Liverpool: The Sleeping Giant?

First of all I'm going to get this out the way before anyone else can accuse me of it. This blog may seem like bitterness, or sour grapes, or jealousy, or whatever other things you want to describe it as. And maybe it is, but to be honest I don't really care.

Anyway, the reason why I mention all of the above things will soon become apparent, as I'm going to start off talking about Manchester United. Liverpool and Manchester United have always been inextricably linked. As cities, they stole our industry by building the ship canal, something that United (and City to be fair) still flaunt by having a ship in their badge. In football, the rivalry has always been there. I would argue that the obsession has been far more intense on the Manchester side though. It's only from United fans that you'll hear songs about Liverpool during every game no matter who they're playing. And Alex Ferguson made it clear that his career goal at Manchester United was the emulate Liverpool when he said "My biggest challenge was knocking Liverpool right off their fucking perch." It meant a lot to him.

Fergie the grass

The thing is, in Ferguson's time at Old Trafford, there is no denying that United went through a glorious period overshadowing Liverpool who, by their standards, have gone through a darker period in their history. Now, however, I firmly believe these days are over for United. It may only be early days into the post-Alex Ferguson era, but there is no way they can ever recreate the sort of dominance they had over this country without him.

Alex Ferguson had a lot of control over the referees, the FA and the press. When I say that he had control over the press, people often question what difference that would make anyway. Well here's how it works, if a journalist criticised Ferguson or United, or even just broke a story that Ferguson wanted to stay private, he would ban that journalist and his particular news outlet from attending press conferences at the training ground and from attending Old Trafford. For a sports journalist, this could ruin their career. So as it was, Ferguson was practically immune from criticism so his job was never in question. The media have a lot of power when it comes to getting managers sacked as they have a great influence over public opinion. If you make a comparison to David Moyes who's in charge now, if he banned a journalist from press conferences for writing something he didn't like, if that journalist had anything about them he could ruin Moyes' career. It's like how newspapers win general elections. If a big newspaper turns against a manager they can sway huge portions of the supporters against them and get them sacked. Of course, numerous newspapers tried this many times with Rafael Benitez at Liverpool, but we're different, so they failed.

This power over the media is ultimately what gave Ferguson the control over referees. He could easily ruin careers. The main example I give of a referee bottling it from fear of Ferguson was in 2009 when United were 2-0 down at home to Spurs. That was until Michael Carrick went through on goal and Huerelho Gomes tackled him fair and square. However, Howard Webb decided to give United a penalty. They went on to win the game 5-2, but I believe that without the free goal from Webb they would never have got back into that match, and that was the game that won them the title that year in my opinion. If you want to see the blatant wrong decision yourself it's about 1 minute into this video:

However, it's not entirely down to Alex Ferguson that United have had so much "luck" over the years. Ferguson probably couldn't have had the same sort of control at any other club in the country. It comes down to the fact that Manchester United have always been this country's favourite football team. It dates back the The Busby Babes and the Munich Air Disaster, and ever since them days they're the club that the country has always wanted to be it's top team, and any other club that's been the best has never received the same sort of credit. I remember this video from the television show The Street from a few years back, and I've always felt that everything that Officer Slater says in it is entirely true, even if it wasn't meant to be taken seriously: (sorry I have to post it as a link but for some reason they won't let me embed it)

I Hate Manchester United

As a side note, that video is a good 6 or 7 years old but describing Wayne Rooney as a "fat, money grabbing bastard" is still perfectly truthful as of this week.

Liverpool, in contrast, have always had to do things the proper way, the hard way, and we've never even received much credit for what we've done. The reason I decided to write this blog, apart from the fact United hilariously got beat by Olympiakos yesterday, is because I was also made aware yesterday that it was the 5th anniversary of when Liverpool went to the Bernabeu and beat Real Madrid 1-0. This followed another anniversary memory from about a week ago of Liverpool defeating Inter Milan 2-0 at Anfield. 

The results of the English teams in the Champions League over the past couple of weeks got me thinking how much I miss being in the competition. But not only that, looking at our games from years gone by made me think that the Champions League is actually crying out for us to return to it. England as a country should be crying out for Liverpool to return to the Champions League. But they're not, of course. I was thinking about what Liverpool achieved in Europe from the period of around 2004 to around 2009. We went to the Bernabeu and won, we went to the Nou Camp and won, we went to the San Siro and Won. We knocked out Real Madrid, Barcelona, AC Milan, Juventus, Inter Milan, Chelsea and Arsenal from England. There's not really any top teams from Europe we didn't beat, but we never really seemed to be given any credit for what we achieved. Before the games the pundits in the media wrote us off, after the games they seemed shocked, but that was it. I haven't researched this before saying it so I might be wrong, but I don't think any other English team over the past 10 years has had the same sort of results against the top teams in Europe as we have, yet the other teams are the ones the country seemed to get behind.

