Skip to main content

Day: 17 November 2015

Interview: Hotel Chocolat co-founder Angus Thirlwell

Written by Elena Gibbs on . Posted in News.

Beautifully marketed, from the seductive choice of wording to the exquisite presentation of each product, who could resist the cocoa-ey charms of the capsule shop so conveniently located in Manchester’s Arndale? Whether you lose yourself in the arms of the unremitting staff, or browse at your own leisure on the online store, co-founder Angus Thirlwell is here to answer any questions not already made explicit by the brand.

 

The name adds to that luxurious feel of the brand, where it’s a treat rather than a norm. But where specifically did it come from?

It was aspirational. It expresses the power that chocolate has to lift you out of your current mood and take you to a better place. “Chocolat” is almost onomatopoeic, and suggests how the chocolate melts in your mouth.

What inspired the brand, and where did it all begin?

I grew up in the West Indies. We sailed over there in the late 1960s after my father sold his interest in Mr Whippy and took on the challenge of turning around the Barbados Ice Cream Company. I was immersed in an entrepreneurial culture, and surrounded by cocoa trees from a young age!

We all know that Hotel Chocolat is a cut above your average bar. But what is it that makes it so special?

Right from the start, we’ve never played by the rules of what people said a chocolate company should be.  We’re one of the world’s few chocolate makers to actually grow cocoa, on our beautiful plantation in Saint Lucia. Connecting cocoa growing with luxury chocolate making and retailing makes us unique in the UK. Cocoa is at the heart of everything we do.

An obvious one—but are you a chocolate fan yourself?

Cocoa punctuates my day. I start by drinking a cocoa-infused tea to hydrate, and follow that with eggs dusted with ground nibs or chocolate muesli. Then, around lunchtime, an energising barista-made cocoa, and to ease off in the evening, a rum sour whilst enjoying our latest Tasting Box.

Have you found it at all difficult to cope in a time where the nation has become rather obsessed with ‘clean eating’, due to the bad rep chocolate often gets in health?

Our mantra has always been “more cocoa, less sugar”, for a healthier and more satisfying cocoa hit. It’s only when you start pumping sugar and fats into chocolate that it becomes unhealthy. Our house grade milk chocolate is 50 per cent cocoa, and even our white chocolate is 36 per cent cocoa, well above the average. Our 100 per cent cocoa bars have found a hardcore fan base in endurance athletes.

We understand you have incorporated savoury into your products such as the cocoa pasta shells, pesto and finishing oil. Talk us through the range and the process of the new accompanying cookbook.

The roots of this amazing ingredient are deeply intertwined with human history, going back more than 3,000 years. What people often don’t realise today is that people only started getting sweet on cacao 500 years ago. For at least 2,500 years before we added sugar, people mostly enjoyed cacao as a savoury spice. Our cookbook and accompanying cuisine products draw on this rich history, taking inspiration from the dishes and cocktails we serve at our three restaurants (in London, Leeds, and Saint Lucia).

Your christmas products range from the gingerbread spread to the exclusive sculptured advent calendars. What would you recommend for students looking to purchase from the brand?

You can’t go wrong with a ‘Christmas Jumper’ mini slab. Crafted from smooth 40 per cent milk chocolate, at £5, it’s the perfect stocking filler.

In a zombie apocalypse with the chance to save ONE Hotel Chocolat product, which would you choose?

A bar of our 70 per cent Dark Saint Lucia Rabot Estate. It was a real labour of love, restoring a striking 250-year-old estate house and cocoa plantation in Saint Lucia in 2006. At the time, cocoa farming was at an all-time low there and all the local beans that made it to market were lost in mixed bulk sales and anonymous chocolate blends.  I still remember the feeling of pure elation when we became the first chocolatier to produce single-origin Saint Lucian chocolate.

Saint Lucian beans  produce chocolate with a dazzling array of tasting notes, ranging from classically rich cocoa to black tea and ripe yellow fruit, grassy olive oil and dry red Burgundy.

I’m fairly confident zombies would enjoy it too.

Have you considered branding a Golden-Ticket style factory tour? And if so, may I please have a ticket?

Watch this space… We’ve got some exciting things on the horizon.

 

There are options in a range of prices to suit your Christmas budget needs without compromising on quality. Last year I bought a packet of ‘tiddly reindeer’ for a close friend. Or, if you’re feeling lonesome this season, go for a billionaire’s shortbread giant 500g slab all to yourself.

Hotel Chocolat is more than just the products it sells, from ‘bean to bar experiences’ to a ‘chocolate tasting adventure’. Look online to see the range of products, gifts and experiences available—get 10 per cent off until the 22nd of November with online code HC15NOV6PB1FF5F.

Angus Thirlwell will be speaking at an event hosted by the MEC on Thursday the 19th of November, speaking to Manchester students about where his idea came from and how he built his business. This event coincides with Global Entrepreneurship Week. Students can get tickets to the event here.

Ronaldo: Film Review

Written by Davide Cappelli on . Posted in Film, Sport.

Arrogance or winning mentality? This is the question that accompanies the viewing of Cristiano Ronaldo’s new autobiographical film, Ronaldo. With behind-the-scenes-access, the film gives a unique snapshot of the Portuguese superstar’s life.

Ronaldo, a.k.a. CR7, describes his time being spent alone, but he is constantly driven by the desire to be the best—or as he puts it; “to prove I am better than the others.” The term “others” could easily be substituted with the name of an Argentinian superstar, playing in Barcelona. Although Ronaldo stresses that Messi is not a rival, but a person who makes him better, the rivalry between the overall winners of the last seven Ballon d’Ors is a key theme during the 102 minutes of the film.

The rivalry between the two often looks like an obsession, which is often the way with his entourage also. Super-agent and godfather to Ronaldo, Jorge Mendes (also agent to Di María, James, Diego Costa and Mourinho), doesn’t miss a chance to glorify his name. He claims Ronaldo is not only better than Messi but is the “best sportsman in the world.”

