Okay, I have ranted about this a bit already on Facebook, but since then a kind friend of mine let me read the original published research paper which posits the theory that smoking in films directly influences teenagers to smoke, so I am both fully informed and even more annoyed by the carelessness of this research and its use for political reasons.

Now my views on smoking are quite complicated – I define myself as a smoker, and dislike being treated as an idiot, a second class citizen or a pariah by the health profession and various campaigners, especially when I do my best to be a polite and courteous smoker. At the same time, I accept that smoking is harmful, agree that the smoking ban has made many places far more pleasant to be in overall, and am generally as annoyed by Forest’s soapboxing as I am by Ash’s.

I’m not even denying that there could be a causal link between screen smoking and adolescent smoking, just that the methodology of this study is so poor that the results are at best debatable, and certainly shouldn’t be used to demand a blanket recertification of films with smoking in them.

The main problem I have with the methodology is that it attaches the same statistical weight to all instances of smoking in a film, so that an extra lighting up in the background of a bar scene is accorded the same importance as, say, Brad Pitt as Tyler Duerden lighting up stylishly and relishing the cigarette he is smoking. As a film student, I find this to be an absolute nonsense, as it means that a film in which a lot of background or insignificant characters smoke could be given many times the statistical weight of a film in which one hero character smokes a couple of times, heroically.

Also the study makes no allowance whatsoever for the possibility that if teenagers who smoke watch films featuring a lot of smoking, it may be a fallacy to assume that they smoke because they watch films featuring a lot of smoking.

See, here’s something I’ve observed about smoking in films – while family or lower certificate films may show smoking to define a character, they are unlikely to feature the same level of smoking because it suits the environment of the film, i.e. in Avatar maybe Sigourney Weaver’s character might smoke (I can’t recall if she does) but the background characters wouldn’t, because there’s no character reason for them to do so, and a lot of smoking would cause problems with certification. In something like Wild at Heart, on the other hand, there’s no worry about certification, so everyone smokes because it suits the setting of the piece (and is also part of the recurring fire motif).

I became a teenager in the mid eighties. I was smoking periodically by this point, depending on availability of tabs, and I was also watching films similar to Wild at Heart wherever possible, which featured a lot of smoking. I took up smoking for various reasons - boredom, availability, an expression of the fact that I felt different, outside – and I took up watching more grown-up and complex films for similar reasons.

Most of these films would have scored highly in the aforementioned study, because they featured a lot of smoking, but I watched them because they featured characters I related to, and the fact that they smoked and I smoked too, well maybe that’s part of the reason I related to them, just the same as the fact that they wore the same clothes as me, listened to the same music. Okay, they may have influenced me to smoke a certain brand, or check out a new band, maybe buy a different type of jacket, but they no more caused me to smoke than they caused me to wear cow-based outerwear or listen to rock and roll.

This brings me to something I find particularly vexing about this study – the fact that it’s being used by the leader of the study to demand that the law be changed to raise all films featuring smoking to 18 certificate (such a move would pretty much eliminate smoking from films, as makers wouldn’t want to lose the younger teen demographic, but it would also force them to either CGI smoking out of classic films, or not re-release them at all).

First of all, this is a very basic statistical study that takes little account of cultural or psychological factors, so at most it should be the catalyst for more in-depth research that looks directly at how onscreen activities influence or do not influence viewers. Secondly, it’s not her job to wave her paper in the air and call for a change in the law. Demanding that the law should be changed and specifying exactly how, rather than just announcing the results and highlighting the trends that they seem to show, suggests that this entire study was politically motivated in the first place, and thus can’t be trusted..

Okay, rant over, I’m off for a cup of tea, as I can’t be bothered to smoke in the week any more... ;)

I was just thinking back, after reading a press release for a game based on the toy-based cartoon series Monster High, to the monster-themed comedy shows I watched as a kid - the Addams Family, the Munsters, even Scooby Doo.

