Britain’s got talent, but…Posted: May 12, 2012 Filed under: Music, People, TV | Tags: 2012, ashleigh and pudesy, britain's got talent, entertainment, great britain, jonathan and charlotte, loveable rogues, Music, postaday, postaweek2012, TV 4 Comments
I admit that for the last 7 weeks or so Britain’s Got Talent has been my guilty pleasure. I’ve cheered on the good acts, laughed at the terrible acts, and cried at the ones that tugged on my heart strings). It’s amazing to see how much talent there is in this country (and how many nutters there are too).
Tonight was the final and, if you haven’t seen it yet, I warn you now that this post does contain spoilers.
The show tonight contained 11 thoroughly entertaining acts. In my opinion, some deserved to win more than others, but they did all deserved a place in the final. The finalists were:
- Only Boys Aloud (Welsh male choir)
- Ashleigh and Pudsey (dancing dog act)
- Jonathan and Charlotte (17 and 16 year-old operatic duo)
- Kai and Natalia (teenage ballroom and Latin dancers)
- Loveable Rogues (quirky Madness meets The Streets band singing their own tunes)
- Molly Rainford (11 year-old singer)
- Sam Kelly (singer/guitarist)
- Nu Sxool (street dance group)
- Ryan O’Shaughnessy (singer/guitarist)
- Aquabatique (synchronised swimming group)
- The Mend (boy band)
When the results were announced, the top three were Only Boys Aloud, Ashleigh and Pudsey, and Jonathan and Charlotte. I thought it was a real shame the Loveable Rogues didn’t make it into the top three, as I really enjoyed their music and thought it was great that they were brave enough to play something original. I would go out and buy their album tomorrow. Here’s their song “Lovesick”:
Only Boys Aloud were probably the finalists who would have made the best use of the £500,000 prize money, as their choir master clearly had ideas for the future. Sadly it was announced that they were in third place.
This meant that the top two acts were Ashleigh and Pudsey:
And Jonathan and Charlotte:
The winner was voted by the viewing public, and I knew that the chosen act would reflect the interests of the nation. Both acts were entertaining, but for me the clear winners were Jonathan and Charlotte. I mean, just listen to those voices!
Unfortunately, the great British public is a nation of animal lovers… and the dog won. Yes, Great Britain voted for Ashleigh and Pudsey, and now this is one rich pooch.
Don’t get me wrong, the act was very entertaining and that is one talented dog, but was it really the best act in all of Britain? No. It’s hard to choose one winner because there was so much variety in the show. It’s not just a singing contest, or a dance contest. But, clearly, Britain has gone a bit soft in the head to choose a dancing dog as the winning act.
I feel cheated, but at least Jonathan and Charlotte will hopefully have gained some confidence by coming second, and I’m sure they will go on to great things! You see, Britain’s certainly got talent, even though the voting public seem to enjoy “lighter” entertainment.
Sex & the City? Do it yourself!Posted: February 5, 2012 Filed under: Food & Drink, Movies, Shopping, Travel & Tourism, TV, Women | Tags: carrie, magnolia bakery, new york, NYC, perry street, postaday, postaweek2012, satc, self-guided tour, sex & the city, tour, travel 3 Comments
When I went to New York in December, one of the things I really wanted to do was see some of the famous places from the Sex & the City TV series and films (1, 2).
I looked into the options and soon discovered that the organised tours you could pay for were pretty expensive (around $50 per person). These tours also included a number of places that didn’t really interest me. (Rabbit hunting in the Pleasure Chest with my mum? I don’t think so!) When I thought about touring around New York City in a bus full of (most likely) women, trying to cram in all of the “memorable” places from Sex & the City, my skin began to crawl. The only option seemed to be to design my own tour, with just the places that I wanted to see!
The two sites that I considered unmissable were Carrie’s house (66 Perry Street) and the Magnolia Bakery (401 Bleeker Street). These are really close to each other, both in Greenwich Village.
Luckily, we were staying quite close to Greenwich Village, so we started the day by walking there. It was much more interesting to walk than it would have been to take the subway.
On the way, I saw this great shop:
As far as I know, this is not in Sex & the City, but with a name like “Shoegasm” it really should be!