There is no doubt that he is one of the best in the world, but probably not the best. Instead, he’s surely the best in terms of the biggest ego in the world of sport.  What emerges from the film is a picture of a man obsessed with his own individuality. Football is a team game, but in Ronaldo’s view, the individual becomes more important than the team. This is the reason why the only thing that matters to him is the victory of the individual prize that is the Ballon d’Or. That is also why the documentary gives little or no relevance to the victory of “La Decima” by Real Madrid, or to the clubs and the players of Cristiano’s career. For example, according to a report by The Financial Times, CR7 is shown playing for Manchester United for only 19 seconds during the whole film—but he is seen with a tuxedo for more than seven minutes.

Considering himself the best, Ronaldo reveals to get often frustrated by the lack of quality of his team-mates, in particular when it comes to the national side, where not even patriotism is bigger than his ego. Indeed, Portugal’s premature elimination from the 2014 World Cup caused Cristiano the biggest disappointment of his career, not because of the inability to give his country the first international trophy of its history, but due to the fact that Lionel Messi (who is on screen for 2:39 minutes) could reach the final and win the tournament’s Best Player award.

However, the film also tries to add a touch of humanity and fragility to Ronaldo’s portrait, retracing his childhood in the Madeira Island where he had to struggle with poverty and his unsuccessful relationship with his drunkard father.

There are two central figures in his off-field life. One is Cristiano Ronaldo Jr., who he considers to be his “successor.” Despite this, Cristiano Jr. is a big fan of Lionel Messi, and one of the best scenes of the film is when he meets the Barcelona number 10. His other central figure is Maria Dolores, his mother and biggest fan. This is particularly curious because not everybody knew that Cristiano was an unwanted baby, and that she had planned to have an abortion. But at the same time, she was the person who convinced him to leave Madeira for Lisbon at the age of 12, to join Sporting Lisbon and therefore launch an incredibly successful career.

Along with the quality of the screenshots and the different perspectives of the scenes, on and off the pitch, what makes Ronaldo recommended viewing for any sport fan is indeed the quantity of anecdotes that are told throughout the film. One of them is about CR7’s move from Sporting Lisbon to Manchester United. His agent Jorge Mendes reveals that Juventus, Valencia, Inter Milan and Barcelona were all after the 18-year-old sensation, but wanted to send him back on loan to Sporting for a season. Alex Ferguson was the only one who promised that Ronaldo would play in at least 50 percent of the games in his first season, and therefore he managed to sign one of the greatest players of this era.

It’s indisputable that Cristiano Ronaldo has written an important chapter in the history of the game, breaking individual records and winning everything that a club player could win. Furthermore, he has achieved all of that, not only thanks to his talent, but also due to his constant winning mentality. This takes us back to the initial question of this article; arrogance or winning mentality? The line is blurred in Ronaldo’s life.

(On a side note, I would recommend taking a full immersion Portuguese course before watching the film, as you can count on your hand the number of scenes in which they actually speak English.)

It starts with tampons, but where will it end?

Written by Deborah Asamoah on . Posted in Opinion.

When you think of ‘luxury’ you picture something lavish, with a great deal of expense. Something that is perhaps enjoyed as a treat from time to time, or as a ‘one-off’.

Tampons?

I don’t necessarily think that myself, along with 32.2 million other women in the UK, squeal with sheer and utter excitement at the thought of purchasing our monthly menstrual necessities. However, our nation’s MPs seem to think so, recently voting against an amendment to remove VAT tax on these products. That is to say that the five per cent VAT rate that is added onto what is considered as ‘non-essential items’, would have been discarded.

What infuriates me as well as many others in the UK, both men and women, is that in this day and age, in the face of other cuts, something as necessary as ‘sanitary plugs’ are deemed as ‘non-essential’. What adds insult to injury was that in light of all the things we do pay VAT on, such as ‘luxurious’ tampons, the items we don’t have to pay VAT on are even more unnecessary and futile than our sanitary requirements will ever be.

These goods include edible cake decorations, a ticket to the zoo, and my favourite: Yes, you’ve guessed it, crocodile meat. I’m sure women in Britain are really agonising over the choice of buying crocodile meat over tampons on their weekly trip to the supermarket.

This has caused me to call into question the decision-making bodies that decide how our money is spent in Britain. Still in the 21st century, after years of advancement in equal rights of women, there still seems to be a lack of regard for women and their physical health.

What’s more, with the House of Commons being heavily dominated by men—a recent report shows that after the General Election 2015 the ratio of male MPs to female MPs was 459 men to 191 women—perhaps the unfairness of tax amendments is reflective of the disproportionate number of men to women in parliament.

Furthermore, it also sheds light on the self-serving attitudes that some of these men in parliament have, who value tax reform over the basic needs of women. It should not be overlooked, as their actions speak volumes about how we as women are viewed in today’s society.

This subject in particular brought my attention to the idea of ‘gender visibility’. In translation theory, it refers to the power imbalance in language, where feminine attributes have derivative status to masculine attributes. For example in French, a group containing at least one male or one masculine noun is considered masculine, and takes the pronoun ‘ils’. That is to say that even a group which is predominantly female with just one male loses its gender visibility, and thus its entire feminine status is disregarded.

Similarly, this concept can be applied to the final say on our essentials that continue to incur VAT; it takes just one male to make an authoritative decision on how our spending is dictated, so how much more with 459? It is quite evident to me that there is an element of disequilibrium concerning the amount of power women in parliament have on these matters. While we live in a world of male-dominated politics, the role of women in the House of Commons has the right to be more prominent. Moreover, our concerns and needs should not fall on deaf ears, especially not in the day and age in which our country prides itself on being liberal and democratic.