All of those shows seemed to celebrate the theme that there's nothing wrong with being different, as even if you don't fit into 'normal' society, as long as you're true to yourself, you'll be okay and people who really care will accept you. Plus there's nothing wrong with messing with the heads of the narrow minded and judgemental.

These days, though, superficially monster-themed shows such as this just seem to push the same message as the mainstream ones - status is everything, you'll be fine as long as you're beautiful and popular, socialise, don't create, conform to the hive mind...

Hmm, I only seem to write about going swimming on here at the moment, it seems, but hey, at least I'm using it for something.

As I hadn't been for a swim for a couple of weeks due mainly to Sonisphere - capsule review: Slayer, Metallica, Megadeth, Sisters, Killing Joke, Cavalera Conspiracy all awesome, weather less so, but good time mostly due to awesome chums! - I decided to brave the rather lowering weather last night and head for the Lido.

I'm glad I did, as I'd forgotten how strange and magical swimming in the rain can be, the droplets throwing up the surface into spray, and giving the feeling of standing out in the rain while having no sensation of getting wet from it.

I was amused, however, at how many people fled the pool at the first sign of rain though - it's not like you can get much wetter than being entirely immersed in water.

Swimming also seems to be doing me some good, I'm guessing by the fact that I ache like billy-o up the backs of my arms ans across my shoulders, and it also means I'm exercising my top half, which needs it far more than my legs.

Being in the pool is great for people-watching as well, as one mooches up and down in the fourth lane (the one they won't put a sign next to, as it's slower than the slow lane). Most of the people there are just there to do a few lengths after work, which is why it amuses me that there are always a few posers, who everyone largely ignores.

The girl in the tiny bikini who seemed to be nominally taking swimming lessons, but was actually far more interested in practicing her Myleene Klass style exit from the water was worth a giggle. But she paled next to the bloke in budgie smugglers doing quite the most bizarre pre-swim stretches I've ever seen - imagine a combination of yoga, a haka and jazz hands - then appeared to get grumpy that no one was paying him attention, so climbed into the pool and did the most splashy and OTT crawl up and down the middle lane until he ran out of steam.

Off there again tonight, though it looks like the rain will hold off this time.

As it's too hot and heavy out to go running at the moment, and one of my knees is playing up a bit anyway, I decided to have a concerted crack at going swimming. Especially because I can do so at London Fields Lido, which is lovely in nice weather, and reminds me of the pools I used to go swimming in as a kid.

After a couple of exploratory visits to check that I could still actually swim (as I haven't exactly done it much since I knackered my elbow), I decided the best way to convince myself to go was to buy a swim pass, as that forces me to go three times a week to make it worth the money, not to mention giving me access to various pools around London.

I'm quite pleased with progress so far - in the last week I've managed to go swimming more days than not, and I've gone from being able to go for a few metres at a time to being able to swim breast stroke up and down the pool at will, though admittedly slightly slower than continental drift...

Getting up and going in the morning before work seems to be better for swimming space, as in the evening the place is rather too full of posers, couples and ladies-wot-faff (no, dear, you're not holding up the queue of twenty people that has formed while you um and ahh over which colour swimming cap to buy).

However I'm not entirely sure I'm suited to getting up quite that early, plus while swimming made me feel pretty good all morning, I was really crashing towards the end of the day.

Swimming in the evening seems to take all the stress of the day away, which is a good thing, though it does mean I eat rather later than planned. Clearly I'm going to have to choose one and stick with it, altering my schedule accordingly.

Damn, that means actually planning stuff... :/

Right, as I'm likely to be moving house in the Autumn, I need to rationalise and clear out a bit, so I'm wondering if anyone wants any of the following, for FREE...

A delightfully named 'Dave' office chair - Unfortunately the arms no longer connect to the seat at the bottom of the siver tubing bit, but this is only because the two screws holding them have sheared, and can be replaced fairly easily if you can track down similar replacement screws.

Would suit anyone called Dave, and probably quite a few other chaps too.