We soon reached Bleeker Street.
I hadn’t planned to go to any of the fancy shops that Carrie likes to shop in (what’s the point if you can’t afford to buy anything?) but I passed a Jimmy Choo shop and did stop to have a peek through the window.
We got to the Magnolia Bakery nice and early, and I got a birthday cupcake.
One disappointment was that the bench where Carrie and Miranda sit in the TV show wasn’t actually there. I wonder if it was just for the show, or if they had it removed because too many people sat there?!
Just around the corner, was Perry Street.
Carrie’s house is obviously quite a big tourist attraction, but it is actually a privately owned house. The poor people who live there must get so annoyed with all the tourists coming by to take a photo. They’ve actually put a chain up now, and a sign asking you not to sit on the step, which is fair enough I think.
After a wander around Greenwich Village, we walked to Soho to find Onieal’s Restaurant and Bar (174 Grand Street), which is known as “Scout” in Sex & the City. Scout is the bar which Aidan and Steve opened together.
It was a nice bar, and very quiet when we arrived.
We decided to have a bit of lunch and, of course, a Cosmo.
Our timing was so good. Just as we were finishing our drinks, a tour group flooded in. I was so glad we could leave and not be a part of it!
Of course, there are many other locations around New York which are used in Sex & the City, but all of the above was enough for me! As a bonus, we also stopped by the HBO shop (1100 Avenue of the Americas), where I picked up this great book, Sex and the City: Kiss and Tell:
The book includes a Sex & the City map and list of places to visit. I was quite happy to see that there were no additional places I wanted to see. If you’re into brand shopping or bar-hopping there are a lot of other places which I haven’t mentioned. You might want to check out this list for more information. You might also want to read this great article about why organised Sex & the City bus tours suck.
I’m a big fan of seeing places that are used in movies and TV shows, but I’d highly recommend organising your own trips rather than taking a tour. There’s so much information on the Internet, that it’s easy to plan. And now, with this post, you know how to see the highlights from Sex & the City all by yourself. 😉
The locks of love…Posted: January 8, 2012 Filed under: Love & Relationships, Movies, Travel & Tourism, TV | Tags: bridge, brookley bridge, couples, Federico Moccia, italy, love, new york, ponte milvio, postaday, postaweek2012, relationships, romance, satc, sex and the city 4 Comments
On my recent visit to New York I was very keen to visit Brooklyn Bridge, mainly because I had seen it featured in Sex and the City, and wanted to see the view of Manhattan from Brooklyn. One particular scene from Sex and the City had stuck in my mind, and that was the one in the first movie, where Steve and Miranda meet on Brooklyn Bridge to show that they are willing to forget the past and continue with their marriage.
But I hadn’t realised that Brooklyn Bridge was such a popular place for romance. Apparently Brooklyn Bridge has become the place for couples to declare their eternal love to each other by attaching a padlock to the bridge.
Scores of locks have been lovingly left on the bridge, some with messages, names or dates written on them, others plain. Despite the fact that it is actually illegal to attach anything to the bridge, there are these handy little loops all over the place, which people have cleverly made use of.
The tradition dates back to a book by Italian novelist Federico Moccia, which became popular when it was turned into a film, “Tre Metri Sopra il Cielo” (“Three Steps Over Heaven“), in 2004. Following the popularity of the movie, couples began declaring their love on the Ponte Milvio in Italy. Sometime later, perhaps around 2007, the tradition made its way over the Atlantic to the US, and people began to attach their love locks to the Brooklyn Bridge.
As I said, it is illegal to leave these locks on the bridge, but no one seems to be doing anything about removing them. And, really, what harm are they doing?
I wonder now if that scene in Sex and the City was inspired by this tradition of declaring one’s love on Brooklyn Bridge, although Miranda and Steve don’t actually leave a lock.
What do you think? Is leaving a lock on a bridge a good way for a couple to declare their eternal love? Would you do it?
The settling gene…Posted: March 18, 2010 Filed under: Life, TV | Tags: babies, houses, marriage, miranda, satc, settle, settling down, sex and the city 7 Comments
I was walking home tonight, when I saw guy I know from work waiting at the bus stop. Normally I would just say ‘hi’ and continue walking (I don’t know him so well), but he waved me over with a huge grin on his face.
