongue-twister in his office, no doubt), I found myself also reminded of that epsiode of - what else ! - Father Ted...
Is Broken Embraces a meta-film ? : It seems - as well as the film within it - deliberately badly edited : the DVD extras are the best bits !
— THE AGENT APSLEY (@THEAGENTAPSLEY) May 2, 2013
Update
As at 9 May, Rotten Tomatoes says that 34% of audiences, and 60% of critics, liked the film*...
End-notes
* For comparison, the equivalent percentages for Broken Embraces (2009) are 74% and 81%.
If you want to Tweet, Tweet away here
Wednesday 1 May 2013
The Answer to Everything ? (#ATEOpera)
More views of - or before - Cambridge Film Festival 2012
(Click here to go directly to the Festival web-site)
1 May
On Thursday last week, I went to the British Film Institute (@BFI) with the intention of watching a matinee and redeeming a complimentary ticket (issued because of the out-of-synch screening of Underground) : because of some conference, there was no matinee, and I couldn’t find the ticket, but none of that turned out to matter :
I bought a ticket instead to see Streetwise Opera’s (@streetwiseopera’s) production, with sections on film, at some venue, not necessarily NFT3, where we were all delegates together in some (seemingly) fictional conference, although many a one attempted, in character, to do such things as selling me a tie (I pointed out that I had one in my pocket, and that a T-shirt has no collar anyway) or asking me how I felt about the event.
To camera, when invited to say something inspirational, I came up with ‘Brick is beautiful’. It turns out that it would – if anyone had much been paying attention – have been seen on the screen of NFT3. Generating nonsense to order, as this blog as a whole is likely to evidence, doesn’t entail much…
In a way, I wish that I had bantered more with the Streetwise crew, rather than taking my seat, but, once in my seat, it seemed churlish to make the row rise again (to let me out) and, yet again, for my re-entry – the other end of my row was blocked off by the mixing-desk. (It seemed that no one else decided to join in with the ‘official’ delegates at the front, with their suits, briefcases, ability to sing.)
As a homage to Marcel (although spelt differently), I had chosen a name-badge with the identity of Pierre Duchamps, an Alternative Energy Intern. I hoped that something would hang on this, rather than it from the lanyard, so it was a disappointment that it might as well have said George Osborne, Financial Meddler. (No big deal, but there could have been a draw from those badges known to have been issued, and a game of forfeits...)
Ignoring the name, when one of the cast introduced himself by way of an extended arm from two rows forward, I claimed to be Peter Henderson-Smyth-Henderson-Smyth-Henderson, and he concluded that I sounded ‘quite posh’.
I hoped also that, in the style of I Fagiolini’s The Full Monteverdi my neighbour would turn out to be ‘a mole’. When I heard / saw that show (in Cambridge), one knew that, over a modest meal, one had one or more singers at one’s table, but not who he, she or they were :
A woman challenged me as one, and – fool that I am – I didn’t play my denial for all that it was worth. (Although, of course, it was self evident that a denial couldn’t mean anything, so I wasn’t believed anyway, since, as everyone will testify, I do look like a professional singer.)
No matter, as it merely meant that I could, more or less, relax in my seat without the obvious need for further participation. However, I did fail to reckon on the company song, and, at the best of times (silliness doesn’t help), I cannot co-ordinate words and any actions, not least when those words (and their music) were unknown to me minutes before !
Early during the run-through of this act of corporate worship, I gave up, and, standing inert, took much more satisfaction in seeing the cast sing and mime the whole song en masse (which, in the style of The Twelve Days of Christmas, repeated each one of the Ten Rules of Good Business), much more than coaxing my resistant abilities further could have achieved. (I have no doubt that few have my problems, and most would have taken pleasure in what, for me, was an exercise doomed to fail.)
That’s my hesitation out of the way, a strange (but usual) mix of wanting to be in a role-play, but on my terms. So, on to what this combination of filmed and live experience seemed to say. In doing so, I am influenced, after the event, by having read the programme**, which, I found, pulled together one’s appreciation of the overall narrative intent. (Such, of course, is the way – and world – of opera, whereas I am happy and used to making my own way in that of film).
Not to try to summarize what happened, save that the film interspersed with the live singing and action, the arias from Christopher Lowrey (counter-tenor) and Elizabeth Watts (soprano), interacting on screen with members of Streetwise from all over the country, were exquisite. Indeed, as I Tweeted :
I can confidently (wonder whether I should) state that @streetwiseopera's #ATEOpera had a good take on company manners, @catherinebray...
Can't stop humming (in public, and singing elsewhere) Lascia ch'io pianga after @lizwattssoprano and @streetwiseopera plus Sacconi Quartet !
The filmic aspect was in no way subservient to the role and action of these clips, but portrayed the alienation, isolation and heartfelt humanity at work in a response to the clinicality of company lore, which dictates shaking hands with the client not because one feels that one wants to, but as part of good business.
