Posting from a Blackberry

Last year I opened up a WordPress mirror site to mirror the existing Blogger version of this blog in order to circumvent my work’s internet blocking software. It didn’t work. I did keep the WordPress account open and running in tandem because frankly I wasn’t sure which one I preferred.

Recently I got my phone upgrade and opted for one of these new fangled smart phones although many would argue a BlackBerry curve is neither new or smart, could be worse I could have an Iphone. Anyway I wondered how easy posting would be for each site.

Blogger
This was a disappointment. Google have a suite of applications in the Google mobile app but blogger is not one of those which is a little odd, this would be fine if the Blogger site was optimised for mobile browsing. It isn’t, in fact its unusable so basically posting on the move isn’t going to happen on blogger hence why this post is appearing on WordPress before blogger.

WordPress
And over at wordpress it couldn’t be more different. I get a dedicated app which gives me most of the features I’d get on the web version plus the option to save drafts to the phone, handy when I’m on night shift in a dead zone. Overall a very satisfactory experience.
So, will blogger be dumped for this? No, typing a short post like this is sore on the thumbs, so web will still be my primary option, but this is nice to have. Get it sorted google.

I love it when a Film comes together.

I recently saw the new A-Team remake and I thought I'd do a post on it.

For those who don't know, the A-Team was originally a US action TV series about an on the run military unit who helped out people in need. It ran from 1982-1987 and when shown in the UK when I was about 4 or 5 it was a major part of my childhood.

Unlike some of the other integral parts of my childhood, such as Knight Rider, which is still fun as an adult, the A-Team still stands up. It's not high art, but it treads a very fine line with comedy plans, situations and solutions to problems, played largely straight by the characters. When I heard there was a remake in the mix I had misgivings. The balance of comedy and action without the characters ever slipping into playing it for comedy would be a hard nut to crack. My biggest fears for a big budget remake were basically split into 3 groups.

1. Dark and gritty, yes it worked for Galactica, but making the A-Team a dark action film about hard-bitten soldiers would have at best been a good film, but it wouldn't be the A-Team.

2. The Starskey and Hutch route, going into it with a knowing silliness and straight comedy. Again could have been good, wouldn't have been The A-team

3. A Gangsta rapper being cast as BA. They;d be lining up to play a larger than life character originally portrayed by wrestler Mr T, and the studios would love the extra draw a Rapper would give, but I bet it would become a "Vehicle" film, with every other cast member becoming a cipher for BA to riff off of.

Fortunately, none of this happened. Instead the studio brought in Stephen J Cannell, one of the original creators and as a result what we got was a film that can be listed as the best of any of the recent spate of remakes. This is the A-team of my youth, its a perfect reproduction.

Laim Neeson, Bradley Cooper, Quinton "Rampage" Jackson and Sharlto Copeley star as Hannibal, Face, BA and Murdoch respectively, the film tells an origin story (Which If I recall we never saw on the small screen). We see the gang get together and perform the heist that had them incarcerated, although the action is obviously moved to the Iraq war rather than Vietnam. After a double cross by some Private military Contractors our team find themselves Locked up in a maximum security stockade, they promptly escape and go out for revenge. Dogged by soldiers trying to retrieve them and a corrupt CIA agent they must uncover the conspiracy that landed them in jail.

The cast make the film, they nail the characters, ok so we have a slight subplot of Face making a plan instead, and a mentor/student relationship between Face and Hannibal, and a similar plot regarding a significantly less angry BA, but it doesn't jar or seem out of place even to an old fan such as myself. The Murdoch/BA bickering is note perfect (In fact Copeley is probably the best in his depiction of Murdoch, a character which could have easily descended into pratfalls and silly voices) we have OTT action, convoluted plans and baddies getting their comeuppance.

This film is not High art, but it left me with a huge grin on my face, to be honest a picture of my huge grin would have been a better, less wordy review.

The Mantra

No posts for a bit, been busy apologies to both my readers.

Our coalition government has now been running things for a few months now, and when I get round to it there will be a post about that, but it's not what I'm going to talk about today.

There are two untruths that are being repeated by the government, one is by both parties in the coalition and one is by the Tories principally. Untruths is perhaps a harsh word but it has the feeling of repeating an interpretation of events enough to make people believe it. So far at least question time audiences aren't convinced.

First, what I call The Mantra

Every time cuts, economic uncertainty and recession are mentioned, particularly when the con-dems are coming under fire for enacting the Tory dream of small state under the auspices of austerity measures they repeat the same thing. We're in this mess because Labour spent all the money on an unweildly large state. Keep an ear out, you'll hear it next time cuts are mentioned within earshot of one of the coalition.

