Dave's dooyoo stats
Reviews: 1,750 (Frankingsteins) + 136 (Brains)
Timeline: 27 June 2000 – 5 January 2011
Word count: ~1,035,000 archived (+ 275,000 lost or I didn't bother to save, so imagine how bad those must have been)
Earnings for all that: Maybe £1,300–£1,500, most of that in the year after graduation when I cranked out a £50–£150/month production line before getting steady employment. It helped.
Dave's dooyoo archive
Music reviews (Ab-Am | An-Az | Ba-Bi | Bl-Bu | C | D | E-H | I-J | K-M | N-Y | Offspring | Korn)
TV reviews (Sci-fi | Comedy | Kids)
Film reviews (Juvenile)
Book reviews
Game reviews
Internet/shopping reviews (Top 10 websites 2003 | 2004)
Edinburgh Fringe reviews
Misc. reviews (that's this page you're on now, idiot) [Classic Dave c.2004]
Bringing an end to my obsessive-compulsive filing of my old consumer reviews from a dead website that should have been allowed to rest in peace, here's what I thought about groceries, theme parks and other miscellany on the rare occasions I ventured outside my comfort zone or house.
Written for dooyoo.co.uk aged 15–24.
"Food" and drink reviews
I Like Pot Noodle
Written on 14.10.03
****
Often viewed as the bad egg of the food world, aside from bad eggs obviously, Pot Noodles have long held the reputation of being the ultimate food low. Often uttered in the same sentence as "dole scum," this cheap and simple hydrateable (is that a word?) snack has had a bad reputation since it came out in the seventies.
The main attraction of Pot Noodle is that it is quick and as simple to make as toast; even more so considering you don't need to butter the hot water afterwards. So in my early teens, my cooking knowledge being less than unmentionable, this was a real lifesaver, in the days before my mum would buy microwaveable lasagnes which I could also 'cook.'
Pot Noodles are available in a number of flavours, especially Chicken and Mushroom. I say this as the sheer repetitive volume of C&M noodles I have consumed in my life has put me off the flavour for life, as well as allowed me to develop a freehand shortening of its name for use in reviews such as this one. Spicy Curry is my personal favourite, but I'm always willing to experiment with the new flavours. I'm sure I only speak for myself when I say that 'Bombay Bad Boy' is actually a bit nice. Not very nice, just a bit.
It's all pretty fascinating when you're in the early stages of your Pot Noodle life, watching the boiling water soften the noodles and then splash onto the exact same spot on your hand that it always does when you first stab in the fork. That is a true account of my life, by the way! Due to the success of Pot Noodle from all the dole scum who apparently buy them, the Pot Noodle Company, which used to be Golden Wonder so I don't know what happened there, have introduced the hugley less successful Pot Rice and Pot Curry. They're standable, but you know where you are with a good 'Noodle.
They may be boring and a pathetic excuse for a meal (they are officially listed as 'snack'), but Pot Noodles have always been there for me. No one has said it better than Johnny Vegas on the BBC2 'I Love 1970s' series: "I shouldn't slag 'em off, if it weren't for Pot Noodles I wouldn't be alive today." Then again, Dave Lister did prefer to eat dog food when given the option on Red Dwarf!
Advantages: Easy to make, A variety of flavours, They have a sauce
Disadvantages: Not too satisfying, All pretty similar
Dr Pepper
Written on 22.08.07
****
I don’t really like Doctors. They do an incredible job, but it’s all a bit too intimate for me, which is why I tend to get through life aching and snapping with a misguided faith in the healing powers of simply being awake. Laughter may be the best medicine, but so is medicine, which is why the only two Doctors I can honestly say I really like are Christopher Lloyd’s character in the ‘Back to the Future’ films and this carbonated soft drink (which tastes a bit like medicine).
The usual Food and Drink review on Dooyoo will analyse the background and composition of the product being reviewed, yet while that approach is useful, particularly with a product with a long history such as this, I prefer to give a more personalised account of what the drink means to me. Especially as otherwise I would simply be transcribing from Wikipedia and the bottle label. Dr Pepper (Ph3) was an infrequent room-mate of mine at University, where I was studying English and he was apparently studying some form of chemistry in my windpipe, who I ditched regularly depending entirely on the best offer going around for cola drinks. That’s right; the advertising campaigns may state determinedly that ‘it is not a cola,’ to the extent that it is now legally recognised as ‘Pepper-flavoured’ to further distance it from its brown cousins, but to me these drinks all scratched that same itch. I was effectively addicted to fizzy cola drinks since I was a child, a habit I broke by going cold turkey and getting used to previously unpalatable water (poverty helped a great deal), and however different it may seek to be, to avoid monopoly or disappointing cola-thirsty customers, it’s certainly in the same ball park.
Reportedly consisting of 23 flavours, the ingredient list for Dr Pepper is deceptively and cryptically brief, listing carbonated water, sugar, colour, phosphoric acid, preservative and flavourings, the latter obviously comprising the real secrets. The non-specific ‘fruit flavour’ of the drink is impossible to place, but I have always associated this drink directly with Cherry Coke, despite the other’s more specific flavour. It does taste to me (the cola connoisseur, remember), more like cola than anything else, for example orangeade or any of the other fruit-specific soft drinks, and is certainly a uniquely unnatural formula that shouldn’t exist in nature. Many agree, to the extent that Dr Pepper has based entire advertising campaigns on trying to convert unwary virgins, but I couldn’t truly say whether this is a drink you can learn to like, or an instant love-it-or-hate-it Marmite thing. It’s certainly a drink that can grow on you, as I discovered when my Dad started to purchase multiple cans due to some offer or other at Morrisons a number of years ago, and once I became independent it became an equal competitor and alternative to the other big-name cola drinks, dependent on the supermarket offer of the time. Although I could never sustain interest in the drink for as long as I could more traditional colas, it presented a nice opportunity to deviate, providing me with a fruity taste in the same way as Cherry Coke, though not a taste or smell that everyone would enjoy being all over my face.
So what is the taste? It’s so unique and crazily non-descript that I really have no idea, though I’ve usually been able to agree with any attempts that people have made to describe it in terms of another substance. Alan Partridge’s ‘fizzy Benylin’ comes close, and one I could particularly understand was marzipan. Savouring the drink in my mouth rather than instantly and greedily shoving it down my throat as I usually do makes this flavour more clear, and also renders the flavour completely obsolete if drinking in tandem with a Battenberg. It’s not just a silly joke; I have done this a surprising number of times. The sticky, sugary sweetness of the Battenberg’s marzipan window-frame overloads the sticky, sugary sweetness of the Dr Pepper, effectively robbing it of its point. It doesn’t taste incredible, but it’s so caramel-like in consistency that the sugary sweetness is the source of most of the flavour. This is why I instantly regretted buying ‘Dr Pepper Zero’ (as they now call it), which tastes completely watered down and pointless. Despite this sweetness, it’s actually better for you (ever so slightly) than Cherry Coke, from what I remember during excessive periods when Sainsburys had buy-one-get-one-free offers for both drinks (how was that supposed to help my addiction? I fell off the wagon a few times, I can tell you), and roughly identical to a bottle of regular Coke. Reading from the bottle, a 250ml serving of Dr Pepper contains 105kcal and 25.9g of sugar, very similar to Coke, and clearly not the best thing to drink a bottle of a day for seventeen or so years.
For those unconcerned with weight gain or making their teeth and liver last into old age, Dr Pepper can be an incredibly enjoyable drink, when used sparingly. The offers in recent months have been less prolific, at least in my experience, though I bought two bottles for £2 in Sainsburys today, which was the same price as Coke (and not much more expensive than Sainsburys own-brand cola these days – angry review coming soon). If Coke’s not on offer, Pepsi invariably is, but Dr Pepper makes a nice alternative that I would urge people to try, just as the adverts do. The drink works quite differently from Coke, frothing enormously and rapidly up through the glass even when the bottle has been kept completely still, before this thin froth subsides completely as quickly as it came. This helps to create the exciting illusion that you’re indulging in a chemistry experiment with the good Dr, something that can be expanded by using it as a mixer with alcohol. With its more defined and offensive taste, Dr Pepper usually works far less successfully when mixed (which is why you don’t see it on tap), but people will have their own views on Vodka and things I expect. All I know is that it doesn’t agree with whisky or rum, frothing high and long and conflicting quite badly. Say what you like about Dr Pepper, there’s certainly no end to the excitement. It makes me wee an awful lot as well.
It’s always seemed a little odd to me that the company would base much of its advertising on the fact that people might hate the drink, as although the conclusion is invariably a positive one for the Dr, it could just as easily perpetuate the distrust by addressing its existence. The advertisement I remember the most was one that took my earlier ‘virgin’ comment to its metaphorical conclusion, by having an attractive young woman persuade a young man to indulge in something sinful of which his parents would disapprove, which was ultimately revealed to be... dot dot dot... Dr Pepper. I remember being quite excited when I first saw the advert in the cinema, and incredibly disappointed at the denouement, and perhaps my strange on-off relationship with this ludicrously unnatural drink is partly based on that early adolescent experience. I might go to extremes to try and prove I’m alternative, but I’m a whore for advertising just like everybody else.
The current Dr Pepper offer is two free vouchers that instantly grant 2-for-1 entry to popular attractions in the UK until the end of October.
Advantages: Unique taste, frequently found on offer for a competitive price.
Disadvantages: Easily loathed, addictive, diuretic.
Coca-Cola
Ho, Ho, *Hic*
Written on 02.09.07
****
I’ve spoken before of my unfortunate and debilitating coke addiction, which lasted from early childhood to a time not too long ago. Don’t worry, I meant that kind of Coke! Oh, you already knew. There’s a picture. I see. Well now that the fun’s out of the way, on with the review. Without a doubt, the most well-known and authentic carbonated cola drink belongs to the ludicrously rich Coca-Cola Corporation, which has ensured through endless and unstoppable advertising to ingrain the idea into the minds of everyone that their product is the best. But is it true? Well, probably.
Even in my worst excesses of cola binge drinking, this expensive product would usually be substituted for a cheaper supermarket equivalent or occasionally the arch rival Pepsi, which is forced to resort to numerous special offers and irritating sponsorship deals to maintain its market share. I came to regard Coca-Cola as the rich man’s Asda Just Cola, at the opposite end of the scale to undrinkable, leafy 21p bargain brands (which can also be detected by the presence of ‘American-style,’ ‘star’ or ‘pop’ in the title). It doesn’t deserve such special recognition for essentially including the same ingredients in a slightly nicer tasting composition – and apparently based somewhere down the line on lemons as opposed to Pepsi’s orange, at least that’s what I’ve heard – but my linear mind has always inevitably placed it at number one in the cola list.
The ingredients list on a bottle of regular Coke is understandably vague and generalised by necessity, otherwise we’d all be brewing the formula in our bathtubs. Fortunately, the company is required to display the nutritional information, based on the quantity of a 250ml glass. There are 105kcal, which evidently makes up 5% of the body’s daily intake according to their guideline of a 2000kcal diet, but more debilitating is the large 26.5g of sugar, equalling 29% of the same daily allowance in a single glass. This sugar amount is slightly worse than that of Dr. Pepper, but better than Cherry Coke, and the obvious cause for alarm for dieters who are nowadays thankfully spoiled for choice with sugar-free brands that still allow them to be coked up to the eyeballs without doing their bodies any harm. Alright, there may be a few health concerns in a diet consisting entirely of fizzy cola drinks, particularly for the teeth and liver, but look on the bright side: you could turn out like me.
As usual, I’ll skip the information on Coke’s illustrious and scandalous history in favour of evaluating it as a fizzy drink – all that information can be found on Wikipedia, but only here will you receive my unique and clearly wrong insight. Coke certainly has a distinct flavour and smell, especially compared to its medium quality supermarket equivalents, but a large part of this comes in the anticipation before the drink actually enters my mouth. The fizzy burp released on opening a fresh bottle or tearing open a can is a pleasant and familiar one, hinting at the caramel-like taste that I am about to enjoy and not going overboard on the froth as some other brands tend to. You don’t get this sensation from a supermarket cola, in which the fizz merely acts as a gassy irritation rather than a pleasant precursor to taste, but a major disadvantage common to all colas is the prevalence and persistence of bubbles that can make it difficult to drink for many, and often invite a wave of burping (I’ve been spared this, as I can’t actually burp). The taste passing onto the tongue is initially pleasant, aided by the aroma, but all too soon takes on a slightly too sticky and almost metallic tinge that leaves me a little unsatisfied. The oddest thing of all comes in the after-effects left behind in the mouth, which will still be slightly fizzing and coated by the sugar, particularly the teeth. I don’t want to get too unpleasant, but the thick and sticky saliva is quite unpleasant, and an unconscious interior cleaning by the tongue will usually follow.
In my experience, Coca-Cola isn’t particularly addictive in the short term in the way something like Dr. Pepper tends to be, as one glass can easily be enough in one sitting, the maximum under normal circumstances being two. Still, the slightly improved taste over what I consider the ‘base’ own-brands of supermarkets lends the drink a false sense of luxury, and I will be more likely to over-indulge for pleasure rather than mere thirst (bearing in mind that the only drinks I would ever drink would be cola drinks). This means that a bottle would have a fairly short lifespan, usually no more than a day, which can be a problem if relying solely on this famous brand as it tends to be the most expensive. I think my local Sainsburys is currently offering 2 bottles for £2, in a rare triumph over the price of Pepsi, but even when bought in bulk the price will usually be quite in excess of £1 per bottle, often along the lines of 2 for £2.30. Bought in smaller local shops without a discount, the bottles currently bear a price label of £1.59 each, which would seem to rise only by a few pence every few years, so there’s nothing to worry about in this regard.
Coke has been the leading brand in its field for well over a hundred years, and will clearly dominate for however long American capitalism reigns until its collapse and the accompanying destruction of the planet. In the short time we have left, let’s enjoy our favourite drinks and disregard the obvious ill effects and sheer prices and indulge our vices as best we can, something the Coca-Cola Company is encouraging by bringing out ever more ludicrous spin-offs of its core product. I rarely drink Coke now, even when I fancy a cola drink, but its powerful legacy has clearly been enough to cripple my life. On second thought, I can’t blame all my problems on a fizzy drink.
It’s amazing and lovely that this category didn’t exist before this review. I’m sorry for contaminating the site.
Advantages: Deservedly the leading brand of carbonated cola drinks.
Disadvantages: The ultimate symbol of despicable capitalism, and it leaves your mouth all sticky.
Sainsburys Classic Cola
The Mighty Have Fallen
Written on 16.09.07
***
If I was writing this review a year ago, it would undoubtedly be a five-star affair filled with praise for Sainsbury’s commendable achievement in marketing an affordable alternative to the more expensive big-name cola brands, whilst skilfully avoiding the pit-falls that often make budget brands undrinkable. I’ve now long been over my once tragic cola addiction that lasted from about the age of four to sometime earlier this year, and as I couldn’t afford to be too picky with my choice of junk, these 34p bottles provided an excellent option to keep me from bankrupting myself with the slightly tastier but sadly far too expensive Coca-Cola and Pepsi, which commonly retailed for over £1 even when accompanied by a special offer. Unfortunately, in their idiocy (or perhaps because the product simply wasn’t profitable), Sainsbury’s stores have increased the price drastically since, to over double the original figure. When I first saw the new price tag of 69p I was distressed and angry, and more recently I’ve spotted a further increase to 79p.
Now that I can drink cheaper and healthier alternatives such as water (from the invigorating spring of my bathroom tap) I laugh in J. Sainsbury’s face as I pass his expensive product by, now no longer worth buying for its slightly inferior quality to other products that can be bought for around the same price, or perhaps a little more. Of course, I wasn’t going to let the opportunity pass by to snag a few bottles when I spotted them in the reduced section for 20p (I’m not sure of the reason, they don’t appear damaged, but if no more new reviews pop up from me next week you can make your own judgements), as although I no longer crave the sickly texture and unpleasant gaseous sensation, it’s still the best drink to have on hand by the beside when awakening with the threat of a hangover. I don’t usually opt for a diet equivalent of drinks, but in this case the offer forced my hand, allowing for a full analysis of its alleged benefits to the drinker’s health (or more accurately, the amount of damage lessened by drinking diet).
Although each major supermarket has its own brand cola drink, all of which taste roughly the same (and I would know), Sainsbury’s ‘Classic Cola’ was designed specifically as a rival for the bigger brands not only in terms of its excellent budget price, but for its inherent quality. The attempt was quite successful, though I would argue no more than Asda or Tesco cola which taste roughly the same (not Morrisons though, if memory serves), and although it can taste a little cheap, the proportional scale of quality verses price was greatly in its favour before the price increase, when it dropped significantly and is thus no longer really worth bothering with. At the lower end of the scale, Sainsbury’s Basics Cola is undrinkable, leafy-tasting, brown unpleasantness in a bottle for 21p (used to be 18p) but for less than twice that low price (originally), cola fans would be greatly satiated by this fair approximation of ‘the real thing.’ There are still a few signs of its budget origins remaining, such as the overpowering gassy smell as opposed to a true aroma, the rough-edged screw-top lid and prevalence of a layer of ‘head’ inside the opened bottle that takes a couple of hours to vanish, but anyone who wouldn’t give it five stars for quality, and then reduce that to three when the price became unreasonably extortionate, would be quite the cola snob. Or simply someone who doesn’t like stupidly fizzy carbonated soft drinks that potentially rot their teeth and liver.
The diet equivalent of Classic Cola is disappointing in the way all diet versions are for people more accustomed to the sugary versions, and seems to have far less of a distinctive taste than the customary red version, even bordering slightly on the edge of Basics Cola/Happy Shopper Cola/any budget cola brand whose name includes the words ‘American,’ ‘Star’ or ‘Pop.’ To make up for this lack of taste are some impressive statistics that feasibly make this less damaging for the drinker’s health, boasted by the brightly coloured ‘wheel of health’ adorning the front of the bottle’s label, which is unexpectedly all-green. Each 250ml serving (a standard glassful) is said to contain only a single measly calorie, with 0.3g of sugars and only slight ‘traces’ of fat, saturated fat and salt. This is bad news for me as I tend to enjoy quite a lot more than 0.3g of sugar in my fizzy drinks, though trying to add it yourself is probably unwise. The same goes for calories: delicious! Sainsbury’s commitment to producing a health-conscious fizzy drink shouldn’t be underestimated however, as the reverse of the label makes sure to mention the lack of Benzoate and ever-controversial Aspartame in this drink, which is sweetened with the presumably less bad Sucralose. Don’t ask me, I always feel under-qualified when reading the ingredients list on bizarre chemicals such as this. The flavouring is also said to be all natural, as is the standard dark brown colour of the drink – it’s not just there to look pretty.
The same storage and usage principles apply as for any fizzy drink, the option to refrigerate being down to individual taste or perhaps the state of the climate, and although the bottle instructs customers to drink within three days of opening, I find that this diet version becomes flat quite a lot quicker than that, the last of my hangover remedy tasting quite bland and a little unpleasant within 24 hours of opening. These bottles follow all the other supermarkets in stealing the internationally recognised Coca-Cola colour schemes of red and silver to distinguish between regular and diet versions, but the text plays it safe by being typed in a neutral serif font, rather than riskily inviting an Asda-type lawsuit for being too similar to the real thing. The most recent (expensive) line of these drinks feature the same image on both diet and regular versions of a glass filled with ice cubes and tasty-looking cola, and like most products in Sainsbury’s latest packaging re-design, the image of the product is presented as a somewhat disconcerting extreme close-up that winds up about double the actual size. I mean it when I say disconcerting: as well as being quite impractical in this instance, only being able to fit on a small section of the glass, I was actually a little freaked out when browsing the supermarket’s biscuit section and being presented with all these monstrous, oversized chocolate digestives and bourbons. I’ll hand it to Sainsbury’s: they know how to make biscuits scary. It goes without saying that this product is only available at Sainsbury’s supermarkets and smaller Sainsbury’s stores, but I thought I’d still say it anyway. You know what some people are like. Well that about rounds it all off nicely, is there anything I’ve forgotten to mention? Ah yes –
And the taste? Well, the sugary version is quite caramelly and sweet in a way many cheaper colas fail to be, and is really quite nice, but the diet is less appealing. I’m always quite disappointed with the taste of diet cola drinks in general, but this is fair enough knock-off for it not to really matter. I’d say that this tastes more similar to Pepsi than Coca-Cola, but of course I may be being swayed by the sugar-free familiarity of Pepsi Max. It’s a very fizzy drink, not overpowering but very prevalent even for a long time after pouring. The initial froth is nothing too major, and is noticeably looser in the diet version due to the lack of sugar, and it does make the overall experience a little less pleasant than it otherwise would be. Like Coca-Cola, the initial smell factors largely into the illusion of taste, and the smell of Classic Cola is quite unpleasantly gassy and rather more cola-y than the expensive brands tend to be, reminding me of cola-flavoured still drinks, ice lollies and sweets from my childhood. There’s even something slightly metallic about it, and it leaves quite an unpleasant after-taste in the mouth, especially when drunk flat, while the sugar version leaves the usual irritating film behind all over the surface area of the drinker’s mouth and teeth. For 34p this was all to be expected, and the drink performed above and beyond expectations, but 79p is a little too much to ask for what is still essentially an average middle ground between the horrors of budget cola and the heights of the big American names.
I’d recommend Sainsbury’s Classic Cola and Sainsbury’s Classic Diet Cola only if the other alternatives are far too expensive, but similar varieties varieties of Coke and Pepsi can commonly be found in 2 for £2 offers and the like, the extra 21p being an acceptable cost for this upgrade to first class. Other supermarket brands are also well worth trying, though I haven’t had them in a while and I’m out of touch with the prices. I hope they haven’t followed Sainsbury’s example, though I feel deep down that the days of high quality, low cost cola are now behind us. But that’s okay, I hardly ever drink the rubbish any more. Three stars.
Advantages: Competitive, middle-of-the-road quality, and health-conscious improvements to diet range.
Disadvantages: Unreasonable and sudden doubling in price sort of ruins the point.
It's Still Yoghurt, Dammit
Written on 21.10.07
*****
Unlike comedian Richard Herring, who clearly is, I am not obsessed with yoghurts. I just happened to want to write a thousand words about Sainsbury’s Basics yoghurts today, there’s nothing funny about it. It’s not like I’m involved in the yoghurt trade and I’m trying to promote it or anything. Well, saying that, my Dad’s farm does supply the milk they use to make those Muller corners, but that’s not the point. He gets a substantial discount, which used to mean plenty more yoghurts for me, yum! Not that I’m obsessed with yoghurt or anything. Saying that, I really fancy one now though.
What could there possibly be to complain about in Sainsburys Basics Low Fat Yoghurts? Costing a mere 29p for a 500g pack of four different flavours (it used to be 28p, what are things coming to?), or alternatively the ever-so-slightly more expensive 8p for a 125g solitary yog, only available in strawberry. The four-pack needs to be kept refrigerated after purchase to avoid turning into a liquid rather than its standard goo, so it’s best not to get it out in preparation for dessert after a time-consuming, hearty feast. The sell-by date is roughly a fortnight, which is more than enough time considering that many people will consume more than one at a time, if they’re anything like me (I’m still not obsessed with yoghurt though, I usually have them in pairs, that’s all). The pack explicitly warns against freezing the yoghurts, though I’ve long been tempted to see if this would result in potted Mini-Milk or just a hard, horrible mess. They’re only 7¼p each, I think it’s worth the risk. Maybe next time.
