A belated review of the Rugby World Cup 2011 video game

Only one word can describe this game: shocking. It was a long time ago when i purchased this game, back when i did, i remember hating it, and for some obscure reason i gave it a second chance this Easter, and it remains very, very poor.

I remember my first impression of the Rugby World Cup 2011 being something along the lines of "This is exactly the same as EA Sports Rugby 2006." Indeed, the buttons are the same despite being released 6 years on, and the similarities don't end there: the "special moves" are the same, there are the same old glitches and the same old general fallacy about the whole experience. The thing is, at the time Rugby 2006 was pretty advanced and well informed as a Rugby Game for the PS2. The game was so good in fact i still own it and a PS2 to play it on. For this not to have advanced is disappointing.

Then we come to specific issues within the game. The biggest is the licencing problem. If you bought the official FIFA World Cup video game, you would rather expect Brazil and Lionel Messi to be featured in the game. Alas, in the RWC video game, New Zealand and Australia (two of the best teams of Rugby Union) feature, however with "Fictional" player names because of licencing issues. It is very confusing that the best Rugby team in the World and the hosts of the World Cup are not featured in the tournaments official game. Again, you might hope the official kits for the world cup are there, but this is only the case in the "World Cup" game mode, not for the exhibition match game type.

Again, there is a general issue with squad selection, which were not up to date at the time of the games release, nor is there any downloadable content to update the squads and players. Indeed, England's sensation at the three-quarter position Manu Tuialagi is not in the game, despite featuring in warm up matches.

Gameplay issues swamp the game aswell. In the lineout for example, do not expect to win your own line out too often if you play on the "hard" difficulty, which just seems odd. Earlier today i was pinged for the penalty because "Ball unplayable in ruck" despite the whistle blowing when the ball was in the hands of my Fly-half. Now i'm not a complete expert on the Rules and Regulations of Rugby, however i'm sure a penalty occurs where the infringement happened, not on the half way line from where Rory Jackson took his penalty kick. Penalties in general are awfully designed, with "Dangerous Tackle" awarded every time you make contact with a player off the ball. This incident occurs frequently because of the camera angle used, "side on" is rather one dimensional and hence tackling players is difficult because they move along a different plane to the one the camera is aimed at.

I won't even get started on the awful player design or robotic commentary, all that is left to say is be certain to remember this game is absolutely awful and as a buyer you should not be tempted by it when it is on offer for £15.

Overall 2/10.

The Woman in Black

So, last night i watched the Woman in Black, the cinematic version with Harry Potter. It's fair to say me and my dad don't do horror movies, both of us were left uncomfortable throughout the film, getting all jumpy and watching through half an eyelid during the majority of the film.

In truth my experience of horror movies doesn't stem much further then the Final Destination series and all the Scream's, these serve as humorous gore rather than actual horror hence why this film "shit me up" suitably. I have seen The Orphanage before, a Spanish film quite similar to The Woman in Black (In the The Orphanage an aging woman supernaturally manages to kidnap a kid and kill him), which as a film is just full of thrilling peril.

Indeed, the film was full of the same old tension building moments which as usual climax in a host of loud noises and sudden images which well and truly surprise the viewer. It was quite funny actually, in the cinema screening i was in, everyone jumped and then resorted to a dull chuckling after each "jumpy moment." As if in laughing we somehow collectively brushed off the humiliation that was the grouped fear fest.

As far as the protagonist goes, Harry Potter has not done too badly since Hogwarts, working in a Law firm which requires him to go to a spooky old house "up north" and go through the paperwork of a deceased woman in order to determine the inheritance or the sale of the house. Harry Potter as a person though, hasn't really changed. I'm worried he will never grow out of the dull, the worlds against me, my parents are dead attitude that has plagued his life thus far. Indeed, his child in the film drew a nice picture for him, and had characterised his dad with a frown.