I might be remembering wrong, but isn't our current economic state due to a global financial collapse caused by investment banks trading in toxic debt and making very risky investments for short-term gain, resulting in the treasury having to pay billions to bail out banks? Now, I grant if Labour had properly adhered to the Keynesian plan we should have had a surplus to deal with the inevitable recession and their state was getting pretty big, but the cause, no that was bad banking practice. In fact it was bad banking practice that has largely gone unchanged. The pain has not been felt in investment, due to that fun sub-myth that all our bankers will run off to more relaxed governments if we make things too hard for them. this is rubbish too, lets face it, they're not keen to leave London unless it's for somewhere like Switzerland or the nicer tax havens. And anyone who can go there was offered during the times of plenty, these places are not short on bankers.

Labour is getting it from the coalition for two reasons, the first is simple, The Tories and lib-dems stand to be really unpopular for some of the measures that need to be taken, trying to pass some of that buck to the previous administration is just politics. The other is far more Tory. Many Tories are bankers, or heavily linked to banks. Quite frankly it suits them to cover for their mates, after all favours and tips not to mention cushy jobs post government will be harder to come by if you pointed out your benefactors as the cause of all our woes. It also fits the Tory line that "Big State" caused all the problems not private enterprise. We'll see if this little bit of misinformation takes root.

Second, The Tories have a Mandate from the people.

We hear this a lot, the Tories are still trying to claim some sort of Victory from the Election (An Election that no-one one, let's make that clear) because their guy is in No 10. The only policies the Tories can claim a mandate from are the ones they shared in election manifestos with the Lib Dems, anything else over 60% of the population actually said they didn't want. So, massive cuts, nope,. Big society, no, repeal of fox-hunting, think not, Dismantling the BBC, was that in anyone's manifesto? Youd o hear Tories occasionally trying to claim victory, seemingly in the hope that we'll believe it and assume someone voted for this pap, or indeed that they're allowed to do this because they're in charge. Its worth reminding them this si not the case, more importantly, if your MP is an apologist, sorry Lib-Dem, make a noise, remind them that you and 60% of the population voted against this.

There are other little falsehoods being planted with the hope that they become accepted fact. I'm keeping an eye out for them and will try to blog about them when I can.

Elite Revisited

Back in the mists of time, nearly 30 years ago, it was the 80s Some people regard this as a golden age of video gaming, where you couldn’t sell a game on looks alone and playability was everything. To be honest this is rose tinted glasses thinking most of the time, many games were simple, on occasion addictive but ultimately disposable, requiring far less commitment than the modern equivalent.

Elite wasn’t one of these, it was miles ahead of its time and did amazing things with the very limited resources of the BBC micro. Elite was one of the first “sandbox” games. The premise, you are someone with a spaceship; it has some weapons, a cargo hold and an engine, keep it flying and earn credits to buy add-ons and extras. How you earned money, up to you, you could mine asteroids, hunt pirates, raid other ships, trade legitimately or trade in contraband. Best of all you could switch as the mood took you, although another nice touch was that piracy and smuggling tended to get the attention of the space police which could make your life far more difficult.

After seeing a few documentaries about Elite, I decided to try and find an emulated version to play. The Easiest to find was Elite: The New kind, seemingly a port of the PC version, featuring solid 3D shapes as opposed to the wireframes. There is an old adage of never meeting your heroes, particularly when they’ve aged over 20 years. Elite, I’m proud to say is not this sort of game. Despite the lack of a premise, Goal or score beyond your credits it instantly draws you in. Controls are simple although the keymapping of this particular version isn’t particularly intuitive and you find your hand having to shift between setting speed and firing when a better layout it could have done both. Gameplay is repetitive, but no more than some modern MMOs, you jump to a system, fly to the planet, avoiding/fighting anyone who tries to rob you on the way, dock with the space station and take on fuel/cargo/upgrades as required. Once you get the fuel scoop buying fuel can be replaced with skimming the sun in the system. The look of the game, the lack of any in game music helps the atmosphere, silence as you fly towards a planet broken up by the noise of lasers if you get attacked.

I generally find I play as a trader/bounty hunter, since carrying cargo of any value attracts pirates and fighting them off can sometimes be more lucrative than the cargo run.