I have seen the Watts aria several times over (as my attempt to support Streetwise and download from the iTunes platform failed, after posing insurmountable problems), and it stands that repeated watching, because it is composed entirely in the idiom of cinema. I imagine the same to be true of the aria sung by Lowrey, of which my impression was that the wholly musical performance of the Vivaldi was respected in the service of the message that rapacity to invest threatens to overcome what matters, and what we should really value in this life.
Informed by the programme, I apprehend the arch that these and the other filmed sections sought to erect, but I do confess that I was lost in following how the scene from Peter Grimes, which, I now gather, led into a Streetwise commission from Orlando Gough, brought about the degeneration of the dream of Locateco Solutions : throughout, this cinematic work, the execution was brilliant, and the closing scene of rejection, liberation, and immersion in the natural world was evocative and poignant.
It was merely that the step that took us to where the façade began to crumble was not clear. Arguably, though, for those who felt the movement for the Berlin wall to collapse, or for what is shown in the powerful documentary The Miracle of Leipzig (2009) (Wir Sind das Volk) not to happen, the feelings were stronger than an exact notion of why what was tipping had become unstable.
So the filmed episodes I do not seek to fault : David Pisaro (tenor) singing Grimes in the church setting was marvellous, as was how the scene – with Britten’s skilful writing – built to his expulsion, but – rightly or wrongly – I felt that I did understand, at the time, why everything was unravelling. The programme addressed that, and this is – if a concern at all – a minor one, since I had had the time to read ahead, but chose not to.
The Streetwise singers in NFT3, interacting with the projection, gave an overall feeling that conveyed how important the voice, music, the human spirit is. All in all, a stunning experience, and a tribute to all in any way involved with it !
Post-script
After this Tweet (and following the link) :
StreetwiseOpera @StreetwiseOpera 21m
Lovely review of #ATEOpera in @spectator http://www.spectator.co.uk/arts/opera/8900001/the-point-of-life/
I commented this:
Everything that this reviewer writes about @StreetwiseOpera's The Answer to Everything is spot on : it was timely, its parody of the corporate world (and its tics) was telling and amusing, and the music was of a very high quality, not least that passage from Grimes.
And if any Minister for Culture couldn't understand or relate to it, maybe that person's in the wrong job... !
I have now followed a link to a review in The Guardian, as Tweeted by @StreetwiseOpera... The reviewer found the event dramatically 'confusing', which mirrors what I attribute (above) to not having read the synopsis.
End-notes
* I tried to explain that I was there on the strength of knowing that Elizabeth Watts (@LizWattsSoprano) was involved, whose single with Streetwise I knew (from Splatter) had just been released.
My neighour thought that I said ‘Watson’, and, her not knowing EW, it didn’t seem to help that I said that she is a soprano. I ended up mumbling something about she was probably one of many, as I was, sadly, suddenly not sure, in the guise of being a delegate, how sopranos could fit in a corporate structure…
** It had two front covers (a style of presentation that I gather to be called tête-bêche).
If you want to Tweet, Tweet away here
(Click here to go directly to the Festival web-site)
1 May
On Thursday last week, I went to the British Film Institute (@BFI) with the intention of watching a matinee and redeeming a complimentary ticket (issued because of the out-of-synch screening of Underground) : because of some conference, there was no matinee, and I couldn’t find the ticket, but none of that turned out to matter :
I bought a ticket instead to see Streetwise Opera’s (@streetwiseopera’s) production, with sections on film, at some venue, not necessarily NFT3, where we were all delegates together in some (seemingly) fictional conference, although many a one attempted, in character, to do such things as selling me a tie (I pointed out that I had one in my pocket, and that a T-shirt has no collar anyway) or asking me how I felt about the event.
To camera, when invited to say something inspirational, I came up with ‘Brick is beautiful’. It turns out that it would – if anyone had much been paying attention – have been seen on the screen of NFT3. Generating nonsense to order, as this blog as a whole is likely to evidence, doesn’t entail much…
In a way, I wish that I had bantered more with the Streetwise crew, rather than taking my seat, but, once in my seat, it seemed churlish to make the row rise again (to let me out) and, yet again, for my re-entry – the other end of my row was blocked off by the mixing-desk. (It seemed that no one else decided to join in with the ‘official’ delegates at the front, with their suits, briefcases, ability to sing.)
As a homage to Marcel (although spelt differently), I had chosen a name-badge with the identity of Pierre Duchamps, an Alternative Energy Intern. I hoped that something would hang on this, rather than it from the lanyard, so it was a disappointment that it might as well have said George Osborne, Financial Meddler. (No big deal, but there could have been a draw from those badges known to have been issued, and a game of forfeits...)
Ignoring the name, when one of the cast introduced himself by way of an extended arm from two rows forward, I claimed to be Peter Henderson-Smyth-Henderson-Smyth-Henderson, and he concluded that I sounded ‘quite posh’.