If buying the four-pack, the flavours are (clockwise from top-right) (because that’s where clocks start from): strawberry, peach melba, black cherry, and raspberry. The make-up of each is roughly the same as deduced from the ingredients list, with peach melba being slightly more adventurous with regard to its multiple fruit sources. It’s a little disappointing to see that only 2% real fruit is included in each yoghurt, made up by an additional 1.5% of juice from concentrate, but once again this is nothing to complain about from such a bargain product. Not being a yoghurt connoisseur (honestly), I enjoy these just as much as I do any other standard yoghurt, perhaps because my own tolerance to fruit is quite low. The yoghurts now feature several tiny but very real pieces of fruit that I’m sure didn’t used to be there a year ago, and although they will doubtless satisfy most consumers, I find these a little distracting from the otherwise smooth and creamy dining experience. The rest of the ingredients are a little strange and disconcerting, featuring such delights as carrot extract and the delicious-sounding ‘thickener,’ so it’s probably best to eat/slurp them in ignorance. If you’re drinking them, you haven’t been paying attention to the refrigeration instructions I mentioned earlier, you yoghurt amateur.
I love the Sainsburys Basics range, it provides all the value of a budget supermarket without the customer having to wade through those dingy, soily stores. While some budget products are kept to a necessarily disgusting standard in order that Sainsburys’ more expensive own brand can compete successfully, particularly in the areas of cola and toilet tissue, there’s nothing inferior about these. Sainsburys sell these as naturally ‘Low Fat’ products, and their attractive wheel of health confirms this with a largely green approval of safety. There are 104 calories per pot, if that’s the sort of thing that makes any sense to you (I suppose it’s good?), and the only slightly dodgy, oranged area of the health wheel concerns the 17.5g of sugar in each pot. The yoghurts can’t be eaten by those allergic to nuts for some reason or other, and as they’re made from cow’s milk, vegans and cow-haters should stay away and buy something more expensive. Vegans I understand, but the rest of you are just making it more difficult for yourselves; you won’t start saving money until you set aside your racial enmity.
So, what’s my opinion? Well, the initial clacking apart of the yoghurts is a very satisfying noise, arranged as they are in square-but-rounded tubs for ease of packaging, and although the lids are a little tough to pull, there shouldn’t be any splashing. You can lick the lid clean yourself, or if you have a cat who enjoys fruit, you can put it on the floor, pin down the corner with your socked toe, and allow the cat to enjoy its treat for about twenty seconds or so (my cat only likes toffee yoghurts though. And toffee ice cream). The yoghurts are the usual disappointing size common to all yoghurts apart from Müller and those enormous bio tubs (also available from the Basics range if you’re interested), but they will still satisfy yoghurt fans. Being a budget product made of only 2% real fruit, there is a slight similarity in the flavours between them, more accurately the lack of flavour, but each is distinctive enough that it’s possible to have a favourite. Because you’re obviously so interested, it’s only the peach melba that I’m not so fussy about, but if I really had to choose a favourite it would probably be strawberry. A 7¼p strawberry yoghurt; that’s how adventurous I am. No, maybe raspberry.
There are no changes that Sainsburys should be expected to make to this fine product, and anyone who complains about a 29p pack of yoghurts is a moron. If the producers ever wanted to switch some of the flavours, either permanently or with the option of choice, that would be quite cool, but still unnecessary. As long as these yoghurts retain four individual flavours and a price tag under 30p, they will be a constant presence in my yoghurt fridge. I mean, my regular fridge. I don’t have a second fridge just for cheap yoghurt.
Thank you for reading. 10 of your reads will keep me in yoghurt for another few days. That’s right; I bathe in it as well.
Advantages: Unbeatable price and acceptable quality.
Disadvantages: Won't satisfy more adventurous yoghurt fans.
Super Bare Necessities
Written on 22.07.06
***** [Officially better than Shakespeare]
Sainsbury’s Super Soft Toilet Tissue (Quilted) is the orange supermarket’s home-grown rival to well-known leading brands, although it’s produced in Switzerland. The blurb on the packaging informs buyers of its special design ‘for ultra comfort and absorbency.’ I don’t dispute the high quality of these toilet tissues, but as ‘ultra’ is lacking in detail as scientific terminology, these two marketed aspects of the product need to be compared to other brands for a fair judgement of the quality of these toilet tissues.
Test 1: Absorbency
I have on the desk in front of me one 125mm x 107.5mm sheet of Sainsbury’s Super Soft Toilet Tissue (Quilted), and one of Brand X, belonging to an unknown resident of my floor and left in the communal kitchen for me to steal and compare. I’m enjoying my early morning beverage of plain cold water (which may give you a rough idea of why I have to seek out supermarket brands), mmm, and it’s nice and refresh— whoops. I’ve accidentally just spilled a very small quantity of water onto the desk. Fortunately it’s not enough to cause any damage, but it’s an opportunity to test these two different toilet tissues.
The absorbency rates are similar, but certainly more impressive in the Sainsbury’s tissue, with its 3-ply thickness and miniscule pores. I’ve seen better, and although it could be argued that this particular, quilted brand of tissue is designed for other things, the absorbency is one of its two alleged selling points. In bedroom situations, spillages have to rely on tissue paper, as kitchen roll is often impractically out of reach in the kitchen (that’s why it’s called that). That’s why I can only give Sainsbury’s an absorbency rating of 3 out of 5.
Test 2: Comfort (CAUTION: Contains implications of bodily functions)
I’ve now carried out my early morning ablutions, which featured an intermission of the Brand X toilet tissue to compare the level of comfort. This time the difference was very pronounced, and the Sainsbury’s quilted tissues really came into their own. These tissues boast of ‘luxury softness and strength’: indeed, the quilting was comfortable and soft and although both brands are equal in terms of thickness, the Sainsbury’s brand felt much nicer on my fingers and elsewhere. Sainsbury’s scores a maximum 5 out of 5 for comfort.
These toilet tissues are keen to advertise their luxurious nature, and they do indeed hold up against leading rivals, demonstrating excellent production quality. Being a supermarket brand, this product, as expected, competes through price. The standard price is set at £3.89, both in stores and on sainsburys.co.uk, which is cheaper than Nouvelle and Charmin, but a whole 1p more expensive than leading competitor Andrex! Sainsbury’s toilet tissues are currently offering 3 rolls free on selected packs, meaning 12 rolls for the price of 9 at £3.89, and Andrex have the same offer (this offer excludes online shopping). I noticed in the store this morning, however, a noticeable absence of quilted Andrex toilet tissue, and as the Sainsbury's website confirms that this spin-off does exist, I can only assume that the Lancaster branch of Sainsbury’s is too intimidated by the competition to risk stocking it, despite it costing more.
You may have to rely on luck in finding Sainsbury's packs with 3 rolls free (advertised in helpful and eye-catching bright red). Sainsbury’s packaging has been intelligently designed to incorporate a thin, plastic pair of handles that allows the toilet tissues to be carried home easily without the aid of a carrier bag. Bashful people may be embarrassed at displaying their biological needs in this manner as no attempt has been made by the manufacturers to create ambiguity in the product’s appearance, although the packaging is rather tastefully coloured in pleasant shades of dark green.
These toilet tissues are competitively priced, even in light of the Andrex peculiarity mentioned above, and very pleasant to use. A hypothetical graph of quality against price knocks out all the other competitors completely, and there certainly shouldn’t be any stigma involved in buying a supermarket brand over an advertised one in this instance. Even though the toilet tissues themselves recommend purchasing facial tissues as a possible companion piece, these do the job just as well in my experience, avoiding the ‘paper pollen’ effect of cheaper toilet paper when blowing your nose.
For anyone interested in the specific details (perhaps you’re a toilet tissue nerd or groupie), the tissues are only available in a regular lily white colouring, and the average roll contains 170 sheets, leading to a total area of 27.412 square metres. If you were to lay all 2040 sheets from this 12-pack end to end in a large public place to form a huge square, it wouldn’t be long before the police were called and you’d be forced to explain your abnormal behaviour.
I’d certainly be the first to recommend Sainsbury’s Super Soft Toilet Tissue (Quilted), although I admit that I’m far from being a toilet tissue connoisseur, and I’d probably fail a blind comfort test. One of the leading quilted competitors implores customers to ‘love your bum,’ but I propose the less selfish practice of keeping your bum in satisfactory condition for other people to love instead.
Advantages: Great price, 12 for 9 offer, very comfortable
Disadvantages: Somewhat lacking in absorbency, offer excludes online shopping
Written on 12.08.06
***
On a recent trip to Sainsbury’s I saw a woman out of the corner of my eye, heading down the bathroom products isle. I had faith in this stranger’s ability to make the right decision, and this turned to disillusion as I saw her reach for the cheap option, Sainsbury’s Basics Toilet Tissue. I persevered with my laden basket and didn’t turn back. It wasn’t my time to be a hero. I’m not saying I’m Superman, that’s for other people to say. She would have to learn this one on her own. Besides, it would just embarrass us both if I approached a stranger buying such a sensitive item and got into an argument based around her rear end. Actually, it would only embarrass her, I evidently don’t get embarrassed discussing toilet roll. I’m either enlightened or depraved.
As a companion piece to my review of Sainsbury’s Super Soft quilted toilet tissue, I thought it was important to check out the other end of the scale. Exploring Sainsbury’s ‘Basics’ economy product line is a nice adventure regular customers can embark upon which leads to many surprises, both good and bad. Self-professed low quality equivalents of essential products at a budget price (although I’m not sure how essential red wine and Jaffa Cakes are), Basics products aim to provide cheaper customers with the minimal possible quality for the best possible price.
There are worse toilet rolls out there, plenty of them. Sainsbury’s Basics, despite being an economy brand, has to produce goods of a higher standard than would be expected in budget stores, but this is nevertheless a rather nasty product. People buy it for the price, I’ve done so myself, out of curiosity. The plain, no-frills packaging is almost a guarantee of inferior quality on sight, and this is obviously marketed at a different crowd than the luxurious quilting and pointless ‘honey’ hue of Andrex. Basics toilet roll is only available in 4-packs, as bulk-buy savings would be largely irrelevant. Even compared to the next ascending tier of quality, the store’s own, non-economy brand, there is a saving of £1.16 for four rolls, or 11 pence per 100 sheets.
You get what you pay for, and if there is any discrepancy between price and quality, it’s perhaps even weighted in the latter’s favour. Thin, coarse and minimally absorbent, this certainly isn’t a tissue for sensitive areas, but is acceptable as plain old toilet roll, as long as care is taken. There are people for whom this won’t present a problem, such as those with asbestos skin for example, but in honesty the tissues fulfil their function adequately. Don’t expect a roll to cover the larger ground of facial tissue and kitchen roll (as I always expect and put into practice with toilet roll), as it’s not very absorbent and is sufficiently weak to tear under the slightest dampening. You also don’t want to breathe those loose confetti shards in through your nostrils. A subsidiary box of facial tissues and roll of kitchen roll are therefore essential for once.
One pack of four contains roughly 800 sheets, 200 per roll, which is a little below average. As the paper consist of two very thin layers, this smaller quantity is further emphasised in the slightly thinner shapes. Compared to the bulky rolls of Andrex or even Sainsbury’s own brand, the rolls are flimsy and unattractive, the surface attempting something of a pattern but only revealing itself for the extraordinarily thin tree-peel that it is. The packaging admirably makes no attempt to conceal the product, as the trademark orange-and-white plastic occasionally gives way to transparency. As such, any resulting disappointment with the product would be naïve. Buyers know what you’re getting into and for many on a budget, this is good enough.
Basics toilet tissues can be bought from all stores for 40p (price verified this morning), and even online at sainsburystoyou.com. Oddly, the image for the product features the old-school ‘Sainsbury’s Economy’ packaging which hasn’t been in use for some time, further indicating the budget of this product. Basics doesn’t go in for the tempting offers of other brands, such as the quilting rivalry and ‘12 for the price of 9’ offers floating between toilet roll brands at the moment, and really don’t need to. At 10p per roll, it's all down to the individual buyer's tolerance.
Despite being something of a nice and cheap way to acquire a necessity, I’d feel a little disappointed if I was in someone else’s bathroom and the best they had to offer was Basics roll. Still, it would provide a nice insight into the truth of their financial situation. As most of the people I know are incredibly poor, I wouldn’t feel obliged to complain. I’d simply make a disconcerted ‘tut’ sound within earshot and hope they knew what I meant. While we’re on the subject, don’t buy Basics cola or crisps either. Basics polish, prawns and pies are all acceptable.
Advantages: 40p.
Disadvantages: Feels unpleasant, especially on sensitive areas.
Metal Hammer
Kerrang Deluxe
*****
Written on 16.06.01
"Metal Hammer" is the monthly source of reference for fans of a wide range of music, ranging from punk and old rock to death metal and black metal. Although it is obviously less up to date than the weekly "Kerrang!" magazine, its interviews and features are always more detailed and better presented, giving it the overall look of being more sophisticated and cared about than the seemingly budget Kerrang!
It always has a free gift every month as well, which makes the magazine well worth the price of £3.10, as well as its glossy cover and (around) 114 pages. The gift is usually a CD containing great tunes from most of the bands discussed and interviewed inside the mag, (so if you don't know exactly who you're reading about, you can usually have a listen to what they're made of), although more recently they have given away a video and stickers. There's also the occasional pull out poster extra.
The magazine (which is published at high quality by Future Publishing) is very well laid out and easy to handle, and begins with around ten pages of news (which is surprisingly up-to-date for a monthly magazine as it is usually put in just as it's going to press), which includes major headlines about new bands, band members' side projects, major changes in bands, and even any possible tour dates that may crop up. There are many interviews with bands, some of which are not well known and will not be of interest to anyone except the most hardcore fan, although some issues (for example the latest issue at the time of writing, June 2001) contain a large feature on a famous band such as The Offspring.
There are also personal one-to-one questionings to rock stars, a hilarious and interesting letters page, competitions, reviews of all new albums (and there are a surprising number every month- usually around 100), as well as a large and interesting concert section which is always very recent, usually reporting on a concert within two months of it taking place. There is a section dedicated to old, no-longer-running bands, and very interesting personal sections towards the end which depict and talk about a "Superfan" each month (someone whose interest in a band is laughably- and enviably- large), as well as a rather disturbing "Tatt's Life" section on band members' tattoos, which has featured such people as Davey Havok (AFI frontman) and Christian Wolbers (Fear Factory bassist).
It's also good to see that adverts are few and far between- in the latest issue there were just 16 pages of adverts, although all are relevant to the magazine, and seem more like regular features than advertisments, such as the always-interesting "Alchemy Gothic" page and the useful concert adverts, which are of great importanc to fans who wish to see their favourite bands live. There are no adverts which don't demand a look, except the occassional advert for a very poor band's new album. There are always 2 vouchers in the back of the magazine which allow for £2 off selected albums from HMV- some issues only have around three to five albums in this offer, but others have around twenty. And they're all popular albums.
The magazine is very easy to read, and although a lot of the interviews mostly go unread there is always something interesting. The magazine is aimed at an audience of people in their late teens (around fifteen onwards) and adults, so there is a lack of censorship, with words such as "f**k" and "c**t" occasionally cropping up, but this is usually in the letters column, or strictly to add comedy. The writers are not biased in the least, and all bands that fit roughly into the metal/rock (and occasionally punk) genre are talked about equally, with no talk about "selling out"- even Linkin Park, who have received a lot of stick for being a manufactured boy band- are given a large section with proof in both
directions, although Metal Hammer admit that they like the band, and that in the end it is up to the reader to decide what they do or don't like. A very good attitude for a great magazine.
Kerrang!
Metal Hammer Diet
Written on 17.06.01
****
It's arguable that Kerrang! (the weekly magazine devoted to "alternative" music) is basically a shorter, cheaper, more up-to-date version of Metal Hammer, the monthly king of rock magazines. If you're looking for disposable info on the latest albums, very up-to-date news (within a week of occurences) and the occasional (yet very rare) free gift, Kerrang! is for you.
But Metal Hammer is bigger, and ends up costing less. It always has something free too.
Anyway, enough about Metal hHmmer- if you wish to know more about it, see my review ("Kerrang Deluxe")- let's talk about Kerrang! I don't hate it or anything- I think it's cool. there are always photos of cool people, and information on upcoming tour dates, album releases, short (yet involved) interviews with well-known bands (Metal Hammer is largely about unheard-of bands), and reviews. There's also a letters page, and the magazine usually adds up to around 64 pages, excluding the covers.
Although the magzine is reputed for featuring heavy metal artists, it has expanded its taste over the years to include all punk and pop-punk, the extreme of death and black metal, and even featuring bands such as Stereophonics and Muse. This is a bit of a two-edged sword as more people will tend to buy the magazine, but these sections are of no interest to the regular metal fan.
I personally only find the magazine worth buying if I'm really interested in who's in it, or if it contains a free gift (such as posters or a CD), which Metal Hammer always does, but I have friends who buy it every week. I suppose at only £1.70 it is a lot more easy to purchase than Metal Hammer, and it is very well written. There is a degree of censoring, which sometimes slips up slightly, and the magazine must be good to spawn its own channel. Kerrang! has passed the 850 issue mark, meaning that it has technically been going for over sixteen years- long live Kerrang!
Advantages: Affordable, Very regularly updated, Interesting
Disadvantages: Slightly too wide taste being catered for, Could be better quality
UK Gold
The Doctor Who Fan's Heaven!
***
Written on 11.10.03
One of the first things I noticed about UK Gold that amused me was the amount of non-UK programmes. "Quantum Leap" used to be on every day, along with other programmes whose names now elude me. A more fitting title would be 'BBC Greats'" except that this would interfere with the establishment of BBC Three.
Being one of the higher budget satellite/digital channels, with a place right near the top of the listings with channel number 109, UK Gold is obviously a popular destination for many a bored or simply interested channel viewer, although for me it does not provide quality programming until around 8pm. Comedy classics which are funny, such as "Fawlty Towers," and ones that are not, "Are You Being Served?", are always at hand to tickle your pre-watershed funnybone when the sci-fi has stopped on Sky One. However, I feel that one of the greater benefits of UK Gold is to the heavy-duty sci-fi fan:
While Star Trek's license on satellite firmly belongs to Sky One (with E4 showing the sixties ones), UK Gold are not permitted that particular 'BBC Great.' However, the channel currently shows episodes of Doctor Who at 6pm every day; this will doubtless have attracted digital customers alone! On a more personal level, the highlight of UK Gold has always been its tendency to show Red Dwarf regularly. And not just the very first series which the BBC has repeated again and again in recent years and is now available on DVD and remastered videos in every WH Smith, I'm talking about the early 90s episodes that can only usually be seen by getting deleted second hand videos at high prices off eBay.
So whether you're a Red Dwarf, Doctor Who or Porridge fan, UK Gold might be the channel for you. The only problem is that like all other channels in history, the programmes shown in the day are low-budget rubbish. Apologies if you're a fan of those programmes, but it always seems a shame that afte r dishing out the extra money for Sky Digital every month there is still plenty of below-par programming. Good job I only watch it round my friend's house! Oh yes, and there are adverts too.
Advantages: Shows rare programmes, regularly, Bound to be something you like
Disadvantages: Bound to be loads of things you don't like, "UK" seems a little irrelevant
Paramount Comedy
The Home of Python
***
Written on 12.04.04
Over Christmas my 21st century family got with it, and installed a Sky Digital service. Being the smug young man with one friend that I am, I had already experienced its pleasures over the last three years round my friend's house, but had never experienced Channel 127: Paramount.
PROGRAMMES & SCHEDULING
Paramount is almost exclusively a comedy channel, and one that screens the shows that other channels haven't already claimed through the rule of "baggsy." British classics range from the ever-present, but infuriatingly late runs of 'Monty Python's Flying Circus' to more modern and low-budget affairs such as the Comedy Store and 'Time Gentlemen Please.' Weekends on Paramount, at least late at night, feature plenty of live comedy and through the rule of not fixing an unbroken thing, live shows of Lee Evans show at 9pm almost every week.
The above mix of British comedy is what attracts me to Paramount, and causes me to waste precious evenings of my life in front of channel 127. As with every other channel in history however, the daytime schedule is unfortunately dire. I'm sure 'M*A*S*H' has plenty of dedicated viewers but it's not something I enjoy sitting down to watch, while Michael J. Fox's "hilarious" 'Spin City' never deserves a screening. 'Happy Days' and 'Robin's Nest' fans are also catered for.
One of the channel's major selling points is its array of high-budget, popular US comedies. These shows will doubtless attract the channel many viewers and allow it to remain present, however I would literally rather take my own life than watch an episode of 'Sex & the City' or 'Ally McBeal.' Literally. Well, I would wound myself at least. Earlier in the afternoon, the channel also shows the less risqué but equally poor 'Third Rock from the Sun' and the intellectual boredom of 'Frasier,' 'Becker' and 'Seinfeld.'
Late night also finds time to bring out some truly terrible short programmes such as 'Bill Plymton Shorts': literally a ten-minute screening of some newspaper cartoon images with pauses for reading. Oh dear.
FILMS
Of course, we the general public mostly associate the Paramount logo with films. The Star Trek films have already been bought by Sci-Fi and terrestrial channels, but a healthy mix of American and British comedies often litters the prime time slots. For me, the highlight is the 'Naked Gun' series starring Leslie Nielsen, and fans will be pleased to hear that the channel regularly shows 'Police Squad,' the early eighties comedy series it was based upon. For me, this is where the appeal ends, however any fans of the 'Beverly Hills Cop' movies is very well catered for, as these seem to be on every single Friday. Please don't hold me to that. My Dad would also enjoy the awful 'Confessions' films - yes, those rude, Benny Hill-esque features starring Robin Asquith - and these are shown acceptably late in the night.
AVAILABILITY
Paramount is classed as a popular and regular channel, and as such is included in all basic Sky Digital and Telewest packages. If you don't have access to Paramount, you can simulate its effects by recording Channel 4's late night US import shows, buying some Lee Evans and Monty Python DVDs and finally digging out your mum's tapes of 'Happy Days' for a Paramount night in.
VERDICT
I apologise if my overwhelmingly negative of all but a few programmes have offended readers, or simply caused boredom, but I can't condone these kind of shows. If Paramount was allowed access to more classic British comedy owned by UK Gold - Fawlty Towers and Dad's Army would go down a treat, although I still wouldn't watch the latter - it would be a much more deserving channel, but at present its mix of American and British comedies seems too juxtaposed to really work. Paramount 2 is a nice addition, despite the fact that it doesn't have any unique programmes, but has been known to show popular programmes at a more accessible time; earlier this year it screened Monty Python an hour before the main Paramount channel at 11.20pm.
Paramount is a good channel for broad-minded comedy fans, but for people with specific tastes such as mine it can only satisfy on a limited number of occasions. No matter how many hundreds of channels are introduced, there has not been a channel invented that provides high quality TV during the day.
Advantages: Has exclusive rights to some excellent comedy, Easily accessible- not a premium channel
Disadvantages: Very much a mixed bag: plenty of programmes that won't appeal
p-rock
Punk's Not Dead?
****
Written on 29.04.04
In the modern, digital world, a single music channel is not enough to accommodate the constant stream of varied musical styles and complete trash, and this has led to extensions of the MTV company into more specialised areas, as well as appearances by independent channels. P-rock falls into the latter category and is no longer a member of the digital realm, its lifecycle being turbulent, unpredictable and quite fun.
