11/11/2011 The Review Show

Tonight on the review show, everything from luminous Leonardo

to brutal Bronte. Director Andrea Arnold brings a

modern sensability to a much-loved classic. But do we need another

Wuthering Heights? What will be his name? Heathcliff. The national

gallery assembles the biggest collection of Leonardo's paintings

ever, is there anything new to learn. We have never had the

opportunity to study his aims and ambitions, his extraordinarily huge

ambitions for the art of painting. Vikram Seth is famous for his epic

tones, can his new, lighter offering, please plans. "joy came

and grieve, love came and loss, three years. Error Morris tells an

extraordinary tale in Tabloid, is the master at the height of his

powers. I could never understand the public's fascination with my

love life. Plus Liz Green joins us live in the studio to play you into

the weekend. # So we're standing in line

# With our pots and our pans Joining me in the hallowed halls of

Review this week, are four panelists who couldn't be less

tabloid, Patterson from the Independent, Anne McElvoy, James

Purnell and John Mullan, professor of English at University College

London. You can loudly agree, disagree or disabuse our panel on

Twitter, do be aware they do sometimes bite back. First up

tonight, it is the much anticipated new film from Arnold, who made so

much noise with her last film, Fish Tank. She has turneder attention to

the wild and wind swept lovers, who have haunted and terrorised so many

English students over the years. Emily Bronte's only novel,

Wuthering Heights, must be the most well read and highly analysed books

in the English language. And a favourite for the creative types,

from Lawrence Olivier to Kate Bush. # Heathcliff

# It's me a Cathy It has inspired a multitude of

dramatic adaptations, each with its own unique signature and style.

go it's mine. What children they are. I wouldn't change my life for

their's. Even if I go throw Joseph off the roof and paint the house

with Hindley's blood. Now acclaimed director Andrea Arnold brings her

inter pretation to the big screen. Arnold chose to tell the tale with

the same gritty realisim as past films, Fish Tank and Red Road.

Focusing the film on Heathcliff's troubled boyhood. Arnold tells the

story from his point of view. I will cleanse you. What will be

his name. Heathcliff. Heathcliff, do you reject Satan, come on.

struggle now. Arnold's near fanatical commitment to

authenticity, left the unknown actors, filming in the gruelling

conditions of autumnal Yorkshire. There was the minimal amount of

dialogue. Ungrateful little. Whilst the two Cathys, breerbreerbreer and

Skins actress, Kaya Scodelario, have to portray a transformation

from muddy child to elegant lady of the house.

Arnold's minimalism extended to largely hand held filming, and the

almost total absence of the score, choosing the natural sounds of the

landscape to set the scene. Cathy, Cathy.

The director herself has admitted any attempt will never do the book

justice. So was she right to try? He's gone.

