Product review: mum, don't read this one

The world post- the invention of the internet is a strange one. You can be famous for a week, reviled for a month, and can meet all your heroes at peculiar conventions. One of the other oddities, one that applies to me today, is that sometimes people think your opinions matter just because you write a crummy blog. Hooray!

As a result, I have been sent, by the very generous Adam of Strawberry Blushes, a women's sex toy to review. At this juncture, I'd like to ask anyone not comfortable with the idea of that to skip this post - I'll be back to normal for the next one. Thanks.

Before I tell you what I picked from the site, here's a bit of background information: Ben Wa balls have been used for centuries to help stimulate women, either during sex or throughout the course of the day. It's thought that Japanese geisha used to use them, hence the alternate name "geisha balls."

They serve as more of a prolonged tease than a masturbation aid, so the aim with them isn't to orgasm. In fact, one of their uses is to strengthen the pelvic floor muscles, in much the same way as kegel exercises do.

I bought some a few years ago. I liked them, but found them quite tricky to use, to be honest - they were small enough to slip out sometimes, and the feeling of them clicking against each other takes a bit of getting used to!

Anyway. Fastforward to now: I selected a product called "Girly Giggle Balls" to review. They're a bit bigger, because there are traditional metal balls inside the outer layer. Take a look at that outer layer, by the way. It looks interesting in the "tickly soft pink" colour that I chose - I can only imagine how I'd have felt faced with the "daunting black" option. (It's probably not labelled as that, but come on. Look at 'em!)

If I wanted to insert a morningstar I'd - no. When would I ever want that.

So yes, I chose the less intimidating ones. They were delivered quickly and in discreet packaging, so that ticked all the boxes.

My first issue was that there was no real product information on the packaging. You're told that they're made of "soft and nubbly jelly," which isn't very specific - and it does matter, because you're not supposed to use silicone-based lube with silicone toys. Because it might dissolve the surface and make them feel sticky to the touch (thanks, Wikipedia!). Luckily, the Strawberry Blushes website has a lot of information on it - what they're made of (PVC), their size (1.5"), what they do, how to use them... I mean, I know it sounds obvious, 'put them in;' but a helpful reminder to lie down and relax really wouldn't go amiss.

Because, boy, these aren't the same as my old ben wa balls.

They are bigger. And pricklier. And I really think you'd benefit from being pretty turned on before you even started, which I wasn't.

As I mentioned above, the idea is that the movement of the two balls against each other is intended to gently and continuously stimulate throughout the day as you go about your normal life, but the size of these ones means that they just don't do that. Not for me, anyway. It's not better than the alternative of them slipping out sometimes, because I'm pretty sure they're not toning any muscles. Keeping them in is not an effort. Taking them out, however, requires patience and careful positioning. They're not uncomfortable while they're in, but nor are they erotic, just - present, in much the same way as a mooncup (and, oh boy, I need to write a mooncup review one of these days).

In the absence of any product instructions, I thought I'd write some of my own so that anyone curious can repeat the experiment.

HOW TO USE GIRLY GIGGLE BALLS: instructions for use

1. Lie back on your bed and slowly - SLOWLY - insert the first ball.
2. Take a breather. Try to internally adjust yourself so that there's more room.
3. Insert ball two and sit up - slowly.
4. Question what you're doing with your life.
5. Wonder why you didn't just take up your hot friend on his perfectly reasonable offer.
6. Later, squat and pull the string to take them out - slowly, for the love of god, slowly - and wash them, taking extra care with the string because it looks like it's made of the same stuff as bathroom light-pulls and you've seen how grubby they can get.
7. Have a cup of tea, and try to think of the least undignified way to describe the experience.

TL;DR:

Appearance: 2/5

Ease of use: 2/5

Effectiveness: 0/5

Would I recommend them to a friend: maybe, if they'd annoyed me in some way. Maybe by oversharing. I can't think of any other way it would come up in conversation.

YM, as ever, MV.

This has been interesting, anyway! Next time, I think I'll get something else. Maybe a new vibe. Maybe something showerproof.

Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy, Robot

The following movie reviews are not what you might call professional, because sometimes I don't pay attention.

Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy:
I really wanted to like this film. It's got Gary Oldman, Colin Firth, and Benedict Cumberbatch. What's not to like about that? It screams class and distinction, and I'm a cultured person who goes to the opera and everything, so I should like it, right?

Er, maybe.

It was very slow-paced, and the stiff upper lip mannerisms displayed by the main characters, while very in keeping with that time and world, serve to make the first half of the film drag severely. It's hard to engage emotionally when everyone on screen is doing their damnedest to act like feelings are for the little ladies. The saving grace of the first half was, in my opinion, a thoroughly enjoyable scene with Kathy Burke. I'd never seen her in a non-comedic role before, and was delighted and not a bit unnerved by her personable and slightly predatory character!