I hoped also that, in the style of I Fagiolini’s The Full Monteverdi my neighbour would turn out to be ‘a mole’. When I heard / saw that show (in Cambridge), one knew that, over a modest meal, one had one or more singers at one’s table, but not who he, she or they were :
A woman challenged me as one, and – fool that I am – I didn’t play my denial for all that it was worth. (Although, of course, it was self evident that a denial couldn’t mean anything, so I wasn’t believed anyway, since, as everyone will testify, I do look like a professional singer.)
No matter, as it merely meant that I could, more or less, relax in my seat without the obvious need for further participation. However, I did fail to reckon on the company song, and, at the best of times (silliness doesn’t help), I cannot co-ordinate words and any actions, not least when those words (and their music) were unknown to me minutes before !
Early during the run-through of this act of corporate worship, I gave up, and, standing inert, took much more satisfaction in seeing the cast sing and mime the whole song en masse (which, in the style of The Twelve Days of Christmas, repeated each one of the Ten Rules of Good Business), much more than coaxing my resistant abilities further could have achieved. (I have no doubt that few have my problems, and most would have taken pleasure in what, for me, was an exercise doomed to fail.)
I can confidently (wonder whether I should) state that @streetwiseopera's #ATEOpera had a good take on company manners, @catherinebray...
— THE AGENT APSLEY (@THEAGENTAPSLEY) April 27, 2013
That’s my hesitation out of the way, a strange (but usual) mix of wanting to be in a role-play, but on my terms. So, on to what this combination of filmed and live experience seemed to say. In doing so, I am influenced, after the event, by having read the programme**, which, I found, pulled together one’s appreciation of the overall narrative intent. (Such, of course, is the way – and world – of opera, whereas I am happy and used to making my own way in that of film).
Not to try to summarize what happened, save that the film interspersed with the live singing and action, the arias from Christopher Lowrey (counter-tenor) and Elizabeth Watts (soprano), interacting on screen with members of Streetwise from all over the country, were exquisite. Indeed, as I Tweeted :
I can confidently (wonder whether I should) state that @streetwiseopera's #ATEOpera had a good take on company manners, @catherinebray...
— THE AGENT APSLEY (@THEAGENTAPSLEY) April 27, 2013
Can't stop humming (in public, and singing elsewhere) Lascia ch'io pianga after @lizwattssoprano and @streetwiseopera plus Sacconi Quartet !
— THE AGENT APSLEY (@THEAGENTAPSLEY) April 28, 2013
The filmic aspect was in no way subservient to the role and action of these clips, but portrayed the alienation, isolation and heartfelt humanity at work in a response to the clinicality of company lore, which dictates shaking hands with the client not because one feels that one wants to, but as part of good business.
I have seen the Watts aria several times over (as my attempt to support Streetwise and download from the iTunes platform failed, after posing insurmountable problems), and it stands that repeated watching, because it is composed entirely in the idiom of cinema. I imagine the same to be true of the aria sung by Lowrey, of which my impression was that the wholly musical performance of the Vivaldi was respected in the service of the message that rapacity to invest threatens to overcome what matters, and what we should really value in this life.
I can confidently (wonder whether I should) state that @streetwiseopera's #ATEOpera had a good take on company manners, @catherinebray...
— THE AGENT APSLEY (@THEAGENTAPSLEY) April 27, 2013
Informed by the programme, I apprehend the arch that these and the other filmed sections sought to erect, but I do confess that I was lost in following how the scene from Peter Grimes, which, I now gather, led into a Streetwise commission from Orlando Gough, brought about the degeneration of the dream of Locateco Solutions : throughout, this cinematic work, the execution was brilliant, and the closing scene of rejection, liberation, and immersion in the natural world was evocative and poignant.
It was merely that the step that took us to where the façade began to crumble was not clear. Arguably, though, for those who felt the movement for the Berlin wall to collapse, or for what is shown in the powerful documentary The Miracle of Leipzig (2009) (Wir Sind das Volk) not to happen, the feelings were stronger than an exact notion of why what was tipping had become unstable.
So the filmed episodes I do not seek to fault : David Pisaro (tenor) singing Grimes in the church setting was marvellous, as was how the scene – with Britten’s skilful writing – built to his expulsion, but – rightly or wrongly – I felt that I did understand, at the time, why everything was unravelling. The programme addressed that, and this is – if a concern at all – a minor one, since I had had the time to read ahead, but chose not to.
The Streetwise singers in NFT3, interacting with the projection, gave an overall feeling that conveyed how important the voice, music, the human spirit is. All in all, a stunning experience, and a tribute to all in any way involved with it !
Post-script
After this Tweet (and following the link) :
StreetwiseOpera @StreetwiseOpera 21m
Lovely review of #ATEOpera in @spectator http://www.spectator.co.uk/arts/opera/8900001/the-point-of-life/
I commented this:
Everything that this reviewer writes about @StreetwiseOpera's The Answer to Everything is spot on : it was timely, its parody of the corporate world (and its tics) was telling and amusing, and the music was of a very high quality, not least that passage from Grimes.
