Summer Plugs

On a more trivial note, I suppose, I have to plug a few things. I haven’t posted on new albums and things in awhile, so I’ll take a few lines to spread the word on some notable releases.

First of all, if you’re a Drive By Truckers fan (and if you aren’t you should be), it’s a pretty good time to be one. Patterson Hood, co-founder and one of the lead singers/guitarists for DBT released his second solo album two weeks ago, “Murdering Oscar (and other love songs)” and CNN is already calling it the best record of the year so far. It’s a great album, backed by a full band on most tracks (unlike the at home solo recordings of Hood’s last non DBT outing). All are great sounding fully formed songs that are lyrical character studies of a wide range of humanity. Great music with good lyrics. Pick this one up the old-fashioned way (you know, at a record store), because the packaging is nice and the liner notes are very insightful. The record should hold you off until July’s CD/DVD combo release of DBT’s “Austin City Limits” live show and the upcoming fall release of a DBT B-sides, rarities and outtakes compilation

Also noteworthy recent music albums are the great power pop rock songs from French rockers Phoenix’ third album, “Wolfgang Amadeus Phoenix.” Also, for seriously bouncy perfect pop music check out “Manners” by the band “Passion Pit,” a throwback to 80s synth pop that remains sounding fresh. And, Morrissey’s latest album “Years of Refusal” may very well be the best and most cohesive work he’s put out since leaving the Smiths almost two decades ago.

In other mediums, if you are even a casual comic or graphic novel fan and you aren’t reading writer Jason Aaron and artist R.M. Guera’s excellent “Scalped” series from Vertigo/DC, you are sorely missing out. It’s available in 4 collected volumes (Indian Country, Casino Boogie, Dead Mothers, Gravel in Your Guts) and new single issues come out every month. It’s unlike anything you’ve ever read, a completely new and wholly American noir tale. The only thing giving “Scalped” a run for it’s money on intensity, depth and originality is the relatively new “Unknown Soldier,” another Vertigo title by writer Joshua Dysart and artist Alberto Ponticelli. “Soldier” is a thoroughly researched and eerily visceral take on Uganda and Congo political, war and civilian issues complete with child soldiers, violent civil wars and the re-imagining of the old DC character, the soldier clothed in full bandages. It’s available monthly, the first collected trade is scheduled to come out on September 1st, so mark your calendar and earmark your ten bucks because it’s more than worth it.

Last of all, with movies like “Star Trek,” “Wolverine,” “Angels and Demons,” “The Hangover” and “Transformers 2” raking in dough hand over fist, (good as some of them may be) it’s evident that the months of big, dumb, summer movies are upon us as the critical darlings are held back for the fall and winter. These big flicks are usually fun popcorn fare (Wolverine and Hangover were, I can’t speak for the others I haven’t yet seen them), but if you’re an indie, old-school horror or ‘80s underground film fan don’t forget to show director Sam Raimi a little love for “Drag Me to Hell,” his messy grand return to B horror schlock. I’m catching it this weekend hopefully, we owe him a bit of support for the “Evil Dead” films (even if he did drop the ball on a few aspects of the Spider Man films when he went big budget).

That’s all for now.

“Play it, Sam”

So obviously “Play it Again, Sam” would’ve been a better title in regards to this articles point, but I’d hate to perpetuate the incorrect phrasing of “Casalanca”s most misquoted line, so if you’re one of those few people who still didn’t know, Bogie really said “Play it, Sam.” Okay.
I was thinking about movies, specifically about what draws many of us to watch the same films over and over again. I know of many people who simply won’t watch a film a second time. They see it, they know what’s going to happen and they see no reason to visit the same material again…there are millions of other movies out there to watch for the first time, after all. Others will watch almost any movie multiple times, some very often. Those of us that are at least medium level film buffs are between those two extremes. I own quite a few DVDs, many I watch every year or so, some I watch several times in any given year. If I go to the trouble to buy a film, my intention is usually to watch it at least once a year, to view it with commentary and the complete package otherwise a rental would cover all bases.

So what does a  second (or multiple) viewing of a film give us? Why do those of us that do this do so? I’ve read Roger Ebert and other film critics comment on this in their own columns before, I’m sure I’ve pilfered some of their reasons into my own in some form, but it’s been a long time since I’ve read their opinions so said pilfering is unintentional and done unknowingly.

