Blog Page 1413

Review: Magic in the Moonlight

0

★★★★☆
Four Stars

Woody Allen’s sheer capacity for work puts most film directors to shame. He has written and directed a feature length film almost every year since the early 1970s, taking lead acting roles in many. 2013’s effort was Blue Jasmine, a rework of Tennessee William’s A Streetcar Named Desire so good it earned its lead actress this year’s Academy Award. For 2014, we have Magic in the Moonlight.

Set in the 1920s, the film opens with a magic show performed by ‘master magician’ Stanley (played by a typically superb Colin Firth). After the show, he is approached backstage by an old friend, also a magician, who requests his help in exposing as a fraud a purported psychic medium. This invitation Stanley accepts enthusiastically, and in doing so travels to the south of France.

Here he meets Sophie, the supposed psychic, played by Emma Stone. Sophie is beautiful, likeable and disarming. She is also without wealth or status. Encouraged by her mother, she has been using her ‘gift’ to win the affections of a wealthy aristocratic English family with whom she has taken residence. One of the young men in this family – a future inheritor of its estate – has blindly fallen for Sophie, and after inflicting upon her a dreadful self-sung serenade, makes a marriage proposal.

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%10190%%[/mm-hide-text] 

Stanley is a child of late Victorian England. He is avowedly and eloquently committed to the power of science and reason. He elevates rationality as the highest human ideal, and abhors sentiment and emotion. He espouses a Hobbesian view of humanity, seeing life as nasty, brutish and short. He quotes Nietzsche approvingly, and is a firm atheist. His intellectual dynamism enables him to successfully manipulate audiences into believing his magician’s act, and his proficiency as a magician he fully expects will equip him to expose Sophie as a fraud.

Events turn out quite the contrary. Sophie’s abilities seem to defy reason. She has personal knowledge of Stanley and his aunt despite never having met them. Unable to formulate a rational explanation for Sophie’s ‘abilities’, Stanley becomes spellbound by her. He abandons his earthly rationality, and with it his Hobbesian views. He begins to appreciate beauty, art and nature. His entire life changes.

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%10191%%[/mm-hide-text] 

All of Allen’s films are at least in part confessionals. Perhaps twenty years ago Stanley would have been played by Allen himself. Magic in the Moonlight continues a long-running Allen theme – man’s power of reason eluding him, confounded by love. Stanley’s pessimistic view of the world is symptomatic of the absence of genuine romantic love in his life. When he finds this in Sophie, all of his beliefs crumble and he finds himself questioning the very nature of existence. Of what worth is rationality if it proves so frail?

The critical press has been near unanimous in its verdict – this is not Allen’s finest effort. That assessment is fair but ultimately misguided. This is a delicate, clever and humorous exploration of male frailty. While not quite on par with Manhattan or Everyone Says I Love You for sheer enjoyment, like all Allen films, this is essential viewing.

Review: Night Moves

0

★★★☆☆
Three Stars

A corkscrew wind chime hangs from a tree, spinning in the wind. Its edges grow and shrink as it turns, in and out, in and out. It’s always there, yet seems to disappear and reappear. This image defines Kelly Reichardt’s Night Moves, an ecopolitical thriller which follows three activists in the build up to, and aftermath of, their attempt to destroy a hydroelectric dam.

The film is obsessed with this apparent magic trick, with the idea of hiding in plain sight. Unfortunately however, just like the wind chime, an illusion can only hold your attention for so long and, after a promising start, the film gradually squanders our interest as it runs out of places to go.

A slow burn from start to end, the film takes its time introducing its characters and revealing the plot. We’re first introduced to Josh, an introverted, calculating presence played with surprising shades of vulnerability by Jesse Eisenberg.

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%10187%%[/mm-hide-text] 

Josh is soon joined by Dakota Fanning’s Dena, and Harmon, a lackadaisical ex-marine perfectly played by Peter Sarsgaard. The film shines in the quiet moments of miscommunication between these three characters, who must trust each other with their lives, but know and say so little to one another.

We feel the anxiety of the characters as we follow them through the minutiae of their preparations. We watch them procure a boat, acquire 500 lbs of fertiliser, and navigate a police check. Reichardt wrings every drop of tension from these situations – we watch in terror as the characters push the needle between making progress and attracting attention.

