It's interesting how few people describe themselves as feminists. Almost everybody would agree with votes for women, womens' rights to own property, equal pay etc., but many people find feminism off-putting.
I think probably feminists -especially the militant ones have themselves to blame for that. Instead of defining feminism as believing in gender equality, they tend to define it only as equality for women (when there are many examples where men need equality too -take the fact that prostate cancer kills more men than breast cancer kills women, yet only half the money is spent on it for research: how many feminists have you heard condemning that?)
The word "feminist" is also a gender loaded word, implying for women only. A man sound silly saying he is a feminist. We need a new word to describe someone who believes in equality for men and women. (Equalist perhaps?)
Since we seem to be drifting into Churchill territory, what's the general consensus here on the Darkest Hour film?
Went to see it a week ago and liked it, but had some reservations.
Undoubtedly a great performance by Gary Oldman. Many people find the Tube journey, with its perfectly constituted focus group, to be a bit crap.
Oldman will probably win both the BAFTA and the Oscar. But Phantom Thread is a far better film and I think that Daniel Day-Lewis gives a far, far better performance. DDL would get my vote. If I were looking to back a surprise winner at the Oscars, it would be DDL. Oldman is 1/20 with Betfred, DDL is 25/1......that shows how nailed on it looks for Oldman.
It's interesting how few people describe themselves as feminists. Almost everybody would agree with votes for women, womens' rights to own property, equal pay etc., but many people find feminism off-putting.
I think probably feminists -especially the militant ones have themselves to blame for that. Instead of defining feminism as believing in gender equality, they tend to define it only as equality for women (when there are many examples where men need equality too -take the fact that prostate cancer kills more men than breast cancer kills women, yet only half the money is spent on it for research: how many feminists have you heard condemning that?)
The word "feminist" is also a gender loaded word, implying for women only. A man sound silly saying he is a feminist. We need a new word to describe someone who believes in equality for men and women. (Equalist perhaps?)
That is a very misleading way of looking at cancer deaths. Breast cancer used to kill more women than prostate cancer killed men, by a long way. Since 2000, breast cancer deaths have been in steady decline and prostate cancer rates increasing. Figures released only last week showed crossover for the first time. In the 2 or 3 working days since then, it is hardly surprising nothing much has happened. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/02/02/prostate-cancer-kills-people-breast-cancer-first-time-new-figures/
Since we seem to be drifting into Churchill territory, what's the general consensus here on the Darkest Hour film?
Went to see it a week ago and liked it, but had some reservations.
Undoubtedly a great performance by Gary Oldman. Many people find the Tube journey, with its perfectly constituted focus group, to be a bit crap.
Oldman will probably win both the BAFTA and the Oscar. But Phantom Thread is a far better film and I think that Daniel Day-Lewis gives a far, far better performance. DDL would get my vote. If I were looking to back a surprise winner at the Oscars, it would be DDL. Oldman is 1/20 with Betfred, DDL is 25/1......that shows how nailed on it looks for Oldman.
It does look nailed on for Oldman. Personally I thought the stand out performance was K Scott-Thomas as Clem, but then I'm a bit of a KST groupie.
The Tube scene was naff, but it didn't spoil the film, which is well worth a viewing, whatever your views of the central character.
The Atlantic slave trade and the rape of the Congo both happened before women got the vote. Universal healthcare, the internet and space exploration all happened afterwards.
That's not funny though. I think you are missing the point.
It's interesting how few people describe themselves as feminists. Almost everybody would agree with votes for women, womens' rights to own property, equal pay etc., but many people find feminism off-putting.
I think probably feminists -especially the militant ones have themselves to blame for that. Instead of defining feminism as believing in gender equality, they tend to define it only as equality for women (when there are many examples where men need equality too -take the fact that prostate cancer kills more men than breast cancer kills women, yet only half the money is spent on it for research: how many feminists have you heard condemning that?)
The word "feminist" is also a gender loaded word, implying for women only. A man sound silly saying he is a feminist. We need a new word to describe someone who believes in equality for men and women. (Equalist perhaps?)
