Chindie

This will be it. Most likely the money.

This will probably be the first thing I haven't spoilt my ballot on, I think, conversely.

The point is fairly clear I think. Just because he's Dennis Mortimer, doesn't mean his opinion is any more valid than anyone else's. It doesn't mean he's correct in his thinking, it doesn't mean he's got that much more insight than anyone else. I exaggerated the examples to try to clarify that. Evidently I was wrong. You raised Dennis Mortimer's thoughts to back your position. It doesn't mean anything. It's just another persons opinion. It's no more valid than any pundit. It doesn't support or make any more valid. It's pretty much an inversion of the Hitler fallacy - just because Dennis likes it, doesn't mean it's right.

They're harder to argue of course I support staying in, but I can admit there are numerous problems. Democratic deficit the main one. To explain that I need a paragraph with jargon, and somewhat unrelated asides, to do it. Nobody is going to read that on a leaflet, a great number that do won't understand it, or care. Do it's easier to sit there and mislead people with numbers. The EU costs you exaggerated figure X. The EU brings wishful rounded up figure Y to the UK in jobs. All of them are lies, some contain more truth than others, but again it boils down to this whole thing being a farce. We're reducing the arguments to such a simplistic level to get as many people as possible to understand that the truth is lost. It's ludicrous.

People want Moyes because he's shown ability in England to succeed over long periods, often under constraint (his time at Everton does have some propaganda, he did spend decent money at times). It's the same reason people have raised other names that don't have the 'weight' of Moyes name, they're naming they take to have good records. Don't think his background has much, if anything to do with it. His name's actually been dragged through the mud a bit with his last 2 jobs which dampens the argument is a choice of vanity IMO.

Not quite. The belief is that we have aversions to certain types of flavours as a child to help us avoid harmful stuff. Not fruit and veg generally. We should actually have an inclination to want certain flavours as children - sweet fruit we should be seeking out as our body desires energy, still working on the basis that we need that hit of sugar to keep us going because we might not get more for days. Bitter and sour flavours on the other hand we want to avoid as that's a suggestion of harmful things. We grow to like those flavours as we discover they don't harm us.

Any pundit saying Sherwood was keeping us up doesn't have a clue what they're talking about, and almost certainly haven't watched any of us this season (and who can blame them). Sherwood was broken at the end. He didn't have a clue what he was doing, he'd burnt out the emotional surge he thrives on, and was a mess. No pundit on earth, having seen his performances in the run up to his sacking, and his final couple of interviews where he looked like he'd not slept for weeks and spent the night before the game in a ditch, barely coherent, and clearly done, could think that man was keeping this side up. You can argue the squad is so poor nobody was keeping it up, and I'd say you're probably right on that front, but that doesn't excuse Sherwood of his own failings. Sherwood is a charlatan.

What's Dennis Mortimer's thoughts on the EU? Or how to tackle global terrorism? Or handle the financial crisis? Dennis Mortimer might have been a glorious and successful player for us, 30 years ago. But that doesn't mean he's much more qualified to comment on who should be Villa's manager in 2016 than he is on any of the above.

In fairness, 'that' is often redundant in a sentence and you can generally remove it and still have it read correctly

There's absolutely scaremongering on the Leave end. The stuff about a United States of Europe, pretty much everything about immigration is fear ultimately, the 'ruled by Brussels' stuff is all fear at its heart. Negative campaigning is the heart of everything in this.

That's exactly what Lerner did. All he does now is own the wallet. Which ultimately means he has the power still but he's not actually making the decisions beyond the budget. And it's arguable that the aim, if intensely naive, is to cut that tie as well and have the club pay its own way. Hollis runs the club now. The money he has to do it comes from Lerner. It's Lerner washing his hands of his property to let someone else waste their time making it sellable.

You aren't going to get a decent case either way Tony. A decent case isn't arguable en masse to stay or leave. I think there's been some decent arguments played out here on both sides but doubt it changed anyone's mind. If you think your vote is Leave were it tomorrow, you'll still vote that way in June. Nothing is going to come out of any campaign to really make you (or anyone) consider it further.

I think Remain will win, but it will be close. The result either way will be farcical. The campaigns on both sides are based on half truths, lies and empty slogans.

... Which is precisely why it's a really really bad topic for a referendum...

I don't mind the previous adaptations, although the Colour of Magic is ropey as hell, but they could be better. Good Omens is such a brilliant book it deserves to be done well, and obviously Gaiman wrote half of it so he should do a good job on the screenplay, but so much of that book is the gags in the thoughts and asides of the characters that its going to be hard to translate to the screen and not lose a lot of the humour (which is a problem for all of Pratchett's work). There's a brilliant gag about pre-decimal UK currency that's in a footnote that just won't work on the screen for example, or the M25 joke in the opening. Thankfully they should be able to keep it British though, the story won't translate anywhere else without losing its identity. So much of it is about what would happen if the Anti-Christ was raised in a picture postcard British village by accident, the humour is entirely based on a British sensibility. That's why Gilliam's attempt wouldn't have worked. Aziraphale is not Robin Williams. Johnny Depp isn't Crowley. Etc etc. I'm coming round to Mort. It's a decent story and a good jumping off point for that world. But I want this to be the start of a Discworld universe on screen, and Mort isn't a must see story that engages loads of people. They might have been better skipping to Guards Guards and build from the perspective of the Watch. Cast right and you've got a great seam of characters to build on and so many stories revolve around Ankh Morpork that you build that world at the same time and branch out. Mort gives you a self contained in to the wider world and the ideas of that world, but beyond that and introducing Death, you never revisit any of these characters.

