Showing posts with label tv. Show all posts
Showing posts with label tv. Show all posts

1.1.16

Sherlock Drinking Game

A certain someone asked for a Sherlock Drinking game. This is an obvious necessity and I'm surprised I haven't done one already. So here we are. It is designed to be used with the modern BBC adaptation of Sherlock, but may well work with other versions.

It goes without saying that you should drink responsibly. Set yourself a limit and once you get there, stop! Maybe continue playing with chocolates or bacon sandwiches or doing a little dance for each drinking opportunity.

And so we begin:

  • Any one mentions Nicotine patches - one drink per patch
  • Sherlock fires a gun - one drink per shot
  • Watson Fires a gun - two drinks per shot
  • Anyone mentions Watson's blog - drink
  • Watson's love-life is mentioned - one drink
  • Sherlock's love-life is mentioned - two drinks
  • Any one hints at the 'boys' being a couple - drink
  • Sherlock turns his collar up - drink
  • Sherlock ruffles his hair - drink
  • Watson sighs - drink
  • Mrs Hudson moans about the mess - drink (two drinks if it's blood/body parts)
  • Sherlock receives a text message - drink
  • Anyone runs - drink

I think that should do it.

For the Victorian Christmas special (as many of those may not count) I shall add

  • Styled moustache and beard in a named character (we might die if I include extras) - drink
  • leaping from a moving cab - drink
  • Sherlock lights a pipe - drink
  • any cape twirling - drink
  • sword stick - drink
  • anyone punches Watson - drink (two if it's Sherlock that punches him)

4.9.15

Eat Well for Less

I watched ‘Eat well for less’ last night. Leaving aside the grammar issue, and the fact that I don’t usually watch ‘reality TV’ because the directors always portray the people as thick as planks and thus hateful or snobby know-alls and thus hateful, here are my thoughts.

Pizzettas, ham and peach, made by DD from scratch (including base)
The Scott family was (of course) shown as lazy and stupid in turns, the mother shopping and buying not only almost every meal ‘ready made and oven-cookable’ but worse, she bought food ready sliced, diced and grated. When shown a cheese grater she either had never used one or pretended she hadn’t. (useful advice, buy a modern cheese grater like this one, and cut the cheese into manageable chunks before grating)  She saw slicing a potato as a challenge worth celebration and placing a slice of (pre cut) fruit loaf into a toaster as ‘preparation’.

But I think much of that was rubbish. She microwaved ready made pancakes (!) but didn’t moan that that was preparation for example. I think her ‘lazy stupidity’ was enhanced for the camera and mightily played up by the director. If you haven’t watched it you can probably catch it here.

I don’t believe the mum in this episode was really lazy either. Her children and her house were spotless and the children well behaved and polite, that doesn’t happen by chance, and both parents worked too. I think she didn’t know how to cook, and laughed it off as she was embarrassed.They were a really nice family, and despite the initial desire to slap Kate I did warm to her, her husband and their three children.

I was more interested in what Gregg Wallace didn’t say or show the family. The meals they were shown how to cook were all variations on what they were eating already so not especially healthy, mainly just cheaper and nicer. That makes sense though as you need to change eating habits gradually, there is no point in saying ‘bin the chips, eat quinoa’ that just won’t work. But I do wish he’d talked more about nutritional balance, vegetables, starches, fats etc and which foods contained which things.

There was also much talk of saving money on the food bill, but no discussion as to the fuel bill. Would 45 minutes for cheap potato chips in the oven impact more than the original plan of oven chips that take 15 minutes for example? The same for the pizzas shown later. I don’t know the answer, maybe it would make little impact but I would have liked it to have been considered.

Biscuits made at home
Gregg did briefly mention using a butcher but only to buy the ham, there was no discussion of independent butchers – ours is often cheaper than the supermarket, the meat comes with little packaging and best of all – no sell by dates! – something the mum on the show was shown as being terrified of. (see my take on that here) Not only can local butchers be cheaper, but even if the meat is slightly more expensive it can be better value, the chops we buy there shrink much less in cooking than the ones we buy at the supermarket and taste better too.

Oddly there seemed to be no discussion of buying fruit or veg at a greengrocer’s (very odd as Chris Bavin is a greengrocer). We use a local one when we can, all the food is, again, packaging free, and has no use by dates, it’s a lesson in what fruit and veg should look like. Also fruit and veg bought in season can still be cheaper than trying to stick to the same fruit and vegetables all year round, a local farm shop can be cheaper for the vegetables that are in season if you are lucky enough to have a farm nearby.

Some ideas for recipes in using things that are about to go out of date would have been good too – the old stand-by of banana cake for example for those suddenly black bananas, the idea that you can cook and freeze a meal or blanche and freeze vegetables.