That is a very misleading way of looking at cancer deaths. Breast cancer used to kill more women than prostate cancer killed men, by a long way. Since 2000, breast cancer deaths have been in steady decline and prostate cancer rates increasing. Figures released only last week showed crossover for the first time. In the 2 or 3 working days since then, it is hardly surprising nothing much has happened. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/02/02/prostate-cancer-kills-people-breast-cancer-first-time-new-figures/
I think prostate cancer has been untreated unequally for a very long time in terms of research, and you never hear a feminist criticising it. Men have been historically untreated unfairly in all kinds of ways. In both World Wars only men could be called up to die in battle. On sinking ships I believe it is still women (and children) first. Women have considerably more rights now than men in divorce cases, the outcome of which is often very unfair to men. Lesbianism has never been illegal in Britain, but male homosexuality was illegal until 1967. Need I go on?
Feminism's mistake (apart from the gender loaded word) has always been to go on and on about how women have been treated unfairly, but failing to address the way men have been treated unfairly. Even now in the media it seems perfectly acceptable to slag off men as a sex in a way which would be (rightly) deemed unacceptable when talking about women.
Since we seem to be drifting into Churchill territory, what's the general consensus here on the Darkest Hour film?
Went to see it a week ago and liked it, but had some reservations.
Undoubtedly a great performance by Gary Oldman. Many people find the Tube journey, with its perfectly constituted focus group, to be a bit crap.
Oldman will probably win both the BAFTA and the Oscar. But Phantom Thread is a far better film and I think that Daniel Day-Lewis gives a far, far better performance. DDL would get my vote. If I were looking to back a surprise winner at the Oscars, it would be DDL. Oldman is 1/20 with Betfred, DDL is 25/1......that shows how nailed on it looks for Oldman.
It’s an OK film with a great performance. But the performance itself is a kind of pastiche, and can’t be much more than that given the weakness in narrative and script.
I’ve seen in twice. The first time Oldman awed me. The second time I got a bit annoyed by the rest of the film.
The tube ride doesn’t actually bother me. Except when the black guy starts reciting poetry which was trite.
And, given that the plot is to some extent about political machinations, I would have liked to have known more about the motivations of Halifax, Chamberlain, and for that matter Attlee. But they are all paper cut-outs really, to let Oldman/Churchill shine.
The best bits are when Clemmy complains about money, and when he’s on the phone to Roosevelt.
Since we seem to be drifting into Churchill territory, what's the general consensus here on the Darkest Hour film?
Went to see it a week ago and liked it, but had some reservations.
Undoubtedly a great performance by Gary Oldman. Many people find the Tube journey, with its perfectly constituted focus group, to be a bit crap.
Oldman will probably win both the BAFTA and the Oscar. But Phantom Thread is a far better film and I think that Daniel Day-Lewis gives a far, far better performance. DDL would get my vote. If I were looking to back a surprise winner at the Oscars, it would be DDL. Oldman is 1/20 with Betfred, DDL is 25/1......that shows how nailed on it looks for Oldman.
The problem with the tube focus group is not as some have said that Churchill never used the tube but that it completely misses the thrust of Churchill's work in the wilderness years. It is the same flaw as in The Imitation Game (Cumberbatch as Turing) where a brilliantly acted Turing has an epiphany in the pub to use the bombe to do precisely what in real life he'd designed it to do. Brian Cox's Churchill film was arguably the same. We seem to be suffering from film makers jazzing up stories without first having understood them.
Since we seem to be drifting into Churchill territory, what's the general consensus here on the Darkest Hour film?
Went to see it a week ago and liked it, but had some reservations.
Undoubtedly a great performance by Gary Oldman. Many people find the Tube journey, with its perfectly constituted focus group, to be a bit crap.
Oldman will probably win both the BAFTA and the Oscar. But Phantom Thread is a far better film and I think that Daniel Day-Lewis gives a far, far better performance. DDL would get my vote. If I were looking to back a surprise winner at the Oscars, it would be DDL. Oldman is 1/20 with Betfred, DDL is 25/1......that shows how nailed on it looks for Oldman.
The problem with the tube focus group is not as some have said that Churchill never used the tube but that it completely misses the thrust of Churchill's work in the wilderness years. It is the same flaw as in The Imitation Game (Cumberbatch as Turing) where a brilliantly acted Turing has an epiphany in the pub to use the bombe to do precisely what in real life he'd designed it to do. Brian Cox's Churchill film was arguably the same. We seem to be suffering from film makers jazzing up stories without first having understood them.
My problem with it was that it simply jarred. The scene might have been fine in another type of film about the subject but in this one it was just out of tune with the whole approach. It wasn't that it didn't happen, it's more that it could not possibly have happened or had that kind of effect if it had.