It did pick up towards the end, with Colin Firth getting to show off a bit more of his emotional range, but by the time the film finished I was left a bit unclear about what the whole endeavour had been for. My fault for going to the cinema while sleepy, I'm sure, but there it is.

Real Steel:
I cannot tell you how much I enjoyed this film. Oh, I know, I expected it to be rubbish too! I've heard the jokes: it's the movie adaptation of Rock 'Em Sock 'Em Robots, and so forth, but honestly I haven't grinned through so much of a film in a long, long time.

Charlie, played by Hugh Jackman, is believable and likeable while still being deeply flawed. His son, Max, played by the unbelievably talented Dakota Goyo, had me thinking "that kid is SO BOSS" throughout the entire thing. He was born in '99, can you believe that? Ugh what am I doing with my life. And, oh yes, Evangeline Lilly as Bailey. I've only seen Evie as Kate in Lost before now, and I can say without a shadow of a doubt that Bailey is much less annoying. I'm being unfair... she was amazing in this. Really.

There were moments - very very brief, unmentioned moments - that asked big questions. One shot of a robot facing itself in a mirror, motionless, sparked off so many questions that were never touched on, but the film is all the better for it. This is shameless fluff, and addressing machine sentience is a little out of its grasp. Well done them for not overreaching. Don't make the mistake of interpreting that as an insult: the thing about feel good movies is that they make people feel good! I left the cinema with my heart barfing regenbogen and pleading for a sequel. There will be one. I am delighted.

So what have we learned? That Anna is not cultured, and that Dakota Goyo has a bright future. Oh and regenbogen is German for rainbow.

Guy Christian: further experiments in girling

A few weeks ago, a hairdresser and man-about-town of my acquaintance was looking for people to participate in his bizarre mad-scientist-style experiments.

My response was basically "Heck yes, this will be easy and fun! Plus, free stuff!"

I leapt at the chance, having been to Guy Christian Salon enough times before to know that Christian's got the expertise. He knows what he's talking about. The idea was to pick three products from http://www.guychristianshop.com/ and have it delivered, but being local (and clueless), I thought it'd be easier (and less likely to result in disaster) to drop into the salon and have a chat with the big man himself. It went a lot like this:

He asked how I dry my hair, and I sort of mumbled something inconclusive because I didn't think he'd take too well to "I put a hat on it." (I've said it before, I'm NOT GOOD at girling.)

The products he recommended for my (longish, wavy, thick-as-hell hair) were the following:

• Wella SP Hydrate Shampoo
• Wella SP Smoothen Conditioner
• Wella Professionals Flowing Form smoothing balm

ooh so shiny

The packaging says that these products are only available in salons, and I've certainly never seen them around before, but they're on sale at the link above, so you can get hold of them too!

So, I followed the guru's instructions and now, five weeks later, I'm ready to report back with my findings.

The first thing I noticed was the the da- wait, no, the FIRST thing I noticed was that smoothen is NOT A WORD. The second thing I noticed was that the dandruff problem got worse. Quite a lot worse. I was starting to worry, but he did say that my scalp would need to readjust or something? I don't know, hair science is not my Mastermind subject, but he said I'd have problems at first as my hair got used to not being drowned in shampoo. This was true. But, after enough time that I'm pretty sure I'm getting a realistic result, I'm happy to say that everything is much much better!

The shampoo and conditioner feel, look, and smell as nice as you'd expect them to (i.e. very - I mean they're luxury products, you know? - but in a subtle way). SP shampoo lathers up great (and he's right, you do only need to use a little bit on your scalp), and the conditioner feels great and does seem to have made my hair softer.

The smoothing serum I use after blowdrying my hair (yes, I've abandoned the hat as a styling technique) is fantastic! It smells like watermelon and I have much less problem with frizz now than I did. I'm pretty happy with the result, and am spending a bit more time thinking about interesting things I could do with my hair, but to be honest it's high time I headed back to the salon and had it sorted out properly! When the loan comes through...

Reviews: miscellaneous comedy stylings

You wouldn't think it would happen, least of all to me, but I may have finally hit my tolerance point for talking about myself. I know, I know! I thought my love for myself would last forever; I was wrong. Maybe it's time to start reviewing things in more earnest. If that's the direction I go in, I really hope you like British comedy. Really like it. Like it as much as I do. Which is a lot. To the extent that the actual quality of the programme is all but irrelevant.

I've been watching a lot of Mongrels lately ('a lot' here meaning 8 episodes, as that is in fact all there has been). It's like a slightly more charming, class-conscious version of South Park, with equal parts puppets and Mighty Boosh thrown in for good measure.