For much of the film’s midsection, Reichardt wisely puts the focus on Dena, whose humour and passion make her the film’s most likeable character, even as she remains something of an enigma. Fanning’s slightly rehearsed quality becomes a virtue in the role. Her behaviour is learned, copied, and replicated from those around her. We, like Josh and Harmon, never know exactly who we’re looking at.

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%10189%%[/mm-hide-text] 

The film is really a film of two halves, the first perhaps the least glamorous heist movie ever shot, the second an attempt to dramatise the human costs of secrecy. The first half’s slow, steady pace does nothing to hinder its sense of purpose, thanks to Reichardt’s controlled direction and three strong performances from her leads.

However, the script takes a risky gamble by placing the heist as the film’s centrepiece rather than its climax, and it’s a bad bet from which the film never truly recovers. The explosion sends the gang scattering in all directions, off to hide in the normalcy of their everyday lives. Reichardt cuts short the film’s most compelling aspect – the paranoia and mistrust between the conspirators – by separating the characters for the final hour, and as a result the film drags without a clear direction.

The motivations of the central trio are sketched only lightly – ideological, humanitarian, perhaps a little anarchic. This lightness of touch allows the film to engage politically without having an agenda itself. It seems content to act as a conduit for discussion, rather than attempt to provide conclusions.

An early scene sees Dena and Josh watching an activist’s film screening. The film is crude and amateurish, but they are inspired to act by its message of small scale resistance. Later a character remarks that blowing up the dam was “just a piece of theatre.” In this way the film offers differing perspectives on the medium of terrorism, but they never loom too large over the human story at the film’s fore. It’s a tricky balancing act, and not a wholly satisfying one.

Reichardt, as she has in her previous films, wonderfully captures the dichotomous tranquility and wildness of nature. The score is minimalist but ominous, the editing sparse but deliberate. Her style is austere, but it brims with portent.  She presents us with her story, with her images, but we are left to infer their meaning; we are, like that wind chime, twirling in the breeze.

Oxford City Council divests from fossil fuels

0

Oxford City Council has become the first UK Council to commit to divest from fossil fuel companies after an online campaign reached almost 700 signatures.

At a meeting of the full council on July 14th 2014, a motion proposed by Green Party Councillor Craig Simmons was passed, committing the council to end direct investment in fossil fuel firms.

The motion was seconded by Councillor Ruthi Brandt. 

Campaigners waited until September 16th to announce the historic event, so that it would coincide with the lead-up to the UN climate summit in New York this week.

The action by Oxford City Council is a landmark in the rapid progress of fossil fuel divestment campaigns. A recent study by the University of Oxford found that the current campaign was growing faster than any previous one, and could cause significant damage to coal, oil and gas companies.

Miriam Wilson, from the Turl Street-based People and Planet, commented, “Oxford City Council’s decision to divest from the fossil fuel industry is a great triumph for the UK Fossil Free campaign. As the first council in the UK to divest, Oxford is leading the way forward for other institutions to follow suit. In the absence of bold action on climate change by our world leaders, it is absolutely vital that our municipal governments take significant steps to address this most pressing threat. I hope that Oxford City Council will be the first of many in the UK to do so.”

While the news was greeted enthusiastically by campaigners at Fossil Free Oxfordshire Divestment campaign, many were quick to point out that this is not the end of the road. The Oxfordshire Local Government Pension Fund, according to information obtained by the Oxford Mail, still invests £27.9m in fossil fuel firms.

Councillor Bob Price, Leader of Oxford City Council, told Cherwell, “The City Council’s direct investments have historically been restricted to a limited range of banks and building societies with high security ratings; equity investment has not featured.

“However, Oxfordshire County Council manages the Oxfordshire Local Government Pension Fund, to which City Council employees’ contributions and the employer element of the Scheme funding are directed, and some proportion of that fund is invested in equities. The City Council has sought the Fund’s agreement to move away from investing in fossil fuel companies but that has not been accepted.”

But a spokesman from Oxford County Council insisted that the authority had no legal power to choose its investments on ethical grounds.