Andrea Arnold said earlier this week that the world needed another

adaptation of Wuthering Heights like a hole in the head, but the

material was singing to her and she couldn't resist. Do you think she

should have? Yes, I do. I mean because I don't think it is an

adaptation of Wuthering Heights, indeed my usual president dantic

pleasure at noting all the things - - president dantic pleasure at

noting all the things got wrong were denied me by the film. It says

it is based on the book by Emily Bronte. It is based on all the bits

that are dealt with perfubgt actually in the book itself. Half

the film is the child Hoo and the childhood relationship in --

childhood and the childhood relationship with Heathcliff and

Cathy, which is dealt with in a small way in the book. There is a

point that we need to understand their childhood stories that are so

important. This book takes the ferocity of the spirit of the book,

and reimagines it visually and orally, there is no music in the

book, you hear every little sound and every bit of the weather. The

weather is in the camera, it really gets into the camera. It is

absolutely visually extraordinary. The best thing about it, it might

make you want to read the book again. Do you share her obsession

with the lives of the children, before they become their adult

selves? I loved this film, I absolutely loved it. I think it

caught the spirit of the book in a way nobody has done. The cruelty

and the hostile English landscape that anyone of us has ever seen. It

is awash with mud, and lashing winds and just so elemental, I

thought it really gave a sense of where this terror and cruelty and

passion came from. I felt it was absolutely right to focus on the

childhood in those ways. Those actors were absolutely phenomenal,

Solomon Glave, you know, mixed race, we haven't raised the race thing,

as a mixed race child, that was inspired. I thought it just sort of

reinterpreted the whole thing, it brought it brilliantly alive. I

loved it. Everyone is focusing very much on the fact that she cast a

mixed race Heathcliff, does it work for you? It did work, you were

going to have him in the foreground. She decided to primarily tell it as

his story. It is perfectly alongside the book. He's derided

racially from the moment he arrives. She lays it on too thick, there is

barely a scene when Hindley doesn't call him a ligger. This constant

use of a word, which you feel is put there to alarm and offend

modern audiences is used again and again. You get the point pretty

well that Heathcliff is an outsider and distrusted, not least because

of his race from the start. The real problem I have, I completely

agree with Christina, the childhood bits, the presexual bits, the bond

between them, and the blossoming sexuality, it was fantastic. There

were scenes that stuck with me all week, they were so tender and

passionate. When they grow up it is a disaster. Two different actors,

and what happens then, it turns into Jane Austen. You find yourself

looking at the curtains and thinking that is a nice dress. They

lost it. Perhaps it is too much to do, to put all this intensity on to

the young couple and say no we will look at what happens and cut it off

before the end of the novel. I thought that was really where I

lost it. It was game of two halves, as the footballer commentator, and

the second one failed. It may be Jane Austen and looking

at the pretty dress. Three films into Andrea Arnold we are getting a

sense of the things she likes to do and hear, we have hand held cameras,

a mystifying 4: 3 ratio, slow plays, lack of a soundtrack, do these

things work for you? I like the 4:3, I like the way it look, and gives a

1970s feel, realist but arty thing that you get from the display. I

thought it was more authentic than a lot of Wuthering Heights. I hate

the 1939 Lawrence Olivier one, it is sack cin and they distort the

story. I loved it with the love affair from the start, you really

believe it. I didn't quite buy it, she made Heathcliff too soft, he's

almost a wimp in the second half. No he isn't, he's hanging animals

on fences half the time. But the animal thing, That is all the way

through, and the hanging of the dog it is almost made as that is what

people do. He's given an excuse for everything he does. The thing in

the book he is a torturer but is tordturd. Do you think she should

have gone all the way to the end where we see Heathcliff as torturer

come into his own? The 1939 didn't have that, and this one doesn't,

you don't have his horribleness to Harton, and without the ghost you

lose the madness. Other films made the decision, they may have made it

for quite good reason. We want to see Catherine laid down, and after

that what happens to Heathcliff, though fatastically important in

the book may be less important. That puts the weight on the actor

in the second half of the film. is something to take a literary

classic and cut all the dialogue. It is extremely wordy book, and

Heathcliff is an articulate wordy person, and even as a teenager.

Some of these disagreements are almost by the board, they are the

kind of disagreements one usually has about a costume drama

adaptation of a drama. Should they have left in this and that. This

film is an extraordinary reimagining, which makes lots of

decisions I wouldn't have made. I wouldn't have had Heathcliff as

monosyllabic as she z but she has made the decisions with a kind of

fierce conviction that makes it completely unlike any other costume

drama I can remember seeing. takes little themes in the text,

she mentions fleetingly that Heathcliff can't cry as a child.

And then there is the scene when he sees Cathy crying and he puts some

grit in his eyes to create artificial tears, in itself that is

very moving. Some scenes later we have Cathy kissing the wounds on

his back, and then for the first time in his life real tears go down

his back. I think she's licking him. Being gentle with him, and kissing.