For most films, the first viewing is all about story. You follow the plot, wonder what’s going to happen, determine if the ending gives you the full payoff for the time you’ve invested in watching it. For many, this is what a film is all about, so once that part is done the film has in effect been exhausted for that particular viewer.  Many people will revisit some of these films if the first time around was thoroughly entertaining. If an action, horror or comedy movie, a second or third viewing may yield the same excitement, thrill or laughs that the first did. But non-genre films on second viewings can give the film buff time to watch for things other than story. A second viewing allows the viewer to take note of the acting ability, the directorial perspective and technique, the subtext, the success of particular shots, the framing of a scene or the cinematography. With the arrival of DVDs there’s also the chance to view great films with commentary now. Of course, some commentary tracks are pointless but on some DVDs they can add a lot of  worthwhile knowledge to a fan, if given by the right director or cast.

Films I’m personally drawn to the most for multiple viewings become that way to me for a variety of reasons. “Casablanca” is like listening to a favorite album or looking at an amazing painting. Watching it becomes a matter of marveling at the acting of Bogart and Bergman, loving the contrast of black and white in remastered high quality digital video as perfect shots are restored to precision, listening to the music that is essential to the film and in several scenes takes center stage. “Casablanca” for me is like reading “A Prayer for Owen Meany” or listening to “Highway 61 Revisited,”  something that delivers each time and expands a little more. Few films carry that much weight, but being a huge Hitchcock fan I find many of his require multiple viewings for different reasons. “Vertigo” for much of the same reasons as “Casablanca,” and also because it makes a little more sense each time you see it. “North by Northwest” for pure fun, the action never ceases to be entertaining. “Psycho and “The Birds” because they are near perfect fright films. “To Catch a Thief” and “Dial M for Murder” just to see Grace Kelly.

Some movies for me just work for unknown or a multitude of various reasons, they never grow old. For me those include “Dazed and Confused,’”  “School of Rock,” “High Fidelity,” most recently “The Dark Knight.”

Then there are movies that are ritual, for certain holidays. My wife and I watch “Bad Santa,” “Gremlins” and “A Lot Like Love” at Christmastime every year. I watch John Carpenters “Halloween” and Polanski’s “Rosemary’s Baby” every October because they are the perfect horror films and they work every year.

In short, and here if anywhere I’m probably recapping and rewording what Ebert and many other film critics have said before. A favorite film watched at the end of the day can be the crowning touch on a great day or a pick-me-up on a lousy one. They can work as full immersion to move out of what you’re doing at the time or they can be like a few favorite pieces of music and simply play in the background while other things are going on. You can show a key scene to a friend who’s never seen them before or analyze them in a way you’ve never done before. In short, a great film is a masterpiece worth experiencing again, especially on those times when nothing new looks remotely close to being worth your time.

Observations on “The Reader”

I missed seeing “The Reader” during its theatrical release in 2008, otherwise I certainly would have placed it high on my list of “Best Films of 2008,”  it certainly out-classes and out-thinks some of the more basic diversionary films that settled near the bottom of that list.

“The Reader” is now out on DVD, and a viewing of it left me with all sorts of thoughts. First, on a simply film appreciatory level, it’s a wonderfully made movie with tremendous performances by the entire cast. Kate Winslet consistently proves herself to be one of the, if not THE, eminent actresses of her time. Her work in “Iris” and “Little Children” displayed that, “The Reader” solidifies it.

In narrative and artistically, “The Reader” knocks everything out of the park. I’ve never read the novel on which it’s based, yet I’m certain the allegory, subtext, nuance, philosophy and empathy that cuts through in all directions was present there, and if so it’s amazing that was brought to the screen so successfully. The visuals and many certain shots highlight the deeper meanings that come through in the words and actions of the characters so much so that this film works on so many different levels.