The oven where the magic happens
Gregg briefly mentioned freezing sandwiches, though didn’t discuss the best fillings for freezing, and the suggestion seemed to just be laughed off) for reference, ham, cheese and tuna mayonnaise all freeze well (Though DD says to remind you that on a cold day they may not thaw by lunchtime if taken out of the freezer at breakfast time – I think I’ve lost mummy points!) Adding salad to a sandwich though makes it a soggy mess, so leave the lettuce, tomato and cucumber to add separately to the lunch box!

One thing the mum, Kate, said at the end was that she planned cooking on Sunday and freezing meals for the week. Good on her! And I admired their proposal for meal planning. I think she could also save money, have fun and improve her kitchen skills by baking biscuits with the children, perfect for lunch boxes and a great winter afternoon pastime.

I won’t be watching the programme again, I don’t feel I learned any thing, the presenters took a long time to really say nothing much as the advice on butter vs margarine wasn’t even particularly current. (new research which looked at 50 studies involving more than one million people found there was no evidence that saturated fat was bad for health. ) But for anyone that is out there thinking the a Findus Crispy Pancake is the height of sophistication and that a poached egg on toast is a ‘meal that need a lot of cooking’ then I think this show could help them to branch out a little.

My favourite cook book
I would suggest that ‘looking for cheaper versions of what you normally buy and trying them’ is a good idea, maybe one item a week from a supermarkets cheap basic range? After all, it might be OK and if not you can go back to your usual. We like basic pasta and rice for example but I prefer branded bagels and cream cheese. ‘Blind’ taste tests can be fun too, as the programme showed when they tasted the unmarked coffee…

And the simplest option of all? Buy a simple cookery book.

Did you watch the show? What did you think? And will it make you change your eating or shopping habits?

9.3.15

Poldark drinking game

First there was the Merlin drinking game, then there was the Musketeers (that's still on, do play along!) and now with the joy that is Aidan Turner as Ross Poldark in the new BBC adaptation of Poldark...there is the Poldark drinking game.


As before the rules are simple, if you see a thing on this list happen in the show, you drink. Choose wisely, use shots at your peril, maybe mouthfuls of wine (or tea) or even play with mini marshmallows or skittles, the choice is yours. Have fun, drink responsibly (because those stains won't come out of that sofa)

A beautiful Cornish sunset/sunrise - 1 drink
Two people share a horse - 1 drink
Anyone bleeds - 1 drink
Ross Poldark is topless - 1 drink
Anyone is naked - 2 drinks
Someone leaps to their feet knocking over wine glasses etc - 1 drink
A fight where anyone rolls up their sleeves or removes a coat first - 1 drink
Ross Poldark's ruffled shirt is undone - 1 drink
Ross Poldark brushes sweaty hair from his eyes - 1 drink
Cute dog in the scene - 1 drink
Heaving bosom - 1 drink
A woman slaps a man - 1 drink
A woman tends to a mans wounds - 1 drink
Someone pays for drinks in a pub by flinging money - 1 drink
Bar brawl - 1 drink
Horse canters across the Cornish fields in wide shot to music- 1 drink
Anyone on a cliff top gazing out to sea, includes on horseback - 1 drink 
Every time Ross Poldark has an alcoholic drink - match him drink for drink


That's enough to be going on with. I don't want to die.
Edited 15/03/2015 - Having now watched episode one I have added a couple to the list - sorely tempted to add 'drink anytime the music is so intrusive it makes you scream - but there is not enough alcohol in the land.

Let me know if you play.

30.12.14

Whovians...take a peek at this

I like Dr Who but I'm not one of those super fans that knows all the villains and the order the Drs regenerated in etc etc

I'm happy to watch an episode if I'm about, or miss it if I'm not. But I'm aware there are people that are rather more keen than I am on the entire timey-wimey-ness of it all and so when I received this press release I thought I had better share!!

I confess it did even make me consider a visit, it does sound like the most awesome fun! And for homeschoolers and ...well anyone really, it sounds rather educational too!

The National Space Centre is going all Dr Who!
National Space Centre, Exploration Drive, Leicester, LE4 5NS
31st Jan-1st Feb 2015

Step out from behind the sofa as they look at the science behind Doctor Who – they'll be looking at Time Travel, Teleportation, Regeneration, Robots, Space Travel and providing you with all the information you'll need to stop the next alien invasion on your screens.

You could come face to face with the Deadly Daleks and Cybernetic Cybermen. They've a galaxy of heroes and villains lurking. Maybe K9 will come to your assistance?

Follow their Science Trail around the centre and learn more about the facts behind the Science in Doctor Who. Answer a few simple questions to be in with a chance of winning a prize!

