This is why I won’t be using Halfords Christchurch for my bike repairs ever again

Halfords are really convenient. They're open 7 days a week, and til 8pm most days. My local bike shop is only open six days a week but shuts before I get home. I’d rather support a local business, but unfortunately Halfords wins here.

That’s until I actually use them. I currently am waiting for a phone call to say that my bike is repaired. They've had it for two weeks. It's a simple case of replacing a set of gears wheels (not the technical term  - I leave them to do work that out).

Here's the story so far:

• Tuesday28 October – 6pm I take in bike because chain keeps slipping. Am told that earliest they can look at it is Friday 31st. They’ll call me when they’ve looked at it.
• Friday 31 October – No call all day
• Saturday 1 November – I call, but phone rings and rings. No answer. I decide to call in in person. The technician isn’t in today so no-one has any idea what he has diagnosed. He’ll call me tomorrow.
• Sunday 2 November – No call all day
• Monday 3 November – Call shop again. I still haven't had a call. Speak to technician. Oh yes, you need some new parts to be fitted. I’ve ordered them. Should be in by the end of the week.
• Friday 7 November – Call in again. Technician isn’t in today so I don’t know what’s going on. He’ll call you tomorrow
• Saturday 8 November – No call all day (But then you probably guessed that didn't you)
• Monday 10 November – Got through to technician. STILL waiting for parts. We’ll call you when it’s done.
• Thursday 13 November – No call, no idea what’s happening

So Halfords have had my bike for two weeks now for a fairly simple repair. It's a bike that they themselves sold to me two years ago and the parts as such shouldn’t be hard to get.

I ride my bike to work every day (20-mile round trip). Luckily I’ve been able to borrow another bike but why should I have to?

I will instead go to my local bike repair shop. They might only be open for shorter hours but at least they return my calls and tell me what’s going on. They aren’t more interested in making up lots of kids' bikes for Christmas or selling me 3 for 2 inner tubes.

This isn't even the first time this has happened. I've had occasions where my chain broke on the way home but I couldn’t leave the bike there over night because their stock room was full. One time I got so fed up being ignored that I stood at the desk and RANG their switchboard so that the phone next to me would ring. They then stopped chatting among themselves to see what I wanted.

Here endeth my rant. They don't care about me. When I eventually get my bike they will try to sell me some Gold star service plan, which I will politely decline. I will explain why and say goodbye.

Doctor Who Season 8: End-of-term report

And so, just three months after Peter Capaldi met his adoring public for the first time as Doctor Who at the Deep Breath premiere in Cardiff, we've had the opportunity to enjoy his entire first season. None of this split-season nonsense - a full batch of 12 episodes to give him a run-in, and what a season it has been. Spoilers  follow.

Here's my review of the episodes in transmission order:

Deep Breath (8) - An accomplished introduction of Capaldi, and by the end we were in no doubt (if ever there was any) that we're in safe hands. The scenes of Clara in the clockwork robot's lair are very tense, as is the meeting between Clara/The Doctor in the restaurant. Great direction by Ben Wheatley, and by using THAT cameo and surrounding The Doctor with the Paternoster Gang this helped the transition. It looked and felt very different to what we were used to.  
 
Into the Dalek (7) - Fab Dalek spaceship action and some great battles. The inside of the Dalek itself didn't quite feel right, as evidenced by various bits of cheap tubing. Sam Anderson makes a great intro as Danny Pink (we'll be seeing more of him!)

Robot of Sherwood (5) - I love Mark Gatiss as a writer, but this one just seemed a bit inconsequential. The bickering between The Doctor and Robin soon grew very tiring, and even if Clara looked great in her flowing robe, this just didn't work for me. It could have been any Doctor playing this one and the resolution with the golden arrow just felt lazy. 

Listen (9) - Now this is more like it. Moffat doing big, creepy ideas. Addressing the monster under the bed, some timey-wimey science and a flashback to The Doctor's childhood, What's not to love?  

Time Heist (6) - Ocean's 11 in space, or sci-fi Hustle, the premise is sound and familiar, and this rates as one of those solid episodes that just sits there, filling the season's quota. Keeley Hawes is notably OTT, but The Teller is a fun monster with the ability to turn your brain to soup. The ending is just a variation on the previous season's Hide and was anyone really surprised at the identity of the mastermind behind it all?    

