Rotek USB Otoscope

An Otoscope is medical contraption which is used to look into ears, as we know. Usually the quack will whip it out, turn on a light inside, change the nozzle which goes in your ear after it's been washed (hopefully) and inspect the outer ear and surface of the ear drum.

This gadget takes that a step further and sticks a camera into a thin shaft so that the image can be viewed on a computer screen, live as a video feed. Once the software is running, a photo can also be taken or video recorded. Some folk have been able to send recorded footage or photos to medics to save time for everyone when analysing issues.

First thing to say is that I have a good number of phones here - this unit is (allegedly) Android-only, though you can get other models for iPhone I understand - but I can't get any of them to work with it. You download an App and install, then run the software, but it always returns an error and won't hook up. The instructions say that you have to have a phone which supports USB OTG (no problem here) but also UVC (USB Video Class) which I've never heard of, so maybe someone can advise there. Anyway, no worries, as it works fine - and probably more usefully - on my Windows 10 laptop with an .exe file which is downloaded from the Rotek website.

The unit is about 6" long and has a 5.5mm end with the array of LED lights and central lens for the camera. It fits in my ear fine and I can see very clearly my ear drum and the canal. This unit is fixed focus and seems to focus at about 1" distance from the target. It focuses fine with the 720p HD class camera. You can get higher resolution units, but this is fine for inspection. And it doesn't end there of course. You can use this for looking at your teeth, up your nose - or any other bodily orifice you fancy! Or indeed, there might be a good case for using it to inspect blockages in drains or any other round-the-house DIY thing which you can't get to see easily. There's a cord which goes from the end of it to a USB connector which is one of these 3-in-1 units, microUSB, USB-C or USB-A. In-line in the cord is a rotary wheel to control the brightness of the LED lights at the end, which can be very bright.

It comes with a carry-case and some very dodgy-looking 'ear wax removal' tools and sticky-end things, which I think are best left to professionals, frankly. They could very easily be poked into the ear drum creating damage, a trip to A&E and surgery! I'm surprised that they allow those to be included, but then if people are stupid enough they could stick a cocktail stick in their ear and push a hole in an ear drum. So yes, I think this is a great inspection tool, not treatment device!

The software is easy to use on the computer and has loads of different options for recording and snapping photos. The screen is clear and the target can be seen very well. As an inspection tool, I highly recommend this over a manual unit which only one person can see at a time and has no recording potential. But the best, and amazing thing is the price. AmazonUK are selling this for £16! The kind of kit that a few decades ago might have cost huge amounts of money - and were only seen on Mission: Impossible!

The Girl Who Leapt Through Time

Original Title: Toki o kakeru shôjo
Continuing my quest for good quality Animation (as opposed to mass-produced Disney junk) I stumbled on this one and was disappointed, overall.
The style is that Japanese one, and I get that, but I think the style suffers in the way it depicts human beings - which is a shame. The animation otherwise is top-notch - lovely back/foreground visuals and near 3D-feel and attention to detail as the viewing angle from the camera makes the most of depth and focus in many scenes. It's all clever stuff and if only the people were afforded the same attention instead of blindly following the style, I think it would be much more pleasing.
Apart from that, the storyline had the real makings of an interesting time-travel one, but it has been hijacked and turned into a teen angst tale centred around kids at school, without a rich backdrop or intelligence to lift it beyond.
It's quite a long film for an animation but lacks the class and grip of others I have seen during my quest, particularly those from Studio Ghibli.

Nokia 9 PureView

Nokia phones seem to draw me in more than almost any these days. The attraction is of course, nostalgia, but also the clean version of Android, almost always AndroidOne software now, but each device having a certain class or USP of its own. This is why whenever a new device rolls out of HMD, I find myself disproportionately enthused!

The Nokia 9 PureView was not immediately on my radar, however, as the USP here was photography and I (still) think that hoping to get the flexibility and quality of even a £100 compact camera out of a 'flat' phone is too tall of an order. The compromise, up to now, has not been worth enthusiasm. However, with software development treading where optics can't - and in some cases folding imagery via mirrors and tunnels - maybe there's light at the end of it! Nokia/HMD are pushing boundaries and the 9 PureView is certainly worth a look, particularly as it's been a Limited Edition release and who knows when it might no longer be available - or indeed what existing units in mint condition might become worth! It's time to take the plunge and buy a phone to keep - for a change!

Comparison
It's tempting to compare the 9 with the 8 Sirocco in terms of bare-bones as it shares the same 6GB RAM, 128GB (non-expandable) storage, P-OLED screen, QHD(+) resolution, GG5, the exact same Always on Display, Android One software, Zeiss optics, single loudspeaker, no 3.5mm audio-out socket but 24-bit audio and OZO recording in 4K Video, Qi charging of almost the same size battery - in fact one of few differences is the Snapdragon chipset which the 9 updates to 845 from 835. I get the impression that they're from the same stable! But there are also differences of course, not least of which is the physical size.