And if any Minister for Culture couldn't understand or relate to it, maybe that person's in the wrong job... !
I have now followed a link to a review in The Guardian, as Tweeted by @StreetwiseOpera... The reviewer found the event dramatically 'confusing', which mirrors what I attribute (above) to not having read the synopsis.
End-notes
* I tried to explain that I was there on the strength of knowing that Elizabeth Watts (@LizWattsSoprano) was involved, whose single with Streetwise I knew (from Splatter) had just been released.
My neighour thought that I said ‘Watson’, and, her not knowing EW, it didn’t seem to help that I said that she is a soprano. I ended up mumbling something about she was probably one of many, as I was, sadly, suddenly not sure, in the guise of being a delegate, how sopranos could fit in a corporate structure…
** It had two front covers (a style of presentation that I gather to be called tête-bêche).
If you want to Tweet, Tweet away here
Tuesday 30 April 2013
Burns made me do it...
More views of - or before - Cambridge Film Festival 2012
(Click here to go directly to the Festival web-site)
1 May
A poem, written in the pub - if not over a malt - yesterday, because of seeing* :
How would you talk about the liquid of whisky.....? Is there a word you would say, or a formula or a poem, or what? pic.twitter.com/ffwPYUE1Fw
Here goes:
To a Dram
Note one thing :
These words,
The water of life,
Are not
Metaphor,
Simile,
Analogy,
Allegory...
No, a direct
Statement
Of pure fact,
Pure as barley
As water
As living yeast,
Which drives
Sugar to thrive
Huge vessels
Whose real size
Defies our mind
(All those litres !)
Cannot contain
The breath of God,
A holy embrace
That blossoms
'Volatile', we say,
'Mercurial'
And all of these –
And none – is Scotch…
© Copyright Belston Night Works 2013
End-notes
* This should be, for those in the know, 'an embedded Tweet', but Pratter tells me that I'm not authorized** - pretty rough Version, The Agent, not the Authorized Version...
** In fact, I now see that '@WildAndMagic's account is protected'. How lovely !
If you want to Tweet, Tweet away here
(Click here to go directly to the Festival web-site)
1 May
A poem, written in the pub - if not over a malt - yesterday, because of seeing* :
How would you talk about the liquid of whisky.....? Is there a word you would say, or a formula or a poem, or what? pic.twitter.com/ffwPYUE1Fw
Thank you, @wildandmagic ! - I have written my first poem this year, soon on my blog... Called (after Burns) To a Dram.
— THE AGENT APSLEY (@THEAGENTAPSLEY) April 30, 2013
Here goes:
To a Dram
Note one thing :
These words,
The water of life,
Are not
Metaphor,
Simile,
Analogy,
Allegory...
No, a direct
Statement
Of pure fact,
Pure as barley
As water
As living yeast,
Which drives
Sugar to thrive
Huge vessels
Whose real size
Defies our mind
(All those litres !)
Cannot contain
The breath of God,
A holy embrace
That blossoms
'Volatile', we say,
'Mercurial'
And all of these –
And none – is Scotch…
© Copyright Belston Night Works 2013
End-notes
* This should be, for those in the know, 'an embedded Tweet', but Pratter tells me that I'm not authorized** - pretty rough Version, The Agent, not the Authorized Version...
** In fact, I now see that '@WildAndMagic's account is protected'. How lovely !
If you want to Tweet, Tweet away here
Sunday 28 April 2013
Box perfect[ly] - tick all the boxes !
More views of - or before - Cambridge Film Festival 2012
(Click here to go directly to the Festival web-site)
28 April
Does any phrase containing the word 'box' avoid contention, or just tick all the boxes (as the phrase has it)... ?
It's a wonder that we don't say 'check' all the boxes, but I am sure that it's upcoming, i.e. forthcoming !
Let my little survey explode into life - like a jack-in-the-box (not to be pigeon-holed - another sort of box - it's in any old order) :
* Thinking outside the box, namely not responding with inertia and paralysis to a problem, but solving - or getting near to solving - it, so really just 'thinking' (instead of 'stagnating')
* Would you like to come inside my box ? - a dubious proposition of a sexual nature, calculated to make one think cheaply about the beauty of physical union
* If one did tick all the boxes, what a nonsense that would be : Are you □ Employed □ Self-employed □ Unemployed (unless you are an unpaid intern) !
* You need to box perfect - and, as we've said, Stuff the adverb !