It is, then, important to note that if a predominately male government can begin to make such harsh and unfair decisions regarding our necessary sanitary requirements, who knows what the future holds for other necessities that may be overlooked? Perhaps we will witness a future of higher spending on nuclear weapons at the expense of cuts to our essential welfare care system? It starts with tampons—but where will it end?

Paul Foot: A man of many words that provide little discernible information

Written by Joe C. Evans on . Posted in Features.

Let me begin this by saying that, over the course of this interview, Paul Foot beat me. I’m not sure what he beat me at, but he definitely did. Trying to interview the comic is not unlike trying to catch jelly on a tennis racket: You can try, you can even retry, but essentially it will slip, slide and evade you.

Being called a bitch in an interview is rarely a sign that it is going well. When Paul Foot says it to me though, it could be an indicator of just about anything. The comic, who has been labelled everything from, “a comedy genius” to “a rare exotic bird,” is not somebody easily labelled or read. With this in mind, I feel it only fitting to open up my questions with a gentle opener. Could you introduce yourself in your own words?

“I am Paul Foot, one of the world’s comedians. I was born in Buckinghamshire over 40 years ago. At first I couldn’t speak or walk, but luckily my parents carried me home from the hospital.

“I performed in pubs for 15 years before deciding to become an overnight success. I now work fulltime in showbizness, coping with attention on train station platforms and eating boxes of sushi that sometimes cost more than £4.99.”

It’s an opening salvo that might leave you fumbling for words if you weren’t aware of Foot’s comedic styling. He is a genre unto himself; he describes his style as a collection of “niche genres; Disturbances, Glimpses and Mime Plus [which he describes as mime with added speech] Madness 2.0 and Madness 3.0—my latest genre which is inexplicably funny.”

The more disorientating the conversation becomes, the more seemingly in tune to what is happening he becomes. Defining his appearance is as difficult as pinning down his answers. Foot occupies an aesthetic somewhere between Brian Eno circa 1970 and Richard O’Brien.

Thinking I have found a residue of sanity from which to draw a question I ask him about his style icons: “I invent my own fashion seasons. Last year it was Space Casual—kind of like an off-duty astronaut’s househusband. This winter I’m moving into Vietnam Honeymoon, the Far East meets sexual doom.” Confused, and slightly shaken by that image, I move on.

Photo: IWMPUK

Despite making a number of television appearances, Foot is most known for his stand-up. Asked what first drew him to live performance his tone shifts, seemingly becoming less abstract: “Making a room full of people laugh is addictive, it’s a sport really, and also I get to see some really interesting backstage dressing rooms in provincial theatres.”

Speaking to anybody else about an interest in dressing rooms might have thrown me off, but speaking about his craft seems to appeal to Foot. Continuing this line he tells me about his method for writing his sets: “I like to go on writing holidays. On this tour there’s a show I wrote in a lighthouse.”

For all his apparent mania, Foot is happy to speak about the craft behind his work. As a former Oxford University graduate his wit and wordplay are, perhaps, to be expected. However what he illuminates in his answers is a level of consideration that perhaps isn’t so obvious to those who have caught his television appearances.

I’m interested to ask whether he likes television work, or whether he feels it can be stifling for more avant-garde performers: “I’ve turned work down because a show is too rigid or too macho or too icky.”

“I am always myself on telly but I might perform slightly older material. Nana Foot watches telly, so I probably wouldn’t tell my joke about a disastrous wedding in which the groom is wearing a kilt.”

His appearance on Never Mind the Buzzcocks, in which he innocently enquired as to whether “Coldplay was the one with James Blunt,” is perhaps his best-known television appearance.

When questioned about this apparent aversion to pop culture Foot seems totally unconcerned by it all: “With Never Mind The Buzzcocks, it’s just pop music—I’ve almost no interest in it. A friend couldn’t believe I didn’t know who Rihanna was the other day. But why should I know who she is?”

As ever though he is quick to make an addition to the answer, and, as per, it is unexpected. “I know some celebrities, obviously, as I work with them. Davina McCall for example. She’s a right babe!”

Photo: IWMPUK

Speaking to Foot, in all his ludicrous brilliance, there is a niggling sense that the performance for him must be cathartic—an opportunity to exorcise his strangest thoughts. However, when presented with this suggestion, he seems unimpressed: “I’m not sure it’s cathartic; it takes a huge amount of energy to put on a good show.

“I find hawk sanctuaries cathartic. Actually that’s a lie, the last one I went to really stressed me out.”

Undeterred, and still determined to latch onto some solid ground, I ask him whether he thinks that his success owes anything to him being such a niche performer. “I’m not sure, but it certainly helps in brothels. I have huge admiration for professional sex workers. I’m hopeless at sex, that’s why I stick within my remit as an enthusiastic amateur.”

It is at this point that I felt I was beaten. I’m very much enjoying myself, but the combination of Foot’s articulacy and surrealism was making it impossible to find any logic in the conversation.

Realising this, I decide to embrace it. I asked him why he chose to distinguish his followers as ‘Connoisseurs’, not fans.

“You can create fans with tricks like advertising and over-exposure, whereas people have to want to become a Connoisseur. It really sorts the wheat from the chaff!

“Connoisseur Elaine wore a different homemade Paul Foot t-shirt on each night at Bloomsbury Theatre.”

It’s with this strange image that I am left. This is outside even the top ten thousand most clarifying conversations of my life, but is safely inside the top ten most memorable.

Foot is a man of many words that provide little discernible information. All I have gathered from our conversation is that he likes sushi, space-casual fashion, and Davina McCall, and that he doesn’t particularly like pop music and icky television.

I ask him if he’s got anything to add, possibly a naïve mistake: “I am actually three ducks wearing a human costume. Don’t tell Michelle!” he says.

Who is Michelle?

 

We put some one-word statements to Paul. These are his musings.

