The film off the Hobbit has opened to mixed but generally favourable reviews. Having seen it in 3D I would award it an excellent rating. The critics seem to have honed in on a few points - the length of the film, that the story takes a while to get going and the use of high speed 3D.
The first two points are related. By making use of the other writings of Tolkien, particularly the appendixes of the Lord of the Rings, the film is able to fill in the background information to the dwarfs quest.
This actually makes the film easier to follow and is to be welcomed in my view. The film takes a while to 'get going' because the book takes a while to get going, but the early chapters of the hobbit are brilliantly imagined - keeping faithful to Tolkiens story without allowing the very childish passages of the book to change the tone of the film.
The bewildered Bilbo Baggins as the dwarfs ransack his larder is played to perfection. Of course it it difficult to distinguish all 14 dwarfs - but it is thus in the book and the film does a better job than the book does !
The film is largely faithful to the book, with the usual cinematic licence needed to convert what is on the page into something on the screen.
The encounter with the trolls is comic, and that with the goblins scary and that with Gollum deeply moving. It is striking that Gollum comes across so sympathetically and one feels for a creature who is actually - only an animation. Definitely a highlight of the film.
It is great to see Radaghast the Brown given some scenes and these add to the arc of the story, especially as in years to come people will watch the hobbit followed by the extended version of the Lord of the Rings.
I didn't watch in the high speed version so i can't comment on that but The 3d effects are used sparingly and effectively. I particularly enjoyed the eagles in flight and the various birds and butterflies flitting out into mid air.
The only worrying note - the great Goblin reminded me of the late astronomer Patrick Moore.
Sunday, 30 December 2012
Monday, 10 December 2012
from the telegraph comments
We spend £25 billion on working tax credits, in effect subsiding poor paying businesses and creating awful incentives for both employer and employee. Wouldn't it be simpler to get rid of working tax credits and increase the minimum wage, instead of having an inefficient bureaucracy in the middle collecting tax to only redistribute it back as a wage subsidy?
Similarly, instead of continuing with the £25 billion housing benefit bill madness, which is trapping ever more working people as rents rise whilst wages stagnate, shouldn't we be building social not for profit housing to house people in long-term affordable rents and remove the market distorting housing benefit from the for profit housing sector which only works to inflate rental prices for everyone? Over 90% of new housing benefit claimants are working and the housing benefit bill increased by £700 million last year, a £27k cap on the outliers is not going to dent the overall cost of this benefit
Similarly, instead of continuing with the £25 billion housing benefit bill madness, which is trapping ever more working people as rents rise whilst wages stagnate, shouldn't we be building social not for profit housing to house people in long-term affordable rents and remove the market distorting housing benefit from the for profit housing sector which only works to inflate rental prices for everyone? Over 90% of new housing benefit claimants are working and the housing benefit bill increased by £700 million last year, a £27k cap on the outliers is not going to dent the overall cost of this benefit
Tuesday, 20 November 2012
The world didn't end shock
Oh my goodness an election has taken place in England and Wales using a preferential voting system and the world didn't end :-O North Ireland and Scotland already use preferential voting for many elections.
A little noticed outcome from the Police and Crime Commissioner elections is that in 8 contests the outcome was changed by the counting of supplementary votes.
In Gloucestershire, Hampshire, Humbershire, Lincolnshire, Norfol, Suffolk, Surrey and Warwickshire the candidate with the highest vote tally on the first round was defeated on the second.
The overall effect was that the Independents gained 5 more posts (4 from the Conservatives and 1 from Labour) while the Conservatives won 2 posts where Labour had been ahead. Net result: Independents up 5, Cons down 2 Labour down 3.
The implications for the next set of elections (if there are any) are interesting. In several places the contest for 2nd place was close and if someone else had finished second they may have stood a better chance of picking up transferred votes.
Will the success of Independents spawn more independent candidates next time ? It might go either way but I suspect there will be fewer independent candidates, but they will be better organised and more likely to win. If there prefered candidate is eliminated, given a choice between a party candidate and and independent, in the current political climate and for these post most people choose an Indepent.
