What are you watching tonight?

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Young Apprentice (8-9pm), directly followed by Hatfields and McCoys (9-10pm).
Two solid hours of blood and guts.

[Spartan2]

Like Alien, some of the science is a little iffy too, for example in cryogenic sleep for two years to get to a star system with at least five suns! no way, there isn't a five sun system within 100 light years, never mind two (and that's assuming they travelled at the speed of light).
But that's not what I'm moaning about.

Don't want to come across as a complete nerd but... You can travel to a star system a 100 light years away in 2 years, in fact you can travel practically any distance in any amount of time given enough speed. You might intuitively think that; given nothing can travel faster than light (actually all mass travels less than the speed of light (c)) the earliest you could get there is 100+ years, but in reality the faster you travel in the spatial dimensions, the less time you spend in the time dimension. If you were to travel at 99.9999% of c you could get there in 51days and 12hours.

If you were to return to Earth however, it would still be 200+ years older.

Really not critising just thought 'twas interesting.

Aye, you're talking time dilation at relativistic speeds - but, however, you still need to speed up and then slow down from that relativistic speed and the timel apse (for the observer on the spaceship as opposed to on the Earth) would be far greater than two years - for a 100 light year journey it would, given accelerations/decelerations that could probably be achieved by 2089, be in the region of 81 years elapsed.

But now you've changed the goal posts from scientific imposibility to technological improbability i.e., "you can't travel 100 light years in 2 years" and now: "given accelerations/decelerations that could probably be achieved by 2089". There are of course almost limitless technological barriers to getting there in that time, acc/dec being just one of them. However as you stated "the science was iffy" I just wanted to point out that there is no known scientific reason for this not to be achievable.

Also I don't think anyone can say with anything other than a wild guess what our acc/dec will be in 2089. I very much doubt we will have achieved anything close to relativistic speeds by then anyway.

Here are some of my issues with the film: Who starts a company that takes 200 years for a ROI? All the original shareholders would be dead! The value of anything they mined would be DWARFED by the energy required to get there and back. They are still using CRT monitors in 2089!

[Prufrock]

I'm expecting Never Let Me Go in the post tomorrow from the good people. Any good?

[Bruce Rioja]

Masterchef: The Professionals.

Blimey....not much good are they?

Whilst not generally disagreeing with your point, I know a few guys who've been on telly. The context has to be taken into account, its a programme designed to take people out of their comfort zone and pressurise them. Some of them (in more honest moments) will admit to going completely to pieces when under the glare of the studio lights.

Indeed. And the "skills test" they get them to do is prime example. Pick something and tell the camera that "this is a basic chef skill" like taking the meat out of a cooked lobster then making a salad.

Then ridicule the fecking pastry chef for not getting all the lobster meat out of the arm or sommat.....

I like masterchef in general, but this professional one really bugs the hell out of me.

But I'm yet to see the first one being marched on at gunpoint, LK.

BWFCI - So what if one's 'just' a pastry chef? Does he or she expect to be able to sail through the competition by cooking nowt but pastries?

These people are putting themselves forward in the main as being the big I Am. Well, here's their stage!

I don't see Michel Roux Jr claiming something to fall outside of his comfort zone!

[thebish]

Young Apprentice (8-9pm),

is it true - as someone told me the other day - that the girls team in a previous episode had to wash some clothes at a launderette - and they put them in the tumble drier with the powder???

[Little Green Man]

Young Apprentice (8-9pm),

is it true - as someone told me the other day - that the girls team in a previous episode had to wash some clothes at a launderette - and they put them in the tumble drier with the powder???

What??? They wasted good cocaine? Sheesh, the kids of today etc...

[Always hopeful]

Young Apprentice (8-9pm),

is it true - as someone told me the other day - that the girls team in a previous episode had to wash some clothes at a launderette - and they put them in the tumble drier with the powder???

Almost right. They were about to, but someone in the laundrette pointed out the error of their ways just moments before they did.

[thebish]

Young Apprentice (8-9pm),

is it true - as someone told me the other day - that the girls team in a previous episode had to wash some clothes at a launderette - and they put them in the tumble drier with the powder???

Almost right. They were about to, but someone in the laundrette pointed out the error of their ways just moments before they did.

ahhh - the future is secure!!

[General Mannerheim]

I'm expecting Never Let Me Go in the post tomorrow from the good people. Any good?

S'alright yeah, features a hat trick of britains top current talent in Hollywood' but its miles away from a 'Hollywood' flick. Quite a heartbreaker. Decent.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

But now you've changed the goal posts from scientific imposibility to technological improbability i.e., "you can't travel 100 light years in 2 years" and now: "given accelerations/decelerations that could probably be achieved by 2089". There are of course almost limitless technological barriers to getting there in that time, acc/dec being just one of them. However as you stated "the science was iffy" I just wanted to point out that there is no known scientific reason for this not to be achievable.

Also I don't think anyone can say with anything other than a wild guess what our acc/dec will be in 2089. I very much doubt we will have achieved anything close to relativistic speeds by then anyway.

Here are some of my issues with the film: Who starts a company that takes 200 years for a ROI? All the original shareholders would be dead! The value of anything they mined would be DWARFED by the energy required to get there and back. They are still using CRT monitors in 2089!

