The reason people generally hate opening and closing ceremonies is because there's very little in them that we haven't seen before. It's usually a load of old Fame extras giving their camp artistic impressions of peace and unity, punctuated by the odd pandering inclusion of a celeb who needs a career boost.
What made the Beijing ceremonies so great was that they were entertaining even when ignoring all the pomposity that necessarily goes along with them. It was the scale, the coordination and the sheer ambition that made them so great; a bit like if the Chinese military had been overthrown in a coup by the Cirque Du Soleil. Even the fireworks were as good as any I've ever seen.
When the London bit started yesterday you can tell it was gong to be a load of obvious, twee cliches. And it didn't disappoint.
"What defines the capital city?"
"Rain, smog, red double-decker buses, children walking on people's backs, Leona Lewis and that pen pilferer David Beckham"
Piss off London.
Then the hand over party in the UK started, and what did they offer? Rejects from some local performing arts schools, dressed up in generic Mad Max costumes that they'd nicked from a sixth form production.
Claudia Winkleman would get it mind, if only to shut her up for a minute (2 if I'm lucky).
The 2012 opening ceremony is probably gonna be shit an' all. A load of pretentious symbolism that nobody cares about, performed by kids - because everybody loves kids! feck off.
Beijing was spectacular and they could justify the grandiosity. Apart from the obvious stereotypes that nobody cares about, London will find it difficult to offer anything that any other developed Western city can't. And you can bet your house that the centre-piece will a soppy modern dance performance that's supposed to show the multicultural nature of urban London, which is basically just the appropriated culture of urban America. That'll be original.
The London Olympics will be crap. Manchester is the capital of sport in this country.