On Jeremy Corbyn – “I discussed Jeremy Corbyn recently in my newsletter that I send to my Connoisseurs. Is it a coincidence that his initials are JC? Almost certainly. But, he has some things in common with Baby Jesus. They both have beards, which I hate. They’ve both made something out of wood in the past (probably). Neither is the son of God. I could go on.”

On death – “LOLZ. That’s what I want on my tombstone. Not really. I want Angela Lansbury with angels wings, not a statue though, real Angela, from 11am-6pm Monday to Thursday, just hanging out in the cemetery.”

On allergies – “I presume you ask this because of my joke about Allergies, which is on YouTube I believe. GET WITH THE TIMES BITCH!”

On the Royal Family – “I think they’re fantastic, but I almost definitely wouldn’t mind if they weren’t there. I think Katie Middleton has got a right doss of a job, and I can’t wait for Prince Philip to explode with gout.”

On dinner parties – “I don’t go to any! My worker Ken was saying the other month when we were clothes shopping “Oh yeah Paul, that’s nice – you can wear that to a dinner party…”—“WHAT DINNER PARTY?! I’m not at dinner parties am I? I’m on the frigging stage doing a comedy show!” I don’t go to dinner parties! Not often, anyway.”

On rap music – “I have to be careful what I say here because I have a rap career in the pipeline.”

On Shakespeare – “Ah yeah, top playwright. Definitely up there with the greats. He’s loving it.”

Paul Foot will be appearing at the The Lowry in Salford on the 23rd, 24th and 25th of November, and is on Twitter @PaulFoot.

Four years on from Gary Speed: Men account for 76 per cent of suicides in the UK

Written by Harry Newton on . Posted in Sport.

This month marks a tragic anniversary. On the 26th of November 2011, Gary Speed took his own life. With 535 Premier League appearances, Speed once held the record for the most Premier League appearances—until being surpassed by goalkeeper David James—and remains a part of sporting legend. Yet behind closed doors, Speed was struggling with his own battles.

With 76 per cent of all suicide victims being male, it is obvious that this statistic cannot be ignored. The prevalence of female suicide must not be disregarded or under-prioritised, but as the biggest cause of death in men under 45 in the UK, serious questions regarding why men are three times more likely to take their lives than women must definitely be addressed.

Removing the stigmas that still surround talking about mental health issues is very important. If we are to win this war against depression and suicide, society must enable sufferers to feel comfortable speaking out. However, overcoming the pressure that men are put under to fit into a certain stereotype of what a ‘man’ should be in British culture, is also a battle that must be fought.

Challenging the cultural barrier that stops men seeking help when they need it is a crucially needed means of prevention. A certain stereotype is often forced upon men, one which can leave many feeling unable to speak as they must project a front of being ‘controlled’ and ‘strong’ at all times. To feel able to ask for help, and find available channels for help, is an essential step in combating the issues that any man, woman or child may have.

Louise Speed, Gary’s wife, told an inquest in 2012 that her husband was “quite a closed character” emotionally, and that he was on “top form” at a dinner party earlier in the evening before he took his own life. This behaviour may just have been the nature of Speed, but this implied emotional seclusion points to the importance of opening a door which many men around the country feel they have to keep locked.

Despite living in a world where equality is better than ever, problems still persist and we are still not yet equal. Men find themselves in a position where they cannot act how humans should— with vulnerability; the feeling that they can talk, that they can resolve their issues, and that they can prevent the heartache that comes with suicide.

A label is often fixed onto suicide as being a selfish act—to take one’s life is to leave another’s worse off. Although it is true that every suicide will touch and affect others, to ever suggest that this is a selfish act would be naive. The only selfishness within this matter is brought by those who still feel entitled to enforce male stereotypes which leave men feeling alone in their fight. Even the greatest of generals cannot win a war alone.

CALM (Campaign Against Living Miserably) is a charity which specifically works to prevent male suicide. The aim is to reach men through a variety of platforms—whether it be music, comedy or sport—to fight this cultural wrongdoing. With over 30,000 callers last year, it is evident that CALM are doing a great job, but it is also evident that more men should feel able to contact them.

CALM can be contacted by their website (thecalmzone.net/) or by calling 0800 58 58 58, which is open 5pm to midnight every day of the year.

This week sees International Men’s Day fall on the 19th of November this year. Objectives of International Men’s Day include a focus on men’s health, improving gender relations, promoting gender equality, and highlighting positive male role models. The day will also highlight how social media can be used to help. You can pledge your support to the cause with a tweet or status by going online here: biggerissues.co.uk/.

People need to talk and a single post will be amplified around the country, with Professor Green and Stephen Fry already among many who have pledged. The post itself states: “Suicide is the single biggest killer of guys under 45. We aren’t talking about it enough. Let’s talk #BiggerIssues.’

By going on their website anytime before the 19th of November, you can press a button that allows them to automatically tweet this on your behalf on the Thursday.

Last year, 12 men per day committed suicide, and the aim of CALM and other charities like it, is to combat this issue by going down avenues where men are present, and promote discussion. Paul Farmer, chief executive of charity MIND, in March of this year said: “from the elite level down to grassroots, sport can be used to reduce stigma and encourage positive conversation about mental health.” Whether it be down the avenue of sport, music, comedy or any other way of spreading the message, it is clear that men should feel open enough to talk.

Nightline is a student-run confidential listening and information service for students by students available for University of Manchester students. It is open 8pm – 8am everyday of term, and the number is available on the back of your student ID.

The University of Manchester also has a counselling service available, which you can contact by phoning at 0161 275 2864, or emailing: [email protected]. The Student’s Union Advice Service is also available on the ground floor at the Students’ Union.

Top 5: So-bad-they’re-good films

Written by Christopher White on . Posted in Film.

5) Fool around with: The Cheeky Girls

Although not a feature film, all episodes can be found on YouTube and should be watched back-to-back. This is a classic example of early, unorganised and experimental Naughties reality TV. Mix that with the peculiarity of the Cheeky Girls and you’re in for good time.