The Caretaker (6) - Less The Lodger/Closing Time and more like his Sarah-Jane Adventures, Gareth Roberts' Grange Hill with a robot is actually more fun that it initially promises thanks to some clever dialogue and a great performance from Ellis George as rebel school kid Courtney. Danny really comes into his own here, which helps divert you form the pretty rubbish big bad - the Skovox Blitzer

Kill the Moon (7) - Taking the show completely into the realm of fantasy (the Moon is an egg?) this boasts such huge conceits that it wins points for its cheek. Great monster, nice cool supporting performance from Hermione Norris, an allegory for abortion and The Doctor showing his ruthlessness. Wow!
 
Mummy on the Orient Express (8) - No-one expected this to be good, so what a treat that it not only ticked all the right boxes but also proved to be a rollicking adventure with a cool high concept idea (the clock ticks down on-screen as the monster sees you) harking back to old Who. And a great new writer in the form of Jamie Mathieson.

Flatline (8) - Proving that he's no one-trick pony, Mathieson's other script this season again confounds initial fears that it's going to be a ho-hum Earth-set filler. Instead we great some neat ideas about a 3D menace, some amazing CGI effects, comedy gold around the shrinking TARDIS and a cool hero moment at the end. Spooky and fun.

In the Forest of the Night (5) - Frank Cottrell Boyce's fairy tale about a magic forest just didn't work for me. Not enough jeopardy, some very dodgy animal CGI, a reset switch and a general lack of pace - this was the season's lop point for me. And what was it with the missing sister appearing from behind the bush at the end? WTF
  
Dark Water (9) - Loved this. Great pace, a fantastic reveal, a labyrinthine plot, some huge shocks and a wonderful performance from Michelle Gomez as Missy. This is what cliffhangers were invented for - a story that fully deserves its long running time.

Death in Heaven (8) - Inevitably, this cannot match the power of the first-part, mainly because the big surprises and twists have been revealed. Great set-piece on the plane and in the graveyard, though not happy about the Brigadier Cyberman. Just seemed a bit macabre. The final departure is very well done, with the double-lies of Clara and the Doctor meaning that they are both in a bad place. Really not looking forward to the Santa meets Alien Christmas special.

Average season score – 7.2

I loved Capaldi. He’s just wonderful as The Doctor. He hasn’t set a foot wrong all year. Jenna Coleman has also been given the chance to shine as Clara – right from Deep breath and up to her departure. Has this been at the expense of developing The Doctor? Maybe, but it also meant she could become more than The Impossible Girl. Kudos also to Sam Anderson as Danny Pink, the man with demons who paid the ultimate price. 

In all, a solid season with plenty of evidence that even at 51 this programme is still willing and able to take risks.    

JoyBlog is back...

...with a new design, and I promise to post more frequently. Well, more frequently than once every 20 months!

First up, here's a reminder of this DHDWF (Die-hard Doctor Who fan) as seen on Meridian News back in April.

Here's the link if you can't see the image above.

This was by far my most shared and commented upon social media item EVER. Just goes to show what dressing up with a Tom Baker scarf at the opening of a new TARDIS police box in Boscombe can do for your profile. The Police Box was still there last weekend and looking in good shape.

I'm also hoping to post some of my older interviews and articles on this blog, not least because a lot of the magazines I wrote them for are no longer around and won't be worrying about things like copyright.

A fortnight today I'll be up at the newly regenerated Dcotor Who Experience in Cardiff, so photos and a full review are inevitable, as will a new Radley handbag for Mrs Joy (again, the price I pay for being a DHDWF).

And then at the end of November my fellow Timelord Andy and I will be attending attending Project Motormouth in Slough where we'll be meeting Peter Capaldi, getting autographs and photos, all for charity. 

50th anniversary? That's soooo last year!

Hollywood Costume at the V&A

The Hollywood Costume exhibition at the V&A proved to be a great post-Christmas treat (runs until 27 January 2013), giving you the opportunity to rub shoulders where the rich and famous have already rubbed shoulders. Even for the casual movie fan there’s a real thrill in seeing Darth Vader’s original clunky costume or Audrey Hepburn’s LBD from Breakfast at Tiffany’s.

Arranged in three very different halls, the exhibition’s focus is not just on the costume itself (which is of course the centrepiece) but the work involved in producing it. And so we follow every step of the creative process from the initial script to discussions with the director and fittings with the star. At the end of the day, it IS ‘just’ a dress, but when you see what craft went into its journey to the screen you realise that this is no mean feat. Of note is Tippi Hedren’s plain green suit from Hitchcock’ The Birds. The suit is itself a well-designed piece of couture by Edith Head, but it’s only when you read (or watch one of the many video films running alongside the exhibits) about what it needed to represent, and how many different iterations were required, that you get the full appreciation.