Long, not Dumpy
The Nokia 9 is physically very different to the 8S as it has been made with the now becoming-standard 'long' screen rather than the 8S's 16:9 'dumpy' one - and flat! Pros and cons for both of course, but the width of both is about the same. This clearly means that for the same width, the 9, as I said, is taller. The significance of this for me is that the typing experience on the on-screen keyboard is no worse! The wide 16:9 8S screen makes typing a pleasure, and the 9 retains that. Important stuff! Compared to some other devices I have to hand then, it's a tad smaller in height and width than the Pixel 2XL but certainly less fat, almost exactly the same in all directions as my Moto Z3 Play - so much so that I wonder if my Mods might fit(!) - obviously smaller all-round than the Razer Phone 2 and very similarly-sized to the Nokia 8 (non-Sirocco).

Around and About
The front is a flat piece of glass with substantial sized bezels, chin and forehead. Hurrah! At the top there's a range of sensors, ear-piece speaker and Nokia logo - and at the bottom, nothing! The design language is sympathetic to many recent Nokia devices, including the 6 and 7 Plus, with that chamfered edge of metal around the edge front and back, visually moulding the glass to the 6000-series aluminium circumference. On the right edge are the volume rocker and power buttons, similarly fashioned, solid and clicky. On the bottom is the USB-C data/power port and single mono speaker, on the left there's nothing and on the top, a SIM Card tray with pokey-hole eject. You can get a Dual-SIM model, but this one is single. On the back, which is another sheet of GG5, is another Nokia logo, androidone logo and the array of lenses, which we'll come to, potentially making this a very special phone. The back is a fingerprint magnet, very slippery and reflective. There's one colour available and it's this Midnight Blue. It's attractive in a conservative kind of way. But yes - a TPU is an absolute must (and there ain't one in the box). You will drop it - and it will break!

Hoo-Har
When this phone first hit the shelves in February/March this year, there was much hoo-har about the quality of the in-screen optical fingerprint reader. People were reporting that it was near impossible to register prints and even when they did, it wouldn't recognise them - and another whole host of problems. I didn't see a unit which behaved this way - behind the cutting edge as I am - so can only report on what I find now. The April 2019 Google Security Update was apparently bundled with a whole host of improvements, not only to the camera but also the fingerprint scanner. When I fired up this device, the first thing it did before letting me in to see anything, was to apply that update. So that's where I'm coming from.

Fingerprint Scanner
The registration process is slow and fussy. When the screen is at rest and off, you're not only presented with the AoD but also a target for your fingerprint. Presumably in time, this optical system will disappear and everyone will adopt the much better, faster and more secure ultrasonic version. In the meantime, and having tested this over a number of days, I've turned it off! It's horribly unreliable with time and time again failure to recognise fingerprints. I've tried removing and re-registering to no avail. There are a couple things that those with more patience than I can try. Firstly, it seems to work better when fingers are not dry. So 'moist with sweat' fingers have a much higher success rate. (I'm sure somebody will prove that this is not physically possible, but it seems very much like that in my tests.) Secondly, keeping fingerprints upright, bottom to top, works much better both on registration and in use and lastly, it always works better straight after rebooting the device (which might point to processor/RAM). If you try to use it side-on, it struggles to register and won't often recognise. Which is a shame because the natural position for using it is thumb coming in at 45 degrees. It's not right and is much worse than any other system I've tried. They need to fix this somehow - and they can, as it's software.

Mugshot
The route in, is assisted, however by face recognition. A quick tap on the screen and the face recognition works for me, with full face beard, perfectly every time. From all angles and most lighting. Some have said the payoff here has been security but it's not possible to use this for purchase security, which I reckon is a good thing. The point is, that if you don't want to struggle with a fingerprint scanner that's rubbish (at this point), you have another good option. Or if you're really paranoid, turn it all off and use a password/code/pattern in the traditional way! It's a real shame that this feature has been brought to phones too early for its own good - a capacitive scanner on the back - or better still, on that empty chin, would have been a much better option.

Always On
As I said earlier, the AoD is the exact same version as the Sirocco's and gives four choices for clock and display content, settings to time-out (or never), always-on when on charge (so a handy night-light-clock) and it's equally bright, big and white on this AMOLED screen. Take note, Google and adopt for Pixel! [I note that in Android Q Beta 4 changes are being made to the size/clarity of the AoD.] It's so nice to have a true AoD though this one doesn't seem to wake up very well after switching off having been in a pocket. I'm continuing to test that but at the moment, it seems that every time I get it out of my pocket, I have to press the power button to wake it up.

Bright and Sharp
Heading back to the screen, it's a bright and sharp and gorgeous 1440 x 2880 (538ppi) in 18:9 ratio. It's all-but 6" and is a P-OLED protected by GG5, like the N8. Watching video on the device is a real treat as the brightness and colours pop out. Wind up the brightness manually and it is incredibly bright. Delightful.

Clean Sweep
The phone arrived with Android 9 (Pie) in place and quickly updated to that aforementioned April Security with the improvements that I wasn't able to appreciate on a before and after. The AndroidOne software ensures a near-Vanilla clean software experience with additional useful features like the Nokia AoD, Camera, Lightroom (optional at startup), My Phone (Nokia's Support and Maintenance package) and that's it. Hurrah! I don't think we need to go over all the aspects of Android Pie again, but it's all here and works very nicely. I've not even installed Nova Prime!