* Tick the box on Amazon® to send a Twat that says I've ordered the Cary Grant boxset ! - thereby prove that you reject boxed set
* No, this is my cardboard box - for those who like cheap gibes at those on the streets, and wouldn't support @StreetwiseOpera by buying its beautiful single with @LizWattsSoprano, the Sacconi Quartet and Duncan Ward, available as a download straight from iTunes, or you can first watch that extract from their film The Answer to Everything before you buy at : https://vimeo.com/64050260
An unending list of derision
If you want to Tweet, Tweet away here
(Click here to go directly to the Festival web-site)
28 April
Does any phrase containing the word 'box' avoid contention, or just tick all the boxes (as the phrase has it)... ?
It's a wonder that we don't say 'check' all the boxes, but I am sure that it's upcoming, i.e. forthcoming !
Let my little survey explode into life - like a jack-in-the-box (not to be pigeon-holed - another sort of box - it's in any old order) :
* Thinking outside the box, namely not responding with inertia and paralysis to a problem, but solving - or getting near to solving - it, so really just 'thinking' (instead of 'stagnating')
* Would you like to come inside my box ? - a dubious proposition of a sexual nature, calculated to make one think cheaply about the beauty of physical union
* If one did tick all the boxes, what a nonsense that would be : Are you □ Employed □ Self-employed □ Unemployed (unless you are an unpaid intern) !
* You need to box perfect - and, as we've said, Stuff the adverb !
* Tick the box on Amazon® to send a Twat that says I've ordered the Cary Grant boxset ! - thereby prove that you reject boxed set
* No, this is my cardboard box - for those who like cheap gibes at those on the streets, and wouldn't support @StreetwiseOpera by buying its beautiful single with @LizWattsSoprano, the Sacconi Quartet and Duncan Ward, available as a download straight from iTunes, or you can first watch that extract from their film The Answer to Everything before you buy at : https://vimeo.com/64050260
An unending list of derision
If you want to Tweet, Tweet away here
Thursday 25 April 2013
Kelly Brook's ex hit by doube-decker (according to AOL®)
More views of - or before - Cambridge Film Festival 2012
(Click here to go directly to the Festival web-site)
25 April
At any rate, the hedline (sic) talks of a doube-decker.
Knowing that a deck denotes part of the equipment of the likes of DJ Skunk, I dare not assume that this is a merror (a portmanteau word*, comprising 'error' and 'mere'), but guess that doube might denote :
* That 'whole dub thing'
* A Routemaster smeared with melted cheese and barbeque sauce
* A bi-plane flown by a dove**
* A love-track sung by Kelly, which went straight to this former partner's heart
Yes, I am too lazy to read 'the actual' story, or rather, me and my doube, we're havin' too much craic... !
Postscript : 26 April
And to-day AOL® excels itself :
Woman defiant against bag theif [sic]
End-notes
* Thank you, Lewis Carroll !
** German Taub.
If you want to Tweet, Tweet away here
(Click here to go directly to the Festival web-site)
25 April
At any rate, the hedline (sic) talks of a doube-decker.
Knowing that a deck denotes part of the equipment of the likes of DJ Skunk, I dare not assume that this is a merror (a portmanteau word*, comprising 'error' and 'mere'), but guess that doube might denote :
* That 'whole dub thing'
* A Routemaster smeared with melted cheese and barbeque sauce
* A bi-plane flown by a dove**
* A love-track sung by Kelly, which went straight to this former partner's heart
Yes, I am too lazy to read 'the actual' story, or rather, me and my doube, we're havin' too much craic... !
Postscript : 26 April
And to-day AOL® excels itself :
Woman defiant against bag theif [sic]
End-notes
* Thank you, Lewis Carroll !
** German Taub.
If you want to Tweet, Tweet away here
Wednesday 24 April 2013
The 100 best romantic movies ? (according to @TimeOutFilm)
More views of - or before - Cambridge Film Festival 2012
(Click here to go directly to the Festival web-site)
24 April
It all started with Catherine Bray (whom The Agent Follows on Pratter)... :
Catherine Tweeted :
Stupid Apsley looked at her 1 to 10 (as previously Tweeted), since she had been one of Time Out's 101 'experts, including the folks who make their living from giving movies a critical mauling', and Tweeted Catherine :
Skipping a few more of Apsley's irritating questions, we move on to :
So, if it were all democratic - with a lot of great strictness thrown in - what did the 100 list really mean ? :
And what about those 'romantic' films. For what it's worth, Apsley has this to comment :
So Apsley got thinking... :
Ten free choices for each of 101 voters, so 1010 selections to be whittled down to a ranked list of 100 by, where possible, weighting the choices according to preference.
Obviously not a scientific experiment to which a test of significance need necessarily be applied, but assume, for argument's sake, that one in every two or three list of ten choices would be a duplicate : 505 discrete selections, but how skewed might the voting get if, say, 1st place carried 15 points, 2nd place 13 points, 3rd place 11 points, and then allocating a range of 10 points to the remaining 7 positions?
Could it possibly be that a relatively very small number of the overall 101 voters, choosing the same film in 1st place, might out-vote a larger number ranking it, but putting it lower down their list ? If so, democracy would mean that those with 'a passion for' a film within their choice of 10 would vote down (or, even, out) a greater number putting it, say, 8th...