Now, i didn't particularly like the Harry Potter films, all a bit fanciful, that's all wrapped up quite nicely until next term type of sequel film. As a result i have become quite cynical with regards to the characters, saying things like "Why does Harry and his friends have to go looking for trouble? Why can't they just behave? Why don't they just get on with their school lives?!" Well, it's the same old, same old for Harry in this film. A reasonable man, upon hearing some creepy noises/seeing the dead in a creepy old house would bail on it faster than greased lightening. Of course, stupid is as stupid does, and rather than leaving the house and showing the proverbial "fuck you" to his bastard law-firm, instead he decides to probe the issue, and explore the house, opening up every door and every box or trunk in search of god knows what, only to find sudden noises and scary non-beings. Indeed, despite having been well and truly being spooked in his first visit, he decides that he should spend the night at the house in order to get work done! Needless to say, without wanting to reveal spoilers, shit hit the fan, screams and all.

As a film its actually not too bad. The plot as to why there is a "woman in black" is quite interesting, and we learn more and more as the film goes on. However, with about half an hour to go, both dad and i shared a look as the film become a little bit too far fetched for our liking. Harry suggested to the only other sane person in the town that they some how "reunite" the woman in black with her dead son in order to relieve the woman in black of her supernatural pain and suffering. Indeed, what a brilliant mind Potter has to figure that out, rather than do the sane thing and just leave... Of course, this idea results in possibly the most atmospheric 10 minutes of cinema i have ever seen.

t

The film is set in that era where big creepy houses in the country were the norm. Indeed, you can understand  where these stories came from. Big city writer leaves the city for the country, only to be greeted by strange folk who talk of strange goings on up at the old house.

I'd recommend to be honest, it was a pretty nice change to the usual horror stuff i've seen, even if it did make me awfully frightened.

Coming at you with another Film review....

As yes, i do recognise with this being my second film review in almost as many days, i appear to be treading on some of my friends toes (a far better film critic writes here: My friends Blog and here: My friend's film review blog). Still, forgive me but i like having literally 1,500 worldwide hits within a year, i'm going to press on regardless of how many stolen ideas i regurgitate (technically my last blog was the "anniversary" blog as i first started posting seriously again in response to the 2011 budget).

Today i watched Starter for 10, for the University Challenge viewer, you will understand the reference, because indeed the films protagonist is a Student with a quest for knowledge (not unlike myself, i smiled when he mentioned his longing for reading Plato) who makes Bristol University's team for the University Challenge competition.

Not too much is made of how he gets on the team and how he gets on when competing, instead the storyline is drawn from his struggles surrounding being on the team, which result in impaired performance. While being a drama in genre, you still get the Rom-Com story line, the hurdle that is the misinformed love interest, the balls'd up attempt at choosing the right love interest and the falling out with the best mate.

Despite the "predictable" aspects of the films storyline, i was still rather engrossed by the main character, Brian (Played by James Macavoy) and his meandering life. As a whole the film is a loose (i say loose because it was the plot development had degrees of subtlety) transformation from working class lad to grown-up, smart in most sense adult.

At no point did was i ever on the edge of my seat, nor did i cry or wish the film went on for 30 more minutes. However, i did sit and watch very content in the knowledge that while the ending did strike me as a foregone conclusion, i did not mind the road we took to get there. Indeed, along the way there are certainly laughs thanks no doubt to the work of Macavoy and Bendedict Cumberbatch.

Set in the 80's, the film is also gifted with a terrific soundtrack, of pop and a lot of alternative rock such as the Smiths, which went down very nicely.

Its a BBC made film, so by all means keep an eye out for it in on the BBC one night as they try to fill up some air time. My all means worth the watch.

Parliament, Take Two.

Last week, on Wednesday 21st March I found myself in Parliament for the second time this academic year. The wider scope of the day was to basically smile and nod a lot as my perspective employers sized me up as whether or not I would be suitable to work at Westminster next year, my Placement year. However, these activities would not begin until 2pm, so i was free to do as i pleased until that time.

Oliver Cromwell, the catalyst of change that brought power back go Parliament

I turned up very early, being budget day and Prime Ministers Question's being on, i anticipated a lengthy wait to get in, queues all round the place. I was very wrong. After a 30 minute commute, it took me only 5 minutes to get from the Visitors entrance, through security and to the admissions office where i had to pick up my tickets for Prime Minister Questions.