Plus I have two of the standard Ikea-type (though not actually Ikea) S-chairs up for grabs. These are in a somewhat faded doom metal black canvas fabric, with wooden frames in pure black metal noir. Sort of like this, but with a black frame - perfect for contemplating the utter bleak futility of existence while gently rocking back and forth with a cat on your lap.

They look sort of like this, but more black, and in greater numbers...




There are also two speakers, which are yer generic Matsui jobbies that came with one of those pretend stacking systems, and have wire contacts to go into the back of an amp. I wouldn't say they're good, but they make music happen reasonably loudly and almost recognisably.


I couldn't find a picture of anything that looked remotely like them, and it would just be two black shapes anyway, so here's a kitten instead...



More stuff to appear soon, so keep your eye on my LJ (especially if you're a chap who fits 34" long trousers, or knows someoene who does).

1. Name five things you can see without getting up.
- an arty Laibach poster
- a disturbingly empty coffee cup (why coffee gone?)
- a can of 'Vive El Che' energy drink
- a bowler hat with goggles and a small polystyrene plane perched on it
- a snow globe of the Reisenrad in Vienna

2. How many times have you changed your hairstyle in the past five years?
Heh. I've had no hair to style for about the last ten, but I have gone through a wide variety of facial hair styles in that time.

3. What is your favourite article of clothing (that you own) and why?
My square-toed, heeled low-ride cowboy boots, because I feel like Clint Eastwood whenever I wear them.

4. What's your favourite cartoon?
Of the classics, Roadrunner, because I identify with Wile E. Coyote, and of contemporary ones, ZIM is MIGHTY!

5. If you got a tattoo, what would it be of?
I have various designs planned - I just need to sort out both the time and the money to get them put on.

6. What's your favourite mystical creature?
The 393 bus.

7. What are you thinking about right now?
That I probably ought to be getting on with work, as then I'll be able to relax, though I prolly still won't do it till later anyway due to prevarication. Also, why is my coffee cup *still* empty?

8. Write the first word that comes to mind.
Cheese.

9. What musician is your favourite to see in concert?
Any that know what the audience's expectations are and then do their best to exceed them, and are also there to be there, not for the money - Ministry, Nitzer Ebb, PWEI, Roger Waters, Slayer, Helmet, Leech Woman, Neubaten, too many to name...

10. If you came across $2,000 (or other currency) would you keep it or turn it in?
Hmm, not sure. If it was identifiable, in a wallet or purse, say, then sure. If it was just a bundle of notes and nothing else, hmm, I'm not sure, though probably (with my inner monologue shrieking at me for being an idiot).

11. What was the last thing that you bought?
Picnic type foods, wine and the ingredients for champagne cocktails (as I got my bonus at last, and it's not as bad as I thought).

12. What other countries have you been to (if any)?
Pretty much all of Western Europe (even Liechtenstein, though oddly not Ireland), Egypt, the US, Cuba, think that's about it. Must travel more.

13. Do you have a favourite comedian and if yes, who?
Hmm, not specifically. Bill Hicks is probably closest, but I can't think of many recent ones who remain funny for long. Oddly, I also have a soft spot for Bob Monkhouse - he could deliver a one-liner like no other.

14. Last book you've read?
Last finished a re-read of Heart of Darkness (which I always forget is more like Apocalypse Now than I think it'll be), and currently halfway through Agent Zigzag, which is a superb story.

15. What are you doing this weekend?
No real plans, as trying to save cash before Sonisphere. Hopefully a bit of writing, some art, maybe leave the house, but probably not.

16. What is your song of choice RIGHT NOW? The one you select when you kick off your playlist in the morning or whenever.
Right now, not really in a musical mood. Last thing I listened to was the very cheerful Woods of Ypres, but I don't listen all the time, as it distracts from writing.

17. Favourite movie of the last six months?
Senna, I think - a superb, powerful documentary on a true legend.

18. Favourite season?
Spring and Autumn - seasons of change are so much more vital and exciting.

19. Which part of this year are you looking forward to the most?
Sonisphere should be a good laugh, as will some time away in Cornwall for Nerys and Mike's wedding.