Flight OTG
As I said before, under the bonnet there's a Snapdragon 845 chipset, which no doubt everyone will say is 'very last year' but seems to do the job well. There are some things related to camera which could be done faster, which I'll come to, but I really don't think that a SD855 would fix that, and 6GB RAM which keeps everything around the UI flying nice and quickly. The 128GB storage could be more (or a microSD Card slot could have been added) but I would have been delighted if it had been doubled to 256GB. For those pushing the camera to limits, that will certainly be a restrictor and necessitate the use of flash SSD plugged in OTG. Thankfully that OTG seems to work well and I've been able to read/write media to cards. The device is not a heavy one at 172g but it is IP6/7 rated for dust and water.

Lend me your Ear
We now come to my favourite topic, sound output - the single mono speaker and lack of 3.5mm audio-out socket. The speaker is bottom-firing and if left unobstructed produces a decent enough sound. It's louder and better quality than the Sirocco's with a tad more bass and certainly more volume. Perfectly good for the vast majority of people - and equaliser available in software (not system-wide) of the user's choice. I've been using Equaliser + Pro again and it enables the speaker to pack a decent punch after tweaking. The lack of an earphone jack will impact different people in different ways of course, those who want to use legacy gear will weep, whilst the vast majority won't give a stuff and get on with the Bluetooth 5 and aptX. In the box there's a revolting looking intrusive ear-canal attacking pair of earphones(!) with in-line control (which works with both media and Google Assistant) but they work OK and sound fine with the 24-bit thing once the supplied USB-C to 3.5mm adapter from the box is employed! What's notable however, is that when I plug in my decent reference AKG headphones, I can hardly hear anything! Tried again with the dongle which came with the Sirocco - same result. Tried with the Razer Phone 2's super-power DAC dongle and suddenly it all came to life! Volume and power and rich sound. The dongles supplied in the box of these devices are clearly doing nothing and a DAC-enabled solution is needed to get any decent volume and quality. But then, to be fair, this is not a music-centric phone!

USP Hit or Miss?
No, it's a photography-centric phone of course and this is where I turn to the camera(s). The basics of what's being done here is that an array of 5 cameras are working together to supposedly create super-snaps! 5 x 12MP f1.8 Zeiss Optics units, two of which have RGB sensors and the other two, mono. There's nothing special about these cameras, lenses, sensors - it's in the combination, ToF and software that the magic is supposed to happen. (Time-of-flight is supposed to resolve distance between the camera and the subject for each point of the image, by measuring the round trip time of an artificial light signal provided by a laser or a LED. Wiki.) The array of lenses on the back are distinctive and interesting-looking, already having attracted comment and questions!

RAW Depth
Each camera takes a separate image when the shutter is fired, the images are then combined and processed. JPEG is the standard but RAW is available for those who want to go nuts on detail and post-processing - and produces DNG files. The Adobe Lightroom software will allow on-device tweaking of lots of parameters of the taken shot, though have to then be converted back to JPEG to be shared anywhere sensible via the phone. There's a Depth Map setting which can be turned on and off - if on, 1200 levels of depth are recording with every shot. Processing takes about 5-10 seconds after each one, then the resulting image can be opened in Google Photos (on the phone) and the point of focus and level of 'blur' can be adjusted and 'new' photo saved.

Eating Storage
This works excellently (and is great fun) but we understood that it is also supposed to work in Google Photos Editor in Chrome and it doesn't seem to do so - that final Depth Slider is missing from the array of options. Perhaps this will be fixed by Google/HMD. One thing to be aware of is that the phone creates an image roughly 5x the size if Depth Map is on, which might be an issue for those with auto-upload over cellular connection operative. I have enjoyed playing with and impressed by the results of the 10-second 'bulb' setting for low-light photos, but of course you do need to somehow keep the phone still for the duration. I've also been impressed with one thing I never assess during reviews these days - the LED flash, which though no Xenon, works much, much more effectively than most phones I've tried recently - with half-decent power/coverage and balanced light/colours.

Eating Data
Shooting in RAW of course records all sensor's data in the images which provides for much more flexibility in Lightroom and other image-manipulation solutions over the good-enough-for-most compressed-to-save-space JPEG equivalent. This is all real 'pro' stuff (or at least 'nerd') for those who really think they have a use for photos beyond what 98% of people do! But fine, it's a hobby! I see the difference when testing it here and zooming in - though again, users should be aware of the much bigger c.30MB file sizes - not only for sharing around and backing up, but also the hit on the 128GB on the phone - and no expanded memory. And don't forget processing time - don't be in a hurry!

Playtime!
There's loads to play with for someone interested in pushing the boundaries of photos from phones and playing with images as a hobby or profession (if they are stuck somewhere without their proper gear, I guess), though we do await software improvements and tweaks. Other phone hardware still seems to do a better job, despite this phone's supposed 'expertise'. The inclusion of a free (light) version of Lightroom is helpful for playing around, even if some of the higher-end features will cost the user not a one-off payment, but £4.39 per month to use! Steps back. Depends how keen the user is to play about with images on-the-go, I guess.

