MR SPOCK, EU HAVE THE CONN

Space. The Final Frontier ... or in this case, the space in my schedule tomorrow I will have in order to get to the polling booth in order to cast my Referendum vote, which is actually more than I thought I would get, given I work for a market research company. Given the option to travel at warp speed, I'm sure that the turnout tomorrow would probably leave a Klingon looking over his starboard bow wondering what the kab'leth was going on.

So, what on Earth do you think this has to do with the EU Referendum tomorrow ?? Well, for a start it's happening, and thank goodness it is, most of us want it to be out of the way, most of us can't wait to get to the polling booth, and of course most of us can't wait the get to the pub to have an EU drinking contest.

So, then, you want my opinion ?? You want to know what I'm doing tomorrow. I'm voting to leave. Yep, I'm voting for Brexit, and once again I'm going to invoke the world of Star Trek in my reasoning as to why I'm doing so.

What the EU should only ever have been, what it should have aspired to be nothing more than, and what I'm sure we thought it was going to be when we signed up in the late 70's, was something like the United Federation of Planets, a benign, pace-keeping organisation comprising a collaborative group of interplanetary governments, dedicated to providing a forum for it's leaders, underpinned by a fundamental prime directive of non-interference in the affairs of each of it's members, as well as ensuring that those who wish to join have demonstrated they can have the ability to do so by being able to achieve warp drive on their own.

A simple, pan-continental trade association where we can pick and choose the best bits of each, with a few in house rules to stop people playing silly buggers - what we've ended up with instead is the Borg Collective.

A ruthless, aggressive, faceless, sterile, remorseless malevolent force hell-bent on assimilating everything in it's path into a single, hive-minded collective with no regard for the individual. No one is control. It is an organic thing always and only seeking more power for itself. A faceless entity without visible leadership. In popular culture, like the Cybermen from Doctor Who, they are a symbol for any overwhelming power, the enemies of individuality, robbers of all autonomy.

If you've ever watched "Star Trek: First Contact" (and I strongly recommend you do, it's the best of the Next Generation films by a star system) (and which was conspicuously shown on Channel 5 on Saturday), here's the Borg mantra;

"We are the Borg. Lower your shields and surrender your ships. We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own. Your culture will adapt to service us. Resistance is futile."

All of us have a Borg in our own psyche – the parents we want to test our burgeoning adulthood against, the fashion police we are constantly on the alert for. When we are strong in our identity, we enjoy resisting the Borg, it helps us forge an authentic self with a stake in the future. When we are vulnerable, we back away, isolate ourselves from the sites of contestation, stay familiar with the past.

Yet it’s striking that the European referendum debate has thrown up fear of the Borg on both sides of the political spectrum. On the right, fear of a bureaucracy that shapes the rules and customs of our country without giving us a chance to have our say. On the left, fear of the neoliberal hegemony that shapes our economy and disempowers the 99%. The sense that both of these are uncontrollable is common to both, until recently, when the European 'project' of enlargement and political, social, and economic integration was seen – not just by Europeans but by global observers - as a ‘soft power’ for all those involved.

A bit like in the Star Trek universe when the human race nearly wipes itself out and then discovers that they are not alone in the universe. And in principle it's a wonderful idea that underpinned Gene Roddenberry's optimistic vision of the future. I mean, what could be wrong with the post war nations working together towards a common enterprise (look, look, see what I did ?? See what I did there ??), attracting those on their fringes to join in and play a part.

Europe after WWII had a distinct role and character on the global scene – it was ambitious, sophisticated, a beacon of post-conflict resolution, pretty much in the same way the Federation was when it was founded in the series finale of the Star Trek prequel series, "Enterprise".

However, in the real world, the task of pulling people towards an ever closer union has fallen to politicians, economists and bureaucrats – that is, power elites. Instead of enhancing and amplifying Europe’s soft power – the attraction of its multi-cultural project – we have been subject to an amplification of its 'hard' power: its ability to control outcomes, for good and for bad. In this scenario, closer European integration continues to be the Borg that everyone fears – even as they are spinning it for or against.

Unlike the Borg, however, the EU is not flexible enough to adapt to changing circumstances. It's also horrendously inefficient and doesn't put the needs of the collective before the needs of the few. All in all, I think that in a comparison with a race of alien zombies the EU actually comes second.

And that's why we need to resist being assimilated.

The way Spain, Portugal and Greece has been treated demonstrates exactly the kind of 'hard' power the EU likes to wield. This was not the actions of a benign collective group of governments, but the malevolent actions of mean-spirited wannabe dictatorship determined to force it's will onto a sovereign nation who only wanted to improve. I for one cannot remember an episode of Star Trek where the Federation infringed the sovereignty and dignity of one of its members, dictating fiscal policy to it and not compromising one bit whilst forcing them into a humanitarian crisis. Well, actually, it did, in the episode "Mirror, Mirror", but that was set in a parallel universe.

