Emma Chambers


They are rerunning “The Vicar Of Dibley” for the third or fourth time in Sweden now so i guess iÂŽm not the only one liking it.
I adore Emma Chambers and her character Alice Tinker is my favorite, sexy……vegetable. 😉
I would love to see her play a murderer or cop or something just for the contrast.

 

Emma G. Chambers (born 11 March 1964) is an English actress. Her work includes the role Alice Tinker in the BBC comedy The Vicar of Dibley and Honey Thacker in the film Notting Hill (1999)

Chambers was born in Doncaster, West Riding of Yorkshire, where she went to school at St. Mary’s. Her secondary education was at St Swithun’s School, Winchester, Hampshire. She then trained at the Webber Douglas Academy of Dramatic Art in the 1980s, where she was a classmate of actor Ross Kemp. Her sister is Sarah Doukas of Storm Model Management

I adore her!

Career

After taking some smaller parts on television productions such as The Bill, in November 1994 Chambers played the role of Charity Pecksniff in the TV serialisation of the Charles Dickens novel Martin Chuzzlewit. In the same month she first played the role of Alice Tinker in the BBC comedy The Vicar of Dibley. Chambers appeared in all 24 episodes. In 1998 Chambers won the British Comedy Award for Best Actress for her performance. Her last outing as Alice was the Comic Relief Special in March 2007.

In 1998 Chambers took the role of Helen Yardley in the TV series How Do You Want Me?, and 1999, she appeared in the film Notting Hill, as Honey, the sister of Hugh Grant‘s character.

In 2000 she was cast as Martha Thompson in Take a Girl Like You, a made for TV drama based on the Kingsley Amis novel and a remake of the 1970 film.

Chambers worked as a voice performer in the animated made-for-TV film The Wind in the Willows in 1995. In 2003 she provided the voice of Spotty for two episodes in the TV seriesLittle Robots. Her episodes were called “Spotty Rules” and “Spotty’s Clean Machine”.

She was in theatre for about 10 years before her major break in television. She has appeared in a number of stage productions including Tartuffe and Invisible Friends. In 2002 she toured with the Michael Frayn play, Benefactors, where she starred opposite Neil Pearson.

She currently lives with husband, fellow actor Ian M. Dunn  in Lymington, Hampshire.

From “Notting Hill”

 

Filmography

“Platsar” Bingo?


Bingo RimĂ©r har alltid framstĂ„tt som intelligent och vĂ€ltalig i mina ögon men nu hos Malou sĂ„ vrĂ€ker han ur sig att om man (som modell) inte “platsar” hos dom “etablerade” agenturerna sĂ„ skall man plugga till ingenjör istĂ€llet???

Ytterligare lite av detta Amerikanska , elitistiska dravel som fÀrre och fÀrre gÄr pÄ.

I Bingos vÀrld antar jag att Arnold Swartzenegger Àr en av vÀrldens största skÄdespelare?

Arnold har varit en av de högst betalda i Hollywood och fĂ„r vĂ€l ses som tĂ€mligen etablerad (han Ă€r sjĂ€lv en sĂ„dan som skulle kunna hjĂ€lpa eller sjĂ€lpa en karriĂ€r med ett “expertutlĂ„tande”).

Samtidigt sÄ var givetvis Vincent Van Gogh en vÀrldelös mÄlare.

Han tjÀnade knappt en Gulden och jobbade bla som prÀst. Men som konstnÀr blev han aldrig etablerad (om Bingo rÄkar Àga en Van Gogh sÄ tar jag gÀrna skiten sÄ den slipper ta upp plats i hans kÀllarskrubb).

 

"Etablerad"

Icke "etablerad"

 

 

Vi lever i en vĂ€rld dĂ€r kĂ€ndiskulten gör att de företag som Ă€r just “etablerade” kan avkrĂ€va folk allt möjligt och dĂ€r normala regler för ett “jobb” inte lĂ€ngre gĂ€ller (och i visa fall Ă€r det i sanningens namn motiverat. Alla “jobb” Ă€r inte vanliga).

Att bli bedömd och fĂ„ “Nej” ingĂ„r i jobbet för alla som sysslar med nĂ„got konstnĂ€rligt vare sig det gĂ€ller auditions eller “go seeÂŽs” och det Ă€r nog alla med pĂ„.

Dock ger det samtidigt utrymme för “sĂ„garna” att sĂ€nka folk eller stĂ€nga dörrar baserat pĂ„ annat Ă€n kvaliteter i sjĂ€lva verksamheten.

Idag skulle tex Marilyn Monroe inte ha “platsat” pĂ„ de flesta agenturer. Twiggy skulle möjligtvis det eftersom modellbranschen numer Ă€gnar sig Ă„t necrofili.