And yes it undermines the more interesting aspect of Churchill's work between the wars.
Since we seem to be drifting into Churchill territory, what's the general consensus here on the Darkest Hour film?
Went to see it a week ago and liked it, but had some reservations.
Undoubtedly a great performance by Gary Oldman. Many people find the Tube journey, with its perfectly constituted focus group, to be a bit crap.
Oldman will probably win both the BAFTA and the Oscar. But Phantom Thread is a far better film and I think that Daniel Day-Lewis gives a far, far better performance. DDL would get my vote. If I were looking to back a surprise winner at the Oscars, it would be DDL. Oldman is 1/20 with Betfred, DDL is 25/1......that shows how nailed on it looks for Oldman.
It’s an OK film with a great performance. But the performance itself is a kind of pastiche, and can’t be much more than that given the weakness in narrative and script.
I’ve seen in twice. The first time Oldman awed me. The second time I got a bit annoyed by the rest of the film.
The tube ride doesn’t actually bother me. Except when the black guy starts reciting poetry which was trite.
And, given that the plot is to some extent about political machinations, I would have liked to have known more about the motivations of Halifax, Chamberlain, and for that matter Attlee. But they are all paper cut-outs really, to let Oldman/Churchill shine.
The best bits are when Clemmy complains about money, and when he’s on the phone to Roosevelt.
The Roosevelt bit was really funny. Presumably to sell it to the American market.
Since we seem to be drifting into Churchill territory, what's the general consensus here on the Darkest Hour film?
Went to see it a week ago and liked it, but had some reservations.
Undoubtedly a great performance by Gary Oldman. Many people find the Tube journey, with its perfectly constituted focus group, to be a bit crap.
Oldman will probably win both the BAFTA and the Oscar. But Phantom Thread is a far better film and I think that Daniel Day-Lewis gives a far, far better performance. DDL would get my vote. If I were looking to back a surprise winner at the Oscars, it would be DDL. Oldman is 1/20 with Betfred, DDL is 25/1......that shows how nailed on it looks for Oldman.
It’s an OK film with a great performance. But the performance itself is a kind of pastiche, and can’t be much more than that given the weakness in narrative and script.
I’ve seen in twice. The first time Oldman awed me. The second time I got a bit annoyed by the rest of the film.
The tube ride doesn’t actually bother me. Except when the black guy starts reciting poetry which was trite.
And, given that the plot is to some extent about political machinations, I would have liked to have known more about the motivations of Halifax, Chamberlain, and for that matter Attlee. But they are all paper cut-outs really, to let Oldman/Churchill shine.
The best bits are when Clemmy complains about money, and when he’s on the phone to Roosevelt.
You admired Pickup's portrayal of Chamberlain though, didn't you? Second best performance in the film.....after KST of course!
The Atlantic slave trade and the rape of the Congo both happened before women got the vote. Universal healthcare, the internet and space exploration all happened afterwards.
That's not funny though. I think you are missing the point.
Nothing in the tweet is funny, either. He's just an oaf.
Since we seem to be drifting into Churchill territory, what's the general consensus here on the Darkest Hour film?
Went to see it a week ago and liked it, but had some reservations.
Undoubtedly a great performance by Gary Oldman. Many people find the Tube journey, with its perfectly constituted focus group, to be a bit crap.
Oldman will probably win both the BAFTA and the Oscar. But Phantom Thread is a far better film and I think that Daniel Day-Lewis gives a far, far better performance. DDL would get my vote. If I were looking to back a surprise winner at the Oscars, it would be DDL. Oldman is 1/20 with Betfred, DDL is 25/1......that shows how nailed on it looks for Oldman.
It’s an OK film with a great performance. But the performance itself is a kind of pastiche, and can’t be much more than that given the weakness in narrative and script.
I’ve seen in twice. The first time Oldman awed me. The second time I got a bit annoyed by the rest of the film.
The tube ride doesn’t actually bother me. Except when the black guy starts reciting poetry which was trite.
And, given that the plot is to some extent about political machinations, I would have liked to have known more about the motivations of Halifax, Chamberlain, and for that matter Attlee. But they are all paper cut-outs really, to let Oldman/Churchill shine.
The best bits are when Clemmy complains about money, and when he’s on the phone to Roosevelt.
The Roosevelt bit was really funny. Presumably to sell it to the American market.
The call never took place, of course, but as a shorthand way of indicating that the US couldn't help, and explaining why, it was very effective.
