Brainbites

I wasn’t planning on writing an article for the next few days but with this breaking story I decided to quickly put my thought’s to paper (or cyber-paper) and write about what I’m sure with be a seriously controversial issue especially those from the Merseyside area and those reading who may have young children. I can’t imagine there will be many jokes flying around this topic, but since there’ a bloody Facebook group already dedicated to this I figured I throw in my meaningless opinion so here goes.

As many people know one-half of the Bulger Killers, Jon Venables was recalled to prison this week. What is creating more of a furore is what will be naturally expected as the reaction from the tabloid press. I even had a game with my friend yesterday over what the Daily Mail would say. I bet it uses the word ‘tot’, a word that you never see anywhere else but in shit newspapers talking about kids that are dead or molested. ‘Tragic tot’… they will probably accuse of him of being on Muslim benefits while there at it, I especially loved how The Sun keeps pointing out that his licence condition included not contacting the other dude involved in the murder or the Bulger family, when there’s no suggestion that he tried to do that at all.

Of course now the tabloids and idiotic people who have misplaced logic for hate are crowing that the justice department should hold a press release telling us about what Venables did to be recalled. They’ve spent hundreds of thousands, I would imagine, giving him a new life and identity. The press have a lifetime banning order on them discussing the identity or whereabouts so technically Jon Venables doesn’t exist anymore except to a close circle of people within the legal system and the social departments.

This will just start off all this crazy stuff from a few years ago when there were people claiming they were served by him in McDonalds or were playing 5 a side against him. All we need is News of the World “WHAT MONSTER MAY LOOK LIKE NOW” headline with an ‘artist’s impression’ resembling someone from the Guess Who? Board game. Some people I spoke to yesterday said they should have been hanged… When they were fucking 10 years old? Are these people really Gary Bushell?

Two ten year olds killing a two year old = String ‘em up.
Someone (probably) in their early to mid twenties executing two ten year olds = Justice
All in all… Delightful hypocrisy.

Another friend of mine said to me “As adults they should at least be forced to explain the actions they carried out and live with the names they were born with not least so people can know whose living next to them, dating their daughter, or worse still babysitting the kids.” The problem with this is that the British public can’t be trusted with such information. We’ve seen paediatrician’s cars get torched with a little help from the News of the World. Also, who knows that they spent 8 years playing computer games all day? Bit of a tabloid assumption.

No-one’s looked at the root-cause, the upbringing and most importantly the fucking parents. Why is this? Because no-one wants to think that they’re kids could turn out the same way. There’s plenty of scumbag parents in this country who don’t give two shits about their kids, don’t care if they attend school or not and would probably fit the parenting profile of these two children. These people are also a good chunk of the tabloids readership, hence why when something horrific like this, Columbine or any serious crime involving kids happens a scapegoat must be found quickly. Childs Play 3, Marilyn Manson records etc. People need something to point a finger at instead of actually looking at the real causes, which might bring up a much more unpopular answer.

A good point that’s been overlooked is Bulger’s mother. As this was such a high profile case and will always shift units, the newspapers must have her number of speed-dial. At what point do the public become part of the problem and people should just say ‘Leave the poor woman alone, let her get on with her life without constant reminders’. Sadly it’ll never happen though. For whatever reason, people can’t get enough of child abuse. Housewives and other assorted morons lap this shit up. I’m still stunned at how popular all those “Stop it Daddy, It Hurts” books are. And the press remind me of that cliché about the devil; his greatest trick was convincing the world he didn’t exist and all that. They whip up all manner of “controversy” and hysteria, yet somehow remain invisible (in the eyes of the average member of the public) regarding their part in it. It’s like these media storms happen all on their own and the papers are there by coincidence. Nobody really bothers calling out the media on invasion of privacy or hounding people anymore, because we’re all so used to it.

So what if Venables was actually rehabilitated to some degree Again, they’re in the business of selling papers. No-one wants to hear that after years of counselling he could be a well balanced bloke with huge remorse for the atrocity he committed as child. People want to hear stories of evil monsters lurking on every street corner. It would’ve made the news if one of the killers had supposedly bought a packet of fags in a shop near a school or been ‘seen’ in a shopping centre. Whether this would make the front page depends of course on whether Big Brother was on TV, or what was happening in the love lives of our national football team.