20. Best thing this year so far?
Seeing Roger Waters playing the Wall, with Dave Gilmour. Really never thought I'd see it happen, and it sends shivers up my spine just thinking back to it.

I did actually massively enjoy last night's outing to the cinema to sea Pirates of the Caribbean 4: On Stranger Tides, but that was mostly to do with being there with great chums (oh and the half bottle of rum secreted in my bag) and very little to do with the film.

Granted, POTC4 is not as plain muddled and confusing as the previous entry in the series, but it is a soulless and clinical by-the-numbers trudge through stuff that kinda worked in previous films, with big gaps where previous recurring characters have left the series - the lack of traditional thin clown/fat clown really hurts the film, despite attempts to shoehorn Depp and Rush into those roles.

So what’s good about it then? Well there are some great one liners, especially between Depp and Rush, and the verbal (and actual) sparring between Depp and Cruz is fun, albeit a rerun of the similar relationship with Keira in the first film, and some of the pretty is, well, pretty – Blackbeard’s ship is excellently grotty and sinister. Plus the London-set opening scenes are very nicely done, with a fun courtroom scene, an excellent Richard Griffiths as the king, and some nicely choreographed chases.

And as for what’s bad? Well, everything else, really. As soon as it’s established that the mcguffin is the fountain of yoof, the plot grinds to a shuddering halt (perhaps the simple premise was a reaction to the overcomplexity of the previous film, but that’s no excuse).

Instead of developing any real motivation for finding the fountain, or giving the treasure hunters puzzles to solve to find the place, POTC4 is more focused on endless swordfighting sequences, having characters behave utterly illogically, just to get them in a fight with a bunch of redshirts.

The film also time-wastes incessantly and for non-apparent reasons. The nadir of this is a scene where Cap’n Jack is being cajoled to jump off a cliff by Blackbeard, and rather just push him off, the film goes off at this bizarre tangent into a pointless game of Russian roulette, which has no bearing whatsoever on what happens next.

Speaking of Blackbeard, I feel sorry for Ian McShane, who does an excellent job of instilling gravitas and menace into one of the most underwritten characters in the series (which is quite an achievement in itself). He’s given no back-story, no clear motivation, and the film sets up a whole supernatural symbiotic relationship between Blackbeard and his ship (think Saren/Sovereign in Mass Effect) but doesn’t explain how it works or how it came about (or indeed who wears the trousers), and just uses it for a couple of cheap deus ex machinae.

McShane doesn’t get quite as badly shafted as the Liz and Will replacements – Sam Claifin and Astrid Berges-Frisbey, playing respectively a missionary and a mermaid – though. The relationship between them is given very little screen-time, neither is given any backstory whatsoever, and they trudge through their roles with all the enthusiasm of KFC staff on a double-shift. The other adversaries in the film, the Spanish, are also given negligible screen-time, save to pop up at the end to contribute utterly illogically to the denouement of the film.

And speaking of mermaids, the mermaid scene starts quite well – think of a sort of fishy version of the vampire succubi in Dracula – and is genuinely creepy and beautifully shot, but then it goes really strange and brutal. Imagine, if you will, one of those scenes in the Faroe Islands, where the islanders capture and slay dozens of whales in an orgy of bloodshed. Then replace the whales with naked, panicking young women. I can’t imagine who the fuck thought that was a great idea, but it’s up there with Bruce Willis beating a skinny Chinese woman to death while hurling racial epithets at her.

I could go on, but really, what’s the point. On Stranger Tides is a cynical, lazy and needless sequel, and I really hope they give it a rest now, as they’ve clearly run out of worthwhile stories to tell. Just to demonstrate how bad a film it is, even Purple Stuart couldn’t find much nice to say about it!