The film explores the after affects of the holocaust in a way I’ve never before seen displayed. The story takes place in Germany in the ‘50s, ‘60s and ‘80s (the ‘70s are entirely skipped) and concerns first a boy of about 15, Michael (played by David Cross as a teen and later by Ralph Fiennes as an adult), who is seduced by a thirty-something woman, Hanna Schmitz (played by Kate Winslet) . Hanna abruptly disappears from Michael’s life one day and he sees her again years later when he is a law student in as his class observes the trial of a group of SS women for war crimes. She is one of those on trial.

What this story manages to do is to remove all easy judgments the viewer might normally make on any character. Whereas noir films muddy things up by showing that there is no complete good in all and the heroes and villains alike share darkness within themselves, this film is like a reverse noir in which the emphasis is on no character being completely bad. It’s ingrained in us to feel it’s good and just to hate the Nazi’s. What other human group can be so easy and blameless for us to loathe? It’s true that there were many human monsters traipsing around in SS uniforms, it’s true that people like Hitler, Mendel and the like cause us to question their very humanity in light of their actions. But what of the rest of the country? Those that served in the army, the SS and other jobs as accomplices in the whole messy, evil affair? Those that simply felt they were “doing their job,” or “serving their country,” or merely trying to get by? Those that didn’t take the time to think about the depth and implications of their actions. Or what of those that didn’t work in any related field yet passively allowed such things to happen by not speaking up, by not acting out, by not revolting? This film shines a light on the next generation of Germans who lived knowing their parents, teachers, preachers and older friends had actively or passively allowed one of the absolute worse national crimes in history to occur.  By taking it further and juxtaposing this relationship between a young teen, who represents that next generation, and a thirty-something woman, who represents Nazi-era Germany, this entanglement is even more pronounced. Most difficult and surprisingly, Winslet portrays this woman in such a way that you begin to feel sympathy for her tremendously, yet then you question yourself for doing so. Shouldn’t these people be void of our sympathy? We’re practically trained to think so. Yet her humanness  shows
through anyway, and her protestations of “I never thought about the past” ring true. Were such a terrible ordeal to occur this day, in this country, wouldn’t many act in the same way? This doesn’t excuse the behavior, not at all, and the film never does that., it never excuses the behavior or lightens its impact.

It reminds me quite a bit of a comment theologian NT Wright made in his book “Evil and the Justice of God,”  in which he notes the fervor and ardor that people voice hatred towards pedophilia and child molesters. He writes that although such things are “admittedly stomach-churningly wrong and evil,” the extent to which that one crime is so focused on by some is to his mind a way for a society that looks the other way or justifies most other past “sins” to be vocally critical and morally superior to at least one target group. The extent to which such a thing like child molestation is horrific and wrong allows many people to justify a complete hatred on and judgment passing to others.
We feel comfortable demonizing a select few groups of people this day and age, and Nazis and child molesters are certainly guilty of things that deserve the reaction of moral repulsion. What this film manages to do is to pull back the labels and allow you to view someone underneath that label not all that removed from what some of us would be capable of in the “right”(in this case wrong) situation. Shifted from that position of moral superiority we are left to see that most of us are quite human beneath any quite possibly horrible actions we’ve committed. Interestingly, even past the Nazi issue the female lead character is still guilty of seducing a young teenage boy and then deserting him, leaving him floundering in her shadow the rest of his life to such an extent that it seems all other relationships he has are sullied. He acknowledges her ill affect on him in a conversation with a woman who had survived a concentration camp as a young girl  (played by the remarkable Lena Olin). “Yes I know she’s guilty of much worse to so many others,” he tells her looking like a large part of him still loves her even as it hates her for what she’s done to him.

Another interesting theme that arises in relation to that feeling of moral superiority we all often get is brought home by one of college age Michael’s classmates who points out the absurdity of placing a few female guards on trial for war crimes when virtually the whole country actively or inactively aided in the atrocity. He asserted that society was doing this to make themselves feel better, not to bring about justice. The law teacher insightfully pointed out that society doesn’t determine or go by morality, but by law, and the two can be on quite the opposite ends at many points.

In short summation, in addition to being an entertaining, artistic, perfectly acted, immensely watch-able and heartbreakingly tragic film, “The Reader” also prompts more intelligent consideration and thought that almost any film in recent years.

