The final part of the Derren Brown Investigates trilogy is on tonight (Channel 4, 10pm). This time the focus is on a ghosthunter called Lou Gentile. My guess is that on this occasion our man will indeed be convinced that something paranormal is going on. Not.
There doesn't seem to be a trailer as such available for tonight's show, but there is some 'exclusive footage' from the show on our old friend YouTube:
It's a toss up between whether we watch DBI or the final episode of Flashforward, which is on Five at the same time. Luckily I imagine both will be available to watch on the web (or on Channel 4+1 for DBI) so we won't miss out either way!
Monday, May 31, 2010
Saturday, May 29, 2010
Lost but not forgotten
So this week saw the end of Lost, one of the most ambitious and complex drama series ever. It spanned six seasons over six years and kept fans glued to the screen right up the final moments.
Many a fan will have quickly turned to the internet to help them make sense of what they had just watched, as well as help them to interpret and re-interpret everything they had seen from Season One onwards! There aren't many TV shows that integrate such diverse topics as destiny, time-travel, faith, philosophy, love, and what happens after we die into a compelling drama.
But, of course, many questions were left unanswered, such as: So what exactly was the island? Why could it move in space and time? What was the smoke monster? Who was Jacob's "mother"? Why did the island need protecting? Etc., etc. If you're a fan of the show you'll know what I'm talking about, if you're not (and shame on you) you won't have a clue or, indeed, give a toss.
The web is abound with discussions and speculation over what it was all about, including its very own Lostpedia. As I browse through a few reviews of the finale and the discussions that follow, it is interesting to notice that those people who seem to be least satisfied with how it ended are those who don't seem to 'get it'. Those that have a better handle on what was going on seem quite happy with how it was brought to a close, despite the many unanswered questions.
It seems there is likely to be a final 'epilogue' to be included in the DVD boxed set that focuses on what happens to Hurley and Ben after they take over as the new protectors of the island. But other than that, that's your lot.
Many a fan will have quickly turned to the internet to help them make sense of what they had just watched, as well as help them to interpret and re-interpret everything they had seen from Season One onwards! There aren't many TV shows that integrate such diverse topics as destiny, time-travel, faith, philosophy, love, and what happens after we die into a compelling drama.But, of course, many questions were left unanswered, such as: So what exactly was the island? Why could it move in space and time? What was the smoke monster? Who was Jacob's "mother"? Why did the island need protecting? Etc., etc. If you're a fan of the show you'll know what I'm talking about, if you're not (and shame on you) you won't have a clue or, indeed, give a toss.
The web is abound with discussions and speculation over what it was all about, including its very own Lostpedia. As I browse through a few reviews of the finale and the discussions that follow, it is interesting to notice that those people who seem to be least satisfied with how it ended are those who don't seem to 'get it'. Those that have a better handle on what was going on seem quite happy with how it was brought to a close, despite the many unanswered questions.
It seems there is likely to be a final 'epilogue' to be included in the DVD boxed set that focuses on what happens to Hurley and Ben after they take over as the new protectors of the island. But other than that, that's your lot.
Saturday, May 22, 2010
The Future is Google
Or rather the future of TV is Google TV:
Speaking of Google, if you happened to try Googling something today or yesterday you would have discovered that it is the 30th anniversary of Pac-Man, and a click on the Google logo would have got you a free game!
Speaking of Google, if you happened to try Googling something today or yesterday you would have discovered that it is the 30th anniversary of Pac-Man, and a click on the Google logo would have got you a free game!
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
A very funny man
I have mentioned in passing before that I have long been a fan of Bill Hicks. He died back in 1994 but he continues to be as popular now as when he was alive. Indeed, last week saw the release of a new biopic about him, called American: The Bill Hicks Story. It includes stories from those who knew him, interspersed with archive footage of his performances. Looks good.
Sure you can watch the clips of Bill on YouTube but going to see this movie at the cinema is going to be the closest you're ever likely to get to seeing the guy live on stage. And then some.
Sure you can watch the clips of Bill on YouTube but going to see this movie at the cinema is going to be the closest you're ever likely to get to seeing the guy live on stage. And then some.
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Derren 'n' Vyacheslav
It turns out it was Men with X-Ray Eyes (as opposed to the singular Man). Although it didn't appear as though anyone had X-Ray eyes. The focus of last night's Derren Brown Investigates was the Bronnikov Method, pioneered by a chap called Vyacheslav Bronnikov.
Among the claims made by Bronnikov is that his 'method' can help people see through blindfolds and can even help blind people to see (including those who don't have eyes!). And level 1 of the course costs only 700 Euros. All very intriguing, and all very dodgy-sounding.