No doubt more than one way to analyse these data-sets and arrive at a 1 to 100, then...
For example, Annie Hall :
* Richard Gere (who didn't choose it) only voted for 2 films
* Sally Hawkins put it 7th
* Frances O'Connor put it 4th
* Sara Pascoe put it in an unranked list
* Christopher Walken - as Gere
Summary : 3 out of 18 Actors voted for it
* Dave Calhoun (Time Out) had it 1st
* Kate Muir (The Times) put it 5th
Summary : 2 out of 18 Critics voted for it
* Judd Apatow only voted for 3 - this was the 3rd
* Richard Curtis put it 1st
* Aside - Gideon Koppel's choice for 1st was Carry on Camping...
* Jamie Travis says 4th [and, for my money, wisely names Hannah and her Sisters as 9th, which I didn't notice in anyone else's list]
* Penny Woolcock goes for 2nd
Summary : 4 out of 21 Film-makers voted for it
Conclusion
Overall, out of 57 people in these three lists who could have voted for Annie Hall, only 9 did, with 2 x 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 2 x 4th, 5th, 7th and an unranked.
To me, though Annie Hall is a great film (if not, in my view, really a romance), it suggests that the voting must (if 57 / 101 is a representative sample - I can analyse the other three categories...) be too diffuse for the votes of many to count for anything and / or that the weighting gives an unrepresentative result.
Taking this on :
Of the Film industry insiders Of whom there were 20), Shira MacLeod rated it 3rd, and Louisa Dent 2nd, but no one else named it. 2 out of 20
There were 13 Cultural heroes* : Lauren Cuthbertson put it 6th, Robyn Hitchcock 3rd**, Tim Key voted (but didn't rank it), Tom Odell said 5th, and Isy Suttie 4th. 5 out of 13
Finally, 11 Writers, of whom Moira Buffini listed it, chronologically, penultimate, Joe Dunthorne put it 6th, and Jack Thorne 1st. 3 out of 11
Those new categories make, all in all, 10 out of 44, with a further 1st, 2nd, 2 x 3rd, 4th, 5th, 2 x 6th, plus 2 x unranked.
Added to the categories above, 19 out of 101 (more respectable) :
1st x 3 (Critic, Film-maker, Writer)
2nd x 2 (Film-maker, Film industry insider)
3rd x 3 (Film-maker, Film industry insider, Cultural hero)
4th x 3 (Actor, Film-maker, Cultural hero)
5th x 2 (Critic, Cultural hero)
6th x 2 (Cultural hero, Writer)
7th x 1 (Actor)
Unranked x 3 (Actor, Cultural hero, Writer)
With the new categories, around one in five named Annie Hall, and that got it 4th in the 100 list. How much that is down to the weighting, with 8 out of 19 in the 1st to 3rd positions, is anyone's guess...
And, of course, if the three voters who declined to rank their choices had not done so, that might have made things different again !
Afterword
And what about Dr Zhivago (1965), ranked only no. 96 - to the digust of someone who commented on Time Out's pages ?
Well, I guess that there couldn't have been many votes, and, out of their 10 choices, this is what I find:
* No Actors voted for it
* No Critics voted for it
* In Film-makers, Gillies MacKinnon put it 7th, and Shirin Neshat 8th
Just over the halfway point (57 from the 101 who made some sort of selection), only two picked it - how many more secured Dr Zhivago its position at 96 ?
No Film industry insiders or Writers, and just Bella Freud from Cultural heroes (5th), so 3 votes out of 101, nothing higher than 5th place, gets 96th place.
Fourth place overall secured by 19 votes, 96th by 9, so where anything came in that list of 100 could be depend on the weighting given by - or lack of weighting - one person who chose the film...
Highly scientific (or democratic) ? Maybe a much-higher place was won for a film with, again, just three votes, because it had all its votes in positions 1st to 3rd
Comments, especially from @TimeOutFilm, welcome !
End-notes
* Bella Freud is to be valued for listing Subway (1985).
** Hitchcock came up with The Purple Rose of Cairo (1985).
If you want to Tweet, Tweet away here
(Click here to go directly to the Festival web-site)
24 April
It all started with Catherine Bray (whom The Agent Follows on Pratter)... :
Catherine Tweeted :
And here is the glorious full @timeoutfilm Top 100 Best Romantic Movies: ow.ly/kksI9
— Catherine Bray (@catherinebray) April 23, 2013
Stupid Apsley looked at her 1 to 10 (as previously Tweeted), since she had been one of Time Out's 101 'experts, including the folks who make their living from giving movies a critical mauling', and Tweeted Catherine :
Well, it must be a fix, @catherinebray, if there's no duplication in the @timeoutfilm 100 - and can reviewers swear these are free choices ?