Unrelated Preamble and “The Watchmen” Film Review

Flashes from the news this morning: yet another full story devoted to the media-dubbed “Octo-Mom,” this time in regards to a house donated to her and her close to 20 children by Dr. Phil. She’s a media sensation, she’ll probably get a book deal and inspire others to follow her example, and folks everywhere can snarl angrily and reinforce their false stereotypes that it’s Octo-mom type folks who drain up all the welfare from the good taxpayers.

Cut to Rush Limbaugh, a clip replaying him snarling and shaking, jowls flapping as he says “ I hope the President fails!” So this is the supposed “face of the Republican party” as many have called him, “the base unifier.” This man who is the very picture of intolerance, hatefulness, divisiveness, and political ugliness. This man actually hopes the president’s policies will fail simply so he can point and shout “I was right,” regardless of the effect such a failure would have on everyone living in the country today. RNC head Michael  Steele lambasted Limbaugh in one of the few smart comments I’ve heard him make, only to retract it the following day.

Then the news cut to a roundtable of financial advisors grading Obama’s first 50 days as mediocre to poor. Each stressed that Obama focus on the economy and the economy only, refusing to admit that health care reform has anything to do with improving the economy, education improvement and increased accessibility has anything to do with the economy, and the stimulus package with spots for new jobs in the energy and construction sectors have anything to do with it either. Focusing only on Wall Street in the hopes of bouncing stock prices still leaves the other 50 percent of Americans who own not a single stock nor even an IRA or 401K ravaged by the rising cost of health care and it’s declining quality and unable to send themselves or their children to increasingly expensive schools with the hope of bettering their opportunities. Even a quick bounce will leave the stock holding 50 percent better off only in the short run because those above-mentioned factors will someday hit them just as hard as well if something isn’t done now. The first 100 days is the perfect time for a new President to cast all of their nets into the sea and see which will make a catch. Obama had kick-started the talk for health care and education reform which if successful will make long term progress, opened the door for stem cell research to make advances in health, science and technology, and placed a renewed importance on the education sector of America, thereby restoring a bit more hope to future generations. So yes, Wall Street and the economy is very important, and it will likely take the majority of Obama’s time as President to work on. So give the man time, there is no quick fix as much as we all wish there were in this scary economic environment.

Now on to the “Watchmen” Film Review.

First of all, “Watchmen” by Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons is the best graphic novel of all time and is also easily one of the top 10 best works of fiction of any kind of the twentieth century. No joke. So if you’ve never read it, read it before seeing the movie. If you have already seen the movie, go and read it now, it’s not too late. My book review of “Watchmen” as part of my “10 Examples of Comic Literature” thread is in my archives, so click on “comics” at the bottom tab and scroll way back to last summer to find it and read it if you would like to.

That being said, this movie does not live up to the book. But it does amazingly well at getting it’s points and themes across, and it does better than I ever would have imagined it possible to do. All in all, I give it a B +, an 8.5 out of 10, 4 out of 5 stars, somewhere in those mixed systems. The casting is great, it’s as if Rorschach and The Comedian stepped right out of the comic and onto the screen. Everyone does a great job. The effects are dazzling. Yes it’s long, but at 2 hours and 45 minutes it was over before I knew it, it simply sucks you right in. The ending is different than the one in the graphic novel, much to many fanboys dismay, but it gets the same point across. The effect is the same, and arguably the film’s version works much better on the big screen than the book’s would have given the time and medium at work here.
The title screen may be one of the best parts of the whole movie. While Dylan’s “The Times They Are A Changin’” plays, viewers see a summation of 40 years of major events in the Watchmen universe leading up to the 1985 setting of the film.

There are many things that simply cannot be reproduced in a film version of this story. Moore’s work was as much an example of what the comic and graphic storytelling medium is truly capable of as it was a story itself. There are so many wonderful explorations of the medium that were top notch and phenomenal just because they made you notice that such things would be impossible to do with any other medium.  Also with the length Moore had to work with, there was much more room for detail than this film has. That being said, the story-within-a-story “The Black Freighter” and the fictional autobiography “Under the Hood” sections that took place between each chapter are slated to be released as animated shorts in an upcoming straight-to-DVD release this month as “The Black Freighter.” Maybe someday there will be a directors cut DVD that interweaves them into this movie, I’d say it’s a possibility.