And looking back on most episodes of Star Trek, it's clear that Captain Kirk was too much of a cowboy to have any truck with the EU. He was constantly telling bureaucrats to f*** off. The Federation in Star Trek is about maximising personal liberty; the EU favours the exact opposite. And I for one cannot conscienceoulsy vote to remain part of something that only wishes to ride roughshod over what has been built up through blood, sweat and toil over hundreds of years.

The United Kingdom of Great Britian and Northern Ireland.

Our Federation.

And that's why I'm voting to leave the EU, preferably at Warp Factor 9.

Live long, and prosper.

WHO YA GONNA CALL ?? ... SOMEONE ELSE

I love the diversity of movies I often go to see. I look back in particular over the last year and look at what I've watched and it's quite the proverbial smorgasbord of cinematic goodness.

I've been to see most of the superhero blockbusters (Captain America: Civil War is due to pass my eyeballs this very week as it happens) but I've also seen some very innovative and artisan films such as Birdman, and a very genteel Ian McKellen as Sherlock Holmes. The recent comedic biopic of Eddie the Eagle was funny and heart-warming, Kingsmen: The Secret Service was bonkers and brilliant, The Revenant was powerful, gripping, intense and gut-wrenching, Mad Max: Fury Road an astonishing, visceral thrill-ride of visuals and social commentary.

I even treated myself to a solo screening of Deadpool, a film that was more fun than watching a wombat in a washing machine. As well as this I have taken in the latest outings of James Bond, and even Star Wars, which isn't one of my favourite franchises, but I enjoyed very much because it was fun, enjoyable and a good old nostalgic blast.

This last point I make is because in a couple of months time, we get another nostalgic reboot coming in the form of a new Ghostbusters movie, with an all-female cast. This was potentially an excellent idea. At the time, all of us who loved the original speculated about our new team of kick-ass ladies able to wield a proton gun with sass and style. Emma Stone, Anne Hathaway, Rebel Wilson, Tina Fey, Eliza Dushku, Amy Schumer were all mentioned and this excited us. This was a great opportunity to bring the franchise kicking and screaming back to life.

Then it was announced Paul Feig was directing and Melissa McCarthy was leading the cast. We mourned our lost opportunity, we mourned that some great names would now no longer be on board. And we mourned, most of all, because what should have been a great opportunity to breathe new life into a beloved franchise was instead potentially degenerating in front of our eyes into a layer of dressing for a mediocre comedy.

A lot of comic book, sci-fi, and franchise movies get criticised these days for being 'dark gritty reboots', and yes, Marvel have shown with Guardians of the Galaxy and Deadpool that this doesn't have to be the case, but Ghostbusters would have been PERFECT for that approach. Die hard fans alike have already voiced their displeasure of the film and gone on to slam the new all female cast. Its my interpretation of the film by the pictures and the plot details released that its going to fail not because its an all female cast but rather because the plot seems really uninspired as a Ghostbusters film.

It has nothing to do with the fact they are all female but rather that they all seem to be generic characters. In the original Ghostbusters they were more diverse than that and that’s why made them funny without actually having to try and be funny. Egon was the smart one. Ray was also a smart scientist but also a very warm, identifiable human character, he was the audiences eyes into the world of the Ghostbusters. Venkman was a charming, ducking and diving ladies man. Finally there’s Winston, who wasn’t just the token black guy, he actually represented the everyman. He was just a hard working man looking for a job and got it working as a Ghostbuster.

All this achieved the humour and gave us a memorable movie without ticked boxes and pre-filled demographic quotas, and without the aid of blatant stunt-casting. Already with this reboot I feel as if they’re going with the basic modern comedy formula which will be filled with slapstick, stereotype characters. I feel as if there isn’t going to be that diverse cast of characters but rather four actresses trying hard just to be funny with no other rhyme or reason other than moving the movie forward.

Already with the trailer it seems as if its going to be a lot of trying too hard to make the audience laugh. I feel like its going to be your pro-typical modern day comedy which aren’t really that funny anymore and its not for lack of trying its for lack of storytelling. I feel like everything from character development, atmosphere, comedy, fear, horror, a lot of things could be done better if there was someone different who respected the roots of the franchise.

A different writer and director would have accomplished this. If they did that then the character development would flow right along with the story cause you cant develop a character without first having a story that also flows right along with it. The comedy and fear would be better set up with story telling that gives you a reason to laugh or fear something rather than just having jump scares just because you cant figure out a way to do something that creates that fear or legitimate gritty tension.

And this goes back to the point I made earlier. By making this new Ghostbusters a light-hearted comedy there is no progress with the franchise being made at all, there's no evolution. A 'dark gritty reboot' may not have been to everybody's tastes, but it could have at least learnt itself to more authenticity. I feel this film will fail because its going to try too hard to recapture what made the original great while trying too hard to do something different by making some sort of forced joke or plot detail for a certain piece of technology.

Does this mean I'm sexist ?? Well, the odds are I will go and see the new Ghostbusters because of my nostalgic love for the franchise. The fundamental idea of an all female cast was a GOOD one, and it potentially could have had so much going for it. We had our heroes back in the 80's, and I totally agree that young girls of today deserve the opportunity to discover and be inspired by their heroines too. This new Ghostbusters was the perfect opportunity to do just that, but without squandering the charm of the original and the nostalgic warmth we feel for the franchise 30 years later.

