Peter Moore remembers the sudden disappearance of Mourinho, the darling of the tabloids

————————

It was an aberration when Jose Mourinho left Chelsea two and a half years ago, almost unnoticed in the dark of a September night. He was Chelsea’s most successful manager; a darling of the press and a public pantomime villain in equal measure.

Any logic would have had him trumpeted out of the London by the Lord Mayor’s brass band aboard the Queen’s own carriage. Either that or being chased down the Mall with pointed sticks flying past his ears. As it was, ‘The Special One’ disappeared into the night. Before the press knew it, he was gone.

Journalists had cause to be aggrieved. Rarely had a figure appeared with a greater talent for controversy than Mourinho. Amongst his most famous incendiary quotes were claims that Arsenal boss Arsene Wenger was a ‘voyeur’, that Alex Ferguson unfairly used his prestige to influence referees and that Tottenham’s defending reminded him of a bus parked in front of the goal.’ With Mourinho around, the sports paper of any national newspaper wrote themselves.

It’s apt to remember Mourinho a couple of years on. Managerial spats remain about as common as squabbles in a nursery school, but with Mourinho around they always had an extra glimmer of comedy and eloquence. In comparison with a snippet of one of Mourinho broadsides, Benitez’ attack last week upon Ferguson looked quite tame. A little like a donkey off Scarborough beach stood next to Gandalf’s Shadowfax.

So, for a touch of Monday morning amusement, and with Mourinho’s Inter Milan proudly stood at the top of Serie A, let’s bask in a bit of retro-Mourinho. Here are a few quotes from our dearly missed Portuguese friend:

—————————————-

‘I’m not a defender of old or new football managers. I believe in good ones and bad ones, those that achieve success and those that don’t. Please don’t call me arrogant, but I’m European champion and I think I’m a special one.’ (June 2004)

‘As we say in Portugal, they brought the bus and they left the bus in front of the goal. I would have been frustrated if I had been a supporter who paid £50 to watch this game because Spurs came to defend. There was only one team looking to win, they only came not to concede - it’s not fair for the football we played.’ (September 2004)

‘This is nothing against Sir Alex whatsoever. After the game on Wednesday we were together in my office and we spoke and drank wine. Unfortunately it was a very bad bottle of wine and he was complaining, so when we go to Old Trafford for the second leg, on my birthday, I will take a beautiful bottle of Portuguese wine.’ (On Alex Ferguson, January 2005)

‘During the afternoon it rained only in this stadium - our kitman saw it. There must be a micro-climate here. The pitch was like a swimming pool.’

‘The moral of the story is not to listen to those who tell you not to play the violin but stick to the tambourine.’

‘If he helped me out in training we would be bottom of the league and if I had to work in his world of big business, we would be bankrupt!’ (On Roman Abramovich)

‘I think he is one of these people who is a voyeur. He likes to watch other people. There are some guys who, when they are at home, have a big telescope to see what happens in other families. He speaks, speaks, speaks about Chelsea.’ ( On Arsene Wenger, October 2005)

—————————————————————-

Image Credit: dphuonq

• These quotes are taken from a BBC electronic article, entitled, The World According to Mourinho

Tags: Digital TV, Sport // Add Comment »

January’s Choice

Nominated for 4 Golden Globes
8.7 rated on IMDB
94% on Rotten Tomatoes
Nominated for Best Picture from the Producers’ Guild of America

“Slumdog Millionaire” is this year’s aesthetic achievement to rival last year’s “The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford” in quality. From start to finish this is, pardon the use of a rather silly and frequently used expression, a ‘visual feast’. The editing, digital cinematography, and Danny Boyle’s direction (with co-director Loveleen Tandan) create a fascinating aesthetic which is perfect for the material.” (The Cinema Journal)

Tags: Digital TV, Films, Sport // Add Comment »

Marie Kemplay laments a downturn in silly television to accompany the economy

I always have such fun explaining to my boyfriend that while I think Clarkson (I don’t need to mention his first name) is a fool, I find him hugely entertaining, whereas my boyfriend just thinks he’s a fool. So I’m gutted to learn that that the Top Gear budget for the next series is being cut to the extent it will visibly affect show quality.

What? No more pointless explosions!?! I completely accept that Top Gear is frivolity in excelsis but my God I certainly need a bit of frivolity with Robert Peston beckoning the apocalypse at every turn. My recommendation to anybody who does not enjoy Top Gear is simply to mute it and allow the pictures to speak for themselves. Or failing that to consume a few glasses of wine, upon which you’ll be transported to a state of uncontrollable giggling.