"This is Anfield... and what?" proclaimed Spanish newspaper Marca, before Liverpool destroyed Real Madrid 4-0 at Anfield

Throughout history Liverpool have never been given that much credit for their achievements. We beat Real Madrid in the 1981 European Cup final, but when supporters of other clubs talk about it they say it was a poor Madrid side. A poor Madrid side who made the European Cup final? In contrast, when talking about the 1978 victory we hear that it was "only Club Brugge". Club Brugge just happened to be one of the best teams in Europe at the time and one of the favourites to win the competition. The same thing happens when people try to belittle one of the biggest nights in our history, St Etienne, by questioning how great it was due to the opposition. Etienne, at the time, were one of the most feared teams in Europe due to the fact they were the most successful team in France, European Cup finalists the previous year, and had one of the best strikers in the world in Dominique Rocheteau. The same with Borussia Monchengladbach who Liverpool defeated in the final, they had a famous rivalry with Bayern Munich at the time which is still remembered in Germany but long forgotten or just not cared about here. St Etienne and Monchengladbach were pretty much the two favourites at the start of the tournament and we beat them both. Just because a team isn't great at a certain time doesn't mean they once weren't. You could take an example now, even though the chronology is reversed, that 5 years ago beating Paris Saint Germain would have meant nothing, but now it's a great achievement.

Dominique Rocheteau against Liverpool

So even though I described the past couple of decades as a darker period for Liverpool earlier in this blog, we did have some good times. However, it's fair to say we were overshadowed by United. But now, I truly believe, that without Ferguson United have had their day. And personally, I would quite happily see them be crippled by their debt and go into administration and drop through the leagues like a stone. They've had everything handed to them on a plate for years so they'd deserve it. Even though Ferguson may have knocked us off our fucking perch, we're still here, and right now we're ahead of United in the league and our future looks a lot more promising.

I've gone on for quite a bit now so I think I will just leave you with this final thought: When Liverpool's era of dominance ended, after we won our last league title in 1990, we had 11 more league titles than Manchester United and three more European Cups. Now, the Ferguson years are over at Manchester United and they have two more league titles than Liverpool and are still two European Cups behind. 

You may have knocked us off our perch, Sir Alex, but we never fell very far. 

Up The Reds!

@adamheath

(Credit to Joe O'Brien for the title of this blog @joe_obrien34)

Religion And Stuff...

The reason I'm writing this is because I saw a story a few weeks ago, and I felt like I had to share a few thoughts about it. This is the story...

And since I saw that I've just been thinking about how completely crazy it is. The thing is, to me, the idea of religion actually seems more absurd than the idea of homosexuality, and I can't believe in 2014 people can still use religion to justify a hatred. 

Now let me first of all point out that I have nothing against people who are religious. I went to a Catholic school and I studied the bible, and I actually think the bible is full of really good messages. I just get the feeling that we've spent so long studying it that people are just getting it all wrong now. 

To paraphrase the comedian Jim Jeffries, you could replace the entire bible with the simple phrase "don't be a cunt." Because that's all the bible is, it's a book telling you how to live your life the right way. All the other parts are irrelevant, but people take these irrelevant parts and twist them to justify their fucked up views. There's people who hate Jews because they killed Jesus, and you feel like saying to them you're focusing on the wrong part mate. It doesn't matter who killed Jesus, it's the fact he suffered for other people. He was being a good person, and he wants you to do the same. And by hating others you're not doing that.

It doesn't matter if Jesus really was the son of God. But if he was, and God sent him to earth to spread the good news about him, and that good news became the bible, God would be looking down now, seeing what people do in his name, and turning to Jesus and saying "you've made me look a right twat here son."

But anyway, as I was saying, I have nothing against religious people, because most of them are just living their lives the right way. But you don't have to believe in God, or pray to him, to be living the right way. You can be a good Christian without believing in God and he's not going to punish you, because you've been a good person. It's like Beyonce once said, "hollering in a church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a Cadillac."

In general, people just don't like what is different to them. It's like Yul Brenner says in Cool Runnings, "People are always afraid of what's different." As with the story above, the guy doesn't like homosexuality because it's different. It's using religion as the justification for this dislike that's pretty much caused all the world's problems for the past 2000 years. Family Guy summed it up perfectly with this sketch...

How many people have died in the name of a particular religion. Not just Christianity though, it happens with all of them. And the thing is, they're actually all similar in how they tell people to be. They're all peaceful, telling people to treat others well, and they've all been butchered by us.

But anyway, that was just a little rant, and I hope I burn in hell.

@adamheath

The Death of Football?