At the end of the day I’m neither happy nor sad this case is back in the public eye. Naturally for some reason when a killing of such tragedy happens we metamorphism into the Salem Witch Trials. We can’t do that and I would love to know what triggers the mind to do so. Then again I’d love to know how a killer kills but we can never really know. As for finding out what Venables did, does it matter, if it was drugs there may have been a reason for it, then again it’s possible he could have forgot to report in, Which in tabloid language is “Bulger Killer planned to Flee Country” I’m done… enjoy the next few days of scaremongering.

Ciao for now
Ash x

*Originally written for Facebook (4/3/10)

First of all thanks to Rosalie Lawrence for filling in for me, and now after Rosie’s well constructed piece, here’s some bollocks from me about animal rights freedom fighters.

After reading about the intrusion in the dog show recently, and thinking of the countless other fiasco’s of theirs, I have to know, do they actually do anything besides cause disturbances and protests and such? Do they actually do any good stuff at all? There are countless animal rights groups that don’t do the crazy stuff PETA does (OK, maybe they do and it don’t get publicized, I don’t know) and actually do good for the well being and treatment of animals. I honestly think, at the core, PETA is a bunch of people who really love and care for animals which I can respect.

However, they’ve gotten to a point where their message has been corrupted over the years. So much so, that now they feel the need to keep their name in the headlines by staging pointless and stupid demonstrations and propaganda material that does nothing to further their cause and just destroys any credibility they may still be clinging to. PETA’s pretty much a PR company for animals. PETA doesn’t necessarily help, or support, animal shelters they just complain about stuff. The good stuff they do is blow whistles on various slaughterhouses that abuse animals. But the only reason they do that is because the blow whistles on virtually every slaughterhouse so they were bound to find one that is unethical.

Whatever their intentions the group comes across as goofy publicity hounds. They’re at their most visible with shameless stunts rather than encouraging an informed debate. And that makes other animal rights activists, legitimate activists with intelligence that makes a real difference, look bad by association. When people hear the phrase “animal rights” anymore, they don’t think of local Humane Societies or even Greenpeace. They think of PETA, of naked girls “protesting” outside KFC restaurants, of vegetarians crashing a fishing tournament splashing the water with bamboo pools to scare the fish away. And (even though naked girls can be fun) they tend to think of them all as stupid.

I think PETA has good intentions and I think their message is a noble one. But some of their campaigns recently have started to hurt them a bit. They do alot of whacko stuff to get attention to their cause. They seem to be operating in the “any publicity is good publicity” way of thinking. Unfortunately for them some people are starting to be put off by their actions and are dismissing the message because of it. I think protests are fine. Commercials are fine. But things like the “Un-happy Meal” campaign they ran a few months ago, where they passed out blood splattered happy meal boxes with pictures of a knife wielding Ronald McDonald to little children, hurt them. In my opinion they do many good things. I liked when they convinced the major beauty pageants to stop using real animal furs. But it’s time to fire the public relations department. It’s presenting them badly, which in turn only hurts their cause.

I don’t like the way they target children. I already mentioned the Un-Happy Meal campaign, but there was also the booklet that they passed out to school children that showed a man fishing with the sentence “Daddy is a Murderer” under it. I think there are ways to teach children your message without freaking them out or angering their parents. See Smokey the Bear. They’re way too busy calling farmers who milk their cows rapists, euthanizing animals they’re supposed to protect and supporting terrorists for this petty “constructive activism” and “actually working for the respect of animals” bollocks.

I’m not an animal rights activist. I like meat, especially chicken. But I whole-heartedly respect people fighting For such a cause in an intelligent manner. I even agree with them to a point about how inhumane so many poultry plants are…I’m just not upset enough about it to stop eating chicken sandwiches.

I also don’t understand their methods with television commercials either. They film racy, whacked out commercials that they know no network will air. They do it purposely because they know the commercials will be played on the news and they probably get a million hits on the internet. The problem with that exposure is, the news commentators are going to be critical, and the people watching the videos on the net are not watching because they’re rallying around the cause. They’re watching because the video is whacky. Why not film a commercial that can make the air and get some credible views. Then some people might see them for the first time and think, “Hey, I like that message and will send them a donation.” Again it’s public relations. You have a good, simple message. Use it. I just don’t get it.

