Did you see the 3rd series finale of Dr Who, ‘Last of the Time Lords’? I’m not sure what to make of it. This series has been my favourite so far, with a marvellous new addition to the regular cast along with some imaginative and diverse plotlines, and I still think that Russell T. Davis’s writing is among the most reliable and trustworthy on television at the moment but I can’t help feeling that something’s gone awry. I was let down by the conclusion and, I hate to admit this, I’m not excited about the Christmas special.

Beware! There will be spoilers.

Before I sound as though I hated the whole thing I’ll start with the usual good things. There were top-notch performances, excellent CGI, nice little tie-ins with past episodes and with Torchwood and some terrific music.

However, there were three things that left me feeling cheated of the finish, I feel, the rest of the series had promised. Firstly, Martha leaving?! Yes, it’s left open for her to call the Doctor, and if Richard of Richard and Judy is right she will be back for the next series but it doesn’t make for a satisfying ending. Martha’s a strong and fiesty character, with intellect and drive so the ‘will she/won’t she’ thing isn’t working for me. Martha’s decisive: either she’s with the Doctor or she isn’t.

Messing around like that is just manipulating the audience. While I know the job of a writer is to create a tension by manipulating the audience, but isn’t the trick to ensure they don’t notice that? If they feel manipulated you run the risk of alienating or insulting the very people you’re trying to entertain. That’s certainly how I felt watching it.

The second problem I had was with the end of The Master. Refusing to regenerate! What a let down and a cop out.

Great scene for Tennant though. But isn’t killing off the Doctor’s best villain a bit like shooting yourself in the foot? I do so hope that Davis has a wonderful plan for his resurrection. Something that isn’t obvious, such as using the object lifted out of The Master’s ashes. That felt a little rushed to me. As though someone thought they’d made a mistake and had to rectify it quickly. Although the death could be a great opportunity to cast another actor of the calibre of Derek Jacobi – more villainous in his few minutes than Simm in two full-length episodes.

The last cheat was the revelation about the Face of Boe. Two characters being one! No. No. No. The phrase that springs to mind isn’t one I want to appear in type. As a long-time fan of the show I’m just plain unhappy about that. Apart from my love of the general gorgeousness that is Captain Jack and indignation about what this then makes him, it just doesn’t make sense.

In series 2 the face of Boe told the Doctor he had something to impart the third time they met; how would Boe know which time that would be when technically they’ve travelled together many times before? I just can’t figure it out because every time I try to work out the timelines it still works out that Boe knows they’ve met many more times than that so how does he know the Doctor doesn’t know that? I’m confused. Russell T. Davis, I’m on my knees, please explain it soon.

I applaud the concept of ‘The Pen is Mightier’ behind the revival of the Doctor but telepathy reversing time and leading to levitation asked me to suspend my disbelief a step too far, even for Sci-Fi. The effect it’s had is that I don’t care that the Titanic has crashed into the Tardis now. Last week I would have.

What did you think about it all? Did anyone actually find it satisfying?

Not that I’m going to go into a rant about political voting. I’ve always been drawn to the eastern European entries anyway. Estonia caught my attention a few years before they won, 1994 or 1996, and I’ve been searching for their entry ever since. It was in the days before it became cool to watch so no CD was released.

I’m still kicking myself for not putting a bet on Estonia the year they won. I’d contemplated placing it online before the show that year – they were 110-1. I used to predict the winner a lot back then, shame I’ve lost that skill.

Now for my thoughts on this year:

Marvellous staging. Spectacular and actually quite artistic. The presenters have been too intrusive either, which is nice.

The UK’s Scootch is Eurovision friendly with quite an appropriate ‘flying the flag’ theme and it’s rather fun. Although I don’t hold out much hope for getting into double figures with the votes. Mind you, it got quite a good cheer from the audience.

So far I’m backing Sweden. It was funky, psychedelic and foot-tappingly retro fun. But I’ve also enjoyed the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, annd Hungary but wouldn’t mind the simple artistry of Lithuania’s performance to win.

I didn’t mind the Bosnia and Herzegovina and Moldova entries either. Big, belt songs.

The Ukrainian entry was insane!

Romania’s effort smacked of desperation to me. All those languages.