AUDIENCE
P-rock catered primarily for fans of punk rock music, a genre that has increased in popularity here in Britain through the efforts of more accessible bands such as Green Day, the Offspring and Blink 182, however much some fans of "real" punk would wish decapitation for all concerned. MTV 2 is the music giant's apparent answer to everyone's "alternative music" needs, but this channel strangely became less useful and more full of stupid programmes the more it became necessary to have a really good rock channel. The channel set up by rock magazine 'Kerrang!' is still going strong, although its style of constant music across a number of styles inevitably leads to far too much repetition and viewers that still aren't satisfied.
At the end of 2002, two new channels appeared at roughly the same time; 'Scuzz,' owned by the wealthy Sky company, and P-rock, set up by two South-London businessmen. Scuzz played a variety of music similar to Kerrang, but over the years has managed to establish itself as a channel with some interesting features and the hour segments divided into more specialised programmes. P-rock played videos constantly, chosen by viewer phone votes in the manner of the other channels, but there was much more focus on contemporary and classic punk rock than metal.
BANDS
The channel's popularity relied partially upon the inclusion of popular artists among its tracklist, however there also seemed to be a lot of interest in bands that rarely had any time devoted to them on other channels. Over the Christmas 2002 period, the channel notably played videos by Rancid, the Rancid guitarist's side-project 'Lars Frederisksen and the Bastards,' the Distillers and the Vandals, extending to underground rap-rock bands such as Cypress Hill. When videos were shown by more popular bands, they were always chosen with regard to what was actually good (for good, read: "punk") and this led to the inclusion of rarely seen early videos from the Offspring, among others.
THE SHOWS
There were no attempts made by P-rock to have shoddily made discussion shows, a lesson that MTV 2 never seems to pick up on, although the channel was obviously planned with care. A pretty much non-stop stream of viewer-selected videos filled the schedule, while there were features such as the 'Top 10' at weekends, or late at night. The channel also allowed itself to show some of the less savoury, but ultimately better, music videos at night that were banned from daytime showing, usually for poor reasons.
THE END
P-rock's founder Mark Shipman, presumably a man who had either noticed a niche in the market or was simply a huge Rancid fan, has stated that lack of commitment and punctuality by advertisers led to the decision to close the channel down, as although it was receiving 600,000 viewers a week it was no longer financially secure. It seems that the plucky underdogs do not always have the ability to stand up and defeat the establishment, despite what rubbish Stallone films may teach. P-rock had a minor comeback for dying again, sort of like a punk Christ.
According to internet bulletins, the channel resumed playing in May 2003, albeit not as part of Sky Digital, but a recent unsuccessful visit to p-rock.tv left the impression that it has indeed faded into oblivion. P-rock managed to bring some less mainstream music to the public's attention, and for that it should be praised. Although technical problems were rife even during its run, which only added to my humorous and friendly, non-corporate view of the channel. But it did get annoying.
When the Kerrang channel first aired, the first music video I caught them playing was one by Dr. Dre. In a genre where selling out is harshly criticised, P-rock managed to avoid such actions. And it went off the air.
Advantages: Exclusive music videos that other channels couldn't be bothered to play (although some did after this), Enjoyable to watch, and not spoiled by filler programmes
Disadvantages: The same videos inevitably received too many screenings, No longer exists [This is a slight drawback, yeah], Technical problems
Hamsters
Geronimo!
***
Written on 15.10.03
Hamsters have provided much hilarity to me and my younger brothers in the past as they attempt to bite their way out of the cage and run around on the floor in the green ball, but also much sadness when I discovered poor little Hammy dead. We weren't too bothered when Geronimo had to be put down though, cause he'd got scabby.
As a pet, hamsters are very popular for the low effort required in caring for them, they have to be fed and watered but not taken to the park, and they're small enough for a child to hold or hurt so they're loads of fun. But compared to something larger, more interesting and basically better, they're a bit of a letdown. I'm aware that not every family will want to look after a cat or dog, but hamsters really aren't that great. The children will tire very soon of cleaning them out and feeding them, and these must be done very regularly to avoid seeing elliptical pellets of excrement and wet wood shavings in the little house on the right.
It also seems a little heartless to keep a hamster, considering they spend most of their waking hours attempting to find freedom from their cage or ball. Hammy and Geronimo often escaped from the ball because it was crap, but they were always found easily again, apart from one time when geronimo hid inside a chair.
As far as I'm concerned, all you have to remember to do with a hamster is to clean and feed it regularly, and let it have a recommended half an hour of exercise per day. There may be other things that a keeper is supposed to do, but my family had a 50% success rate with hamsters so that's good enough for me.
If you're content to have some little rodent in your house which will die in a couple of years, hamsters may be the pet for you. However, they are prone to a number of diseases; either that, or we made a big mistake with Geronimo's water. Poor guy eventually started turning black and horrible, so his death was not mourned so much as the predecessor.
Last time I saw Hammy, she was being buried in a very shallow stretch of soil in a house which we moved away from very soon after. I often wonder whether any children have since been disturbed by unearthing a skeleton with decomposing organs while simply trying to look for worms. The mistake my mother made when selecting old 'G' was to take pity on the small hamster in the corner of the pet shop cage, left out while his surviving brothers and sisters suckled away on the dugs of their mother. I'd recommend buying a hamster that at least looks like it has a chance of survival, especially if you've got a cat.
Advantages: Pretty funny, Feel nice, Cheap
Disadvantages: Die easily, Boring
Furby
Not Too Annoying
***
Written on 29.03.04
Furbies, if you haven't seen one or think it might have been something else, resemble a cross between an owl, a rabbit and a mechanical skeleton requiring AA batteries- although don't hold me to that, it has been a long time since I murdered a Furby and the batteries may well have been AAA. They come in a number of fur tones which are usually based around nature but which you could always paint pink if you liked that sort of thing. Male and female varieties are available, and if you buy two of them they will interact with each other, as demonstrated by the oh-so-witty Chris Evans on that TFI programme which wasn't brave enough to reveal the swear word in its title. He's a monster, Stu.
This Easter, why not buy a Furby? Well, there are several good arguments, but the recent price drop in some places adds another advantage to this incredibly popular toy.
Although they have a reputation for being very annoying, which is understandable if you have to hear someone playing with it all the time, Furbies are quite easy to shut up. Simply covering their eyes for about a minute or soothing them with rubs on the back will eventually make them sing a lullaby, something which I cannot help but link with a resounding "Yes! Thank God." The Furby won't wake you up in the middle of the night either, as I know from personal experience; my brother recevied one as a gift last year and when he got bored of it, the Furby sat still on a shelf for six months until it was accidentally awoken. Thankfully, but also confustingly, all it said was "need sleep again."
Furbies require someone to interact with them, and it helps if you understand what they are saying. Their language is known officially as "Furbish" and it revolves around them saying things like "may may" and "kah boo way," all of which should be detailed in an English-Furbish Dictionary which is much easier to understand than the English-Klingon Dictionary I received as a Christmas present several years ago. Qa'pla!
Some facts about the Furby, taken from the Habsro website (www.furby.com):
- Top Toy for 2 years running
- 12 million sold (that's this many zeros - 000000)
- Banned from the Pentagon due to learning ability
There's also a fact about the 12 million Furbies circling the Earth 700 times if they were laid end to end, but that's just an unnecessary selling pitch. I'm sure no parent will be impressed by the Earth-circling abilities of Furby sales. Anyway, the money required to engineer such a monumental task would be irresponsible use of Government funds that could be used to feed the starving chilldren next Christmas or something, so shame on you Hasbro.
I personally have no qualms about treating a Furby for what it is; some plastic and gears with fluff and eyes covering it, however I know there are many people that would think of reporting me to the RSPCA for taking out the batteries and effectively 'killing' it. The Furby's got a reset button as well, just in case it ends up learning your company's top secret stategy or the name of a mistress called out during sleep. It's not like Johnny 5 anyway, it's not advanced enough to be alive.
The ability of the Furby to learn English is one of its major attractions, although it's hard to tell whether this has worked. I am guilty of hearing the toy say something along the lines of "me listen," following which I would shout a number of blue words at it, but so far there has been no cigar. Another disadvantage of the gift could be a theoretical Furbydiction taking place in which the child may not want to go to school, preferring to play with his battery operated pal. No cheap shot double entendres please, it was obvious what I meant.
If you were thinking of buying a Furby for a child this Christmas, they're probably a lot cheaper than the £19.99 they used to charge, and it could be a good gift. Basically like buying them a hamster, but you don't have to change the wood shavings or cope with the inevitable death. They can be annoying but if you're a fan of cute things, or ever collected soft toys, you'll probably enjoy seeing a child react to it. Just be careful what you say around it.
Advantages: Less expensive than they used to be
Disadvantages: Reasonably annoying
Fun Family Day Out
****
Written on 28.03.04
Often overlooked in comparison to theme parks such as Alton Towers and Camelot, the American Adventure in Derby is one of the most enjoyable theme parks in the North. Reasonably cheap at around £15 for an adult and £13 for a child, and even less with a season pass, you'll also avoid the crowds of the more popular parks. There are never any queues.
The American Adventure is, obviously, based on something of a Western theme however this has largely faded over the years. The rides and attractions are all situated around a vast lake, and while a section of the park is very distinctly based on the saloon and home-on-the-range motif, the rollercoasters slightly break the illusion. There are also some repetitive and historically inaccurate Mount Rushmore heads in the distance.
In terms of the rides, there are several noteable examples that fall into the following intelligent categories:
ADRENALINE JUNKIES
- The most impressive 'ride' greets visitors as soon as they enter, and is called SKYCOASTER. Apparently the tallest ride of its kind in Europe, this involves up to three people being harnessed and secured together and hoisted 200 feet into the air for a face-first freefall! Certainly not a ride for those with a heart condition, it even unnerves me when I see the tiny peoples' faces shrinking into obscurity and I've been on it at least thirty times. The problem with Skycoaster is that it costs extra; £15 for one fly, which means either splitting the cost between two or three people, or having some solo action.
- The only truly enjoyable rollercoaster has existed at the park for over fifteen years and is called THE MISSILE. A quite basic track takes riders upside down and twisting before reaching the far side and doing it again in reverse. No impossibly high drops to terrify people like Blackpool's Pepsi Max 'Big One,' but it's a fun and consistent ride that can easily be enjoyed throughout the day.
- TWIN LOOPER has now been painted yellow to tie in to the park's 'JCB World' attraction, but is still a lot of fun. Another simple rollercoaster, this one features two consecutive loop-de-loops and then is pretty boring for about two minutes.
- SKY BOUNCER isn't really a ride, more a set of trampolines that you have to be tied up to bounce on. The enjoyment of this high-bouncing pull-fest really does hinge on the staff's experience as straps that are too loose can cause back ache, while straps that are too tight could severely damage my chances of ever conceiving children.
- No park would be complete without a LOG FLUME, and the three-drop American Adventure version is by far the best I have been on. In my youth it was promoted as 'the tallest log flume in Europe' but I don't see that mentioned so much nowadays. There are also RIVER RAPIDS on which people still defeat the point and wear plastic overalls to protect their clothes; I feel my Dad's hostility.
AHH, THAT'S NICE
- One of the main features of the park is its LIVE SHOW, which occur three times a day. People hired either for their acting talent or their horse-riding ability - and certainly not a mixture of both - carry out quite a silly tale involving exploding barrels, jumping sound effects and a redneck man who cals his mother "Ma" a lot. Good to see the first time, but after that it loses its charm and is the same for the rest of the year.
- The 3D CINEMA is a feature of many places and as long as you don't mind it being the same every time then you should be happy. There's a more aggressive MOTION MASTER that throws riders around in their seats which is more fun.
- The BALLOON RIDE, or Beep-Beep, is a relaxing ride that basically consists of sitting in pretend hot air balloons that spin on an axis. Still, it's better than the deadly boring Wagon-train Big Wheel (I think they were going for the 'Wagon Wheel' joke but I'm not going to give them the satisfaction).
I must also complement the park on its staff; much more easy-going and friendly than the average worker at Alton Towers, my Dad developed such close friendships with those working on Skycoaster that he negotiated a deal whereby he would pay for two 'flies' and receive a third later in the day for free. And of course some of the less communicative staff earn themselves nicknames.
The American Adventure's 2004 season begins next Saturday, and my father already has the season tickets. I'd recommend this park to anyone who regularly visits Alton Towers, however be sure not to over-do it.
Information on tickets and location can be found at www.americanadventure.co.uk [Not any more it can't. RIP.]
Advantages: No queues, Some great rides, Not too expensive
Disadvantages: Not much to tempt the frequent visitor, Skycoaster costs extra, Quite remote
Deserving the Hype?
****
Written on 07.05.04
My Dad loves his rides. I quite like them, but I must make it clear that the balding farmer and father of three lives for the adrenalin rush of a good rollercoaster. Every fortnight he takes my brothers and me to the American Adventure Theme Park in Derby, but he does occasionally desire a change.
Blackpool Pleasure Beach, located on the North-West coast of this green and pleasant land, is one of the most well-known and well-funded amusement parks in the country, but there are plenty of pros and cons that depend greatly on the person with the wallet.
ENTRANCE & PRICES
Blackpool receives a huge number of visitors every day, and there is no entrance fee to the park. This is good news for less enthusiastic mothers who would normally have to pay around eighteen pounds to enter the grounds of Alton Towers, as the system is based purely on a pay-as-you-ride basis.
The more extreme rides naturally cost more than some of the tamer experiences, and the price is the only real area in which Blackpool Pleasure Beach fails to impress. Apart from some of the independent attractions, explained later, the rides and attractions have fees based on a 'tickets' system; each ticket is the equivalent to a pound, and there are several ways to obtain these tickets, depending on the nature of your visit:
· TICKET MACHINE - Located at many convenient points, these convert precious quids into flimsy tickets at the cost of one pound per ticket. Ideal for people who are not planning on attending many rides.
· DAY PASS - The more cost-effective solution for people visiting for the whole day, wristbands can be obtained from the entrance reception desks for the price of around £28 (for an adult). On our recent visit, my Dad paid £104 for three adults (they did not hesitate in classing my 15 year old brother as an adult) and one child. These wristbands feature barcodes which need to be scanned on every ride, and this seems to be the most popular method of payment for most visitors.
· SEASON PASS - For those who plan on coming again and again, these passes cost between £125 and £200, and allow access for the whole season.
Taking the wristbands as the most popular entrance method to rides, their cost-effectiveness does prove itself very early on. Believe it or not, popular rides such as the Pepsi Max "Big One" costs seven tickets per ride - that's seven pounds per rider, every time they ride - but with a pass, the visitor can ride as many attractions as they desire, as many times as they can fit in to their schedule.
THE RIDES
Blackpool Pleasure Beach was established well over a century ago, and thankfully some of the archaic rides have been preserved, as a contrast to the more colourful, metallic and modern equivalents. There is no specific "theme" to this park, although in regions surrounding popular rides (notably the Valhalla attraction), food dispensers and scenery have been tastefully altered to suit the atmosphere.
On my previous visits to the Pleasure Beach I did not feel as if I had achieved the full experience, however following my visit last Sunday I feel confident that I know enough rides to recommend them. For ease of use, I will list them under appropriate headings:
ADRENALINE JUNKIES
There are many fast rides, some more well-known than others, and they all carry legends warn ing of the possible side-effects for people with high blood pressure or developing foetuses, among other things. They are all incredibly safe, and ride throughout the day.
The PEPSI MAX "BIG ONE" is obviously the most famous, and a little infamous due to the deaths that occurred early in that ride's existence, and although the ride experience itself is a little disappointing when compared to the visual spectacle of the track (which encircles the entire park), it is incredibly fast and has a terrifying first drop. The queue was very manageable on my last visit, but on busier days it can be very long.
SPIN DOCTOR is not a rollercoaster, but is certainly a very extreme ride. Four occupants are placed in a pod which proceeds to spin around a very large axis, occasionally veering upside down and constantly at a very fast pace. This is another ride that causes a lot of apprehension, and the only real problem is that the queue is always quite long, as the two pods can only seat a maximum of eight riders each time.
BLING, possibly the worst-named ride in human history, is a new addition to the park and is very enjoyable for its unpredictability. A long metal shaft with a counterbalance at the end can seat 24 passengers - 4 in each of its six arms - and then spins them into the air, around its axis. The weight of the riders influences its path, and each of the six arms spins and dips on random courses. Very fun, and not a very long queue as it can carry many riders.
IRN BRU REVOLUTION is a little disappointing and very short, but is very quick and easy to get onto. Situated high above ground, this rollercoaster follows a short path of dips and a loop, and then repeats it backwards.
Originally introduced as the Sony PlayStation ride, the ICE BLAST is still a very quick and original experience. Up to twelve riders sit around the central pole, and after a tension-building wait they are thrust vertically into the air.
The park's OLD ROLLERCOASTERS are still some of the most enjoyable experiences available, as they are very fast and have a great character. Being old also makes them a little less appealing to some younger visitors, the kind who would find 'Bling' the most bo' selecta name they had ever heard for a ride, so this means queues are very short and repeat rides are sometimes allowed to occur. There are three of these fast, creaky, wooden-track rides; the Roller Coaster, the Big Dipper and the double-track Grand National.
WHAT AN EXPERIENCE
As well as fast rides, some of the park's most notable attractions are the indoor rides. I have always loved haunted houses, and every time I'm in one I wish that society wouldn't frown on me eventually owning a house like that (I may get one anyway), and TRAUMA TOWERS is one of the best haunted houses I have experienced. It's a real shame that these kind of experiences no longer have the ability to frighten me, as some of my most enjoyable childhood memories are of being terrified inside such attractions by myself, but I still love the atmosphere. And my twelve year old brother found the changes in floor texture and overall darkness very scary, which made it all worthwhile! A sign outside indicates that Tony Blair once stayed at the ride on a Friday the 13th, I hope he enjoyed the spinning ride at the end. The separate Ghost Train isn't really worth mentioning.
Possibly my favourite ride at the whole Pleasure Beach is the incredibly detailed and very wet VALHALLA. Heavily based on Viking themes, this basically features boats of passengers going around tracks inside a large structure and getting damp, but there is a fantastic atmosphere and some interesting effects that make this stick out in my memory. From simple treats such as unexpected dips and excellent use of fire blasts and smoke effects to more subtle points such as the chilling and very fresh air inside one room, I don't feel I can do this ride justice. I'd recommend it to anyone who enjoys interesting ride experiences, and you can even buy a protective mac if you don't want to get wet. You know, if you're a wimp.
A very interesting feature that does not seem to be a regular staple of the park is a virtual reality experience that I believe was called FRANTIC FREDDY or something along those lines; unfortunately, internet searching has left me without any clear answers. The level of intrigue as my family stood among a crowd watching many grown men screaming in unison and leaping about in their chairs was unbelievable, and we had to discover what could be making them do this! It turned out that the game involved defeating digitalised opponents by shouting, jumping about in your chair and stamping your feet, which took some of the fun away but hey, I won!
YOUNGER PEOPLE
There are also a lot of rides and attractions to cater for very young children, none of which are particularly impressive. It's quite enjoyable to see a miniature version of the PlayStation/Ice Blast ride, and the atmosphere of the children's area is very pleasant. Children of around eight years and above should have no problems get ting on to some of the more accessible adult rides such as the old rollercoasters, the pirate ship, log flume and the excellent indoor attractions, and I wouldn't suggest that any parents try and prevent their children from accessing these rides if they are tall enough for the restriction and desire a go; I used to love them.
VERDICT
A trip to Blackpool Pleasure Beach will end up costing quite a lot, but it is worth it, especially in comparison to some other theme parks. A wristband for the day, or a season pass if you are really dedicated, is much more cost-effective than buying the incredibly overpriced tickets, and there is literally something for everyone's tastes. I did not comment on the shows at Blackpool as I have no experience of them; our wristbands granted access to one free show of our choice, but we preferred to keep riding! Still, they seem very popular and with a choice of an ice show, a magic show and a performing arts/dance based attraction, there is quite a degree of choice there also.
Blackpool itself has a bit of a reputation for being quite a tacky tourist area, but it is no more rubbish than other coastal towns. Granted there are far too many shops selling rock and fish-shaped fridge magnets, but there is a very long beach and plenty of attractions. In me experience, the town of Scarborough (on the opposite coast) features better activities in the town, such as the haunted house-esque attraction that remains one of my fondest memories, but a trip to Blackpool that includes the Pleasure Beach is ultimately worth it. The park stays open on many nights until about 9.30 to 10.00, which provides plenty more time than parks such as Alton Towers, which close at around 5pm.
Advantages: Can be very costly, Sometimes a little confusing and badly laid-out
Disadvantages: Some excellent rides, including the largest roller coaster in Europe, Great indoor attractions, Open 'til late
General
Written on 26.06.04
Jillmurphy has invited Dooyoo members to take part in lazy current debates. These questions (apart from the last one which I have noted) have been hotly and less hotly discussed over the course of this week.
I didn’t think I was going to attempt this as I’ve never really had opinions on anything important, but then I realised that this was sort of the point of the debate: after all, a few disgruntled members of an obscure internet consumer review site isn’t going to bring about any change.
Even when school lessons demanded I take a stance on some issue with a group, I would usually twist it into a vaguely relevant comedy routine that would avoid making any real commitment. I still received fairly high marks though, which suggests to me that the teachers were just lazy and were really only judging each pupil’s glasses-wearing ability. I can seriously think of no other reason to explain my survival of the Maths course, although now I think about it I did spend two years copying off Bailey.
So following are my horrifically uninformed views on life, pornography and everything, following jillmurphy’s now legendary guidelines. Everything I type is subject to change once I decide to start thinking about stuff.
- Do you believe in life after death?
I gave up on religion when I was around six, after being taught contradictions by well meaning adults: in an assembly I answered a teacher’s question of “where is God?” by saying “God is in heaven,” as I had been told. My recollection of that morning may be tainted slightly by the years, but the teacher said something along the lines of “no, that’s wrong. God is everywhere. (I am right),” and several pupils laughed at my idiocy. Nice to see my personal opinions being encouraged at such an influential age. In terms of spirits, I developed an interest in the paranormal when I was about twelve, but later realised I just enjoyed a good ghost story, and considering I’ve sat through several episodes of ‘Most Haunted’ without being shown anything to encourage a belief in life after death it seems a little odd that there aren’t more signs. So, to finally meander onto the question in point, I don’t know. Maybe.
- Should smoking be banned in public places?
I’ve never had a problem with anyone smoking when I’m around them, and I hate ruining peoples’ times, so I’d only recommend it in places where it might be dangerous or just rude. Which is probably where it’s banned already; well done Tony Blairs, or whoever. (See what I mean? I’m hopeless)
- Is capital punishment wrong?
I don’t think people should be executed for their crimes, especially when they’ve only been driven to them by forces out of their control (God or bereavement for example). I think the basic capital punishment should be quite a hard smack in London (the capital, do you see?) for small misdemeanours, the pain level being raised according to the atrocity of the crime. Prison’s still a good idea though, even if most of them are like a holiday in the Algarve (rubbish satire).
- Should cannabis be legalised?
It might as well be, it’s everywhere (like God). Even though it always received a bit of a laugh in my school’s assemblies, I think it’s a good idea to point out the dangers of it to young people, but considering alcohol and tobacco are still sold without hesitation to anyone who pops in to their newsagents with less than savoury motives:
CUSTOMER: Hello, can I buy some alcohol and tobacco with these ten pounds please?
SHOPKEEPER: Those look like children’s dinner money pounds. You’re not buying this for those naughty children on bikes waiting out there and looking at us, are you?
CUSTOMER: Yes I am, they let me keep the change, the idiots.
SHOPKEEPER: Well done, wish I’d thought of that.
CUSTOMER: Can I have a pack of Pokemon cards too please?