4) Samaria Cop

At number 4, Samaria Cop offers a taste of slightly eccentric, very peculiar directing, which is exactly what is required for a so-bad-it’s-good film. The film can be slow at points, however, and for this reason it isn’t as high up as its contemporaries.

3) Troll 2

Made in 1990, this 25-year-old film still holds up. A hilarious script, terrible line delivery and overall nonsensical plot makes this film very watchable. Enjoy!

2) The Room

Tommy Wiseau, the writer, director and main character of The Room is rather unconventional. Completely funded by Wiseau, he spent $6 million to bring us 99 minutes of hilarity. The best moments come from the unusual script, with added humour from Wiseau’s acting, which is perfectly wooden and reserved to help The Room be a solid second place.

1) Birdemic: Shock and Terror

With a budget of $10,000 and a rating of 1.8/10 on IMDB, director James Nguyen has created somewhat of a master piece.  The worst CGI ever used, and an inability to pan a camera following a car are just a couple of things that will have you in stiches. Nothing I can say will prepare you for this film, you will just have to watch it, and trust me that Nguyen did not intend this film to be a comedy.

Sport in the City: Salford City FC

Written by Adam Selby on . Posted in Sport.

Over the course of the academic year, as well as paying close attention to, and prioritising the progress and successes of, our university’s very own societies, teams and campus sports, let our new Sport in the City feature tempt you into a very different sporting day out. Whether it’s a new sport, a team about whom you did not know, or just an event that interests us, we hope that we will be able to entice you to explore the wide sporting variety that the city has to offer during your time studying at the University of Manchester.

In the spotlight this week: Salford City FC

Well… what is it?

If you haven’t read about this week’s featured team in the paper, or turned on the TV without hearing either ‘Salford City’ or the ‘Class of 92’ mentioned in previous weeks, then where have you been? The semi-professional outfit based in the Kersal Area of Salford, Greater Manchester, are undoubtedly the name on everybody’s lips at the moment, kicking up a storm in the world of non-league football and coasting towards a consecutive league title based on current standings. So should we believe the hype? Although it takes much more than money for success both on and off the pitch (OK, so it helps), Salford City are blessed in having both the financial backing and also the valuable experience of five Premier League legends with a combined total of just under 2,400 appearances between them.

A stone’s throw away from their former stomping ground, Nicky Butt, Paul Scholes, Ryan Giggs and Gary and Phil Neville are the famous five who each own a mighty 10 per cent of the non-league side. The remaining 50 per cent of the club is owned by Singaporean businessman and investor Peter Lim. Lim is also the owner of Spanish giants Valencia, after securing a 70.4 per cent stake in the La Liga side back in May 2014, to claim full ownership.

How do I get there?

In the previous editions of Sport in the City, I have always attempted to ensure that the sport in the spotlight for that respective week is both interesting but more importantly accessible for students to reach via public transport. Sadly however, opting not to focus on Salford City was just not an option given their recent escalation into the limelight in recent weeks and months, and I strongly believe that any extra time spent travelling will be worth it in the long-run!

Unfortunately, Salford City is not directly accessible via public transport. However, in terms of distance, Moor Lane, the home of Salford City, really is not too far away. Moor Lane is only 4.3 miles from the City Centre and by taxi, or perhaps if you’re lucky enough to have a car with you in Manchester, this would definitely be the best and only real way of getting there directly. Therefore, discussions of a move to a different stadium in Salford in the near future, in order to accommodate more fans, may also solve the problem of easy travel to and from the stadium.

But how much does it cost to get in?

Although transport may be hard to come by, and you may end up spending more on sharing a taxi with your friends to ensure a safe journey to and from Moor Lane, please take comfort from the fact that entry to the ground is more than affordable for students. Whilst a full-price adult ticket would set you back a mere £7 without a student card, those with student ID will benefit from the reduced concessionary entrance price of £2! A concessionary season ticket is priced at £40 for the whole season according to Salford City’s official website, which over the course of a 23 game season would mean each game would only cost you £1.75—oh the joys of non-league football!

What are the facilities like? 

With average league attendances of anything between 400 – 500 people, this could perhaps be your best opportunity to experience the rawness of non-league football before the Salford club catapult into stardom. The stadium itself can hold up to 1,500 spectators and attracted a sell-out crowd for both of their recent FA Cup ties against Southport and Notts County. With regards to watching the game from inside the stadium, Moor Lane is largely standing, although seating is available for those who prefer to sit and watch the game with some minor comfort. And of course there are facilities for refreshments as well as a social club situated inside the stadium.

Tell me something I didn’t already know…

Given the wealth of publicity the Salford outfit have received in recent times, those with an eye on the Class of 92’s project will of course know the background, the owners and a lot about their previous league campaign! However, their self-titled documentary was filmed during the 2014/15 season, meaning there have been some changes to the side. They’re aiming to earn promotion every season in their quest to be part of the football league.

Firstly, Salford City can boast a number of players with top-flight experience within their ranks, unlike the majority, if not all of their competitors in the Evo Stik Premier Division. With the likes of Danny Webber, a former professional with over 50 goals from almost 300 professional appearances for the likes of Manchester United, Leeds and Sheffield United, as well as Stephen O’Halloran, a former Aston Villa youngster with Football League experience with Southampton and Swansea City, they are a force to be reckoned with.

Off the pitch meanwhile, owner Peter Lim was tied for #949 amongst the world’s billionaires, with an estimated net worth of $2 billion. The non-league side have also recently signed a lucrative five-year shirt sponsorship deal with Umbro, and with just over 45,000 Twitter followers, they are more popular than professional non-league teams such as Barnsley, Peterborough United and the MK Dons.

Finally, when can I see this in action?