The Atlantic slave trade and the rape of the Congo both happened before women got the vote. Universal healthcare, the internet and space exploration all happened afterwards.
That's not funny though. I think you are missing the point.
Nothing in the tweet is funny, either. He's just an oaf.
It is indeed completely devoid of anything akin to the humorous. Completely, do you hear?
Since we seem to be drifting into Churchill territory, what's the general consensus here on the Darkest Hour film?
Went to see it a week ago and liked it, but had some reservations.
Undoubtedly a great performance by Gary Oldman. Many people find the Tube journey, with its perfectly constituted focus group, to be a bit crap.
Oldman will probably win both the BAFTA and the Oscar. But Phantom Thread is a far better film and I think that Daniel Day-Lewis gives a far, far better performance. DDL would get my vote. If I were looking to back a surprise winner at the Oscars, it would be DDL. Oldman is 1/20 with Betfred, DDL is 25/1......that shows how nailed on it looks for Oldman.
It’s an OK film with a great performance. But the performance itself is a kind of pastiche, and can’t be much more than that given the weakness in narrative and script.
I’ve seen in twice. The first time Oldman awed me. The second time I got a bit annoyed by the rest of the film.
The tube ride doesn’t actually bother me. Except when the black guy starts reciting poetry which was trite.
And, given that the plot is to some extent about political machinations, I would have liked to have known more about the motivations of Halifax, Chamberlain, and for that matter Attlee. But they are all paper cut-outs really, to let Oldman/Churchill shine.
The best bits are when Clemmy complains about money, and when he’s on the phone to Roosevelt.
I would agree. We learn very little about why so many Tories favoured Halifax over Churchill, or why Attlee insisted not Halifax. A great performance, but really nothing more than a vessel as a film.
The Atlantic slave trade and the rape of the Congo both happened before women got the vote. Universal healthcare, the internet and space exploration all happened afterwards.
That's not funny though. I think you are missing the point.
Nothing in the tweet is funny, either. He's just an oaf.
It is indeed completely devoid of anything akin to the humorous. Completely, do you hear?
LibDem politics must be a nightmare. They're the only party that can point to unequivocal success in government. And yet, they don't bother. What they actually do is tart themselves up and promise some sort of favours to another party that has decided to line up behind the stupidest man in Christendom. Apart from those slight oddities.. They really should be the natural recipients of my vote, and yet they've never even been close to consideration.
What sort of favours are the Lib Dems promising, Mr Omnium? This is the first I have heard of them.
I think you must have been reading to many briefings from Conservative Central Office.
It's interesting how few people describe themselves as feminists. Almost everybody would agree with votes for women, womens' rights to own property, equal pay etc., but many people find feminism off-putting.
I think probably feminists -especially the militant ones have themselves to blame for that. Instead of defining feminism as believing in gender equality, they tend to define it only as equality for women (when there are many examples where men need equality too -take the fact that prostate cancer kills more men than breast cancer kills women, yet only half the money is spent on it for research: how many feminists have you heard condemning that?)
The word "feminist" is also a gender loaded word, implying for women only. A man sound silly saying he is a feminist. We need a new word to describe someone who believes in equality for men and women. (Equalist perhaps?)
I think that a lot of people - men and women - see feminism as meaning dislike for men. It's similar to the position of the Conservatives in the 2000's. Many people agreed with stated policies, until being told that the Conservatives advocated them.
The Atlantic slave trade and the rape of the Congo both happened before women got the vote. Universal healthcare, the internet and space exploration all happened afterwards.
That's not funny though. I think you are missing the point.
Nothing in the tweet is funny, either. He's just an oaf.
It is indeed completely devoid of anything akin to the humorous. Completely, do you hear?
It is not funny but is clearly intended as a joke, and as a pastiche of the Orson Welles/Third Man line about cuckoo clocks.
... private enterprise paid for by the US government
(SpaceX would have gone under years ago if it had not been for a timely launch and development contract from NASA. SpaceX would be impossible in a country without the existence of organisation such as NASA. But now is not the time for such quibbles.)
A couple of decades ago I watched videos of the DC-X Clipper doing vertical landings, and thought I saw the future. It was then abandoned. Then I saw Masten and Armadillo doing vertical landings, and wondered if they would ever scale up.
But tonight was something else. In the film Gattacca, you see rockets launch regularly from the complex as a sort-of futuristic sci-fi vision. I *never* thought we would have simultaneous landings.