And the funny thing is, with all these popular franchises, there was a time when they weren't part of the comfort zone. There was something about the time we were first introduced to a franchise that made us want to stay there. And unfortunately, that first, energizing experience that bought our loyalty will never happen again within the same franchise.

No matter how much the instalments improve their special effects, no matter how much a fifth sequel boasts of 'recapturing' the original, no matter how many times the writers claim to be 'massive original fans', there can only ever be one moment of discovery.

And for all the controversy, I honestly don’t mind an all female Ghostbusters … but I do mind when the story, heart, and the characters are not there.

STOP MY 30's, I JUST WANT TO GET OFF ...

So, then, here I am, in just a shade over 24 hours from now I will have turned 35. I am no longer just a 30-something, but a person in their MID-30's ... not long to go now before my age finally catches up with my waist size, and from then the two can happily start going up together concurrently until I end up in a coffin with a hump in the lid. That is unless posthumous liposuction is approved by the government.

Thirty-five trips around the sun since yours truly emerged into this universe, and the universe in kind cracked it's knuckles, snicked it's jaw, wricked it's neck and said; "Right then, sunshine, here's where it gets complicated …".

There was a change in media culture starting in the 80s, when I emerged dribbling, crying, naked, screaming and covered in all sorts of bodily fluids I hope never to encounter again. The Internet and video games emerged at the same time kids weren't out playing with other kids, what they were doing was sitting around in front of a Nintendo all day. Add to that the fact that as soon as they grew up and moved away from home in their 20s, there was free and abundant Internet porn to satisfy them with.

The only thing the world has in abundance is people looking to exploit these ills. Especially in the ever-over-complicating, horrendous, ultra-competitive sport of relationships. Dating sites are ready and willing to lift money from lonely people, then there's the booming self-help industry that teaches people with no dating prospects what they're doing wrong, despite the fact that they still walk away without any prospects after buying the books and therapists and whatever else.

Now, I’m pretty unremarkable in most respects – neither fantastically attractive (if only), nor absolutely hideous. I’ve got plenty of friends, male and female. They always express confusion and disbelief that I’ve been unable to get a girlfriend in the 20 years or so I’ve been interested in the idea. Apart from this, I’ve lived a full and active life, but somehow this particular aspect has, through more quirks of a fate than a superhero film directed by someone having just ingested a bucket of heroin, passed me by.

My parents met and married through work. They have been married for 40 years. And it hurts me to the core to be 35 and unmarried. Alone. Without a loving wife or a long-term girlfriend. I feel the pain from it every single day like I'm wiping my ass with a cheese grater. Or maybe it's because a random advert for Justin Beiber's new album spoiled my enjoyment of the Nostalgia Critic's review of "Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice".

It’s a cliché, but it really did seem seem like one day all my friends were suddenly shacked up with a partner and squeezing out kids right, left and centre expect me. Arriving at 35 as a single man happens via one of three routes. The first is because there were series of relationships that never panned out. Or, there was one epic fail of a marriage that lead to a series of relationships that never panned out. The wake of this type of failure leaves a trail of broken hearts and disillusioned souls.

The third, mine, is because simply no-one has bothered to give me a bloody half decent chance because someone else arrived, with an agenda, therefore automatically gaining the upper hand before I had the chance to even offer the prospect of pistols at dawn at thirty paces.

Distrust of each other turns relationships into transactions. There is literally a universe of information consolidated into constellations of blogs on the topics of sex, love and relationships. As a society we keep talking about it, and by talking about it we make it important. Products, lyrics and lives coalesce around it.

Love is both form and substance yet, if you find yourself single at age 35, love isn’t nearly as important as feeling legit and being desired. And desire will continue to kick your sorry, pink, hairy ass until you find that you can notice it without having to turn your head. It doesn’t matter what bracket you are in. There will always be another rung of the latter to climb, someone to be jealous of and past failures to reconcile.

And I think the greatest lesson I’ve learned being 35 and single is that ultimately nothing matters in reference to the big picture. Emotions drag us into the fray and spur storylines that can both catalyse and interrupt the flow of creation. It's how I managed to drag it out into three "Ghostbusters" scripts and a mountain of "Doctor Who" fanfiction.

When I first set off to write this blog there was a very particular angst welling up in me that wanted to provide a narrative to the joys of being 35 and single. But, I had to stop myself because, honestly, it kinda sucks too. Four generations of rampant new wave feminism have not exactly produced a plethora of well-balanced traditional men who are equipped to head a heteronormative family and deal with non-feminist women, in fact, most young men are feminists or equalitarians who have been brainwashed into despising our civilisation.

In other words, they are just as unhinged and difficult as the young women that feminism produced - this is what you reap when you sow anti-authoritarianism and tolerate gendermainstreaming. Slowly but surely younger generations are realising what is wrong, but given the power of the Internet and mainstream media it won't be undone in a generation.

There are 60 years of terrible mistakes to undo.

Sadly, I means bypassing those such as yours truly, who have long since given up the ghost.

Happy Birthday to me ...