Salford City, off the back of a recently televised FA Cup first-round win over Notts County, face AFC Stamford at home this Saturday, 21st November, at 3pm. For the latest information, please consult their website: pitchero.com/clubs/salfordcityfc

If you have any requests for local teams, sports or events taking place in Manchester, or if you wish to be involved, please contact: [email protected].

Review: Steve Jobs

Written by James Moules on . Posted in Film.

Steve Jobs was (and remains) a man whom it is nigh impossible to regard with any degree of indifference—the tech visionary behind Apple has inspired devoted admirers and passionate haters in equal measure, with some attaching to him that most dangerous of words that is ‘genius,’ and others dismissing him as a narcissist who took more credit for Apple’s success than he deserved. But whatever your opinion of the man may be, it’s unlikely that Danny Boyle’s movie is going to leave it unrocked. What he gives us is a brilliantly complex and daring portrait of the now iconic tech giant.

Right from the film’s opening moments, we are hit by a ferocious hurricane blast of Aaron Sorkin’s sharp dialogue as Jobs (Michael Fassbender) and his team attempt to solve a technical error on the original Macintosh prior to its launch event. Backstage, Jobs is confronted by his former girlfriend (Katherine Waterston) for denying paternity of their daughter and making slanderous remarks about her in interviews. These challenges, along with other encounters with figures including Steve Wozniak (Seth Rogen) and John Sculley (Jeff Daniels) make up the frenzy of preparations as Jobs readies himself to take to the stage.

This sequence of events represents one of the mere three scenes that make up this movie—the aforementioned launch of the Macintosh in 1984, the launch of the NeXT in 1988 after Jobs’ departure from Apple, and the launch of the iMac in 1998 after his return. Each of these scenes takes place in real time (with a few interspersed flashbacks) as he prepares himself to give the respective presentations. There’s a distinctive visual style for each one, and the three together form a grand ‘rise’, ‘fall’ and ‘redemption’ narrative in the Steve Jobs story. It’s a bold piece of film-making, and it pays off fantastically. Instead of giving us a standard model biopic in which we might see Jobs’s life play out in a chronological series of events, Boyle and Sorkin deliver a refined drama that brims with urgency and an almost manic energy.

Aaron Sorkin’s screenplays often bring out the best in actors, and Steve Jobs is no exception. Michael Fassbender, despite bearing absolutely no physical resemblance to Jobs, gives one of his best performances to date in this movie. Perhaps the most notable aspect of this performance is the restraint that he brings to the role. A lesser actor would have overacted to play the famously mercurial Jobs. While Fassbender does shout and scream at the right moments, his Steve is often more subdued and brooding. And yet that fiery intensity behind Jobs’s eyes is never absent. A well-deserved Oscar nomination (and possibly even a win) will almost certainly be coming Mr Fassbender’s way. The strongest link from the supporting cast is Kate Winslet, who shines as Jobs’s marketing executive Joanna Hoffmann. Her character acts as Steve’s conscience, albeit one that he ignores all-too frequently.

The cliché of the ‘flawed genius’ persona has been portrayed many times in film history, with varying degrees of originality, so anyone approaching this film with scepticism could be forgiven. But Steve Jobs’s statement (or, perhaps, his command) of ‘Think Different’ is taken by Boyle and Sorkin as one of the founding principles of this film, leading to a fiercely unique take on the trope. Using the film’s unconventional structure, acute writing and talented stars, the director gives us a portrait of Jobs as an extraordinary man in an extraordinary moment in space and time. He may or may not be a true genius—the audience members are left to form their own judgment.

Although Steve Jobs is not a monumental masterpiece on the same level as the other recent Sorkin-penned tech biopic, The Social Network, it’s still a tremendous piece of cinema. Its only real misstep is the rather mawkish ending it gives itself, but that’s not enough to destroy the electrifying two hours that preceded it. The movie is a triumph of creativity and outside the box thinking that its subject would no doubt have lauded.

5/5

Feature: Disney’s live-action remakes

Written by Mancunion on . Posted in Film.

Should we be excited for Disney’s live-action remakes?

No matter what generation you are part of, Disney’s classic animations such as Cinderella, Lady and the Tramp and Alice in Wonderland will always hold a special place in your heart as probably some of the first films that you ever saw and fell in love with. In this collective love, their development into live-action films can only be seen as a good thing from a creative perspective.

Personally I was sceptical about this whole live-action fiasco, until I was dragged along by my younger step-sister to a screening of Kenneth Branagh’s Cinderella in April. The thought of Disney publicly executing one of their most precious characters was disastrous, as they almost did with Maleficent. Thankfully, Branagh and his magical directorial vision left me in a state of excitement to upcoming releases like John Faverau’s The Jungle Book, which is influenced heavily by Andy Serkis’s work; and Bill Condon’s Beauty and the Beast.

A re-creation of iconic films is a fine line to walk, but when some of the best actors, directors and producers are joining the party over at Disney, one cannot help but turn some attention towards them and also praise them for their frivolous efforts in delivering a new generation into the magic that is so synonymous with the brand. Take for example Alice in Wonderland, as directed by the enigmatic Tim Burton. The film broke the special $1 billion mark, which prompted Disney to start exploring other films to add to this growing live-action series. Although cynics will exploit mundanity on Disney’s behalf in re-creating pre-existing properties to gain an affirmative profit on their films, I personally see it as a playground for directors, like Branagh and Burton respectively, to create a piece of work with their style and signature placed on it. Will people really comment upon Disney’s constant development of the Star Wars Universe? I highly doubt it. So why feel negative towards this side of their game? The countdown is on for a live action enactment of Hakuna Matata….

Or should we be sceptical?