I can't believe Thomas Hitzlsperger is gay. Only joking, that's not what this blog is about. Hitzlsperger coming out as gay is actually a very positive thing for football, so fair play to him for that. This is actually about the other big news from the world of football that broke last week; the announcement from FIFA general secretary Jerome Valcke that the 2022 World Cup in Qatar will be held in the winter and not, as is tradition, in the summer. And this is actually one of the rare occasions where I write something quite serious, so I don't even know why I started it with a joke.

Vagina Stadium Qatar, host of the 2022 World Cup final

But anyway, the death of football. It has been clear for quite some time that the people running football do not care about the fans who follow the sport any more. Which is a shame, because without the fans football is nothing. But this latest decision, to move the 2022 World Cup to winter, is, I believe, the final nail in the coffin for the game as we know it. Let me explain my reasoning for this...

First of all, and most importantly, the whole bidding process for host nations of the FIFA World Cup has now been thrown into disrepute. Most people in this country will know how the bidding process works, as like myself you've probably seen England go through it twice in your life time. The countries involved spend a lot of money putting together a presentation for FIFA that shows why they deserve to host the World Cup. The thing is, when the country puts together the bid, they are trying to show that they are a suitable host for a tournament taking place in the summer. There's no other option, FIFA do not let them choose between summer and winter, they are under instruction that the World Cup has to take place in summer.

This means that Qatar's bid for the 2022 World Cup was based on a summer world cup. If they would have been bidding for a winter tournament, this wouldn't be such a big deal. But they weren't, so it is. In fact, I know this has gained a lot of media attention, but I don't even think it's being treated as seriously as it should be. This is where I get to the real point. Because if Qatar entered a bid for a summer World Cup, and FIFA compared that bid to the other entries, and decided that it was the best one, then surely they shouldn't have to switch the tournament to the winter? But they did. After choosing Qatar for the 2022 World Cup, they then came to the conclusion that it was not safe enough to host the tournament there in the summer. Why wasn't this picked up on during the bidding process? It can only mean that the bid wasn't considered properly in the first place, and Qatar were awarded the World Cup for different reasons...

Now I learned about liable and slander when studying journalism in uni (even though I can't remember which is which) but to be honest this is just a blog that's headed by a photo of Adam Sandler in the bath, so I'm not really bothered if what I say breaks any laws. And what I'm saying is that FIFA officials accepted money from Qatar in exchange for awarding them the 2022 World Cup. It doesn't really take a genius to work that out, they're not a suitable host nation, therefore their bid to host the World Cup was false, but they are an extremely rich country, and they were awarded the World Cup regardless of the aforementioned issues.

This may all seem obvious, but this could really spell the death of football as far as I'm concerned. I just wonder how far it could go. FIFA, and a few men at the top of the organisation, pretty much control the game of football around the globe. These few men at the top of the organisation are the ones who decide who hosts the world cup, and are the ones who have accepted payment to award it to Qatar. UEFA run football in Europe, and the European teams really make the world cup what it is. If UEFA wanted to, they could withdraw the European countries from the world cup in protest, and FIFA would have to act on this or they wouldn't have a tournament. However, UEFA have shown no concern for what has happened. Even England on it's own has a fair bit of influence on UEFA and indeed FIFA, but they have not acted at all. Initially, the FA seemed to show some defiance, but all of a sudden this changed and they seemed to accept any decision made by FIFA. And this begs the question, how far have the payments gone from Qatar to secure this World Cup for them?

"Pay me and it's yours."

This is where the end really is in sight for the real supporters in football. We've seen that the top governing body in football can award a country the World Cup just to line their own pockets. How long will it be before a country like Qatar decides it wants to host the Champions League final, and pays UEFA officials vast amounts of money for this? And can we trust them to turn it down? I don't trust anyone who is running the game any more, they're all greedy and don't care about the fans. This has been obvious for years, with poor choices of host stadiums and tiny allocations for supporters, so it wouldn't take much for them to take the next step and move the final outside of Europe.

And could it possibly go further? What if a rich country far away decided it wanted to host the FA Cup final? I wouldn't trust our FA to deny them. They're currently paying off a huge debt on Wembley stadium, and could pay that off a lot quicker with a massive pay off from abroad than they ever could just from hosting matches.

Anyway, I'm not to sure if I've been able to put into words exactly what I was thinking, but hopefully it gives people something to think about. And in all honesty I wouldn't be surprised if we see a country outside of Europe awarded the Champions League final or FA Cup final within the next few years.

@adamheath

Celebrity Big Brother

First of all, I just can't believe this still happens. They still make programmes like this, and people actually still watch them. Just in general, any show that involves celebrities and public votes, surely this should have stopped by now. Do people still actually call in to vote for people? Pay for a phone call to vote for someone to stay on or leave a TV show? If they do they need to have a serious word with themselves. If a member of my own family was on a TV show and they wanted me to vote for them I wouldn't even do that just out of principle. 

