Violent Crop Turtles

Seven Day Wine - Brewing Aftermath

2010-08-17T18:37:00.000+01:00

The seven short days with my wine were fairly uneventful. There was a lot of bubbling going on in the airlock and not much else. Solomon was kind enough to include detailed instructions and after five days he told me to check a sample of the wine with a hydrometer. Reading the hydrometer was a Grade-A bitch of a difficult task and I practically didn't have a clue what I was reading. Depending on the outcome, I was meant to add Stabiliser but I couldn't read it, so added it anyway. I then did some funky shaking stuff to get rid of excess gas from the bottle, and then added a sachet of "Add Back" - whatever that is. I had a distinct feeling that the wine making was quite out of my own hands. It would've been nice for Solomon Grundy to let me know what each sachet of whatever was doing. Regardless, I continued on to add a sachet of "Kieselsol" which I presume is some sort of Hungarian prostitute concentrate.

I drunk the sample used with the hydrometer - it was yeasty and bitter which I wont lie, is not how I usually like my wine or anything at all. Went straight to my head though, so on the fifth day I rested - a bit like God.

The day after I added "Chitosan" which apparently clears the wine - god knows how. I left it for 24 hours and the wine started clearing and going a sort of amber, apple-juice colour. Sediment built up at the bottom and with the wine ready I sterilised some empty wine bottles, added a final 400g of sugar to the wine mixture, shook to dissolve and siphoned the wine into the empty bottles. I had another go at the hydrometer and managed to work out it has an alcoholic strength of about 11% and is classed as "very sweet".

On to tasting - it really is not bad. In fact, it's a lot better than I thought it would be and I'd happily drink six bottles of it, which is convenient because that's how much I possess. It's very sweet, fruity, and I'd go as far as saying it's actually good. So frankly I reckon that's a success for my first home brewing attempt.

Now to come up with a name for my home brew...-?

Solomon Grundy's Home brewed Wine in SEVEN DAYS

2010-08-10T11:46:00.001+01:00

Ever since I was 16 and unable to legally buy booze from supermarkets, off-licenses and so on, i've had a persistent dream to brew ale, mead or wine at home. I'm chronically lazy so it's taken me four years to walk to the shop and buy brewing equipment, as well as a "kit" to make my first home brew.

I opted for "Solomon Grundy's Elderflower Wine" which apparently brews in a mere seven days. "Bought on Monday, drunk on Sunday" or in my case, bought on Monday, started brewing on Tuesday (there's that laziness I spoke about) and drunk on.. next Tuesday. Or, more accurately - hammered on Tuesday.

From the picture I have deduced you need a big hat to enjoy this wine to it's full extent.

I started by sterilising all my kit - a spoon, funnel, a gallon bottle, lid of said bottle and rubber stopper, scales, air lock and a jug. I then realised I couldn't complete the wine making process without having Marmite on toast and some tea.

After a tea break I returned to work. Solomon Grundy was kind enough to include all the ingredients I needed, bar sugar, in the kit. I followed his instructions and poured various amounts of hot and cold water into the jug, followed by approx 775g of granulated sugar. That was particularly difficult to get down a funnel so I ended up spooning most of it in - boring work. LESS SPOONING, MORE WIIIIINE!

I then chucked in the grape concentrate, wine yeast, stabilizer and acid (didn't know wine needed class A's but if Solomon says so..) and gave the whole thing a big shake. I half filled the airlock with water and put the bottle in my room to emit some nice brewery-like smells about the house.

Hopefully i'll have some beautiful tasting wine in a weeks time. I'm a bit dubious I didn't do it a little wrong though, because there was rather a lot of yeast and sugar stuck around the rim of the bottle. I wasn't sure to clean it off and considered using my finger. Unsure and in a state of panic whether it was a good idea to put my non-sterilised finger into the tip of the bottle, I sort of got a bit scared and put it in half way and waggled it about (story of my life). Hopefully this won't affect the quality of the wine.