— THE AGENT APSLEY (@THEAGENTAPSLEY) April 23, 2013
@theagentapsley What do you mean by no duplication? Plenty of people have picked the same films...
— Catherine Bray (@catherinebray) April 23, 2013
Skipping a few more of Apsley's irritating questions, we move on to :
@theagentapsley You'll have to ask @timeoutfilm for specific metrics - I don't have the details!
— Catherine Bray (@catherinebray) April 24, 2013
@theagentapsley @catherinebray nobody was allowed, or tried, to pick a film twice. we apply v strict and strictly democratic system!
— Time Out Film (@TimeOutFilm) April 24, 2013
@theagentapsley some didn't want to rank (v few) and so each of their choices got same points
— Time Out Film (@TimeOutFilm) April 24, 2013
So, if it were all democratic - with a lot of great strictness thrown in - what did the 100 list really mean ? :
In @timeoutfilm's Top 100 (timeout.com/london/film/th…), 101 voters' choices (1 to 10 each) were pooled. But were the choices equal, or ranked ?
— THE AGENT APSLEY (@THEAGENTAPSLEY) April 24, 2013
@theagentapsley each of the 101 gave top ten in order. points assigned to each film in each list (more for no1, less for no10)
— Time Out Film (@TimeOutFilm) April 24, 2013
That's fine, @timeoutfilm, but, without knowing the weighting, the overall 1 to 100 means relatively little - as against unranked 1 to 10s.
— THE AGENT APSLEY (@THEAGENTAPSLEY) April 24, 2013
And what about those 'romantic' films. For what it's worth, Apsley has this to comment :
In @timeoutfilm's Top 100 Romantics, 5 films for Cary Grant, with Jimmy Stewart nearby - did other stars top that ? timeout.com/london/film/th…
— THE AGENT APSLEY (@THEAGENTAPSLEY) April 24, 2013
In @timeoutfilm's Top 100 Romantics, does voting Annie Hall (1977) no. 4 miss what Allen (and Brickman !) is really doing with this film ?
— THE AGENT APSLEY (@THEAGENTAPSLEY) April 24, 2013
So Apsley got thinking... :
Ten free choices for each of 101 voters, so 1010 selections to be whittled down to a ranked list of 100 by, where possible, weighting the choices according to preference.
Obviously not a scientific experiment to which a test of significance need necessarily be applied, but assume, for argument's sake, that one in every two or three list of ten choices would be a duplicate : 505 discrete selections, but how skewed might the voting get if, say, 1st place carried 15 points, 2nd place 13 points, 3rd place 11 points, and then allocating a range of 10 points to the remaining 7 positions?
Could it possibly be that a relatively very small number of the overall 101 voters, choosing the same film in 1st place, might out-vote a larger number ranking it, but putting it lower down their list ? If so, democracy would mean that those with 'a passion for' a film within their choice of 10 would vote down (or, even, out) a greater number putting it, say, 8th...
No doubt more than one way to analyse these data-sets and arrive at a 1 to 100, then...
For example, Annie Hall :
* Richard Gere (who didn't choose it) only voted for 2 films
* Sally Hawkins put it 7th
* Frances O'Connor put it 4th
* Sara Pascoe put it in an unranked list
* Christopher Walken - as Gere
Summary : 3 out of 18 Actors voted for it
* Dave Calhoun (Time Out) had it 1st
* Kate Muir (The Times) put it 5th
Summary : 2 out of 18 Critics voted for it
* Judd Apatow only voted for 3 - this was the 3rd
* Richard Curtis put it 1st
* Aside - Gideon Koppel's choice for 1st was Carry on Camping...
* Jamie Travis says 4th [and, for my money, wisely names Hannah and her Sisters as 9th, which I didn't notice in anyone else's list]
* Penny Woolcock goes for 2nd
Summary : 4 out of 21 Film-makers voted for it
Conclusion
Overall, out of 57 people in these three lists who could have voted for Annie Hall, only 9 did, with 2 x 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 2 x 4th, 5th, 7th and an unranked.
To me, though Annie Hall is a great film (if not, in my view, really a romance), it suggests that the voting must (if 57 / 101 is a representative sample - I can analyse the other three categories...) be too diffuse for the votes of many to count for anything and / or that the weighting gives an unrepresentative result.
Taking this on :
Of the Film industry insiders Of whom there were 20), Shira MacLeod rated it 3rd, and Louisa Dent 2nd, but no one else named it. 2 out of 20
There were 13 Cultural heroes* : Lauren Cuthbertson put it 6th, Robyn Hitchcock 3rd**, Tim Key voted (but didn't rank it), Tom Odell said 5th, and Isy Suttie 4th. 5 out of 13
Finally, 11 Writers, of whom Moira Buffini listed it, chronologically, penultimate, Joe Dunthorne put it 6th, and Jack Thorne 1st. 3 out of 11
Those new categories make, all in all, 10 out of 44, with a further 1st, 2nd, 2 x 3rd, 4th, 5th, 2 x 6th, plus 2 x unranked.