Till we meet again
we shall not see each other (obviously)
Ciao
Ash x

*Originally written for Facebook (3/3/10)

Perez’s charming reaction to news that Christina Milian has had her first child is “Seems like just the other day we found out she was sperminated!” In another article about Sharon Osbourne, he puts it “That Sharon doesn’t hold back! Sharon Osbourne opened up about leaving her post as judge on The X Factor back in June 2008 and she didn’t mince words when talking about fellow judge Dannii Minogue! Sharon vents: “I actually walked from X Factor because I couldn’t stand the bullshit any more. I was getting well paid - very well paid - so it was hard to leave, but I did because they didn’t like me speaking the truth. They’d rather have some doll like Dannii Minogue as a judge, endorsing this bullshit.” “Dannii - I couldn’t stand her. She was so much a dim bulb as a bulb in a power cut. Fucking useless.” Meow!! Way harsh, Shar! We anxiously await what’s sure to be Dannii’s catty reply!

On a story about Miley Cyrus being pictured with her boyfriend, Perez says “They look so bored happy! Miley Cyrus and boyfriend Liam Hemsworth were spotted taking a walk together in Toluca Lake over the weekend. Miles even stopped to take a pic with a fan! We’re not feeling the slicked-back ponytail on her, though. Not the most flattering look, girlfriend!”

Almost equally as acidic are some of the comments on the article, mostly by people hidden behind screen names. While one says “UGHHHH she needs to cover up those big nasty ears” another says “she has absolutely no neck ”. However, there are some comments in her favour, such as “You call her a slut. And slather every nasty name about her across your pages, but the one day, when she actually looks more like a young girl should look, than you go and make a comment about how HER hair, isn’t good enough for YOU. Sad.”

One of Perez’s favourite past times is to insult Victoria Beckham, and this article is no exception. “This past weekend, Victoria Beckham attended a private party in Beverly Hills. And as usual, Posh went dressed all glamorous in a black outfit, tying it all together with her overpriced Louboutins stilettos. Unfortunately, Posh was looking damn skinny. Skinny even for her usual slim self. Check out her chest. She’s all bones and skin and silicone! Please, Vic, eat a cookie. Eat anything!”

Although some of Perez’s comments can be entertaining, it is strange how his attitudes can differ so much, and he is quite hypocritical at times. While Perez is content to bash some celebrities, he does have his favourites. He refers to the singer Rihanna as ‘Princess Ri-Ri’ and calls Lady Gaga ‘Gagaloo’ or ‘wifey.’ He has an annoying habit of referring to things he approves of as ‘ferosh’ or ‘mayjah’. It’s not so much the content that is offensive about Perez, it’s more the fact that his only claim to fame is…. well, writing about other people’s fame. A man with little talent to offer except doodling over pictures of celebrities and deciding whether he wants to contribute to making or breaking them. No wonder he got punched in the face.

However, as the demand for celebrity news is constant, and he gets millions of hits a day, it looks like ‘Hollywood’s most hated website’ will continue to deliver “celebrity juice, not from concentrate.” For a sometime obese Cuban, Perez has managed to carve out a career on the back of other people’s success, failures, and personal triumphs and tragedies. It is worrying that behind the anonymity of the internet, people will say pretty much whatever they like. Outside of an article like this though, could this relationship of negativity with people we don’t even know be dangerous? How much further can our obsession with celebrity go? Only time will tell.

Rosalie Lawrence

*Originally written for Facebook (2/3/10)

This article might be a little bit different to what you are used to getting from Ash’s Brainbites. Although I can see the funny side to the antics of Perez, the purpose of this article is more informative, outlining what he includes in his gossip blog.

Over the past ten years, thanks to the ever burgeoning growth of the internet, it has never been easier for minions like you and me to access the world of celebrity. Nobody has latched onto to the idea of exploiting this seemingly insatiable need for information about these chosen few, than Mario Armando Lavandeira, Jr., who is better known under the guise of Perez Hilton.

Perez has a blog, Perezhilton.com devoted to celebrity gossip, and according to Wikipedia the blog “is known for posts covering gossip items about musicians, actors and celebrities. He is also known for posting tabloid photographs over which he has added his own captions or “doodles.” His blog has garnered negative attention for its attitude, its active “outing” of alleged closeted celebrities and its role in the increasing coverage of celebrities in all forms of media. ” The self-proclaimed “Queen of all media” has been subject to much scrutiny over the content of his blog. Indeed, with the recent deaths of Brittany Murphy and Michael Jackson, his reaction was deemed somewhat controversial.

When news of Michael Jackson going into cardiac arrest broke out on 25th June 2009, an article posted on the site claimed that it was a publicity stunt , with sarcastic comments including “Get your money back, ticket holders!!!!” and “Jacko pulled a similar stunt when he was getting ready for his big HBO special in ‘95 when he “collapsed” at rehearsal!”. This was in reference to Jackson’s upcoming This Is It tour that had been announced earlier in the year. When it became apparent that it was not a hoax, the original post was replaced with a shorter message linking to the news site TMZ saying that the singer had indeed gone into cardiac arrest. This incident goes to show how much controversy Perez can cause, and how he can often make cruel assumptions.