Iron Man 2 Review

2010-05-02T11:56:00.006+01:00

If you’ve watched the first Iron Man you’re probably expecting a well paced action movie with explosions, guns and babes. Not much has been changed for the sequel. Ok, not a bad thing since the first was a smash with great reviews, but Iron Man two feels like it runs about 20 minutes too long.

The storyline feels mostly made up of same story - different day with a sparing sprinkle of fresh ideas on top. The basic outline, villains and ending are what you’d expect. Good guy, bad guy, pseudo-good guy becomes bad guy, fighting, good guy rescues dame. Fin.

In fact I reckon that sums up the first films plot, too.

This time the enemies aren’t from Afghanistan, but Russia. A revolutionary twist. If that wasn’t enough, main character and hero Tony Stark (Robert Downey, Jr.) ends up fighting against altered versions of his own Iron Man suit. Does it feel familiar to the prequel yet? How about when Stark creates a new reactor-cum-heart, you’ll find that here too.

One thing that has changed is Terrence Howard no longer plays the character of Lt. Colonel James Rhodes. It is now played by Don Cheadle, much to the disdain of Terrence; "There was no explanation, apparently the contracts that we write and sign aren't worth the paper that they're printed on sometimes".

Throughout the film, the acting is ok but doesn’t stand out. The “special” effects are what you’d expect from any modern movie. The music is ACDC. Cool, but not everyone’s cup of tea. The ending is the same boss-fight scenario you’ve seen over and over again. Stark is in the grip of death but manages to overcome “Ivan Vanko”, the Russian antagonist played by Mickey Rourke. There is a distinct lack of tension throughout because you will know the feel-good, get-the-girl outcome before you’ve even watched the opening scene.

All in all it’s not a bad film, it’s just so. It’s run of the mill, mediocre, and will probably appeal to fans of the series more than newcomers.

To see stills from the movie, look at the slide show below:

ChatRoulette - Potential for other uses

2010-04-28T12:53:00.000+01:00

: Ben Folds playing a concert live on Chatroulette

ChatRoulette is a website that was established a year ago and allows one person anywhere in the world to be connected at random to another user so that they can see and talk to each other. Anyone (Well, there are a couple of rules. Like you must be over 16, and clothed) can use it so long as you have a keyboard and a web camera. A microphone and speakers for audio are optional.

Established in November 2009 by high school student Andrey Ternovskiy from Moscow, ChatRoulette has gone from 500 visitors shortly after it launched to 50,000 a month later. By the start of March 2010 it had an estimated 1.5 million users and an Alexa rank of 1864 near the end of March.

On the surface it's just another form of social networking coupled with the negative connotations of "seedy" and "pervy old men" that camera websites notoriously drag along with them. Although you are likely to come across legions of naked exhibitionists, mostly men (you have been warned), users are finding a number of increasingly elaborate and inventive uses for the service.

For instance, there are various Chatroulette drinking games appearing on the internet. Some rules include "Guess the age of a fellow Rouletter, every year you are away from the truth = a finger." and "Someone wants you to speak because they 'love your accent' - 2 fingers."

: This is what anonymity does.

Ben Folds played a concert and had Chatroulette projected across the back of the stage. He improvised songs relating to what the person who appears on the screen is doing. Check it out here.

FCUK recently ran a competition on Chatroulette. The challenge was to "chat up" women on the website, described on the FCUK blog as "the most densely populated patch of guy terrain on the web." and "A hostile environment worthy of a Ross Kemp special." The winner, Paul Flynn, received £250 in FCUK vouchers.

People also play their own games within it such as holding a bit of paper to the camera with "Tilt your head to read this, I win" written on it, and a tally of how many people they've tricked.

Chatroulette is still in it's infancy, though it has grown a lot recently and you can expect to see plenty of other uses and developments within it. Personally, I can't see the benefit of "meeting" and chatting to a stranger on the net when you can get much more from meeting a person in the real world, who wont disappear when one of you decides you've had enough.

Here's an interview with Chatroulette creator Andrey Ternovskiy.