Other than that, most complaints I’ve read by fanboys and critics alike are overly critical. This movie was so mixed in its reception. Film critics were almost exactly split in half in their perceptions, ranging from A + praises, like that of Roger Ebert who said you should see it multiple times, to pans and F’s from folks like Gene Shalit. Fanboys that did complain chose funny things to complain about. One I read was mad at the soundtrack — “A song like 99 Luftballoons just jerks you out of the movie, and the ‘Graduate’ song at a funeral is just funny” (to paraphrase). I have to disagree. Of course, “99 Luftballoons” isn’t my favorite song but it worked perfectly in its brief use because it was very time appropriate since it was 1985 in the film, the song is a deceptively poppy song with lyrics about nuclear war, which the story is very much about, and the scene in question was a date so it doesn’t “jerk you out of the movie.” As for “the ‘Graduate’ song,” which is “The Sound of Silence,” really works better at a funeral than it did in “The Graduate,” as much as I love that film. The rest of the film soundtrack works perfectly, from Leonard Cohen and Bob Dylan to My Chemical Romance, and the score is good as well. Another fanboy complaint I read came from a guy angry that details like Ozymandas owning a pet lynx weren’t explained. Umm, he’s insanely wealthy and eccentric and thus owns a lynx, what’s to explain?

All in all, it’s a very watch-able, suspenseful, action-packed, at times disturbing and entertaining movie. Sure there are missteps, but it’s always ambitious. I think the only complaint I have is that characters who in the novel have no powers seem to be insanely powerful here (Night Owl and Silk Specter rumble through the prison destroying everything in their path with seeming ease, but hey).

So check it out if you’re considering it. It’s worth it.

The “Friday the 13th” Re-make

(A) Film review
(B) Enjoying Schlock rather than Celebrating Mediocrity
(C ) What Could’ve Been
(D)Parents have no common sense sometimes

So I actually went to the theaters to see the new “Friday the 13th” re-make. Me, who just wrote an article disdaining the celebration of mediocrity opted to see “Friday the 13th” this close to the Oscars without yet having seen all of the nominations– more on that later in this article, but first I should actually offer a movie review.
It’s a bit difficult to adequately review a movie like this. Going into this I knew it wasn’t going to be “good” in the technical sense. Sure the special effects are good, the violence and action looks terrifyingly appropriate for such a thing. Surprisingly the acting isn’t terrible, given the short range the actors have to work with in their characters. At this point the characters in slasher films are “teens” that are consistently over-sexed, heavy pot and alcohol imbibers with few redeeming personal qualities that wander into the wrong place at the wrong time and become prey for an unstoppable killing machine. One character of the entire lot actually gets to portray himself in a purely noble manner whereas the others only show positive qualities in short, if any, bursts.
There are some highly effective moments, and this is a movie that benefits from a theatrical viewing if you hope to get any actual jolts from it. The use of music and noise heavily amps up every possibly scary moment. Each appearance of Jason Voorhees does work in a very scary, or “awesome” (if you’re an ‘80s fan boy) way.
It’s not a re-imagining nor simply a remake of the first “Friday the 13th,” it’s more of a compressed and exacerbated amplification of the first 3 films into one hour an a half lightning bolt of gore that makes full use of new effect developments and less violence restrictions than the originals. Viewers catch the gist of the first film in the first 5 minutes of footage, and Jason gets to make his appearance much quicker than in the old days. The first group of teens to wander in Jason’s path quickly find their demise (at least most of them) and months later a new group wander into the woods on their own trip, as well as the brother of an earlier missing girl looking for his lost sister.
Anyway, it’s enjoyable and problematic and could have been so much more yet should it have been given the source material?
See, I’m a child of the eighties, born in ‘82. Growing up in my early years, cinema slashers like Jason, Freddy and Michael Myers were practically omnipresent and when I was old enough to finally watch the films I was a huge fan. This geekdom comic fan and horror niche market past made it a given I’d see this. I wrote an article this past Halloween discussing 10 horror films I felt were truly great, and I went into a discussion on what is good about Horror entertainment and what makes for a good example of it (scroll back through my past entries until late October and you can read it if you missed it when I put it up the first time). This movie would not make such a cut. Yet it’s undeniably fun in many ways.