Nobody can even remotely claim the programme is about seriously road testing cars anymore, we’re talking the most outlandish stunts you can possibly get. Take the other night where they had to cross from one end of Vietnam to the other on scooters. Not only is this pretty ridiculous in itself, considering Vietnam is 1,650km long, but they then proceeded to start attaching large objects to their scooters like model galleons and paintings. Then they had to convert them into amphibious craft and ‘sail’ across Ha Long Bay to their final destination. Ridiculous, but, quite frankly, equally brilliant.

But all is not lost Top Gear’s executive producer, Andy Wilman wrote on a Top Gear Fansite that they have a plan for combating the budget cut: “Basically instead of trimming back a little bit on every show – losing a helicopter here or a truck crash there – we’ll endeavour to make 13 of our 14 shows as per the usual Jerry Bruckheimer standard, and then the last one, when we only have a tenner left, will be utter, utter sh*te.” Hey maybe the final episode may see them actually return to the shows roots and actually seriously test some cars. Although it may not be as funny, I’m sure serious road buffs would like it.

But all of this got me thinking, how will other shows start to be affected? Strictly Recession Come Dancing? No sequins? Gavin and Stacy will have to stop hopping between Essex and Wales and just pick one or the other. Maybe all the news studios will have to sell their vast stockpiles of glass and plasma screens and go back to their plywood-esque desks that look like they’ve been stuck together with tape. I realise I’m not treating this issue with the gravity it deserves but seriously where will it end? Producers surely know that if they keep cutting budgets programming will become so dull and unimpressive that viewers will simply stop watching, eliminating the whole raison d’etre of TV programmes in the first place. The BBC is already slashing its programming budget by as much as 30 per cent in some areas after admitting it is facing a $293 million funding shortfall caused by inflation and rocketing utility bills, and it’s likely other broadcasters are facing the same predicament.

This may sound flippant but on a serious note maybe much like the universe (bear with me) after the big bang of digital television maybe the number of digital channels will stop growing exponentially and as revenues dwindle we will see the number of channels contracting until once again we are left with a few good ‘quality’ channels and the rest showing either garbage or just repeats? We’ll see in a few years. Personally, I wouldn’t really miss the vast majority of the hundreds of channels, I hardly ever venture out of the mainstream channels except to occasionally watch repeats of Top Gear on Dave, something I’ll be forced to do more often post-budget cut if I want my fill of pointless explosions.

—————————————————————-

Image Credit: Podknox

Tags: Digital TV // Add Comment »

Traditionalist Marie Kemplay explores why you should cook from the heart not from the telly…

The nadir of festive Christmas cooking programmes is Nigella’s Christmas Kitchen, the premise that this programme is somehow meant to make Christmas easier and less stressful is pretty amusing. Anybody who measures up their cooking experience to Nigella simultaneously drinking lethal festive concoctions, entertaining 10 guests, talking to a camera oh and roasting a whole dinner is probably going to be disappointed.

I was always of the mistaken belief that Christmas was the one time of year you could stick to the time old favourite of a good old fashioned roast, but watch this programme and you’re left with the impression that unless your larder (not that I even have one of those) is packed with homemade mince pies and lamb tagines and your friends will all be receiving jars of beetroot and ginger chutney, well quite frankly your attempts at Christmas are just not good enough, Nigella is Christmas, apparently. Her tyranny even continues after the big day, she says and I quote ‘You haven’t had a leftover turkey sandwich worth its name until you’ve had my chilli jelly with it’. I beg to differ, come boxing day I will be having many a leftover turkey sandwich and a bit of cranberry is always good enough for me.

This programme is clearly not aimed at people like me who have no ambition to make Michelin star roast potatoes, it’s for people who have enough time to do a bit extra and enjoy laughing along with Nigella as her little jokes demonstrate how much like the rest of us she is, oh ho ho Nigella I can’t believe you used canned lychees, you sly old dog.

I may be archaic in my interpretation of Christmas but I always thought it was a family affair, not so much about overly fancy food dishes as a simple yet hugely satisfying meal that brings everybody to the table. I personally can’t think of anything worse than going around to my aunt and uncles’ and finding Nigella’s fare on the table. You can see it now, thousands of families up and down the country eating the same gentrified roast, no individuality or sense of tradition. I really rather enjoy my family’s Christmas dinner, with its own little quirks that have developed over the years, just simple things like sausages cooked inside the turkey. I would be loath to throw out years of successful roasting to fit in with Christmas 2008 cooking fashions, because we all know come Christmas 2009 Nigella will have wearied of christmas pudding bonbons and the new fad will be pomegranate and chilli salmon, or roast quail topped with chocolate angels.