This week I read: Inconceivable - Ben Elton

2010-04-27T22:46:00.003+01:00

Today I finished reading Ben Elton's book, "INCONCEIVABLE". I'd already read this book a good few years ago, probably when I was about eleven years old. I remember being on holiday and my mum reading it by the pool, and I decided I'd give it a go.

My younger self felt it was a funny read, so when I saw it in a book shop recently I was curious to see if it was as good as I fondly remembered it.

It's not a difficult read, it's easy going. Light, but written well. There are some great, funny parts and good one liners are abundant throughout. It was interesting to see the characters develop throughout the book, they drive the story.
It's written in a format of "diary entries" - the two main characters (husband and wife) take it in turns to write their diaries, opening up their feelings about their inability to conceive a child.

I felt that Lucy started as a strong character but sagged in the middle - Sam's perspective on events was usually funnier and Lucy's sometimes felt it was there just because that was the format being used, and to push the story on.

The ending is fantastic. Not that it's mind-blowingly unpredictable, but it quickly ramps up the emotions and I genuinely felt for the characters. A satisfying read that, particularly at the end, deals with some uncomfortable issues anyone who's been in a relationship will be familiar with. It wraps up happily, though, and who doesn't love a happy ending.
Next, I'm reading Flat Earth News: An Award-Winning Reporter Exposes Falsehood, Distortion and Propaganda in the Global Media by Nick Davies. I attended a lecture of his and he was fascinating, so I have high hopes for his book.

Gotta start somewhere

2010-04-26T22:45:00.000+01:00

The first puff of the cigarette was exhaled from his clenched teeth as he groaned. Smoking didn’t look natural for him but he swore by it. The amount of fuss he made with each puff, you’d think he was smoking glass. He felt he was a thin line away from being a fake. He sat at his laptop puffing away waiting for lightning to slam some inspiration into his head but he hardly every wrote anything beyond a couple of paragraphs.

“Sure, the books on the way. It’s in the pipes baby. I’m collecting ideas for it at the moment. Lots of analogies, that’s what I’m working on.”

“How much have you written so far”

“Some. I’ve been working on it for about a year.”

A couple more drags on the cigarette. The cherry edges closer to the filter. Chuck it now, there’s plenty more in the pack, no need to smoke everything to your fingertips. Headrush. Faint gray images play in his head. How can he work in these conditions? Time for a nap.

Creating a TV package - my first attempt

2010-03-10T23:51:00.004Z

I've been having a fantastic time on the MultiMedia Journalism course at Bournemouth. The first term was tricky - we were plunged straight into work. Before I knew it I had reams of shorthand pages filling up and assignment deadlines lurking in the near future.

Now a sizeable chunk of the second term has run it's course I feel more in control and less stressed. I'm enjoying the course and the mass of variety we have - last month we were researching, writing for, producing and presenting radio news packages. This month we're working on TV - there's always something new and exciting looming around the corner.

This is my first attempt at a TV news package. We worked in pairs, so equal credit to Alasdair Gray. It could be improved, definitely, but for my first shot and the limited time scale I'm happy with it.

Improvements - Some of the script has repeated words.

The script doesn't always extend to the end of the images.

It's a bit 'cheesy'.

The voice tone changes between clips.

A few sound issues with background noise.

It could've investigated deeper rather than just vox pop.

To see the full piece go to the Buzz Article. Or click here for my other work on Buzz.

Alice in Wonderland - Review

2010-03-06T09:53:00.013Z

As the film opened, I had high hopes. It begins with the camera flying through the mists and fogs of London and I swear if you look closely enough you'll see the Cheshire cat’s smile upon the moon at the very start.

There's a cute scene between Alice as a child and her father as he comforts her after a nightmare.
What happens next will set you up for the disappointment of the rest of the film. There's a whole play on "oooh my mysterious dreams" between an older Alice played by Mia Wasikowska and her mother. It all comes across as falsely sinister and very "Oh, what will happen next, something dangerous, I bet!".

