Freeview? Peeview more like!

five (that’s Channel Five to you and me) is set to take its first tentative steps into the world of multichannel with the launch of two new channels: five us (Five U.S.) and five life (not to be confused with Five Live). They’re both going to be launched on Freeview, which is good news, isn’t it? Nah.

I used to get quite excited whenever a new channel was added to Freeview’s lineup. But I’ve come to realise that most of the channels are utter crap. Also, most of the new channels have been squeezed in by reducing the picture quality. These days most Freeview channels just look like a load of pixelated, blocky shit — a step above YouTube.

Luckily, Channel Five has found the space for their new channels by buying part of Top Up TV and nicking all of their space. (Top Up TV is repositioning itself as a PVR service. The PVR will cost Â£180, then Â£9.99 per month. Any takers? No?) So at least Five’s new channels won’t look as though you’re watching them through a sieve.

But they sound as though they are going to be full of a load of insipid trash.

Five US features a mix of American drama, films, documentaries, sport and comedy…

Just like the original Channel Five then.

…while highlights from Five Life include the highly-acclaimed drama series Love My Way and the award-winning The Ellen Degeneres Show.

“Highlights” like some programme that nobody’s ever heard of, and a chat show hosted by somebody that everybody thought was left behind by the 1990s.

Let’s face it: these channels are going to be filled with programmes that aren’t even good enough to be shown on Channel Five. And is there anybody who thinks that Channel Five has enough material to fill even one channel?

People said the same when ITV launched ITV3, which the last time I looked was the third-biggest multichannel channel (behind Sky One and ITV2). That doesn’t make its content any good though. ITV3 is filled with twenty year old dramas that look as though they were filmed in an actual theatre, and probably should have stayed in the theatre aswell.

Meanwhile, ITV2 has become the home of uninspired spin-offs called things like The X-Factor X-treme DX Reloaded Uber Edition the Third On ITV2 (I think that’s also the name of Gilette’s new razor). Either that or it’s showing some wet Holywood chick flick or teen movie.

ITV4 is the worst of them all, especially when you consider that ITV essentially removed Men & Motors to make space for it. Like Men & Motors, ITV4 is meant to be aimed at blokes. But whereas Men & Motors had the well-known brand, fanbase and reasonable programming, ITV4 doesn’t.

Can anybody actually think of any progammes that ITV4 shows? The only one I can think of is David Letterman, which already had a perfectly good home on ITV2. Indeed, since they moved Letterman to ITV4 you would think that they would show it at a decent slot, but it still occupies the same irregular post-midnight slot. You could only hope of catching it if you came back late from the pub and happened to be flicking past ITV4.

ITV isn’t the only company polluting Freeview. Channel 4 has also done a disappointing job. E4 is okay, but it promises a lot more than it ever delivers. It should be showing more experimental British programmes. But most of the time it shows cheap American imports that are superficially good looking but are ultimately as appealing as stapling your bumcheeks together. The one thing going for the channel is E4 Music, which actually shows a decent variety of music. It certainly does a much better job than The Hits or TMF.

The jury is out on Film4. I have watched a few films that I wouldn’t have seen anywhere else, but the number of repeats already is worrying. I don’t think it’s quite delivering.

Then there is More4, another channel that seemed promising but you never seem to watch it. Again, does anybody know what this channel shows? There is The Daily Show, if you can remember to watch it. But is there anything else? Whenever I flick past it, it seems to be showing repeats of Noel Edmonds’ Imaginary Telephone Conversations.

The channel launched in a blaze of publicity with A Very Social Secretary, but has produced nothing notable since then. More4 is obviously hungry for more of that kind of publicity — it’s only gone and shot George Bush. Please.

Then there is the BBC. In fairness, the BBC’s digital channels have produced much more quality programmes than its commercial rivals have. But still something seems to be lacking. BBC Three in particular seems to have completely lost its way.

In fairness, a lot of BBC Three’s troubles seem to stem from the ridiculous rules and quotas that the Department of Culture, Media and Sport imposed on the channel. It famously told the BBC that BBC Three must show news in order to distinguish itself from commercial rivals, then later criticised the news programme because nobody watched it!

A couple of years ago, on the crest of the Little Britain wave, BBC Three seemed like a quite a good channel actually. Don’t forget that BBC Three was also the home of The Mighty Boosh and Monkey Dust, two fine programmes.

But since then it has produced reams of steaming poo like Tittybangbang (officially the world’s least funny comedy) and Grownups (a flimsy script coupled with dreadfully wooden acting, this makes Two Pints look like a bloody masterpiece). Even Rob Brydon seemed to be shat up with the misfiring Anually Retentive.