Since we seem to be drifting into Churchill territory, what's the general consensus here on the Darkest Hour film?
Went to see it a week ago and liked it, but had some reservations.
Undoubtedly a great performance by Gary Oldman. Many people find the Tube journey, with its perfectly constituted focus group, to be a bit crap.
Oldman will probably win both the BAFTA and the Oscar. But Phantom Thread is a far better film and I think that Daniel Day-Lewis gives a far, far better performance. DDL would get my vote. If I were looking to back a surprise winner at the Oscars, it would be DDL. Oldman is 1/20 with Betfred, DDL is 25/1......that shows how nailed on it looks for Oldman.
It’s an OK film with a great performance. But the performance itself is a kind of pastiche, and can’t be much more than that given the weakness in narrative and script.
I’ve seen in twice. The first time Oldman awed me. The second time I got a bit annoyed by the rest of the film.
The tube ride doesn’t actually bother me. Except when the black guy starts reciting poetry which was trite.
And, given that the plot is to some extent about political machinations, I would have liked to have known more about the motivations of Halifax, Chamberlain, and for that matter Attlee. But they are all paper cut-outs really, to let Oldman/Churchill shine.
The best bits are when Clemmy complains about money, and when he’s on the phone to Roosevelt.
I would agree. We learn very little about why so many Tories favoured Halifax over Churchill, or why Attlee insisted not Halifax. A great performance, but really nothing more than a vessel as a film.
I think that producers think that viewers will find political intrigue boring. Whereas done well, it's fascinating. I'd cite Conspiracy, with Kenneth Branagh as Heydrich.
Since we seem to be drifting into Churchill territory, what's the general consensus here on the Darkest Hour film?
Went to see it a week ago and liked it, but had some reservations.
Undoubtedly a great performance by Gary Oldman. Many people find the Tube journey, with its perfectly constituted focus group, to be a bit crap.
Oldman will probably win both the BAFTA and the Oscar. But Phantom Thread is a far better film and I think that Daniel Day-Lewis gives a far, far better performance. DDL would get my vote. If I were looking to back a surprise winner at the Oscars, it would be DDL. Oldman is 1/20 with Betfred, DDL is 25/1......that shows how nailed on it looks for Oldman.
It’s an OK film with a great performance. But the performance itself is a kind of pastiche, and can’t be much more than that given the weakness in narrative and script.
I’ve seen in twice. The first time Oldman awed me. The second time I got a bit annoyed by the rest of the film.
The tube ride doesn’t actually bother me. Except when the black guy starts reciting poetry which was trite.
And, given that the plot is to some extent about political machinations, I would have liked to have known more about the motivations of Halifax, Chamberlain, and for that matter Attlee. But they are all paper cut-outs really, to let Oldman/Churchill shine.
The best bits are when Clemmy complains about money, and when he’s on the phone to Roosevelt.
You admired Pickup's portrayal of Chamberlain though, didn't you? Second best performance in the film.....after KST of course!
Actually, yes, he was good. And I thought the guy who played the King was good too. Just the script was formulaic.
I have very little idea how accurate any of the film was - to my shame.
The Atlantic slave trade and the rape of the Congo both happened before women got the vote. Universal healthcare, the internet and space exploration all happened afterwards.
That's not funny though. I think you are missing the point.
Nothing in the tweet is funny, either. He's just an oaf.
It is indeed completely devoid of anything akin to the humorous. Completely, do you hear?
It is not funny but is clearly intended as a joke, and as a pastiche of the Orson Welles/Third Man line about cuckoo clocks.
Holy phuck, has this site been taken over by cyborgs? For the avoidance of doubt, when I said "it is not funny", I meant "it is funny". Because it is.
Westminster child abuse accuser 'Nick' is charged with paedophile offences
The man, who can only be identified as Nick, was arrested last year and has already appeared in court, charged with multiple offences relating to allegations of making and possessing hundreds of indecent images of children.
Since we seem to be drifting into Churchill territory, what's the general consensus here on the Darkest Hour film?
Went to see it a week ago and liked it, but had some reservations.
Undoubtedly a great performance by Gary Oldman. Many people find the Tube journey, with its perfectly constituted focus group, to be a bit crap.