In the weeks prior to the death of Brittany Murphy in December 2009, Hilton had posted a number of derogatory articles about her. On December 2nd, under the heading “Brittany’s looking loopy” and with “I feel fab” and “zzz” scrawled across her photographs, Perez said “Is Brittany Murphy all hopped up on the crazy happy pills??? You be the judge!” When news of Murphy’s death broke on December 20th, Perez had radically changed his tune. “Absolutely devastating. Especially because this comes as no surprise! We, and those who knew Brittany personally, saw this coming. That does not make this any less horrible,” and couldn’t resist adding “Lindsay Lohan and Courtney Love take note: that could have been YOU!.”

In a later article, Perez made highly insensitive comments about her husband’s reluctance for an autopsy to be carried out. “What is Brittany Murphy’s husband trying to hide??????? Reports say Simon Monjack strongly opposes the Los Angeles County Coroner’s office’s decision to perform an autopsy on Murphy!!!!The coroner’s office are still planning to performing an autopsy on the late actress and there is a pending investigation by both the Coroner and the LAPD in the cause of Brittany’s death. WTF was going on in the hours leading up to Murphy’s death???? And was Monjack responsible in any way?????The truth will come out soon enough!” The fact that Perez was implying Monjack had something to do with his wife’s death seem crass and insensitive to someone who has just lost a spouse.

Looking at the site today, he documents the twitter war of words between Lily Allen and Courtney Love after they exchanged cross words at the NME awards. He says “Enough already! Lily Allen Tweeted quite an unflattering photo of Courtney Love which naturally sent Court on a Twitter rampage even causing her to retaliate with links to pictures of Lily not looking her best!” On a photograph of the two he has scrawled his trademark doodles in white, adding the caption “Oh no” above Lily and a pair of devil horns to Courtney Love’s head. He concludes “Silly is right! We think both of you should shut the eff up now!”

Part II coming soon

*Originally written for Facebook (2/3/10)

Overall it’s a tough one really. Whilst what I think John Terry did was fucking pathetic, given the fact that he two kids, married and it was one of his best mate’s ex’s. It’s bad enough doing the dirty on your wife, but let’s be honest about it, it happens fucking all the time now so it’s quite normal. However, it really says something about you if you are doing your best mate’s ex. But, with the way Terry’s wife has reacted as if nothing ever happened, it makes me wonder if it’s just the nature of the beast in the entertainment industry. Wayne Bridge probably doesn’t give a shit as he probably new she had been passed around the Chelsea dressing room. It seems quite obvious Terry’s wife’s sole purpose is to be a WAG and that is all she cares about.

You have to wonder, is infidelity just an accepted thing in the celeb world? with money comes security and knowledge that there is ALWAYS someone who would suck your cock and bend over for the sight of £££. People fear being alone and when you live in the normal world it’s this fear that can keep you in line. Also, when you find someone you often think “you can’t do better than this”. When you are rich and powerful you will feel that you can have anyone. With this belief you will always have the power in the relationship.

Since I was talking about the power element in a relationship in my post above, you would think Cheryl Cole has that power now. Maybe she does? You have to remember that this so called affair happened in 2008, round about the time when the initial affair was made public knowledge. He probably just got his end away left right and centre then. However, since then she has become one of the biggest stars in the country so it’s now Cheryl who probably wears the trousers.

The thing with these situations is that the tabloids sensationalise it. Yeah it’s not right that these guys have been shagging around behind the wife’s back…..BUT what do we know about the relationships behind closed doors? The famous hotties might be absolute bastards at home….right little diva’s who strop about. All the money these guys make won’t make the marriage happy unless they ARE happy. Not that i condone what any of these guys have done as physically the women are very pretty, but maybe they were unhappy and wanted a bit of spice in their lives.

I guess the honest fact is that in general men have massive sex drives and considerable egos, and those two factors combined are going to make it hard to turn down the opportunity if you’re lucky enough to get the chance. Multiply that by the number of chances that a man gets who’s become immensely rich and famous for his ability to kick/putt a ball better than other men, and you can see the odds of infidelity shortening considerably.

Thanks for reading this mammoth 2 Part Article, as next time I won’t be here, as Brainbites get’s invaded by the female of the species as Guest Writer Rosalie Lawrence debuts “GIRLbites”.