For some reason, I can’t help but just feel as though live-action films of the Disney kind—particularly remakes, are a quick and easy cash cow for film producers, directors, distributors and whoever else—in the most predictable way possible. I don’t have anything against remakes. Sometimes, remakes are good because they’re an easy watch, sometimes there’s a twist in the plot and you see things in a new light—like Malificent. But live-action remakes like this year’s Cinderella made me pensive about the future of Disney films. Is there really a lack of imagination out there now?

Take Cinderella, for example. Swarovski. SWAROVSKI. The glass slippers were by Swarovski. And that’s fine. But did it really have to have a paying gallery exhibit in Leicester Square this year? That’s advertising and product placement, and Swarovski is a big company. I feel as though this shifts the importance of film into purely aesthetic value only. You won’t care about the characters or poor Cinderella. But as long as she’s the one with the glass slippers by Swarovski that’s okay, right? It’s totally not a marketing ploy at all, is it?

Fairy tales were intended to teach morals and put one in an element of fantasy—especially children. I don’t want to sound old-fashioned at all, and I’m all for the advancement of technology and making visual possibilities that much more accessible, but wasn’t the Disney legacy because of animations? I don’t think there was a live-action Disney film existing until 1950 and that was Treasure Island in Technicolor—and the purpose of Technicolor is so similar to animation in that it replicates a dreamlike quality, and this is probably why it was abused for its effect in musicals.

If I were to take a stance on liking any live-action film at all, Tim Burton—yes, fine, I like it. Alice in Wonderland was okay at best and I liked it, but it doesn’t stand out by any means. While at Disney during the 1980s, Burton’s first animation short, Vincent, was made with the help of an apprenticeship programme there—meaning Burton already had a relationship with Disney from the get-go. Sell-outs gave Burton trust and creative power with Disney—and who is he to deny a handsome paycheck in return for guaranteed success at the movies?

TV Binge: Peep Show

Written by Georgia Welch on . Posted in Film.

Is there a more original and ingenious British sitcom of the 21st century than Peep Show? If there is, I’m yet to discover it. After eight series documenting the questionable life decisions, self-deprecation and failed romantic escapades of flatmates Mark Corrigan and Jeremy Usborne, much-loved double act David Mitchell and Robert Webb have finally come together once more to reprise their roles in a final series of the hit Channel 4 show. Told through the unique point-of-view camera perspective, which has become one of the show’s most iconic features, Peep Show, for those who haven’t had the pleasure (or displeasure) of watching, became a fast favourite amongst critics and fans alike after it premiered in 2003.

It’s clear to see from the haphazard and often cringe-inducing attempts by Mark and Jez to survive their everyday lives that a great deal of Peep Show’s success stems from the starkly hilarious contrast between the pair’s attitudes to, well, everything. Whilst Mark struggles to win the affections of his colleague Sophie whilst battling with his vapid office day job, Jeremy lives a life of frivolity, idleness and contributes very little: “As I’ve told you before Mark, re: doing a job, because of my creativity it’s kind of abuse.” In countless Peep Show-related discussions I’ve been involved in, the question of whether I’m “more Mark or Jez” has never failed to crop up. Indeed, the relatable quality of the protagonists’ deeply flawed but lovable personalities plays a huge part in audiences’ enthusiasm towards the show.

With an equally amusing supporting cast, most notably Matt King as Jeremy’s friend Super Hans, the “crack-addled maniac,” each episode is equally quotable and rewatchable. Peep Show is arguably one of the most consistent sitcoms produced in recent years, with no particular series surpassing another. Its humour remains relentlessly dry, witty and biting, thanks to the exceptional writing of creators Sam Bain and Jesse Armstrong. The uncomfortable, often humiliating scenarios the duo find themselves in make for some unbearable second-hand embarrassment at times, a personal favourite being Series seven’s The Nether Zone, in which Mark and Jeremy find themselves trapped in the airlock between Jeremy’s girlfriend’s flat and external door. It’s truly a testament to the show’s incomparable dialogue that such simple situations can evoke such hysteria among audiences. If ever a show deserved the description ‘laugh out loud’, it’s Peep Show.

Dark, sarcastic and oddly comforting, Peep Show is undeniably one of Britain’s finest comedic exports. It greets you like an old friend when you’re feeling a little down on life, and is a must-see for those who love self-deprecating humour. After the cliffhanger ending of series eight, the show’s final outing seems both promising and intriguing. Trailers for the series feature the welcome return of some of the show’s best-loved characters, and it’s clear to see from the social media frenzy generated that Peep Show is highly-placed on people’s collective TV radar. The shared paranoia, anxiety and often bizarre thoughts of Mark and Jeremy is endlessly painful and entertaining in equal measures—a combination that is absolutely instrumental to the show’s success; so whether you’re a new or old fan, be sure to tune in for the return of the ‘El Dude Brothers’ on Channel 4 throughout November.

Review: Scouts Guide to the Zombie Apocalypse

Written by Lina Jfairi on . Posted in Film.

Scouts Guide to the Zombie Apocalypse. The three protagonists in this movie are teenagers who have been best friends for a long time. They are Ben (Tye Sheridan), Carter (Logan Miller) and Augie (Joey Morgan). Denise (Sarah Dumont) plays the role of a sexy teen dream with long legs and a trim figure. The lead scout is David Koechner, known as the scout leader Rogers.

The movie starts off with the three main characters in a classroom with scout leader Rogers recruiting for new scouts… with only one attendee. No new successful recruits are achieved. They all decide to meet at their usual campsite. Augie is the only one of the three last members that is still happy with being a member of the scouts. The other two feel differently. Ben and Carter drive into a deer and get interrupted. Later, Carter’s sister Kendal (Halston Sage), along with her other friends, invite the two to the ‘Secret Seniors Party’. Just before they leave, they find that the deer has vanished.