Oldman will probably win both the BAFTA and the Oscar. But Phantom Thread is a far better film and I think that Daniel Day-Lewis gives a far, far better performance. DDL would get my vote. If I were looking to back a surprise winner at the Oscars, it would be DDL. Oldman is 1/20 with Betfred, DDL is 25/1......that shows how nailed on it looks for Oldman.
It’s an OK film with a great performance. But the performance itself is a kind of pastiche, and can’t be much more than that given the weakness in narrative and script.
I’ve seen in twice. The first time Oldman awed me. The second time I got a bit annoyed by the rest of the film.
The tube ride doesn’t actually bother me. Except when the black guy starts reciting poetry which was trite.
And, given that the plot is to some extent about political machinations, I would have liked to have known more about the motivations of Halifax, Chamberlain, and for that matter Attlee. But they are all paper cut-outs really, to let Oldman/Churchill shine.
The best bits are when Clemmy complains about money, and when he’s on the phone to Roosevelt.
I would agree. We learn very little about why so many Tories favoured Halifax over Churchill, or why Attlee insisted not Halifax. A great performance, but really nothing more than a vessel as a film.
I think that producers think that viewers will find political intrigue boring. Whereas done well, it's fascinating. I'd cite Conspiracy, with Kenneth Branagh as Heydrich.
Political intrigue was why Game of Thrones used to be so good.
Since we seem to be drifting into Churchill territory, what's the general consensus here on the Darkest Hour film?
Went to see it a week ago and liked it, but had some reservations.
Undoubtedly a great performance by Gary Oldman. Many people find the Tube journey, with its perfectly constituted focus group, to be a bit crap.
Oldman will probably win both the BAFTA and the Oscar. But Phantom Thread is a far better film and I think that Daniel Day-Lewis gives a far, far better performance. DDL would get my vote. If I were looking to back a surprise winner at the Oscars, it would be DDL. Oldman is 1/20 with Betfred, DDL is 25/1......that shows how nailed on it looks for Oldman.
I am probably going to be lynched. But here goes. Shouldn't Oldman's award be for Best Make Up?
Amazing. And we're wasting time with Brexit and nostalgia driven politics.
Others are shaping the future .
In this very thread, polling was produced that showed less than 15% of Leave voters was nostalgic about the Empire, so that old chestnut can finally be put to rest. Of course, I suspect ardent Remainers have such prejudice about Leave voters no degree of evidence will change their minds.
Westminster child abuse accuser 'Nick' is charged with paedophile offences
The man, who can only be identified as Nick, was arrested last year and has already appeared in court, charged with multiple offences relating to allegations of making and possessing hundreds of indecent images of children.
Westminster child abuse accuser 'Nick' is charged with paedophile offences
The man, who can only be identified as Nick, was arrested last year and has already appeared in court, charged with multiple offences relating to allegations of making and possessing hundreds of indecent images of children.
It seems that the UK agricultural sector is not as dependent upon migrant labour as we are given to understand:
' the APS estimate of resident workers in the agricultural sector for the year to June 2016 was 346,000. Of these, 18,000 were estimated to be from another European Union country (except Ireland). '
The Atlantic slave trade and the rape of the Congo both happened before women got the vote. Universal healthcare, the internet and space exploration all happened afterwards.
That's not funny though. I think you are missing the point.
Nothing in the tweet is funny, either. He's just an oaf.
It is indeed completely devoid of anything akin to the humorous. Completely, do you hear?
It seems that the UK agricultural sector is not as dependent upon migrant labour as we are given to understand:
' the APS estimate of resident workers in the agricultural sector for the year to June 2016 was 346,000. Of these, 18,000 were estimated to be from another European Union country (except Ireland). '
Noel Edmonds has now set up an online radio station called Positively Noel.
Between songs, he plays messages about his case and encourages Lloyds staff to call his whistleblowing hotline. The songs all relate to the TV and radio host's campaign in some way - including Lunchmoney Lewis's Bills, and Don't Give Up by Kate Bush and Peter Gabriel.
The music is interspersed with anti-banking messages, mock Lloyds adverts and appeals for anyone who has had similar experiences to get in touch
... private enterprise paid for by the US government
(SpaceX would have gone under years ago if it had not been for a timely launch and development contract from NASA. SpaceX would be impossible in a country without the existence of organisation such as NASA. But now is not the time for such quibbles.)
A couple of decades ago I watched videos of the DC-X Clipper doing vertical landings, and thought I saw the future. It was then abandoned. Then I saw Masten and Armadillo doing vertical landings, and wondered if they would ever scale up.