I don’t begrudge Nigella, I’ll even admit to using a couple of her recipes what I dislike is the self satisfied tone, ‘oh it’s a moment’s work’; maybe for you Nigella, but for the rest of us it’s hours in the supermarket searching for obscure ingredients like buttermilk and crème de lychee or cider vinegar, then there’s the piles of washing up that somehow appears from producing one ‘simple’ dish.

I’m going to be incredibly bold and say something bordering on the quite frankly unbelievable: you don’t need Nigella to have a good Christmas. And I hate to say something horribly crass, but surely the stress free way to enjoy Christmas is maybe just to buy those mince pies, just a thought?

—————————————————————-

Image Credit: CielChen

Tags: Digital TV, News // Add Comment »

In a continuing series on the future of the media, Marie Kemplay looks at the effect the digital age is having on the humble newspaper

—————————

I never thought I would live to see the day that The Independent would move into the offices of the Daily Mail, but it’s happened. I can not think of two more unlikely bedfellows.

When The Independent was launched in 1986 it was intended to have a right-of-centre ethos, but soon became known as a champion of liberal values; a title it might find difficult to defend with ‘middle England’s’ favourite rag just down the corridor. Certainly it would be hard to get away with its famous ‘It is [independent] are you?’ slogan now.

But maybe The Independent’s fate is indicative of newspapers as a whole. Times is‘ard! Circulation figures for all the national daily newspapers are consistently dropping month by month. Only the Guardian and the Financial Times’ circulations increased in November by 0.45% and 0.82% respectively but even then their circulation figures for the year are down on 2007.

And the trouble’s not limited to London, the Glasgow based Herald and Times Group, publishers of the Scottish national daily papers The Herald and The Evening Times, last week announced it was making 250 staff redundant and asking them to reapply for their jobs, indicating all is not well to the north of the border either.

A number of factors are at play here, in cities across the country there are now numerous free sheets to contend with, The Metro, London Lite and thelondonpaper in the capital, MEN lite in Manchester etc. and although the proprietors of these papers claim they are targeting an audience who would not buy a newspaper anyway, it seems like common sense to me that they will encourage the staple market of daily commuters to stop paying as well.

The main issue for newspapers is how to successfully embrace an audience so familiar with the Internet. The Internet, of course, trumps newspapers in two respects; it’s free and news is updated with regularity rather than once or twice daily. Only the Financial Times charges readers to read it online and even they allow you to read 20 articles free each month. Perhaps in the future British newspapers may have to take a nod from across the pond, in America it is common practice for online editions to only give readers a ‘taster’ before demanding they pay for the rest of the article. But then of course we would just be driven into the open arms of the broadcast news websites such as Sky and BBC.

The Internet also embraces a totally different style of writing, quick snippets of information designed for instant digestion, not necessarily the traditional style of newspapers. It’s important for a newspaper’s ‘googleability’ that stories are written in a certain way, with keywords featuring regularly throughout otherwise when people search for a story online they won’t find it. Journalists may be loath to write in this ‘painting by numbers’ way but they will have to if they want to remain well-read and, ultimately, that’s what they care about.

Multimedia has forced newspapers not to be mono-faceted; I recently visited the Daily Telegraph’s Head Office which rather than being a fortress of conservatism like you might expect has TV and radio studios. With the advent of youtube generation, newspapers have been forced to jump off the page and embrace all technology with videos, blogging, pod and vodcasting now the norm, even for the older generation of journalists. I was told at The Daily Telegraph that even journalists in their 60s and 70s have to learn how to use the new technology. Can you imagine it, being a business for 40 years and having to learn a whole new methodology? But in these difficult economic times newspapers like all other business are going to have to learn to give the punters exactly what they want at a decent price or like The Independent they’re going to find themselves in trouble. And with advertising revenues almost certain to drop during this recession they have a tough time ahead.

—————————————————————-

Image Credit: Alex Barth

Tags: Digital TV // Add Comment »

Marie Kemplay discusses how ‘the show” will have to go on without its most famous voice

He’s only Wo-gone and done it. Can you believe that after 35 years as the face of The Eurovision Song Contest Terry Wogan has pulled out? To be replaced by our favourite, over-the-top and camp comedian, Graham Norton. You may be thinking he’s the perfect host for the annual showcase of Euro trash, but Wogan was about all that made the contest bearable: bringing British common sense to an evening of nonsense. I’m thinking, miniature cars, Rock monsters, airline crews, the madness goes on…

It was pretty obvious he was leaving when at the end of last year’s contest he signed off with wistful comments like “I have to decide whether I want to do this again. Indeed, western European participants have to decide whether they want to take part from here on in because their prospects are poor.”