But anyway, I saw that Celebrity Big Brother was on last night just by chance, and there really wasn't anything else on so I thought I'd watch it as it might provide something decent to terror. It didn't disappoint, and that's where this blog comes in. However, it's not the same as when I was talking about the Extreme Railways show, in fact I'd even give the internet porn I talked about in a blog more credit than this. This is just utter garbage television that I can't believe still attracts viewers.

So... The show started last night, and I think they thought the reveal of the host was a massive surprise or something, because they held off on it for ages and even gave it like a little drum roll. But it was, of course, Emma Willis, because that's just like what she does. They still gave her this entrance from behind a curtain like she was fucking Elvis or something though 

There's a Davina McCall clone in my jap's eye

We can see straight away that the format of the show is going to be exactly the same as it has been for the past decade, and you know how I was saying before I couldn't believe people still watch this, even worse is the fact people still actually go and stand outside to be there for it. Look they made banners...

It does not surprise me that one of them is called Chanel

Emma Willis is just a proper Davina copy you know, it's like they've had her in training just to do this. She bores us to death with her tour of the house though. She even has to ask the crowd to cheer and that. Bad news on the opening night. A lot of the time they just do like them "wooooo" sounds that you get on 90s gameshows when they reveal the prizes as well. Emma's buzzing off the fact there's a toilet in jail, because that means they can stay longer in jail. I swear they long ago ran out of ideas on this you know. Throwing them in jail and that, I think they'd just make The Hunger Games if they were allowed. To be fair we're probably not far from that in terms of television in this country. Instead of allowing people to be creative and come up with new television shows, they just take anything and throw celebrities into it. And celebrities will do anything for money.

Speaking of which, I'll cut straight to the housemates... The first of which, is good old Jim Davidson. And you know what I was saying about anything for money? Well in Jim's introductory VT, he uses the fact he was arrested as part of Operation Yewtree to justify his celebrity status. What the fuck? It's like he's saying "well only celebrities were arrested as part of Operation Yewtree, therefore you have to believe I am one." He even uses his arrest as an excuse to why he wasn't on the show a year earlier.

Sorry I'm a year late, I was busy noncing Matilda with Rolf Harris

The scary thing is, Channel 5 were going to sign him up for Celebrity Big Brother, then he got arrested for being a nonce, then Channel 5 decided to sign him up again. Only in this country would the 'famous' part of the term 'famous paedophile' be the most important part. It's like that bit from Pirates of The Caribbean, like someone's gone to Jim Davidson "I've heard of you, you're that paedophile" and he's gone "ah, but you have heard of me". What is going on. He even repeats the fact he's a year late when they bring him onto the stage, like Yewtree is his big selling point. Snooker Loopy. 

Sound editing by me that like

The next person into the house I can't even be arsed talking about. It's one of them Nolan's. They're like rent a celeb them, turn up on everything. The only thing is we find out now the housemates are to handcuffed to someone else when they enter the house. And would you believe it, the Nolan is marketing herself as someone who hates male, chauvinistic pigs (she's aiming for the feminist vote) and she's going to be handcuffed to Jim Davidson who is, as well as a nonce, also well known for being chauvinistic, a pig, and indeed, male. Fun. 

The next person in the house is a cunt. Bit harsh that like, it's actually Dappy. He's a bit of a wrongun though. After Tulisa made a tit of herself on telly, if Dappy comes out of this badly N-Dubz will probably go down as the biggest group of bellends ever. 

That fusey is worse than the hat he used to wear

I proper hate the little promotional videos they did for each housemate, it's just them acting up as best they can to create a character to get them publicity. Dappy was just chatting wham, but the bird after him was a joke.

Liz Jones is a columnist. That's not even a celebrity. Who's blurred the lines between media and who's in the media? Oh yeah, the fucking media have. This is seen in her opening video where she basically just says all the stuff she knows people will consider controversial. Again, just acting to get more publicity. Fair play to Dappy, because she thought he'd be proper intimidated by her and he just wasn't arsed. But saying that you can't be when you're wearing a suit like this...

Please notice me

The one on the right is Liz Jones, but I'm sure you all know that with her being dead famous and everything... I'm still just fuming about her slating my Rihanna to be honest. At least she has a Wikipedia page though, unlike Jasmine Waltz who's one of the other housemates. It should be a general rule that you can't be considered for Celebrity Big Brother if you don't have a Wikipedia page, because that would tell you that the general public has not heard of this person. Jasmine Waltz does have a porno, but I talk about stuff like that in other blogs... 