SHOPKEEPER: Yep. Is that for the children as well?
CUSTOMER: Um… yeah.
- Is beauty only skin deep?
Not possessing outward beauty myself I am better able to see past such fleshy issues, and although I obviously admire a nice breast, I don’t think I’m as bothered about physical beauty as a lot of other people. As long as she can stand Iron Maiden and doesn’t like Jim Davidson, I’m sure I’d be happy with anyone. But I did once think it would be cool to marry a load of male comedians I like (without any sexual activity obviously) so they could make me laugh all day though, so my mind is obviously somewhat addled on these matters. It sounds quite pathetic (and obvious), but if I found someone attractive inside, I’d always find them attractive on the outside. I would draw the line at the Elephant Man though.
- Do animals have rights?
I like animals, and although I’m unable to execute a slug (surely the most pointless and unnecessarily disgusting animal ever created) for crawling into the house and trying to eat my cat’s food, I’ve never really had a problem with cows being mass slaughtered so I can eat their gonads and eyeballs in Big Maccs (more rubbish satire). I find it a little cruel that cosmetic companies still test their products on animals, but I would have more faith in them if they actually tried putting lipstick on the rabbits’ mouths to test whether it looked nice, rather than injecting it into their spleens.
Like many people I’m a vegetarian in principle, except that I think meat’s really nice. I have promised to myself that I won’t eat tongue, liver or sweetbreads though: it’s not because these are all incredibly unappealing, I just find them the most barbaric. The fact that they’re horrible is just coincidence.
- Does Britain still need a monarchy?
What, ‘the fascist regime?’ We certainly don’t need one, but I don’t see any problem if we just leave them in the background for the tourists, bringing them to public attention a couple of times a year and paying them enormously to just sort of sit around and not really do anything. Oh wait, that’s what already happens (excellent scathing satire!) I don’t think we’d mind so much if they were actually pleasant people, but that’s what you get when the monarchy’s descended from in-bred Europeans (ha ha).
- Should fox hunting be banned in England and Wales?
Another issue that doesn’t affect me, I actually find it quite funny (in a sick way) that modern Britain still features men in Napoleonic uniforms with bugles, ganging up on defenceless rodents and slaughtering them. It is cruel though, but these men would only learn their lesson if the foxes evolved to become the dominant race and hunted mute humans for their sport and profit, like in Planet of the Apes but with foxes, and Prince Charles instead of Charlton Heston. You only have to watch ‘Brass Eye’ though to discover that foxes don’t actually feel anything, as they are made of string.
- Should Britain join the Euro?
This question has been a constant presence in both my German and Business A-levels, and I’ve never had an opinion on it. Call it lazy or whatever you wish (although lazy is the right answer, clearly). I quite like quids, but I’d easily be able to adapt to any changes without a problem. The only issue then is that of the economy and, although I have my Business & Economics notes at hand, I’m not going to bother reading them. After all, my test isn’t until Monday.
- Should all fire arms be banned for private use?
This is the only question here that I really don’t know how to answer (although you may have noticed otherwise). While reading a book on the artist H.R. Giger I somehow came across a statistic that four out of five gun-related deaths in Los Angeles are due to owners accidentally shooting themselves; whether this is true or not, it seems a lot more tempting to shoot a criminal than grab a kitchen knife or your under-bed nunchaku and threaten them. I don’t want to commit myself here, as I don’t know how I would act in such a situation.
- What is your opinion on legal prostitution?
As most other people have said on this debate, it’s been around forever and probably will be and ever for more shall be so. Legalisation could be seen as endorsement to what I consider an unpleasant and depressing trade (although I’m sure there are some perks, such as getting a lot of sex and stuff), but it could also make the overall experience less unpleasant and depressing. I think they might as well legalise it and see how it goes; what’s the worst that could happen? Being overly sentimental and a little obsessed with other peoples’ happiness over my own, I wouldn’t ever use such a service but I can appreciate why people do. They have to remember that God is watching though.
- Are we living in rip off Britain?
My experience of prices only extends to useless consumer products (‘that sh** I don’t need’), so in that regard I try and avoid rip-off Britain by importing from cheap-ass China and slightly-dodgy-CD Russia. From my Business lessons I got the impression that the economy’s pretty stable here at the moment, with quite moderate interest rates only rising every so often to keep the balance, but this hasn’t affected me directly so far. Don’t swear at me though, you can take delight in the fact that once you are retired and living off the younger workers, I’ll still be out there settling out of divorces and wasting my money on houses. I can’t wait.
- What is your opinion on pornography?
During early senior school I filled the role of ‘the kid who knows a lot of naughty things and tells his friends,’ due to my overly-liberal and quite dirty father, who would usually teach me through song or joke form: “do you know what the rudest number is?”, etc. Having such a degenerate for a father meant that there was always some pornography to be stealthily found, borrowed from his house and borrowed to my friends. Nowadays I’m not too bothered about porn, but a few years ago it was one of life’s most exotic treasures: I think the thrill went away as soon as I realised I was technically allowed (and perhaps encouraged) to look at it.
There are a couple of fetish ideas that I quite enjoy and I still like ‘nice’ and genuine pornography, but virtually everything unfortunately falls into the ‘sleazy’ category that I just don’t find interesting anymore. When did I grow old? I’ve not got anything against teenagers being exposed to (legal) porn though, as it’s safer than smoking and is far better education than the clinical diagrams of year seven sex education classes: I remember seeing a documentary on a hardcore ‘education’ film that was shown in some seventies schools before being banned. Yet another reason I dislike the modern education establishment. I wrote quite a lot for this one, didn’t I?
I hope it doesn’t annoy Jill, but as any answer I provide to her last question, “is genetically modified food right?”, would be boring and uninformed, I’ll briefly discuss something that has actually affected me (for once).
- What is your opinion on the education system?
I have no basis for comparison to agree with people who claim that school and exams today are much easier and less worthwhile than they used to be, but I agree anyway. Although some of my GCSEs and A-levels have been genuinely hard work throughout (especially German), almost every subject in my experience has been far too straightforward compared to the qualification it merits. That’s not to say I always achieve high marks, as I’m obviously better in some areas than others, but I feel I would have achieved the same kind of marks if I had simply been left to teach myself through the internet or library books; once revision time starts and I realise areas that have been missed, that’s what I do anyway. I can also tell that my University education isn’t going to be as strenuous as it should be, and that I’ll be able to spend three years lying on car bonnets talking about music rather than studying.
I also think a lot of teaching methods should be put under scrutiny: although my secondary school was quite an acclaimed and popular comprehensive, there were still a great many teachers who clearly didn’t want to be there, and who didn’t seem to care whether they were teaching something relevant or not. At the same time there were a number of friendly and dedicated teachers who made lessons much more enjoyable and worthwhile, but sometimes I think a bit of Nazi-style discipline could go a long way.
Of course, the non-ambitious part of me (which is almost all of me, and certainly all I usually consist of apart from in this one strangely dogmatic paragraph) is very happy to have had an easy school life, and even though I haven’t achieved as well as I could have done with more discipline, I look forward to several more carefree years at hard-working adults’ expense. Don’t worry though, I know what I’m doing, and I’ll immediately despise myself for my actions once I turn 23.
IN CONCLUSION
Yep. I think I may have wandered onto a relevant point somewhere in that lot, thank you for reading (or simply clicking a rating button immediately, which is probably wise in this case). This is why I write heavy metal reviews.
Advantages: I thought about something for once, It's not that bad, be happy
Disadvantages: Things could be better, I am wrong about where God lives [And about foxes being "rodents"]
Edinburgh
Athens of the North
*****
Written on 27.08.04
Scotland’s capital Edinburgh has long been associated with the arts; every summer, millions of overeducated fans of performing arts and stand up comedy spend more money than they conceivably afford on hour-long shows and . I think that’s the case anyway, but it’s possible that I’m just confusing everyone in a big city with just me.
Athens has been described as the Athens of the North, but there are several differences. Firstly, the highland breeze is a lot different from the hot Mediterranean climate (and thus better in my view), and the architecture is less white. Iced Earth have also never played a two-day set there and released the show as a live album. The artistic and cultural background of Edimburgh is certainly enough to rival Athena’s city though, and Prince Philip, the Duke of Edinburgh, is Greek after all.
TRAVEL
Edinburgh’s city centre is incredible easy to navigate. Seriously, even if you’ve printed off a street plan from the internet and circled areas where your venues probably are, you won’t need it. Buses and taxis are constantly available all day and night, while the traffic is never really an issue as you only ever need to cross the road once.
Heading south from Waverley railway station leads to the Royal Mile and North/South Bridge roads, all housing the entertainment, libraries and artistic places, as well as far too many hotels tucked away in streets to feasibly comprehend, while heading in the other direction reveals the large shopping section of the town and Princes Street Gardens which are probably nice.
ARCHITECTURE
Edinburgh’s skyline is impressive from any angle, with plenty of busts, statues, funky lighting at night (I love lights me) and my personal favourite form of architecture, spiky towers. My personal favourite of these was the Scott Monument on Princes Street (thanks to proxam for identifying it), which looked like some kind of Gothic rocket ship. Throughout the night there was also plenty of building work being done on more modern and equally huge buildings in the city centre, so Edinburgh is still something of a work in progress. Not surprising considering the Hob Nob quality of the walls in the Underbelly venue.
ENTERTAINMENT
My experience of entertainment at Edinburgh is primarily that of the comedy venues, and there are some sodding good ones. From the relatively low-key comedy bars such as the Stand to the converted cinema of the Pod Deco, the courtyard-based arena of the Pleasance or the pretty cool Smirnoff Underbelly, the city centre is arranged so that there’s plenty of time to travel between the venues amidst the one-hour shows. None of the big TV-stand up names would be caught performing throughout the month in these kind of arenas, although fans of Billy Connolly, Lee Evans and Peter Kay aren’t exactly stuck for DVD releases and national tours, but many of the remaining excellent comedians can be found up there every year, along with a stream of quite poor imitators.
Being a large city also entitles Edinburgh to much more impressive and much better facilities and entertainment than the humble towns I grew up in that were fairly rubbish.
PEOPLE
I suppose the Glasgow stereotype is drunk Scotsmen bawling, puking and asking Jimmie to “stitch that,” but the international nature of Edinburgh’s summer meant that I didn’t see much of this kind of thing. Only a bit, and it was quite funny. The people I did encounter were all very friendly, despite their obvious inner frustration at all the arty types coming up and taking over their city in the summer, and the Scottish accent is great anyway. Much better than having an indistinct accent that doesn’t really suggest you are from anywhere, but that still requires concentration to stop dropping ‘t’s on the ends of words. I love the Scottish, even though there are apparently no Scottish women according to one comic I saw. Strange as it seems, that did make me think for a few moments before dismissing it as a silly joke, but I get his point.
THE FRINGE
Dooyoo has a category for the festival, but I really wanted to talk about Edinburgh in general as it is a great place that I will definitely be visiting again. Nevertheless, I was only up there because of the legendary antics of London comedians.
Richard Herring and Stewart Lee were the primary reason I went up to the festival, and their respective shows were completely worth it. Although nothing else I saw came close in terms of enjoyment and brilliance, the Fringe month is dominated by theatrical, artistic, musical and humorous acts to provide something for everyone. Everyone with at least a few hundred pounds to spare for travel, accommodation and entertainment over a few days.
WEATHER
Actually, while I was there the weather was very favourable. Scotland may be associated with strong winds, fresh-faced people breathing that wind in and then getting rained on, but when I went it was pretty much the same as the rest of England. Not too hot, but quite sunny, although this was in August obviously. I don’t think Edinburgh’s actually in Scotland at all; that’s just a ploy to sell the beanie baby rip-offs of Nessie to everyone for £5.99 a time. I know, I’m not buying my brother one of them now.
Next August I might just rent a flat there for a month. It is good, you should go. [I ended up living there for three years.]
Advantages: Friendly people and great entertainment, Easy to get around, Nice buildings, I liked them
Disadvantages: Crowded during the summer
Grant Management
Letting Agency to Avoid
*
Written on 12.02.10
Mention the name 'Grant Management' within earshot of a group of twentysomethings anywhere in Edinburgh or Glasgow (and possibly elsewhere; their reach is depressing), and you'll be regailed with stories of burst pipes, illegal entry, broken boilers, vanishing deposits and Grade 1 Environmental Health Risks, among other things.
Unfortunately, we didn't think of asking these people when choosing our flat with Grant Management a couple of years ago.
I'm aware that any flat agency that spreads itself as wide as Grant Management has somehow managed to achieve will have the occasional dodgy property, and also that people tend to be more vocal about negative experiences than positive ones, but even taking this into account it really does seem that no one has a good word to say about Grant Management. And I'm afraid I'll have to go all mainstream on this one and join the dissenters.
I don't have many standards from a property - I've always chosen to live in cheap flats, and have had a good run thus far with amusingly dodgy landlords (even if they were a little on the racist side), but living with Grant Management was a new one on me. On average, I really don't think a week went by without at least one problem rearing its ugly head across those twelve long months.
I'll start at the beginning, with the contract signing. Needless to say, there was some discrepancy between the things we were told when being given a guided tour of the property and the things that these statements later evolved into. Take the £75 administration fee, which we were told was to cover the cost of obtaining our references... only to be told that we were to provide our own references. We reported this to the City of Edinburgh Council, who found it quite interesting, but not as interesting as they found the complete absence of a HMO license that's supposed to be essential for properties of three or more people.
Although these things seemed annoying at the time, in hindsight it feels rather petty to moan about a vanishing £75, especially when we fast-forward to the tedious process of getting back the deposit, something that was only achieved after months of regular phone calls to various disconnected employees within Grant Management's seemingly independent offices on Coates Crescent and Nicolson Street in Edinburgh. There was also their attempt to lumber us with a £140 cleaning charge, and the times they debited hundreds of pounds without permission, for seemingly no reason, stealing our money. We did eventually get everything back, but it was an annoying process.
But hell, that's just money, and insignificant compared to some of the really bad stuff. Like those pesky bed bugs. Or the numerous times they let themselves into the property without the required 24 hours' notice, one time even to show round prospective tenants who seemed even more confused than we were (I can only imagine how many times they let themselves in when we were all out at work and unable to catch them at it).
There was more, but I'm getting a little depressed remembering it all. The worst part is, we really weren't alone in our experience, and despite formal complaints to the council, it seems Grant Management is somehow getting away with all this, on a very regular basis.
I normally give companies a lot of leeway - I wouldn't think of sueing someone if I found a mouse's head accidentally esconced in my Snickers, for example - but with Grant Management it's different. I'm not prepared to simply eat around the disgusting article this time.
This company damages the quality of life for hundreds of young people and students each year, meaning it really is a menace. If you search around, you can find plenty of horror stories from Grant Management tenants and survivors on the internet, though sadly none of these negative reviews seems to appear high up in search results, which must be some huge credit to whatever agency's in charge of Grant Management's SEO strategy. I wonder if this review will ever register in a position noticeable enough for people to take notice? Hopefully, a few more negative reviews might save people from making the same mistake so many others have done, and go with a letting agency that isn't completely terrible.
It depresses me to walk down any residential street in Edinburgh or Glasgow and see Grant Management's signs jutting out of another godforsaken property like a Jolly Roger. Still, the Grant Management experience wasn't a completely worthless one, as at least it taught me the lesson to always be scrupulous when choosing landlords in the future. You can have that one on me.
Advantages: Flats in great locations.
Disadvantages: These flats are owned by Grant Management.
Weatherseal
Written on 13.02.10
*
Weatherseal Window Systems uses illegal and immoral business practices to sell poor quality windows to blameless fools.
It was good to get that out. Rest assured, I'm planning on justifying all those outrageous statements.
Firstly, I have to admit that I used to work for Weatherseal for a while, in the now-distant past. My excuse is that I'd been unemployed for six months and dooyooMILES weren't proving to be quite enough to cover the cost of rent and food, so I was desperate enough to take their morally repulsive job and illegal pay on the mental condition that I would escape as soon as possible (it took four and a half months in the end).
This allowed me to see how the organisation was run, at least from the admittedly lowly position of a telephone canvasser in a regional call centre. I can honestly say that the branch manager was the most offensive person I've ever met, using desperate fear tactics in a hopeless attempt to motivate 17 year olds to be more aggressive on the phone. It was amusing and inevitable that her much fairer replacement managed to yield a much stronger result, and retain more staff, through the unconventional method of being nice.
Of course, this is a review of the company as a whole, not just one rotten apple. But I heard enough complaints about the poor quality of Weatherseal's windows - and more importantly, the service of their sales staff - that I'd warn anyone against using them. The only problem is, I don't have the inside knowledge to know whether any of the competitors are any better, and I'm not going through all that again just to find out.
You only have to check the website of the Information Commissioner's Office (www.ico.gov.uk) to see that Weatherseal has been served with several enforcement notices regarding its illegal cold-calling practices. This means that not only were they calling around randomly in the hope of baiting unsuspecting homeowners with their lying offer of "free windows, doors and roofline," but they were also calling numerous people who had gone to the trouble of registering with the Telephone Preference Service (www.mpsonline.org.uk/tps) to avoid just that type of sales call. As for the rest of you not currently registered with the TPS, these people can phone you whenever they like, so I suggest you sign up now (they phone mobiles too).
As mentioned above, the sales tactic of canvassers revolved around promising the chance of winning free products, which is an incredibly loose reference to the few properties that end up feature in the company's products brochure, which get a discount. The call centre I worked at had a suggested script stating that homeowners had a 1 in 12 chance of getting their work done free of charge, which was clearly a blatant lie. The other lie, which can't reasonably be excused as an exaggeration, was that the salesperson would only take "up to an hour" of the customer's time demonstrating their products, with "no hard sell." Of course, no greedy salesman would really be doing his job if he stuck to an hour and took "no" for an answer, and the most common complaint I received during my time there was of overly pushy, offensive salespeople who took up hours of peoples' time.
As for those who were happy to go through with the process and buy some windows, I'm sure many of them were satisfied. They're just UPVC windows after all. But inevitably, there were also many customer complaints of poor quality products and non-existent after-sales service to take care of them. Plus, once Weatherseal has you on their database as a previous customer, they will never leave you alone. Our call centre had ancient piles of past customers that would be phoned repeatedly, no matter how many times they stated their disinterest.
If companies such as Weatherseal do end up phoning you (though they never use their real name - typically opting for the non-existent 'Feature Homes' or 'Ideal Homes' to avoid scaring people away with the disreputable brand name at the first hurdle), the only way you can be guaranteed of getting removed from their database is to specifically ask to be removed. The company has to comply with this by law, but it depends to an extent on who's handling the call, and if they or the branch manager can be bothered to take the details down to pass on to the Do Not Disturb database.
Simply saying you're "not interested" isn't enough, as those numbers are still recycled again and again. Even if you say you live in a council or rented property where you can't make changes like install double glazing, they'll still call you again - just in case you were lying.
People do.
The company's poor treatment of the general public even extends to the poor sods manning its call centres, who are paid pretty offensive wages. I was happy to take the £4.50 per hour at the time (it's about nine dooyoo reviews, right?), but even with the promise of huge rewards for those who were the best at being pushy and ignorant, I never saw these materialise. And I actually got pretty good at being bad by the end of it.
Weatherseal really doesn't seem too happy about this information getting out, either. As soon as I left their employment (on the day I was paid £50 for a week's work, just because they could get away with things like that), I made a rage-fuelled video for YouTube with text explaining much of what I've just told you, in text form. Although it was produced in anger, it was an entirely fair and accurate video that gave little person opinion and merely pointed out what was easily found elsewhere on the internet - but of course, it was negative publicity in the burgeoning domain of social media, so it had to go.
Though I was surprised when I got a phone call at my (much better) new job from a man who was probably claiming to be higher up in the organisation than he actually was, telling me to take the video down or face a lawsuit. Obviously, I conceded (I may be a web vigilante fighting against the tyranny of corrupt companies, but I'm not an idiot), and like Grant Management before them, Weatherseal has miraculously manipulated a clean set of search results that give no clue as to the truth behind the company, until you look a little deeper (or easier, just add 'complaint' to your search term).
The initial excitement of being threatened with legal action aside, I soon became more interested in how exactly they had tracked me down, to my mobile number no less. The guy said he was aware I used to work for Weatherseal, and when I caught up with a friend who still worked there the following year he said word had got around the office, so I'm at least glad I proved to be a minor menace to them.
I don't know what cold-calling script Weatherseal is using nowadays, but you can be sure it's along the same lines. I'd be interested in reading other peoples' reviews of this company, I'm amazed that the category didn't exist here until I suggested it.
Advantages: You might be looking for double glazing.
Disadvantages: Illegal cold calling practices, lying telephone scripts, pushy sales staff.
**
Written on 14.02.10
Keswick is one of the most beautiful and tourist-friendly towns in The Lake District, home of many breathtaking views that have long made it a popular destination for those looking to get away from it all, as well as more mountaineering shops than anyone could possibly need. Bizarrely, the town also features some really inappropriate museums too.
To its credit, the Pencil Museum wasn't chosen randomly - unlike its close neighbour the James Bond Museum (yeah, Keswick - that place that's synonymous with 007). This museum is constructed out of a functional unit next to the much more impressive Cumberland pencil factory, where they make all those high quality pencil crayons that the kids at school who belonged to more well-off families than you did flaunted so proudly. You know, the pencils that were supposed to work like watercolour paint if you wet the nibs, but which ended up making your hands stink of graphite for seven years instead.
The company is proud of its contributions to the pencil industry, which led to the creation of this attraction - which proudly informs visitors that it is the only museum in the world dedicated entirely to the pencil. There is perhaps a reason for this.
Upon entering the Pencil Museum and paying the only slightly cheeky entrance fee of £3.50 (adult), visitors proceed through the only theme park-style exhibition, a replica of the Seathwaite mine were graphite was discovered, seemingly by a race of crumpled-faced sub-humans if the poorly maintained figure is anything to go by. Once this rather pointless embarrassment is out of the way, visitors are free to explore the compact museum, which features places to sit and draw (probably the best part, and while you could technically do this anywhere it's handy to have access to some slightly mangled pencil crayons). There are also 'interactive exhibits.'
Well alright, not really. There is an over-ambitious movie theatre though, which plays a 10-minute video ad nauseam demonstrating pencil production and showing some kids colouring things in, along with some non-celebrity opinions from what seems to be people who just like using Derwent watercolour pencils. The film concludes by playing an extended portion of Raymond Briggs' the Snowman, which was famously animated using the factory's pencils. It's a bit of a tenuous link though, and questionable justification for playing the excerpt hundreds of times each day, without any kind of commentary to try to make it more relevant.
You might think I've made the Pencil Museum sound a little boring so far, but I haven't even got to the main attraction yet. All the best museums have something of colossal proportions to wow audiences - whether it's a monstrous Tyrannosaur skeleton or gigantic turbines and steam engines - and what could be more exciting than seeing the world's largest functional coloured pencil firsthand? Well alright, it's enclosed in a case to protect its majesty, but it's still an impressive sight (it's 26 feet long, who's going to steal that? And how could they possibly make use of it without a giant colouring book?)
If this review seems a little sarcastic, I should confirm that I did enjoy my visit to the Pencil Museum on a recent break in Keswick, being fully aware even before we approached that I was not its target audience - indeed, from all the positive comments left in the visitor book it seems that kids find it both fun and educational (though strictly about pencils and nothing else).
