09/12/2011 The Review Show

On the Review Show tonight, we have Father Ted, Dickens for Christmas

and a modern morality tale. A '50s classic, the Ladykillers, is

reworked by 21st century comic masters. Would you like a tea, Mr

Marcus? Oh, I do apologise. I should have known your face.

Another reinvention of tradition in Dickens' Great Expectations for the

BBC. He is to live as a young fellow of

great expectations. Real people from the past at Scotland's

National Portrait Gallery after a two-year revamp with 60% more space.

Does a new picture of the nation emerge? And a documentary portrait

of a forgotten woman in her 30s whose skeleton was found three

years after her death in a London flat. What does that say about

modern Britain? I often thought about what she was doing and

probably most of the time I actually thought that, she was

already dead. Plus, performing live in the studio,

the Manic Street Preachers' front man, James Dean Bradfield. Joining

me in the studio to mull and whine over the seasonal offerings are the

Classic FM presenter Mark Forrest, the Economist's public policy

editor Anne McElvoy, the writer AL Kennedy and comedian and political

activist Mark Thomas. Don't forget to send us a torrent of Tweets.

They keep us amused and horrified in the green room after the show.

The transition from stage to screen is well established, but some

recent productions have reversed the trend. Think about Dirty

Dancing, Legally Blond or Ghost, for example. Now one of TV's top

comedy writers has gone back to the 1950s to adapt one of British

cinema's all-time greats for the stage. Written by William Rose and

directed by Alexander Mackendrick, the Ladykillers is one of the best-

loved British comedy films of all time. Alec Guiness, Cecil Parker

and Peter Sellers form part of a motley crew of criminals who pose

as classical musicians in order to rent a room from an apparently

dotty landlady. I thought you and your guests might like a cup of tea.

Oh, you shouldn't. Now a writer renowned for his eccentric

characters, the creator of Father Ted and the The IT Crowd, Graham

Lineham has written a new version of the black comedy. The film is

very lean and very - it tells the story and it tells a very simple

story very effectively, and it kind of gets out, but with the play,

once I had lost all the location stuff, it left me with a lot more

room to play around with these characters, because you'll notice

in the film there's all of these great comic actors playing the

roles of Harry and the Major and so on, but they don't actually get a

Mrs Wilberforce? Yes. My name is Marcus. I believe you have rooms to

rent. What? Who told you? Director Sean Foley's cast includes TV stars

James Fleet and Ben Miller with Peter Capaldi as the brains behind

this. There is such affection in the show. There is such a warm

tribute to the original material. Oliver -- all of us come here with

great respect and are trying to make a new, warm version of the

same thing that people can embrace. It's a brave move to adapt a film

often cited as one of our finest classics, so can Lynne Han's

version equal the standards of the original film, or would it be

better left undisturbed as a gem of the silver screen. You have been

dishonest with me, professor. All of you have. You're not amateur

musicians! Now, Mark, we know Graham Lineham clearly relishes

eccentricity if we look at the work he's done with Father Ted and The

IT Crowd, so in a way perhaps it's not surprising he was drawn to this.

No, because the characters are so extreme, exciting and quirky and

odd that, yes, this is really his natural palette, if you like.

What's brilliant about it, I think - because the show is great. I

think what's really interesting about it in terms of his writing

and in terms of directing is they've stripped out the suspense

element because we know what's going to happen, so they have

stripped out the suspense. They have stripped out the idea of

what's going to happen next, and it means the actors can just play, and

they have created almost a farce this wonderful slapstick adaptation

of the Ladykillers that exists in its own right. It's great. But then

if you strip out the suspense, isn't there a risk there isn't the

same kind of excitement about it? loved the original film. I don't

know if I was excited by it. No, it's a beautiful character piece.

You've got a fantastic cast. They're clearly working

extraordinarily well together and having fun in a good and not self-

indulgent way, and you've got this extraordinary staging. Michael

Taylor's set is remarkable, and what's happening more and more -

you have Scott Penrose, a magician, is bringing in magical effects, so

the actors are doing things you would expect a magician to do. Pen

and teller are working in the theatre. Now Andy Wyman has been

working in the theatre. It's very generous. I love going to see

something that's funny and you get the verbal humour, the slapstick

humour, the remarkable staging. You just get extra and extra. The

curtain call is immaculate. It's going to run. You're going to take

your mother to see it, the kids to see it, people to see it on

holidays. It's a lovely show. Capaldi in particular is having fun,

isn't he? I think he's having fun in the role. When we saw him

talking about playing the role, my skin was beginning to creep because

he gets in you're blood. When he comes on, he has a leering presence.

