Welcome to Reverend Wayne Austin Goodchild's official blog. Not that there's an unofficial one...

Click WAYNE GOODCHILD IS HAUNTED to go to his Facebook page! There's good stuff on it! Honest!

...all work on here is copyright wayne goodchild, unless otherwise stated, you cheeky monkeys...

Tuesday, 1 August 2017


Let me tell you a little bit about what's been keeping me busy lately.

A few years ago, I wrote product descriptions for Walmart's website. Once I got into the swing of things, I quite enjoyed it and it was always a bit of a lucky dip to see what stuff I'd be sent to write about - it could be anything from pool filters to action figures to black paper plates. I hoped to go back to that work, but the company have since changed their rules so that they only employ American citizens/residents (before, all you needed was a Paypal account). So, I looked into similar work I can sandwich in-between my teaching hours.

I think I've ended up in a Cabin In The Woods sequel. One that replaces the monsters for a scathing commentary on social media and internet 'celebrity'. You see, I'm currently transcribing video clips. The pay is pretty poor, to be honest, but I'm going to stick doing it for a little while because, well, I literally have no idea who's using the service.

I've done three clips so far, all between 20 and 30 minutes in length. The first one was some kind of lecture/Excel spreadsheet tutorial by a chap with a heavy Japanese accent. I figured one of his students needed it transcribing, given the heavy accent. I also thought this would form the brunt of the work - transcribing lectures for students. Except the second clip was of a Youtuber: A young black man, using the n-word a copious amount of times, and answering a viewer's question. That question was 'why do black women show their cleavage in church?'

Now, turns out the host was a deacon's son, so that kind of explained the subject matter. But he said some pretty rough things about women that I obviously won't repeat. It then became apparent he's some kind of science student, as the clip ended with him holding one-sided conversations concerning upcoming exams (he was reading comments on his computer screen).

And the third clip was of two apparently-teenage girls doing a Ouija board. I swear I'm not making this up.

They were sat on a bed, talking into a webcam and occasionally checking their phones to read/answer comments. I initially thought I was watching some kind of home video project, or even some kind of super weird sex-cam fetish thing, but then they started mentioning Youtube and their 'stream'. The Ouija board section of their 20 minute video was practically useless, as they--sorry, the spirit--spelled out absolute nonsense. This didn't stop them from getting freaked out in a 'feed each other's fear' type scenario - you know, when one person's calm but because the other person keeps saying or acting a particular way, it starts to influence the calm person's behaviour? That.

I have absolutely no idea who would want these last two things transcribed. Neither contained any information that would benefit being read or stored. The 'church' one made me think I was amassing evidence against the host and his underground group of 'black women in church' haters, but the Oujia one put me most in mind of CABIN IN THE WOODS.

In CABIN IN THE WOODS, the company is storing monsters and using them to kill people in strict horror movie ways, in order to appease ancient gods. Maybe this transcription company (or someone using the service) is making sure certain people stream certain things, in order to meet some esoteric internet quota? I honestly have no idea quite what I'm on about, but I can't shake this feeling that some mysterious force is cataloging Youtubers for reasons unknown. Of course, the Youtubers themselves might want it doing, but again, I can't think of any possible reason why, except either misguided vanity or a weird need for compiling their own work.

Although I'm not being entirely serious about all this Bilderberg-baiting stuff, it's definitely weird. The real concern I have is how easily people share certain things online (names, location, etc). I wish they (and especially young people) would bear in mind that, okay, they might only have a few subscribers, but that doesn't mean they're not being monitored in some other way, so please, please be careful about what information they share. You never know who's watching! *dramatic music*

Friday, 16 June 2017


I recently watched the extended edition of BATMAN V SUPERMAN, in two sittings over two days, which I think may be the best way to ingest it. It's still clumsy and feels overlong, though the extra stuff adds context and doesn't take away from the insane spectacle of the action set pieces. However, it left me with one very pertinent question:


Spoilers, obviously, but if you somehow made it this far without finding out about the 'shock' ending of the film, I salute you. So anyway, Superman kicks the bucket being heroic, and Clark Kent's death is attributed to the damage caused by the battle. That's a clean way to do it. But then, we see both funerals and Clark's body is at home in an open coffin, before being buried. Fine.

But what are the military burying in Superman's coffin? How did they not get their mitts on his body? I can imagine Bruce Wayne pulling some strings to make sure the corpse is kept out of their hands, but then someone is bound to wonder where it went. Someone higher up and with more clout than Bruce Wayne must be curious where the corpse of a godlike alien went, unless a 'substitute' was found...? Possible, I suppose.

But what about Clark's body? Was he laying in his coffin with his glasses on or off? Would someone have embalmed him, or tried to? Again, it's possible Bruce Wayne sorted it so the body was kept out of the typical funeral loop, but I wonder if someone, somewhere, noticed either this or that dead Clark looks remarkably like Superman...? LIFE IS FULL OF MYSTERIES.

But in all seriousness, I did enjoy the film a lot more a second time, with the extra stuff and viewing Wonder Woman with the knowledge of what shaped her in the past. I also, initially, found her acting wooden, but either because I was used to her mannerisms or just not as bothered by it, I didn't feel the same way during this viewing.