Added to the categories above, 19 out of 101 (more respectable) :
1st x 3 (Critic, Film-maker, Writer)
2nd x 2 (Film-maker, Film industry insider)
3rd x 3 (Film-maker, Film industry insider, Cultural hero)
4th x 3 (Actor, Film-maker, Cultural hero)
5th x 2 (Critic, Cultural hero)
6th x 2 (Cultural hero, Writer)
7th x 1 (Actor)
Unranked x 3 (Actor, Cultural hero, Writer)
With the new categories, around one in five named Annie Hall, and that got it 4th in the 100 list. How much that is down to the weighting, with 8 out of 19 in the 1st to 3rd positions, is anyone's guess...
And, of course, if the three voters who declined to rank their choices had not done so, that might have made things different again !
Afterword
And what about Dr Zhivago (1965), ranked only no. 96 - to the digust of someone who commented on Time Out's pages ?
Well, I guess that there couldn't have been many votes, and, out of their 10 choices, this is what I find:
* No Actors voted for it
* No Critics voted for it
* In Film-makers, Gillies MacKinnon put it 7th, and Shirin Neshat 8th
Just over the halfway point (57 from the 101 who made some sort of selection), only two picked it - how many more secured Dr Zhivago its position at 96 ?
No Film industry insiders or Writers, and just Bella Freud from Cultural heroes (5th), so 3 votes out of 101, nothing higher than 5th place, gets 96th place.
Fourth place overall secured by 19 votes, 96th by 9, so where anything came in that list of 100 could be depend on the weighting given by - or lack of weighting - one person who chose the film...
Highly scientific (or democratic) ? Maybe a much-higher place was won for a film with, again, just three votes, because it had all its votes in positions 1st to 3rd
Comments, especially from @TimeOutFilm, welcome !
End-notes
* Bella Freud is to be valued for listing Subway (1985).
** Hitchcock came up with The Purple Rose of Cairo (1985).
If you want to Tweet, Tweet away here
Tuesday 23 April 2013
Video: Woman shocked to see tiger in public toilet (according to AOL®)
More views of - or before - Cambridge Film Festival 2012
(Click here to go directly to the Festival web-site)
23 April
Of course, a tiger in the petrol-station, or in the woman's bedroom, would have been unremarkable*.
After all, Esso still seems to like tigers (though, I am quick to say, I do not have any idea what it does to forestall their extinction - nearly said 'secure', but that was just a confusion of seeking and stopping), and many a home has a Tigger, either a fluffy version, or built into a photograph-frame.
As for this toilet tiger, it couldn't have been a bothersome sort, because there is no claim that the woman was hurt ('mauled' is the preferred term), but just that she was shocked by seeing it. Perhaps she was under the faulty impression that they are extinct...
Mean of someone, then, to go and proof her wrong by attracting it inside the WC, but you know what these activists are like !
End-notes
* Oh, the perils of what T. S. Eliot (to be specific) liked, I think, to call specificity !
If you want to Tweet, Tweet away here
(Click here to go directly to the Festival web-site)
23 April
Of course, a tiger in the petrol-station, or in the woman's bedroom, would have been unremarkable*.
After all, Esso still seems to like tigers (though, I am quick to say, I do not have any idea what it does to forestall their extinction - nearly said 'secure', but that was just a confusion of seeking and stopping), and many a home has a Tigger, either a fluffy version, or built into a photograph-frame.
As for this toilet tiger, it couldn't have been a bothersome sort, because there is no claim that the woman was hurt ('mauled' is the preferred term), but just that she was shocked by seeing it. Perhaps she was under the faulty impression that they are extinct...
Mean of someone, then, to go and proof her wrong by attracting it inside the WC, but you know what these activists are like !
End-notes
* Oh, the perils of what T. S. Eliot (to be specific) liked, I think, to call specificity !
If you want to Tweet, Tweet away here
Sunday 21 April 2013
In Praise of Baxter
More views of - or before - Cambridge Film Festival 2012
(Click here to go directly to the Festival web-site)
21 April 2013
Dear Bruce Baxter
Forget it, Susan Tomes !
You have always been the best, but your new all-Mozart recording is just blinding.
The music critic for The Times called it revelatory, but, for me, its effect is very shiny and totally chic - not at all redundant.
I know that you treasure these epistles, and I am more in awe of you than ever, but I remain your number-one fan
Juliet
If you want to Tweet, Tweet away here
(Click here to go directly to the Festival web-site)
21 April 2013
Dear Bruce Baxter
Forget it, Susan Tomes !
You have always been the best, but your new all-Mozart recording is just blinding.
The music critic for The Times called it revelatory, but, for me, its effect is very shiny and totally chic - not at all redundant.
I know that you treasure these epistles, and I am more in awe of you than ever, but I remain your number-one fan
Juliet
If you want to Tweet, Tweet away here
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)