The news of Oxford City Council’s commitment to battling climate change comes soon after some 67 Oxford academics, including Lord Professor Robert May, former Chief Scientific Adviser to the UK Government and Head of the UK Office of Science and Technology, wrote an open letter to the University asking it to end its own investments in fossil fuels, something a number of American universities, including Stanford, have already done.

Oxford medics question proposed bus link

0

A new bus service will halve the time taken to travel between Oxford University’s science corridor on South Parks and the John Radcliffe hospital, transporting “thousands” of students and staff.

The 600 will run from Pear Tree Park and Ride through to the John Radcliffe Hospital via Woodstock Road, Banbury Road, St. Clement’s and Headley Way. The service will cut a 30 minute journey, including a walk to the High Street, to just 14 minutes. The service will be available from September 29th and will run from Monday to Friday between 9.50am and 3.20pm.

The University has greeted the new service with enthusiasm, with William James, Pro-Vice Chancellor and Professor of Virology, stating, “the new 600 service is an excellent initiative that I hope will enable not only further collaboration between our medical sciences departments and a closer partnership with the NHS, but also help reduce traffic and parking in Oxford.”

Ed Wigzell, travel officer for Oxford University, said, “the main aim is to provide a link between the science area and the Headington hospitals. There’s more than 4,000 staff and many more students working and studying here in the science corridor and many of these need to travel to and from the hospitals.”

If it proves popular, the Oxford Bus Company may increase service to run during peak times and at weekends.

While the service will clearly benefit residents of North Oxford by providing them with direct links to the hospitals, Medical Sciences students remained less convinced. Ealish Swift, a 3rd year medic at Jesus, thought that it might help “the hit-and-miss nature of trying to catch a bus to the JR from the High Street from lectures” but added, “I probably won’t benefit this year. However, those who are doing research projects based at the hospital might appreciate this.”

Gareth Davies, a Wadham 4th year, was more skeptical, telling Cherwell,“I can’t see myself ever using it. The fact it’s only 9:50-15:20 means that most medics won’t find its service hours useful.”

Sam Skillcorn, a second year medic, echoed this cynicism, saying, “the only time I’d ever get this bus is if I fall over on my way to a lecture and need to go to A&E.”

 

Should the rest of the UK care about Scottish independence?

0

I did not intend for this article to happen. Instead, I imagined myself commissioning a friend of mine, notorious for his ideological flexibility, to write an I-don’t-give-a-shit article about Scottish Independence. After all, Scotland only comprises 8% of the UK’s population and independence, whilst it would inevitably cause seismic change up north, would not change much down south. Indeed, a recent survey showed that only 55% of English people cared about the referendum and that the majority thought that secession would leave the rest of the UK’s place on the world stage either unaltered or even magnified. Heck, after all the English hate that the most militant yes campaigners express, and their shocking overconfidence in an independent Scotland, it is unsurprising that the reaction of many of my friends to Scottish independence is one of mirth; intrigued by the idea of a constitutional shake up but at the same time ready to laugh when Scotland goes to the dogs. When one considers that independence would get rid of the great inequality in UK public spending whereby Scotland receive £1,623 per head more than the rest of the UK, a case could be made that, if anything, independence would be great for the average Oxford student.

Yet, as with much of what has been said in the campaign, this view is painfully narrow-minded. Both campaigns seem to suffer from an acute case of short-termism. The Yes campaign’s biggest asset undoubtedly is hatred and distrust of Westminster as epitomised most poignantly by the twin evils of Thatcher and Cameron. Their economic case is predicated on oil revenue that can only be predicted with any certainty in the short-term future. So the reference points for this campaign only really extend 30 years either way. For sure, the present is important and it is very easy to see the case for independence in the light of the damage Thatcher wreaked upon Scotland. Never again would be seemingly a good enough motive for any Aye voter.

Even the No campaign have been focusing quite rightly on the technicalities of what a split would actually entail for Scotland in the next 10 to 20 years. Yet, there is so much more to it than that.  The Union has not existed for only 30, or 60, or 150 years, but for more than 300. Its importance transcends generational problems, the problems that both campaigns seem to be focusing on. Nothing annoys me more than when Alex Salmond pops his head up and says that this is a ‘Once in a generation’ choice. It is not and to say so mitigates its importance. Constitutionally at least, its not even a ‘once in a lifetime’ choice but a ‘once in half-a-millennium’ one. So, the very notion that the outcome of the referendum could turn on a hatred of David Cameron is a rather grating one.