She falls down the rabbit hole and there's the well known scene of shrinking but forgetting to collect the key from the table. This isn't a bad thing that they took some material directly from the book. It's a great thing. The problem lies in them not adding any solid, new material. The only new material was a few nonsensical words they had mashed up and thrown in. They don't work; Nonsense needs context and meaning.

Johnny Depp played an animated, pleasurably insane Mad Hatter but was let down by the poor story and again, the poor scripting and lack of nonsense which made the book so fantastic. There's huge room for funny lines in the film, but they rarely appear.

The two queens were unconvincing. Helena Bonham Carter as the Queen of Hearts was annoying to listen to. It's a quirk of the character that she shouts all the time, but it was screechy and lacked the fun eccentricity.

Anne Hathaway was something worse though. For a film that habitually mimics other cinema conventions such as the evil being ugly and the good beautiful, the white queen was odd and plain at best.
The make up didn't do her justice.
At the point where she receives the Vorpal blade her expression was more of a nymphomaniac receiving a diamond-encrusted sex toy than that of a queen receiving her champion’s sword. Hehe.

There is a massive amount of computer generated imagery in the film. It seems to be of various qualities. Crispin Glover as the Knave of Hearts, for example, looks very unnatural when moving whereas the Jabberwocky is fantastic to look at with great animation as it shoves aside huge concrete columns and smashes everything in its way.

An Alice in Wonderland story where the world has become sinister is a great idea, but this film doesn't deliver. It doesn't distinguish itself from other bad-meets-good films while also gutting the story of both the magic in the book and the psycadelia of the 1951 cartoon.

Considerday

2010-02-21T15:12:00.006Z

Any governments or populations goal is surely to bring their nation to the state of being a utopia. Like a graph, the line representing economical success, happiness of the populace and so on can go up indefinitely but cannot hit a glass ceiling, since there isn't one. (Why would there be a limit to happiness?)
Additionally, were a "peak" reached, it should have to be maintained continually else it would drop.

Assuming we all seek out what contents us; Whilst there is a variety of people and opinion, there will always be some who aren't happy. The supporters of the party in power are happy - the opposition are not.

So, maybe to have a utopia and for everyone to be content we would have to all be satisfied by the same politics, leisure activities, work, opinion and so on or at least to not be dissatisfied by them. Either way we would like the same things - just more or less of them than others.
Perhaps a utopia is impossible to achieve since, basically, "variety is the spice of life" - I wouldn't want to be the same or overly similar to a large proportion of the population. Do you sacrifice variety or a state of utopia? Both bring content.

Press

2010-02-02T14:22:00.007Z

Seven storeys down from my concrete perch an orange-jacketed man runs across the road to the car park of the flats. Behind the rain-flecked windows I sit on the backrest of a blue chair, smoking a beedi. An Indian cigarette, a simple tobacco leaf wrapped around raw tobacco and tied with a miniature pink thread. I imagine, somewhere, an Indian woman is busily tying the threads of a hundred thousand others. The world is nearly silent. Not eerie but peaceful. I cannot hear the drip drop of the coffee filter - the water has now all run through, dyed with the flavours of the coffee.

If I took a photograph of this moment and the serenity that accompanies it, it would not be as powerfully calming as it is for me now if I had not adopted the same state of mind.

Brawling

2010-01-24T23:21:00.004Z

Bars, clubs, pubs, gigs, raves, concerts, house parties. Whatever your favourite place to go is, whether you’re planning on socialising, catching up, dancing or just getting plain-old-fashioned off-your-nut-drunk, there is always some cretin who will start a fight.

It’s a given that when people are drunk they are clumsy and bump into people. This doesn’t mean they are challenging them to some fisticuffs, throwing down the proverbial gauntlet when they accidentally spill a few sips of whoever’s drink. Yet some people can’t help but prove just how awesome they are by either hurling a torrent of abuse or, in a few cases, actually being stupid and ridiculous enough to get physical.

It amounts to pointless violence fuelled by cheap alcohol. Not that I think it’s a bad thing alcohol is cheaper than milk. You can’t have beer on your cereal. People will always love milk.