Next in is Sam Faiers, who's famous for being famous. You wouldn't know she was once with Joey Essex if she hadn't mentioned it one or ten times in her opening video. They all have a proper obsession with justifying their fame, but I think Jim Davidson's paedophilia was a more convincing argument than her "once with Joey Essex" one. On a side note, whilst we're talking about Joey Essex and paedophilia (yes I have just made a genuine side note on them topics) how are people like her and Joey Essex famous? I heard someone on the radio a while back call in and say she'd been queuing for three hours so her twelve year old daughter could meet Joey Essex. If I could have spoke to that woman I would have said what's wrong with you, the only reason your daughter likes him is because she wants to have sex with him. And she's twelve. Because lets be honest, what else has he done to make people like him and want to meet him? Absolutely nothing. Just something wrong with modern society. Anyway, back to Sam...

 You can tell the angle she's going for straight away. "I'm 100% single". I've translated this into what she's actually saying, "If you keep me in the house I might have sex." That's all it is. That's a major part of celebrity culture in a nutshell, I might have sex on telly. The magazines love it. With programmes like Celebrity Big Brother the gossip magazine's are just writing about unfolding stories that everyone can see in front of their eyes anyway. I honestly don't know why people still go along with this celebrity culture.

Anyway she's definitely going for this sex angle because Emma points out the fact again that she's single. Add to that the fact her outfit shows off her knickers and you can pretty much read it like a book

For the lads

She's not even that nice. They've cuffed her to her to the bird who has a porno, thus completing the pair who will probably have sex on telly for a bit of publicity. 

Speaking of doing anything for publicity, the next one in is Lee Ryan from Blue. Straight off you can see the angle he's going for, the thick cunt angle. Like Blue have been around for years, and they used to be on SMTV live and everything back in the day, and I'm sure he wasn't like this. He's definitely putting it on. I reckon he's watched Joey Essex on I'm a Celeb and thought you know what, birds love that so I'm gonna model meself on him. How bad is it if you're modelling yourself on Joey Essex. I guarantee he'll start coming out with some proper stupid shit in the next few days like "I can't put me own socks on" or something just to try and be like him. He already says straight away though that Blue are the best band in the world, so to be honest he can already be considered thicker than Joey Essex, and that kid can't blow his nose. Honestly though, if you watch Lee Ryan's opening VT and think any of that is genuine it's you who's the thick one. Shocking telly.

Anyway, it was at this point that I got fed up. As I've already said I hate shows like this so it was killing me to watch it, and also Drive was starting on BBC and everyone knows Gosling is the boy. But there was just a few thoughts I had whilst watching, let me know what you think...

@adamheath

Facebook

A blog about Facebook is long overdue from me. If you follow me on twitter you will have seen me have numerous rants on the subject, and some of these views will be getting expressed here, but I will be able to go into a bit more detail.

To be honest, a lot of what I say may be a bit hypocritical. I use Facebook myself, I appreciate the odd like, and this blog itself is most likely going to get posted to Facebook. This could be construed as me being the exact thing I'm criticising here. But anyway, I'm just going to go with it...

I decided to write this blog after a status I posted myself on facebook last night. This status to be precise...

The Ted reference was excellent

Now, the fact this is a facebook status is actually irrelevant to the point I'm about to make here. It's more to do with the naming of the kids that I mentioned there, and the thought process that's gone into these names. It's the fact that parents picking the names have gone through the thought process of what other people will think of the names that annoys me. They've made the conscious decision that rather than give their kids normal names they will double barrel two names that don't really go together in an attempt to make them different and more memorable. And I fucking hate the idea of this.

This leads me on to my main issue with Facebook, in case you were wondering like. It's the thought process that goes into the posts people make on there. The idea that people have posted a certain thing in a certain way for the purpose of it gaining attention. What it boils down to, is that Facebook has now just become a competition. Pretty much everything people post on their is done so with the purpose of presenting how good their life is, to present the idea that their life is better than yours. In some situations you could argue that this isn't the case, but it's the way people present things in a certain way that makes you know that they've thought about the best way to get the most likes for this post. In all honesty though, people's lives probably aren't all that great, otherwise they wouldn't be on Facebook.

Of course, the opposite of this, when people are having a shit time and thus are not competing... they are in fact still fucking competing. My tragedy is worse than yours. One of the things that annoys me the most that you will see all the time on Facebook is posts to dead relatives. "Rest in peace nan. 3 years ago today I lost you, I'm sure you're looking down on me angel." Nan didn't have Facebook when she was alive so she's probably not got it in the afterlife. Visit the grave and lay some flowers you cretin instead of posting it on Facebook in an attempt to get some likes. You'll then find the tremendous overuse of the word "hun" in the comments from friends consoling them. Just fucking give them a call or visit them if you're that good friends. But I forgot, you want everyone to see that you're consoling your friend.