I am not saying, however, that the two campaigns are wrong to take such a short-termist approach. Nothing motivates the voter more than the immediate future. I am rather saying that despite the temptation to view the referendum as a far off distraction, when looked at through a longer-term lens it becomes very important indeed. There has always been a curious tension between our national identities (English, Scottish et cetera) and the supranational Britishness, one that this campaign has brought to the fore. Yet, after 300 years of Union, the interconnectedness of the Scottish, English and Welsh is undeniable. I am but one of many whose roots are as Scottish as English, having been born in Edinburgh and in possession of Scottish ancestry.

Indeed, whilst Scotland itself has five million residents, 800,000 further Scots live in the rest of the UK, disenfranchised in the upcoming referendum. Politically, the last Labour government counted a Scottish Prime Minister, Chancellor and Defence Secretary within its ranks. It is undeniable, to use clichéd terminology, that Scotland is an inextricable part of the family. We may formally be separate peoples but practically we are anything but. Thus, that is my first reason why the English should care: Scotland going independent would be more akin to our family being broken up than the ejection of a tenant.

A second, and closely related, reason is the extent to which we can achieve more together than apart. Being in the United Kingdom has undoubtedly given Scotland an advantage, not least free trade with the rest of Britain – its main trading partner – one of the primary reasons behind the establishment of the Union in the first place. The UK has given Scotland a platform to do things that it could never have accomplished otherwise, from a pioneering role the Industrial Revolution to extending its influence to all corners of the globe.  Yet Scotland has also itself been integral to the great success that we, the United Kingdom, have achieved in the past few centuries. Scots stood shoulder to shoulder with Englishmen in both world wars. The State that we have forged today, as much Scottish as English, is the envy of the world, with a national health service, free for all.  Alexander Fleming, a Scot, discovered penicillin in an English laboratory. To use an example closer to home, without the 14 Scottish medallists at London 2012, Team GB would have plummeted down the rankings. Thus, a Yes vote on Thursday would put an end to one of the most successful partnerships of all time.

Admittedly, this all seems slightly romanticised and emotional. After all, isn’t it the future that counts? Well, an independent Scotland would be damaging for that too. Not just for Scotland itself but for England as well. It is predicted that GDP growth for the rest of the UK would dramatically slow as a result of independence whilst the UK would lose 32% of its land mass. A lot of time and money would have to be expended on the transition, thereby forcing the English to neglect other pressing issues such as the rise of Islamic State. Trident alone would cost up to £3.5 billion to relocate. But it is far more than money or time which England would lose due to a Yes vote. It would also lose considerable prestige and power on the world stage. Its prominent place in Europe would be diminished whilst its permanent seat on the UN Security Council would be threatened. It is of no surprise therefore, that foreign leaders across the globe, from China to Australia to the USA, are worried enough about the damaging consequences of a Yes vote to interfere and state publicly their support for the Union.

Thus, in the present, past and future, this referendum will have a dramatic impact on the rest of the UK as well as Scotland: a family member lost, a promising future dampened. For centuries, we have forged our identity with the notion of a United Kingdom at its core. If, therefore, we are no longer united, our very identity is threatened. It is for this reason, above all others, that every part of the UK should care about this referendum. 

Oxford film wins big at Portobello festival

0

A film directed by and starring Oxford students has beaten 600 entrants to claim a prize at the Portobello film festival, signifying the recent meteoric rise of Oxford’s film scene over the past year.

The Wishing Horse, directed by Oxford Broadcasting Association president and New College student Alex Darby, received ‘Best London Film’ at the festival, which was dubbed by the Independent as “the largest celebration of independent film in Europe”.

Starring Imogen West-Knights, who graduated from Exeter College in 2013, the ten minute film explores the grief of a young girl, Lily. She is unable to cope with her father’s failing health and a difficult relationship with her mother, until she is reminded of a folk story her father – voiced by Richard E. Grant (of Dracula, Corpse Bride, and Downton Abbey fame) – used to tell.