Plus, I still get chills when this kicks in:

Sunday, 4 June 2017


Here's a slight change of pace: WONDER WOMAN. I went to see this with a group of friends (mostly ladies) last night and the general consensus was it was really good, despite stretches of tedium. Watch out for my opinion!

The film opens with an overlong and overfamiliar 'origin' of Diana, Princess of Themiscyra (Gal Gadot, actually really good as the character this time around), learning to fight and revealing she has an extra 'power', the exact details of which are needlessly hidden from her by her mum, Hippolyte, Queen of the Amazons. To its credit, the film does keep her actual origin as being created from clay, which suggests the weirder aspects of this particular mythology will get an airing (and it does, thanks to a painterly flashback/infodump about the Greek gods).

The island the Amazons live on is protected by a forcefield that renders it invisible to the outside world (and apparently keeps the weather just right, too). However, this doesn't stop a German fighter plane from barreling through it into the sea, which Diana witnesses. Without hesitation, she dives in and drags the pilot to safety - it's Steve Trevor (Chris Pine) and he's an American spy who stole the plane in a recent attempt to deliver vital German info to his superiors in London. Unfortunately, he was followed and German soldiers storm Themiscyra, to be beaten by a small army of female warriors (who themselves aren't, unfortunately, bulletproof). As a result of this skirmish, Hippolyte is extremely reluctant to let Diana go with Steve back to the world of man and war, but obviously this plea falls on deaf ears as Diana can't stand by and do nothing, knowing she has the ability to help. 

It's this core belief at the heart of the character that really sells WONDER WOMAN, as she clearly enjoys fighting, but is raised to believe peace is more important than war. However, (as far as she knows) conflict exists thanks to Ares, the god of war, and the main plot of the film sees Diana on a course to find and kill him, thereby (from her viewpoint) ending the First World War and removing Ares' corrupting influence from the heart of all men. Steve Trevor, despite witnessing the Amazons and Diana's superhuman powers, is still convinced (and tries to convince Diana) that war exists, not because of an ancient god pulling our strings, but because some men are evil, and that's an unfortunate fact of life. It's an interesting idea, as both Steve and Diana want the same thing, but come into conflict themselves over the best way to deal with the situation.

I enjoyed the specatcle of BATMAN V SUPERMAN, but thought the overall film a mess - I also thought Gal Gadot's performance was rather wooden. Thankfully, WONDER WOMAN does far more right than it does wrong, and is a marked improvement on the preceding DC film. The chemistry between Chris Pine and Gal Gadot is excellent, as he counters all her strange behaviour and sincere naivete with a bemused "Well, alright then" but, importantly, doesn't doubt or undermine her. As this early version of Diana, Gal Gadot imbues the 'fish out of water' sensibilities (dealing with early twentieth century society) with a fierce determination to succeed and, above all, do the right thing. There are some really well-handled scenes in which she witnesses the horrors of war and wants to help, but comes to realise it is actually impossible to help everybody, despite her amazing abilities.

Let's talk about those abilities. She has super strength and enhanced speed, can deflect bullets with her wristbands, is handy with a sword and shield, and uses a lasso that compels anyone caught in it to speak the truth. All of this stuff is used brilliantly, particularly in an extended scene in which she removes German soldiers from a village. WONDER WOMAN, in its action scenes, is a film that made me grin like a loon, as she powerslides her way through opposing forces and superleaps into a building with enough force to demolish it.  There are a couple of other things she can do that aren't really explained and seem to only exist as plot devices for when she needs to gain a much-needed upperhand, but I won't touch on those for fear of spoilers.

The villains are interesting. Danny Huston has now popped up as a bad guy in Marvel and DC films, as here he plays a German captain/commander/higher-up, working in tandem with 'Dr. Poison', a female chemist who develops an horrifically deadly gas. These are, basically, normal humans, responsible for killing thousands of innocent people. There is the suggestion that Danny Huston's character may be some new personifaction of Ares, but I'll leave that up to you to find out. I will say that I really liked the way Ares is handled overall in this film, even if things devolve into a CGI slugfest at one point (but that seems inevitable with these DC films).

Steve Trevor's actual mission is to stop this gas from being deployed, and he enlists a few friends to help him: Sammy, an actor/con-man; Charlie, a melancholy sniper; and Chief, a Native American smuggler. We get just enough flavour to these chaps to get a decent idea of why they'd stick by Steve's side, even if they're not getting paid. And seeing their bemusement at Diana's determination to fight, followed by horror as she launches herself into the firing line, and then surprise as she reveals her incredible powers, is excellent. 

WONDER WOMAN is getting a lot of praise solely by virtue of it featuring a strong female lead, and it's a bit sad that that has to be 'a thing' in this day and age, rather than simply commonplace by this point. I really like the fact this is a superhero film I had female friends actively interested in (given that the general view is that they're "boys' films") and that Wonder Woman herself is set to act as a very positive role model for a whole new generation of girls. Maybe the gender politics within the story itself could have had more of a focus, but ultimately I'm glad they're used as theme rather than potentially hamfisted political statement, as this means the film remains fun - which, given the dour nature of the cinematography, historical setting (and current events in real life), is worth celebrating above all else.