His body is so angular. His body is too big for him all the time, just

as he thinks he's too big for his boots. "I am a very clever man," he

says at one point as he gets stuck in the window with a cello case

that fantastic comedy, but underneath it, there has to be a

dark side to the Ladykillers. I wondered with the slapstick how

they were going to do that moment when you believe he's prepared to

have her killed. He does that perfectly. It is dark. They have

stripped out a lot of the sinister elements. If you look at the

original film, the lighting, the way they're in that room which is

sinister and expressionist, you get that - Alec Guiness is brilliant

because you really think he can do some damage. There is one scene

where they're having the fight at the end in the film where he

emerges out of the smoke from the trains holding this club, and it's

just amazing. It really is quite an amazing moment. They have stripped

that out. I think they have taken the suspense out. I think they have

taken a lot of the menace out in a way, but that doesn't matter. In

many ways it doesn't, because the actual direction - I think Sean

Foley really deserves major league credit for this because he's got

his fingerprints all over this production. I think it's absolutely

brilliant. What they've done is just allowed them - Graham is right.

What they've done is allowed them room to play. But the spiritual -

or indeed the presence of Alec Guiness looms large, doesn't it,

over any future production? Very much. His voice in the film -

absolutely sensational. The look he went for - it was a hair-and-teeth

part, extraordinary. Peter Capaldi does that. I was worried when he

first came on he hadn't got far enough away from Peter Capaldi. He

had hair and teeth and gone for the scarf and the long coat as well. I

felt with Alec Guiness in the film, what you got was parts that grew

and developed. And I felt with Peter Capaldi, even though I loved

the show, I felt with Peter Capaldi he came on menacing, leering. For

me he was like the hooded claw out of Wacky Racers. He was a cartoon

from the beginning. The other four are cartoon characters. I felt they

were more subtle. Their characters grew, whereas Peter Capaldi was one

note all the way through. Alison? He'll come into it because he's

really authority it ative with the audience. They're doing a lot of

difficult business and physical stuff. I imagine that set is so

raked, you could really easily snap an ankle if you're not careful, but

when it settles, it will really... I loved all the slapstick and the

stuff with the black board. It's puerile but sensational. I wondered

if that distracted from what he was doing. The film in its time, which

was seen as a social commentary, a state of the nation - they could

have updated this. The original film - there is a wonderful shot at

the beginning where Ms Wilberforce walks through the street, and

there's picture of Churchill and a picture of a tramp next to him

begging. That sets the tone of this is Britain after its finest hour,

and here we are. We've come to this. They're too hung up on the film,

which I watched in a haze on Boxing Day many years ago - I recognise

it's very good. It wasn't in the forefront of my mind. I was one of

those theatregoers if you like. The person who missed out on this - it

really makes this social commentary very well is Mrs Wilberforce.

Marcia Warren. Yes, controlling brilliantly the part of the old

lady. She's still the centre of this play around which this all

evolves. If you don't believe in her and the fact she's the little

voice of morality at a time everyone is exhausted after the war.

People are taking their chances. You have a society that is

fragmenting after the war has held it together - you really have to

believe in her. She did that downplayed in a way Peter Capaldi

didn't. In fact it's extraordinary the way she does manage to be the

focus of attention so much throughout the pay. I enjoyed it,

like all of you I think. The Ladykillers is at the Gielgud

Theatre until April. Far more serious and tragic events behind

closed doors in a new documentary from filmmaker Carol Morley. The

story began in January 2006, when decomposing human remains were

found in a bedsit in north London. Officials from a housing

association discovered the remains of 38-year-old Joyce Carol Vincent.