Delighted with the achievement, Darby told Cherwell, “The award was a massive surprise and is a huge help – it really puts the film out there and boosts our distribution budget. We were pretty humbled and shocked at the awards ceremony – we didn’t expect to get anything so we were very glad we turned up!”

West-Knights, who plays Lily, shared Darby’s delight. She explained, “The award was certainly a surprise. Making the film was a great experience – everyone involved with the process was really committed to making it as good as it could be within our capabilities, which made all the difference to the final film I think. Hopefully there are more pleasant surprises to come as we hear back from other festivals!”

Founded in 1996, the Portobello Film Festival describes itself as a “reaction to the moribund state of the British film industry”, and it aims to “provide a forum for new film-makers and give exposure to movies on different formats.” Many of the filmmakers shown at the festival have since been recognised by the mainstream film industry – Guy Ritchie, for instance, was shortlisted in 1996 for his film The Hard Case.

The Wishing Horse is the first film produced by ABG Productions, founded in May 2013 by Aidan Grounds and Emily Precious, the latter having recently worked on The Man Who Knew Infinity, starring Dev Patel and Jeremy Irons.

Grounds told Cherwell that they were “delighted to win the award … The Wishing Horse was the first film we made, and we can’t wait to keep making more in the future.”

Darby was keen to credit ABG with spearheading Oxford’s rising film scene, explaining, “Over the last two years loads of people have been making interesting films, the scene has really gone from zero to hero.

“When I was at the end of my first year there wasn’t much of a film scene at Oxford. Aidan and Emily were keen to make sure that the profits made from their student productions at Oxford were reinvested to support the development of a film scene in Oxford. I had the idea to set up the film fund, and Thelma Holt found additional funding make it a reality. That’s now been turned into the Oxford Broadcasting Association, which I run with Ksenia Harwood after Anatole Sloan set it up last year.

“The majority of the team [working on the film] were Oxford grads who had only done theatre before – they pretty much all work in film now.”

The project was funded with support from Oxford’s Vice Chancellor, Andrew Hamilton, to whom Darby is extremely grateful. He explained, “We also had help from various kind friends through a Kickstarter project and Oxford student drama bodies. Later down the line we were generously supported by Exeter and St. Catz JCRs.”

While he describes the project as a “ton of work”, “exhausting”, and “painstaking”, he told Cherwell that “working with the cast was one of the most enjoyable bits of it as I had much more experience in that area, and Imogen (West-Knights) in particular was fantastic to work with – she is a very responsive and subtle actress.”

Darby continued, “We’re planning on using the prize money to submit to more festivals – we’re screening in Southampton in October, and are waiting to hear back from a quite a few others.”

Darby hopes for more of the same success when his next films – titled “Waterbird” and “Catkins” – are released over the next few weeks.

See the film’s website for more information. Details about Darby’s next films, Waterbird and Catkins, can be found here.

Review: MTV’s Snack-Off

0

TV is a difficult medium for food basically because it is food. Until SMELL-O-VISION or Lick-A-Vision become commonplace, there will always be an element of food TV that is impossible for the audience to experience.

This is probably why most focus on something other than the food – for Come Dine with Me it’s drunken arguments, for Hell’s Kitchen it’s the fact that Gordon Ramsay swears at his contestants, who meanwhile threaten to stab each other. My personal favourite shows are those which have an element of creativity, but also don’t take themselves too seriously, and my current favourite is MTV’s Snack-Off.

The show works around the limits of the medium by using comedy and silliness, and focusing on the ridiculous and incongruous aspects of the food. The contestants are amateur cooks in their 20s who make a snack out of other snack foods like chips, crackers, and peanut butter within a set amount of time.

The results are usually fairly gross-looking, and according to the Daily Mail one of the judges said she felt sick after eating  these foods all the time but there is also a kind of perverse delight in the gross-ness of things like bacon-crushed crackers and tuna melts. The prize is a thousand dollars and winning ‘The Golden Spork’ as well as a supposed mention in some as yet non-existent cookbook.