He is just, I was tremenduously moved by that. I thought there was

a delicate touch like that. And the way the camera would linger on a

moth or some flowers. There was an incredible senuality of the

landscape. You were saying earlier that you thought the landscape was

for bidding and cruel. I'm a northern girl, in the English

context, I was aching to go back to the Dales when I saw this. The

cinematographer deserves a huge applause. A won didn't he. It is

worth watching because it is so beautiful regardless. The endureing

appeal of Cathy and Heathcliff as lovers to audience and readers is

obvious. What do you think she's trying to bring in in tepls of an

audience, casting an actress like Kaya Scodelario, known from Skins,

is she bringing in younger people, it is an art house film? I don't

know what is art house about it. If you see the film it has a 70s feel,

it feels quite hip. It has a mix of elemental and 1970s, I think it has

a timeless quality. I think it is just about passion. That surely is

timeless, isn't it. On that passionate note. It loses a bit of

the horror. Passion, horror, Wuthering Heights has it all, on

general release. Puppy lovers beware. If you have ever visited

the Mona Lisa in Paris, you know the crowds that flock to a single

painting by Da Vinci. Imagine the frenzied excitement when nine of

his works are assembled in one place. Our panelists managed to

beat the crowds and get a sneak peek. It is the ultimate

blockbuster art show, with more than 60 works by the Italian

Rennaissance master, many on display in Britain for the first

time. The curator aimed for a contrast to previous exhibitions,

which have often focused on other parts of his prodigious output, as

scientists, engineer and craftman. This is about Leonardo the painter,

we have had the scientist and draftsman, but we have never had

the opportunity to study his aims and ambitions, his extraordinarily

huge ambitions for the art of painting before. Perhaps those

ambitions limited him, only 15 completed paintings are known. This

exhibition is a rare chance to see so many in one place. He was a

great non-finisher, we have to ask ourselves why. I think it is

because he had such an extraordinary idea of what he

wanted to achieve in his head, times that was simply uncould be

tainable. The national gallery has managed to secure collections from

around the world. A task that required more than a little

diplomacy People don't lend Leonardos lightly. Some were very

easy, and others were diplomatic and needed intervention from the

arts minister. But in the end it is right that each of the decisions

that various lending institutions made, had to be considered over a

period of months and years. secure those loans is undoubtedly a

coup, but rather than merely assembling them, this show aims to

illustrate a deeper thought. What you are seeing best is the move

from a painter who considered himself to be essentially the

mirror of nature, to precisely observe what you could see around

him. Just somebody who thought that his own act of creation was some

how like that of gots God's. So he's creating in a way that is, he

could see as being sort of divine in an odd sort of way. You can

follow that journey in the nine works. He thought of his own

creative skills as being akin to those of God. He saw his talent as

being God-given. It was almost miraculous, I think. Already

launched to critical acclaim, and selling as fast as any show on

record, the exhibition is an undoubted hit. Does it make the

case for Leonardo's position at the very Zen it of art hiry? --

history? It is a hit this show, does it add

up to the sum of its parts? parts are pretty amazing. I found

myself on the front picture with the lady in the ermine, open

mouthed in the sheer beauty. You don't need to get to the

explanations behind it, there is fascinating things about how he's

trying to understand God through nature, to overtake nature, to

leech to God. His inspiration between different forms of

philosophy. Actually you just sit there for so many of the paintings

just completely blown away. To have that pure, absolutely gut wrenching

feeling is something that is incredibly exciting. These were the

years that really made him, when he turns up in Milan, he's not yet the

resonance sans polymath we see today. Rennaissance polymath we see

today. We are asked to leave our other ideas of him and see him just

as a painter. Is it possible to do that? It is, it is so jofrpb

womening it is a lifetime treat. I hadn't realised that I hadn't --

overwhelming, it is a lifetime treat. I realised I hadn't looked

at his paintings in detail until I got there. This is the rich

tapestry laid out before us. They are not in -- full works, but the

allure of the time sent me to read up on the beautiful women. What are

the things you realise, a lot of them were mistresses of his patron.