Wogan’s departure marks the end of an era when Britain, and other Western European countries could actually win. In recent years there have been very plausible accusations of bloc voting after a series of Eastern European countries have won in succession and Western European countries have been given consistently bad marks. It was less than surprising when Russia took the prize last year after receiving ‘douze points’ from Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Ukraine, Belarus and Armenia.

But is there not perhaps just a hint of ’sour grapes’ at work here? Let’s be honest have any UK songs actually deserved to win in say the last five years? Does anybody even remember any UK entries from the past 5 years? Scooch anybody? Andy Abrahams? Daz Sampson? I’m not suggesting there isn’t some serious favouritism going on amongst our ex-Soviet counterparts but you can’t blame them for how utterly forgettable and just downright bad our entries have been.

But it’s not just us Brits, I think the contest as a whole is suffering, these are no longer the glory days of ‘Waterloo’ and ‘Save all you kisses for me’. I have no idea what last year’s winning song, ‘I Believe’ by Dima Bilan sounds like, or Molitva by Marija Šerifović from 2007. Perhaps Andrew Lloyd Webber, who is writing the UK’s song this year can inject some of his special brand of musical magic and save us from the embarrassment of ‘nil points, however I don’t hold out much hope and if I’m honest I don’t care too much either.

—————————————————————-

Image Credit: proteusbcn

Tags: Digital TV // Add Comment »

In the beginning man created the BBC and man saw what he had made and it was good. But quarter of a century later and the BBC is no longer alone on our television screens. Marie Kemplay asks in the digital age what is the future for the original analogue channel?

Turn on your TV and you can choose from hundreds of channels, and although at any given time about 70% are showing Top Gear re-runs or home decoration programmes we, needless to say, still have a lot more choice than when we had just five channels. In this environment the broadcaster which was founded with the duty “to inform, to educate and to entertain” seems to be losing its way.

In the past few weeks the Ross/Brand fiasco seems to have highlighted just how vulnerable the BBC’s position is. Being attacked from all directions from an older generation for caring too much about being ‘edgy’ and not catering to let’s say more ‘refined’ tastes and the younger generation criticising them for caving in to pressure from people without a sense of humour. MPs have also been having a field day in Parliament over this. For example just listen to Liberal Democrat MP Phil Woolas: “I think once again the BBC have demonstrated that it is one law for its highly paid stars and one law for everyone else. When we are forking out millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money on presenters, the least we can expect is a level of propriety commensurate with what the public considers decent.”

One of the most contentious issues is of course Ross’ hugely inflated salary of £1.8m which literally as Ross - so frequently loved to point out – came at the price of 1,800 journalists, who were made redundant last year. It begged the question if providing edgy entertainment is seemingly more important than news programmes how is the BBC still able to justify its public service funding?

It seems in its quest to be the ‘everyman’ of British television, the BBC has lost touch with exactly who its target audience should be. In the digital age broadcasters such as Sky have a very distinct advantage in that it does not have a prescribed public service remit and is freer to court the rapidly changing tastes and habits of its viewers.

Both Sky and the BBC are currently foraying into High Definition television. The obvious benefit with the BBC is that if you have all the right HD equipment you have to pay no extra charge. However with Sky you must pay an extra subscription but you also get far more HD channels for your money such as sky films, Sky Sports and Discovery Channel as well as BBC HD.

Another point is that in recent years people have increasingly wanted to watch television more flexibly. It is now completely the normal to watch programmes on the computer rather than television screen. Recognising this, last year the BBC launched iplayer, a hugely successful online viewing platform. Sky has recently announced it will follow suit and although the details are not yet confirmed Sky have said it will show favourite programmes from its favourite channels. Sky Player will be available to everybody regardless of whether you currently subscribe to Sky or not, and although you will have to pay a fee, what most people are quick to forget is the BBC is not free, currently costing £139 a year, somehow I doubt that Sky Player will cost that much.

It seems likely in the future the BBC will be forced to stick to a more ‘public service’ role, i.e focus more on educational programming such as news and documentaries if it is to retain its license fee funding in a world where there are hundreds of channels providing entertainment. However I hope it is not forced to abandon entertainment altogether where would we have been without the likes of Fawlty Towers, Little Britain and Yes Minister, it will be black day indeed when the BBC is forced to abandon comedy. As for Sky I think it will continue to do what it does best, provide great sports coverage, great movies and the next generation of quality American television a la ’24’ and ‘Lost’ – and to boot probably all of the above in glorious High Definition quality.