I did rate all the entries out of ten, being the Eurovision nerd that I am, but I won’t bore you with it. I miss being able to see Denmark, The Netherlands, Norway and Cyprus though. Norway always came up with something interesting.

So what’s my top pick? I think Sweden was the best entry but that Ukraine will win.

Who do want to win?

It’s not the Sponsored posts themselves with which I have difficulty. I’ve yet to meet a 4 year old who can’t recognise an advertisement when they see one and we, as readers, are all more than capable of making the choice to read one of those posts or to skip it. So, in my mind, to say it corrupts the blog content itself is naive. On most blogs the other posts are normal and we’re all media savvy enough to take sponspored posts with a pinch of salt and maybe even learn about something new, the blog we’re reading or ourselves. So I see the posts can be quite useful, which is why I’m contemplating them.

No, for me, the problem with PPP comes from elsewhere. The higher your blog ranks in various methods of measuring these things, such as Google, Alexa and Technorati, the more your blogs posts are worth and consequently, the more the blogger can earn. It makes sense for advertisers to reward those with larger readerships and greater internet exposure expontentially. But that brings with it unscrupulous exploitation.

There are a number of PPP bloggers who are increasing their Google and Alexa PageRanks by exchanging links with anyone who asks, not just sites they like. When I visit a site, there are certain things that will make me warm to it and its owner. Usually it’s a shared interest or outlook on the world, and it’s this perceived connection that makes me feel I can trust their judgement. I’ll take time to visit their admired or blogrolled links assuming that there will something of interest to me somewhere there as well.

Take Valiant Knife as an example. I discovered this webmistress years ago and felt like I had found a kindred spirit in her passion for literature and history. So after exploring her site, I visited the sites on her links page and, sure enough, I found several other sites I visit at least once a month, even years later. Some bloggers, such as Jenn clearly label the links they exchange for PPP purposes, but I’ve visited many that don’t. I’ve followed links and found myself looking at sites that are about things the first person has clearly stated they abhor. True, they could still be friends but the cynic in me says it’s to do with rankings. And that contradiction confuses this poor old brain of mine.

Even more worryingly, in my mind, is the manner in which some of the bloggers themselves are manipulating other sites, and consequently deceiving all of its visitors. I find it to be morally dubious and a subversion of everything I love about the internet. Strong words, I know, but let me explain.

Sites such as Technorati are built on word-of-mouth and this word of mouth has to be honest. I’ve seen a number of people add numerous sites to their technorati profiles because someone else has asked them to. This ‘you scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours’ attitude is subverting the organic nature and accuracy of other recommendations. When I visit technorati, I expect a favourited blog to be someone’s favourite not a favour for a stranger. Where’s the honesty? the transparency many of these people have declared in the individual ‘Disclosure’ policies?

There’s nothing wrong with doing a favour for a mate, but if they are your mate then you’ll have done these things already, so you won’t need to ask strangers. These sites should showcase the best of user-generated web content and it’s made me wary of them.

And it’s not PayPerPost’s fault: it’s the individual bloggers themselves who make those choices. So my question is: is it possible to become an active and successful member of the PayPerPost community without compromising my integrity? I guess there’s only one way to find out.

There is now a shiny square one in its place. It has the most unusual screen I’ve ever seen: it’s got a bizarre, almost circular, tint around the outside that colourises the edges of the picture, blues become purples and pinks; greens and oranges become yellow. Sounds hideous but it’s creating the most beautiful pictures I’ve seen outside an art gallery. Skylines, in particular, are now wonderfully artistic and somehow it’s really relaxing on the eyes. Impressionism on the ‘Box’. Literally.

During Persiflage’s little hiatus, Shakespeare’s Quill has managed to attain a Google PageRank of 2! Persiflage’s itself is 1. Not too bad for only a couple months online and with lots to come.

So what have I been watching? Not a lot of new things really, but I’ll leave the DVDs for another time and concentrate on new transmissions. Apart from the lack of a TV set, there seems to have been a drought in the schedules with few ‘must-see’ programmes around. Doctor Who being the one exception.