I love that the drama, the way the wife is staring at the mistress.

don't know it is the wife. We like to think it is. I just want to make

one point. One of those women is 16. They have these confidence and

bearing, it is also a painting about position and power. Everyone

mentions beauty proportional -- proportion and all the things's

famous for, their position is precarious, in 15 years it is

someone else, at the heart of all the paintings. The poise? Still so

beautiful. Rough time for women, but to be in one of those, fine.

Extraordinary, as he works to create this ideal of beauty, at the

same time, every one of those human beings is credible as a human being,

I think, as a soul. That is why we find it so moving. The exhibition

is skillfully curated, it is about Leonardo the man, the process

behind him making these works. It is very well guided. Immediately we

walk into the exhibition, a sense from a tiny drawing that you might

go past, the eye, about how it creates creativity in the soul.

Very early on the painting of a young musician that was a quiet

revolution. For the first time he turns the portrait around. How did

you respond to that sense of the way that Leonardo's mind was

working? I have to say, it has been so heavily hyped this exhibition.

It is hard for an exhibition to live up to the hype. I found it

really quite an overwhelming experience. From the moment I went

in and saw that first picture, it is about the ventricles of the

brain and perception. I felt overwhelmed. You see the different

sketches of hands, or drapery, there was one of a child's torso,

that makes you want to cry. You want to pick up that child and

cuddle it. It is only a tiny segment of a torso, there is more

humanity in that segment, than you would find in a thousand artists

put together. For me, one of the many things that moved me about

this, this sense of endless quests for perfection. Although he was

unbelievably lace yeen when it came to -- lazy when it came to painting,

he only painted 15. One deadline took him 25 years to meet. We all

relate to that. I love the line about how freelance life didn't

suit him. But you see the effort he put into what he did do. Then you

see the paintings, and you just want to weep. For me it was the

lady with the ermine, that and weirdly the Burlington cartoon,

more than the Madonnas. But you look at those paintings and you see,

you can really only call the human soul, a humanity and soul that I

can't think of another artist that reaches. Lots of people are talking

about this in rather religious terms? It is a semi-religious

experience. I'm not sure I'm quite the zealot that everybody else is?

Why? Because I'm not sure, I think it is a wonderful exhibition. I'm

not sure I find all the paintings as immediately humanely

understandable as everybody else seems to. Because to me there is

something strange as well as human about them. What's fantastic about

the best ones, the lady the er -- Lady with the Ermine is fantastic.

What Christina is saying about it is true, it is this strange art

fact of Rennaissance perfection. He believes in perfection in way we

don't. It is not like going to see an exhibition by a great artist

from later centuries, where you are always thinking this is a

particular person. It is a person, but it is also strangely not her,

it is also an image, conjured. We don't know what she looked like,

but it is an image of sort of almost, yes, religious

contemplation, as well as a particular individual. That's

what's extraordinary about it, and what makes it, makes some of the

art works strange and distant as well as wonderful. Sorry, we have

so much to say, if you want to see perfection or as close as we will

come to it, the exhibition is on at the national gallery, 500 tickets

are held back every day to sell on the door. Please do set your alarm

clocks early, it is really worth the wait. If Leonardo is the

quintessential Renaissance Man, Seth is also a man of many --

Vikram Seth is also a man of many talents. Seth is a man of many

talents, with The Suitable Boy, he also writes poetry. In The Rivered

Earth, he combines writing with his long-term passion, music. His novel

An Equal Music, experimented with musical forms, in The Rivered Earth

he connects with music more directly. It contains music by

accompanying composer, Seth's own kal Liffey adoorns the pages, it

takes us all over the world, from China to his Salisbury house, where

the English poet George herb bet lived and died. Shared ground is on

the fact Herbet and I shared the ground, his having been here almost

400 years ago. He's a gentle spirit, it is possible to live in his house,

he doesn't bully you. Not a hindrance, but encouraging spirit.