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%10181%%[/mm-hide-text] 

Snack-Off is the brainchild of Rob Dyrdek who is best known for Ridiculousness which is basically just You’ve Been Framed but with bad anal sex jokes. Ridiculousness manages to be both crass and dull which makes Snack-Off a surprise success, but this may be because Dyrdek is not a host. The real strength of the show is the tone. The judges swear, take Instagram photos of their food, and generally mess around.

The judges have excellent camaraderie and it’s nice to see Eddie Huang finally host a TV show. He is the perfect host, managing to join in with the other hosts but not attempting to hog the limelight. The judges are a good mix of  funny (Yassir Lester and Chrissy Teigen) and serious ( Jason Quinn).  Essentially, I like Snack-Off because it’s everything GBBO isn’t. It’s laid-back, silly, and doesn’t take itself too seriously. It may be crass and have seemingly little ambition but it also doesn’t induce the same anxiety of GBBO‘s pastel purgatory.

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%10182%%[/mm-hide-text] 
The judges.

 

Review: Medea

0

When confronted with a production of this calibre – so absorbingly relevant, so in tune with our society’s downward-spiralling pattern of destruction – it can come as a shock to remember that Medea was written by a man, Euripides, in the 5th century BC, to be performed by men for an exclusively male audience. Out of what might well have been intended as a warning of the consequences of uncontrolled female passion, not an exploration of the suffering produced by gender inequalities, the National Theatre have created a harsh immediacy from the text, aided by Ben Powers’ innovative translation.

The chorus, making the most of their unique position as intermediate between characters and spectators, contribute with consonantly dark choreography. The way in which their rigidly awkward, puppet-like movements during Jason’s first dance with his new bride give way to the twitching and juddering of malfunctioning mechanical dolls seem to express something more than how the gods can be puppeteers of human action. It contrasts the expressionless, desireless objects that the women of the play are expected to be with the awful malfunction that occurs in Medea’s mind when the strain of this act becomes too much: a strain demonstrated as Medea, in an expertly judged performance by Helen McRory, must put on a mask of weakness, apologising for her womanly tearfulness while begging Creon, the father of Jason’s new wife, not to exile her and her children.

This is made all the more powerful by occasional glimmers of how she once was – in her vivacious humour, her formidable intelligence now put to a terrible use, in how other characters, those who knew her in the past, treat her with such love and concern. Capitalising on this tension in an intensely dramatic but rather overt example of extreme bipolarity, Medea’s monologue at one point becomes a spilt-personality conflict between a timidly uncertain self, appalled by what she is compelled to do, and a roaring, demonic ferocity that possesses her. This was a technique also put to slightly better use in Alex Kingston’s portrayal of Lady Macbeth last year.

Danny Sapani convinced as Jason, a character endlessly capable of turning the stomach as he switches allegiance with the ease of someone whose only concern is political advantage. “You are my proudest achievements”, he tells his sons as if they are just an addition to his collection of trophies, while utterly incapable of meaningfully interacting with them. Watching his calculated and powerful fury giving way to shaken, horrified impotence in the face of Medea’s crime creates an unsettling emotional mix of devastation and elation.

But her crime is no act of insanity. Hints of her psychological motivations remain almost understandable when they surface: her evident traumatisation by difficult childbirth was left unresolved, as must have been the case for so many women in a time of extremely limited knowledge of both medicine and of the mental stress which such experiences could exert. The focus on Jason and Medea’s failed marriage, arguing in a way that couples have clearly argued for millennia, also resonates as a reminder of how this is a story that is being retold endlessly. For its deeply relevant depiction of how experiences of betrayal can brutalise anyone, this is certainly not a performance to miss as its National Theatre Live Encore screenings are broadcast to cinemas this September.

Down it fresher!

0

Prospect of the new term making you work up a sweat? Feeling thirsty after the long summer? Well you needn’t worry! Here’s your go-to guide for the best places in Oxford to grab a drink. Be it on the way to a morning lecture or a weekend catch-up with friends, whatever the time and whatever the taste, we’ve got it covered.

Best for… COFFEE LOVERS

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%10179%%[/mm-hide-text] 

Branca

Wanting a coffee, but not just any old coffee? Branca’s the place to go for the swankiest coffee in Oxford. Expect a complimentary Italian biscotti and a glass of water, lemon and ice with every order.