Her skeleton was surrounded by Christmas presents. The television

was still on three years since her her missing. Newspapers offered few

details about the case, but the story caught the eye of documentary

film-maker Carol Morley. I remember being on the tube, finding The Sun,

looking through the Sun and finding this head line, "Woman is dead in

plait for three years", and when I read that head line, it was so

extreme, really, I suppose, and there was no photograph of Joyce,

no personal information. She was so anonymous, and I think as soon as I

saw the head line, I wanted to tell the story, and I wanted to make a

film about it and find out about her. It's like she never really

existed. She was just a figment of our imagination. It was a story. It

was like someone we made up almost. Someone died that we all thought we

cared about. If you read that in a book form, you would be thinking,

this has got to be fiction, but this is real life. The debate about

being living in dislocated societies, not having communities

anymore has been banging on for ages. It's been a theory. This is

the living reality about it. often thought about what she was

doing and probably most of the time I actually thought that she was

already dead. Carol Morley spent five years track down her friends

and former colleagues and managed to piece together a time line of

her life in London. She then uses this information to script

reconstructions with the actress Zoe Ashton portraying Joyce. The

circumstances of Joyce Carol Vincent's enigmatic life and tragic

death shock because they're so rare, but does her story highlight wider

issues in this story? Why did this happen? Perhaps we could ask

ourselves why doesn't this happen more often? Especially in urban

areas we can become anonymous. It's the joy of a city, but also the

downfall of a city. Dreams of a Life attempts to piece together a

story with many gaps. Does her death make the film more of a

mystery or make the story Margerie, this is an intriguing

story. She doesn't seem to be the kind of person you would expect to

fall through the cracks. That was the starting point for me, surprise.

When you read that story, you would possibly think it was somebody who

hadn't had a great life and had fallen through the holes but it

wasn't like that. She was a bit of a drifter but also rather

unglamorous figure, on a fast set... -- a glamourous figure. Getting in

with the PR crowd. That, I suppose, is what must have been the starting

point, that we are supposed to be surprised. What worries me is that

is -- it is extremely voyeuristic and in that way and pleasant. If it

set out to do a service and tell a story, it is wide of the mark. It

was journalistically not a good film. A big draw you win? Of the

things we have watched, it was the most memorable, but because of the

frustrations. Carol Morley spent five years tracking people down,

but you don't see any of these people. They are a small handful of

friends that near her early on. You don't meet the family. She must

have spoken to the family. Her mother died when she was 11 but her

father and three sisters were still alive when she died. No mention of

them, other that they didn't want to talk. The Boyfriend, we hear

from again and again. She had dozens a boy friends that we hear

from double. The boy friends and the family of what shape to this

woman -- and we hear from two. The presumably, they wouldn't want to

appear in a film from -- like this? That is one of the failures. Why

does a woman ended three years dead in his flat? Really urgent

questions, and then it fails to answer any of them. You are right,

journalistically, it fails. It doesn't trace the family or talk to

them, or the immediate neighbours. It doesn't have any contact with

the Lord Taylor -- the utilities or the authorities. You are left with

gossip fulls -- from friends, former friends, and that is not

good enough. Is it fair to call it gossip? At least two were very

close, two were boy friends. don't think she is aiming for

journalistic, it is the way she was with her previous film, she is

interested in whether you can no people at all and she wants to

present you with people as if you are meeting them in a bar, how well

can you know strangers? I found it very moving when I watched it. I

think it opens up a lot of issues philosophically. I did think it is

tried to give you an essay or trying to investigate life in a

journalistic way. But it sets out like that, that is how it said said,

why did she fall through the gap? Why did this happen? -- that is how

it said said. It asks the questions. It is not come into a conclusions

are that respect, I didn't think it was telling me you are Red Four,

society is at fault. It was making Meikleour, and all of her friends

were, she was someone who made the choices -- it was making it clear.

We haven't it splayed about the use of the actors. -- discussed about

the use of the actors. Carol Morley is explaining what she thinks.

does use drama and reconstruction as a way of telling this. They are

just awful. I think so I Ashton does the best that she can. These

shots that are felt for three times as long as they should be. What is

happening is the film-maker is imposing a reality on this woman

because she cannot fill in the gaps and then asking somebody to try and

back to them out. The really crucial point here is that there is

bad imputation. There is imputation about child abuse, people just say

so extraordinary things that they eat grass bout of the air. -- grass

bout of the air. Your projected on to higher, because she was

mysterious and she is dead if -- you projected on to have.

appreciate what you are saying that, but I found that moving, opening

some present and realising there was a tie in one of those boxes.

She was giving a present to a man in her life he didn't notice she

was gone for three years. If you can't watch the end sequence

without being moved, you have got a heart of Formica. In it is not

saying it is a problem in society... It is blaming society and it has

this big society message. Like the bloke said in your clip, it goes to

show we should all be in a cabinet it. This is somebody who wants to...

You are in Boulder Channel 4 website project related to the film.