It's OZO Cool
Apart from the above, the camera interface is very similar to the Sirocco's with Nokia's style and design - with a pretty much similar feature-set. Time lapse, slow-mo, Pro, Mono, Panorama, Square - the usual stuff. There's a button which zooms you in to 1x, 2x and 5x but it's not optical - and there's no OIS - the software and smart combination of lenses and sensors is supposed to negate the need, I think! But it doesn't help for video - which only uses one camera and electronic stabilisation (which is kind of better than nothing)! Incidentally, the OZO sound recording is present, like with other Nokia phones, and works superbly well when shooting 4K video. Mind that storage though! There's a 20MP Selfie camera on the front with which you can use the Bokeh Mode, which does a decent enough job, but there's obviously no Depth Map thing going on, with the 5 cameras facing the other way!

Shaking Power
One thing to note is that the vibration motor in the phone is one of the strongest I've used for years! It makes a right old racket if left on a table, almost negating the need for ringtones! The AoD, like with the Sirocco, doesn't seem to hit the battery too hard and has a little more capacity at 3320mAh. In my tests over a week or so I'm doing well with it - no trouble at all getting through a day - in fact most times, it can be eek'd-out to a day and a half or so - as always, depending on what you're doing with it! Start mashing RAW photos on a day out and uploading 4K video, watching films and blasting music and it'll be a different story, as with any phone. Power management is helped here by the QC3 brick in the box and Qi Wireless charging for sipping as you go.

Hovering Around, Waiting Development
Some phones seem to really struggle with Android Pay terminals, in my experience - some even needing their case taking off to work at all - but this works amazingly well. Two, three, four inches hovering over the receptor and it picks up and works. If you want one of these units (and trust that Nokia will continue to develop the potential going forward) you'd better not hang about as it was a limited release. Who knows when it might just not be available (and we'll be onto the next thing)! The phone, as I said, is AndroidOne, so there is some commitment in that regard at least for 2 OS Updates and 'regular' security Updates (though this is feeling a little forgotten already, still on April).

Further Viewing and Reading
Those who want to pull the results apart and deeply analyse the performance of the output of images from this phone, which should be its USP, should take a look at Steve Litchfield's (very, overall fair at the time but negative) Phones Show 361 and see that improvements all round are needed by Nokia for people looking under the surface (though the 100% fingerprint scanner failure rate then is really not true now - it's up to about 50%!). For the rest, who want to tinker with tech and see what's going on, they might want to consider even buying! It's not cheap, but it's also not expensive! Half way between budget and flagship at around £500 (or I see $400 in the USA). I was hoping that the price would drop, but no - not in the UK, even to the USA level. I shall be very interested to see where Nokia take this and how much development comes along, so I'm happy to keep it in stock.

Resuscitate the Duck!
There's lots of negative commentary out there about this phone, but I have hope for the underdog. People like to jump on a project that appears to be a dead duck, but I really like the phone - for more reasons than its USP. Sucker for Nokia? Yes, this is most likely the case, I admit! If this were a phone made by any other company with the development yet to come and these gaps in performance, I'd have laughed at it, not given it a second look, least of all considered buying it!

Stan & Ollie

Saturday Morning Pictures was my earliest memory of the appreciation of Laurel and Hardy. In those days of course, it was just the build-up to The Lone Ranger, but appreciate it we did. Their work was an institution and regular doses on TV ensured an ongoing love. Delighted always going forward then was I, to see anything related - and I'd been waiting for quite some time to get my teeth into this film.

The added bonus for me was to see Steve Coogan in a straight role as Stan Laurel. I've always appreciated his work and flexibility - adapting to so many characters in the world of TV and film - and he didn't disappoint. He embraced the role of Laurel, had clearly learnt to ape many of not only his on-stage behaviours and quirks, but also in more private scenes where he didn't drop the similarities for a second. It was an excellent portrayal.

I know this film has been met with criticism and praise in equal measure, but I certainly come down on the latter side. It depicts the later days of the duo's career. We see a snippets of them at work in the 1930's but most of the action is later on, in the 1950's when they were older, not so healthy and on the wind-down to retirement. The action is centred around Britain, during their tour where they were fairly badly managed by money-grabbers around them, in whom they had placed their trust. There is conflict between them as Stan is portrayed as the one chasing the fair deals, not to be done-over with Ollie more passive and more interested in his craft and living for the moment.

It's a sad story in many ways - a side of the pair which is not always well known. It focuses somewhat on that conflict, but also on the passion for their art and ultimate love for - and appreciation for each other. It's also a delightful story of success as they bring such joy and happiness to so many people, evident in some of the scenes when they mix with the British public. The poor management and short memories of many contribute to some of the difficult times in small theatres around the country where they often played to very small audiences, however.

Playing Ollie opposite Coogan was John C Reilly (Tale of Tales, Holmes & Watson, The Lobster) and he too was an excellent choice. His face heavily made up for different ages and sizes of Hardy, you never forgot who he was, as he played Ollie with command and sympathy. Supporting the pair were the wives fulfilled by Shirley Henderson (Tale of Tales, Happy Valley, Okja) and Nina Arianda (Midnight in Paris, Crisis in Six Scenes, Billions), both of whom brought something to the film, the latter offering a very funny performance in some parts which she was clearly enjoying.

