Nick's Blog
The Blog Giveth and the Blog Taketh Away
24/4/2009 @ 10:05
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I had two contrasting experiences in the last two weeks which just illustrated to me just how fickle those fingers of fate are and oh no that alliteration just gave me a headache.....
Two weeks ago I was at the British Society of Comedy Writer's annual convention. First of all, I was invited as a guest...the next thing I know I was being asked to give a speech on internet comedy...and then I found out I was the first speaker of the day.
After the talk, I was approached by lots of keen and eager writers all wanting to know more about Rhubba and in the subsequent days I was sent all kinds of scripts and praises about how great Rhubba is from people who weren't just as the convention, but who had found Rhubba via the Chortle comedy site.
I was basking in the adulation and respect of my peers. Next stop...stardom!
Until yesterday that is.
I had an appointment at a London based film agency; one of those state funded schemes that have lots of well meaning grants and support for up and coming film makers. I went to see an advisor who I hoped could help me find funding and give me advise on marketing. So I went in there, flashed my best can-do smile and explained about Rhubba and our film work.
It was clear after 10 minutes that this person wanted me out of their office. They couldn't help me, it was explained to me, because they don't fund internet based films, only short films shown in cinemas. Fine, I said, the internet is only one way we can show our work and that we'd be up for our material to be shown at a cinema. She didn't seem convinced...
I knew it was a stretch asking for funding from this organisation, but I thought they could give me some names of places where I could apply for funding. No can do, they said. So I asked them about help with marketing and how to raise Rhubba's profile. She didn't offer any advise other than do the rounds of short film festivals and submit my work to them.
Now I've done the circuit in the past and it's a soul-crushing and largely pointless experience as most short film festivals are attended by student film makers who descend in their posses and refuse to acknowledge any other film makers. The organisers are generally so far removed from the people who submit them films that they sometimes treat them like something stuck on their shoes.
I asked this woman could she recommend any good festivals...the ones that don't waste the film makers time and have actual top film executives and producers in attendance. She didn't. She suggested I try Googling "short film festivals in the UK" and making a list or...and this really sucked...just going along to the many short film clubs and showing them one of our sketches on the night.
Now this person is meant to be a professional careers and business advisor but I couldn't help feel that they were stating the bleeding obvious. Imagine a lawyer or an accountant or any professional going to a careers advisor, asking about what vacancies there are in their chosen industry and being told "have you tried Googling 'law firms in the UK' and writing to them all?"
Then she made a faux pas by suggesting that our sketches weren't quite up to standard...without having seen any of them. She said "we support high quality film...what I mean to say is well filmed...well, any work submitted has to be of a high professional standard". I reminded her that I had been working in the film and TV business for 15 years and that I had 17 director credits to my name.
If I needed reminding that the internet is viewed as a poor, illiterate cousin who farts at the dinner table during family reunions by the mainstream film and TV industry, then I sure got it yesterday. On top of everything, she told me that her organisation supports work of social and cultural relevance. My reply was "comedy has cultural relevance". It would have been my one moment of triumph at that meeting had she not interrupted me halfway.
To Boldly Blog...
19/4/2009 @ 17:20
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
...Or to blog boldly for those of you who are grammar pedants.
Society's pariahs change over the centuries, particularly everyone's betes noirs. Once apon a time it was the done thing to hate all Protestants, then Catholics, those who opposed the slave trade, those who supported the slave trade, Nazis, Communists, Conta-Communists, Great Train Robbers, those that sent Great Train Robbers down for 30 years, murdering doctors, paedophiles and now bankers.
But pretty soon a new category of social pariah is going to emerge...in fact, I suggest it's emerging NOW. This pariah will probably only exist in the internet community and not in the everyday real world but nonetheless they will have to navigate treacherous waters over the coming months and face ridicule, abuse and complete antipathy from the majority.
I'm talking about people who don't like the new J.J. Abrams Star Trek movie.
At the moment it is considered a social faux pas on the grandest scale to suggest this new movie is going to disappoint or even suck even the teeniest tiniest nanobit. Just Google "new Star Trek movie" and look what the internet community are saying about the new movie...and then look at what they say about people who are less than complimentary about it.
Apparently, J.J. Abrams is the finest film-maker in our generation. The man who, on the surface of things, overhyped Cloverfield, made the Mission Impossible movies unwatchable and who turned Lost from an interesting concept into the most mind-numbing pointless TV experience of the last decade is totally misunderstood. In retrospect, all these movies and TV shows were excellent in the most high and if you think Lost does suck then it's because J.J. left the show after Season 1 even though he still retains an executive producer credit.
Likewise it is wrong to suggest in internet chat forums that the scriptwriters, Orci and Kurtzmann, are overpaid hacks who haven't covered themselves with glory with efforts like The Island and the recent Transformers movie. No sir, NEVER suggest that. Instead, point the blame for the lacklustre results squarely on director Michael Bay's shoulders. It's never the writers' fault, you see?