His ghost, his soul is here. He will change my style. But you could

do worse than rent his rooms of verse. Joy came, and grieve, love

came and loss, three years, tiles down, moles up, drought, flood.

Though far in time and faith, I share his tears. His hearth, his

ground, his mut, yet my host stands just out of mind and sight, that I

may sit and write. This month sees the release of the CD Shared Ground,

the musical component of the collaboration between Seth,

composer Alec Roth and a violinist. Do his talents extend to the

musical realm? This is being published as a stand

alone literary work, it is asking to be judged first and foremost on

those merits, do you think that is right? I think that is trickery. It

works when you get the music and the big coral sound, which is very,

very well engineered, in a musical sense. That works extremely well,

you think now I want to read this libbret toe in detail. The problem

with the book is it tells you far too much about how he set about

working on it and his relationship with Alec Roth, it is the

equivalent of watching sasauges being made. You want to get on and

read it. You read it, and the spare poetry, it reminds me he's a bridge

builder between cultures, that sense of the old Chinese and Indian

poetry, where there is nothing at the end of your life, just you and

the place you are. That comes over very, very well. I think some of it,

frank frankly, is a bit windy, the music covers that up, get the music

alongside the book. Musical sausage making? Agree with Anna. In the

book he's a connoisseur of his creativity. Not a lovable thing.

He's a very, clever old thing. He can do the metres, he can do the

rhymes, and these kind of lots of languages, then he writes Chinese

translations and you think others do this and brilliantly, this is OK.

He imitates the stanziac forms and well, but why not set the George

Herbet to music, and don't worry about translating and adapting them,

go to George Herbet, he was a genius. The aim was because he

lived in George Herbet's house. They have made some elevated

comparisons, there is a lot of talk about Bach, Schubert and Herbet.

Are they setting themselves up for a fall? Genuinely is if one

mentions Bach! I must say I think I like this more than you two did. I

agree the peoples are uneven. It is a hotch potch, the book is

described as libretto and peoples, it can't be both. Unless you buy

the Bob Dylan is a poet-genius argument, that is a whole other

deal. Are they peoples or lyrics, it is a miscellaneous job lot. Some

of the Chinese translations I read 20 years a he didn't meet his

deadline. Then you have the shared ground peoples, I really like those.

The spirit of Herbet does pervade them in way that works very well. I

think what Vikram Seth does beautifully, when his peoples work

they have a real clarity and simplicity. The lyric is his form.

I think that those Herbet inspired peoples do work beautifully. With

the music, no it is not Bach, but it is actually very beautiful coral

music. With this really haunting ethey areal quality. I'm not in a

position to judge whether it is great music. I loved it. Without

the book in front of you and gazing with the lyrics, it would seem like

an expensive thing that you wouldn't know the results. It does

make one want to have been there, to hear them in sit tu. With the

intro to The Traveller, he said he needed a grand entrance, why not

all human life. That might be preposterous arrogance, coming not

from Leonardo Da Vinci or Vikram Seth. As a boy he did cover the

gamit. Do you think a writer of his undourtable powers, do you think he

should be -- undoublable powers, do you he should be turning his hand

to this kind of offering? The music, sitting there listening to it

whilst reading was incredible. I thought the rest of it was uneven.

There may be an explanation in the way he describes the process. Sends

in a more worked through multilayered people called Fire,

then the composer said it is too e elliptical to be set to music. They

are to too makish. He makes the difference between a text and a

people. Are we to judge them as a libret toe or a people. The

translations were published many years ago, do they stand alone now?

I don't think so. There is a terrible tendency to bathos in a

lot of them. There is the border line which is to do with reading

from anticity, you are not sure if it is very profound or very obvious.