The confrontation between Derren 'n' Vyacheslav ended with our man requesting that Mr Bronnikov tell him what was inside a sealed box, something that should be straightforward for a man with X-Ray eyes. Bronnikov declined. Which left us wondering what was inside the box!
My guess is that it was a small yellow plastic duck... on a chain.
Among the claims made by Bronnikov is that his 'method' can help people see through blindfolds and can even help blind people to see (including those who don't have eyes!). And level 1 of the course costs only 700 Euros. All very intriguing, and all very dodgy-sounding.The confrontation between Derren 'n' Vyacheslav ended with our man requesting that Mr Bronnikov tell him what was inside a sealed box, something that should be straightforward for a man with X-Ray eyes. Bronnikov declined. Which left us wondering what was inside the box!
My guess is that it was a small yellow plastic duck... on a chain.
Monday, May 17, 2010
The Man With X-Ray Eyes
The second of three documentaries in the Derren Brown Investigates series is broadcast tonight on Channel 4 at 10pm. I wonder if the man in the title will be watching...?
Sunday, May 16, 2010
A very significant buttock
We all use psychological 'short cuts' from time to time in order to make sense of the world around us. These short cuts can affect the way we behave and interact with other people. For example, we often rely on stereotypes to to make judgements about other people. These are usually simplistic over-generalisations about members of certain groups.
You might think that suppressing our stereotypes might prevent them from influencing our behaviour. Not so. In a study by psychologists back in the 1990s, participants were shown a picture of a ‘skinhead’ and were asked to spend five minutes writing about a typical day in this man’s life. Participants were randomly assigned to one of two conditions. In the first condition (the control condition) they were simply allowed to write their account with no further instruction. However, in the second, experimental, condition participants were instructed to try to not allow any stereotypical preconceptions they might have to influence their account. That is, they were asked to suppress any stereotypical thoughts.
Not surprisingly, the accounts of the man’s day produced by the control group tended to be more ‘stereotypical’ in content than the accounts produced by the participants who had been asked to suppress their stereotypes. But this wasn’t what the researchers were really interested in…
After the participants had completed their task they were taken into another room to meet the man in the photograph. When they got there, the man had apparently nipped out to go to the toilet, and had left his denim jacket and bag on the end chair of a row of eight chairs. So, the experimenter asked the participant to sit and wait in one of the remaining chairs. The researchers were interested in which chair each participant chose to sit in. And guess what, they found a difference between the two conditions. The people who had been instructed to suppress any stereotypical thoughts tended, on average, to sit almost one chair further away from the man’s chair at the end of the row than did the people who had not been asked to suppress such thoughts!
Macrae, C. N., Bodenhausen, G. V., Milne, A. B. & Jetten, J. (1994). Out of mind but back in sight: Stereotypes on the rebound. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 808–817.
You might think that suppressing our stereotypes might prevent them from influencing our behaviour. Not so. In a study by psychologists back in the 1990s, participants were shown a picture of a ‘skinhead’ and were asked to spend five minutes writing about a typical day in this man’s life. Participants were randomly assigned to one of two conditions. In the first condition (the control condition) they were simply allowed to write their account with no further instruction. However, in the second, experimental, condition participants were instructed to try to not allow any stereotypical preconceptions they might have to influence their account. That is, they were asked to suppress any stereotypical thoughts.
Not surprisingly, the accounts of the man’s day produced by the control group tended to be more ‘stereotypical’ in content than the accounts produced by the participants who had been asked to suppress their stereotypes. But this wasn’t what the researchers were really interested in…After the participants had completed their task they were taken into another room to meet the man in the photograph. When they got there, the man had apparently nipped out to go to the toilet, and had left his denim jacket and bag on the end chair of a row of eight chairs. So, the experimenter asked the participant to sit and wait in one of the remaining chairs. The researchers were interested in which chair each participant chose to sit in. And guess what, they found a difference between the two conditions. The people who had been instructed to suppress any stereotypical thoughts tended, on average, to sit almost one chair further away from the man’s chair at the end of the row than did the people who had not been asked to suppress such thoughts!
Macrae, C. N., Bodenhausen, G. V., Milne, A. B. & Jetten, J. (1994). Out of mind but back in sight: Stereotypes on the rebound. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 808–817.
Thursday, May 13, 2010
Great face for radio
Off the back of the Derren 'n' Joe show on Monday, I was asked to take part in a local BBC radio show this morning to discuss whether psychics are real or fake...
You can listen along by clicking here (it's in the first hour). I even have an impromptu go at a bit of psychometry... with interesting results!
You can listen along by clicking here (it's in the first hour). I even have an impromptu go at a bit of psychometry... with interesting results!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