The museum may be a little lacking in attractions and misguided in its reverence of pencil crayons, and essentially a front to sell loads of overpriced Derwent products in the gift shop that's as big as the museum itself, but it's a fun little attraction that makes Keswick a better place. I'd take it over the James Bond Museum any day. Did 007 have a pencil?
Well yes, he did actually, and it's on display in this museum. And you get a free souvenir pencil to lose on your own schedule.
The Cumberland Pencil Museum is clearly signposted all around Keswick, and is open from 9am to 4pm all year round except the usual Christmas holidays, on which days you can get your pencil crayon fix from watching the Snowman again and again and again.
The main attraction of Pot Noodle is that it is quick and as simple to make as toast; even more so considering you don't need to butter the hot water afterwards. So in my early teens, my cooking knowledge being less than unmentionable, this was a real lifesaver, in the days before my mum would buy microwaveable lasagnes which I could also 'cook.'
Pot Noodles are available in a number of flavours, especially Chicken and Mushroom. I say this as the sheer repetitive volume of C&M noodles I have consumed in my life has put me off the flavour for life, as well as allowed me to develop a freehand shortening of its name for use in reviews such as this one. Spicy Curry is my personal favourite, but I'm always willing to experiment with the new flavours. I'm sure I only speak for myself when I say that 'Bombay Bad Boy' is actually a bit nice. Not very nice, just a bit.
It's all pretty fascinating when you're in the early stages of your Pot Noodle life, watching the boiling water soften the noodles and then splash onto the exact same spot on your hand that it always does when you first stab in the fork. That is a true account of my life, by the way! Due to the success of Pot Noodle from all the dole scum who apparently buy them, the Pot Noodle Company, which used to be Golden Wonder so I don't know what happened there, have introduced the hugley less successful Pot Rice and Pot Curry. They're standable, but you know where you are with a good 'Noodle.
They may be boring and a pathetic excuse for a meal (they are officially listed as 'snack'), but Pot Noodles have always been there for me. No one has said it better than Johnny Vegas on the BBC2 'I Love 1970s' series: "I shouldn't slag 'em off, if it weren't for Pot Noodles I wouldn't be alive today." Then again, Dave Lister did prefer to eat dog food when given the option on Red Dwarf!
Advantages: Easy to make, A variety of flavours, They have a sauce
Disadvantages: Not too satisfying, All pretty similar
Dammit Jim, I'm a Carbonated Fruit Flavour Soft Drink, Not a Physician
Written on 22.08.07
****
I don’t really like Doctors. They do an incredible job, but it’s all a bit too intimate for me, which is why I tend to get through life aching and snapping with a misguided faith in the healing powers of simply being awake. Laughter may be the best medicine, but so is medicine, which is why the only two Doctors I can honestly say I really like are Christopher Lloyd’s character in the ‘Back to the Future’ films and this carbonated soft drink (which tastes a bit like medicine).
The usual Food and Drink review on Dooyoo will analyse the background and composition of the product being reviewed, yet while that approach is useful, particularly with a product with a long history such as this, I prefer to give a more personalised account of what the drink means to me. Especially as otherwise I would simply be transcribing from Wikipedia and the bottle label. Dr Pepper (Ph3) was an infrequent room-mate of mine at University, where I was studying English and he was apparently studying some form of chemistry in my windpipe, who I ditched regularly depending entirely on the best offer going around for cola drinks. That’s right; the advertising campaigns may state determinedly that ‘it is not a cola,’ to the extent that it is now legally recognised as ‘Pepper-flavoured’ to further distance it from its brown cousins, but to me these drinks all scratched that same itch. I was effectively addicted to fizzy cola drinks since I was a child, a habit I broke by going cold turkey and getting used to previously unpalatable water (poverty helped a great deal), and however different it may seek to be, to avoid monopoly or disappointing cola-thirsty customers, it’s certainly in the same ball park.
Reportedly consisting of 23 flavours, the ingredient list for Dr Pepper is deceptively and cryptically brief, listing carbonated water, sugar, colour, phosphoric acid, preservative and flavourings, the latter obviously comprising the real secrets. The non-specific ‘fruit flavour’ of the drink is impossible to place, but I have always associated this drink directly with Cherry Coke, despite the other’s more specific flavour. It does taste to me (the cola connoisseur, remember), more like cola than anything else, for example orangeade or any of the other fruit-specific soft drinks, and is certainly a uniquely unnatural formula that shouldn’t exist in nature. Many agree, to the extent that Dr Pepper has based entire advertising campaigns on trying to convert unwary virgins, but I couldn’t truly say whether this is a drink you can learn to like, or an instant love-it-or-hate-it Marmite thing. It’s certainly a drink that can grow on you, as I discovered when my Dad started to purchase multiple cans due to some offer or other at Morrisons a number of years ago, and once I became independent it became an equal competitor and alternative to the other big-name cola drinks, dependent on the supermarket offer of the time. Although I could never sustain interest in the drink for as long as I could more traditional colas, it presented a nice opportunity to deviate, providing me with a fruity taste in the same way as Cherry Coke, though not a taste or smell that everyone would enjoy being all over my face.
So what is the taste? It’s so unique and crazily non-descript that I really have no idea, though I’ve usually been able to agree with any attempts that people have made to describe it in terms of another substance. Alan Partridge’s ‘fizzy Benylin’ comes close, and one I could particularly understand was marzipan. Savouring the drink in my mouth rather than instantly and greedily shoving it down my throat as I usually do makes this flavour more clear, and also renders the flavour completely obsolete if drinking in tandem with a Battenberg. It’s not just a silly joke; I have done this a surprising number of times. The sticky, sugary sweetness of the Battenberg’s marzipan window-frame overloads the sticky, sugary sweetness of the Dr Pepper, effectively robbing it of its point. It doesn’t taste incredible, but it’s so caramel-like in consistency that the sugary sweetness is the source of most of the flavour. This is why I instantly regretted buying ‘Dr Pepper Zero’ (as they now call it), which tastes completely watered down and pointless. Despite this sweetness, it’s actually better for you (ever so slightly) than Cherry Coke, from what I remember during excessive periods when Sainsburys had buy-one-get-one-free offers for both drinks (how was that supposed to help my addiction? I fell off the wagon a few times, I can tell you), and roughly identical to a bottle of regular Coke. Reading from the bottle, a 250ml serving of Dr Pepper contains 105kcal and 25.9g of sugar, very similar to Coke, and clearly not the best thing to drink a bottle of a day for seventeen or so years.
For those unconcerned with weight gain or making their teeth and liver last into old age, Dr Pepper can be an incredibly enjoyable drink, when used sparingly. The offers in recent months have been less prolific, at least in my experience, though I bought two bottles for £2 in Sainsburys today, which was the same price as Coke (and not much more expensive than Sainsburys own-brand cola these days – angry review coming soon). If Coke’s not on offer, Pepsi invariably is, but Dr Pepper makes a nice alternative that I would urge people to try, just as the adverts do. The drink works quite differently from Coke, frothing enormously and rapidly up through the glass even when the bottle has been kept completely still, before this thin froth subsides completely as quickly as it came. This helps to create the exciting illusion that you’re indulging in a chemistry experiment with the good Dr, something that can be expanded by using it as a mixer with alcohol. With its more defined and offensive taste, Dr Pepper usually works far less successfully when mixed (which is why you don’t see it on tap), but people will have their own views on Vodka and things I expect. All I know is that it doesn’t agree with whisky or rum, frothing high and long and conflicting quite badly. Say what you like about Dr Pepper, there’s certainly no end to the excitement. It makes me wee an awful lot as well.
It’s always seemed a little odd to me that the company would base much of its advertising on the fact that people might hate the drink, as although the conclusion is invariably a positive one for the Dr, it could just as easily perpetuate the distrust by addressing its existence. The advertisement I remember the most was one that took my earlier ‘virgin’ comment to its metaphorical conclusion, by having an attractive young woman persuade a young man to indulge in something sinful of which his parents would disapprove, which was ultimately revealed to be... dot dot dot... Dr Pepper. I remember being quite excited when I first saw the advert in the cinema, and incredibly disappointed at the denouement, and perhaps my strange on-off relationship with this ludicrously unnatural drink is partly based on that early adolescent experience. I might go to extremes to try and prove I’m alternative, but I’m a whore for advertising just like everybody else.
The current Dr Pepper offer is two free vouchers that instantly grant 2-for-1 entry to popular attractions in the UK until the end of October.
Advantages: Unique taste, frequently found on offer for a competitive price.
Disadvantages: Easily loathed, addictive, diuretic.
Ho, Ho, *Hic*
Written on 02.09.07
****
I’ve spoken before of my unfortunate and debilitating coke addiction, which lasted from early childhood to a time not too long ago. Don’t worry, I meant that kind of Coke! Oh, you already knew. There’s a picture. I see. Well now that the fun’s out of the way, on with the review. Without a doubt, the most well-known and authentic carbonated cola drink belongs to the ludicrously rich Coca-Cola Corporation, which has ensured through endless and unstoppable advertising to ingrain the idea into the minds of everyone that their product is the best. But is it true? Well, probably.
Even in my worst excesses of cola binge drinking, this expensive product would usually be substituted for a cheaper supermarket equivalent or occasionally the arch rival Pepsi, which is forced to resort to numerous special offers and irritating sponsorship deals to maintain its market share. I came to regard Coca-Cola as the rich man’s Asda Just Cola, at the opposite end of the scale to undrinkable, leafy 21p bargain brands (which can also be detected by the presence of ‘American-style,’ ‘star’ or ‘pop’ in the title). It doesn’t deserve such special recognition for essentially including the same ingredients in a slightly nicer tasting composition – and apparently based somewhere down the line on lemons as opposed to Pepsi’s orange, at least that’s what I’ve heard – but my linear mind has always inevitably placed it at number one in the cola list.
The ingredients list on a bottle of regular Coke is understandably vague and generalised by necessity, otherwise we’d all be brewing the formula in our bathtubs. Fortunately, the company is required to display the nutritional information, based on the quantity of a 250ml glass. There are 105kcal, which evidently makes up 5% of the body’s daily intake according to their guideline of a 2000kcal diet, but more debilitating is the large 26.5g of sugar, equalling 29% of the same daily allowance in a single glass. This sugar amount is slightly worse than that of Dr. Pepper, but better than Cherry Coke, and the obvious cause for alarm for dieters who are nowadays thankfully spoiled for choice with sugar-free brands that still allow them to be coked up to the eyeballs without doing their bodies any harm. Alright, there may be a few health concerns in a diet consisting entirely of fizzy cola drinks, particularly for the teeth and liver, but look on the bright side: you could turn out like me.
As usual, I’ll skip the information on Coke’s illustrious and scandalous history in favour of evaluating it as a fizzy drink – all that information can be found on Wikipedia, but only here will you receive my unique and clearly wrong insight. Coke certainly has a distinct flavour and smell, especially compared to its medium quality supermarket equivalents, but a large part of this comes in the anticipation before the drink actually enters my mouth. The fizzy burp released on opening a fresh bottle or tearing open a can is a pleasant and familiar one, hinting at the caramel-like taste that I am about to enjoy and not going overboard on the froth as some other brands tend to. You don’t get this sensation from a supermarket cola, in which the fizz merely acts as a gassy irritation rather than a pleasant precursor to taste, but a major disadvantage common to all colas is the prevalence and persistence of bubbles that can make it difficult to drink for many, and often invite a wave of burping (I’ve been spared this, as I can’t actually burp). The taste passing onto the tongue is initially pleasant, aided by the aroma, but all too soon takes on a slightly too sticky and almost metallic tinge that leaves me a little unsatisfied. The oddest thing of all comes in the after-effects left behind in the mouth, which will still be slightly fizzing and coated by the sugar, particularly the teeth. I don’t want to get too unpleasant, but the thick and sticky saliva is quite unpleasant, and an unconscious interior cleaning by the tongue will usually follow.
In my experience, Coca-Cola isn’t particularly addictive in the short term in the way something like Dr. Pepper tends to be, as one glass can easily be enough in one sitting, the maximum under normal circumstances being two. Still, the slightly improved taste over what I consider the ‘base’ own-brands of supermarkets lends the drink a false sense of luxury, and I will be more likely to over-indulge for pleasure rather than mere thirst (bearing in mind that the only drinks I would ever drink would be cola drinks). This means that a bottle would have a fairly short lifespan, usually no more than a day, which can be a problem if relying solely on this famous brand as it tends to be the most expensive. I think my local Sainsburys is currently offering 2 bottles for £2, in a rare triumph over the price of Pepsi, but even when bought in bulk the price will usually be quite in excess of £1 per bottle, often along the lines of 2 for £2.30. Bought in smaller local shops without a discount, the bottles currently bear a price label of £1.59 each, which would seem to rise only by a few pence every few years, so there’s nothing to worry about in this regard.
Coke has been the leading brand in its field for well over a hundred years, and will clearly dominate for however long American capitalism reigns until its collapse and the accompanying destruction of the planet. In the short time we have left, let’s enjoy our favourite drinks and disregard the obvious ill effects and sheer prices and indulge our vices as best we can, something the Coca-Cola Company is encouraging by bringing out ever more ludicrous spin-offs of its core product. I rarely drink Coke now, even when I fancy a cola drink, but its powerful legacy has clearly been enough to cripple my life. On second thought, I can’t blame all my problems on a fizzy drink.
It’s amazing and lovely that this category didn’t exist before this review. I’m sorry for contaminating the site.
Advantages: Deservedly the leading brand of carbonated cola drinks.
Disadvantages: The ultimate symbol of despicable capitalism, and it leaves your mouth all sticky.
The Mighty Have Fallen
Written on 16.09.07
***
If I was writing this review a year ago, it would undoubtedly be a five-star affair filled with praise for Sainsbury’s commendable achievement in marketing an affordable alternative to the more expensive big-name cola brands, whilst skilfully avoiding the pit-falls that often make budget brands undrinkable. I’ve now long been over my once tragic cola addiction that lasted from about the age of four to sometime earlier this year, and as I couldn’t afford to be too picky with my choice of junk, these 34p bottles provided an excellent option to keep me from bankrupting myself with the slightly tastier but sadly far too expensive Coca-Cola and Pepsi, which commonly retailed for over £1 even when accompanied by a special offer. Unfortunately, in their idiocy (or perhaps because the product simply wasn’t profitable), Sainsbury’s stores have increased the price drastically since, to over double the original figure. When I first saw the new price tag of 69p I was distressed and angry, and more recently I’ve spotted a further increase to 79p.
Now that I can drink cheaper and healthier alternatives such as water (from the invigorating spring of my bathroom tap) I laugh in J. Sainsbury’s face as I pass his expensive product by, now no longer worth buying for its slightly inferior quality to other products that can be bought for around the same price, or perhaps a little more. Of course, I wasn’t going to let the opportunity pass by to snag a few bottles when I spotted them in the reduced section for 20p (I’m not sure of the reason, they don’t appear damaged, but if no more new reviews pop up from me next week you can make your own judgements), as although I no longer crave the sickly texture and unpleasant gaseous sensation, it’s still the best drink to have on hand by the beside when awakening with the threat of a hangover. I don’t usually opt for a diet equivalent of drinks, but in this case the offer forced my hand, allowing for a full analysis of its alleged benefits to the drinker’s health (or more accurately, the amount of damage lessened by drinking diet).
Although each major supermarket has its own brand cola drink, all of which taste roughly the same (and I would know), Sainsbury’s ‘Classic Cola’ was designed specifically as a rival for the bigger brands not only in terms of its excellent budget price, but for its inherent quality. The attempt was quite successful, though I would argue no more than Asda or Tesco cola which taste roughly the same (not Morrisons though, if memory serves), and although it can taste a little cheap, the proportional scale of quality verses price was greatly in its favour before the price increase, when it dropped significantly and is thus no longer really worth bothering with. At the lower end of the scale, Sainsbury’s Basics Cola is undrinkable, leafy-tasting, brown unpleasantness in a bottle for 21p (used to be 18p) but for less than twice that low price (originally), cola fans would be greatly satiated by this fair approximation of ‘the real thing.’ There are still a few signs of its budget origins remaining, such as the overpowering gassy smell as opposed to a true aroma, the rough-edged screw-top lid and prevalence of a layer of ‘head’ inside the opened bottle that takes a couple of hours to vanish, but anyone who wouldn’t give it five stars for quality, and then reduce that to three when the price became unreasonably extortionate, would be quite the cola snob. Or simply someone who doesn’t like stupidly fizzy carbonated soft drinks that potentially rot their teeth and liver.
The diet equivalent of Classic Cola is disappointing in the way all diet versions are for people more accustomed to the sugary versions, and seems to have far less of a distinctive taste than the customary red version, even bordering slightly on the edge of Basics Cola/Happy Shopper Cola/any budget cola brand whose name includes the words ‘American,’ ‘Star’ or ‘Pop.’ To make up for this lack of taste are some impressive statistics that feasibly make this less damaging for the drinker’s health, boasted by the brightly coloured ‘wheel of health’ adorning the front of the bottle’s label, which is unexpectedly all-green. Each 250ml serving (a standard glassful) is said to contain only a single measly calorie, with 0.3g of sugars and only slight ‘traces’ of fat, saturated fat and salt. This is bad news for me as I tend to enjoy quite a lot more than 0.3g of sugar in my fizzy drinks, though trying to add it yourself is probably unwise. The same goes for calories: delicious! Sainsbury’s commitment to producing a health-conscious fizzy drink shouldn’t be underestimated however, as the reverse of the label makes sure to mention the lack of Benzoate and ever-controversial Aspartame in this drink, which is sweetened with the presumably less bad Sucralose. Don’t ask me, I always feel under-qualified when reading the ingredients list on bizarre chemicals such as this. The flavouring is also said to be all natural, as is the standard dark brown colour of the drink – it’s not just there to look pretty.
The same storage and usage principles apply as for any fizzy drink, the option to refrigerate being down to individual taste or perhaps the state of the climate, and although the bottle instructs customers to drink within three days of opening, I find that this diet version becomes flat quite a lot quicker than that, the last of my hangover remedy tasting quite bland and a little unpleasant within 24 hours of opening. These bottles follow all the other supermarkets in stealing the internationally recognised Coca-Cola colour schemes of red and silver to distinguish between regular and diet versions, but the text plays it safe by being typed in a neutral serif font, rather than riskily inviting an Asda-type lawsuit for being too similar to the real thing. The most recent (expensive) line of these drinks feature the same image on both diet and regular versions of a glass filled with ice cubes and tasty-looking cola, and like most products in Sainsbury’s latest packaging re-design, the image of the product is presented as a somewhat disconcerting extreme close-up that winds up about double the actual size. I mean it when I say disconcerting: as well as being quite impractical in this instance, only being able to fit on a small section of the glass, I was actually a little freaked out when browsing the supermarket’s biscuit section and being presented with all these monstrous, oversized chocolate digestives and bourbons. I’ll hand it to Sainsbury’s: they know how to make biscuits scary. It goes without saying that this product is only available at Sainsbury’s supermarkets and smaller Sainsbury’s stores, but I thought I’d still say it anyway. You know what some people are like. Well that about rounds it all off nicely, is there anything I’ve forgotten to mention? Ah yes –
And the taste? Well, the sugary version is quite caramelly and sweet in a way many cheaper colas fail to be, and is really quite nice, but the diet is less appealing. I’m always quite disappointed with the taste of diet cola drinks in general, but this is fair enough knock-off for it not to really matter. I’d say that this tastes more similar to Pepsi than Coca-Cola, but of course I may be being swayed by the sugar-free familiarity of Pepsi Max. It’s a very fizzy drink, not overpowering but very prevalent even for a long time after pouring. The initial froth is nothing too major, and is noticeably looser in the diet version due to the lack of sugar, and it does make the overall experience a little less pleasant than it otherwise would be. Like Coca-Cola, the initial smell factors largely into the illusion of taste, and the smell of Classic Cola is quite unpleasantly gassy and rather more cola-y than the expensive brands tend to be, reminding me of cola-flavoured still drinks, ice lollies and sweets from my childhood. There’s even something slightly metallic about it, and it leaves quite an unpleasant after-taste in the mouth, especially when drunk flat, while the sugar version leaves the usual irritating film behind all over the surface area of the drinker’s mouth and teeth. For 34p this was all to be expected, and the drink performed above and beyond expectations, but 79p is a little too much to ask for what is still essentially an average middle ground between the horrors of budget cola and the heights of the big American names.
I’d recommend Sainsbury’s Classic Cola and Sainsbury’s Classic Diet Cola only if the other alternatives are far too expensive, but similar varieties varieties of Coke and Pepsi can commonly be found in 2 for £2 offers and the like, the extra 21p being an acceptable cost for this upgrade to first class. Other supermarket brands are also well worth trying, though I haven’t had them in a while and I’m out of touch with the prices. I hope they haven’t followed Sainsbury’s example, though I feel deep down that the days of high quality, low cost cola are now behind us. But that’s okay, I hardly ever drink the rubbish any more. Three stars.
Advantages: Competitive, middle-of-the-road quality, and health-conscious improvements to diet range.
Disadvantages: Unreasonable and sudden doubling in price sort of ruins the point.
Sainsbury's Basics Low Fat Yoghurts
It's Still Yoghurt, Dammit
Written on 21.10.07
*****
Unlike comedian Richard Herring, who clearly is, I am not obsessed with yoghurts. I just happened to want to write a thousand words about Sainsbury’s Basics yoghurts today, there’s nothing funny about it. It’s not like I’m involved in the yoghurt trade and I’m trying to promote it or anything. Well, saying that, my Dad’s farm does supply the milk they use to make those Muller corners, but that’s not the point. He gets a substantial discount, which used to mean plenty more yoghurts for me, yum! Not that I’m obsessed with yoghurt or anything. Saying that, I really fancy one now though.
What could there possibly be to complain about in Sainsburys Basics Low Fat Yoghurts? Costing a mere 29p for a 500g pack of four different flavours (it used to be 28p, what are things coming to?), or alternatively the ever-so-slightly more expensive 8p for a 125g solitary yog, only available in strawberry. The four-pack needs to be kept refrigerated after purchase to avoid turning into a liquid rather than its standard goo, so it’s best not to get it out in preparation for dessert after a time-consuming, hearty feast. The sell-by date is roughly a fortnight, which is more than enough time considering that many people will consume more than one at a time, if they’re anything like me (I’m still not obsessed with yoghurt though, I usually have them in pairs, that’s all). The pack explicitly warns against freezing the yoghurts, though I’ve long been tempted to see if this would result in potted Mini-Milk or just a hard, horrible mess. They’re only 7¼p each, I think it’s worth the risk. Maybe next time.
If buying the four-pack, the flavours are (clockwise from top-right) (because that’s where clocks start from): strawberry, peach melba, black cherry, and raspberry. The make-up of each is roughly the same as deduced from the ingredients list, with peach melba being slightly more adventurous with regard to its multiple fruit sources. It’s a little disappointing to see that only 2% real fruit is included in each yoghurt, made up by an additional 1.5% of juice from concentrate, but once again this is nothing to complain about from such a bargain product. Not being a yoghurt connoisseur (honestly), I enjoy these just as much as I do any other standard yoghurt, perhaps because my own tolerance to fruit is quite low. The yoghurts now feature several tiny but very real pieces of fruit that I’m sure didn’t used to be there a year ago, and although they will doubtless satisfy most consumers, I find these a little distracting from the otherwise smooth and creamy dining experience. The rest of the ingredients are a little strange and disconcerting, featuring such delights as carrot extract and the delicious-sounding ‘thickener,’ so it’s probably best to eat/slurp them in ignorance. If you’re drinking them, you haven’t been paying attention to the refrigeration instructions I mentioned earlier, you yoghurt amateur.
