Aug 27 2018

DO NOT USE MOTION CHARTERS

Do NOT use Motion Charters

These people do not deliver the boat promised and then steal your deposit. These guys ARE conmen.

rating

Two years in a row, they failed to deliver the J109 that was promised, for Cowes week (2017 & 2018).

In 2018 they substituted the boat for a Fairview sailing boat and then tried to claim to Fairview sailing that we were to settle the bill, even though we had paid £5K for the weeks charter to Motion Charters took a £3K insurance waiver deposit and are now refusing to return deposit, on the basis that we should pay Fairview another £1,900.

Never ever communication, worst people I have ever dealt with + they steal.

I personally went 22 Hillside Mews, Sarisbury Green, Southampton, England, SO31 7LQ, where Matt Beacroft & Kelly Beacroft live.

I knocked on the door several times, no answer. I waited outside a man appeared, I questioned if he was Matt, he denied being Matt and says the Beacrofts live on Northampton.

Later Fairview Sailing confirmed that they know of Matt & Kelly Beacroft and they do indeed live at 22 Hillside Mews.

Sitting on the drive is an £80K RS6 Audi, and a brand new Fiat Abarth. Not sure how you make that sort of money out of maintaining and chartering a few boats.

IMG_6216

Our next move is small claims court to recover the money owed.

Kelly’s mobile is 07860 466411

Have you had a similar experience with Motion Charters? Please contact us on do.not.use.motion.charters@gmail.com

If you need more evidence please see Google reviews of Motion Charters – **UPDATE (They have subsequently removed their Google Reviews!)

Below are reviews from other before they were taken down.

OTHERS ON GOOGLE

A very bad experience. Motion Charters took a big deposit for a Cowes week J109 race charter and race entry fee, then took the full sum as contracted with about six weeks to go. We found out with five days to go that the chartered boat was ‘not available’ having been withdrawn by the owner for unspecified reasons, and they tried to move us to another class. Comms were poor, phones not answered.

Was there ever a J109 for me? I suspect not but have no hard proof: they never entered a boat in my name (which at best was an expensive error on their part as the difference between early bird and standard entry is vast) and have failed to reply to questions asking for the boat name so I can avoid that owner in future years.

The refund was then late. 
I wont be using them again. 

——————————————————————————–

I wasn’t going to post my experience with Motion Charters until I saw Alistair’s post. Frankly he could have written mine. I hasten to add that my J109 2016 RTI race charter with them was great.

Some 6 months after my deposit was paid and only weeks before the 2017 RTI race I too found out the J109 I had chartered wasn’t available. I was told the owner had decided to sell her last minute and that the total lack of communication following that disappointing news was due to the hospitalisation of one of the key staff members (for which I gave great sympathy and understanding and was why I hadn’t posted). We were offered alternative boats, but none that met my requirements / expectations and my deposit was returned.

I know the charter business can be tricky particularly at peak times so I’m not surprised there are some bumps and disappointments along the way… But isn’t that when a company worth its salt demonstrates outstanding customer service, meticulous comms and goes that extra mile in order to rectify these situations?

Do NOT use Motion Charters


Nov 14 2015

SPECTRE ‘It’s a feat of pure cinematic necromancy’

Daniel Craig in SPECTRE

SPECTRE review: ‘a swaggering show of confidence’

This is pure flamboyance from Sam Mendes as the 24th movie of the James Bond franchise combines hold-your-breath action and ghosts of 007 past, says Robbie Collin.

What do we do now?” wonders Madeleine Swann (Léa Seydoux), around halfway through the new James Bond film SPECTRE, shortly after our hero (Daniel Craig) has done away with a villain in creatively gruesome style during a railway journey across the Sahara.

Of course, everyone in the cinema knows the answer – as, you suspect, does Madeleine, who, less than 24 hours after meeting cinema’s premier secret agent at a snow-swathed clinic in the Austrian Alps, has jumped continents to Morocco, boarded the Tangier to Marrakesh sleeper, slipped into an ivory cocktail gown, repaired to the dining car for a Martini (neither shaken nor stirred, but dirty, FYI) and shot a couple of bad guys in the head for good measure. A Bond film’s rules might be predictable, but once its mechanisms start whirring, you can’t help but fall in step. An impossibly glamorous love scene isn’t just a good idea; it’s virtually mandated by the cosmos.

Daniel Craig: ‘My family hate me’

Rome looks like a $300-million-dollar Tiramisu 

If James Bond Skyfall, the 23rd film in the Bond franchise, was about making sense of the Bond character in the modern world, finally resetting the clock with that delicious closing scene – Bond, M and Moneypenny restored to the wood-panelled office of old – SPECTRE, the 24th, is the film that Skyfall made possible. The four-word epigraph that begins the film – “The dead are alive” – reminds you that no film series has been better at raiding its own mausoleum, and throughout SPECTRE, ghosts of Bond films past come gliding through the film, trailing tingles of nostalgic pleasure in their wake.

It starts in Mexico City, however, with something completely new: a hold-your-breath tracking shot, perhaps five minutes in length, that follows Bond through a surging street parade, into a hotel, up three floors, into a suite, out of the window, and much further, without a single observable cut – an instant all-time greatest moment in the franchise.