Something to bear in mind though is what will happen if Channel 4 gets its wish and is given Public Service funding, now that would completely change the landscape of broadcasting in the UK.

Tags: BBC, Digital TV, Sky // Add Comment »

As Jonathan Ross is currently on unpaid leave you’ll have to make do with or very own movie buff Marie Kemplay instead.

A cinematic review of 2008

Batman

Although it’s impossible not be influenced by his tragic death and that inevitably coloured my judgement, Heath Ledger’s performance as the Joker really stole the show from Christian Bale, who despite playing the lead character of Batman was just plain bland. But I’m in danger of flogging the film as a one trick pony and there is much more to it than Ledger, for example the undercurrent of dodgy financial dealings is one we are now unfortunately only too familiar with, a dark film for dark times, yet highly entertaining nonetheless. Unlike everybody else I also thought there was the perfect number of false endings, I would have felt cheated had I not been tricked a few times.

There Will Be Blood

In terms of aesthetic quality There Will be Blood has to be high on the list, the rich black oil bursting forth from the parched and arid earth of California is deeply beautiful. The black stuff has an almost Midas-like quality to it, corrupting everything it touches and I guess that is the underlying message…maybe. Confusion is what prevents me from really enjoying the film, I don’t really understand what message is being conveyed, oil is evil? Really you don’t say! Overall the film gives the impression of complete futility, and after investing 2.5 good hours of my life, I would like a bit more than that. The ending especially threw me, I just don’t understand why Daniel Day Lewis kills the priest there is of course some kind of message about the hypocrisy of the church and the new religion being wealth and capitalist greed hidden in there but still…WHAT? Overall, Imagery: spectacular, Acting: fantastic, plot (excuse my French) crap.

Cloverfield

I really enjoyed Cloverfield, I put it down to my age, it has an intentional badly made student film vibe. Perhaps the greatest thing is that it unapologetically leaves you with no real resolution, we never found why this weird monster appeared or what happens next. I never mind being cheated out of answers if the plot is gripping enough. Although those American accents become somewhat grating – I’m thinking multiple “OH MY GAWDs” here - I can’t imagine a British equivalent being quite as plausible. If a British man’s love interest was trapped at the top of building with little chance of successful rescue and a giant monster was ripping through the streets of London I would expect his reaction to be: “anybody fancy a pint?” It was good old fashioned scary movie; no hint of government conspiracy, terrorism, etc a perfect hiding behind the sofa flick. It’s the kind of horror film that rather than leaving you unnerved allows you to sleep well at night and put the weird Godzilla-like monster in the same mental box as you put the wicked stepmother and big bad wolf when you were a child.

“W”

I think W deserves a place if just for the sole reason that it finally allows us to celebrate George W Bush’s departure in glorious technicolour. Although in my opinion the film has arrived 8 years too late, I think it would have been far more useful before he came into office to give us a clue about the kind of disastrous policies we could expect. But of course without the good old Iraq war and years of gaffes and unfortunate choices of words it is unlikely anybody would have paid much attention. So as it is this film is one giant sigh of relief that he’s on the way out, allowing us to have one last laugh at him but also unexpectedly to maybe even empathise with him, I know, it surprised me too. Overall nothing too revolutionary about the film and some of the acting is quite questionable, Tony Blair for example is pretty ludicrous. I also think Oliver Stone missed a trick by not covering the whole Florida recount fiasco which got Bush into the White House in the first place.

Sex in the City

And finally, allow me my foolish indulgence, as a female I tend to go weak at the knees over dresses, designer labels, jewellery…anything that would provoke the opposite reaction from a bloke. I think the Sex and the City movie is perhaps the ultimate polarising film, for women it champions all the best things about being a modern woman: being gorgeous, having a great job, and most importantly shoes and handbags. It’s a film about having it all basically, and while it’s wholly unrealistic it’s nice for a few hours to escape the dreary streets of Britain to uptown Manhattan. However for a bloke I can see the film is anathema, but I reckon it might be a good pulling trick, I’m willing to bet if you quoted a line from the film the ladies would be putty in your hands…here’s a good one: “You fancy ‘Colouring’ sometime?”

—————————————————————-

Image Credit: muckster

Tags: Digital TV, Films // Add Comment »