Do you think it says something wider about society? I saw some of

the talking heads and I found it very interesting and right now, in

a very material time, when people are working like hell or been

unemployed like hell, that somebody... How long would it be

until somebody noticed you were dead? Are you going to notice you

would stop? Are you living in a way it is meaningful, are you telling

people you love them? One of the things I thought about was that she

wasn't somebody who was neglected per save. She had withdrawn. She

had decided to hide. The projection she was able to give to all of her

friends, she was terribly beautiful and every man wanted to go out with

her, she was successful and had a job in the City but something had

gone on in her past that was completely shaping the way she made

relationships. Dreams Of A Life is in selected cinemas from next

Friday. Now, what to Mary Queen of Scots,

Dolly the sheep and Susan Boyle have in common? I will tell you

before you tweet any suggestions? - -. They are three people on the

walls of the oldest purpose-built gallery dedicated to the portrait,

which has recently undergone a dramatic facelift.

The Scottish National Portrait Gallery houses the second largest

collection of portraits in the world. Four other 120 years, its

imposing neo-Gothic structure has sat in Edinburgh's New Town without

alteration. But over the past two years, a dramatic refit has

transformed the gallery's space. have revolutionised what we have

done inside. We have restored the building to its Victorian original,

much more space, the light floods in, and the pictures look fantastic.

In the past, in the room we are standing in now, we told the whole

history of Scotland from the 16th century up to the 18th century. Far

too much, far too complicated to get your head around. This has been

spread out in 28 different galleries, which means we can do

the opposite of dumbing down and look at subjects in greater detail

that make it more appealing to the general public. What we have got

our Portrait of the people who did amazing things. Each person on the

walls has a fabulous story to tell. The aim of the redesigned space is

to tell Scotland's story through 3 -- D batik displays that will

change over time. -- thematic. They go for the restoration right up to

the present day. This is a gallery about Scotland at the present as

well as the past. It is what makes Scotland the country it is today

and so as well as all the people you would expect like Mary, Queen

of Scots or David Hume, we have also got Karen Gillan, a Susan

Boyle, Kenny Dalglish. It is about Scotland today, informed by

Scotland of the past. The gallery also houses a new room which was

showcase some of the 38,000 photographs in the national

collection. What photography does is democratised the gallery. Before

we should, we did show photographs occasionally but it wasn't integral

to the displays. Now, they are absolutely central and I think the

whole product of what we are trying to present to the public is a very,

very much richer blend than we were able to do before. So does this

ambitious we decide on a grand old Scottish building did justice?

I know this building well from where I live in Edinburgh and I did

enjoy going there but it was always slightly gloomy. I know, you sort

of get distracted by the cake, it was warm and welcoming. It is dark

and then that it this -- that is light and welcoming. The first

thing you do is Scots that have done well. Are you got a hot Scot?

I have never been part in my life. -- are you not. It is not about we

are the finest, if you happen to be from here, it is nice to see people

who have done well, and if he was not, here we are, a small culture

and we present ourselves. Mark, you knew the old one. I love what they

have done there, they have transformed that Central Hall,

which is incredible. I remember going there and thinking it was

like Hogwarts, it was all done dusty, and they have opened up the

space and made this incredible opening Hall, the central part of

the building that just flourishes. The space is amazing that, they

have given... What they have done is created a really amazing it

gallery. So much thought has gone into it. It is not done strictly

chronologically, but the rooms are thematic, so you have the Jacobite

but not just the Jacobites, it is the Jacobite in exile. Actually,

there is a bit of chronology. The way they took us around, anyway,

and they started us off at 1,500 with their first Portrait, and then

you saw Mary, Queen of Scots -- 1,500. The Jacobites, I walked in

and I thought it is a bit hysterical and I never studied this

but you can clearly see how important that gallery is. We were

taken around by a photographer- curator, he was very keen to get us

there and that is when the gallery came to life. A lot of these

paintings, you will have seen that before, and when you get to the

photographs, you are met with these extremely -- met with this extreme

where everything has gone and you start this romantic journey through

extraordinary Scottish landscapes which then taking into the urban

centre of Edinburgh and Glasgow. You're right, the photographs are

just stunning. That is where the gallery really kicks in. You get

this amazing sense of Scottishness, of it really is an assured --

National Gallery of Scotland and tells her history. It's a cultural

interpretation. That is really exciting. It is such a clear

expression of Scottish nationhood, it is very interesting watching the

effect that galleries and collections can have on countries

that are trying to do something different. I have just seen a lot

of emerging countries do that. In the context, it is fascinating. I

was riveted by the very miserable picture of James the 6th, or James

the first, whichever way you look at it Kebabou I thought that would

be going on to campaign posters. -- and I thought. It cannot be called

nationalistic, though. Not at all. They are under 10 she would get if

you knew the history, like the romantic Camera exhibition --

undertones. You get more and more people and you end with that

beautiful, vibrant picture of a ball of the people being properly

it. The Glasgow town hall Christmas party, which is just people having

a wonderful time and being alive. But it is not nationalistic or

stupid. There is a real sense of ownership, which was really

interesting. While we were there, people came in and said, we are

read this and were pointing at one of the films. -- we are in this.