The 1950's sets of old Britain are quite superb in every detail. No expense has been spared and the atmosphere can be sipped in, in almost every scene. From telephone boxes to seaside pavilions, from buses, hotels, restaurants and clothes to food. It's beautifully laid out in a delightful backdrop to the story. The photography is executed beautifully with thought and consideration, focus tricks and lighting adding to the overall feel.

I appreciate that some people coming to a story about one of the greatest comedy duo's the film world ever saw were expecting more of a performance, more fun, reenacted sketches and scenes, but this film is not about that. The comic scenes that are shown, are done very well - but this is a story about the other side of the heyday - the reality about what it was like for the pair when the fame and higher profile had gone - as Stan writes new material relentlessly for their stage act. A poignant scene reflects this in which Stan is stood outside a theatre looking at a poster of Abbott and Costello. Their day had come and gone and it was time to move over for someone else to entertain. I thought it was presented, acted, directed, shot and produced near-faultlessly. Highly recommended.

Perfect Porridge

I've always loved Porridge! There's a million ways to enjoy it of course, but here's my method...

-1 measure of Porridge Oats.
-1 measure of milk.
-1 measure of water.
-Bring to the boil, stirring throughout.
-Remove from heat, cover and leave for 5 minutes.
-Serve, sprinkled with brown sugar (naughty!)

Obviously there are variations on this and I have, for some time now, used these instant microwave packs, but there's nothing quite like making it on the stove.
I remember when I lived in Scotland they used to make it with all water, no milk and salt - which I didn't like at all!
Honey, syrup, fruit - pretty much anything can be added to taste of course.
Good healthy high-fibre grub!
What's your method or variation?

Midnight Lace

The death of Doris Day prompted me to watch one of her films which I'd not seen before and ended up here with the thriller Midnight Lace. I spent the whole film thinking that had to be a Hitchcock production, but can't find a link!

Doris Day plays Kit, an American living in London with her husband Tony, played by Rex Harrison. He's in business and she tries to fill her time shopping and socialising. Quite early on in the film, she gets the impression that she's being stalked, both physically and via telephone by a man with a 'singing' voice. The viewer sees and hears what she does, but nobody else in the story, apart from her. Is she mentally ill, they all wonder. Is she imagining it, they muse. Or is it clever plotting and careful execution by the fiend.

The film and story unfolds in a very Hitchcockian way, the style, lighting, camerawork, angles and sets could be straight out of Dial M for Murder. And speaking of which, up pops the same actor playing the same near-comic Scotland Yard Inspector role from the very film, John Williams! Twirly-edged moustache and frightfully British demeanour, the same. As if that wasn't enough, along comes the same actor in the villain role, Anthony Dawson - apart from the fact that Day was used in one of Hitchcock's best, The Man Who Knew Too Much!

The cast are all excellent, particularly the two leads who we'd much more readily expect to see in light and fluffy comedies, musicals or romantic outings. Doris Day is, apart from camping it up here and there, very convincing as the woman in distress and Harrison could easily be Professor Higgins! It was funny to see a young clumsy Roddy McDowall in the mix sans ape-mask and an older silent-film beauty Myrna Loy as Kit's aunt. Some of the acting is a bit wooden here and there, but the main players hold it together.

It's probably not hard for a modern and hardened audience to guess what's going on but I would imagine that the cinema-goes of 1960 would have been kept on the edge of their seats, thrilled by the twists and turns and eventual outcome and truth behind the characters involved. It's a great film in which Doris Day acts beautifully and is a pleasure to watch in full swing. She turned her hand well to a serious role and was well directed within it by Lonely are the Brave creator David Miller.

It's great to be able to look back at many of these films still from the 1950's and 1960's which really do have a style and class of their own, so often missing from modern film-making and productions of current day. A tribute to the other side and talent of Doris Day.

Cinema Paradiso

This 1988 Italian Giuseppe Tornatore creation is even more engaging than his excellent Malena and Deception, which has captured the heart of many a European cinema-goer and many more beyond. It seems that there's a cut-down version (which misses out much of the delight) in general circulation for a broader audience who apparently don't have the concentration span to sit through the near three hours.

The much more satisfactory full-length version is the one I'd recommend in order to gorge on the meat rather than nibble on the bones. It's a story of three parts, set in a small town in Sicily during the 1940's and forward. It tells the tale of a young mischievous lad who is fascinated by all things cinema and does everything he can to be involved in the work of the local projectionist of Cinema Paradiso. As the first part of the story unfolds, it's full of rich humour and character-building. The young Toto is played to perfection by Salvatore Cascio (who seems to have, after a few further projects, dropped out of film). He has just the right face, cheekiness and look to pull it off and does so very well - he's very funny and clearly an excellent actor.

The second part of the film is when Toto has grown into a teen, where he is played by Marco Leonardi (who has gone on to other work including parts in Like Water for Chocolate and Once Upon a Time in Mexico). He, too, is well chosen for the task and continues the story through the middle of the film where Toto falls in love, deals with town crises and is whisked off for National Service. The older projectionist is played by Philippe Noiret (Il Postino) throughout and does so with just the right amount humour and seriousness to get the story across. He's a lovable old chap with an outlook on life which later on becomes significant.