Also props to Jack (the real one), for going above and beyond the call of duty in service to the rum industry! ;)

Having seen Roger Waters on Thursday night, I went straight from work to meet Lianne in Camden for the start of the Mute Weekender (trying not to think about the 300-odd quid Waters and Mute tickets cost between them).

I was hoping the first night would be a lively show as six hours sleep and a hangover meant I wasn't entirely in the zone for experimental noodlings. Luckily Recoil had clearly been briefed, and were playing a hits set, which got even more jolly when Nitzer Ebb joined them onstage for the last three tracks, including an excellent Family Man and deconstructed Personal Jesus.

Nitzer Ebb themselves reappeared a little later, after I'd had a couple of pints and was feeling more chipper, and played a cracking set of classics. Douglas McCarthy is still one of the coolest frontmen in music, though I'm puzzled why Bon Harris dresses like a cab driver in a musical.

Lianne headed home after Ebb, while I was planning on staying for NON and Carter Tutti, but the queue to get into the studio was so long I couldn't be bothered, and left after chatting to Paulo, Caroline, Chris, Ally and Zazz for a while. At any oher venue I may have been annoyed that the second room was so small, but the Roundhouse is such a beautiful venue and so perfect for this event that it's hard to blame it for its layout.

We were feeling a lot more lively on Saturday, and got to Camden quite early, but decided on a slap-up lunch at La Porchetta rather than the early acts, before meeting up with Debbie and Rodney. So the first band we caught was The Liars, who everyone else hated, but I rather liked in a sort of shambolic Birthday Party/Buttholes/Primals spaz rock sort of way.

The Residents, following them, were enjoyably strange and creepy, but a long and quite leisurely set eventually lost my interest. The lead singer is quite mesmerically odd though.

Next up onstage, Vince Clarke and chums were certainly the most poppy part of the weekend. Firstly a slim and youthful-looking, though obviously nervous Alison Moyet joined Clarke (who now looks like Robocop with headphones on) for three Yazoo numbers including Page in your Diary and Don't Go - live she really has one of the best voices I've ever heard.

Following her, a rather peculiar looking Andy Bell appeared - still buff, though with rather a beer gut and a fair bit of plastic surgery, which with his twirling around started taking him close to Nathan Lane territory. Still, he was in great voice and an excellent showman, and they played the four Erasure songs I like, although it did make me realise the drop-off after those is fairly steep.

This section finished with Feargal Sharkey (who really does look like he's been locked in a sarcophagus for the last couple of decades) popping up for a run-through of The Assembly's 'Never Never', which sounded pretty much the same now as it did back then, and rather a nice surprise.

The night was rounded off by the mighty Laibach, who put on one of their best sets ever, percussive, martial and stomping, with a reasonably populist setlist that finished with powerful run-throughs of Geburt Einer Nation and Warm Leatherette (which Recoil had also played). Managed to resist strangling a fellow audience member who I heard say "It's a bit of a rip-of of Ramstein, isn't it?", but only because I couldn't find him in the dark.

All in all a truly awe-inspiring three days of music. Time for a quiet, relaxed Sunday I think.

Something I was pondering on the train on the way home tonight. Looking round the carriage, I noticed that of the dozen other people in my bit of the carriage, maybe three quarters were talking into phones.

This isn't even particularly unique, on public transport, in shops, on the street. Even where I work, a large number of people seem to be permanently on a call (though admittedly I work for a mobile phone company).

I was just wondering - what is it that all these people have to talk about?

I'm not trying to make any sort of value judgement about the quality of their conversations. Just, as someone with a quite substantial aversion to using a phone at all, I find it amazing that people are capable of sitting there talking at great length, and then as soon as that call finishes, phoning someone else.

I recall the days before the advent of phones-for-all. They seemed like exciting times, with stuff going on, but there didn't seem to be the necessity of never travelling more than four feet from a receiver.

Is there really that much more information to share these days?

Just because I wrote it for work's website and they didn't end up using it, I figure I may as well punt up my Brighton Rock review here...

( Brighton Rock Review )