There is a real sense of ownership and it raises, actually, an

interesting question. It is kind of like the artistic version of the

West Lothian question. If the Scottish National Gallery has so

much about Scottish national identity and the National Gallery

in London is so much about being British, where is the English

National Gallery? On that enormous note, we will leave this part of

the discussion, because that could take a very long time to answer

that question. Now, deny it as you might,

Christmas will soon be upon us and it wouldn't be Christmas without

the star studied television adaptation of a popular classic.

This year's BBC One centrepiece is one of Charles Dickens'best-loved

books, Great expectations. The novels of Charles Dickens are

no strangers to the TV adaptation. Over the decades, many of his

players -- most famous works have to be translated to the small

screen and Great Expectations is a firm favourite. It first appeared

on the BBC in 1959, at nearly every decade since, a new variation has

been made. Where is your mother? Sarah Phelps, who cut her teeth of

EastEnders, is the latest writer to tackle this classic tale of

transformation. Oscar Kennedy plays the young the Pip, Ray Winston

gives a bruising performance as Magwitch. And the X Files Gillian

Anderson offers a ghostly Miss You're Pip from the Forge. Yes,

madam. I am not madam. I am not married. After years in his uncle's

forge, pip is informed by Jagers, played by David Gibbs that he's to

be transformed into a gentleman. The owner wants Mr Pirip to be

removed from his present life and go to London where he is to be

instructed in the ways and manners of society, where he is to live the

life of a gentleman, where, in short, he is to live as a young

fellow of great expectations. Mean and moody cinematography of

the opening episode make much of the bleak setting. The production

values are certainly high, and it has a starry cast, but do we really

need yet another adaptation of this well-worn favourite? My food not

good enough for you? It's Christmas. If you can't beat a boy at

Christmas, when can you beat him? That's a fantastic line. We have

seen a lot of the Great Expectationss over the years. Do we

need another? Yes, please. I thoroughly enjoyed this. It was

terrific. The last one I saw was that updated one - Alfonso Cuaron -

that was '98. I hadn't seen one for awhile. Knowing this was going to

have Gillian Anderson again, who was Lady Deadlock in that amazing

Bleak House bleak - I put the DVD in. I was worried at first because

the Bleak House was done in half- hour episodes, wasn't it, and it

was very short, tight scenes. It was done like a serial. I thought

this was the way forward... Going back to Dickens'... Yes, the way

Dickens had done it. They have reverted to the conventional style.

The scene everybody knows in the graveyard, young Pip is there. The

gloom is there. The mist is there. It's washed out when it starts,

then teeny bits of colour come in. You see a little bit of blood, a

little bit of pie. The bleakness of the landscape and the way it was

filmed - there is a brilliant opening where you get a shot across

the river and the prison ships and suddenly Ray Winstone's head comes

out of the water. It's a nod to apocalypse. There are some great,

great moments in it. I think there are some really good actors, but Ms

Haver sham is just not good. she's great. She had a bit of Kate

Bush in Wuthering Heights. I love it because apart from anything else

she's George V Bridge in a petticoat. She stands in front of a

young boy and says, here's your future. It's shiny. Oh, I'm sorry.

