Posts by Richard Llewellyn
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Probably available elsewhere, but I'd love to see (because i'm really enjoying a series of graphic novels called The Walking Dead) how the post-apocalypse TV show Survivor has stood the test of time.
Likewise, the Tomorrow People.
And, because nobody else can seem to remember it but it must have scarred me for life, an incredibly cheap, lame, but hypnotic ad featuring a signing cowboy in front of a gold tinsel curtain singing a little ditty to advertise the merits of a company called Blundell & Brown. Whats my chances of tracking that down?
-
Apologies if its been posted previously, but here's as simple and effective an explanation as any I've heard that it would be a bit stupid not to take climate change seriously .....
-
My mate in England says exactly what you did Hayden, that we're cheating b'stards. It's a very common perception.
Probably true, but I think a perception enthusiastically fed by a bunch of hypocritical british rugby hacks (you know who et al) who have had years of AB beatings to stain their soul.
The sort of guys who lionise british players for their heroic losses, who forgive the Martin Johnsons for their transgressions while calling the colonial's thugs or poachers, and who will continue to let the ghosts of long-forgotten wins forever haunt their current teams.
Mind you, I've seen how AB fans - and media (Chris Rattue anyone) can frequently be less than *gracious* winners, so the accusations of cheating can make that terrible feeling of loss to the smart just a little less.
-
I guess it was some kind of positive to play that bad and still be in with a shout of beating the Boks on their home turf with a few minutes to play, but jeez that was painful to watch.
Possibly the worst AB performance for some years, and I guess what seemed to be most frustrating - cos I certainly don't think there was a lack of effort - was the game plan. Playing the Boks in our own 22, throwing loads of 50/50 passes with a bunch of offside intercept specialists lurking, and constantly short-kicking possession back to them just seemed wrong.
By contrast the Bok game plan was simplicity itself, pressure, pressure and more pressure. Hasn't really changed for awhile but they are awfully good at it.
Also think that we are - no offence to the team intended - lacking a bit of starch and aggression. Bakkies Botha - a helluva player - was pretty much given free rein to bully us. We are lacking, for want of a better word, some quintessential Jerry-ness in the collisions and in the attitude around the breakdown. Poor old Richie seemed to be lone ranger at times.
-
Late to the thread, but just to comment on an earlier view (which sounded a lot like snobbery) that the Food Show is just for corporate food interests and that 'real foodies' wouldn't be caught dead there ..... sorry have to totally disagree
Yes, there is a lot of corporate presence (as there is at any trade show in any industry - the big players are needed to help subsidise the small players and make the event financially viable), but there is a lot of small, local, damn tasty food proprieters adding a lot of heart and soul to the event who genuinely regard themselves as people who love real food.
For many of those smaller outlets (and I've seen first-hand how hard some of them work being married to someone who runs a stall at the food show), this event is a once a year opportunity for their product to not only be seen and tasted by thousands of people, but also to be tasted and discussed with the trade, chefs, and (yes) maybe even sold to the corporates in order to try and find its way into more kitchens around the country.
The event aint cheap to be part of, and its bloody hard work, but a lot of them love what they do and love being part of it. And whats wrong with that?
-
past the basic appeal of 'beat the Aussies'
While I think Freddie Flintoff is a bit of a posing knob, I'm loving the various incarnations of 'throbbing forehead' thunderous looks that this series is inducing in Ricky Ponting ........
-
Or did I have the wrong end of the stick there?
No, I don't think so Danielle, I thought that was what the book was largely about as well, the guilt of white South Africa against the aspirations and casual violence of new South Africa, set around two disgraceful (one of them horrific) incidents, and the (almost deliberately) extreme reaction to those incidents, one of the daughter, and one of the father. Its not a particularly happy or enjoyable book (or film), so maybe loved was completely the wrong word, but it certainly stuck with me for awhile.
And on the subject of organisation I don't quite get why the Civic lets the incoming film-goers meet the outgoing film goers at exactly the same time.
-
Would thoroughly recommend Looking for Eric even for non-Manchester United fans.
Probably the closest thing Ken Loach will ever make to a feel-good crowd pleasing confection, with some wonderful comic moments (apparently much of the supporting cast were Manchester stand-up comedians) alongside the usual social commentary.
And Eric Cantona - who despite some dodgy acting has screen presence in spades - has some delicious fun poking at his own iconic image and tendency towards portentious aphorisms.
Not so sure about Disgrace. Loved the book, but just couldn't imagine John Malkovich in the key role - he's a difficult actor to warm to, which made the character a bit one-dimensionally bastard. But the themes of new South Africa colliding violently with old South Africa still came across well - with the sub-plot of Petrus and the land coming across a bit Jean de Florette.
-
he'd earned the right to wear whatever the hell he likes
Absolutely true Megan and Hadyn. The Fed can do no wrong by me and can wear PJ's on court if he so wanted. But surely, given the long and (occasionally) distinguished history of english fashion commentary, its OK (in fact almost mandatory) to take the piss out of sartorial excess?
-
Apropos the Fed's uniform, from Giles Smith in this mornings Times ..
this was the Wimbledon at which Federer routinely turned up with a gold-trimmed racket bag. If he had opened it up and a Chihuahua had popped out, it would have been no surprise.
Standing by Federer and defending him against all detractors has, for many years, been easy, but it's getting harder and with every new dodgy jacket, the firmness of one's belief slightly corrodes. I don't wish to sound alarmist, but some of our number could be as little as one further piece of gold accessorising away from crumbling altogether.
Here's what we'd like to see Federer wear for the opening Monday of Wimbledon 2010, when he returns to defend his title: a tracksuit top. A white one, maybe. Certainly not gold. No “utility detailing”. No cinched waist. No “military inspired” pockets and flaps halfway up the arms. Just a zip. And no gold numbers.
And certainly no waistcoat underneath it. And if he could bring his rackets out in some kind of bog-standard holdall rather than Coleen Rooney's overnight bag, that would be good also.
But you know what? I've got this awful feeling he's going to come on dressed as a Sea Scout, and trailing his stuff behind him on wheels, like an air hostess. And he's the greatest tennis player ever. Someone have a word.