Ciao Mow
Ash x

*Originally written for Facebook (23/2/10)

Now before I put forward this hypothesis I would like to state that I do not condone what John Terry or Ashley Cole have done to their partners. HOWEVER… In my devil’s advocate role I wondered whether it was really all their fault. Take, for example, Mr Cole. He is currently married to a woman who is considered (by quite a few people) to be one of the most gorgeous women on the planet and yet he gets his kicks by playing away from home. Wayne Rooney is another example, engaged to his childhood sweetheart, and a pretty good looking girl in her own right and he ends up paying to get his end away with an “Auld Slapper” prostitute old enough to be his grandmother! Why is it that these men are driven to doing this? Could it be that they are stupid, arrogant or both?

This is not a situation exclusive to footballers; Jude Law was in a long term relationship with the beautiful Sienna Miller but still ended up shagging his children’s nanny. And most recently Tiger Woods cheated on his gorgeous wife Erin to have countless affairs with other women. So why these rich and successful men with apparently happy family do lives end up straying from their partner or wife? I wonder whether it is something that I call the “Simpson-Lachey Factor”. The SLF occurs when a man gets together with a gorgeous woman and either marries her or settles down with her. The women after an undetermined time (could be months, could be years, could be INSTANTLY), starts to restrict the “bedroom” portion of the relationship, until it is almost nonexistent (i.e. just on his birthday).

So when baring in mind the SLF please put yourself in the shoes of Ashley Cole. His wife has made a career from her looks, she is a model for L’Oreal and her day job is to dance around in skimpy outfits whilst singing. She has appeared in magazine spreads in alluring poses and small amounts of clothes and is a fantasy woman for many a red blooded man. People often say that they are jealous of Cole because of his wife but if she is nothing like her public persona in their private life it must be a bit gutting for Ashley. Imagine owning a sweet shop but you don’t have the keys to go inside. The public can come and go as they please but you, the owner, can’t even go in to check out the lemon bon bons! What a bloody swizz!

The “Simpson-Lachey Factor” was named after the relationship of Jessica Simpson and Nick Lachey as revealed to us on MTVs Newlyweds. Simpson played the part of the blonde bimbo and Lachey as the often frustrated husband. She might not be everyone’s cup of tea but Jessica Simpson is conventionally very beautiful. Anyone who has seen her in Dukes Of Hazard in that red bikini can attest to that. During one episode of the programme Simpson set Lachey a challenge and he was allowed to choose his own reward if he completed it. He chose his reward to be “more sex” to which Simpson replied “ewww gross”. If you are married to Daisy Duke for God’s sake and she doesn’t enjoy a roll in the hay then that has got to be so frustrating. Unsurprisingly the marriage didn’t last that long and they got divorced.

So are we to assume that despite Coleen Rooney, Cheryl Cole and Sienna Miller being gorgeous girls who project quite a sexual image they don’t actually like the act of l’amour itself?

PART 2 coming up later or tommorow… till then
Ciao xx
Ash

*Originally written for Facebook (23/2/10)

Hello, not much different to Brainbites this article except this time around I am reviewing films. Had quite a few suggestions for films to review and I promise some of them will be coming soon (some of the others will have to be tracked down), but for now I decided I would kick off the 1st edition of Filmbites by reviewing the worst film by my most loathed director. The one and only M. Night Shyamalamadingdong.

Now I make no bones about it, I hate his work, it’s that deliberate confusing paranormal plot with THE TWIST near the end somewhere and it makes sense for the last 10 minutes of the film after spending the previous 80 sitting in confusion watching bad acting. Shyamalan had his big success with “The Sixth Sense”, a film that isn’t bad but I’ve never been too fond of. Then he followed it up with the financial success of “Signs” (which I hated due to the presence of a certain Mr. Gibson), then he had a horrific drop off in quality with “The Village” and the film I’m going to review here “The Happening”, in my opinion a bloody downright awful film from a director whose film’s I loathe. What a perfect start to Filmbites. So let’s dive in.

With “The Happening”, when I first saw both the poster, and the trailer, I thought to myself ‘Hmmm, that looks interesting, could be worth a watch’. Then, when I heard the plot, I thought to myself ‘Hmmm, that sounds interesting, I’ll definitely have to seek that out’. What a mistake and how wrong I was!

The concept is thus. The Earth becomes self-aware, and realises that humans are a virus, and are ruining the planet, and therefore must be killed off. Quite an interesting premise? Indeed. Shame they decided to portray this by having an entire film of unlikeable lead characters, cringe worthy dialogue and a terrible ending. Basically, the Earth decides to kill off the human race by releasing a toxin into the air, through plant life, that causes humans to find the quickest way to kill themselves. It also, for no apparent reason, causes everybody to start walking backwards. Why? God knows, I’m just watching this.