I’ve loved this programme since I was little; am especially fond of David Tennant’s Doctor, he has a likable and trustworthy quality that I think the Doctor needs. So I was looking forward to seeing his new sidekick. Freema Agyeman’s beauty struck me during the final storyline of Season 2; she and David looked good together so on the surface she seemed perfect. The only question was whether she’d step into Rose’s shoes. The answer was that she didn’t; she stepped into her own shoes and, for me at least, has created a a companion with greater presence and potential than I can recall seeing before.

Don’t get me wrong, I liked Rose. I was impressed with Billie Piper’s acting talents and screen presence and cried buckets during her final scenes with the Doctor, but the character always seemed to me to lack something that marked her out as her own person. We saw her stranded, helping the Doctor by working things out on her own but it never rang true with me. Yes, she had the intuition and empathy that the Doctor seemed, at times, to try to leave behind but she was a girl who was defined by the Doctor and was that enough? Martha is a multi-faceted woman. She has it all: intuition, empathy, beauty, independence, direction and intelligence. I can’t wait to see how she develops. I just hope the production doesn’t bottle out on a character with the potential to be such a powerful role in her own right.

On a sidenote, I had to mention it: the Shakespeare episode filled me with joy. You know why.

That is all.

Her songs were so rich, full of emotion, enriched by the huskiness and the missed notes stopped mattering; probably because of her lack of confidence. Tricia and Shaun were better singers but they just hit notes and missed feelings. They may well have been feeling them but, for me, it was like I watching them through glass. Which, of course, I was only Tara made me forget she was inside a tv set in my living room. Now that’s talent.

As you can see by my lack of posts, this series didn’t grip me. The last one was too good to eclipse and this years crop of students was at a far lower standard.

A few things struck me though:
* On the Tuesday of last series controversy hit when the four remaining student conspired to to tie the vote and thus not decide, throwing the semi-final place open to the public vote. On this Tuesday, the same thing happened, evicting the weakest student, Angellica, this time (previously it was Dawn, not Reggie).
* All the comedians went out early, there’s usually one in the final.

Results:
Roland Rivron: 13th.
Miranda Hart: 12th
Linda Robson: 11th
Tim Vine: 10th.
Zoe Salmon: 9th
Mel Giedroyc: 8th
Fred Macaulay: 7th
Angellica Bell 6th
Ray Stubbs 5th
Colin Murray 4th
Shaun Williamson 3rd
Tricia Penrose 2nd
Tara Palmer-Tomkinson 1st

But the real winner is Comic Relief!

I get that he’s being paid to be critical but there are ways of doing that without crossing the line into Pantomime baddie. If you’re going to play ‘baddie’ on one of these shows the emphasis is on ‘Pantomime’. You have to be able to take a bit of banter with someone who holds another opinion. He just doesn’t seem able to accept that someone else’s different opinion is equally valid. His behaviour has been inconstistant, petty and vindictive and it’s ruining the show. Why should I tune in to watch adults behaving like that? that’s what Christmas celebrations are for.

Last night did hightlight a possible flaw in the shows planning. If Richard choses a third contestant in the bottom three, what’s the point of having the other two judges for balance if they’re opinion is ignored? It should be thrown open to the public vote to decide. If not, maybe they should just all line up in front of Richard on night one, let him choose one and then they can all go home and have a cup of tea.

Now I’ve ended my Richard Rant, on to my revised thoughts of the gang at the end of the first week of shows.