Which brings me to what I feel is a tie-in point with my recent “Celebrating Mediocrity” article. I propose now that there’s a bit of a difference between celebrating mediocrity and enjoying schlock- B-movies, silly speed metal, pulp novels and big dumb horror movies. “Friday the 13th” doesn’t pretend to be anything it is not. It doesn’t aim for crowd-pleasing wide range attractiveness of a middle-of-the-road turd of a movie like “Marley and Me.” It makes no concessions to reach the widest range of people, it knows its audience and goes after it. Critics were strictly average on their ratings and judging by most internet fan posts, a lot of 14-18 year old boys thought this was 5 star phenomenal. The rest of us, those of us who appreciate what the horror genre is capable of and what its faults are, those of us that know the good ones when we see them yet are able to glean a few minutes of gold from a lot of average see such a film as escapist fun that harkens back to a time when we were much younger and much more terrified by such a silly idea.
The one concession I make that pinpoints me as guilty of something I accused those of celebrating mediocrity as doing is that I was able to see this at my local theater. I drove 2 hours to see Milk, an hour to see “Frost/Nixon,” and my local theater still does not have the Oscar front-runner “Slumdog Millionaire,” that ones yet another hour drive away. Yet they had “Friday the 13th” and I paid them my matinee 6 bucks to see it, allowing them to keep bringing such things in over such other choices. I’d have gladly driven to a 24-plex to see this one if only my local 12-plex had things like “Slumdog” and “Milk” for the entire community to see. Oh, well.
It’s worth noting what “Friday the 13th” could’ve been. It could’ve gone two different paths from what it did, either of which probably would have been much better than it was. See, the excellently campy, action packed, big dumb summer movie that was “Freddy Vs. Jason” screamed “bad” from all directions yet remained immensely watchable and enjoyable. Sad to say, but the infinitely better and more important “Gandhi” remains a favorite of mine yet I’ve actually watched “Freddy vs. Jason” 4 or 5 times now and Gandhi only once. Which goes to show that big dumb fun remains escapist fun.
The other path that could’ve been would’ve been the Rob Zombie path. He had mentioned his interest in doing the character and concept himself, that the franchise was in dire need of a new approach to bring out its potential, yet the producers already had Damian Shannone and Marcus Nispel on tap to do it. Rob Zombie handled “Halloween” as a re-imagining and provided viewers with a captivating, disturbing, and highly psychological yet violently visceral dark art film. Zombie could’ve made art out of Friday had he been the one to write and direct this remake rather than Shannon and Nispel (who directed the remake of “Texas Chainsaw Massacre”) with the association of Michael Bay. The original had such capability of subtest. Ebert called it “Psycho in reverse,” with “mother killing for son.” Add that to Jason himself, a physically deformed and mentally handicapped never-ending child who simply can’t die and continually kills because his dead mother orders him to– there is so much room in that preposterous concept for a disturbing yet artful psychological thriller that Zombie’s infinitely better potential version practically writes itself if you’ve seen his “Halloween.”
I do find it interesting that the original, and undeniably classic slasher film that was “Halloween” was responsible for inspiring such a thing as the original “Friday the 13th,” and critics who loved the artful and subdued “Halloween” hated “Friday the 13th.” Now, 2 decades later we see a successful remake of Halloween that doesn’t equal the greatness of the first yet succeeds by a totally different approach possibly inspiring a remake of “Friday the 13th” which vastly improves on its original yet doesn’t beat either version of “Halloween.”
To see what a typical mainstream critic is saying of this film, here’s the first part of Roger Ebert’s review:

“ ‘Friday the 13th’ is about the best ‘Friday the 13th’ movie you could hope for. Its technical credits are excellent. It has a lot of scary and gruesome killings. Not a whole lot of acting is required. If that’s what you want to find out, you can stop reading.”

Last of all, I was at a weekday 1 pm showing and noticed at least 2 children under the age of 12 accompanying their parents to see this movie. It contains pervasive gore, language, drug use, binge drinking, sex and  nudity . What parent in their right mind would take their ‘tween to see such a thing?