It’s a swaggering show of confidence from returning director Sam Mendes and his brilliant cinematographer, Hoyte van Hoytema, who shot SPECTRE on luxurious 35mm film – a marked change of texture from Skyfall’s gleaming digital froideur. The film’s colour palette is so full of mouth-watering chocolates, coffees and creams that when the story moves to Rome, the city looks like a $300-million-dollar, fascist tiramisu.

It’s a feat of pure cinematic necromancy 

Bond has gone to Mexico on the advice of M – not the Ralph Fiennes model, but the Judi Dench version, who in a posthumous message that has surfaced since Skyfall, asks him to do away with a contract killer, Sciarra, “and don’t miss his funeral”.

  • SPECTRE: how many classic Bond references did you spot?

Sciarra – or rather, his widow, Lucia, sleekly played by Monica Bellucci – turns out to be the frayed stitch in a conspiracy that loosely knots together the events of the previous Craig-led films. (Or Casino Royale and Skyfall, at least: Quantum of Solace is tactfully ushered off-stage for the most part.) The trail leads Bond to a creaking cabin on the shore of Lake Altaussee in Austria, then on to the mountaintop clinic and Madeleine, whose name’s Proustian resonance – surely the most highbrow Bond Girl pun to date – does, as promised, spirit 007 to an encounter with his past.

Much speculation has swirled around the film’s main villain, Franz Oberhauser (Christoph Waltz), and the particulars of his agenda won’t be mentioned here, but suffice it to say: despite the globe-encircling master plan, this time, it’s truly personal. Waltz occasionally dices with camp, but mostly underplays what’s essentially a ridiculous role, deploying a blank serenity that’s truly chilling in key scenes, including his first appearance in the SPECTRE boardroom, silhouetted against a column of golden light. Craig, meanwhile, captains Bond into a majestically craggy middle age, bringing a mature, clenched physicality to the chase and combat scenes, and even allowing himself the odd crumpled smirk after a deadpan quip.

There is an elegantly subtle moment in M’s office towards the start of the film in which both Bond and his boss both look their age: they’re having to contend with younger, nimbler threats from within as well as without. To that end, the British government is developing an international surveillance scheme called Nine Eyes with a view to rendering the (dated, unaccountable) double-0 programme redundant. It’s being masterminded by Denbigh (Andrew Scott, known to many as Sherlock’s arch-nemesis Moriarty), a Whitehall mandarin whose code name is C: we never find out what this stands for, but given his conduct, it’s easy enough to guess.

We’re also spared the details of exactly what the scheme will entail, though Denbigh talks about capturing “the world’s digital ghost”, and boasts of being able to scan through CCTV footage from any member nation at will. But a couple of junior MI6 members aren’t sold on it: they are, naturally, Moneypenny (Naomie Harris) and Q (Ben Whishaw), both of whom develop their Skyfall roles with charm and wit (and, in Q’s case, some excellent knitwear).

Meet the man who makes Bond go bang

Up against this flinty modernity, though, writers John Logan, Neal Purvis, Robert Wade and Jez Butterworth rub sly references to the Bond canon, and craft moments of pure flamboyance that belong there: a secret base inside a crater, a spot-lit meteor as an interior design feature, a wrestling match in a pilotless helicopter, two leonine sports cars roaring through the Roman night. There is also a torture scene for the ages, peppered with dark laughs, but tense and shiveringly sadistic – which probably tests the film’s 12A certificate to its limit. But Spectre pulls it off in the grand old Fleming style. It’s an act of pure cinematic necromancy.

Find out the latest on James Bond Spectre premier London


Jul 16 2015

Jurassic World is an excellent movie with special effects

Review on Jurassic World Movie

The film doesn’t skimp on special effects, but the story and dialogue are wooden

Owen (Chris Pratt) trains dinosaurs in "Jurassic World."

The dialogue in “Jurassic World” is nothing to write home about — surprise, surprise — but it is telling.

“No one’s impressed with a dinosaur anymore,” one character says near the beginning of the film. She’s talking about visitors to Jurassic World, the theme park built from the ashes of Jurassic Park Review. But that’s the obstacle the filmmakers face, too, right?

When Steven Spielberg’s “Jurassic Park” debuted in 1993, seeing a velociraptor whiz by or a T-Rex open his jaws and roar was stunning. Truly, there hadn’t been anything like it before, that kind of realism with such fantastic subject matter, and there couldn’t have been a better director than Spielberg to bring it to life.

But it’s 22 years later, both in real life and in the time frame of the film, and director Colin Trevorrow and the team of screenwriters acknowledge with that line the challenge they face, both in the movie and out. A generation of audiences has seen it all before.

Or as they say in the movie, “Consumers want them bigger, louder, more teeth.”

At least on that front, “Jurassic World” gives the people what they want.

Although customers still flock to the theme park, where they can see more and bigger dinosaurs — kids ride some in one attraction — growth isn’t meeting projections. We learn this from Claire (Bryce Dallas Howard), the ice-queen manager who is evidently lacking in any form of human emotion.

This gets at another telling line in the film: “Nothing in Jurassic World is natural.”

This includes character development.

To boost attendance, the park’s resident scientific genius, Dr. Henry Wu (BD Wong, the lone holdover from the first film), has come up with a new dinosaur or something like it: Indominus Rex, a genetically engineered creature whose origins are kept a secret. But what’s clear is that it is designed to be bigger and badder than anything that’s ever come before.

What could possibly go wrong?