The last third of the film is set in the later days, 30 years on, when we catch up with the main characters, find out a bit more about the outcomes of various elements of the tale and are able to pull it all together - as usual, I won't give away any spoilers at this point! Some of the actors need replacing with older people, some don't, but the supporting cast around the two main characters all do very well, though if I'm honest, I really don't know many of them.

The story is a thrill-a-minute for fans of cinema as the audience is offered clips-upon-clips of all sorts of films from the day - the filmmakers have not been frightened to show sections of films throughout as they project for the local community. It's also a sad tale of the decline of cinema at the time and the rise of television. We're treated to an inside view of a small village who's only entertainment in the day was the cinema and it was packed to the roof for every screening. It's also a love story, of sorts, which is moving, touching and tragic. Hankies at the ready, for that part! It's also a story about loss and values, the meaning of life and existence - but with more of a central theme about letting go of the past. This is returned to time and again throughout, demonstrating the strong bond between potential outcomes for those who will let go, those who won't and those who try to embrace both.

It is a long film, but there's so much going on that the time passes quickly. Try and see the full version if you're going to as the themes in the second - and particularly third - parts offer a much richer experience overall. The photography is excellent - a real delight to watch as a piece of art in that respect - and the sets are often beautiful Italian landscape and dusty, dry towns with high-key lighting. I watched it with subtitles, but I'm sure there's a dubbed version for those who prefer. Highly recommended as a piece of not only cinematic history for our time, but also a record of another time and what film and cinema meant to those of a different generation.

Edit: Not sure how I missed out a mention for Ennio Morrocone's soundtrack, which is, like most of his work, beautifully appropriate throughout with a mix of haunting strings, jazz, piano, brass and orchestral delight reflecting the moods, themes and emotion of the storyline and events.

L'enfer

I'm back on my European cinema kick here, with a 2005 art-house offering directed by the Death in Sarajevo man, Danis Tanovic. Based on some of the Heaven, Hell and Purgatory writings of Krzysztof Kieslowski (Trois couleurs, Dekalog, The Double Life of Veronique et al) the story tells a modern tragedy in love and misunderstanding, based around the lives of three estranged sisters.

The first part of the tragedy is when the three sisters' father is sent to prison in Paris when he is caught in a room with a naked young man in his charge. We find out later that this was not all it seemed but that no opportunity was afforded the man to escape the wrath of the court. Time passes and the three sisters have grown up, but because of the tragedy and resulting actions on the father's release from prison, have no contact with each other.

Sophie is married to a photographer with whom she has two children, but he's cheating on her. When this is exposed, more tragedy ensues for all involved. Anne is a student who had been having an affair with her tutor, but got pregnant - with tragic consequences for all. Céline would like to find love but doesn't and is the only one of the three who has contact with their mother, now in a care home, who she visits periodically. The boy involved with their father's case, back in the day, is now trying desperately to reveal to the family his part in the father's downfall, to rid himself of the guilt. Céline misinterprets this as amorous advances, which leads to further tragedy!

The film portrays layers upon layers of tragedy, not only in the story itself but also in the imagery it offers, depicting tragic scenes in nature often, but also ultimate glimpses of hope, colour and beauty. The disturbing history of the family, the current crises of each arm of the family, the situation of the mother in a care home - would make you think that this is just a European filmmaker playing pretentiously with the audience's emotions - and indeed there are many clichéd art-house trappings which have been fallen into along the way. But that doesn't take away the fact this is a beautifully crafted film full of interesting imagery, lovely photography, excellent sets and fabulous lighting. As a work of art, it's a joy to watch.

How deeply the viewer wants to delve into the analogies relating to Dante's living hell or Greek Mythological Medea is up to each. It's certainly there for those who wish to, and you can just see classrooms full of students being taught the deeper meanings in Media Studies or the like! For me, I like to see it at face value, a story about people in a social situation which could well happen. The effects of actions on the lives of others, the impact of saying, or not saying, the right things at the right times to smooth troubled waters and how human nature often destines itself towards tragic outcomes. Some people's hell.

The key actors do a grand job. Very convincing, though at times directed towards the purposefully theatrical. The very attractive Emmanuelle Béart (Un Coeur en Hiver) playing Sophie beautifully, pouting to the last(!), Karin Viard (Delicatessen) as Céline, Marie Gillain (Mon père, ce héros) as Anne and (not very well made up to look old) Carole Bouquet (For Your Eyes Only) as the mother.

If you're a fan of Neeson, Reynolds, Willis and Gilson you're going to hate this film! The pace is slow for the purpose of musing and digestion. Move along to the popcorn stand for lighter consuming! The rest of us can hopefully grab much from the experience. I don't pretend to understand all the deeper meanings on offer here and maybe I'm under-qualified to review such films, but I have been able to enjoy it and would suggest that, approached with the right frame of mind, some folk reading this might take something enjoyable and meaningful away from a viewing.

Pixel 3a

The Pixel 3 was only made available last autumn but just a few months later in Spring this year, along comes the Pixel 3a. There's also the Pixel 3a XL but I don't have that to hand just yet, so will focus on the smaller brother and compare it with the Pixel 3, which I do also have to hand.