If that happens the political parties enthusiam for preferential voting might decline even more, but the public might start to like it and demand it for other elections.
A little noticed outcome from the Police and Crime Commissioner elections is that in 8 contests the outcome was changed by the counting of supplementary votes.
In Gloucestershire, Hampshire, Humbershire, Lincolnshire, Norfol, Suffolk, Surrey and Warwickshire the candidate with the highest vote tally on the first round was defeated on the second.
The overall effect was that the Independents gained 5 more posts (4 from the Conservatives and 1 from Labour) while the Conservatives won 2 posts where Labour had been ahead. Net result: Independents up 5, Cons down 2 Labour down 3.
The implications for the next set of elections (if there are any) are interesting. In several places the contest for 2nd place was close and if someone else had finished second they may have stood a better chance of picking up transferred votes.
Will the success of Independents spawn more independent candidates next time ? It might go either way but I suspect there will be fewer independent candidates, but they will be better organised and more likely to win. If there prefered candidate is eliminated, given a choice between a party candidate and and independent, in the current political climate and for these post most people choose an Indepent.
If that happens the political parties enthusiam for preferential voting might decline even more, but the public might start to like it and demand it for other elections.
Monday, 12 November 2012
Labours plan for jobs - a spoof surely ?
Below direct from the Labour Party Website is their plan for jobs.
1. A £2 billion tax on bank bonuses to fund a real jobs guarantee for all young people out of work for a year and build 25,000 more affordable homes.
2. Bringing forward long-term investment projects schools, roads and transport - to get people back to work and strengthen our economy for the future.
3. Reversing the Tory-led Government's damaging VAT rise now for a temporary period - a £450 boost for a couple with children - immediate help for our high streets and for struggling families and pensioners.
4. A one year cut in VAT to 5% on home improvements, repairs and maintenance - to help homeowners and small businesses.
5. A one year national insurance tax break for every small firm which takes on extra workers - helping small businesses to grow and create jobs.
So basically - three one off measures ! one shuffling of spending and a new tax which is with the economic margin of error of not existing.
1. The Government spends around £630 billion a year. Another £2 billion is not a change. You might note that the Government is spending £125 Billion more each year than it gets in Taxes - so taxing bankers bonuses - while welcome will not solve the fundamental problem. One wonders why Labour didn't tax the bankers bonuses when they Labour were in power ? 25,000 more affordable homes would be welcome, but it is really a drop in the ocean compared to the need for affordable housing. Labours record on providing affordable Housing 1997-2010 was appalling, the worst of any Government since 1906.
2. 'bringing forward' means - no new expenditure. Just money earmarked for spending in 2018 might in theory be spent in 2016 or 2017 - but it won't be spent in 2018. In practice the coaltion governement has already tried to
3. Does cutting VAT boost growth ? It would certainly cost the Government a lot of money and it might make a few families feel slightly better off for a short while - but it's hardly investment for the future. The 'rule' is VAT rises under Labour - sound budgetary management - VAT rises under the coaltion - bad budgetary management.
4. Oh my goodness - a one year cut in VAT for home improvements - what will they think of next ? Do I really have to criticise this for people to see how small scale this is.
5. More tinkering - I imagine that a few businesses might take on staff - but mostly - it will not be the National Insurance that prevents businesses taking on staff and a one off, one year cut is not much of an incentive.
1. A £2 billion tax on bank bonuses to fund a real jobs guarantee for all young people out of work for a year and build 25,000 more affordable homes.
2. Bringing forward long-term investment projects schools, roads and transport - to get people back to work and strengthen our economy for the future.
3. Reversing the Tory-led Government's damaging VAT rise now for a temporary period - a £450 boost for a couple with children - immediate help for our high streets and for struggling families and pensioners.
4. A one year cut in VAT to 5% on home improvements, repairs and maintenance - to help homeowners and small businesses.
5. A one year national insurance tax break for every small firm which takes on extra workers - helping small businesses to grow and create jobs.
So basically - three one off measures ! one shuffling of spending and a new tax which is with the economic margin of error of not existing.