If you then go on to suggest the trailer is loud and stupid (which it isn't. Very important to remember it's the greatest trailer ever...even better than Iron Man) with an idiotic scene featuring a 12 year old James Kirk driving a Corvette over a cliff and being arrested by a robot policeman, then you deserve every insult thrown at you. Don't you see, it's a brave new step for Star Trek?
And if the thought of Kirk high fiving on the bridge of the Enterprise or a comedy relief Scotty turns your stomach then it shouldn't. Despite all visual and audio evidence presented, neither of those things happens. NEITHER OF THEM. If you think you saw or heard them, it is only because you are a narrowminded *%&! rooted to the ^%#!@ and other words which I daren't repeat here.
I confess, I had doubts about this movie, doubts about the talents of the people involved, I questioned the need for a reboot of Star Trek (you have to be careful about calling it a reboot because it wasn't, then it was, then it wasn't, then it REALLY wasn't, then it was and now it is....I think), I speculated that the return to Kirk and Spock only young smacked of unoriginality and brand recognition, I really didn't like the trailer, I didn't like the design of the Enterprise's bridge and I thought all the dialogue sounded cliched and obvious but now I'm clearly wrong because the internet has told me so.
Another person felt like I did and put up a bad review of the movie on IMDb...it was taken down. You see, there can be no bad reviews of the new movie for it is perfect. You cannot pine for the old series or movies for it is forbidden. To oppose new Trek is to oppose progress. I know for the internet tells me so.
So I write this in the hope that all the new Trek fans stop sending me hate mail or tell me I'm mad, stupid, mad AND stupid, a dickwad, a dorkwad, several terms of abuse I've never heard of and the anti-christ who is worse than Hitler.
So embrace the new Star Trek. Smile and cheer even though every muscle and every brain cell in your body tells you to yell out "WHAT A PILE OF CACK!" If you don't, then I can't guarantee you any peace from the fans until the 12th of never....
On Her Majesty's Secret Blog
09/4/2009 @ 14:35
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One of the things that occurred to me when hearing the story about the British head of counter terrorism, Bob Quick, having to resign was how low tech his gaffe was.
(Here's the news story in case you haven't read it)
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/4/20090409/tuk-anti-terror-chief-quits-after-blunde-dba1618.html
Now a news photographer managed to get a snippet of the secret anti-terrorism operation by using a long telephoto lens and taking a picture of the document under Mr. Quick's arm but the fact that he was carrying the document under his arm was disappointing.
You see, ever since I started to watch spy thrillers or action-adventure dramas as a kid, I thought these top government types kept top secret documents in metal attache cases with a built in set of handcuffs and a self destruct detonator that would arm itself if you flipped a switch on the case. I mean, they're called "attache cases" precisely because they're meant to be carried by top government people! Is the UK so cheap now that we don't issue exploding attache cases with built in handcuffs to people carrying sensitive material about the security of the country? We don't even issue cases anymore, even non exploding ones? They've got them down at Argos for £20! Exploding costs extra.
The "honestly, it's not what it sounds like
officer" blog
02/4/2009 @ 17:58
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yesterday I took Junior to the gym for his swimming class and after it I took him to the men's changing room to have a shower and get him changed back into his clothes.
Now this is a task Wifey normally performs but I offered to look after him while she had a swim. Junior is only 11 months old so I have to carry him whilst in the shower and be constantly reassuring him as the water cascades onto him. He's used to baths, not showers, so the experience of being sprayed is new and a bit unsettling for him.
However, there is a problem with fathers taking their babies into a communal shower. Once the curtain is pulled and no one else can see you, they can hear what you're saying but they won't know that you're talking to a wee baby.
If you were a man in a changing room and you heard the following from behind a shower curtain, what would you think?
"That's it...who's a good boy? Look at you, all pink and squidgy! You're doing so well...you're daddy's little soldier, aren't you? Good boy! Daddy's going to wash you with soap now...don't be startled...my...you're getting bigger all the time...phew, you're so heavy, daddy's finding it difficult holding you and keeping you up....Good boy...daddy's proud of you!...When we get home, I'm going to play with you and bounce you up and down"
When we'd finished our shower, I pulled back the curtain to see some other patrons all looking at me weirdly for a moment. Then they saw Junior and all let out a sigh of relief as if to say "It's OK, he was just talking to his baby son".
It's the thin line men must tread lest they get people thinking the worst! It's different for women...they wouldn't have that problem in the shower and no one could misconstrue what was being said....
...unless she had twins.
"Wow, you two are soooooooo big! How did you get so big? Mummy's going to bounce you around when we get home! Maybe daddy would like to see you two bounce and jump up and down!"