Again, it just goes back to the thought process the person has gone through to make this post. They've thought of a heartfelt status about a dead relative, but they've thought of it in a way that will best achieve Facebook popularity, and it just means nothing to the person who's actually died. The same principle applies to people who make a status to wish a relative happy birthday. The worst one is when it's for kids. "Happy 1st birthday Robbie-Joe, we love you." (It's bound to be a shit name like Robbie-Joe if the kids only one, because the parents probably picked the name with a Facebook status in mind when they decided it.) But yeah, why wish a kid who's not on facebook anyway happy birthday? It's done with the sole purpose of everyone else seeing it's your kids birthday, so you can get likes on it. Any time there's a status from someone wishing a close relative I just feel like saying can't you give them a card and wish them happy birthday in person, does the whole of Facebook have to see it you attention seeking whore. Pick up the phone for fuck sake.

Thought process and public announcing are the two most annoying things on Facebook. The worst thing for this is pregnancies. If you follow me on twitter you will have seen me commenting on the number of pregnancies on Facebook recently. Now, I don't have an issue with the pregnancy itself, but it's just the impression I get sometimes that the persons first thought has been to get the news on Facebook to get likes on it. What do likes even achieve by the way? Does it just help people feel better about their mundane lives?

Another thing I see on Facebook that really irks me is the arranged photo, and again it is down to the thought process. The 'designed for Facebook' vibe it gives off. To explain, the arranged photo is an evolution from the old status of someone explaining what their night would involve in an attempt to portray a certain lifestyle that person is leading. In order to give an example of this I've stolen a previous example someone used in an article: "Time for a bubble bath and a large glass of champers methinks." You get the idea, the kind of thing that does not need to be made public, yet is made public to present this image of a person. Anyway, this has been evolved, mainly due to the catalyst that was Instagram, to become the arranged photo. If the example above was to be taken, this would involve the person posting a photo of said bubble bath, with said bottle of champers being neatly placed in shot to look very appealing to the viewer. The kind of photo that is not a natural snapshot of a situation and again does not need to be shared with the public. Arranged photos, I fucking hate them.

These days, I hate Facebook. It's become tedious, and like I said it is just a competition, a my life is better than yours. People post things that follow a similar pattern, whether it's the posts I mentioned above or just the use of certain words or phrases that are Facebook popular at any particular time. Yes, I do still have Facebook, but the honest reason for that is just due to the fact my life's photos are stored on their and I can't be bothered to save them all. Someone once said that Facebook is like a girlfriend you've spent years with and are bored of, but you don't want to end the relationship because you've put so much into it. That is very true.

@adamheath

Harry Potter and The Goblet of Fire

Harry Potter and The Goblet of Fire, or as I like to call it, the one when Emma Watson got fit. I decided to do this blog because I've always really thought of The Goblet of Fire as my favourite Harry Potter film, but I Sky Plussed it yesterday and was watching it today, and I realised that it's actually shit.

To be honest, I've never been a big fan of the Harry Potter films just because I like the books so much. I've always had a problem with books I like being made into films, and nothing irritates me more than when things from the book are changed for the film. And like, in The Goblet of Fire, this happens right from the start. I'd let them have the opening scene as a job well done, but that's until I'm watching it and fucking Doctor Who turns up uninvited:

Barty Crouch Jr wasn't even in that scene in the book, but there he is making an appearance from the start of the film. I know for a film they have to work it differently sometimes because there's less time to tell the story, but this pisses me off straight away because it alters the whole narrative of the story, because in the book we find out about the history of Barty Crouch as it progresses, which leads to the big reveal at the end that his son is still alive. The thing is, with the Harry Potter films, because they don't have that much time to tell the story, it often feels like they're just listing the events from the book. Which is shit. If you've read the book it's okay but not as enthralling, and if you haven't I could completely understand someone turning round and saying Harry Potter is shit. Anyway, on with the story... we're up early and we're walking somewhere, no explanation as to where, but here's Amos Diggory, who we're supposed to be meeting but we're supposed to just know that cos we've read the book:

It's a bit weird that he's out in the woods on his own isn't it oh wait... 

He's with Edward Cullen who's sat in a fucking tree. They've never explained that. There he is falling back to earth. What a dickhead. The way they make Cedric in film I was actually quite glad he died at the end. I should really point out the spoiler there but to be honest if you're reading this and haven't seen the film it's a bit pointless anyway.

The way they introduce new characters in this film is the same every time as well, it's always just by someone saying that's them. "There's Amos Diggory", "This strapping young man must be Cedric." Why did Arthur Weasley say that by the way? That's the weirdest thing he says in any of the films, why don't you just neck him Arthur. He loves Cedric more than he loves plugs. 