Since ditching the 7 O’Clock News, BBC Three seems to have filled its current affairs quota with documentaries by complete dullards wittering on about their tiny penii. And people think bloggers are self-indulgent! And let’s not forget those awful programmes about parenting. If I want to see lots of toddlers with potty mouths I’ll go to the supermarket.

The whole tone of the channel is unbearable aswell. Why are those continuity announcers trying to be my mate? It is contrived, unfunny and annoying.

BBC Four is pretty good at what it does. And let’s face it, most of BBC Three’s best programmes would probably fit easily on BBC Four. Vaguely decent comedy shows like Screen Wipe or Don’t Watch That Watch This do fine on BBC Four, so why not? Sometimes it feels as if the Beeb uses the word ‘youth’ as a proxy for ‘shit’. So they should do with that shit what everybody else does with it. BBC Three should probably just be thrown in the toilet, and the BBC could concentrate on just the one digital channel.

Minor spoiler alert

I’m not much of a moviegoer. The last time I went to the cinema was to see Signs (it wasn’t my choice), starring that popular fellow Mel Gibson. In case you have forgotten this forgettable movie, it featured aliens that were scared by water. The entire length of the film was spent avoiding the question: If these aliens are so scared of water, why the hell did they land on Earth, a planet which is >70% water? That was four years ago.

The time before that was to see Austin Powers 2. There was a powercut in the middle of the film. That was in Kirkcaldy’s own scummy ABC cinema, when Kirkcaldy still had a cinema (we now have to make a bloody 40 minute round trek to Dunfermline for the nearest cinema). That was seven years ago. I can’t even remember the time before that. I was probably an actual child.

I don’t even watch films on the television all that much. It just doesn’t really float my boat. But there was no way I was going to miss Snakes on a Plane.

The problem was that it was difficult to know exactly how to approach the film. We know that the film was supposed to be a thriller / horror / disaster film. But all of the hype on the internet gave the film such an inherently comic twist.

When you hear of them shooting new scenes to include comedy lines like “I have had it with these motherfuckin’ snakes on the motherfuckin’ plane” and literally sex up the film because of all the internet hype, you half expect a comedy film, or at least a film that isn’t taking itself too seriously. This suspicion increases when you see that one of the actors is Keenan from Keenan & Kel.

Indeed, my friend was guffawing all the way through the film, mostly in bits that weren’t funny. He was, though, the only person in the entire cinema laughing, bar a few titters here and there. There was one part that I found quite funny though, when all of the lights in the plane go out and you hear somebody in the distance shout: “SNAKE!â€

But most of the film is delivered with a straight face. A lot of it is actually pretty gory, and not in a slapstick blood-n-guts type way à la Troma. This would be just like any other horror / disaster movie were it not for all of the internet hype and the refreshingly unpretentious film title. They almost called this film ‘Pacific Air Flight 121′. That pretty much sums up why I don’t like watching films much.

Samuel L. Jackson has it spot on about the title, which he says is the only reason he took the job:

It’s not Gone with the Wind. It’s not On the Waterfront. It’s Snakes on a Plane!

Of course, were it not for that title — and the fact that Samuel L. Jackson is starring in the film with that title — there would have been no internet buzz. In one sense, I think the way New Line handled the buzz was pretty cool, when they decided to add lines that internet users came up with (mind you, these lines stuck out like a sore thumb. “That’s all we need — snakes on crack” was particularly bad).

In another sense I think — in typical MSM ivory tower style — they have misread the buzz. For instance, I don’t understand why it meant that they had to crowbar new sex and drug scenes in a deliberate attempt to get an R rating. And I’ve noticed that New Line have been disappointed by box office takings so far:

“I think people were more excited about the marketing than the actual movie,” said [Paul] Dergarabedian of Exhibitor Relations. “New Line did not set out to create this Internet buzz. That’s actually a marketer’s dream, but when marketing translates into awareness but does not inspire people to get out from behind their computers and into the theater, that’s a problem.”

Dergarabedian might think that the internet hype was a marketer’s dream — but it must be a filmmaker’s nightmare. In reality, anybody who saw the film because of the internet buzz saw the film because of the internet buzz, and not because they wanted to see the film. As soon as Samuel L. Jackson said, “I’ve had it with these motherfuckin’ snakes on a motherfuckin’ plane,” the film was essentially over.

The Snakes on a Plane internet buzz says much more about the internet than it says about Snakes on a Plane. The film itself is completely meaningless compared to the many virals and memes that have been out there on the internet. The event was not the film’s opening on Friday; the event has been happening on the internet for months.

That said, I was actually quite impressed with Snakes on a Plane as a film, so I would recommend this even if you’re reluctant about it.

Wikipedia: Snakes on a Plane
IMDb: Snakes on a Plane
Samuel L. Jackson promoting SoaP on The Daily Show:

doctorvee

Archive: daily-show