Det Ă€r kanske inte alltid sĂ„ dramatiskt som att man vĂ€grade ligga med regissören och dĂ€rför inte fick en utlovad roll men det kan mycket vĂ€l vara sĂ„ att andra “hĂ„llhakar” utöver vad verksmheten egentligen krĂ€ver finns pĂ„ plats, allt för en möjlighet till “kĂ€ndisskap” (letÂŽs face it, idag finns det nog fler som vill bli “kĂ€nda” Ă€n vad Ă€n vad det finns som vill bli bra) eller en möjlighet till utövande.

Kort sagt: Etablerad = bra.

NÄgot som tyvÀrr verkligheten inte tycks hÄlla med om.

Vi lever ocksĂ„ i en vĂ€rld dĂ€r “indie” verksamhet blir mer och mer utbredd.

Kort sagt, folk Ă€r bra pĂ„ saker oavsett om dom “fĂ„r” eller ej.

En gÄng i tiden Àndrades Hollywoods studiesystem genom att skÄdespelare helt enkelt tröttnade.

Om de som Ă€r “etablerade” ihĂ€rdar i att tro att dom har nĂ„got slags sista utslag vad som Ă€r “bra, sĂ€ljbart” eller “gĂ„ngbart” sĂ„ kommer dom snart att inse att publik, designers, regisörer, omstĂ€ndigheter och tidsanda ocksĂ„ vill ha ett ord med och kan Ă€ndra Ă„sikt nĂ€r som helst.

De “etablerade” brukar oftast svara med att försöka köpa upp. Alternativt sĂ„ blir de “oetablerade” plötsligt “etablerade” och lika goda kĂ„lsupare (Punk och Hip Hop Ă€r vĂ€l goda exempel. Snart kommer det vĂ€l att krĂ€vas 50 uiversitetspoĂ€ng i “Hiphopologi” för att tas pĂ„ allvar som rappare?).

Jag tycker att “Fair Faces” gör rĂ€tt.

Jag tror pĂ„ “indie” och att göra sjĂ€lv.

Att visa att de etablerade inte nödvĂ€ndigtvis “platsar” i ens vision och att ha lite integritet Ă€r sĂ€kert irrierande.

Att ha lite FAKTISK intresse i sin konstart i en vĂ€rld dĂ€r man ombeds att prostituera sig för en budget och en plats bland de “etablerade” Àr sĂ€kert störande med (och drev ut sĂ„ fullkomligt oviktiga filmskapare som Wells och Chaplin ur USA).

Jag tror naturligtvis pÄ att lyssna pÄ de som Àr erfarna, ha lite ödmjukhet och inse nÀr nÄgon har hÄllit pÄ lÀngre.

Jag tror ocksÄ att mÄnga Àr etablerade just för att dom Àr bra.

Dock tror jag Ă€ven att mĂ„nga blev etablerade delvist för att dom sĂ„llade utlĂ„tanden frĂ„n “sĂ„gare”.

Rolling Stones blev inte de dom Ă€r genom att vara med i “Idol” och ta rĂ„d frĂ„n Bard, en expert som sjĂ€lv började genom att mima över en leksassynth.

Kenneth Brannagh tog (och tar sÀkert) rÄd frÄn Royal Shakespeare Company,RADA och liknande pÄ lÄngt större konstnÀrligt allvar Àn rÄd frÄn nÄgon producent som pungar ut pengar och kan öppna dörrar.

PÄ nÄgot sÀtt Àr det nog bara att inse att de med konstnÀrliga yrken eller verksamheter gÄr en balansgÄng mellan industri och konst och att resten Àr en frÄga om prioritet.

SOPA, Cultural And Economical Suicide


I recently posted a picture of actor Steve Valentine in a kilt (not here, but on the web) where i remarked how i think he is an interesting and great actor.

One would THINK that that would be a compliment.

Instead, either he and/or his agent, the Scottish fashion people whoÂŽs show he was modelling in or the TV show he is in might be pissed that i “stole” a picture (despite that my commenting might make it pass as “fair use” ).

I linked and the only way to see the whole thing would be to click and go to the original page of the picture.

This was just a thumbnail.

So have i “stolen” from someone, or am i part of what keeps this industry afloat in the first place?

I would argue that this is just the casette tape argument regurgitated and enlarged.

They call it piracy, i call it free advertisement.

I call it commentary.

I call it cultural reaction.

In a sense a non proffessional part of the industry itself.

How many albums by artists you never heard of before have you bought because you heard them on a mixed tape somebody gave you?

How much of this “piracy” do you think actually serves to keep people, artists, products and concepts in the public mind?

What brings in more revenues, one picture stolen which makes people check out something they might not have heard of otherwise, or at least wearent interested in, or the corporations being the only ones talking about their products ,paying other corporations to spread the word?

Did casette tapes or video tapes hurt the record or movie industry?

 

The entertainment industry just dont understand what makes a fan.

They are just that, an industry.

They think people go to conventions wearing plastic pointy ears becase they watch Star Trek.