The pair later go to buy alcohol when they meet Denise (Sarah Dumont), who works at the local strip club as a cocktail waitress. She and Ben get on instantly; she agrees to buy alcohol for them. They make their way to Augie to set up their campsite at the woods. Carter goes to convince Ben to make their way to the ‘Secret Seniors Party’; Augie catches up and feels a sense of disappointment. Ben and Carter drive into town only to find that the strip club bouncer is no longer at the door. They decide to sneak in but are faced by two zombies… they are quickly saved by Denise.

Augie decides to go to Rogers’s house, only to be attacked by him. They finally manage to drive to the party, only to realize that they have been given the wrong address. Carter recalls that his sister Kendal keeps a diary, where the address of the party is likely to be stored. Denise decides to go to the military to tell them about the un-evacuated party, while the three main characters make a final stop at a hardware store and load up with domestic weaponry. They manage to locate the party and go on to protect love interests and friends. They get to a stage where Augie reveals his homemade bomb. Zombies run onto the scene. Augie sets the bomb alight as they jump out of a garbage chute. The military arrive and the love interest is sealed—Ben and Kendal Kiss.

Augie did a good job of being the good scout-abiding member with plenty of taught tricks up his sleeve. Ben was in the middle: He wanted to remain a scout but also wanted to do usual teen things. Carter did a fair job of being the annoying youngster who wanted to always break rules, but is a do-gooder and so stays alive as per usual in teen flicks. The eventuality of this movie is typical of that of an American horror teen flick. Denise is not overly sexual but acts as more of a female do-gooder who subliminally, at intervals, leads the team. Overall, a good teen flick.

Camera angles on Denise tended to be heroic rather than a striptease. Ben was depicted as the caring one who wanted well and lighting tended to be best on him out of the three scout members. Carter tended to be more in shadows. Augie was typically associated with food and overeating. A useful projection of cheap-yet-effective form of props throughout scenes was involved. The costumes remained the same throughout the movie but use of light variety and sets accumulated to generative formulations of scenes and events. The director managed to tell the story well. He moved from one scene to the other through a good use of light harmony and relevant actor/actress scene entry.

3/5

Sugar, bacon and the missing link

Written by Joely Thomas on . Posted in Food & Drink, Opinion, Uncategorised.

Pigs laugh mercilessly while vegetarians can’t help but feel a bit smug. No-one else however, has seemed very pleased by the WHO’s announcement that processed meats such as bacon, sausages and ham, are to be classed amongst the most carcinogenic substances. Eye-rolling is understandably the response from societies being told that almost everything is bad for them.

The announcement came not long after calls by Jamie Oliver for a sugar tax to be introduced on fizzy drinks in the UK. Brighton, where the tax was trialled, increased certain sugary items by a whopping ten pence each. Even sticks of rock were subjected to the increase—a move which, at a seaside resort, seems as harsh as taxing cinemagoers for buying popcorn.

Though the way in which many children are now being brought up high on sugar is certainly an issue in need of addressing, I fear that this tax would be a step too far in attempts to control the way we live. Jamie likened it to putting children on the naughty step, but viewing the state as society’s better-knowing parent is a slippery slope.

Will Mary Poppins soon be censored so that a spoonful of sugar no longer helps the medicine go down?  Will Willy Wonka’s Chocolate Factory be rated 18, not because the film creates the sense that his creepy factory is part of a child molesting scandal, but for its glorification of glucose?

It is clearly not an action that would deter purchases. Jamie claimed the move would be “symbolic” but such rhetoric is as patronising as suggesting that sticks of rock should be renamed ‘sticks of sugar’ to avoid misleading consumers. Another reason put forward was that it would raise £1 billion per year. This would then create a situation, as has happened with tobacco and alcohol, in which the government is benefiting from the very thing it intended to condemn.

Yet, the most problematic aspect of such actions—both taxing sugar and alerting people to the potentially dangerous side effects of processed food—is that they target the consumers and not the producers.

This is not to say that the producers of sugar and processed meat would not be affected. It seems odd that a government that loves to adopt policies that disproportionately affect the poor, and is at ease with interfering in the most minute details of our daily lives through the Investigatory Powers Bill, would immediately reject the notion of a sugar tax.

Yet once we consider that it was reportedly a phone call from a Florida sugar baron that had caused Bill Clinton to drop propositions for a sugar tax in the US, reasons behind the rebuttal became clearer.

It was, of course, the meat industry that replied particularly cynically to the bacon-cancer revelations, mocking the pedantry of an organisation that also rightly identifies breathing in polluted air and sunburn as carcinogenic. No argument of any substance was given to support the industry’s contention of the classification.

But targeting those that buy rather than those who make the food, even if there may be a knock-on effect, is still both unfair and insufficient.

People are actually buying less visible sugar and more ‘invisible’ sugar—sugar that is added to low-fat products, to bread, baked beans, pies and even fish—the list goes on. These are not conscious consumer choices to eat more fructose syrup but tricks played by industries to ensure our sweet teeth enjoy the taste of their food. And it is the diets of the poor that are most affected with foods high in sugar, like the value ranges found in supermarkets, that use sugar and salt as cheap bulk, being more affordable.

It is equally short-sighted to expect people to reduce their consumption of processed food when it is the meat industry’s disregard for both the animals that are eaten and the consumers that eat them which has caused processed meat to become a cheap alternative to fresher, healthier, and thus more expensive, produce.

Implementing higher food standards across the board, rather than allowing health and ethics to become a niche market under the name ‘organic,’ would increase the supply of such food and thus reduce prices; as would supporting local co-operatives and community gardens. Targeting the culture of fast food that has snuck over from the Atlantic so that McDonald’s can’t claim to be offering a healthy option simply by adding a few floppy lettuce leaves to the menu, would be another positive step.

But increasing the already varying prices of fizzy drinks by a few pence, and creating a bacon and sausage scare? The outcome is more likely to be a nation so unhappy from being told that everything is bad for them, that the consumption of sugar and sausages peak in a comfort eating frenzy, or as consumers engage in a childish revolt against being sent to sit on the naughty step.