Celebrating Mediocrity

My brother commented on one of my articles recently suggesting I make a list of hit films, books and songs that, although very popular, are not good in the artistic or critical sense; in other words, what’s my top ten hit media items that I feel are really just crap?

Well, this isn’t really that. This isn’t a countdown of what’s the worst popular junk in systematic dissection, this is more an article about the enthusiasm for mediocrity as a whole.

There’s a recent TV commercial for McDonald’s, a company I loathe almost as much as Wal Mart. In the commercial two young guys are in a traditionally “trendy” looking coffee shop. Both are wearing glasses, one is reading a book. Both speak in low, stereotypical “pretentious” voices. One says to the other “did you know McDonald’s sells coffee now?” The other says “well what are we doing here then?” He whips his glasses off saying he doesn’t really need them. He says he’s tired of sitting in coffee shops and talking about “films” and that he really just enjoys “sitting and watching football.” The other agrees but concedes he actually does need his glasses.

So really, this commercial is showing that there is no need to go to a trendy independent coffee shop where poetry readings and acoustic open mic sessions are  held and where people discuss art, film and philosophy. No, now you can go to McDonald’s and get a dollar cappuccino and take it home to sit on your couch and watch football till your brain drips out your ear from the numbness of average, ordinary mediocrity.

I’m not going to get into a criticism of football. I’ve written about baseball often on this site, if you click on “baseball” at the bottom of the page and read back at all of my baseball articles from last year you’ll even see at least two that comment on why I feel baseball is a superior sport to football on various levels. That’s not something to get into yet again here. I don’t loath football, I’m just not a fan. Perhaps it’s somewhat silly for me to equate baseball as a symbol of positive American values and football as a symbol of negative American values, but it’s mainly just for fun in my case. No, I’ve been known to watch a super bowl occasionally (I’ll definitely tune in to the halftime show this year because Bruce Springsteen is my favorite musician of all time). Not everyone who watches football is a symbol of mediocrity, but the idea that there’s nothing better for the average guy than to sit on his couch and watch football all day, possibly eating fast-food, is a bit of mediocrity celebration.

On a smaller scale, much of what is incredibly popular is insanely mediocre. Your typical active rock radio station plays the most uninspiring new rock imaginable (Nickleback anyone?). Hip Hop stations play the same club jam and pop rap hit like “Live Your Live,” “Apple Bottom Jeans” (Re-Remix), or a mash up between Justin Timberlake, Akon and Bow Wow. Country stations wallow in mediocrity. Alt-country, classic country or even slightly edgy country will not be on the radio–instead get ready for Toby Keith, Big & Rich or any number of other brain numbing works. A slew of mediocre books were turned into mediocre films over the past months ( Marley and Me, He’s Just Not That Into You, Confessions of a Shopaholic). I’ve mentioned authors that churn out sub-par work on a regular basis that manage to sell truckloads worth of books (James Patterson post-the first five Cross novels, Nicholas Sparks, many would say “Twilight” ).

The point is, quite often very unintelligent, unoriginal, and utterly crappy material becomes very successful, be it music, movie or book. I can list a lot but there’s really no point. Why do such things appeal to so many people? Many would say that they are safe, middle of the road affairs that appeal to the lowest common denominator so that they can reach the widest group of people. Typically such things don’t require too much thought, too much absorption and concentration or any measure of taste cultivation. Really, the best of any medium quite often requires the reader, listener or viewer to participate in the process a bit by thinking, involving themselves in the field to better understand the author or artist. So what makes this troublesome is not that people like “crap.” People are different, they can like anything they want to. What’s problematic is that the better work is too often buried underneath mediocrity, pushed out of stores to make room for the top selling garbage, and ignored by the radio stations, TV stations and book stores.

My Last 2008 Best-Of

2008 is over, so I’ll issue my one last best of ‘08 recap and move one. I’ve perused AMG, Rolling Stone and NPR’s best of music recaps and found some overlap and similarity to my personal picks and some differences. Once I see Paste and Mojo’s choices I’ll be done with that. As for films, I’m holding out for the Oscars to see how they fall in (I tend to completely overlook People’s Choice and Golden Globes).