I love the Sainsburys Basics range, it provides all the value of a budget supermarket without the customer having to wade through those dingy, soily stores. While some budget products are kept to a necessarily disgusting standard in order that Sainsburys’ more expensive own brand can compete successfully, particularly in the areas of cola and toilet tissue, there’s nothing inferior about these. Sainsburys sell these as naturally ‘Low Fat’ products, and their attractive wheel of health confirms this with a largely green approval of safety. There are 104 calories per pot, if that’s the sort of thing that makes any sense to you (I suppose it’s good?), and the only slightly dodgy, oranged area of the health wheel concerns the 17.5g of sugar in each pot. The yoghurts can’t be eaten by those allergic to nuts for some reason or other, and as they’re made from cow’s milk, vegans and cow-haters should stay away and buy something more expensive. Vegans I understand, but the rest of you are just making it more difficult for yourselves; you won’t start saving money until you set aside your racial enmity.
So, what’s my opinion? Well, the initial clacking apart of the yoghurts is a very satisfying noise, arranged as they are in square-but-rounded tubs for ease of packaging, and although the lids are a little tough to pull, there shouldn’t be any splashing. You can lick the lid clean yourself, or if you have a cat who enjoys fruit, you can put it on the floor, pin down the corner with your socked toe, and allow the cat to enjoy its treat for about twenty seconds or so (my cat only likes toffee yoghurts though. And toffee ice cream). The yoghurts are the usual disappointing size common to all yoghurts apart from Müller and those enormous bio tubs (also available from the Basics range if you’re interested), but they will still satisfy yoghurt fans. Being a budget product made of only 2% real fruit, there is a slight similarity in the flavours between them, more accurately the lack of flavour, but each is distinctive enough that it’s possible to have a favourite. Because you’re obviously so interested, it’s only the peach melba that I’m not so fussy about, but if I really had to choose a favourite it would probably be strawberry. A 7¼p strawberry yoghurt; that’s how adventurous I am. No, maybe raspberry.
There are no changes that Sainsburys should be expected to make to this fine product, and anyone who complains about a 29p pack of yoghurts is a moron. If the producers ever wanted to switch some of the flavours, either permanently or with the option of choice, that would be quite cool, but still unnecessary. As long as these yoghurts retain four individual flavours and a price tag under 30p, they will be a constant presence in my yoghurt fridge. I mean, my regular fridge. I don’t have a second fridge just for cheap yoghurt.
Thank you for reading. 10 of your reads will keep me in yoghurt for another few days. That’s right; I bathe in it as well.
Advantages: Unbeatable price and acceptable quality.
Disadvantages: Won't satisfy more adventurous yoghurt fans.
Household products reviews
Sainsbury's Super Soft Toilet Tissue (Quilted)
Super Bare Necessities
Written on 22.07.06
***** [Officially better than Shakespeare]
Sainsbury’s Super Soft Toilet Tissue (Quilted) is the orange supermarket’s home-grown rival to well-known leading brands, although it’s produced in Switzerland. The blurb on the packaging informs buyers of its special design ‘for ultra comfort and absorbency.’ I don’t dispute the high quality of these toilet tissues, but as ‘ultra’ is lacking in detail as scientific terminology, these two marketed aspects of the product need to be compared to other brands for a fair judgement of the quality of these toilet tissues.
Test 1: Absorbency
I have on the desk in front of me one 125mm x 107.5mm sheet of Sainsbury’s Super Soft Toilet Tissue (Quilted), and one of Brand X, belonging to an unknown resident of my floor and left in the communal kitchen for me to steal and compare. I’m enjoying my early morning beverage of plain cold water (which may give you a rough idea of why I have to seek out supermarket brands), mmm, and it’s nice and refresh— whoops. I’ve accidentally just spilled a very small quantity of water onto the desk. Fortunately it’s not enough to cause any damage, but it’s an opportunity to test these two different toilet tissues.
The absorbency rates are similar, but certainly more impressive in the Sainsbury’s tissue, with its 3-ply thickness and miniscule pores. I’ve seen better, and although it could be argued that this particular, quilted brand of tissue is designed for other things, the absorbency is one of its two alleged selling points. In bedroom situations, spillages have to rely on tissue paper, as kitchen roll is often impractically out of reach in the kitchen (that’s why it’s called that). That’s why I can only give Sainsbury’s an absorbency rating of 3 out of 5.
Test 2: Comfort (CAUTION: Contains implications of bodily functions)
I’ve now carried out my early morning ablutions, which featured an intermission of the Brand X toilet tissue to compare the level of comfort. This time the difference was very pronounced, and the Sainsbury’s quilted tissues really came into their own. These tissues boast of ‘luxury softness and strength’: indeed, the quilting was comfortable and soft and although both brands are equal in terms of thickness, the Sainsbury’s brand felt much nicer on my fingers and elsewhere. Sainsbury’s scores a maximum 5 out of 5 for comfort.
These toilet tissues are keen to advertise their luxurious nature, and they do indeed hold up against leading rivals, demonstrating excellent production quality. Being a supermarket brand, this product, as expected, competes through price. The standard price is set at £3.89, both in stores and on sainsburys.co.uk, which is cheaper than Nouvelle and Charmin, but a whole 1p more expensive than leading competitor Andrex! Sainsbury’s toilet tissues are currently offering 3 rolls free on selected packs, meaning 12 rolls for the price of 9 at £3.89, and Andrex have the same offer (this offer excludes online shopping). I noticed in the store this morning, however, a noticeable absence of quilted Andrex toilet tissue, and as the Sainsbury's website confirms that this spin-off does exist, I can only assume that the Lancaster branch of Sainsbury’s is too intimidated by the competition to risk stocking it, despite it costing more.
You may have to rely on luck in finding Sainsbury's packs with 3 rolls free (advertised in helpful and eye-catching bright red). Sainsbury’s packaging has been intelligently designed to incorporate a thin, plastic pair of handles that allows the toilet tissues to be carried home easily without the aid of a carrier bag. Bashful people may be embarrassed at displaying their biological needs in this manner as no attempt has been made by the manufacturers to create ambiguity in the product’s appearance, although the packaging is rather tastefully coloured in pleasant shades of dark green.
These toilet tissues are competitively priced, even in light of the Andrex peculiarity mentioned above, and very pleasant to use. A hypothetical graph of quality against price knocks out all the other competitors completely, and there certainly shouldn’t be any stigma involved in buying a supermarket brand over an advertised one in this instance. Even though the toilet tissues themselves recommend purchasing facial tissues as a possible companion piece, these do the job just as well in my experience, avoiding the ‘paper pollen’ effect of cheaper toilet paper when blowing your nose.
For anyone interested in the specific details (perhaps you’re a toilet tissue nerd or groupie), the tissues are only available in a regular lily white colouring, and the average roll contains 170 sheets, leading to a total area of 27.412 square metres. If you were to lay all 2040 sheets from this 12-pack end to end in a large public place to form a huge square, it wouldn’t be long before the police were called and you’d be forced to explain your abnormal behaviour.
I’d certainly be the first to recommend Sainsbury’s Super Soft Toilet Tissue (Quilted), although I admit that I’m far from being a toilet tissue connoisseur, and I’d probably fail a blind comfort test. One of the leading quilted competitors implores customers to ‘love your bum,’ but I propose the less selfish practice of keeping your bum in satisfactory condition for other people to love instead.
Advantages: Great price, 12 for 9 offer, very comfortable
Disadvantages: Somewhat lacking in absorbency, offer excludes online shopping
Sainsbury's Basics Toilet Tissue
Ebenezer Sainsbury's Basics Bog Roll
Written on 12.08.06
***
On a recent trip to Sainsbury’s I saw a woman out of the corner of my eye, heading down the bathroom products isle. I had faith in this stranger’s ability to make the right decision, and this turned to disillusion as I saw her reach for the cheap option, Sainsbury’s Basics Toilet Tissue. I persevered with my laden basket and didn’t turn back. It wasn’t my time to be a hero. I’m not saying I’m Superman, that’s for other people to say. She would have to learn this one on her own. Besides, it would just embarrass us both if I approached a stranger buying such a sensitive item and got into an argument based around her rear end. Actually, it would only embarrass her, I evidently don’t get embarrassed discussing toilet roll. I’m either enlightened or depraved.
As a companion piece to my review of Sainsbury’s Super Soft quilted toilet tissue, I thought it was important to check out the other end of the scale. Exploring Sainsbury’s ‘Basics’ economy product line is a nice adventure regular customers can embark upon which leads to many surprises, both good and bad. Self-professed low quality equivalents of essential products at a budget price (although I’m not sure how essential red wine and Jaffa Cakes are), Basics products aim to provide cheaper customers with the minimal possible quality for the best possible price.
There are worse toilet rolls out there, plenty of them. Sainsbury’s Basics, despite being an economy brand, has to produce goods of a higher standard than would be expected in budget stores, but this is nevertheless a rather nasty product. People buy it for the price, I’ve done so myself, out of curiosity. The plain, no-frills packaging is almost a guarantee of inferior quality on sight, and this is obviously marketed at a different crowd than the luxurious quilting and pointless ‘honey’ hue of Andrex. Basics toilet roll is only available in 4-packs, as bulk-buy savings would be largely irrelevant. Even compared to the next ascending tier of quality, the store’s own, non-economy brand, there is a saving of £1.16 for four rolls, or 11 pence per 100 sheets.
You get what you pay for, and if there is any discrepancy between price and quality, it’s perhaps even weighted in the latter’s favour. Thin, coarse and minimally absorbent, this certainly isn’t a tissue for sensitive areas, but is acceptable as plain old toilet roll, as long as care is taken. There are people for whom this won’t present a problem, such as those with asbestos skin for example, but in honesty the tissues fulfil their function adequately. Don’t expect a roll to cover the larger ground of facial tissue and kitchen roll (as I always expect and put into practice with toilet roll), as it’s not very absorbent and is sufficiently weak to tear under the slightest dampening. You also don’t want to breathe those loose confetti shards in through your nostrils. A subsidiary box of facial tissues and roll of kitchen roll are therefore essential for once.
One pack of four contains roughly 800 sheets, 200 per roll, which is a little below average. As the paper consist of two very thin layers, this smaller quantity is further emphasised in the slightly thinner shapes. Compared to the bulky rolls of Andrex or even Sainsbury’s own brand, the rolls are flimsy and unattractive, the surface attempting something of a pattern but only revealing itself for the extraordinarily thin tree-peel that it is. The packaging admirably makes no attempt to conceal the product, as the trademark orange-and-white plastic occasionally gives way to transparency. As such, any resulting disappointment with the product would be naïve. Buyers know what you’re getting into and for many on a budget, this is good enough.
Basics toilet tissues can be bought from all stores for 40p (price verified this morning), and even online at sainsburystoyou.com. Oddly, the image for the product features the old-school ‘Sainsbury’s Economy’ packaging which hasn’t been in use for some time, further indicating the budget of this product. Basics doesn’t go in for the tempting offers of other brands, such as the quilting rivalry and ‘12 for the price of 9’ offers floating between toilet roll brands at the moment, and really don’t need to. At 10p per roll, it's all down to the individual buyer's tolerance.
Despite being something of a nice and cheap way to acquire a necessity, I’d feel a little disappointed if I was in someone else’s bathroom and the best they had to offer was Basics roll. Still, it would provide a nice insight into the truth of their financial situation. As most of the people I know are incredibly poor, I wouldn’t feel obliged to complain. I’d simply make a disconcerted ‘tut’ sound within earshot and hope they knew what I meant. While we’re on the subject, don’t buy Basics cola or crisps either. Basics polish, prawns and pies are all acceptable.
Advantages: 40p.
Disadvantages: Feels unpleasant, especially on sensitive areas.
Magazine reviews
Kerrang Deluxe
*****
Written on 16.06.01
"Metal Hammer" is the monthly source of reference for fans of a wide range of music, ranging from punk and old rock to death metal and black metal. Although it is obviously less up to date than the weekly "Kerrang!" magazine, its interviews and features are always more detailed and better presented, giving it the overall look of being more sophisticated and cared about than the seemingly budget Kerrang!
It always has a free gift every month as well, which makes the magazine well worth the price of £3.10, as well as its glossy cover and (around) 114 pages. The gift is usually a CD containing great tunes from most of the bands discussed and interviewed inside the mag, (so if you don't know exactly who you're reading about, you can usually have a listen to what they're made of), although more recently they have given away a video and stickers. There's also the occasional pull out poster extra.
The magazine (which is published at high quality by Future Publishing) is very well laid out and easy to handle, and begins with around ten pages of news (which is surprisingly up-to-date for a monthly magazine as it is usually put in just as it's going to press), which includes major headlines about new bands, band members' side projects, major changes in bands, and even any possible tour dates that may crop up. There are many interviews with bands, some of which are not well known and will not be of interest to anyone except the most hardcore fan, although some issues (for example the latest issue at the time of writing, June 2001) contain a large feature on a famous band such as The Offspring.
There are also personal one-to-one questionings to rock stars, a hilarious and interesting letters page, competitions, reviews of all new albums (and there are a surprising number every month- usually around 100), as well as a large and interesting concert section which is always very recent, usually reporting on a concert within two months of it taking place. There is a section dedicated to old, no-longer-running bands, and very interesting personal sections towards the end which depict and talk about a "Superfan" each month (someone whose interest in a band is laughably- and enviably- large), as well as a rather disturbing "Tatt's Life" section on band members' tattoos, which has featured such people as Davey Havok (AFI frontman) and Christian Wolbers (Fear Factory bassist).
It's also good to see that adverts are few and far between- in the latest issue there were just 16 pages of adverts, although all are relevant to the magazine, and seem more like regular features than advertisments, such as the always-interesting "Alchemy Gothic" page and the useful concert adverts, which are of great importanc to fans who wish to see their favourite bands live. There are no adverts which don't demand a look, except the occassional advert for a very poor band's new album. There are always 2 vouchers in the back of the magazine which allow for £2 off selected albums from HMV- some issues only have around three to five albums in this offer, but others have around twenty. And they're all popular albums.
The magazine is very easy to read, and although a lot of the interviews mostly go unread there is always something interesting. The magazine is aimed at an audience of people in their late teens (around fifteen onwards) and adults, so there is a lack of censorship, with words such as "f**k" and "c**t" occasionally cropping up, but this is usually in the letters column, or strictly to add comedy. The writers are not biased in the least, and all bands that fit roughly into the metal/rock (and occasionally punk) genre are talked about equally, with no talk about "selling out"- even Linkin Park, who have received a lot of stick for being a manufactured boy band- are given a large section with proof in both
directions, although Metal Hammer admit that they like the band, and that in the end it is up to the reader to decide what they do or don't like. A very good attitude for a great magazine.
Metal Hammer Diet
Written on 17.06.01
****
It's arguable that Kerrang! (the weekly magazine devoted to "alternative" music) is basically a shorter, cheaper, more up-to-date version of Metal Hammer, the monthly king of rock magazines. If you're looking for disposable info on the latest albums, very up-to-date news (within a week of occurences) and the occasional (yet very rare) free gift, Kerrang! is for you.
But Metal Hammer is bigger, and ends up costing less. It always has something free too.
Anyway, enough about Metal hHmmer- if you wish to know more about it, see my review ("Kerrang Deluxe")- let's talk about Kerrang! I don't hate it or anything- I think it's cool. there are always photos of cool people, and information on upcoming tour dates, album releases, short (yet involved) interviews with well-known bands (Metal Hammer is largely about unheard-of bands), and reviews. There's also a letters page, and the magazine usually adds up to around 64 pages, excluding the covers.
Although the magzine is reputed for featuring heavy metal artists, it has expanded its taste over the years to include all punk and pop-punk, the extreme of death and black metal, and even featuring bands such as Stereophonics and Muse. This is a bit of a two-edged sword as more people will tend to buy the magazine, but these sections are of no interest to the regular metal fan.
I personally only find the magazine worth buying if I'm really interested in who's in it, or if it contains a free gift (such as posters or a CD), which Metal Hammer always does, but I have friends who buy it every week. I suppose at only £1.70 it is a lot more easy to purchase than Metal Hammer, and it is very well written. There is a degree of censoring, which sometimes slips up slightly, and the magazine must be good to spawn its own channel. Kerrang! has passed the 850 issue mark, meaning that it has technically been going for over sixteen years- long live Kerrang!
Advantages: Affordable, Very regularly updated, Interesting
Disadvantages: Slightly too wide taste being catered for, Could be better quality
TV channel reviews
The Doctor Who Fan's Heaven!
***
Written on 11.10.03
One of the first things I noticed about UK Gold that amused me was the amount of non-UK programmes. "Quantum Leap" used to be on every day, along with other programmes whose names now elude me. A more fitting title would be 'BBC Greats'" except that this would interfere with the establishment of BBC Three.
Being one of the higher budget satellite/digital channels, with a place right near the top of the listings with channel number 109, UK Gold is obviously a popular destination for many a bored or simply interested channel viewer, although for me it does not provide quality programming until around 8pm. Comedy classics which are funny, such as "Fawlty Towers," and ones that are not, "Are You Being Served?", are always at hand to tickle your pre-watershed funnybone when the sci-fi has stopped on Sky One. However, I feel that one of the greater benefits of UK Gold is to the heavy-duty sci-fi fan:
While Star Trek's license on satellite firmly belongs to Sky One (with E4 showing the sixties ones), UK Gold are not permitted that particular 'BBC Great.' However, the channel currently shows episodes of Doctor Who at 6pm every day; this will doubtless have attracted digital customers alone! On a more personal level, the highlight of UK Gold has always been its tendency to show Red Dwarf regularly. And not just the very first series which the BBC has repeated again and again in recent years and is now available on DVD and remastered videos in every WH Smith, I'm talking about the early 90s episodes that can only usually be seen by getting deleted second hand videos at high prices off eBay.
So whether you're a Red Dwarf, Doctor Who or Porridge fan, UK Gold might be the channel for you. The only problem is that like all other channels in history, the programmes shown in the day are low-budget rubbish. Apologies if you're a fan of those programmes, but it always seems a shame that afte r dishing out the extra money for Sky Digital every month there is still plenty of below-par programming. Good job I only watch it round my friend's house! Oh yes, and there are adverts too.
Advantages: Shows rare programmes, regularly, Bound to be something you like
Disadvantages: Bound to be loads of things you don't like, "UK" seems a little irrelevant
The Home of Python
***
Written on 12.04.04
Over Christmas my 21st century family got with it, and installed a Sky Digital service. Being the smug young man with one friend that I am, I had already experienced its pleasures over the last three years round my friend's house, but had never experienced Channel 127: Paramount.
PROGRAMMES & SCHEDULING
Paramount is almost exclusively a comedy channel, and one that screens the shows that other channels haven't already claimed through the rule of "baggsy." British classics range from the ever-present, but infuriatingly late runs of 'Monty Python's Flying Circus' to more modern and low-budget affairs such as the Comedy Store and 'Time Gentlemen Please.' Weekends on Paramount, at least late at night, feature plenty of live comedy and through the rule of not fixing an unbroken thing, live shows of Lee Evans show at 9pm almost every week.
The above mix of British comedy is what attracts me to Paramount, and causes me to waste precious evenings of my life in front of channel 127. As with every other channel in history however, the daytime schedule is unfortunately dire. I'm sure 'M*A*S*H' has plenty of dedicated viewers but it's not something I enjoy sitting down to watch, while Michael J. Fox's "hilarious" 'Spin City' never deserves a screening. 'Happy Days' and 'Robin's Nest' fans are also catered for.
One of the channel's major selling points is its array of high-budget, popular US comedies. These shows will doubtless attract the channel many viewers and allow it to remain present, however I would literally rather take my own life than watch an episode of 'Sex & the City' or 'Ally McBeal.' Literally. Well, I would wound myself at least. Earlier in the afternoon, the channel also shows the less risqué but equally poor 'Third Rock from the Sun' and the intellectual boredom of 'Frasier,' 'Becker' and 'Seinfeld.'
Late night also finds time to bring out some truly terrible short programmes such as 'Bill Plymton Shorts': literally a ten-minute screening of some newspaper cartoon images with pauses for reading. Oh dear.
FILMS
Of course, we the general public mostly associate the Paramount logo with films. The Star Trek films have already been bought by Sci-Fi and terrestrial channels, but a healthy mix of American and British comedies often litters the prime time slots. For me, the highlight is the 'Naked Gun' series starring Leslie Nielsen, and fans will be pleased to hear that the channel regularly shows 'Police Squad,' the early eighties comedy series it was based upon. For me, this is where the appeal ends, however any fans of the 'Beverly Hills Cop' movies is very well catered for, as these seem to be on every single Friday. Please don't hold me to that. My Dad would also enjoy the awful 'Confessions' films - yes, those rude, Benny Hill-esque features starring Robin Asquith - and these are shown acceptably late in the night.
AVAILABILITY
Paramount is classed as a popular and regular channel, and as such is included in all basic Sky Digital and Telewest packages. If you don't have access to Paramount, you can simulate its effects by recording Channel 4's late night US import shows, buying some Lee Evans and Monty Python DVDs and finally digging out your mum's tapes of 'Happy Days' for a Paramount night in.
VERDICT
I apologise if my overwhelmingly negative of all but a few programmes have offended readers, or simply caused boredom, but I can't condone these kind of shows. If Paramount was allowed access to more classic British comedy owned by UK Gold - Fawlty Towers and Dad's Army would go down a treat, although I still wouldn't watch the latter - it would be a much more deserving channel, but at present its mix of American and British comedies seems too juxtaposed to really work. Paramount 2 is a nice addition, despite the fact that it doesn't have any unique programmes, but has been known to show popular programmes at a more accessible time; earlier this year it screened Monty Python an hour before the main Paramount channel at 11.20pm.
Paramount is a good channel for broad-minded comedy fans, but for people with specific tastes such as mine it can only satisfy on a limited number of occasions. No matter how many hundreds of channels are introduced, there has not been a channel invented that provides high quality TV during the day.
Advantages: Has exclusive rights to some excellent comedy, Easily accessible- not a premium channel
Disadvantages: Very much a mixed bag: plenty of programmes that won't appeal
Punk's Not Dead?
****
Written on 29.04.04
In the modern, digital world, a single music channel is not enough to accommodate the constant stream of varied musical styles and complete trash, and this has led to extensions of the MTV company into more specialised areas, as well as appearances by independent channels. P-rock falls into the latter category and is no longer a member of the digital realm, its lifecycle being turbulent, unpredictable and quite fun.
AUDIENCE
P-rock catered primarily for fans of punk rock music, a genre that has increased in popularity here in Britain through the efforts of more accessible bands such as Green Day, the Offspring and Blink 182, however much some fans of "real" punk would wish decapitation for all concerned. MTV 2 is the music giant's apparent answer to everyone's "alternative music" needs, but this channel strangely became less useful and more full of stupid programmes the more it became necessary to have a really good rock channel. The channel set up by rock magazine 'Kerrang!' is still going strong, although its style of constant music across a number of styles inevitably leads to far too much repetition and viewers that still aren't satisfied.
At the end of 2002, two new channels appeared at roughly the same time; 'Scuzz,' owned by the wealthy Sky company, and P-rock, set up by two South-London businessmen. Scuzz played a variety of music similar to Kerrang, but over the years has managed to establish itself as a channel with some interesting features and the hour segments divided into more specialised programmes. P-rock played videos constantly, chosen by viewer phone votes in the manner of the other channels, but there was much more focus on contemporary and classic punk rock than metal.