1. The Government spends around £630 billion a year. Another £2 billion is not a change. You might note that the Government is spending £125 Billion more each year than it gets in Taxes - so taxing bankers bonuses - while welcome will not solve the fundamental problem. One wonders why Labour didn't tax the bankers bonuses when they Labour were in power ? 25,000 more affordable homes would be welcome, but it is really a drop in the ocean compared to the need for affordable housing. Labours record on providing affordable Housing 1997-2010 was appalling, the worst of any Government since 1906.
2. 'bringing forward' means - no new expenditure. Just money earmarked for spending in 2018 might in theory be spent in 2016 or 2017 - but it won't be spent in 2018. In practice the coaltion governement has already tried to
3. Does cutting VAT boost growth ? It would certainly cost the Government a lot of money and it might make a few families feel slightly better off for a short while - but it's hardly investment for the future. The 'rule' is VAT rises under Labour - sound budgetary management - VAT rises under the coaltion - bad budgetary management.
4. Oh my goodness - a one year cut in VAT for home improvements - what will they think of next ? Do I really have to criticise this for people to see how small scale this is.
5. More tinkering - I imagine that a few businesses might take on staff - but mostly - it will not be the National Insurance that prevents businesses taking on staff and a one off, one year cut is not much of an incentive.
Wednesday, 7 November 2012
Obama
Yay ! Obama wins. Hopefully it will lead to the Republicans moving away from the religious right and tea party extremism.
Tuesday, 6 November 2012
Morecombe and Wise
The Book Wot I Wrote - Eddie Braben ISBN 0 340 83373 4
Eddie Braben is best known as the writer for Morecombe and Wise during their most popular phase.
This book covers anecdotes from his life, tips on comedy writing, working with Eric and Ernie and more.
Braben came up with the role of 'play wright' for Ernie Wise and made him much more of a funny man than a just a feed to Eric Morecombe
The humour is slightly old fashioned (as Braden readily acknowledges) and often based on word play.
For people who like Morecombe and Wise this book will be both interesting and amusing. Braben also wrote for Ken Dodd and many other top comics.
Eddie Braben is best known as the writer for Morecombe and Wise during their most popular phase.
This book covers anecdotes from his life, tips on comedy writing, working with Eric and Ernie and more.
Braben came up with the role of 'play wright' for Ernie Wise and made him much more of a funny man than a just a feed to Eric Morecombe
The humour is slightly old fashioned (as Braden readily acknowledges) and often based on word play.
For people who like Morecombe and Wise this book will be both interesting and amusing. Braben also wrote for Ken Dodd and many other top comics.
Sunday, 4 November 2012
Left Luggage
Left Luggage - From Marx to Wilson by C. Northcote Parkinson. C.Northcote Parkinson, if he is known at all today, is remembered for his classic book Parkinsons Law - which ought to be compulsory reading for anyone involved in business, politics or running any organisation.
This is a great book by a great author. Although it was written in 1967, almost all of it remains relevant today. The only real air of nostalgia is the idea that Labour MPs believed in something called "socialism"
It is a swift and entertaining history of socialist thought - and highlights it flaws, failings and limitations. He is particularly effective in criticising Trade Unions, the co-operative movement more for what they don't do than what they do.
Parkinson is slightly less effective in defending Conservatism - you get the feeling he is too nice a person to be other than a paternalistic what used to be called a one nation tory or tory-wet.
One question puzzles, what does the C in his name refers to ? and did he prefer to be called Northcote ?
This is a great book by a great author. Although it was written in 1967, almost all of it remains relevant today. The only real air of nostalgia is the idea that Labour MPs believed in something called "socialism"
It is a swift and entertaining history of socialist thought - and highlights it flaws, failings and limitations. He is particularly effective in criticising Trade Unions, the co-operative movement more for what they don't do than what they do.
Parkinson is slightly less effective in defending Conservatism - you get the feeling he is too nice a person to be other than a paternalistic what used to be called a one nation tory or tory-wet.
One question puzzles, what does the C in his name refers to ? and did he prefer to be called Northcote ?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)