The book is available in all good bookshops, the CD released next

week. Error Morris is one of the world's most celebrated documentary

makers, with a string of work in the Thin Blue Line and The Fog of

War. Now he brings his investigative eye to a rather more

tawdry tale. Tab is the extraordinary story of

former beauty Queen, Joyce McKinney, and her mysterious tempt pestous

relationship with a young Mormon from Utah, and what happened when

he went on a mission to London back in 1977. I did what every American

girl would do if her fiance vanished into thin air strikes I

looked for him. McKinney describes a weekend of food, fun and sex,

resulting in charges of imprisonment, and three nopbts in

Holloway Prison and a covert escape. This is the beginning of a whole

new idea in the media, the self- invented celebrity. The person who

has created this strange public image of herself, using tabloid

newspapers. Now we see Joyce McKinneys everywhere. In the 1970s,

she was something new. While some newspapers portrayed McKinney as a

romantic victim, others searched for a more shadey past, and

suggested she was a depraved sedubgt trees. You have two

newspapers You have two newspapers fighting over Joyce McKinney and

whether she's a virgin or aer who. Crazy. The clear interest is not

who is Joyce McKinney, the interest is whatever story we will put

together to sell newspapers. Tabloid is Joyce McKinney's chance

to reply. Filmed using Morris trade mark teretron, a device which

allows direct eye contact with the subject on camera. It calls into

question firsthand accounts. I could never understand the public

fascination with my love life, I was a human being caught in an

extraordinary circumstances. All of us are involved in narrating

a story to ourselves and to others. Joyce is a perfect example of that.

She's a person with a strong romantic vision of herself. That

has remained intact, no matter what has happened to her over the years.

That does fascinate me. While Tabloid sells a remarkable tale, is

it anything more than a bit of eccentric fun.

Error Morris turned documentary film making on its head with The

Gates Of Heaven, many of the techniques are standard operating

procedure for him, does it pack a punch? It is an extraordinary punch.

You have documentaries about really important issues but not that

interesting to watch. This is fascinating to watch. I'm not sure

if it is about a really important issue. He manages with not a lot of

archive, to keep you gripped all the way through. The story flips

back wards and forwards, lots of time, like the best thrillers. The

whole thing about how we perceive her, how she perceives herself, how

it is interpreted through different people. And how her feelings change

throughout it. It is an emotional rollercoaster, and great to watch

from start to finish. I'm not sure it sheds an awful lot of light on

celebrity now, I enjoyed watching it. He insists at its heart it is

about a love story. Is that completely disingenious? Does he

really insist that. Clearly that is completely disingenious. It is a

rollicking good yarn. As I think it is one of the journalists who says

it is the perfect tabloid story. It is, the man keled norm man meets

the women. The words are flashed across the screen, manacled Norman,

and spread eagled. The story is so gripping and she's such a mez

merising performer, performer she is, I know she is taking legal

action. Error Morris said if there was a catagory for Best Performance

in a Documentary, she would win it. I do think all that vintage footage

and 50s kitchen, All of this adds a different slant tonally from all

the other Error Morris films I have seen. Normally he allows the voices

to build up into a symphony that speaks for itself, here he is

commenting on the story. It is not just a rollicking good yarn, it is

one that we are all invited to snik snigger at. It is fine, but a

different enterprise. It makes the whole question of tabloid

journalism more complicated. He has called it Tabloid, he is a self-

professed laufr of tabloids, gets - - lover of tabloids, he's a lover

of tabloids. Shall we not talk about tabloid, and comlum inchs and

air time. Do you think it works as an investigation into how

journalists are operating then and today? It is an innocent era in

tabloid journalism. It is the moerm mans who tap the phones? Gone are

the days you could find an American girl tying moerm mans to bed. In

those 1970s tabloids they spriankled gold dust on newspaper,

people who -- spriankled gold dust on newspapers. Mab they wouldn't

have tapped your phone, these were entertaining blokes you would want

a drink with. I'm not sure it tells you something you wouldn't know.

You know there will be a fight over the memoirs. This film shouldn't be

called Tabloid, it should be Joyce. She's so fan tais particular, and

will be played by McAllister son Steadman at some point. --

McAllister son Staed man at some point. Tab -- Alison Steadman at

some point. It only works if you zoo can see yourself in it.

says an important line about telling a lie long enough and

believing it. She's not talking about herself. Moving on from Joyce.