Understandably, some of the costumes have fared better than others, with the most modern required to stand the scrutiny of high definition. Marilyn Monroe’s billowing dress (arguably the Mona Lisa of Hollywood costumes) is wisely stood behind a plexiglass screen, though others are available for you to lean in close – though clearly no touching or photography.

Personal highlights were inevitably Han Solo’s simple attire from Star Wars, Indiana Jones’ hat and bullwhip, Christopher Reeve’s ropey Superman suit and the modern gadgetry of Batman’s latest incarnation.

It’s no great surprise that the exhibition has been sold out on the most popular days – there’s plenty to see and it’s well-priced for London entertainment. The £25 catalogue is a bit steep (£35 for hardback) though is packed with plenty of glossy stills and designs. If you get the chance to see it before the end of January it’s well worth the trip. Even during our recent trip to Hollywood we didn’t see so many iconic exhibits in one place.

  

I passed on the Ballgowns exhibition which is also showing at the V&A – not really my thing. But what’s a bit worrying is the restrictions on viewing. Not only can you not touch or take photographs, you’re also forbidden from sketching. Bizarre. I’m sure that I could Google a good high quality image of any one of the exhibits. Is sketching such a risk? I wonder if you get a fully body search for pencils and then a memory wipe afterwards just in case you were tempted to rush out and furiously sketch what you’ve seen on the back of a napkin? Perhaps they could use the Memory Worm that was used to great effect in the Doctor Who Christmas Special. What do you mean you don’t remember it?

HFR and the Hobbit – What works best for you?

And so, it’s finally here – The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey. And I wonder if J R R Tolkien would have expected that his slender tome would have endured such an unexpected journey from page to screen with such media attention. Quite apart from the last-minutes changes to the structure resulting in a three-picture epic rather than the previously planned duo, we now have to work out which format to go for. Many people have come up to me in recent days asking what the difference is between regular 3D and 3D HFR. And while I was able to explain the mechanics of what HFR was (essentially you get 48 different frames per second instead of 24) I couldn’t say which was best. Having seen the move in both formats, here’s my verdict.

Before I go into detail, let’s just park the whole 3D thing. I’m not a 3D fan – for every Avatar there’s a dozen Clash of the Titans cynically converted post-production so that the studios can justify adding a couple more quid to the ticket price. You get the occasional auteur like Ridley Scott who with Prometheus used the format to add depth, but for many directors there’s too much temptation to throw boobs or other objects at us (Piranha 3DD stand up!) So, yes, I don’t see 3D as the future of cinema, I’m looking forward to movies going flat again and I really do think it’s just a fad.  The 3D in The Hobbit is better than most – you get a real sense of 3D rather than the pop-up book layering used in some productions – Gandalf’s nose is particularly impressive. The New Zealand vistas are of course sumptuous, but did this movie NEED to be in 3D? Not really. But enough about that – what about the HFR?

To make a meaningful comparison between HFR and regular frame rate I decided to go to view the movie in IMAX and then HFR. As anticipated, IMAX was crisp, beautifully loud and delivered the goods. HFR, by comparison made the film look cheap. Comparisons with BBC studio-based costume dramas are spot-on. Imagine one of those BBC Narnia adaptations shot on video or outside broadcast units. It has its own look because that was the limitation of the technology.  To deliberately (what I see as) retrograde the picture does not endear this technology to me. It looks too clear but not in a filmic way. This isn’t a case that hi-def is spoiling the show – it’s more than that. HBO’s Game of thrones is shot in hi-def and yet it looks filmic, The Hobbit HFR looks like it was shot on video, but with amazing CGI effects. This is amplified in the scenes shot in Bilbo’s house, which make it feel even more like a cheap Channel 4 home improvement show (Hobbits under the hammer?). Exterior close-ups fare little better, with some of the movement just not scanning correctly. But it’s not all Mount Doom and gloom, as the sweeping vistas look great, the CGI of Erebor is very impressive, and even the Rivendell scenes are less of a distraction.

Ultimately it’s down to personal taste – I’ve spoken to others whose experience ranged from not noticing the difference to having a wretched night out. My tip is to go for IMAX if you can, or regular 3D digital. HFR is a well-intentioned curiosity and I welcome innovation. Sadly, I cannot de-programme what I consider a film should look like. The tech isn’t going to have to refine itself before I regard this as my format of choice.