I decided rather than to sit idly in the cafe for a few hours, i ventured up to one of the Committee Rooms and sat in on the Education Committee's evidence session on how best 15-19 year olds should be tested. Most if not all of the spiel was well over my head, however one exchange did prick my ears up. They were discussing how some courses such as module based GCSE courses offer "Easy Routes" to get good grades. What this means is of course a syllabus is set and it is up to the school to choose how to teach it. They want to change the "easy routes" course to make it more challenging, rather than getting "safe" marks and safe grades. Now up until this point, you may not have found this story that interesting, however, other than module based courses they also mentioned another GCSE that was offered too many easy routes. You can guess what is coming. Yes, Geography, the infamous "Colouring in" course, defended by those who take it and slammed by those who don't for being a weak subject. Well, i'm sorry, but it would appear it is official, Geography is just "colouring in".

I left the committee at about 11am, where more fun was to be had. Having just left the Committee Room, i was summoned back by one of the Committee Room attendants, where we had the following exchange:

State Opening of the Commons after the 2010 Election

Attendant: Are you Press?
Me: No.
Attendant: General Public?
Me: Yes.
Attendant: You think you can just help yourself to water?

Now, an brief explanation. When i entered the room i was ushered into a seat on the side of the room. The room was reasonably full, but not over flowing so i did not really think anything of being sat in a different position to all the other observers. In front of me, were glasses and a bottle of House of Commons branded water. Being a very old building made up of a lot of windows, it was quite hot, and i helped myself. Now, back to our exchange:

Me: Excuse me?
Attendant: You cant just help yourself to water, its meant for Press and official visitors. (This was said quite aggressively)
Me: Well, i was told to sit there and i saw everyone else helping themselves to it so i just assumed...
Attendant: Yes it was our mistake to sit you there, but water isn't for general public.

And that was that, he wandered off back into the room and i was left wholly perplexed. I didn't worry too much about it, my thirst was positively quenched.

I then made my way down to the Central Lobby. There all visitors loitered, waiting for the Chamber to be opened. Sure enough at 11:30 rumbling voices became hush as one of the Clerks shouted "SPEAKER" loudly down the corridor. The mass of people parted and the speaker, clerks and ceremonial mace walked through toward the Chamber at a slow pace, the speaker graciously smiling at the visitors.

Up the the gallery we went. A long queue meant i didnt get in until 5 to 12, at which point the Chamber was already buzzing, full the brim with MPs waiting for the Prime Minister to show up and answer questions.

While PMQs itself was not particularly spectacular, the atmosphere was still electric, a gladiatorial showdown between Left and Right. I would say the Conservative won the bout, Ed Milliband never really got into a stride because his questions were bi-partisan "Support of withdrawal of troops" rather than political attacks. David Cameron made a jibe about Ken Livingstone, which went down well with the Right and hence probably edged him to victory in the competition that is PMQs.

Then, the budget. Interestingly, the Speaker left the chamber, the reason because the Speaker and his Clerks are servants of the King or Queen. And as of the Glorious revolution of 1688, the King/Queen is no longer trusted with the money, so convention dictates they leave the chamber for the budget.

Osborne led with an hours discussion about the details of the Budget, which at times was met by cheers from the Tory backbenchers, waving their notes in the air as they did. At others, Labour jeered, indeed Ed Millibands quip about a Millionaires Budget went down grandly with the opposition.

The good bits where built up with an increase in his tempo and volume, with the occasional fist crashing against the dispatch box. Of course, when he retired down, withdrew himself and his body language, it was obvious he was revealing a measure of taxation that would not be popular. Overall however, his delivery was quite good.

Messer's Osborne and Alexander's work within the famous red box

Unfortunately however, i could not stay for long, as i had other business to attend to, which involved Q and A sessions with various MPs and dignitaries, including Baroness d'Souza and Robert Rogers, Clerk of the House of Commons (and author of How Parliament Works). It was a great day, and i would recommend a visit to anyone who has not been. It is of course a public building, paid for by the tax payer.

Cashing the cheques

Aha! Yes you were expecting a post about the budget (given i was in the Chamber for the budget on Wednesday 21st March i would not blame for expecting one!). However, i'm talking about Mr Cash. Mr J. R. "Johnny" Cash.