First of all, our technology is science based, and therefore while pedantry might dictate that I should have used 'technological' rather than 'scientific' I don't think it obscured the issue at hand... otherwise I concede your point.
Secondly, I used figures from Nasa from when they commissioned interstellar feasibility programs back in the 60s which I think were slightly better calculations than just a wild guess, although even NASA acknowledged that there were a lot of technological hurdles to overcome to achieve that.
[As a side note, interestingly, NASA were predicting in 1967 that an unmanned interstellar probe would be launched by 2010! As you probably know, apart from Pioneer and Voyager probes which were in reality interplanetary probes, nothing of the sort has happened or is likely to happen for the next decade at the very least]

As for your issues, I'll agree with.

[BWFC_Insane]

Indeed. And the "skills test" they get them to do is prime example. Pick something and tell the camera that "this is a basic chef skill" like taking the meat out of a cooked lobster then making a salad.

Then ridicule the fecking pastry chef for not getting all the lobster meat out of the arm or sommat.....

I like masterchef in general, but this professional one really bugs the hell out of me.

But I'm yet to see the first one being marched on at gunpoint, LK.

BWFCI - So what if one's 'just' a pastry chef? Does he or she expect to be able to sail through the competition by cooking nowt but pastries?

These people are putting themselves forward in the main as being the big I Am. Well, here's their stage!

I don't see Michel Roux Jr claiming something to fall outside of his comfort zone!

No clearly not, and as you say they've applied. Its not that I feel sympathy for the contestants as such......I just find the whole arrogance of Roux Jr and the vile beast who "screens" them somewhat tiring.

The people on it are a real mixture, quite a few of them completely "self trained" and young. Some have probably not done much more than basic "top level gastro pub" standard food. Which is fine. I'm not entirely sure why they're even there.

But I just think its fine to test em and judge em, but they don't need to be bullied and ridiculed when they can't empty out a lobster in the correct manner or whatever. Quite a few of them I bet have never seen a fecking lobster. Let alone "de-veined" one.

Then you get Roux Jr rocking up with some "classic recipe" that no fecker has ever heard of. Can't be that "classic" then. (And yes I know they are "fine dining" French classics"). Then he goes round and asks em all if they've ever cooked it. With the insinuation being "well you fecking should have" grrrrr. Then he judges their results with a sneer whilst pointing out how many ways he is better than them. He's clearly a brilliant chef, I just think the sneering and fake indignation get tiring. Though he's better than the witch he sends before him. Which is actually highly irritating the whole way thats dressed up. Why can't they just be honest and say that he's too busy to judge the plebs from the outset? Instead of pretending he's far too important to see "unscreened" chefs. "I wouldn't even dream of putting that in front of Meeeeeeechelle......".

Oh really?

I'd love one of them to be really ace, get through to "Meeeechelllllleeee" and then just do a massive shit on a plate and see how he likes that being put in front of him!

[thebish]

of course - you don't HAVE to put yourself through the trauma of watching it...

[BWFC_Insane]

of course - you don't HAVE to put yourself through the trauma of watching it...

But I do generally enjoy Masterchefs, and I'd enjoy this one too if it wasn't for the arrogant judges.

Anyway, I need something to moan about now Coyle has gone!

[boltonboris]

That carrot cake looked ACE!

[BWFC_Insane]

That carrot cake looked ACE!

Was amazing. As was his main course.

Of course Roux Jr found plenty to moan about.

[thebish]

of course - you don't HAVE to put yourself through the trauma of watching it...

But I do generally enjoy Masterchefs, and I'd enjoy this one too if it wasn't for the arrogant judges.

Anyway, I need something to moan about now Coyle has gone!

I understand - you relishing the opportunity to moan about a chef being to moany!

[Lord Kangana]

Ooh, bit of Bowie on BBC4.

Altogether now:

Take a look at the laaaaawman beating up the wrong guy....

[William the White]

Cineworld down the Valley for The Master.

Joaquin Phoenix magnificent. Hoffman very good. Script hasn't made its mind up what the film is about.

Mostly it is concerned with a cult in 1950s America, The Cause, which is clearly based on Scientology.

Phoenix is the alcoholic, traumatised survivor of World War 2, who stumbles on the cult and is 'rescued' by the Master (Hoffman), self proclaimed genius who makes it his mission to take charge of Phoenix's character, to thus rescue him from himself...

He sometimes approaches 'success' but it is always tenuous, always provisional, always under threat... and, indeed, imho, it is hard to care anywhere. It's not easy to find sympathy or empathy with either character. There is a lack of clarity in the story, and therefore a lack of tension in the film. It feels flabby and uncentred.

Good music, good photography, good acting, poor story telling. Three stars.

[thebish]

Sofie Gråbøl is back tonight as Sarah Lund in The Killing... that's me sorted!

[jmjhb]

Cineworld down the Valley for The Master.

Joaquin Phoenix magnificent. Hoffman very good. Script hasn't made its mind up what the film is about.

Mostly it is concerned with a cult in 1950s America, The Cause, which is clearly based on Scientology.

Phoenix is the alcoholic, traumatised survivor of World War 2, who stumbles on the cult and is 'rescued' by the Master (Hoffman), self proclaimed genius who makes it his mission to take charge of Phoenix's character, to thus rescue him from himself...

He sometimes approaches 'success' but it is always tenuous, always provisional, always under threat... and, indeed, imho, it is hard to care anywhere. It's not easy to find sympathy or empathy with either character. There is a lack of clarity in the story, and therefore a lack of tension in the film. It feels flabby and uncentred.

Good music, good photography, good acting, poor story telling. Three stars.

I agree wholeheartedly with that review.