The lead character and his ex-girlfriend find themselves lumbered with a friend’s young girl for the film, and the young girl is the only character in the entire film that exudes any amount of sympathy, and that’s pushing it. Does anyone care for the starring role? Not in this film. Mark Wahlberg, who I can usually stand, comes across as wooden, tedious and so unengaging, that he could have perished in the first 10 minutes, and I wouldn’t have cared. I want to actually care about these people I’m watching damnit! I wouldn’t have bothered otherwise.

Some of the deaths are just ridiculous, as are repeated scenes of people running around screaming ‘The wind! Avoid the wind!!’. Good one. It’s not exactly helped by the choice of a wind-cam, that’s right a WIND CAM, giving the impression that the wind is an actual tangible creature, and flying after them. It works for the shark in Jaws, it doesn’t work here. And the lawnmower death towards the end actually made me burst out laughing. That’s what you get you try and make the wind like a fucking shark, I laugh in the misfortune of others.

The ending is the worst though, due to being SO unbelievable. So, this couple that nobody cares about are alone with the little girl, and everybody around them has died. They end up separated, the man trapped in a house, the woman trapped in the shed outside. They can’t get to each other, because *SHOCK* the wind has arrived! That evil wind. Except, they decide, that in their final minutes on earth, they still love each other and need to be with each other. So, they brave the evil killer wind to run into each other’s arms in the middle of a field, to die together. Touching and sombre end? No. Because at that EXACT moment, the wind stops….and goes away….and they are both fine….nothing happens to them. Does true love destroy killer wind? No. It was all just a massive coincidence… FUCK… OFF.

And that’s it. They adopt the girl, and live happily ever after. Great… Oh, and at the very end, there is a scene where The Killer Evil Wind of Doom arrives in Paris. A harbinger of things to come?!!? Just fuck right off. Fuck you straight to hell Shyamalan.

A fair and justified review… well NO, it wasn’t. But this is Filmbites and if I’m honest I tend to enjoy reviewing horrible movies more.


Till next time people
Tata and Ciao
Ash x

*Originally written for Facebook (21/2/10)

YAY It was the BRITS (iTV 1). DID YOU watch the BRITS? HOW AWESOME was the BRITS?!?! OK the Brit Awards is never anything too big to shout about. The show hasn’t really been relevant for almost a decade now. In fact I can’t name anything that happened at a Brit Award show since I last watched them back in 2002 (the year Zoe Ball & Frank Skinner stunk the joint and Booze was banned). But because I damn well had nothing better to do, I decided to watch the Brit Awards with my only knowledge that Lady Gaga and Cheryl Cole were performing. Surely the other performers who I wasn’t aware of would smash my expectations… and to some extent, they did.

Looking at the positives of the show, Lady Gaga’s performance was more like an installation than the slice of pop were expecting. Infact… It was quite refreshing seeing her not warble that fucking awful “Bad Romance” song AGAIN. Her tribute to fashion designer Alexander McQueen may have been confusing but at least it was bloody different. Thank God. JLS who I’ve never much time for were tolerable doing that song that I can’t remember and can’t be bothered to research for the article. They mimed the chorus but overall they didn’t do badly for themselves. Lily Allen worked the opening slot well with “The Fear” and Kasabian were downright brilliant even if there lead singer then produced a sensation fall as they collected there gong later on.

The good performances kept on coming, Dizzie Rascal and Florence and the Machine did a unique duet (even through throughout the performance I kept thinking Florence looked like Janet Street Porters lost daughter). And even Jay-Z & Alicia Keys pulled off a great duet. But I’m sure your thinking, HUH? Ash where’s all the cynicism and bitching. Well I’m going to bitch sadly, just make some honest point about what was bad in this year’s Brits.

1st of all the Spice Girls appeared 5 separate times during this show… a show in 2010. Christ. Most of the people handing out awards were pretty terrible, Courtney Love, good grief. And how could we not mention the work of Peter Kay, who hosted the awards. I’m not going to slag off Kay as much as I should because to some extent he was fighting a lost cause. It’s quite hard to keep an audience of 200 people going never mind the thousands he had to work with and they were not like a comedy audience. Remember alot of these people were drunk and milling around talking general waffle while he spoke. So I’ll give Kay a pass on this one, he jokes were still crap (Jason-Z) but he was never going to win them over anyway.