Seventh Doctor, Sylvester McCoy will be appearing alongside his Doctor Who Companion, Ace, played by Sophie Aldred.

They will aslo have a stunning, full size studio replica of the TARDIS console as it first appeared in Doctor Who, alongside not one, but two TARDIS police boxes (well this is time travel after all!)
Members of Project Dalek will be attending the event, with fully mobile Daleks patrolling the Centre too, watch out, you may be EXTERMINATED!



The Daleks are joined by members of the UK 15th Cyber Legion, who will be showing how their amazingly accurate Cyber Costumes are created. Warning, You may be DELETED!


K9 will be trundling around the centre, so look out for the Time Lords best friend! (I adore K9 I wish they'd bring him back for a visit!)

If all that were not enough, there are prop making workshops, live action walk through encounters, a Knitathon (completing a Tom Baker scarf in just two days), costume competition and even the opportunity to design and have your own monster created live!

National Space Centre

The National Space Centre is the UK's largest visitor attraction and research facility dedicated to space.The National Space Centre opened to the public in June 2001 and has welcomed over 2.8 million visitors, including over 550,000 school children.

I just re read it....I'm all excited again...now If I can just find the time and sort out travel - if only I had a TARDIS!

27.1.14

Musketeers drinking game

A drinking game to play while watching The Musketeers, for a teetotal version use marshmallows instead of shots

Take a drink when ...



  • A Musketeer leaps through a window - 2 drinks, (one if it's anyone else that leaps)
  • A musketeer is running through a market and a stall is upset - 2 drinks (one if it's anyone else)
  • Someone is threatening someone with a musket but not shooting - 1 drink
  • There is a Man hug - I drink
  • There is a Heaving bosom - 1 drink
  • A musketeer denies being hurt or down plays a wound that is obvious to everyone - 1 drink
  • A Musketeer kisses a woman - 1 drink
  • A musketeer fights with a sword in each hand - 2 drinks (one for each sword)
  • A musketeer gets topless - 2 drinks
  • Anyone is surprised in their underwear or other state of undress - one drink
  • A musketeer stands brooding in the rain - 1 drink
  • A woman banadages a mans wounds - 1 drink
  • A woman folds linen - 1 drink
  • Anyone swirls a cape - 1 drink
  • A musketeer takes a drink....match them drink for drink
  • A musketeer thinks about, or moons over, a lost/past love - 1 drink

Anyone still sober?






17.1.14

Benefit Street

I haven't watched Benefit Street. I do not intend to watch Benefit Street. This does not stop me having an opinion on Benefit Street.

One would have to be blind, deaf, living in another country and have no access to any news, to not know about the Channel 4 show Benefit Street.

I have not watched it because the title tells me all I care to know. It cries 'let us be disparaging of those scroungers that lay around all day living on benefits'.

And it seems from the discussions on Radio 4 and elsewhere that I'm not far wrong. Sold to those that 'star' in it as a 'show about community spirit', it appears to be far from that.

I feel sad that the people in the show were so used and so naive to let it happen.

Why did they not guess that a TV show would have an agenda? Why did they not realise that it is negativity that the world loves? Why did they not think to get something in writing as to what would be the tone of the show? Why was the street identified so that now people (and children!) that live there are being bullied?

I'm disgusted that while thousands condemn the show, a huge number of people watch and believe what they see. Disgusted that many who don't believe it, watch it anyway, (adding to the viewing figures) and then mutter their disgust after each episode.

I don't suggest for one moment that all people everywhere are saints. But I do suggest that skewing results is an unkind and deeply cynical thing to do.

I await with some glee a "Politician Street" looking into the lives of a more upper class of 'benefit' claimant. But I'm not holding my breath.

16.11.12

Scream Time

sorry no, not scream, screen...or maybe I was right the first time.

We (not the royal we, I do have a husband) have settled on what we consider appropriate screen time for our soon to be teen daughter.

We are not a family that watches much TV, we have never watched before 4pm and as adults we tend not to sit down to watch until about 9pm and we go to bed at 10pm so we are not square eyed. We also try to be discerning in what we watch, sticking to a few dramas (no soaps, no reality tv) and some nature, or history or art and culture stuff.

We have a child though and she is less discerning, loving many comedies, kids shows, reality stuff, whatever and while we try and restrict times and ensure the TV is not actually unsuitable we let her get on with it. For a while we even tried total derestriction (during the summer holiday) hoping she'd get bored and it would lose the attraction, this didn't work, she pretty much watched every waking hour and moaned if we asked her to leave the house with us at any time!