“What’s up?”, I asked.
His reply was to show me his cell phone with a picture of his two-week old baby boy on it. (Last time I saw him, he was still expecting.)
I think I reacted appropriately. “Wow! So cute! Congratulations!” That’s a normal reaction, right?
The thing is… I faked it. Just as Miranda Hobbes fakes her sonogram in Sex and the City (Season 4, “Change of a Dress”), I faked my reaction to this guy’s baby. I mean, yeah, it’s great news. And he was clearly thrilled. But it’s so hard to get excited about other people’s kids.
I’m definitely at that age where all my friends are buying houses, getting married and having babies (although not necessarily in that order!), and I can’t help wondering… is there such a thing as a ‘settling gene’? And, if so, do I have one?
As a single girl in her (gulp!) late-twenties, living in rented accommodation, and doing a job which, let’s face it, probably isn’t a lifelong career, I really do feel worlds apart from most of my friends right now. But I have no maternal instinct urging me to settle down and procreate. I do want to buy a house someday, but I don’t know where I want to live yet. And I don’t know if I want to buy that house with someone, or go it alone.
Two of my co-workers are planning weddings right now, and two of my best friends back home got married last year. Another of my friends back home is getting married really soon, and one of the best friends mentioned above is about to have her first baby. I’m thrilled for them all, I really am. But I do find it hard to really be interested in it all when, honestly, I’m not. I’m mean, of course I’m interested in my friends and what they’re doing. But I’m not really interested in weddings and babies.
Is it possible that I am in fact just missing a gene? A gene which would make me dream of white weddings and storks? I am romantic, and I’m not opposed to the idea of settling down (with the right person), but it doesn’t seem to be something I’m going to be doing this side of thirty. And if I do settle down, I really don’t think there will be any babies!
I don’t think I’m completely alone in this line of thought, though. In fact, I’m reading a great book at the moment (The Group by Mary McCarthy), with this excellent line in it:
“It was plain to Polly that many of her married classmates were disappointed in their husbands and envied the girls, like Helena, who had not got married.”
Maybe I, like Helena, could seem to have an enviable life, at least to those who are unhappy with their own. I have no ties, from either a husband or a baby, which means I am able to live in a foreign country and basically do as I please. My free time is my own, my money is my own, my choices are my own. I don’t really have to answer to anyone, and I’m free to change my mind, my hairstyle, and my sheets 😉 as often as I like. Maybe I’m better off without the settling gene?
What do you think?
What's your theme song?Posted: October 14, 2009 Filed under: Music, TV | Tags: 4 non blondes, ally mcbeal, billy joel, fairground attraction, lucky soul, Music, NaBloPoMo09, stan bush, TV 6 Comments
In Ally McBeal, season one, episode 17 (“Theme of Life“), Ally’s therapist, Dr. Tracy Clark asks Ally to think of a theme song – something she can play in her head to make her feel better, when necessary. In this episode, Dr. Clark says her song is “Tracy” (by The Cuff Links), like her name.
Ally has trouble choosing a theme song, but I think she settles on”Tell Him” (by The Exciters) in the end.
I really related to this episode (not sure if that’s a good thing…!) and have since been trying to come up with the perfect ‘theme song’. I actually have a playlist on my iTunes called ‘Theme Songs’ which I regularly listen to. I’m down to a top 5 now I think. And they are…
What’s Up – 4 Non Blondes
This is a classic for me, and one I always sing at karaoke!
Ain’t Never Been Cool – Lucky Soul
I can just relate to the lyrics of this one – it reminds me of being a kid at school, and I’m disturbed to find that life doesn’t change as you get older!
Perfect – Fairground Attraction
I’m a perfectionist – what more can I say?
Dare – Stan Bush
Classic get-up-and-go song!
Vienna – Billy Joel
This one is probably more of a movie montage song than a theme song. It calms me down though.
So, what do you think?
(1) What should I choose as my personal ‘theme song’?
(2) What would you choose?
Please leave your thoughts and musings (and YouTube links) below! 😀
Oh, and by the way, you’ve gotta love John Cage’s theme song in Ally McBeal…