It is odd how you get drawn in to such a simple world, you feel genuine joy when you manage a steal on some cargo (Finding something dirt cheap somewhere and selling for huge profit) and similarly the relief when a hard fight ends and you’re left waiting for your power cells to recharge.

The funny thing is, it is truly sandbox, you can (Within the limits of what the game actually contains) do anything, where as modern sandbox games sometimes try to hold a narrative (GTA, I’m looking at you) for progress, in Elite the universe is there, you just have to spend the time exploring it.

I hear that if I like Elite I’d love EVE on line, essentially modern Elite as an MMO, and indeed I can see how well it would work as one, but I encourage any readers to give Elite a go.

I am the Faceless Blogger Woooooo

I thought, since I’ve written a bit of political stuff, I’d explain why I blog from behind the very attractive but ultimately faceless façade of the Pie Man.

What it boils down to is my job, now I’m not going to tell you what that is beyond its in civil engineering; those who know me know what I do. The problem is twofold.

First, I do worry about my employers monitoring the net. Other companies have done it, and while I can’t update my blog from work it is out there for all to see. Even if I didn’t say what I did I doubt they’d be happy if their monitoring flagged up a critical article by their employees. I like blogging, more than my job, but until people will pay me equivalent salary for this random emptying of my mind anonymous will have to do. There are links between my real identity and my blog, but you’d have to find them (It’s not actually that hard but I’ll hardly tell you). There have been existing cases of employees sacked over the content of their blogs, so I’ll at least make linking me with my blog that much harder.

Second, Lazy Journalists. So, I write a piece critical of my company, or indeed my union near an upcoming strike. When one or the other comes under scrutiny journalist have often searched for key words and phrases in the hope of finding some internal bitching. This sort of thing got some MPs in trouble after their twitter feeds were followed last election. Now this may seem like me seeming overly self important, but I don’t want to read an article stating “Worker in company X blasts management/unions” and a reveal of my name may well lead to a discovery of my employer. This one is more pernicious. While my company not liking what I’ve written I can defend by pointing out my relative anonymity and how I do not say it is the opinions of an employee, something hitting the presses on the other hand is harder, as in public my name and status as an employee would be front and centre. To this end I do self censor a lot, both in blogs and forums, a shame because a couple of times saying I work where I work, or even quoting standards could have easily won arguments. This I think is wrong. I shouldn’t have to fear reprisals from what I post online, I would ask if ranting in the pub would receive the same scrutiny, but the only difference is I’m less likely to be near someone who can report it nationally while ranting in my local while on a blog it is there, and there for a good while.

I would like to see my right to express opinions about my work, employers and related gubbins protected, so that my boss can’t sack me for expressing opinion (Hell, I even have a comments section, that’s right to reply there you know) and I’d also like my blog posts to be protected by some form of copyright, namely that if anyone wants to use them they have to ask permission. Its new legal ground and I’ll be interested to see how many sackings we get before something is done.

Iron Man 2

Well, I posted a bit showing my excitement for this film, and I have actually seen it, should I perhaps post a review. I will warn at the moment, I won’t shy away from spoilers.

First, a plot summary, picking up where Iron man left off, Tony Stark has gone public about being Iron Man, and has been using the armour for some time, both in a “Fighting Evil” role and for publicity stunts like we see in the opening. Only problem is that the Arc Reactor in his chest is slowly killing him and as he sees death coming Stark begins to act more and more recklessly. A situation not helped by senate hearings demanding Stark hand over Iron man to the military and a new threat in the form of Disgruntled Russian Vanko.

This film has taken a fair amount of criticism, mainly for being more of the same. For my money I think more of Iron Man is no bad thing, there were some nice echoes to Tony’s remarkably flaky character, and particularly the Demon in a bottle Story as Stark goes off the rails in quite a bad way. While Vanko is more grunts and gestures as a villain perhaps the real for is Justin Hammer, a rival arms manufacturer who works really well as a potential rival to carry through future films. It also sets up a bigger supporting cast, we saw Nick Fury at the end of Iron man and we’re also introduced to The Black Widow as well as more screen time for Faverau himself as Happy Hogan and Don Cheadle taking the role of Jim Rhodes/War Machine and making it his own.

On the Cheadle/Howard front. I had no objections to Cheadle, and actually think he captured the comic’s version of Jim Rhodes and particularly War Machine that may not have suited Howard’s depiction in the first film.

Criticisms, well, introducing such a big cast means some people get less screen time, Vanko isn’t particularly fleshed out as the main Villain, and we don’t see that much of Black Widow. If you’re wanting a non-stop action fest then you’ll probably be disappointed too as there is still more Tony than Iron Man.

