March 12th, 2004


Radio SMEG

the radio show, the radio show.

that was done last night, and i really can't tell you if i was fascinating or, perhaps more likely, not. the oddest thing for me was that i had no real audience to play off. you do a panel, or you speak publicly, there's always that body--that physical evidence--of an audience out there and their reactions coming in second by second, so you can pick if you're heading down a path of soul searing boredom or if you told one dick joke too many... but on the radio, you've just got a couple of other guys sitting in a box, and the rule of thumb to use them to guide you along is only useful up to a certain point, because they're not the audience. (well, actually, they might be. i mean, it is community radio.) so all i can say is that i was there, i spoke, and i leave it to other people to say if i was entertaining or interesting or none of the above.

still, it was fun, and for a wednesday night, there are much worse things to do than appear on a radio show.


i'm thinking, this morning, that savvy is a good word. it's a word that really needs to be brought back into use.

  • Current Music
    nirvana - come as you are

Once Upon a Time in Mexico.

went and saw once upon a time in mexico, which is a rather frantic film that, if not for johnny depp and his thousand and one cheap disguises, probably wouldn't have been nearly as fun as it was. it's a good indication that a film is going to barrel along when one of the credits appears as 'shot, chopped, and put together' (i might have that last part wrong) and the word 'flick' is used. in a perfectly reasonable observation, if the word flick is used in the credits, the kind of film you're going to get is going to be a loud and cartoonishly violent one.

which is what once upon a time in mexico is.

it even has mickey rourke in, who i have a soft spot for seeing in films. i'm not quite sure why, but i do. william dafoe is there, too, and so is salma hayek, who has surprisingly little to do with the film. the only person who seems totally unnecessary to the film is antonio banderas' el mariarchi, who i think would have been better served by being left in desperado. but then, to be honest, i've never really seen the point for antonio in most films he appears in.

there are, however, some fine moments in the film, and they have pretty much all to do with johnny depp and his cia agent, sands. (who wears a cia t-shirt at one stage.) he's got snappish dialogue ("i'm just going to go and freak out right now.") and some really quite funny moments, the highlights being with the kid towards the end of the film, the mexican chef, and with the fattening cheech from cheech and chong. if you're not convinced that depp will be in the film long enough for you, i assure you that he has the equal screen time of antonio, perhaps a little more.


outside this film, i saw some kid's car that had been painted with a bad dragon on it. i know, i know, but it was right there, parked so that everyone could see. a kind of come-up-and-see-my-car position. except, of course, that this dragon was awful. it was flat, one dimensional, and looked as if it had been painted by a bunch of depth perception deprived kids of year three. it was disappointing on so many levels, the first being, of course, that someone would get a green dragon painted onto their white car, but the second being that they didn't pay for someone professional to do the design for them.

i've just no faith in the world.