And finally there is Cheryl. Our Princess. I know I did provide a balanced argument about her a few weeks ago. But this time I’m a little more biased. It was an awful performance, technical glitch or no glitch. I mentioned earlier the JLS mimed their chorus. However Cheryl mimed her whole way through the song, and this is not a personal attack. Actually, I would say the same about any performer who was consistently rubbish, and mimed all the time, and relied solely on “technology” to make their performance look good. I think it is cheating the audience. It’s all smoke and mirrors. Mariah, Britney, they all use the same technique. Mariah is a control freak, who will tweak everything to within an inch of its life, and it still sounds like a strangled cat, Britney, is like Cheryl, can dance, but not too good at singing and relies on the backing track to get her through.

They rely on the gadgets and the gizmos to make them look good. They have millions of pounds thrown at them to get to that point, and without that backing, they would never be as good as they seem. JLS, I can’t comment on them miming at the Brits, but they have proved they can sing live, well. However, I doubt that on their own, individually, they would be as good as they are together. This is the same with Cheryl. With Girls Aloud she can hide, and be drowned out, on her own, there is nowhere to hide.

I come from a theatre background, and this notion, of not being able to sing and dance is a load of old tosh. Every night, in the West End, and on Broadway, there is thousands of performers who day in day out, will sing and dance at the same time. Not just one song that lasts 4 1/2 minutes, but for 2 hours, a night, plus matinee’s on Saturday. Those who say it’s not possible do not have the talent. Plain and simple, it is an easy cop out.

Ever heard the story of the Emperor’s New Clothes? That is Cheryl - even in today’s papers, it’s all how she stole the show, yet anyone who saw it, could plainly see how rubbish it was. So do you believe the hype, do you believe what you are told, or do you believe what you see? The reaction to her performances in the tabloids was bloody awful. They practically fainted and masturbated about the moment where Cheryl looked “angry” as if it was a bigger moment than that chap who stood his ground to the tanks in Tiananmen Square.

So who was the star of the Brits? Was it Lady Gaga picking up 3 awards, JLS for their 2 awards, the brilliant performances of Florence and the Machine or Lily Allen? No… It was Cheryl Cole, because her husband’s been a dick. Welcome to music in 2010.

Till we meet again
Tata ‘n’ Ciao
Ash x

*Originally written for Facebook (17/2/10)

Hello dear readers, Ash is back with several interests brainbites coming up including the new “Filmbites” article starting up soon. However today I decided I wanted to look at the world of gameshows. We all love gameshows, they are a staple of TV like 80’s pop star Kim Wilde and available in every country in the world (except Iraq most likely) and as we go into an age where people love formula by crave originality I decided (with help from the goold ole UKFF) to pitch some TV gameshow idea’s of my own so here is the Ash Preston’s Brainbites Mega Super Deluxe Game Show Pitch-A-Thon Extravaganzaaaaaa.

Wall in the Hole: A cross between “Hole in the Wall” and the brick wall doors on Takeshi’s Castle. 3 contestants face 3 giant holes, pitch black so you cannot see what is inside them. 2 of them have giant brick walls inside and one has an exit to the other side. The catch however is that instead of running blindly into a hole, each hole is assigned a cannon and the constestants must climb in and hope the hole they are fired into leads to the safe exit. No safety gear is worn and only people who are members of the “BNP Support” facebook groups are allowed to play.

Big Brother Royale: 20 contestants are locked into a house. On entry to the house they are given backpacks containing random weapons, some good some bad. The house is divided into zones, anyone left in randomly picked zones will be killed. Last person left alive wins their own show on channel 5.

Beale or no Beale: 24 boxes containing random pictures of Ian Beale from Eastenders. Moronic contestants, each more moronic than the last, bring their randomly chosen box to the table. The persons box that contains the picture of Ian Beale when he had that silly little tash wins a bag of chips off Ian Beale. All the other contestants have to be battered and served in Beale’s chippy and/or cafe.

Guantanamo - The Game Show: Get a load of people, lock them in a warehouse house with no windows or outside door, basically no source of natural light and no clocks, them follow them around Big Brother Style. Fuck with them, meals at random times, work-out regimes for no reason, and then nothing for a few days. Then the winner is the one who can guess how log they’ve been in the house.

and finally… Duck It: a game where people throw ducks at balloons and nothing makes sense… much like this article

Join me next time when “Filmbites” takes alook at one of my least favorite movies ever.