The Missing Bean

This independently run espresso bar has built up a reputation for its freshly made Italian coffee. The laid-back atmosphere makes it perfect for a quick drop-in with friends.

Turl Street Kitchen

Coffee not your thing? Famous amongst Oxford students, Turl Street Kitchen offers an outstanding array of herbal teas with comfy sofas to match. From delicate green tea to exotic fruit infusions, the choice is endless.

 

Best for… JUICE AND MILKSHAKE LOVERS

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%10180%%[/mm-hide-text] 

Queen’s Lane Coffee House

Don’t be deceived by the name – providing freshly pressed juices since 1654 and conveniently placed on the High Street, these juices are both refreshing and affordable.

Moo Moo’s Milkshakes

Always packed, you haven’t had a milkshake until you’ve gone to Moo Moo’s. Freshly made to order, these creamy, frothy milkshakes will hit the spot any day. Why not treat yourself and grab an ice-cream to match?

Shaken Stephen’s

Whether you fancy a super sweet milkshake or a super healthy fruit boost, come here for a drink that’ll please those taste-buds, and give you an instant pick-me up.

 

Best for…COCKTAIL LOVERS

Raoul’s Bar

Using homemade ingredients and more fruit “than any other bar in Oxford”, Raoul’s offers cocktails that are great value whatever the time. Feeling creative? Get in contact for a Cocktail Masterclass with the super-friendly bartenders.

The House

Fitted with a slick monochrome interior and cream leather seats – not to mention an outdoor private terrace – this is one of the classiest bars in Oxford to enjoy a drink.

Angels Cocktails

Angels tailor their cocktails to suit even the most specific taste, making them right before your eyes. Almost half the price during happy hour and offering a free serving of nuts with every order, there’s every reason to head here on a Friday night.

British athletes’ success bodes well

0

August’s European Athletics Championships in Zurich was full of drama and there is a welcome air of optimism in the team GB camp after a highly successful championships.

Forty-year-old Jo Pavey hit headlines the world over for her scintillating performance on the first, winning gold in the 10,000m only eleven months after the birth of her second child. The Briton is the oldest ever female athlete to win a European title. It goes without saying that Pavey’s resolute run spurred on the rest of the British team (talk less of several middle-aged mums!) to hunt for greatness in their own events.

Mo Farah gunned for gold the next day in the men’s 10,000 and got his prize, as he is often does. This win had a different flavour to it, however, as only a few weeks before the Olympic champion had suffered a severe health scare, which included him collapsing and having to be airlifted to hospital. Behind Mo, compatriot Andy Vernon fought for silver. A few minutes after these medals had been won, 23-year-old Ashleigh Nelson got another medal for Team GB, this time a bronze – running 11.22 behind Dutchwoman Dafne Schippers who won in 11.12 seconds, and France’s Myriam Soumaré (11.16). More was to come. American-born Tiffany Porter won her first ever gold in the 100m hurdles, in a time of 12.76 secs. The medals just kept rolling in for the Union Jack team; a matter of minutes later James Dasaolu won 100m gold in a time of 10.06 seconds, with Harry Aikines-Aryeetey coming through to take bronze in 10.22, and France’s Christophe Lemaitre seizing the silver (10.13).

There was drama of a different nature on the same day when French steeplechaser Mahiedine Mekhissi-Benabbad had the nerve to take off his shirt some 100m before the finish line and motion furiously to the crowd to join in with his celebration – despite not having officially won the race yet. Ironically, despite blowing his own trumpet, the long-distance runner was disqualified – ostensibly for removing the number that identified him to officials. Mekhissi-Benabbad is already known for causing trouble – in 2011 he was involved in a fight with another Frenchman after a race, and the following year, after winning European gold, he pushed over the mascot as she reached out to congratulate him.