You're condemned to hell forever. Go and write - no, it's grand. It's

her speciality now. I adored her. It was a great story of social

mobility whether or not George Osborne took it away. She's awful

in it. It's such a shame because it's motoring along so beautifully,

and Pip that boy actor, your heart is going out to him. You just want

to go in and rescue him from his surroundings. Then he comes in -

it's like a Kate Bush B side then a goth in a basket look about the

whole costume. They have gone too far and over-stylised her. That's

not her fault but she has this vacant look on her face. The thing

about her is, she's such a manipulative creation, you think,

which dark depths of Dickens' mind did she come from? It's like having

a 33 RPM record played all the time. She slows the whole thing all the

time. What about the interpretation of Pip because he can be incredibly

bland, the innocent - just a cipher. It's interesting because we have

only seen the first episode - it was an hour long. AL Kennedy played

the young Pip. I thought he was terrific, not only soaking up

everything around him, but he had a personality as well, which often

doesn't come out. We then saw old Pip. I thought it's boy George - he

hasn't done a lot as of yet. Whether he turns out to be as good

we'll have to see. When you look at the span of them over time, do you

think this tells us something about our own age? Absolutely. When you

look at the '60s and '70s when everything seemed to be evening out,

you had the cozy Dickenses. Now we're going back there in so many

ways. It's not an anachronistic bleakness, but particularly in the

first episode you're looking at everything slightly from young

Pip's viewpoint. Everything is huge and threatening. You have no

expectations, genuinely savage. That's where a lot of children are

living. The question you asked in the beginning, do we need another

adaptation? No, we don't. This is good. It's fine, but it's a period

drama served up every Christmas with some kind of regularity...

can't we have one now? Dickens... It's a part of Christmas

in the end... Which he'll not put - for heaven's sake - the

anniversary... There is a coo curious thing about why we like

Dickens - the English in particular like Dickens because he represents

- the English people or the middle class English like the Conservative

radical. That's why we like Stephen Fry and his lot. Ann? I don't agree

with that at all. If you look at what they're doing here, they're

taking this idea of social mobility, we're all banging on about in one

way or another and touched on a bit tonight and focusing on that they

have been raised up and the difference of being raised up and

cast down into poverty, and it's so brilliantly laid out, it's faithful

to the story. I think in a very subtle way it's referring to

concerns we have in society today, but it's not done with a

sledgehammer. That's the clever thing about it. Sarah Fox has done

a clever thing in leaning on things. She's upped the stakes in a really

nice way. You can see whether you think it's about the big society.

Great Expectations is on BBC One over three nights from December 27.

Monday night saw the presentation of the Turner Prize, and for the

third year in a row, the winner emerged from here in Glasgow. We

asked art critic Moira Geoffrey what it is about the place that's

led to such artistic prominence. someone who lives in Glasgow and

writes about art for a living, I asked why the city produces so many

Turner Prize winners. The winner for the 2011 Turner Prize, Martin

Boyce. With Martin Boyce's win this week, the last three successive

winners have been brought up or educated in the city. The questions

on Monday night at the ceremony in Gateshead tended to run to, is

there something in the water? I am not sure about that but there might

be something in this institution - Charles Dicken's Glasgow School of

Art where many of Turner Prize's successes have trained. The

building itself may be a radical masterpiece that's inspired many

Glasgow artists. It's not so much the bricks and mortar that matter

as the people inside - the teachers and peers in the city who Martin

Boyce mentioned in his acceptance speech. It's worth remembering the

artists who reach the Turner Prize now are usually in their 40s.

They're the product of an affordable higher education that

might be denied to future generations of artists. On the

other hand, it might be something about this building here. This is

the Modern Institute, the commercial institute that

represents both boys and the winner in 2009.

The current Glasgow art scene is diverse and can't be reduced to a

single building, movement or style - as well as international prize

winners, there are dozens of lesser-known artists dedicated to

their practising. It's at this bridge over the River Clyde that

Susan Phillips cited her prize- winning Lowlands Valley in 2010.

Her rendition of a melancholy seaman's ballad marks her Glasgow

roots. One of the great things about this city is the river that

runs through it. This is a Victorian mercantile city whose

products have flowed ever outwards. There is maybe something in that

water after all. I can tell you the water didn't look calm like that

last night with all the winds. Thanks to my guests tonight, Mark,

Alison and the other Mark. Next week, it's the final Review Show of

the year, and Kirsty is going to be joined around the Christmas tree by

Natalie Hanes, Susan Hitch and Paul morally to look back at the year's

highlights. The Divine Heady will be live, and

there is even a brass band. Don't say we never push the boat out.

Tonight's music comes courtesy of James Dean Bradfield of the Manic

Street Preachers, whose complete catalogue has just been released.

He's playing Motorcycle of # Culture sucks down words

# Itemise loathing and feed yourself smiles

# Organise your safe tribal war # Hurt, maim, kill and enslave the

ghetto # Each day living out a lie

# Life sold cheaply forever - ever, ever

# Under neon loneliness motorcycle emptiness

# Under neon loneliness # Motorcycle emptiness

# Life lies a slow suicide # Orthodox dreams and symbolic

myths # From feudal serf to splendour

# This wonderful world of purchase power

# Just like lungs sucking air # Survival's natural as sorrow,

sorrow, sorrow # Under neon loneliness, motorcycle

emptiness # Under neon loneliness, motorcycle