Till next time
Ciao
Ash x

*Originally written for Facebook (10/2/10)

Somebody sent me a message about why I dislike Cheryl Cole. So I thought I’d write an entire article. I love being hung-over and incredibly bored. So let’s have a look at Cheryl Cole as we judgmentally review her (laughs, I’m not going to be judgmental). To be fair to Cheryl and give her the benefit of the doubt she didn’t exactly have it easy achieving her fame like 80’s pop star Kim Wilde and unlike certain people (Jack Fucking Whitehall). So in a way I do have respect for achieving a level of fame not easily attainable. But let’s look at the old Cheryl Cole.

Cole won many modeling competitions, including Boots Group’s bonniest baby, Mothercare Happy Faces Portrait competition, Best Looking Girl of Newcastle, The Evening Chronicle “Little Miss and Mister”, and “Most Attractive Girl” at the MetroCentre, so I guess you could say fame was destined for her. Of course the Cheryl we saw on Popstars: The Rivals in 2002 was a very different Cheryl Cole than we see today. Horrible and I mean Horrible Chavy Clothes, an awful corn rose or Croydon face life hair style and a very different face to what we see today. Slagging off other celebs and then she was charged with assault (while it was also rumored that she called a black toilet attendant a “Jiggaboo” though that has never been confirmed). But the world of PR and the Tabloids and Bollock Mags (my term for Gossip Magazines) can do a wonderful thing to people.

Cheryl and her band found big success. And she regained some credibility after the arrest incident. Then she got the X Factor job and my dislike for Cheryl began to make a front. The issue is as I’m sure it is for alot of people is that you simply can’t escape her. She’s like a faintly attractive Boogeyman, she’s following you on every TV program, every music channel, every news source and every magazine has something to say on her. She even got her own primetime one-off special last year. This woman had been catapulted into a supernova megastar. And therein lies the problem. Her omnipresence.

To me, she embodies the vapidity of modern celebrity worship culture. An attractive girl with nice teeth and no real meaningful ability who pursues celebrity with the dead eyed efficiency of a great white shark, and having achieved it now courts discussions on whether people are allowed to question her pointlessness. There is no point at all to Cheryl Cole. I was banging on about this the other day, when these people hit a certain level of celebrity, then that level of celebrity is pretty much all they need to sustain themselves, to the extent that flogging shampoo on telly is considered a triumph of some sort on her part. She’s too bland to elicit hatred, though her relentless attention seeking antics grate right on my bloody nerves, and her “Princess Cheryl” style antics on X-Factor irritated me no end. She comes over as hugely contrived and very carefully packaged and coached and airbrushed that I sometimes wonder if she has a special kind of organic wax imported to replace the usual sort mere mortals build up in their ears.

And breathe out. Here’s the problem - the public want their celebrities and entertainers to have talent, to have attained their fame through some sort of gift or achievement. The best way to attain fame without talent is to look the part – that’s your Katie Prices, Victoria Beckhams and, of course, your Cheryl Coles. You can only coast on image alone for so long before the public will want something more from you, and if you don’t deliver…

That’s when the fans start crying out “ur just jalous becoz shes gorjus.” I don’t think people are jealous (or “jalous” as the internets seem to spell it now) at least I know I’m not, but then again I don’t claim to hate anyone (I make take the piss every now and then) I just think that the public will only put up with a talentless person being in the spotlight for so long before they want something more. I have no hatred for Cheryl, just what kind of celebrity she is I don’t understand why I’m being forced into loving her. What was with ITV’s ‘I love Cheryl’ evening? Just people sitting around talking about how wonderful she is? That was just silly.

Finally the media simply loves her because she sells papers. The Media love anyone; they would blow Nick Griffin if he became a superstar. For an example of how big Cheryl is here is today’s story from the Sun.

http://news.sky.com/sky-news/content…4/15537859.jpg

the actual article (which is considered front page news, remember) is just a couple of lines saying “GORGEOUS CHERYL COLE smolders in a frock held together by one long ZIP. The GIRLS ALOUD star, 26, posed in the silver mini-dress and sexy leather boots to launch her debut solo tour this year”. The picture they’re talking about however was taken last October time, so its nearly 3 months old. So essentially the front page news story here is “Cheryl Cole looks good wearing a dress in a photo shoot from 3 months ago” oh and by the way JD Salinger died yesterday. That is far more important than Cheryl Cole’s dress. Sadly for Salinger he didn’t have a pair of tits and nice hair. Sucks to be you JD.

Till next time
Ciao

*Originally written for Facebook (29/1/10)