On 15th August, day four of the championships, Martyn Rooney finally won his first European gold medal after years of coming close. The new kid on the block, Matthew Hudson-Smith helped add to Team GB’s medal tally with an impressive second place. Christine Ohuorogu, who has a reputation of delivering at major championships, was this time unable to snag a medal, finishing in fourth place in the women’s 400m after a quiet season. Laura Weightman came through in the 1500m to get a brave bronze for Great Britain. Jodie Williams went one better later in the evening with a silver medal in the 200m, setting a new personal best (22.46) behind the phenomenal Dafne Schippers, who ran the fastest 200m by a European woman in 19 years – 22.03 – despite being a heptathlete. Jodie’s time was the fastest by a British woman since 1984. What’s more, in making the 200m final, Jodie, Bianca Williams and Dina Asher-Smith had become the first set of three women to line up for Britain in this event in over half a century. Bianca finished in fourth place, but unfortunately 18-year-old Asher-Smith was unable to finish, pulling a hamstring halfway through the race. Adam Gemili topped off a much awaited men’s 200m final, beating Christophe Lemaitre to the gold in a time of 19.98 seconds to get his first senior medal.

On the penultimate day of the competition, the Scottish lasses built on their successes in the Commonwealth Games a few weeks earlier. Eilidh Child upgraded her silver from Glasgow to a gold medal in Zurich. The last time a British woman managed such a feat was 20 years earlier, when Sally Gunnell became 400m hurdles champion. Lynsey Sharp also made history with her performance last Saturday, breaking Susan Scott’s Scottish record and smashing her own PB by 0.87 secs to run 1:58.80. Victory was arguably sweeter for Sharp – whose mother and father were international athletes in their own right, her father a competitor at the 1980 Olympic Games and her mother also an 800m runner at the Commonwealth Games – who two years earlier had been denied the opportunity to stand on top of the podium by a doping Russian athlete, and just a few weeks before had been in hospital on a drip. Jo Pavey, the heroic wonder-woman of the opening day, returned to action for the 5,000m final but this time it was seventh place.

The sixth and final day of the European Championships did not disappoint. There was more drama to unfold in the men’s 1500m, where Mekhissi-Benabbad stepped out onto the track again, after being stripped of his earlier gold medal. In a race fraught with bumps and falls, which resulted in Britain’s Charlie Grice taking two rather heavy tumbles, the Frenchman again finished ahead of everyone else, and yet again took the liberty of celebrating before crossing the line. This time, however, he refrained from removing his shirt and clutching it between his teeth for the final quarter of the last lap. His controversial behaviour earned him some boos and critics but this time the distance runner did manage to hold on to his medal. Chris O’Hare worked hard to get the British team another bronze medal.

Mo Farah became the most successful individual athlete in the history of the European Championships and the most decorated British athlete when he won his second gold in Zurich 2014 in the 5,000m. Compatriot Andy Vernon also got his second medal of the championships, this time a bronze. Greg Rutherford added another senior title to his collection with his 8.27m and 8.29m jumps in the long jump. The father-to-be now is now simultaneously Olympic, Commonwealth and European Champion. With the World Championships next year, it seems it won’t be long before the 27-year-old British record holder holds all four major titles.

Team GB medalled in each of the four relays that capped off the championships in Switzerland. The ladies’ 4x400m team made up of Eilidh Child, Shana Cox, Kelly Massey and Margaret Adeoye put in a determined performance to get the bronze in a very close finish: only a few hundredths-of-a-second separated the gutsy French runner, Ukrainian and Adeoye at the finish line. The men triumphed in their 4x400m final, an event in which we have proved medal-worthy at every  European Championships since 1978. This time it was a gold, brought home by the team of Conrad Williams, Matthew Hudson-Smith, Michael Bingham and Martyn Rooney.  

The remarkable successes of their fellow British athletes on the final day must have fired up the 4x100m teams. For a short while after the four-lap relay victory, James Ellington, Harry Aikines-Aryeetey, Richard Kilty and Adam Gemili ran a time of 37.93 seconds, to win a confident relay gold ahead of Germany and France. The women followed, not only managing to beat the French and Russian teams, but also managing to break a 34-year-old British record, lowering it to 42.24 seconds. Even more remarkably, eleven days later, (and again in Zurich) the British girls rounded down the record again – this time to 42.21.

It seems safe to say that we are in a new season of British athletics. Relays are being won confidently, rather than wrecked by terrible baton changes. Sprints are being won. Records are being broken. At this year’s European Athletics Championships, Britain topped the table, with 12 gold medals and 23 medals overall, more than Team GB has ever managed before.  It seems the legacy of London 2012 is still in the air…