Apparently, my Emma was impressed by Cedric hiding up a tree then falling out of it to surprise them. Can we just revisit it again sorry, why was he up that tree? I really don't get it. Anyway here's Hermione and Ginny looking all impressed by it:

Interesting side note, whilst this was the first film Hermione was fit, it's also the last one that Ginny and Neville were ugly. The change that came over Neville is quite disturbing, he did puberty right that kid. 

For some reason now, they give us a proper unnecessary shot of the portkey looking all majestical

And how do I know it's a portkey I hear you ask, well because Harry, in a lucky coincidence, asks the question that's on the viewers' mind, "why are they all crowding round that manky old boot?" And not one of the Weasley twins, but both of them, answer his question. They always have lines together The Weasley twins, it must have been great for the actors they'd never forget their lines because the other one would just remind them. And also, the lines are hard to forget because the dialogue is pretty dreadful at times. Like that manky old boot line, who talks like that? 

Why does Arthur Weasley tell them to let go of the portkey? Surely it's designed to take them to a certain place and if they let go they won't get there? They might die Arthur, Molly will be fuming. He's just a fucking prankster isn't he.

Because after they let go it just turns into a fucking nightmare for them, they all proper hit the ground at full pace whilst Arthur, who didn't even let go when he told them too, floats down like a fucking feather and has a perfect landing. Next time Arthur Weasley tells you to do something Harry I'd just do the opposite mate. Here's Robert Pattinson being Twilight (being a cunt) 

Floating to earth like a fucking fairy. Arthur Weasley just made Cedric look good at the expense of his own kids. Reckon Malfoy's dad has a point about him you know. It's moments like this were I was just like "Cedric just die already will you", like in the book I don't even remember being that arsed about Cedric but in this film they made him a bellend. It doesn't help that they used Edward Cullen for the role like but still.

Smell my fingers... Kristen Stewart

Harry's far too happy getting helped up by Cedric, and Cedric hasn't even said a fucking word yet. All he's done is sit in a tree for no reason, fall out of said tree, then show he's an expert in portkey travel. And whilst Harry's being helped up you just hear someone go "total shambles as per usual" just dead randomly, cos nothing's happened to suggest it was a shambles. It's just a line from the book that's been thrown in without the necessary precursor to explain it.

Welcome to the Quidditch World Cup. That one line explains all the shit that's just gone before it. Books in film don't work! Actually, Fried Green Tomatoes worked, I'm like emotionally involved with both the film and the book of that. I weep over them.

Anyway, there's the Quidditch World Cup looking like Glasto on magic (two meanings there) 

That's like another moment were, if you hadn't read the book, seeing a load of tents introduced as a World Cup you'd just be like what are you on about mate. Look there's a man juggling to emphasise how fun and different it all is

That's Arthur Weasley who's now randomly wearing a giant top hat by the way. Oh this Quidditch World Cup is so much fun. I hope that hat's FIFA approved.

Emma's impressed...

My list of ways to impress Emma Watson is steadily growing. Number 1: Hide in trees and fall out of them. Number 2: Juggle.

When I've mastered juggling whilst sat in a tree I will propose to her.

"See you later Cedric!" Can I stop you there. Are you fucking messing Fred or George? You hate Cedric. Cedric doesn't even reply to them as well, he hasn't spoke at all in this film. I wish he didn't talk in Twilight the sparkly twat. Kristen Stewart says like one word then bites her lip for like 10 minutes, what's all that about? I watched the Twilight films then read the books just so I could be in a position to fairly criticise them, and I can honestly say they're fucking dreadful. Like if something's intended for girls and I don't like it for that reason, I can accept it and still appreciate it's quality as a piece of work. Unfortunately, Twilight is not this.

Hurry up and die Cedric.

Shocked Harry is used for the anticlimactic reveal of wizard tents. The wizard tents are only explained in this book because 3 books later Harry, Ron and Hermione practically live in one for a year. Clever JK. Wizard gypsies.

Remember he lived with muggles for 11 years until one day a giant man broke down his door in the middle of the night and told him wizards were real and he was one. Seems legit. It actually does work in the book that bit, but again it doesn't transfer to the film. If you'd never read the book and were watching the first film you'd just be like nah bail it.

It was at this point I realised there's no way the whole films getting covered in this blog. But anyway, back to the action...

Harry loves magic

I have nothing to say on this, I just thought that screenshot was great and had to include it.

The Quidditch world cup final is being held in a big hole in the ground apparently 

And there are wizards there from all over the world, as can be seen by the inclusion of these stereotypical African looking people 

Or that might just be Kinglsey Shacklebolt, it's hard to tell the difference. Excuse the casual racism there (oh no he didn't). A big deal wasn't made about Kingsley Shacklebolt being a black Minister For Magic, because wizards are dead cool and liberal and that.

"Put it this way, if it rains, you'll be the first to know."