First impressions are very much about how light it is in comparison, though in actual fact, the weights are almost the same, by 1g! This is because the 3a is bigger. It's bigger in all directions, slightly taller, slightly wider and slightly fatter. The screen is 5.6" instead of 5.5" but the real-world difference is really only the width when using the keyboard, the experience being not quite so cramped. The 3a is made of plastic and glass, rather than the aluminium and glass found in the 3. I don't really think this is significant as although the 3 might 'feel' more premium because of it, the 3a is lighter and will bounce more readily without denting!

The screen does not go as far out to the edges as it does on the 3, though the 'chin' is the biggest offender here, for those who don't like bezels, as it is significantly bigger, even though it doesn't need to house a front-facing speaker like the 3 does. The corners of the OLED panel are wonky, too! Take a closer look and you'll see that they haven't been 'rounded' properly! Only a small point and hardly noticeable, but who let that through QC?!

LG's P-OLED panel of the 3 has been replaced with OLED, which, on the face of it seems like the wrong way round! You'd think that the more economic version would have the 'plastic' version, but that's not taking into account that the P-OLED screen is newer (and presumably more expensive) as we move towards foldable and flexible panels. It makes no difference here really, except for the money. All of these OLED panels, as I understand it, are AMOLED whether or not they're made by Samsung, LG or some Chinese outfit.

What is significant however, is that the screen on the 3a is 'whiter' (full brightness, Adaptive off, 100%) than the 3's - the latter retaining that LG blue cast. Looking straight on from the front it's only very very slightly noticeable, but as you tilt the device, it becomes more apparent. We've had this in numerous devices and the user gets used to it of course. The Pixel 2XL was a culprit - as is my beloved Nokia 8 Sirocco - all with LG panels. But it's not really significant, rather worthy of note. In terms of brightness, I think they're about the same. The 3a appears brighter, just, but only because it's whiter.

Both screens are 1080p and their pixel-count is about the same at around 440ppi. Returning to those bezels, and particularly the chin, brings us to the speakers and the fact that instead of the (faux) stereo speakers both facing forward on the 3, so left/right in landscape, the 3a follows the herd and places the 'bottom' speaker to be downwards-firing. I really don't see why they had to do that, except to reduce the chin, which has got bigger! But then I'm no mobile phone engineer! Net result, pragmatically, is that it's easier to block with fingers.

The sound coming from both devices is this popular kind of 'stereo' which isn't, but emulates it by tuning and overall rounded delivery. As I've said before, I don't really care much about stereo on such a tiny device as nobody is really expecting a surround-sound cinema experience in their pocket, but what is important is overall output volume and quality. The volume of these two devices is about the same, I reckon. Maybe the 3 just edges it, but the difference is in the quality of sound. The 3 sounds significantly better than the 3a, which is slightly more tinny, less rich, less bass'y and an altogether less appealing sound. This is, of course, test-bench situation! If you didn't have the devices alongside each other testing them note-for-note with all the same settings, sounds and software of course, the average user would be more than happy. But for me, there is a difference. How much it has to do with speaker placement, I don't know. If the speaker components are the same ones, then maybe that's it. I suspect however that the 3a has not quite so good parts and it's reflected in the output.

What the 3a does have, however, is the 3.5mm audio-out socket, which it can boast over the 3! The return of sanity! Not that I use it much personally, but for those who do, it's clearly a bonus. I do get very confused still when comparing headphone output from 'apples and oranges', so I just listen with what is supplied (and my headphones) and judge on that, not on what dongle is doing what - as the average user will just use what's supplied and available. So my test is with my headphones and the supplied USB-C to 3.5mm dongle in the box with the 3 - and just plugging straight into the socket on the 3a. For what it's worth, the same applies as it does with the speakers - the sound coming from the 3 is markedly louder, richer, bass'y and more qualitative than with the 3a. Again, most people using this will be more than happy - but up against the 3, I can tell the difference even with my wonky old ears!

Battery is worth a mention here, not because the 3a's has been increased from the 3's 2915mAh to 3000mAh, which seems a little insignificant, but that the 3a is missing the wireless Qi charging which the 3 has. Now, how much this matters to the user is a personal thing. I find that if I have Qi available I'll use it, but if I don't, I don't tend to miss it! The advent of widespread USB-C means that plugging in cables is no longer a fiddly gamble and most phones these days get the user to bedtime anyway, obviously depending on usage pattern. In my short use, it's a bit hard to say, so I'll point to others who report that on slightly longer use, the battery is performing more robustly than the 3 - so no trouble at all getting through a long day with medium/mixed usage - partly due to the demands of the different chipset.

The chipset in question in the 3 is the (near) top-end SnapDragon 845 whereas in the 3a, the more modest SnapDragon 670 has been used. I have been playing with both phones for 2 or 3 days now and I really can't see any problem with that - except for a couple of notables. Firstly, if you're a demanding 'gamer' you might see some slowdown not experienced with the faster processor - and secondly, if you're a pixel-peeping photo-taker! In a sense, the 3a has been made for the likes of me and photographs - the very casual snapper, not advertising-board poster-creator! What's missing from the otherwise almost identical camera setup is the Pixel Visual Core thingie! They've tried to rework this machine-learning algorithm for the SD670 but the net result seems to be that it's slower to process shots, for those who are counting! OIS, AI digitally enhanced zoom, excellent Portrait and Night Sight remain in the main camera, which is the same 12MP f1.8 with all the Google software magic. Well, most of it! The selfie camera is apparently not as good either, for those who go pubbing! Anyway, I'll leave further analysis of the camera to those who care! All the above add to the battery's performance of course and help it to stay a cut above the expectation of the 3's.