Angellica Bell: This is how I rekcon my voice would sound. Not a good sound, although I did hear an improvement in the verse of the Pisce Girls number. I’m blown away by her performance, it’s like she’s a world class established artist like Madonna or Kylie. Now that’s a talent.
Colin Murray: Always good performances but I wish he could hit a few more notes.
Fred Macaulay: For me, he’s the worst of the bunch, has he actually hit a note yet? If he has, please let me know ‘cos I’ve missed it.
Linda Robson: Ahh, I liked Linda. Had a nice energy in the team. Looked amazing after Tara’s facial.
Mel Giedroyc: Has good bits to her voice during the day, it just seems to vanish at night. Fun though. LIke her turn of phrase, not strictly relevant to a singing comp but nice to hear on live streaming.
Miranda Hart: So sweet, so not a singer. Would liked to have got to know her through streaming but was not to be.
Ray Stubbs: Another one I’m not to fond of. It’s the huge amount of praise for such a lack of notes that get me irritated and makes me want him booted out.
Roland Rivron: Nothing more to say about him, except I still don’t get why he did such an obviously female song.
Shaun Williamson: I no longer care that Shaun was a pro. I like him, Patrick was so cruel those first nights leaving him until near the end before announcing he’d got through. He has a gorgeous voice, and ‘My Heart Will Go On’ was so emotional. Richard criticised him for sining a woman’s song, but it isn’t: it has nothing to with being a woman therefore how can it be a woman’s song? It was just originally sung by a woman, there’s a difference.
Tara Palmer-Tomkinson: I’m really liking Tara. I agree with Lesley’s judgement on her emotional honesty: it’s appealing. She’s brought a tear to my two nights in a row. I’d like her to get through to near the end.
Tim Vine: What the hell was going on? He’d been consistant, obviously had a voice in there somewhere and good performance skills. He’d become one of my favourites.
Tricia Penrose: Nice voice, all my previous doubts about her being pro have gone – she should definitely be there for a long time. Shame I find her little dull, the flaw is what makes a voice attractive to me and I know she can make the notes so the risk-factor is gone.
Zoe Salmon: I was wrong. She can’t sing but, boy, can she talk. Every time I’ve seen her during live streaming she’s giving a running commentary to anyone who’ll listen. Spot the Blue Peter presenter, wans’t Konnie like that last time? I don’t think she can go much further vocally but I think her looks are going to take her a fair way.

I emphasise the ‘men’ because it’s a phenomenon that doesn’t seem to affect women. Contrast Darren Gough in ‘Strictly’ with Dame Kelly Holmes in ‘Dancing on Ice’ series 1: both workman like, not really talented, at what they were doing; both criticised by the judges; but the man beats the more talented contestants to win and the woman is booted out. And it’s happening again. Ray Stubbs is flying through Fame Academy, despite giving consistantly poor performances, arguably worse than Roland and definitely not as good as Linda who had one good and OK performance more. Admiring a sports star is marvellous, I’m not saying that’s bad at all, but admire him for his skill in his sport and judge him for his ability in a new area on a level playing field with the rest. Anything else just isn’t Cricket.

So come on voters, stop showing how much you admire someone in another arena and give the genuine talent a chance.

I admire anyone who can get up in front of the nation to do something like this and have always had a secret yen for the opportunity (or should I say vague ability) to be one of them. So I have a feeling all my impressions of the series will be coloured by envy

With that in mind, my initial impressions on this years crop of students:

Angellica Bell: Glad she got through. I was surprised by how scared she seemed since she’s used to live TV, and how it affected her. Want to see how she grows.
Colin Murray: Good to see him in there after Edith Bowman last year. Fun performance, I liked him and his energy.
Fred Macaulay: Was it meant to be funny? Hmmm, maybe I wasn’t paying attention.
Linda Robson: Marvellously entertaining, hope she can keep it up. I’ve heard her sing before and was expecting it to be bad but it wasn’t. Yay for Linda.
Mel Giedroyc: I was so surprised, my favourite performance of the night. Fun, committed performance.
Miranda Hart: Found her faintly embarrassing, mainly because I know that’s who/where I’d be.
Ray Stubbs: Who? Did he just sing? Didn’t notice him, why do I always miss the sportsmen in these shows?.
Roland Rivron: I was disappointed, ex-professional musician (drummer) seemed to be lacking a little rhthym and I didn’t find him as funny as usually I do. Shame he’s gone though.
Shaun Williamson: Good voice but No! No! No! He’s a professional singer, with his own band that gigs all over the country. The show is about non-singers learning. He shouldn’t be in there. But felt sorry for him being left ’til the end befoe being saved by Patrick.
Tara Palmer-Tomkinson: What is she on? Still, mildly amusing with great eye make-up.
Tim Vine: One of the trickiest songs around, done well under pressure from an amateur. Want to see him improve.
Tricia Penrose: Excellent voice, but again she’s a pro. I’m sure she released a single or two a few years back. Enjoyed her nonetheless.
Zoe Salmon: So much better than her Blue Peter counterpart last year, Konnie Huq. I thought she showed real vocal promise, I’m looking forward to hearing her after some rigorous training.

I seem to discover the rock chick in me when I watch this show. Last year I supported Adrian Edmondson (go Punk Swing) and I am already veering towards Colin and Mel.