Lucius Malfoy's character is entirely based on class divides. He wasn't really arsed about Voldemort and evil stuff. I think he would have preferred the Tory party to be in power over Voldemort. He definitely doesn't read the Daily Prophet, he's got Daily Mail written all over him.

"Do enjoy yourself, while you can"

They proper set up the whodunnit's in this film, like JK Rowling's story wasn't good enough or something. Was it the mysterious man who might be Doctor Who that we seen at the start? Is it Lucius Malfoy? What are we even supposed to be suspicious about?

Apparently Irish wizards are very good at creating CGI leprechauns that belong back in 1998 on Windows Movie Maker 

A big thank you to Fred and George here (yes they share this line as well) for letting us know that "there's Troy, Mullet, and Moran". We really need to know the names of the Irish players, when we don't even get to see the match and we never hear about them ever again. It really bugs me that we don't get to see the quidditch world cup final, it's like the biggest quidditch match that happens in Harry Potter and we don't see it, and also it's important for the character of Victor Krum. We need to see that he catches the snitch and ends the game even though he can't win, cos like, that builds his character and that.

After the game, Ron practically whips his cock out and knocks one out over Victor Krum. Meanwhile, Fred and George act like dickheads

Stop destroying the characters Mr Movie Maker. At least Harry seems happy though.

Not for long though. You know how Harry is like one of the most famous wizards in the world, and everyone loves him cos he destroyed the most evil wizard in history? Well someone decided it was okay to web him in the face and leave him for the death eaters. Fucking great that isn't it

I reckon if that was Victor Krum Ron would have stuck a finger in.

When Harry wakes up Doctor Who is back

You know I've never watched Doctor Who, so if that fella wasn't him that reference is terrible. But anyway, more interestingly than that, Trigger's there as well 

He's proper fuming about the dark mark. He's dead scared by it. Unfortunately I don't share his fear, because like the Irish Leprechaun the dark mark they use in this film was fucking made on Windows Movie Maker

Terrible! Anyway, thus far the film has not created the story like the book did at all, and now the feeling of them just listing the events that happen in the book continues as they're already on the Hogwarts Express back to school. 

Harry gets a boner over Cho Chang, who's buying two pumpkin pasties the fat bitch. She's Scottish and she's Chinese. Just because.

In the first film Harry buys everything off the trolley, like he has no consideration for anyone else on the train. What an absolute tit. I'm starting this new school were I'm famous and I just want to keep my head down, I shall start by buying all the food on this train so no one else can eat anything for the rest of this 5 hour trip. Malfoy had a fucking point about Harry as well.

Before they've even explained that the Triwizard tournament is taking place, there's just a fucking huge flying horse and carriage coming to Hogwarts. Again, if you hadn't read the book you'd just be like what the fuck is this shit 

Then a boat comes out of the lake

Is that Johnny Depp?

Everyone at Hogwarts is proper impressed by what they've witnessed. There's so many scenes in this film that show people being impressed by magic. You wouldn't think they lived in a fucking wizard world

After all this has happened, Dumbledore then explains about the Triwizard Tournament. Like in this film version of Harry Potter, the people arriving at the school in a flying horse and carriage and a magical submarine boat were a proper surprise, yet no one even questioned what was going on. They just got all impressed by it. Weird. Anyway, this is where the film really gets stupid, when the foreigners make their entrances into the great hall. The French birds just do like this proper weird thing were they skip for a bit then stop, turn their heads to the side, and sigh. Why did they do this? It was so unnecessary. 

Just stop it, now. Imagine when you were at school if you visited another school and you had to make your entrance through interpretive dance. Also, they decided to just bring one gymnast with them who's dressed like a medieval jester. Seriously, this is where the film proper lost it for me.

"You can do gymnastics. You have to dress like a twat"

Now Durmstrang arrive. They have fire sticks and they can run really fast. They also have a few gymnasts, I think that's one of the rules of making your entrance. Must be some gymnastics displayed. This ones not a bad break dancer as well

Victor Krum enters after his mates, he doesn't look happy though. I reckon they should of had him enter the great hall to Stone Cold's entrance music. 

Again, they proper struggle on ways to introduce new characters. They've already overused the someone saying that persons name technique, so they go with something new to introduce Mad Eye Moody. For some reason, the ceiling just decides to go west, and Moody fixes it. I swear I fucking hate this film you know, why throw something out there like that without explaining it, like it happens in all the films or something. People question things. Well I do anyway.

It was at this point in the film were I gave up watching it, and then did this blog. To be honest I wasn't intending it to be this long but it's gone on for fucking ever and if it started off a bit humorous (probably giving it more credit than it deserves) it's just boring now. So I'm going to leave it here for now, might do a part two if I can be arsed watching the rest of the film and if anyone actually reads this. Enjoy

@adamheath