Yes it has been a busy week for me, travelling home for the Easter Vacation, a trip to Parliament to be in the chamber for Prime Ministers Questions (which as a comment was particularly tame) and then be in the chamber for part of the Budget. I then met with various MPs, Baroness D'Souza and Robert Rogers (Clerk of the House) for a discussions all things Parliament. On Friday i had an interview, which i tackled with ease, only really bamboozled by the notion that "If you work with us, Labour will be your party for life, expect hostility from any connections you make if you choose to defect." No, this post will be about a film i watched on Friday night, Walk the Line. Released in 2005, i am a little late to the party but this film was just that good i had to write about it.

Joaquin Phoenix and Reese Witherspoon play the roles of Cash and June Carter (the singer/love interest of Cash) with great personality, energy and intensity, which really made their relationship and performances connect with me. For those who do not know me, i am not particularly Film of Musically savvy, hence why my last sentence rather emphasises this films brilliance.

The merits of the film are reflected in its nominations at the Acadamy awards, Best Lead Actress of course was won by Witherspoon. Further, a not so modest budget of $28million reaped a handsome $187million at the box-office.

It wasn't a particularly moving film, which are the kind of films i tend to connect with, it was instead just a "good" film. The plot flowed nicely (as you would expect given its not a fictional script i suppose...). The music was good, both sung by Phoenix and Witherspoon very professionally as actor/actress rather than singer. The main positive of the film however is the chemistry between the lead roles, which has been described by film critics as "fiery" and "spine-tingling." I'll throw my hat into the ring and describe their ebb-and-flow relationship as: positively electrifying to the point of receiving second degree burns.

I would recommend watching this film to all. Rather like the richter-scale measures the magnitude of earthquakes, the "Alex Smith-Scale" for measuring films is the authority on motion pictures, and is given only one measurement criteria: does Alex get on with the film? If the answer is yes, then you will too. Walk the Line receives a solid Yes/Ja/Oui/Da/Affirmative.

As a post-script, i would note that this week mother analysed my history of girlfriends/celebrity crushes and has concluded my type is the brunette (she probably isn't wrong). Witherspoon in this film is Brunette as opposed to the usual blond, and i can confirm she looks F.L.Y. So fly, there is a picture below. Hands off, she is mine. Dibbs on Eva Green and Evangeline Lilly too.

Faux-Paso? I'm just a Faux-Dancer

It was mother's birthday yesterday (48) and during our lengthy discussions she probed me on an event she wants me to take part in, which in a nutshell is supervising an old time dance session in the local church. While not against my participation, i had to explain dancing isn't as easy as it looks. Her cries of "how hard can it be to teach them 1,2,3 - 1,2,3?" fell on deaf ears as i tried to explain how much of a lay-dancer i am.

When i dance a routine or "pattern" as some of our members call it, i never think of the choreography involved, nor am i particularly mindful of what direction i'm going in. Rather, i have learnt a sequence, and memorised the sequence. The sequence involved however isnt: Lock-Step, Chassis, Spin-Turn, its a series of "moves" as i call them, under the names i have chosen for them. For example, i name a move after the action it represents such as a "wehay!!" or a "cha-cha real smooth".

Further, i cannot count the dance, that is pick up the rythem and follow it, dancing on time. This is where my partner becomes useful, as she can lead me into the timing (she can actually count the dance). My brain is not particularly arty, and hence i cannot easily pick up a beat. Given the necessity to dance on time, i'm not entirely sure how mum expects me to teach this. Further, while waltz for example employs a simple 1,23-1,2,3 sequence, the Quickstep has slow-slow-quick-quick-slow. Again, as a lay-dance it is incredibly hard to count in something that isn't a sequence of numbers.

Aside from these concerns i do mostly enjoy dancing. Its something very different, although for years i wanted to give it a try. My past has been all about contact sports, aggressive acts of passion and fury that culminated in me being something of a warrior on the field. Ballroom on the other hand has little place for this kind of attributes (excluding perhaps the Paso-Doble, a dance that represents bull-fighting). Having said this however, i do manage to transfer some of personality's intensity onto the dance floor, people have observed my "smoulder" as i dance some of the Latin routines. This isn't a deliberate choice of facial expression however, instead usually my unhappiness at my partner forgetting the routine...again.

Indeed, while dancing was meant to be some light relief, giving myself a chance to compete at something without putting myself in any serious danger - i find it very difficult to compete in contact sports having split one of my vertebrae at the age of 16. While i can compete in contact sports, i always suffer from a mental road block if you will - in my comeback on the Rugby scene i never wanted to throw myself around too much.