Presumably these street fighters think they’re proving a point by causing trouble. Maybe it makes them look super cool? Maybe they’ll get to screw more chicks if they get into a fight and can show off their war wounds.

However, I don’t think I’ve ever met anyone who was impressed with fighting that wasn’t a thug and who hadn’t ended up with a share of broken bones at one time or another.

Only the other day I was out in a club with a few friends. It was fancy dress so we were painted as Smurfs. I saw an angry looking guy circling another guy who was talking to a girl. Suddenly the aggressor sprung and pulled him to the floor. Drunken fighting looks like a spaghetti bolognaise sprawl of limbs flying in various directions but with hardly any punches landing. It looks obscene.

Without getting too soppy, “where is the love”, people? What’s wrong with having a night out that doesn’t involve hurling torrents of abuse at misunderstood strangers? Also, what the hell is wrong with all these people who get so drunk they fall on their asses. Honestly, what would their dear nanas say? They’d probably be so outraged that they’d never cook them a fruit cake to take back to University ever again.

Jordan Bintcliffe

Fahrenheit 451

2009-12-26T12:21:00.016Z

Fahrenheit 451 – The temperature at which paper spontaneously catches fire without the presence of a flame.

Written by Ray Bradbury, I finished reading this book just today. I slapped it down on the coffee table and mum says “Was it good?”

“It was great”
“What was it about?”
I umm at this for a moment. “It was about.” Another pause.

“It’s about a fireman. But instead of putting out fires, they start fires. They burn books because the government censors them. Citizens are watching lots of TV and don’t want to learn or read so they watch more TV and read less and the government orders all the books to be burnt and if you’re caught with a book you’re taken away.”

I suppose that’s it. No, yes, that’s it. But it’s open to interpretation depending on who you are even though those are the facts of the story. I feel like some breed of pseudo-intellectual when I give my opinions on books. Like I should be sipping coffee in a star bucks with some arty, beret-sporting colleagues who are campaigning for veganism or against nuclear power. They’d probably then talk about the significance of Kazimir Malevich’s Black Square in the art world. Jokes aside, kudos to Malevich for producing such a radical piece of work as early as 1915.

Malevich's Black Square - 1915

Describing the book, I go on to relate it to real world situations such as Hitler’s burning of the books in 1933, China’s Qin dynasty or much more recently, churches in America burning Harry Potter because of their apparently un-godlike teachings. Stretching past the influence of the physical word, just this month China has banned the registration of certain internet domain names for personal use.

I then talk about something I learnt in A-level Media where the world is getting smaller – people stay inside and watch more news and are increasingly afraid of the outside world.
The same happens in Fahrenheit 451.

How many times have you heard “Children don’t play in the street anymore, it’s too dangerous” and how many times have you known this to be true?

A recent survey of 1700 adults showed that one in four cross the road to avoid young people.

Is the world becoming more dangerous or are we becoming more scared?
Perhaps it is both – perhaps the increase in knife crime was all made up but it scared people so shitless they felt they needed to carry knives. It reminds me of a line from Brass Eye:

(In the past) “Everyone had keys to each others houses, and the locks were made of something like paper” – Is it that we have a tendency to remember the past so fondly?

Malevich’s Black Square is discussed in The Crucial Man show;
Jon Gabrus describes it in terms of sex as “Missionary. With three condoms on.”
His guest, Jarrett Gregory, a curator from The New Museum says “No, this is so far beyond missionary. This is like something we’ve all never tried, probably.”

When discussing Duchamp’s Fountain, a urinal turned 90̊ degrees and signed, Gregory says “One of the things you want to avoid saying is ‘I could’ve done that’ because if you didn’t do it then it doesn’t really matter that you could do it.”

Duchamp's Fountain - 1917

Next time anyone is making up their mind what they think or a person is shouting someone down because they believe themselves to be so correct - It doesn’t matter what you think of something as long as you believe it, have reason to and would keep your mind open to change if a better idea was presented to you. At least, that is what I believe.

Jordan Bintcliffe