I would argue that they watch Star Trek because they wear pointy ears.

When something becomes, to a certain point, iconic it becomes part of culture, and that is what we are talking about isnt it, culture?

Popular culture. The question isnt whether the artist should get payed or not, it is whether they should remain artists, and thus add to culture, or become salesmen?

If they want fans they will have to let people be engaged, otherwise ,what they want is customers and they sell a product and it might as well be plastic buckets or toothpaste.

The best way to keep customers is to get people engaged, involved.

 

In the TV show “The Big Bang Theory” the character Sheldon is often wearing a Green Lantern T-shirt (which is probably product placement but thats beside the point for this argument).

To him Green Lantern is very obviously more than a product. It is a part of his world, the myths surrounding him and the culture of which he is a part.

In short, he is a fan.

It is part of his identity.

To simply passively buy “stuff” peddled to him would not get him interested.

In short, deny him fandom and lose a customer.

Springrolls dont need fans, neither do tires, but Stephen King, George Lucas or Bruce Springsteen are part of our times zeitgeist, not just products we bought.

Art, culture, part of our times.

If somebody copied this article and posted it somewhere else, possably commenting, agreeing, disagreeing with it, i would hope they would credit and maybe link, but i would also be glad that they thought it was relevant enough to even react to.

In all fairness, Stephen King, George Lucas and Bruce Springsteen make their living from what they do. I , in this case, dont.

Personally i think SOPA will bring down revenues for the entertainment industry.

It is simply bad business.

A failure to understand the target group.

And i havent even TOUCHED free speach or democracy.

But dont take my word for it, just wait and see.

 

Ps: I havent illustrated with any pictures and i will refrain from ending it with “May the force be with you” or

“Live long and prosper”. I dont want to end up in Guantanamo after all.

Easy instructions for boycotting GoDaddy over SOPA


Posted by Robert David Graham (@ErrataRob)

http://erratasec.blogspot.com/2011/12/easy-instructions-for-boycotting.html

SOPA is a horrible internet regulation law pushed by the copyright cartels that will destroy many of the freedoms on the Internet, such as the TOR project that anonymizes network traffic for activists in repressive countries.

Go Daddy supports SOPA. Therefore, if you care about Internet freedoms, you should probably move your accounts to another registrar. This link http://blog.jeffepstein.me/post/14629857835/a-step-by-step-guide-to-transfer-domains-out-of-godaddy describes how to do it in a painless manner. I’m moving my Go Daddy registrations to Network Solutions, where I already have an account.

Go Daddy has now officially dropped its support of SOPA. It isn’t against SOPA, it has no official opinion. But isn’t it Go Daddy’s original intent that matters? Go Daddy supported SOPA and that’s the kind of internet they would like to see. I think a boycott is in order even if they reversed course after finding out how unpopular their position was.

SOPA And The Entertainment Industry


Written by: Tina Houston

https://plus.google.com/u/0/111294639597754620168/posts

 

SOPA is the new internet censorship laws imposed by the entertainment industry to “protect” the entertainment industry. I am protesting by not buying cable or any kind of TV, Music of any kind, I will not be renting/buying movies or even go to the movie theater. I will not be referring, discussing in any way any performer of any kind with in the entertainment industry. If they want people to buy their shit they will have to get it to the public I will not be a participant in spreading word of mouth advertising in any way other than what I am freely allowed to share via the internet. So if they want word of mouth advertising they will get SOPA advertised and how they are screwing over the entire world. I have enough family, work, projects, and books to read and research to do to keep me entertained with out using ANY entertainment crap sold buy the entertainment industry.
The entertainment industry can kiss my lily white behind and go screw themselves. If I can’t access something in it’s entirety before I purchase it or share it with my friends so they can purchase it, then screw the person/s/corporation/business/who is selling it. I won’t even purchase a book if I can’t skim over the content and view some of it to even see if I want to read it, so why would I spend $24.00 or more on something I am not even sure if I am gonna like it? Screw you Entertainment industry you will get no word of mouth advertising from me. No one will hear a single word about anything put out from the Entertainment Industry. If it isn’t third party I will no longer share it. I will no longer like, +1, or anything that will promote something put out there by the entertainment industry if it is put on there by the artist or anyone who has explicit permission to promote it. This mouth will be absent of words when it comes to any product made with in the entertainment industry. Just want to make that clear. And If someone wants to talk about something I will hide the post, not read it, not view it, or just walk away from the conversation. I don’t even want to know what is new. I will NO LONGER spend a penny on Entertainment produced with in the Entertainment Industry.

Be a HERO and Help STOP SOPA Now!! I’ll tell you How! This Video that Must Be SHARED!


 

Go to http://onecandleinthedark.blogspot.com andhttp://www.cbsyousuck.com for thousands of pages of evidence and links to the original source research on the Internet Wayback Machine.