BANDS
The channel's popularity relied partially upon the inclusion of popular artists among its tracklist, however there also seemed to be a lot of interest in bands that rarely had any time devoted to them on other channels. Over the Christmas 2002 period, the channel notably played videos by Rancid, the Rancid guitarist's side-project 'Lars Frederisksen and the Bastards,' the Distillers and the Vandals, extending to underground rap-rock bands such as Cypress Hill. When videos were shown by more popular bands, they were always chosen with regard to what was actually good (for good, read: "punk") and this led to the inclusion of rarely seen early videos from the Offspring, among others.
THE SHOWS
There were no attempts made by P-rock to have shoddily made discussion shows, a lesson that MTV 2 never seems to pick up on, although the channel was obviously planned with care. A pretty much non-stop stream of viewer-selected videos filled the schedule, while there were features such as the 'Top 10' at weekends, or late at night. The channel also allowed itself to show some of the less savoury, but ultimately better, music videos at night that were banned from daytime showing, usually for poor reasons.
THE END
P-rock's founder Mark Shipman, presumably a man who had either noticed a niche in the market or was simply a huge Rancid fan, has stated that lack of commitment and punctuality by advertisers led to the decision to close the channel down, as although it was receiving 600,000 viewers a week it was no longer financially secure. It seems that the plucky underdogs do not always have the ability to stand up and defeat the establishment, despite what rubbish Stallone films may teach. P-rock had a minor comeback for dying again, sort of like a punk Christ.
According to internet bulletins, the channel resumed playing in May 2003, albeit not as part of Sky Digital, but a recent unsuccessful visit to p-rock.tv left the impression that it has indeed faded into oblivion. P-rock managed to bring some less mainstream music to the public's attention, and for that it should be praised. Although technical problems were rife even during its run, which only added to my humorous and friendly, non-corporate view of the channel. But it did get annoying.
When the Kerrang channel first aired, the first music video I caught them playing was one by Dr. Dre. In a genre where selling out is harshly criticised, P-rock managed to avoid such actions. And it went off the air.
Advantages: Exclusive music videos that other channels couldn't be bothered to play (although some did after this), Enjoyable to watch, and not spoiled by filler programmes
Disadvantages: The same videos inevitably received too many screenings, No longer exists [This is a slight drawback, yeah], Technical problems
Pet reviews
Geronimo!
***
Written on 15.10.03
Hamsters have provided much hilarity to me and my younger brothers in the past as they attempt to bite their way out of the cage and run around on the floor in the green ball, but also much sadness when I discovered poor little Hammy dead. We weren't too bothered when Geronimo had to be put down though, cause he'd got scabby.
As a pet, hamsters are very popular for the low effort required in caring for them, they have to be fed and watered but not taken to the park, and they're small enough for a child to hold or hurt so they're loads of fun. But compared to something larger, more interesting and basically better, they're a bit of a letdown. I'm aware that not every family will want to look after a cat or dog, but hamsters really aren't that great. The children will tire very soon of cleaning them out and feeding them, and these must be done very regularly to avoid seeing elliptical pellets of excrement and wet wood shavings in the little house on the right.
It also seems a little heartless to keep a hamster, considering they spend most of their waking hours attempting to find freedom from their cage or ball. Hammy and Geronimo often escaped from the ball because it was crap, but they were always found easily again, apart from one time when geronimo hid inside a chair.
As far as I'm concerned, all you have to remember to do with a hamster is to clean and feed it regularly, and let it have a recommended half an hour of exercise per day. There may be other things that a keeper is supposed to do, but my family had a 50% success rate with hamsters so that's good enough for me.
If you're content to have some little rodent in your house which will die in a couple of years, hamsters may be the pet for you. However, they are prone to a number of diseases; either that, or we made a big mistake with Geronimo's water. Poor guy eventually started turning black and horrible, so his death was not mourned so much as the predecessor.
Last time I saw Hammy, she was being buried in a very shallow stretch of soil in a house which we moved away from very soon after. I often wonder whether any children have since been disturbed by unearthing a skeleton with decomposing organs while simply trying to look for worms. The mistake my mother made when selecting old 'G' was to take pity on the small hamster in the corner of the pet shop cage, left out while his surviving brothers and sisters suckled away on the dugs of their mother. I'd recommend buying a hamster that at least looks like it has a chance of survival, especially if you've got a cat.
Advantages: Pretty funny, Feel nice, Cheap
Disadvantages: Die easily, Boring
Toy reviews
Not Too Annoying
***
Written on 29.03.04
Furbies, if you haven't seen one or think it might have been something else, resemble a cross between an owl, a rabbit and a mechanical skeleton requiring AA batteries- although don't hold me to that, it has been a long time since I murdered a Furby and the batteries may well have been AAA. They come in a number of fur tones which are usually based around nature but which you could always paint pink if you liked that sort of thing. Male and female varieties are available, and if you buy two of them they will interact with each other, as demonstrated by the oh-so-witty Chris Evans on that TFI programme which wasn't brave enough to reveal the swear word in its title. He's a monster, Stu.
This Easter, why not buy a Furby? Well, there are several good arguments, but the recent price drop in some places adds another advantage to this incredibly popular toy.
Although they have a reputation for being very annoying, which is understandable if you have to hear someone playing with it all the time, Furbies are quite easy to shut up. Simply covering their eyes for about a minute or soothing them with rubs on the back will eventually make them sing a lullaby, something which I cannot help but link with a resounding "Yes! Thank God." The Furby won't wake you up in the middle of the night either, as I know from personal experience; my brother recevied one as a gift last year and when he got bored of it, the Furby sat still on a shelf for six months until it was accidentally awoken. Thankfully, but also confustingly, all it said was "need sleep again."
Furbies require someone to interact with them, and it helps if you understand what they are saying. Their language is known officially as "Furbish" and it revolves around them saying things like "may may" and "kah boo way," all of which should be detailed in an English-Furbish Dictionary which is much easier to understand than the English-Klingon Dictionary I received as a Christmas present several years ago. Qa'pla!
Some facts about the Furby, taken from the Habsro website (www.furby.com):
- Top Toy for 2 years running
- 12 million sold (that's this many zeros - 000000)
- Banned from the Pentagon due to learning ability
There's also a fact about the 12 million Furbies circling the Earth 700 times if they were laid end to end, but that's just an unnecessary selling pitch. I'm sure no parent will be impressed by the Earth-circling abilities of Furby sales. Anyway, the money required to engineer such a monumental task would be irresponsible use of Government funds that could be used to feed the starving chilldren next Christmas or something, so shame on you Hasbro.
I personally have no qualms about treating a Furby for what it is; some plastic and gears with fluff and eyes covering it, however I know there are many people that would think of reporting me to the RSPCA for taking out the batteries and effectively 'killing' it. The Furby's got a reset button as well, just in case it ends up learning your company's top secret stategy or the name of a mistress called out during sleep. It's not like Johnny 5 anyway, it's not advanced enough to be alive.
The ability of the Furby to learn English is one of its major attractions, although it's hard to tell whether this has worked. I am guilty of hearing the toy say something along the lines of "me listen," following which I would shout a number of blue words at it, but so far there has been no cigar. Another disadvantage of the gift could be a theoretical Furbydiction taking place in which the child may not want to go to school, preferring to play with his battery operated pal. No cheap shot double entendres please, it was obvious what I meant.
If you were thinking of buying a Furby for a child this Christmas, they're probably a lot cheaper than the £19.99 they used to charge, and it could be a good gift. Basically like buying them a hamster, but you don't have to change the wood shavings or cope with the inevitable death. They can be annoying but if you're a fan of cute things, or ever collected soft toys, you'll probably enjoy seeing a child react to it. Just be careful what you say around it.
Advantages: Less expensive than they used to be
Disadvantages: Reasonably annoying
Theme park reviews
The American Adventure
Fun Family Day Out
****
Written on 28.03.04
Often overlooked in comparison to theme parks such as Alton Towers and Camelot, the American Adventure in Derby is one of the most enjoyable theme parks in the North. Reasonably cheap at around £15 for an adult and £13 for a child, and even less with a season pass, you'll also avoid the crowds of the more popular parks. There are never any queues.
The American Adventure is, obviously, based on something of a Western theme however this has largely faded over the years. The rides and attractions are all situated around a vast lake, and while a section of the park is very distinctly based on the saloon and home-on-the-range motif, the rollercoasters slightly break the illusion. There are also some repetitive and historically inaccurate Mount Rushmore heads in the distance.
In terms of the rides, there are several noteable examples that fall into the following intelligent categories:
ADRENALINE JUNKIES
- The most impressive 'ride' greets visitors as soon as they enter, and is called SKYCOASTER. Apparently the tallest ride of its kind in Europe, this involves up to three people being harnessed and secured together and hoisted 200 feet into the air for a face-first freefall! Certainly not a ride for those with a heart condition, it even unnerves me when I see the tiny peoples' faces shrinking into obscurity and I've been on it at least thirty times. The problem with Skycoaster is that it costs extra; £15 for one fly, which means either splitting the cost between two or three people, or having some solo action.
- The only truly enjoyable rollercoaster has existed at the park for over fifteen years and is called THE MISSILE. A quite basic track takes riders upside down and twisting before reaching the far side and doing it again in reverse. No impossibly high drops to terrify people like Blackpool's Pepsi Max 'Big One,' but it's a fun and consistent ride that can easily be enjoyed throughout the day.
- TWIN LOOPER has now been painted yellow to tie in to the park's 'JCB World' attraction, but is still a lot of fun. Another simple rollercoaster, this one features two consecutive loop-de-loops and then is pretty boring for about two minutes.
- SKY BOUNCER isn't really a ride, more a set of trampolines that you have to be tied up to bounce on. The enjoyment of this high-bouncing pull-fest really does hinge on the staff's experience as straps that are too loose can cause back ache, while straps that are too tight could severely damage my chances of ever conceiving children.
- No park would be complete without a LOG FLUME, and the three-drop American Adventure version is by far the best I have been on. In my youth it was promoted as 'the tallest log flume in Europe' but I don't see that mentioned so much nowadays. There are also RIVER RAPIDS on which people still defeat the point and wear plastic overalls to protect their clothes; I feel my Dad's hostility.
AHH, THAT'S NICE
- One of the main features of the park is its LIVE SHOW, which occur three times a day. People hired either for their acting talent or their horse-riding ability - and certainly not a mixture of both - carry out quite a silly tale involving exploding barrels, jumping sound effects and a redneck man who cals his mother "Ma" a lot. Good to see the first time, but after that it loses its charm and is the same for the rest of the year.
- The 3D CINEMA is a feature of many places and as long as you don't mind it being the same every time then you should be happy. There's a more aggressive MOTION MASTER that throws riders around in their seats which is more fun.
- The BALLOON RIDE, or Beep-Beep, is a relaxing ride that basically consists of sitting in pretend hot air balloons that spin on an axis. Still, it's better than the deadly boring Wagon-train Big Wheel (I think they were going for the 'Wagon Wheel' joke but I'm not going to give them the satisfaction).
I must also complement the park on its staff; much more easy-going and friendly than the average worker at Alton Towers, my Dad developed such close friendships with those working on Skycoaster that he negotiated a deal whereby he would pay for two 'flies' and receive a third later in the day for free. And of course some of the less communicative staff earn themselves nicknames.
The American Adventure's 2004 season begins next Saturday, and my father already has the season tickets. I'd recommend this park to anyone who regularly visits Alton Towers, however be sure not to over-do it.
Information on tickets and location can be found at www.americanadventure.co.uk [Not any more it can't. RIP.]
Advantages: No queues, Some great rides, Not too expensive
Disadvantages: Not much to tempt the frequent visitor, Skycoaster costs extra, Quite remote
Blackpool Pleasure Beach
Deserving the Hype?
****
Written on 07.05.04
My Dad loves his rides. I quite like them, but I must make it clear that the balding farmer and father of three lives for the adrenalin rush of a good rollercoaster. Every fortnight he takes my brothers and me to the American Adventure Theme Park in Derby, but he does occasionally desire a change.
Blackpool Pleasure Beach, located on the North-West coast of this green and pleasant land, is one of the most well-known and well-funded amusement parks in the country, but there are plenty of pros and cons that depend greatly on the person with the wallet.
ENTRANCE & PRICES
Blackpool receives a huge number of visitors every day, and there is no entrance fee to the park. This is good news for less enthusiastic mothers who would normally have to pay around eighteen pounds to enter the grounds of Alton Towers, as the system is based purely on a pay-as-you-ride basis.
The more extreme rides naturally cost more than some of the tamer experiences, and the price is the only real area in which Blackpool Pleasure Beach fails to impress. Apart from some of the independent attractions, explained later, the rides and attractions have fees based on a 'tickets' system; each ticket is the equivalent to a pound, and there are several ways to obtain these tickets, depending on the nature of your visit:
· TICKET MACHINE - Located at many convenient points, these convert precious quids into flimsy tickets at the cost of one pound per ticket. Ideal for people who are not planning on attending many rides.
· DAY PASS - The more cost-effective solution for people visiting for the whole day, wristbands can be obtained from the entrance reception desks for the price of around £28 (for an adult). On our recent visit, my Dad paid £104 for three adults (they did not hesitate in classing my 15 year old brother as an adult) and one child. These wristbands feature barcodes which need to be scanned on every ride, and this seems to be the most popular method of payment for most visitors.
· SEASON PASS - For those who plan on coming again and again, these passes cost between £125 and £200, and allow access for the whole season.
Taking the wristbands as the most popular entrance method to rides, their cost-effectiveness does prove itself very early on. Believe it or not, popular rides such as the Pepsi Max "Big One" costs seven tickets per ride - that's seven pounds per rider, every time they ride - but with a pass, the visitor can ride as many attractions as they desire, as many times as they can fit in to their schedule.
THE RIDES
Blackpool Pleasure Beach was established well over a century ago, and thankfully some of the archaic rides have been preserved, as a contrast to the more colourful, metallic and modern equivalents. There is no specific "theme" to this park, although in regions surrounding popular rides (notably the Valhalla attraction), food dispensers and scenery have been tastefully altered to suit the atmosphere.
On my previous visits to the Pleasure Beach I did not feel as if I had achieved the full experience, however following my visit last Sunday I feel confident that I know enough rides to recommend them. For ease of use, I will list them under appropriate headings:
ADRENALINE JUNKIES
There are many fast rides, some more well-known than others, and they all carry legends warn ing of the possible side-effects for people with high blood pressure or developing foetuses, among other things. They are all incredibly safe, and ride throughout the day.
The PEPSI MAX "BIG ONE" is obviously the most famous, and a little infamous due to the deaths that occurred early in that ride's existence, and although the ride experience itself is a little disappointing when compared to the visual spectacle of the track (which encircles the entire park), it is incredibly fast and has a terrifying first drop. The queue was very manageable on my last visit, but on busier days it can be very long.
SPIN DOCTOR is not a rollercoaster, but is certainly a very extreme ride. Four occupants are placed in a pod which proceeds to spin around a very large axis, occasionally veering upside down and constantly at a very fast pace. This is another ride that causes a lot of apprehension, and the only real problem is that the queue is always quite long, as the two pods can only seat a maximum of eight riders each time.
BLING, possibly the worst-named ride in human history, is a new addition to the park and is very enjoyable for its unpredictability. A long metal shaft with a counterbalance at the end can seat 24 passengers - 4 in each of its six arms - and then spins them into the air, around its axis. The weight of the riders influences its path, and each of the six arms spins and dips on random courses. Very fun, and not a very long queue as it can carry many riders.
IRN BRU REVOLUTION is a little disappointing and very short, but is very quick and easy to get onto. Situated high above ground, this rollercoaster follows a short path of dips and a loop, and then repeats it backwards.
Originally introduced as the Sony PlayStation ride, the ICE BLAST is still a very quick and original experience. Up to twelve riders sit around the central pole, and after a tension-building wait they are thrust vertically into the air.
The park's OLD ROLLERCOASTERS are still some of the most enjoyable experiences available, as they are very fast and have a great character. Being old also makes them a little less appealing to some younger visitors, the kind who would find 'Bling' the most bo' selecta name they had ever heard for a ride, so this means queues are very short and repeat rides are sometimes allowed to occur. There are three of these fast, creaky, wooden-track rides; the Roller Coaster, the Big Dipper and the double-track Grand National.
WHAT AN EXPERIENCE
As well as fast rides, some of the park's most notable attractions are the indoor rides. I have always loved haunted houses, and every time I'm in one I wish that society wouldn't frown on me eventually owning a house like that (I may get one anyway), and TRAUMA TOWERS is one of the best haunted houses I have experienced. It's a real shame that these kind of experiences no longer have the ability to frighten me, as some of my most enjoyable childhood memories are of being terrified inside such attractions by myself, but I still love the atmosphere. And my twelve year old brother found the changes in floor texture and overall darkness very scary, which made it all worthwhile! A sign outside indicates that Tony Blair once stayed at the ride on a Friday the 13th, I hope he enjoyed the spinning ride at the end. The separate Ghost Train isn't really worth mentioning.
Possibly my favourite ride at the whole Pleasure Beach is the incredibly detailed and very wet VALHALLA. Heavily based on Viking themes, this basically features boats of passengers going around tracks inside a large structure and getting damp, but there is a fantastic atmosphere and some interesting effects that make this stick out in my memory. From simple treats such as unexpected dips and excellent use of fire blasts and smoke effects to more subtle points such as the chilling and very fresh air inside one room, I don't feel I can do this ride justice. I'd recommend it to anyone who enjoys interesting ride experiences, and you can even buy a protective mac if you don't want to get wet. You know, if you're a wimp.
A very interesting feature that does not seem to be a regular staple of the park is a virtual reality experience that I believe was called FRANTIC FREDDY or something along those lines; unfortunately, internet searching has left me without any clear answers. The level of intrigue as my family stood among a crowd watching many grown men screaming in unison and leaping about in their chairs was unbelievable, and we had to discover what could be making them do this! It turned out that the game involved defeating digitalised opponents by shouting, jumping about in your chair and stamping your feet, which took some of the fun away but hey, I won!
YOUNGER PEOPLE
There are also a lot of rides and attractions to cater for very young children, none of which are particularly impressive. It's quite enjoyable to see a miniature version of the PlayStation/Ice Blast ride, and the atmosphere of the children's area is very pleasant. Children of around eight years and above should have no problems get ting on to some of the more accessible adult rides such as the old rollercoasters, the pirate ship, log flume and the excellent indoor attractions, and I wouldn't suggest that any parents try and prevent their children from accessing these rides if they are tall enough for the restriction and desire a go; I used to love them.
VERDICT
A trip to Blackpool Pleasure Beach will end up costing quite a lot, but it is worth it, especially in comparison to some other theme parks. A wristband for the day, or a season pass if you are really dedicated, is much more cost-effective than buying the incredibly overpriced tickets, and there is literally something for everyone's tastes. I did not comment on the shows at Blackpool as I have no experience of them; our wristbands granted access to one free show of our choice, but we preferred to keep riding! Still, they seem very popular and with a choice of an ice show, a magic show and a performing arts/dance based attraction, there is quite a degree of choice there also.
Blackpool itself has a bit of a reputation for being quite a tacky tourist area, but it is no more rubbish than other coastal towns. Granted there are far too many shops selling rock and fish-shaped fridge magnets, but there is a very long beach and plenty of attractions. In me experience, the town of Scarborough (on the opposite coast) features better activities in the town, such as the haunted house-esque attraction that remains one of my fondest memories, but a trip to Blackpool that includes the Pleasure Beach is ultimately worth it. The park stays open on many nights until about 9.30 to 10.00, which provides plenty more time than parks such as Alton Towers, which close at around 5pm.
Advantages: Can be very costly, Sometimes a little confusing and badly laid-out
Disadvantages: Some excellent rides, including the largest roller coaster in Europe, Great indoor attractions, Open 'til late
Discussions
The Uninformed Meanderings of an Opinionless Opinionator
Written on 26.06.04
Jillmurphy has invited Dooyoo members to take part in lazy current debates. These questions (apart from the last one which I have noted) have been hotly and less hotly discussed over the course of this week.
I didn’t think I was going to attempt this as I’ve never really had opinions on anything important, but then I realised that this was sort of the point of the debate: after all, a few disgruntled members of an obscure internet consumer review site isn’t going to bring about any change.
Even when school lessons demanded I take a stance on some issue with a group, I would usually twist it into a vaguely relevant comedy routine that would avoid making any real commitment. I still received fairly high marks though, which suggests to me that the teachers were just lazy and were really only judging each pupil’s glasses-wearing ability. I can seriously think of no other reason to explain my survival of the Maths course, although now I think about it I did spend two years copying off Bailey.
So following are my horrifically uninformed views on life, pornography and everything, following jillmurphy’s now legendary guidelines. Everything I type is subject to change once I decide to start thinking about stuff.
- Do you believe in life after death?
I gave up on religion when I was around six, after being taught contradictions by well meaning adults: in an assembly I answered a teacher’s question of “where is God?” by saying “God is in heaven,” as I had been told. My recollection of that morning may be tainted slightly by the years, but the teacher said something along the lines of “no, that’s wrong. God is everywhere. (I am right),” and several pupils laughed at my idiocy. Nice to see my personal opinions being encouraged at such an influential age. In terms of spirits, I developed an interest in the paranormal when I was about twelve, but later realised I just enjoyed a good ghost story, and considering I’ve sat through several episodes of ‘Most Haunted’ without being shown anything to encourage a belief in life after death it seems a little odd that there aren’t more signs. So, to finally meander onto the question in point, I don’t know. Maybe.
- Should smoking be banned in public places?
I’ve never had a problem with anyone smoking when I’m around them, and I hate ruining peoples’ times, so I’d only recommend it in places where it might be dangerous or just rude. Which is probably where it’s banned already; well done Tony Blairs, or whoever. (See what I mean? I’m hopeless)
- Is capital punishment wrong?
I don’t think people should be executed for their crimes, especially when they’ve only been driven to them by forces out of their control (God or bereavement for example). I think the basic capital punishment should be quite a hard smack in London (the capital, do you see?) for small misdemeanours, the pain level being raised according to the atrocity of the crime. Prison’s still a good idea though, even if most of them are like a holiday in the Algarve (rubbish satire).
- Should cannabis be legalised?
It might as well be, it’s everywhere (like God). Even though it always received a bit of a laugh in my school’s assemblies, I think it’s a good idea to point out the dangers of it to young people, but considering alcohol and tobacco are still sold without hesitation to anyone who pops in to their newsagents with less than savoury motives:
CUSTOMER: Hello, can I buy some alcohol and tobacco with these ten pounds please?
SHOPKEEPER: Those look like children’s dinner money pounds. You’re not buying this for those naughty children on bikes waiting out there and looking at us, are you?
CUSTOMER: Yes I am, they let me keep the change, the idiots.
SHOPKEEPER: Well done, wish I’d thought of that.
CUSTOMER: Can I have a pack of Pokemon cards too please?
SHOPKEEPER: Yep. Is that for the children as well?
CUSTOMER: Um… yeah.
- Is beauty only skin deep?
Not possessing outward beauty myself I am better able to see past such fleshy issues, and although I obviously admire a nice breast, I don’t think I’m as bothered about physical beauty as a lot of other people. As long as she can stand Iron Maiden and doesn’t like Jim Davidson, I’m sure I’d be happy with anyone. But I did once think it would be cool to marry a load of male comedians I like (without any sexual activity obviously) so they could make me laugh all day though, so my mind is obviously somewhat addled on these matters. It sounds quite pathetic (and obvious), but if I found someone attractive inside, I’d always find them attractive on the outside. I would draw the line at the Elephant Man though.