One of the things that's really important to me still (I know, I'm a dying breed) is storage. Not having to rely on always-connected cloud-based access to data and media. I don't think we've got there yet, to rely on such services (though I have to admit that we're pretty close). In the meantime, 64GB storage is pretty much a deal-breaker for me. With the other Pixel models there was always a 128GB option for more cash (often disproportionate) and armed with 128GB for all the stuff I want to carry and access instantly, I can live with that. But not 64GB. It's a bridge too far! Having said that, the USB OTG capability and big-capacity microSD cards do enable a wallet-based expansion of these facilities and maybe it won't be too long before I reverse my position. As long as Google don't remove that functionality to further drive consumers online!

The software experience is, of course, identical to that found on the 3. All the glorious Vanilla flavoured Android, pure as the driven snow straight from HQ! We've covered the ins and outs of this before, and you don't need it all spelling out again, just to remind you that the promise of (pretty much) immediate monthly updates will be here, like with all Pixels, 2 years of OS updates and 3 years of security, minimum. Some find it boring, being so clean, as we know, and like to dabble with what other manufacturers are adding over the top, whereas others see that dabbling as a hindrance. Some of us even sit on the fence, the wind blowing to lean us one way or the other as the weather shifts! I must admit that I approach Pixel as a reference device, not daily, so that I can enjoy the enhancements of others - but I'm soon running back in the first week of every month and following major OS updates!

To wrap up a couple of lingering points, there's no IP6/8 environmental protection (that it's been tested for) and the USB-C port is rated as 2, not 3.1 like the Pixel 3 has, which means data transfer speeds of about 500mbps, from memory, on the new one instead of 10Gbps on the old.

Now we come to the most important factor. Price! In the UK, the Pixel 3 (64GB) was released last autumn for £739. This 3a is £399. There are many who will say that the original 3 should really have been pitched at this £399 price to begin with and that Google were taking the rise, working on an algorithm of market expectation. This price is much more in keeping with the original Nexus theme for reference device mainly for development. Having said that, there's no sign of this being a replacement, rather to sell alongside. It is, however, hard to imagine anyone with their head screwed on now buying the 3. Yes, it's plastic, has no Qi charging, has a lesser chipset, no waterproofing and very slightly less good camera and speakers, but it's also a bit bigger and has a battery that lasts longer. Might be a difficult choice for some, but not from where I'm standing! The Pixel experience is all about the software and services, which you will get with both.

L'illusionniste

Director, writer, animator and all-round talent Sylvain Chomet was only really on my radar because of the mime-orientated segment Tour Eiffel contributed to the beautifully crafted anthology piece Paris, je t'aime. I'll come to that another day. For now, I wanted to enjoy L'illusionniste again and am very pleased that I took the time.

In English known as The Illusionist and not to be confused with the Edward Norton mystery drama from 2006, this animation is a pure delight. I have been watching a number of animated features lately, some from Studio Ghibli and it's great to see the art form continuing without the need for big-bucks Hollywood agendas.

L'illusionniste is a story about, not surprisingly, an illusionist. The film is based on an unproduced script written by French mime, director and actor Jacques Tati in 1956. Made in 2010 but set in 1950's France, England and Scotland, we follow the path of our central character as he tries hard to find work with his simple stage act, whilst all around him, the landscape of stage acts, performance and theatre shifts and changes for a more modern world.

He leaves Paris, flunks a contract in London and takes a long journey to an offshore Scottish Island, before settling into Edinburgh's Music Hall and Theatre scene with a young female fan in tow, collected by accident on the island. He takes rooms in a run-down hotel amongst (and run by) actors, artists and performers all trying to find work and to put a foot in the door of modern life and demands.

The artwork is quite magical with very little dialogue from anyone, a throwback to near-silent film, reflecting the theme depicting new and old entertainment. Every frame is a work of art - there's so much going on in every scene, in every corner of every frame, that to digest it properly requires repeated viewings. Attention to detail to introduce interesting asides, characters, items around the scenes - which most people would miss on one viewing - reflect the time and effort, not only in the making of the animation but also imagining so many ideas and having an insight into what could well be going on in any given street or social setting.

It's often funny, sometimes sad, always stylish but also moving as the story expands and heads towards its conclusion with insights into the post-1950's era of shifted public expectation regarding entertainment and the demise of many old fashioned artists. The pairing of the young girl, getting ready for a life in the times ahead - and the older performer winding down, reflects a clear division of the theme and is used throughout to paint the picture.

The music is always appropriate to the scene, floating between Music Hall pomp to orchestral to rock'n'roll and much between. Very often the haunting sounds of solo piano are at the forefront in the more reflective and poignant scenes. I don't think anyone providing the voices, where there is very brief grunts/dialogue, are in any way famous and the thrust here is clearly the writing, script, direction, story and animation. All of which are a delight. Has to be seen to be appreciated of course - but I can't think that anyone would be disappointed investing their 80 minutes. Highly recommended. Next stop, Les triplettes de Belleville!