Thing is, to me Iron Man has always been more about Tony than Iron Man. He’s often compared to Batman (Both rich orphans who dress up and fight crime) however, while with Batman there is a real ambiguity over whether Bruce Wayne dresses up as batman, or batman dresses up as Bruce Wayne, there was never such ambiguity with Iron Man. People criticise Tony’s wisecracking and the films humour, but this is part of his character. Indeed while I’m never sure about Tony/pepper pairings the chemistry between the characters and the witty rapport would be sorely missed if it was excised from the film, more so if it was excised for brooding.

I suppose you’ll like or dislike this film based on how much you like the central premise of Iron Man. I’ve heard people complain that it lacked Darkness or grit, yes it does, and to add that to Iron man would make it more generic and less unique. If you accept that this is a film about a guy who, to an extent masks his insecurities with a bombastic public persona, and a big metal suit you’ll definitely have more fun.

For Fans, the film has some really good references. Obviously we all love the Avengers stuff and the Thor cameo post credits, but there were other gems. During the race scene one car is sponsored by Roxxon, a fictional Marvel company, Cap’s Shield makes an appearance again and my personal favourite is the War Machine suit being called the Variable Threat Response suit, a nod to the comic’s designation. In fact, a nice touch is the lack of people calling themselves names. Rhodes never calls himself War Machine (Although Tony calls him this once) and similarly Vanko doesn’t turn up saying “Cower Iron Man, now you face the might of Whiplash” its good, fans and toy manufacturers know who these people are, but to add their names to dialogue would seem clunky. Not that it may not happen in the future, particularly if Titanium Man or Crimson Dynamo makes an appearance. (You could argue that Crimson Dynamo already has although he wasn’t crimson)

So, I really enjoyed this, and it has 100% more War Machine tan any other film released in 2010, in fact than any film released to date, so that must count in its favour.

Neeeeerds!

I recently had the good fortune to attend a meet of some of the Scottish members of SFX Magazine’s forum in Glasgow. It was good fun, yes it was only an afternoon and there were only 8 of us, but as a geek, being in the company of other geeks is fun. In fact, this is true in general and regardless of the focus of your geeky tendencies.

In a recent Top gear the challenge was to buy a classic car and race it in a classics time trial event. At the car auction at the start Clarkson and Hammond were being slightly disparaging of the enthusiasts, the John major voice came out along with the classic phrase “I think you’ll find” which is now pretty much used inside most fandoms to represent the joy in geeky pedantry. However by the end they were ruminating on how nice it was not to have to hide the excesses of their hobby (In this case, cars) and this is what I get when I meet up with reilly2040 and other nerds, you can use references as humour, in jokes and talk about the subject of your geekery without fear that the other parties will be bored or about to mock you. In short this is presumably what fans of football and trendy music, plus probably eastenders and “in” TV shows get every day.

You see, just about all of us have something that enthuses us; I have a good few, must be a personality trait that I take laser like interest in various things. None of them particularly useful (My wife wished I’d do the same but with Plumbing, or gas fitting, or car mechanics) If you have a hobby or an interest, you are probably a geek. Yes its usually bundled on for Sci-Fi fans, but geeks take many forms, and indeed, within their specific geek/nerddom there are subdivisions going to a fractal level, You like Cars, well are you interested in mechanics, motor sport or cars themselves, Cars? Supercars, performance, classic, vintage or Modding? With subjects like cars, most music and gaming, plus the obvious SF and Fantasy, we know we’re nerds; the difference is in the ones who have massive fan bases, making interest near universal, Football, Sports in general and fashionable music. You meet people who have a great interest in these subjects, but would never call themselves a nerd. Sir Terry Pratchett has pointed this out on many occasions. There is sometimes a sneering “I’m not like you” from the football fan, or the guy on his way to a trendy indy gig. In truth the only difference is the football fans biggest fear is being the lone supporter in a workplace, while SF fans have to feel out others like us.

It’s why all the smaller fandoms meet, be it in Metal Bars or at the end of station platforms. We all know the score in those locations and we can bring down the screens that we put up to interact with everyone else, all of whom are similarly hiding their own secret Nerd tendencies, we’ll play up our interest in football, (Or indeed talk about that as it may be as big a love as our love of Motorways) but somewhere you want to talk about something else to a like minded person.

So, attend meets, talk on forums and engage with your fellow geeks. You won’t regret it.