- Do animals have rights?
I like animals, and although I’m unable to execute a slug (surely the most pointless and unnecessarily disgusting animal ever created) for crawling into the house and trying to eat my cat’s food, I’ve never really had a problem with cows being mass slaughtered so I can eat their gonads and eyeballs in Big Maccs (more rubbish satire). I find it a little cruel that cosmetic companies still test their products on animals, but I would have more faith in them if they actually tried putting lipstick on the rabbits’ mouths to test whether it looked nice, rather than injecting it into their spleens.
Like many people I’m a vegetarian in principle, except that I think meat’s really nice. I have promised to myself that I won’t eat tongue, liver or sweetbreads though: it’s not because these are all incredibly unappealing, I just find them the most barbaric. The fact that they’re horrible is just coincidence.
- Does Britain still need a monarchy?
What, ‘the fascist regime?’ We certainly don’t need one, but I don’t see any problem if we just leave them in the background for the tourists, bringing them to public attention a couple of times a year and paying them enormously to just sort of sit around and not really do anything. Oh wait, that’s what already happens (excellent scathing satire!) I don’t think we’d mind so much if they were actually pleasant people, but that’s what you get when the monarchy’s descended from in-bred Europeans (ha ha).
- Should fox hunting be banned in England and Wales?
Another issue that doesn’t affect me, I actually find it quite funny (in a sick way) that modern Britain still features men in Napoleonic uniforms with bugles, ganging up on defenceless rodents and slaughtering them. It is cruel though, but these men would only learn their lesson if the foxes evolved to become the dominant race and hunted mute humans for their sport and profit, like in Planet of the Apes but with foxes, and Prince Charles instead of Charlton Heston. You only have to watch ‘Brass Eye’ though to discover that foxes don’t actually feel anything, as they are made of string.
- Should Britain join the Euro?
This question has been a constant presence in both my German and Business A-levels, and I’ve never had an opinion on it. Call it lazy or whatever you wish (although lazy is the right answer, clearly). I quite like quids, but I’d easily be able to adapt to any changes without a problem. The only issue then is that of the economy and, although I have my Business & Economics notes at hand, I’m not going to bother reading them. After all, my test isn’t until Monday.
- Should all fire arms be banned for private use?
This is the only question here that I really don’t know how to answer (although you may have noticed otherwise). While reading a book on the artist H.R. Giger I somehow came across a statistic that four out of five gun-related deaths in Los Angeles are due to owners accidentally shooting themselves; whether this is true or not, it seems a lot more tempting to shoot a criminal than grab a kitchen knife or your under-bed nunchaku and threaten them. I don’t want to commit myself here, as I don’t know how I would act in such a situation.
- What is your opinion on legal prostitution?
As most other people have said on this debate, it’s been around forever and probably will be and ever for more shall be so. Legalisation could be seen as endorsement to what I consider an unpleasant and depressing trade (although I’m sure there are some perks, such as getting a lot of sex and stuff), but it could also make the overall experience less unpleasant and depressing. I think they might as well legalise it and see how it goes; what’s the worst that could happen? Being overly sentimental and a little obsessed with other peoples’ happiness over my own, I wouldn’t ever use such a service but I can appreciate why people do. They have to remember that God is watching though.
- Are we living in rip off Britain?
My experience of prices only extends to useless consumer products (‘that sh** I don’t need’), so in that regard I try and avoid rip-off Britain by importing from cheap-ass China and slightly-dodgy-CD Russia. From my Business lessons I got the impression that the economy’s pretty stable here at the moment, with quite moderate interest rates only rising every so often to keep the balance, but this hasn’t affected me directly so far. Don’t swear at me though, you can take delight in the fact that once you are retired and living off the younger workers, I’ll still be out there settling out of divorces and wasting my money on houses. I can’t wait.
- What is your opinion on pornography?
During early senior school I filled the role of ‘the kid who knows a lot of naughty things and tells his friends,’ due to my overly-liberal and quite dirty father, who would usually teach me through song or joke form: “do you know what the rudest number is?”, etc. Having such a degenerate for a father meant that there was always some pornography to be stealthily found, borrowed from his house and borrowed to my friends. Nowadays I’m not too bothered about porn, but a few years ago it was one of life’s most exotic treasures: I think the thrill went away as soon as I realised I was technically allowed (and perhaps encouraged) to look at it.
There are a couple of fetish ideas that I quite enjoy and I still like ‘nice’ and genuine pornography, but virtually everything unfortunately falls into the ‘sleazy’ category that I just don’t find interesting anymore. When did I grow old? I’ve not got anything against teenagers being exposed to (legal) porn though, as it’s safer than smoking and is far better education than the clinical diagrams of year seven sex education classes: I remember seeing a documentary on a hardcore ‘education’ film that was shown in some seventies schools before being banned. Yet another reason I dislike the modern education establishment. I wrote quite a lot for this one, didn’t I?
I hope it doesn’t annoy Jill, but as any answer I provide to her last question, “is genetically modified food right?”, would be boring and uninformed, I’ll briefly discuss something that has actually affected me (for once).
- What is your opinion on the education system?
I have no basis for comparison to agree with people who claim that school and exams today are much easier and less worthwhile than they used to be, but I agree anyway. Although some of my GCSEs and A-levels have been genuinely hard work throughout (especially German), almost every subject in my experience has been far too straightforward compared to the qualification it merits. That’s not to say I always achieve high marks, as I’m obviously better in some areas than others, but I feel I would have achieved the same kind of marks if I had simply been left to teach myself through the internet or library books; once revision time starts and I realise areas that have been missed, that’s what I do anyway. I can also tell that my University education isn’t going to be as strenuous as it should be, and that I’ll be able to spend three years lying on car bonnets talking about music rather than studying.
I also think a lot of teaching methods should be put under scrutiny: although my secondary school was quite an acclaimed and popular comprehensive, there were still a great many teachers who clearly didn’t want to be there, and who didn’t seem to care whether they were teaching something relevant or not. At the same time there were a number of friendly and dedicated teachers who made lessons much more enjoyable and worthwhile, but sometimes I think a bit of Nazi-style discipline could go a long way.
Of course, the non-ambitious part of me (which is almost all of me, and certainly all I usually consist of apart from in this one strangely dogmatic paragraph) is very happy to have had an easy school life, and even though I haven’t achieved as well as I could have done with more discipline, I look forward to several more carefree years at hard-working adults’ expense. Don’t worry though, I know what I’m doing, and I’ll immediately despise myself for my actions once I turn 23.
IN CONCLUSION
Yep. I think I may have wandered onto a relevant point somewhere in that lot, thank you for reading (or simply clicking a rating button immediately, which is probably wise in this case). This is why I write heavy metal reviews.
Advantages: I thought about something for once, It's not that bad, be happy
Disadvantages: Things could be better, I am wrong about where God lives [And about foxes being "rodents"]
Travel reviews
Athens of the North
*****
Written on 27.08.04
Scotland’s capital Edinburgh has long been associated with the arts; every summer, millions of overeducated fans of performing arts and stand up comedy spend more money than they conceivably afford on hour-long shows and . I think that’s the case anyway, but it’s possible that I’m just confusing everyone in a big city with just me.
Athens has been described as the Athens of the North, but there are several differences. Firstly, the highland breeze is a lot different from the hot Mediterranean climate (and thus better in my view), and the architecture is less white. Iced Earth have also never played a two-day set there and released the show as a live album. The artistic and cultural background of Edimburgh is certainly enough to rival Athena’s city though, and Prince Philip, the Duke of Edinburgh, is Greek after all.
TRAVEL
Edinburgh’s city centre is incredible easy to navigate. Seriously, even if you’ve printed off a street plan from the internet and circled areas where your venues probably are, you won’t need it. Buses and taxis are constantly available all day and night, while the traffic is never really an issue as you only ever need to cross the road once.
Heading south from Waverley railway station leads to the Royal Mile and North/South Bridge roads, all housing the entertainment, libraries and artistic places, as well as far too many hotels tucked away in streets to feasibly comprehend, while heading in the other direction reveals the large shopping section of the town and Princes Street Gardens which are probably nice.
ARCHITECTURE
Edinburgh’s skyline is impressive from any angle, with plenty of busts, statues, funky lighting at night (I love lights me) and my personal favourite form of architecture, spiky towers. My personal favourite of these was the Scott Monument on Princes Street (thanks to proxam for identifying it), which looked like some kind of Gothic rocket ship. Throughout the night there was also plenty of building work being done on more modern and equally huge buildings in the city centre, so Edinburgh is still something of a work in progress. Not surprising considering the Hob Nob quality of the walls in the Underbelly venue.
ENTERTAINMENT
My experience of entertainment at Edinburgh is primarily that of the comedy venues, and there are some sodding good ones. From the relatively low-key comedy bars such as the Stand to the converted cinema of the Pod Deco, the courtyard-based arena of the Pleasance or the pretty cool Smirnoff Underbelly, the city centre is arranged so that there’s plenty of time to travel between the venues amidst the one-hour shows. None of the big TV-stand up names would be caught performing throughout the month in these kind of arenas, although fans of Billy Connolly, Lee Evans and Peter Kay aren’t exactly stuck for DVD releases and national tours, but many of the remaining excellent comedians can be found up there every year, along with a stream of quite poor imitators.
Being a large city also entitles Edinburgh to much more impressive and much better facilities and entertainment than the humble towns I grew up in that were fairly rubbish.
PEOPLE
I suppose the Glasgow stereotype is drunk Scotsmen bawling, puking and asking Jimmie to “stitch that,” but the international nature of Edinburgh’s summer meant that I didn’t see much of this kind of thing. Only a bit, and it was quite funny. The people I did encounter were all very friendly, despite their obvious inner frustration at all the arty types coming up and taking over their city in the summer, and the Scottish accent is great anyway. Much better than having an indistinct accent that doesn’t really suggest you are from anywhere, but that still requires concentration to stop dropping ‘t’s on the ends of words. I love the Scottish, even though there are apparently no Scottish women according to one comic I saw. Strange as it seems, that did make me think for a few moments before dismissing it as a silly joke, but I get his point.
THE FRINGE
Dooyoo has a category for the festival, but I really wanted to talk about Edinburgh in general as it is a great place that I will definitely be visiting again. Nevertheless, I was only up there because of the legendary antics of London comedians.
Richard Herring and Stewart Lee were the primary reason I went up to the festival, and their respective shows were completely worth it. Although nothing else I saw came close in terms of enjoyment and brilliance, the Fringe month is dominated by theatrical, artistic, musical and humorous acts to provide something for everyone. Everyone with at least a few hundred pounds to spare for travel, accommodation and entertainment over a few days.
WEATHER
Actually, while I was there the weather was very favourable. Scotland may be associated with strong winds, fresh-faced people breathing that wind in and then getting rained on, but when I went it was pretty much the same as the rest of England. Not too hot, but quite sunny, although this was in August obviously. I don’t think Edinburgh’s actually in Scotland at all; that’s just a ploy to sell the beanie baby rip-offs of Nessie to everyone for £5.99 a time. I know, I’m not buying my brother one of them now.
Next August I might just rent a flat there for a month. It is good, you should go. [I ended up living there for three years.]
Advantages: Friendly people and great entertainment, Easy to get around, Nice buildings, I liked them
Disadvantages: Crowded during the summer
Local company reviews
Letting Agency to Avoid
*
Written on 12.02.10
Mention the name 'Grant Management' within earshot of a group of twentysomethings anywhere in Edinburgh or Glasgow (and possibly elsewhere; their reach is depressing), and you'll be regailed with stories of burst pipes, illegal entry, broken boilers, vanishing deposits and Grade 1 Environmental Health Risks, among other things.
Unfortunately, we didn't think of asking these people when choosing our flat with Grant Management a couple of years ago.
I'm aware that any flat agency that spreads itself as wide as Grant Management has somehow managed to achieve will have the occasional dodgy property, and also that people tend to be more vocal about negative experiences than positive ones, but even taking this into account it really does seem that no one has a good word to say about Grant Management. And I'm afraid I'll have to go all mainstream on this one and join the dissenters.
I don't have many standards from a property - I've always chosen to live in cheap flats, and have had a good run thus far with amusingly dodgy landlords (even if they were a little on the racist side), but living with Grant Management was a new one on me. On average, I really don't think a week went by without at least one problem rearing its ugly head across those twelve long months.
I'll start at the beginning, with the contract signing. Needless to say, there was some discrepancy between the things we were told when being given a guided tour of the property and the things that these statements later evolved into. Take the £75 administration fee, which we were told was to cover the cost of obtaining our references... only to be told that we were to provide our own references. We reported this to the City of Edinburgh Council, who found it quite interesting, but not as interesting as they found the complete absence of a HMO license that's supposed to be essential for properties of three or more people.
Although these things seemed annoying at the time, in hindsight it feels rather petty to moan about a vanishing £75, especially when we fast-forward to the tedious process of getting back the deposit, something that was only achieved after months of regular phone calls to various disconnected employees within Grant Management's seemingly independent offices on Coates Crescent and Nicolson Street in Edinburgh. There was also their attempt to lumber us with a £140 cleaning charge, and the times they debited hundreds of pounds without permission, for seemingly no reason, stealing our money. We did eventually get everything back, but it was an annoying process.
But hell, that's just money, and insignificant compared to some of the really bad stuff. Like those pesky bed bugs. Or the numerous times they let themselves into the property without the required 24 hours' notice, one time even to show round prospective tenants who seemed even more confused than we were (I can only imagine how many times they let themselves in when we were all out at work and unable to catch them at it).
There was more, but I'm getting a little depressed remembering it all. The worst part is, we really weren't alone in our experience, and despite formal complaints to the council, it seems Grant Management is somehow getting away with all this, on a very regular basis.
I normally give companies a lot of leeway - I wouldn't think of sueing someone if I found a mouse's head accidentally esconced in my Snickers, for example - but with Grant Management it's different. I'm not prepared to simply eat around the disgusting article this time.
This company damages the quality of life for hundreds of young people and students each year, meaning it really is a menace. If you search around, you can find plenty of horror stories from Grant Management tenants and survivors on the internet, though sadly none of these negative reviews seems to appear high up in search results, which must be some huge credit to whatever agency's in charge of Grant Management's SEO strategy. I wonder if this review will ever register in a position noticeable enough for people to take notice? Hopefully, a few more negative reviews might save people from making the same mistake so many others have done, and go with a letting agency that isn't completely terrible.
It depresses me to walk down any residential street in Edinburgh or Glasgow and see Grant Management's signs jutting out of another godforsaken property like a Jolly Roger. Still, the Grant Management experience wasn't a completely worthless one, as at least it taught me the lesson to always be scrupulous when choosing landlords in the future. You can have that one on me.
Advantages: Flats in great locations.
Disadvantages: These flats are owned by Grant Management.
Glaziers to Avoid
Written on 13.02.10
*
Weatherseal Window Systems uses illegal and immoral business practices to sell poor quality windows to blameless fools.
It was good to get that out. Rest assured, I'm planning on justifying all those outrageous statements.
Firstly, I have to admit that I used to work for Weatherseal for a while, in the now-distant past. My excuse is that I'd been unemployed for six months and dooyooMILES weren't proving to be quite enough to cover the cost of rent and food, so I was desperate enough to take their morally repulsive job and illegal pay on the mental condition that I would escape as soon as possible (it took four and a half months in the end).
This allowed me to see how the organisation was run, at least from the admittedly lowly position of a telephone canvasser in a regional call centre. I can honestly say that the branch manager was the most offensive person I've ever met, using desperate fear tactics in a hopeless attempt to motivate 17 year olds to be more aggressive on the phone. It was amusing and inevitable that her much fairer replacement managed to yield a much stronger result, and retain more staff, through the unconventional method of being nice.
Of course, this is a review of the company as a whole, not just one rotten apple. But I heard enough complaints about the poor quality of Weatherseal's windows - and more importantly, the service of their sales staff - that I'd warn anyone against using them. The only problem is, I don't have the inside knowledge to know whether any of the competitors are any better, and I'm not going through all that again just to find out.
You only have to check the website of the Information Commissioner's Office (www.ico.gov.uk) to see that Weatherseal has been served with several enforcement notices regarding its illegal cold-calling practices. This means that not only were they calling around randomly in the hope of baiting unsuspecting homeowners with their lying offer of "free windows, doors and roofline," but they were also calling numerous people who had gone to the trouble of registering with the Telephone Preference Service (www.mpsonline.org.uk/tps) to avoid just that type of sales call. As for the rest of you not currently registered with the TPS, these people can phone you whenever they like, so I suggest you sign up now (they phone mobiles too).
As mentioned above, the sales tactic of canvassers revolved around promising the chance of winning free products, which is an incredibly loose reference to the few properties that end up feature in the company's products brochure, which get a discount. The call centre I worked at had a suggested script stating that homeowners had a 1 in 12 chance of getting their work done free of charge, which was clearly a blatant lie. The other lie, which can't reasonably be excused as an exaggeration, was that the salesperson would only take "up to an hour" of the customer's time demonstrating their products, with "no hard sell." Of course, no greedy salesman would really be doing his job if he stuck to an hour and took "no" for an answer, and the most common complaint I received during my time there was of overly pushy, offensive salespeople who took up hours of peoples' time.
As for those who were happy to go through with the process and buy some windows, I'm sure many of them were satisfied. They're just UPVC windows after all. But inevitably, there were also many customer complaints of poor quality products and non-existent after-sales service to take care of them. Plus, once Weatherseal has you on their database as a previous customer, they will never leave you alone. Our call centre had ancient piles of past customers that would be phoned repeatedly, no matter how many times they stated their disinterest.
If companies such as Weatherseal do end up phoning you (though they never use their real name - typically opting for the non-existent 'Feature Homes' or 'Ideal Homes' to avoid scaring people away with the disreputable brand name at the first hurdle), the only way you can be guaranteed of getting removed from their database is to specifically ask to be removed. The company has to comply with this by law, but it depends to an extent on who's handling the call, and if they or the branch manager can be bothered to take the details down to pass on to the Do Not Disturb database.
Simply saying you're "not interested" isn't enough, as those numbers are still recycled again and again. Even if you say you live in a council or rented property where you can't make changes like install double glazing, they'll still call you again - just in case you were lying.
People do.
The company's poor treatment of the general public even extends to the poor sods manning its call centres, who are paid pretty offensive wages. I was happy to take the £4.50 per hour at the time (it's about nine dooyoo reviews, right?), but even with the promise of huge rewards for those who were the best at being pushy and ignorant, I never saw these materialise. And I actually got pretty good at being bad by the end of it.
Weatherseal really doesn't seem too happy about this information getting out, either. As soon as I left their employment (on the day I was paid £50 for a week's work, just because they could get away with things like that), I made a rage-fuelled video for YouTube with text explaining much of what I've just told you, in text form. Although it was produced in anger, it was an entirely fair and accurate video that gave little person opinion and merely pointed out what was easily found elsewhere on the internet - but of course, it was negative publicity in the burgeoning domain of social media, so it had to go.
Though I was surprised when I got a phone call at my (much better) new job from a man who was probably claiming to be higher up in the organisation than he actually was, telling me to take the video down or face a lawsuit. Obviously, I conceded (I may be a web vigilante fighting against the tyranny of corrupt companies, but I'm not an idiot), and like Grant Management before them, Weatherseal has miraculously manipulated a clean set of search results that give no clue as to the truth behind the company, until you look a little deeper (or easier, just add 'complaint' to your search term).
The initial excitement of being threatened with legal action aside, I soon became more interested in how exactly they had tracked me down, to my mobile number no less. The guy said he was aware I used to work for Weatherseal, and when I caught up with a friend who still worked there the following year he said word had got around the office, so I'm at least glad I proved to be a minor menace to them.
I don't know what cold-calling script Weatherseal is using nowadays, but you can be sure it's along the same lines. I'd be interested in reading other peoples' reviews of this company, I'm amazed that the category didn't exist here until I suggested it.
Advantages: You might be looking for double glazing.
Disadvantages: Illegal cold calling practices, lying telephone scripts, pushy sales staff.
Museum reviews
Cumberland Pencil Museum, Keswick
Are You Ready to Experience the World's Largest Coloured Pencil?
**
Written on 14.02.10
Keswick is one of the most beautiful and tourist-friendly towns in The Lake District, home of many breathtaking views that have long made it a popular destination for those looking to get away from it all, as well as more mountaineering shops than anyone could possibly need. Bizarrely, the town also features some really inappropriate museums too.
To its credit, the Pencil Museum wasn't chosen randomly - unlike its close neighbour the James Bond Museum (yeah, Keswick - that place that's synonymous with 007). This museum is constructed out of a functional unit next to the much more impressive Cumberland pencil factory, where they make all those high quality pencil crayons that the kids at school who belonged to more well-off families than you did flaunted so proudly. You know, the pencils that were supposed to work like watercolour paint if you wet the nibs, but which ended up making your hands stink of graphite for seven years instead.
The company is proud of its contributions to the pencil industry, which led to the creation of this attraction - which proudly informs visitors that it is the only museum in the world dedicated entirely to the pencil. There is perhaps a reason for this.
Upon entering the Pencil Museum and paying the only slightly cheeky entrance fee of £3.50 (adult), visitors proceed through the only theme park-style exhibition, a replica of the Seathwaite mine were graphite was discovered, seemingly by a race of crumpled-faced sub-humans if the poorly maintained figure is anything to go by. Once this rather pointless embarrassment is out of the way, visitors are free to explore the compact museum, which features places to sit and draw (probably the best part, and while you could technically do this anywhere it's handy to have access to some slightly mangled pencil crayons). There are also 'interactive exhibits.'
Well alright, not really. There is an over-ambitious movie theatre though, which plays a 10-minute video ad nauseam demonstrating pencil production and showing some kids colouring things in, along with some non-celebrity opinions from what seems to be people who just like using Derwent watercolour pencils. The film concludes by playing an extended portion of Raymond Briggs' the Snowman, which was famously animated using the factory's pencils. It's a bit of a tenuous link though, and questionable justification for playing the excerpt hundreds of times each day, without any kind of commentary to try to make it more relevant.
You might think I've made the Pencil Museum sound a little boring so far, but I haven't even got to the main attraction yet. All the best museums have something of colossal proportions to wow audiences - whether it's a monstrous Tyrannosaur skeleton or gigantic turbines and steam engines - and what could be more exciting than seeing the world's largest functional coloured pencil firsthand? Well alright, it's enclosed in a case to protect its majesty, but it's still an impressive sight (it's 26 feet long, who's going to steal that? And how could they possibly make use of it without a giant colouring book?)
If this review seems a little sarcastic, I should confirm that I did enjoy my visit to the Pencil Museum on a recent break in Keswick, being fully aware even before we approached that I was not its target audience - indeed, from all the positive comments left in the visitor book it seems that kids find it both fun and educational (though strictly about pencils and nothing else).
The museum may be a little lacking in attractions and misguided in its reverence of pencil crayons, and essentially a front to sell loads of overpriced Derwent products in the gift shop that's as big as the museum itself, but it's a fun little attraction that makes Keswick a better place. I'd take it over the James Bond Museum any day. Did 007 have a pencil?
Well yes, he did actually, and it's on display in this museum. And you get a free souvenir pencil to lose on your own schedule.
The Cumberland Pencil Museum is clearly signposted all around Keswick, and is open from 9am to 4pm all year round except the usual Christmas holidays, on which days you can get your pencil crayon fix from watching the Snowman again and again and again.
Lost reviews
Budweiser – Wassssup *****
Verbatim DataLife CD-R 700 MB 52x *****