Is she a worthy subject for a at the momentry of this length?

not sure -- a documentary of this length? I'm not sure she is. I felt,

as Christina felt, I think, that I had a bit of a bad taste in my

mouth by the end of it. Half way through I was really enjoying t I

agree very much she's an extraordinary performer, and the

bit part characters are good as well. The iconic old ex-hack, and

the gay, born out of moerm mannism, ex-moerm man mormanism, who tells

you what it is all about. It is a tabloid, the pursuit, in

the end, it felt like a pursuit, it became a bit too much. The joke has

an effect. You start feeling, I'm complicit in actually not just

finding her entertaining, but actually, yes, laughing at her.

Because she's not a character but a human being. I have to stop you all

there. We cannot have a serious conversation about Tabloid without

talking about Boeg er. The reason I don't agree with that, I would

agree if they went on and on about the moermmans, the fact she has

engineered this tabloid speak, and asking can a woman rape a man, it

is like putting a marshmallow in a parking meeting. She is up to the

game. She's not a victim. You want to talk about the dog, she clones

her dog. What more could you ask. Tabloid went on general release,

today. Liz Green will be here to play us out in the studio. You can

become your own Error Morris, with the BBC's massive documentary

project. Britain grab your cameras, between midnight tonight and

tomorrow, the BBC are asking you to film something that captures the

intimacy and singularity of your life, and to upload it to a

dedicated channel on YouTube. Last year Ridley Scott and Kevin Scott

looked at the footage of film taken on the 24th of July, it brought a

film edited, and brought from 92 nations.

Now Scott is collaborating with the BBC to create a snapshot of Britain.

40 years ago I went out and filmed my day. That is what led me to do

what I do today. Post monthly make it personal, whatever you film.

will be a unique portrait of 24 hours in the UK. A 0-minute feature

length film, directed by award- winning Morgan Matthews. Whether it

is with your phone camera, or something fancier, capture

something that is you in your life and become part of our nation's

story. You can find out more on the website.

Maybe you could film yourselves watching Review again on i player.

That is it for tonight. Thank you to my guest, send us your lovely

appreciative comerpbts on Twitter, they warm up a cold -- comments on

Twitter. They warm up a glos Glasgow evening. Mark Kermode will

be here with Kerry Shale and others, to discuss the Twilight series. Up

next is jools Holland. First to get your feed tapping is Liz Green with

Bad Medicine, from her album, # The words of an old blues man

# Wrote was in time with his soul # Though his face be cracked and

worn # Like age old summer soil

# You know he gave you his hand # To lift him off the ground

# No-one wants a hand # That's rough to touch

# From the ship it has been carrying round

# Every man wants more than he # Ever did before

# He still has no way out # We have no way out

# No way out # We've got no way out of this

# Well he walks through town # Like a Bible prophet

# Knows he owns it all # But sometimes he doesn't bother

# Sometimes he doesn't bother # For Lord

# Well he knows the dark hearts of # He's been there before

# He won't go there again # No he won't go there again

# For every man wants more than he # Ever did before

# He still has no way out # We have got no way out

# No way out # We've got no way out of this

# So if my eyes turn black # And my teeth fall out

# Or my hair is caught up in ration # Don't give me none of that

medicine # For I'll spit it right back out

# Well he tried so hard # To fit in

# But he never really got a chance # Before he spoke

# They burnt him # Roped him

# Cut him # And finally put him in the ground

# He said I've been through war # Been through law

# Climbed that hill so cold # I've been through more than

# You'll ever know # They won't let me go

# Every man wants more # Than he ever did before

# We have no way out # No way out

# We have no way out of this Mill my eyes turn black

# And my teeth fall out # May hair's caught up in ration

# Don't give me none of that medicine

# For I'll spit it right back out # I will spit it right