But tonight was something else. In the film Gattacca, you see rockets launch regularly from the complex as a sort-of futuristic sci-fi vision. I *never* thought we would have simultaneous landings.
Wow.
True - but is not the Heavy funded entirely at the company's own risk ?
And NASA's budget is only around $18-19bn, an amount almost within our capability ..... though of course the biggest likely customer for the Heavy is the far better funded US military and/or intelligence.
It seems that the UK agricultural sector is not as dependent upon migrant labour as we are given to understand:
' the APS estimate of resident workers in the agricultural sector for the year to June 2016 was 346,000. Of these, 18,000 were estimated to be from another European Union country (except Ireland). '
... private enterprise paid for by the US government
(SpaceX would have gone under years ago if it had not been for a timely launch and development contract from NASA. SpaceX would be impossible in a country without the existence of organisation such as NASA. But now is not the time for such quibbles.)
A couple of decades ago I watched videos of the DC-X Clipper doing vertical landings, and thought I saw the future. It was then abandoned. Then I saw Masten and Armadillo doing vertical landings, and wondered if they would ever scale up.
But tonight was something else. In the film Gattacca, you see rockets launch regularly from the complex as a sort-of futuristic sci-fi vision. I *never* thought we would have simultaneous landings.
Wow.
True - but is not the Heavy funded entirely at the company's own risk ?
And NASA's budget is only around $18-19bn, an amount almost within our capability ..... though of course the biggest likely customer for the Heavy is the far better funded US military and/or intelligence.
NASA have complained that people who should be working on their funded projects (e.g. Dragon 2) are also working on other projects - though that's legal, and they were more worried about the risk aspects than cost.
AIUI, the Falcon 1 and Falcon 9 cost a pittance to build: there's a study somewhere that shows that SpaceX built them for fraction (fifth?) of the cost that NASA would have built the same capability for. (at least to the time of the report).
SpaceX's main cost was in reusability, which seems to have been about a billion - much more than the cost of designing the rockets in the first place!
(It also makes you wonder what else Bezos is doing at Blue Origin if he's chucking a billion a year at that company).
Remember when Brexit was going to destroy the London property market? 2017 saw record investment, and London reclaimed the number 1 golden crown for international investment, from NYC
Remember when Brexit was going to destroy the London property market? 2017 saw record investment, and London reclaimed the number 1 golden crown for international investment, from NYC
Remember when Brexit was going to destroy the London property market? 2017 saw record investment, and London reclaimed the number 1 golden crown for international investment, from NYC
I remember you painfully vote Leave in the fear that your flat would fall in value.
To be fair it was quite refreshing to read Sean passionately backing Leave while seeming to tear his hair out that it will be bad for himself financially.
It's good to see people back things not because they believe its in their own immediate self-interest.
Westminster child abuse accuser 'Nick' is charged with paedophile offences
The man, who can only be identified as Nick, was arrested last year and has already appeared in court, charged with multiple offences relating to allegations of making and possessing hundreds of indecent images of children.
Comments
The word "feminist" is also a gender loaded word, implying for women only. A man sound silly saying he is a feminist. We need a new word to describe someone who believes in equality for men and women. (Equalist perhaps?)
Oldman will probably win both the BAFTA and the Oscar. But Phantom Thread is a far better film and I think that Daniel Day-Lewis gives a far, far better performance. DDL would get my vote. If I were looking to back a surprise winner at the Oscars, it would be DDL. Oldman is 1/20 with Betfred, DDL is 25/1......that shows how nailed on it looks for Oldman.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbSwFU6tY1c
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/02/02/prostate-cancer-kills-people-breast-cancer-first-time-new-figures/
Fox have a live stream of the launch pad.
You can watch the actual rocket sitting there... doing absolutely nothing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mrmVWmDBFFw
I'm rather over-excited. The dual landing back on land should be exciting (if only because it means the missions gone off quite well).
The Tube scene was naff, but it didn't spoil the film, which is well worth a viewing, whatever your views of the central character.
Biggest non-surprise of the year. Overcompensating fantasist turns out to be a scumbag.
It's a point of view I suppose...
Feminism's mistake (apart from the gender loaded word) has always been to go on and on about how women have been treated unfairly, but failing to address the way men have been treated unfairly. Even now in the media it seems perfectly acceptable to slag off men as a sex in a way which would be (rightly) deemed unacceptable when talking about women.