Neil Gaiman has confirmed he's adapted Good Omens into a 6 part TV series after having a posthumous request to do it by Pratchett. Pleasebegoodpleasebegoodpleasebegood. And not American. Also confirmed that a series inspired by Pratchett's Watch characters is still going ahead, and the 4th Discworld book, Mort, is to be made into a feature film. Mort is an interesting one to pick. It's the first book where it felt like he had a solid idea of the world, and is quite self contained whilst introducing a lot of the themes and rules of the Discworld, and setting up a few characters and plots down the road, but it's also a bit of an odd story for a film - Death takes an apprentice and he messes with reality by failing in his duty whilst Death explores what it means to be human... Meet Joe Black but 10 years earlier and set in a fantasy satire.

I was waiting for this exact comment. There aren't many narratives that exist in fiction. I believe the general theory is that there are 7 which all plots in basic fiction book down to. So a great many movies and books take the same overarching plots and mildly tinker with the details to create something slightly different. But if you want to be reductive about it, yeah most action movies of any sort, spandex and capes, AKs and camo, laser guns and spacecraft, can be reduced to 'stop the baddie'. And rinse and repeat for every other movie you've ever seen. What Avatar did, was take a couple of narratives that already exist, photocopy them, and scribble out every reference to Native American and replace it with 'Na'Vi'. It didn't really change much else from stories that already exist in those master narratives. Hence the criticism. Even really poor movies usually add some wrinkle or interest to get away from the narrative inspiration, be that develop villain motivation, add in sub themes or commentary. Avatar literally has the same themes as the movies it pinches its entire narrative from. It was a tech demo with a place holder plot.

I never saw it at the cinema, but watched a few times on home media (usually demoing new kit). There's just the empty plot that is literally taken from 4 other movies. I don't think it's a bad movie so probably wouldn't have walked out but it's the kind of thing you're watching purely for how it looks. There's nothing else to it. I can't get over the fact there's 4 more planned. There's nothing to sequel off. There's not a universe to tell other stories in. Bizarre.

James Cameron is making 4 Avatar sequels back to back now. Apparently he has too much story material to just leave things at a fourth movie. I didn't know Dances with Wives and Pocahontas had so much additional plot. I genuinely don't think there's anyone on the planet salivating for a sequel to Avatar, let alone 4. The original is a brilliant tech demo, showing off Cameron's ability with tech and with developing sci fi worlds (even if some of the design, notably the various creatures of Pandora, is godawful or photocopied from Aliens) and ideas, but the movie itself is bland and listless and, like all his films, too long and too baggy. It still looks incredible, 6 years on, and it's still probably the definitive 3d movie, but there's nothing there beyond that. Why he's dedicating himself to it, I'm unsure. The takings are obviously a big part of it, but it seems to me Avatar's box office was down to its being an event. It won't be again (similarly the Star Wars universe being developed will slow down from the Force Awakens, again as that was an event, a cinematic moment, and everyone saw it. Rogue One and Episode 8 aren't). It's a shame as Cameron is such a great action and sci fi film maker, you have to wonder what else he could be working on.

Size of local population doesn't matter as much these days. Manchester is half the size of Birmingham, but half the planet 'supports' Manchester United. Swansea aren't a big global attraction, but they're part of the Prem and that 'product' sells globally, and as a smaller side with a reputation of being fairly well run, it's a much smaller risk. Villa are huge on paper, but we've been crap for 5 years, are tumbling out of the league, are a mess on and off the pitch, and cost more than Swansea from the get go the risk is huge. If I'm a billionaire investor, and setting aside loyalty, I don't buy Villa. But I might buy Swansea. Swansea aren't perfect and they'll never be a Manchester United, but they don't have the stench of death and decay that Villa have now.

I wouldn't say I've found it unfair yet, my issues have entirely been down to the godawful controls so far, but I have seen an increase in ambushes to what I experienced in the first game. There are lots of occasions where an enemy is hidden round a blind corner, or only activates once you've passed them so you get hit from behind out of nowhere. I've also noticed that a number of enemies have ludicrous tracking on their attacks, spinning on a 5 pence when lunging to hit you wherever you are in your roll. Which is a bit shit. And parrying almost isn't worth bothering with, you still take damage in many cases. Heard that a number of bosses have one hit kill moves later, which seems cheap as well. But I'm kinda enjoying it. Even if I'm only just getting to the Road of Sacrifices.

Greatwood down, Undead Settlement basically cleared out. I'd quite like to change my armour but so far playing as a knight there's been nothing that is better than what you start with that I can see. Also running around with the Katana which is now at +3...

Giffgaff currently showing their frankly excellent reliability history with the entire country seemingly without any service...

You'll need to have seen Winter Soldier and maybe Ant Man. Winter Soldier is a definite though - Civil War is a sequel to that and Age of Ultron at the same time. It's also one of the best of the entire series.

Yeah Spiderman is in it a surprising amount it appears, and every comment is they've finally nailed it. Garfield got close, but looks like Holland is on point. I'm surprised it's reviewing quite as well as it is. I expected it to be good, but also have a few flaws (poor villain, etc) but seemingly it's pretty much a home run. Great to hear the praise for Black Panther as well.