I recommend it if you like comedy that pushes the boundaries of what is acceptable without actually tearing the boundaries down. You see, while it's perfectly happy to address paedophilia, cross-species love, date rape etc. (often through song), you won't come away from watching it with your life changed (other than there being half an hour less of it before your inevitable death).

If, however, you fancy yourself as a member of the intelligentsia (as of course I do; I'm an English and Creative Writing student, superiority comes with the territory), you could do a lot worse than to check out That Mitchell and Webb Look.

It's a sketch show, so of course it's character driven, but rather than create charicatured monstrosities that make you want to scratch "Little Britain sucks" on your own eyeball just so that you remember to never, EVER watch it again, TMAWL reminds me with every sketch of myself. Me trying to fit in at parties. Me getting irate at the grammar failings of others. Me cowering underground after a non-specific Event destroys civilisation as we know it (with the apparent exception of game-shows). Even the beautifully simple "Get Me Hennimore!" sketches play on my assumed nostalgia for classic sitcoms like Dad's Army, and Are You Being Served.

I also watched some of the Armstrong and Miller show, but I'm annoyed with them because of their Enlightenment sketches, so I won't talk about them tonight.

Don't worry, I'm sure we'll be back on me soon (rejoice, peasants!); but in the meantime let me know if there's something you'd like me to review. Even if it's something you just can't be bothered to watch yourself, but feel like you should. By all means outsource that unpleasant duty to me, because I have nothing but time these days and I need to keep myself busy. Otherwise I start thinking about the Event.

Talk to you soon, and stay indoors,
Anna.

PS If you do set me homework, I might not do it. Things might come up. I might get interesting again. Barring that, though, go nuts.

PPS Do not go nuts. Recommend me things to watch, by all means, but please remain as sane as you can.

Sherlock: a review

I've been really enjoying Sherlock on BBC1. Actually, to be pedantic, I've been enjoying it on iPlayer; the future is here and I am no longer shackled to one time and channel (a fact that's led me to bid a tearful farewell to the Radio Times, despite its obvious worth as a media magazine). In fact, our television doesn’t receive any channels, so instead I wait until a convenient moment and watch it online. SCIENCE!

It’s a testament to the show’s excellence that the ‘convenient moment’ is never too long after its airing time. I confess to not being one of the first on board the bandwagon; I only watched it because everyone was talking about it on Twitter, and because @Steven_Moffat (who co-created it with @MarkGatiss) had just signed up himself. That’s the wonderful thing about peer pressure; sometimes everybody’s telling you to try something because it’s actually really rather good.

Really rather good. Also: nom.

I haven’t yet seen the inevitable “if you like X, you’ll love Y” review, so I’ll be the unimaginative chump who says it: Sherlock is in much the same vein as Doctor Who. You’ve got the brilliant, wild, unpredictable lead character legging it around the place, with his faithful companion in tow (who’s picking it up as he goes along, and learning a lot about Life, the Universe, and Everything). It’s only through Benedict Cumberbatch’s enthralling performance that this never feels old. There’s a wonderful moment in the second episode (out of three, mind, so you don’t have long to get on board) when Holmes does an impression of a ‘normal person’ in order to get his way. The social skills and charm are switched on, and Cumberbatch transforms himself again. I’ve not seen him in anything else, I don’t think, but I wouldn’t be surprised to see incredible character range from him in coming years. As for Martin Freeman: he is exactly what Doctor Watson (or, for that matter, a TARDIS-travelling companion) should be. Interesting, active (as opposed to passive), and learning about Holmes as the audience’s eyes and ears. My only criticism would be that we haven’t seen much emotional intensity from him, not even at times that would have demanded it; but his character’s time spent in Afghanistan probably mitigates that accusation.

There's always an awful lot of running to do!

Another thing I’ve loved about this miniseries is the accompanying web presence. The first episode mentioned John Watson’s blog and Holmes’ site “The Science of Deduction.” In addition to these, Molly Hooper’s blog and Connie Prince's website fill out the universe; giving me things to read and puzzle over in the time between episodes. Sites like this really help to bring characters to life for someone as web-obsessed as me, and although I would have preferred in-character twitter accounts, I understand the problems that would present regarding timing, interaction etc.

The plots themselves are convoluted, well-structured, and cleverly untangled by the dynamic duo. The use of text overlay is sheer genius; it’s 2010, yet most programmes are content to narrate every text they receive and letter they read. Leave unwieldy exposition to lesser mortals; with Holmes, it’s all internal. As it should be. So, in conclusion: I’m very much looking forward to the finale; and not just so that I can stare at Benedict and Martin’s lovely lovely faces.

The third episode will air Sunday, 9pm, BBC1; or watch it at http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/ for a week after. There's a good interview with Cumberbatch here if you're interested, but you can't have him.

P.S. my lovely friend Katie has updated her blog with her own Sherlock review! Do check it out.