So now we have a fairly strict regime of timings, less TV in the week and never more than 2 hours a day. (screen time is not just TV it includes computer/wii time too but often computer time is actually youtube or iplayer time!) and for a while that seemed to go well but lately the times for TV are seen as a right, an entitlement, with arguments that TV comes first, before chores, before homework. Behaviour is getting worse too and while I know teens do have the whole struggle with hormones ... it all seems so TV orientated.

I guess what I wonder is what you do? How can we cope? Are we unfair? What is normal? Do we seem too strict or not strict enough? Is there ever an excuse for rudeness?



I totally adore DD but some days I can see why some animals eat their young!

Help!

9.1.12

So what of Sherlock?

If you are in the UK you may well be amongst the many that have been avidly watching the new Sherlock Holmes. I have enjoyed it far more than I ever believed I would, as a real fan of the original written works and the films with Basil Rathbone, followed by the brilliant TV adaptations with Jeremy Brett, I was surprised to see that this new series was a modern version, I was worried it would be either too far from the original feel or too close (and therefore ridiculous) but amazingly it was (as Goldilocks would agree) just right!

I adore the portrayal of the main characters, Moriarty is camp enough to appear amusing and then horrifically terrifying by turns. Watson is perfect as the slightly bemused but never stupid side kick and Sherlock, well he is Sherlock!

So rather than blog about the episodes, the plots the genius rewritings, rather than argue that Irene Adler is still a feminist that bests Holmes or that the scenes in Government buildings are hilarious in the space and cleanliness they show I shall comment on how I see Holmes and his relationships; with Watson (“we are not….”) and with Moriarty and maybe even with ‘The Woman’.

I plan to rewatch the first two episodes in this series, so if I’ve missed anything I apologise. And these are only my rambling ideas anyway. But the main thing I think is that Holmes is a distant character who does not form proper attachments in an emotional sense with anyone. Watson comments, in an overheard conversation with Lestrade, that Holmes has aspergers and indeed he sometimes shows traits of aspergers, autism, and other conditions related to emotional detachment. This is true to the original character who always put intellect before emotion. I enjoyed Watson’s jibe “alright Mr Spock”.

Now I can hear you all ‘but he loves Watson’ ‘he is friends with Watson’ ‘He likes Mrs Hudson’ ‘He lusted or loved Irene Adler’ etc etc

But I put the preposition that he did not and does not, do anything of the kind.

He needs Watson in a way that perhaps even the great Sherlock Holmes does not understand, he needs someone to show off to is the most basic of these needs, he constantly admits to being a show off – he thrives on his own cleverness and the demonstration of his powers. He needs Watson to do the mundane tasks such as writing the blog (and probably buying the groceries, paying the bills, etc), to read the papers for him (much as an MP has researchers) He needs Watson to help him to interact and to understand the emotional side of the world. He is concerned when he realises that Watson may leave him, not because he will miss his friendship, but because he will lose his sounding board, his guinea pig (“you thought the drug was in the sugar! And you gave me the sugar!”)

Mrs Hudson’s character is very similar, she keeps him ‘normal’, she rents him a home and ensures he keeps it habitable. Without her one imagines he would never clean or tidy. He uses her ruthlessness and bravery also, such as when she hides things for him and resists interrogation for him. It is clear she loves him (and possibly Watson) as the sons she does not have. Her ‘boys’.

Sherlock has a relationship with Moriarty that is equally complex,. He both loathes him (for his evil nature) and loves him (for his intellect and ability to challenge Holmes) The real complexity is, that given Sherlock’s lack of emotions, inability to understand ‘caring’ (shown when he couldn’t understand why anyone would not have a vicious dog put down) why is he on the side of ‘good’ at all? After all he sneers at Mycroft and the government, he appears to have no care about many small cases at all, so it is not a desire to help that causes him to solve cases, no of course, it is the challenge of the case. Perhaps the reason Sherlock loves Moriarty so, is that he knows that he could be him, that if the cases dried up, if the criminals became easy and boring, he himself would be drawn to crime just to stretch himself. I have always imagined him as something of a sociopath.

I also believe his relationship with The Woman is similar, he is fascinated by her in non sexual way, as one would be fascinated by an alien species that has bizarre mating habits. He is interested in how she feels about him, he understands the physical aspects of love (the increased pulse, the pupils dilating) and obviously of sex but he himself does not feel them, rather he loves her in the way he loves Moriarty, she is his intellectual equal. She challenges him and makes his life interesting. If he saves her life it it’s not because he loves her, but because his world would be more boring without her in it, and to Holmes, his world is all that matters. He is the most selfish man I have ever seen. And maybe, just maybe this is what makes him so desirable to so many who watch the TV show, or maybe it’s that he is played by Benedict Cumberbatch.

Popular posts