But the performance itself is a kind of pastiche, and can’t be much more than that given the weakness in narrative and script.
I’ve seen in twice. The first time Oldman awed me. The second time I got a bit annoyed by the rest of the film.
The tube ride doesn’t actually bother me. Except when the black guy starts reciting poetry which was trite.
And, given that the plot is to some extent about political machinations, I would have liked to have known more about the motivations of Halifax, Chamberlain, and for that matter Attlee. But they are all paper cut-outs really, to let Oldman/Churchill shine.
The best bits are when Clemmy complains about money, and when he’s on the phone to Roosevelt.
There was much more to the Hunt / Silver squeeze than you’ve said.
In the end the US government decided to take them down - they changed the rules to flood the market
And yes it undermines the more interesting aspect of Churchill's work between the wars.
Watching those two boosters land together. Wow.
I think you must have been reading to many briefings from Conservative Central Office.
Others are shaping the future .
(SpaceX would have gone under years ago if it had not been for a timely launch and development contract from NASA. SpaceX would be impossible in a country without the existence of organisation such as NASA. But now is not the time for such quibbles.)
A couple of decades ago I watched videos of the DC-X Clipper doing vertical landings, and thought I saw the future. It was then abandoned. Then I saw Masten and Armadillo doing vertical landings, and wondered if they would ever scale up.
But tonight was something else. In the film Gattacca, you see rockets launch regularly from the complex as a sort-of futuristic sci-fi vision. I *never* thought we would have simultaneous landings.
Wow.
No news if center core has landed properly yet.
I have very little idea how accurate any of the film was - to my shame.
We should privatise Brexit.
The man, who can only be identified as Nick, was arrested last year and has already appeared in court, charged with multiple offences relating to allegations of making and possessing hundreds of indecent images of children.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/02/06/westminster-child-abuse-accuser-nick-charged-paedophile-offences/
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-42965637
' the APS estimate of resident workers in the agricultural sector for the year to June 2016 was 346,000. Of these, 18,000 were estimated to be from another European Union country (except Ireland). '
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/internationalmigration/articles/labourintheagricultureindustry/2018-02-06
There are also seasonal workers, who peak at about 65,000, and two thirds of whom come from Romania or Bulgaria.
By comparison there are currently about 80,000 18-24 year olds who have been unemployed for over 12 months.
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/960960260428189698
Just asking.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/recent/troubles/the_troubles_article_01.shtml
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5359405/Brussels-PUNISH-Britain-Brexit-transition.html
Really hate Spurs and their diving trio, Dele Alli, Erik Lamela, and the Arsenal supporting Harry Kane.
https://twitter.com/owenjbennett/status/960965013816201218
Between songs, he plays messages about his case and encourages Lloyds staff to call his whistleblowing hotline. The songs all relate to the TV and radio host's campaign in some way - including Lunchmoney Lewis's Bills, and Don't Give Up by Kate Bush and Peter Gabriel.
The music is interspersed with anti-banking messages, mock Lloyds adverts and appeals for anyone who has had similar experiences to get in touch
http://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-42963128
I think I will give it a miss thanks...
And NASA's budget is only around $18-19bn, an amount almost within our capability ..... though of course the biggest likely customer for the Heavy is the far better funded US military and/or intelligence.
Within a couple of years his downward spiral will see him playing for a
lower league club like Blackburn Rovers or Everton.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_United_Kingdom_general_election,_2017#2017
Wow.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aBr2kKAHN6M
A low population density will lead to a higher proprtion of farmers and land has resonance in Ireland.
According to Trading Economics its over 10% in Poland, almost 20% in Serbia and about an incredible 25% in Romania.
AIUI, the Falcon 1 and Falcon 9 cost a pittance to build: there's a study somewhere that shows that SpaceX built them for fraction (fifth?) of the cost that NASA would have built the same capability for. (at least to the time of the report).
SpaceX's main cost was in reusability, which seems to have been about a billion - much more than the cost of designing the rockets in the first place!
(It also makes you wonder what else Bezos is doing at Blue Origin if he's chucking a billion a year at that company).
Edit: from 2011:
https://www.nasa.gov/pdf/586023main_8-3-11_NAFCOM.pdf
It's good to see people back things not because they believe its in their own immediate self-interest.
The EU are shooting themselves in the foot over this and will get widespread condemnation. Looks as if they are jeopardising their 50 billion