Dancing offers a relatively pain free experience, competition does exist and is a great way to satisfy some of my alpha-male urges in trying to win competition. I would recommend dancing to anyone if they get the chance, give it a few tries and you'll start to pick it up. If not for the sporting aspect of it, join so you can observe some of the skimpiest outfits you're ever likely to see during the Latin section of the competitions.

Blink and you'll miss it...

This is a sequel to my last blog, which is effectively a documentation of my memories since 2008. However, as some TV series tend to do, they give you a cliff hanger with so many unanswered questions, which don't get answered for a good few episodes. So, in answer to "what happened on August 19th?" you'll just have to wait a little longer. This is going to be a chronicle of the things i'll miss, now i'm all grown up.

I'll be honest, the two years of sixth form flew by. Even now, i remember the Sixth Form induction week, in fact i remember having an argument with Phil about who was dressed the smartest, him or me. Given i was in Shirt and Tie, and him in Jeans and shirt, i can only assume he was trolling or something, because plainly i was the smartest. In fact, i remember one day dressing in a pretty little purple number, love Cotton Rich shirt from next (which was later ruined in a freak painting accident) and silk tie. Unfortunately my fashion-savvy choice was lost on my classmates, they drew comparisons with it to "blueberry's" and "Violet from Charlie and the Chocolate factory".

So here we go, what i'll miss:

• Having a locker - I miss my locker, i really enjoyed having it. Like a home from home to store by bits and pieces. Some lockers were better than others of course, thankfully i always had one near the top of the stack, god forbid if i was unlucky enough to have a floor situated locker. Indeed, the Lockers were more than just storage units. They were places to socialise and rendez-vous "meet you by the lockers?" Actually....I think i still have my locker key, so really this post is kind of redundant. Since i never gave my key back, i guess my Locker in Sixth Form is still mine!
• School Lunches - They were the best of times, they were the worst of times. Indeed, i look back fondly at my year 7 school dinners, i maintain Turkey Twizzlers had a certain va-va-voom, je ne c'est quoi about them. Lunches were a bit shit from Year 8 onwards thanks to Jamie Oliver's petition, offering a pretty bland selection. Until Upper sixth that is with the arrival of Cucina as our cafeteria's maitre'd. Who could forget "Taco Thursdays"? The thing i loved most was they're flogging of unsold food. Naturally in the free periods in the afternoon you'd head up and grab a bargain. I'll never forget my Sticky Ribs in a bun for 50p :')
• Reading in English - Yes, perhaps the most underrated aspect of School life. Hilarity was on the menu when the English Teacher would divvy up the roles in a particular play (or "Character Book" as i once referred plays as). Of course if it was a foreign play, someone (me) would have bought a different translation to everyone else which would result in some seriously disjointed reading. And of course, every now and then we were given a character to play who had an accent. Laughter. Was. Not. Contained.
• Being the biggest and hence the best - When you arrived at sixth form, there was an unspoken rule that we ruled the roost. Whether it was free-passage down the Staff corridor, jumping the Lunch queue or being able to wear what you like, there was a telepathic agreement of something along the lines of "Shut the fuck up, child." Indeed, perhaps the best thing about being a Sixth Former was the occasional abduction of a lower school child. Yes every now and then a child would be taken from the playground and kept in the maths blook for an indeterminate amount of time.
• Generally being a knob and getting away with it - I say this with reference again to lower school pupils. Examples: A Child walks into a classroom and asks "Do you have any spare chairs?" to which the class pipes up with "No", "Sorry We dont" and "get out". The Child promptly leaves presumably to sit cross leg'd at the front. Another Example: Everyone now and then a child would be sent to a sixth form class as punishment having been sent out, at which point we would pipe up again "You fool, what were you thinking?", "Ah mate, bet you feel like a right twat now...?" and "You fucking dickhead". At one point at Verulam School, two of us were challenged by a boy to a fight after school. Needless to say we chicken'd out.

Just a few examples of things i'll miss. Life seems less full of mischief nowadays. I have fun, but it isn't quite the same as the old days of "school mischief."

Moral of the story, enjoy it why you can.