Skip to main content


For further information by click here.

Hail Zeitgeisters, 

Google Maps–like many things online–has a social dimension. Punters are encouraged to review the businesses that are on the maps. I found the above review of Macca's Tuart Hill, intriguing. Let us ignore for a moment the strange syntax and grammar and ponder the idea that despite the cheese often having a "strange taste" the reviewer still patronises the establishment.  "I'd like a Boston Deli Bagel, but minus the strange-tasting cheese, por favor."  Is that how one would navigate the transaction? For the record, "strange cheese" gave the joint a 4/5 star rating.

The other two reviews also beg questions of the discriminating netizen. "Excellent customer service, always neat and clean, they make you feel like you are the king." It's not clear if the monarch in question is Albert II, King of the Belgians or perhaps boxing promoter Don King, but the reviewer is clearly a fan of this burger palace, rating it a fat 5/5.

The third and final reviewer took a fantasy approach and reviewed as though on a version of Facebook with the infamous, yet non-existent, "dislike" button. "Dislike: The lack of customer service ever by this company, poor listening skills and team work."  Is all of McDonald's–the corporate entity–indicted by this sentence and the 1/5 rating? 

The "poor listening skills" the reviewer is referring to could mean the staff mishearing Grand Angus as Mighty Angus and getting the order wrong. But maybe she or he means the entire McDonald's Corporation–all the way up to RONALD MCDONALD himself, isn't listening to we, the people; the Fast Food Community of America Australia.  

Yeah, you're on notice Ronnymandias–look on your works and despair! Start listening to our complaints on third party sites or we'll use our Google Maps to find directions to Hungry Jacks or Burger King. 

Mr Trivia


Popular posts from this blog

What's with George Eads' Hair? & David Edwards

Hey Zeitgeisters,

Bet you thought this blog would never top “What’s with Bradley Whitford’s Hair?” For those of you who weren’t part of that historical blog entry, it was the glittering moment where I wondered what’s with West Wing star Bradley Whitford’s hair. Good times.

However, tonight, while watching the current series (in Australia) of CSI :Original Recipe, I was forced to witness the unpleasantness of George Eads’ new(ish) 'do and I felt compelled to blog on’t.

George plays the part of Nick Stokes and has spent some 5 or 6 seasons with a haircut “you could set your watch to,” as Grandpa Simpson might say. It was always short; it always had that US Marine Corps vibe; it was always as dependable as the ebbing and flowing of the tides.

Now in something of an El Nino effect, I note that someone in Jerry Bruckheimer’s organization has decided to mess with the length of George’s crowning glory.

Although I chiefly watch CSI waiting for Grissom…

What’s with Bradley Whitford’s Hair?

Okay, Zeitgeisters, that’s as shallow an attention-grabbing start as one could ever want, but I really want to know. And sure, I’m really talking about Josh Lyman’s hair. (I’m like one of those people who insist on calling an actor by their character’s name – only in reverse. e.g. “Go Knight Boat!”)

Whitford plays Deputy Chief of Staff, Josh Lyman, in the Aaron Sorkin-created, NBC television series The West Wing. He plays this part to a tee and now he’s set to do great things in the new Sorkin drama, Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip. I know this last bit because the Angriest Ex-Video Store Clerk in the world told me.

Oh, and Whitford’s married to the awesome Jane Kaczmarek who plays mom, Lois, in the series Malcolm in the Middle. So Mr Whitford’s your regular pop-cultural icon and yardstick for excellence. We’re here in this, frankly, puzzling cultural landscape, because I’ve just finished watching season four of The West Wing on DVD. And Josh Lyman’s hair has bothered me throughout. It’s…

Not Canon? Son of A Gun!

So my fellow geeks, is there any way we can consider Joe Pesci's turn on the Snickers' telly ad as canonical to the LETHAL WEAPON franchise, or the Angry Man in Scorsese Films Like RAGING BULL and CASINO franchise? Probably not.

The idea that there is an established body of works that shape a fictional character and others that do not, has spread like Vegemite thanks to Our Beloved Internet. Her, nerds and geeks of every stripe will argue, for example, which movies or TV series about the Teenage Mutant Turtles are canon and which are not. In some versions of the story, Turtles mentor, Splinter is the mutated form of a man called Hamato Yoshi and in other versions he is the mutation of a rat owned by Yoshi.

I am given to understand that Peter Cushing's role in the 1965 movie DOCTOR WHO AND THE DALEKS is not canon, but is considered part of some kind of extended Doctor Who Universe. Science Fiction franchises like Star Wars and Star Trek, often have meandering strands of s…