Anyway, there are three close runner ups to my music list that I‘ve gotten since I posted my list. All three I heard after my final selections had been made and all three are excellent. I stand my by top ten though, but these three come close:

1)Al Green: Lay it Down
This is the best soul record I’ve heard in years. The only modern soul singer that holds a candle to Mr. Green is Anthony Hamilton but Green surpasses him in sheer maturity and range. Ahmir “?Love” Thompson of the Roots aided in production of this disc but he in no way infuses hip hop into it. He encourages Green’s natural talents and sensibilities and the overall sheen is retro pop perfection. The few folks who aid in the songs vocally, with duets and background vocals are Anthony Hamilton, Corrina Bailie Rae and John Legend, and all are at the top of their game. “Lay it Down” is best in one long, hour dose. Though it’s also good song by song,, it’s the sum of those parts working together that most effectively showcase the last living soul great’s artistry.

2) Vampire Weekend :

This album was the hipster buzz album of the year, preceded by a year’s worth of hype and internet chatter. The reason it’s so buzzed about and critically raved this year, I think, is because it sounds like nothing else. The music is a mixture of classical (seriously, violins, orchestra style classical) and Afro pop. The vocals are pure indie rock, the backing vocals are post punk. The lyrics are collegiate. It all blends together in an artsy, thinking, dancey way and it’s never quite pretentious. Each song is memorable.

3) Jenny Lewis: Acid Tongue
Jenny Lewis has, as many have noted, gone from the alt country/indie pop hybrid lead singer of Rilo Kiley to Costello influenced alt indie on “Rabbit Fur Coat” to this, a lady of laurel canyon folk singer. She’s even moved to the canyon and been involved in starting a music scene there again. Acid Tongue is a great album, full of shining moments. The shifting and three tiered eight minute “Next Messiah,” the Costello duet “Carpetbagger,” and everything else here is fun and unique.

Okay, so my Best Films 08 list was listed in no particular order, completely unranked. I’ve seen a few of the films I was holding out for, but have still not seen “Doubt,” “Benjamin Button,” “Frost/Nixon,” or “Gran Torino,” all look terrific. So what follows is my ranking of the films I enjoyed the most from the 08 release year. Some important and relevant, some merely entertaining.
10-Zack and Miri Make a Porno
9- Forgetting Sarah Marshall
8-Hulk
7- Iron Man
6-Shine a Light
5-Bolt
4- W
3-Changeling
2-The Dark Knight
1-Milk

Finally, some notable events of ‘08 that weren’t negative.
· The 2008 Baseball season-
A)the longest all star game ever with a pre-show featuring Yogi Berra, etc.
B)the road to the world series, which was constantly surprising
C)The World Series, featuring last years last ranked team actually competing for the title. A full, long Series full of fun.

· SNL this year featured some of its best political satire, entertaining musical performances and weekend updates. Poehler’s last year was great and Fey’s constant cameos as Palin were spot on.

- The election. Hopefully progressive politics take hold and work effectively now.

That’s it for 2008 articles. 2009 is here, which means new music, new movies, new events. Articles that are upcoming include the last few book reviews that tie in with “10 Examples of Comic Literature,” articles involving the “Kingdom of God,” and various other theology articles, etc. Stop back by!

“Milk” (And a few thoughts it inspired)

“If a bullet should enter my brain, let that bullet destroy every closet door.”

“I know that we cannot live on hope alone, but without it, life is not worth living. And you, and you, and you, gotta give’em hope.”

I finally discovered the one theater within a 4 hour radius showing “Milk.” I now think I have to bump “The Dark Knight” back to the 2nd slot for best 2008 films—Milk is just too good; important, relevant, inspiring, tragic, hopeful, and excellently acted. The entire cast knocks their respective roles out of the park. Sean Penn delivers a performance that matches and at moments surpasses his classic “Dead Man Walking” and “Mystic River” performances. Josh Brolin delivers his other great 08 performance (in addition to “W”). While watching it and reflecting on what I had seen it became obvious that I felt “Milk” to belong with the best and most important and inspiring biopics ever made—”King,” “Malcolm X” and “Gandhi.” The sheer scope of humanity depicted. The eagerness and earnestness, the drive and conviction that Penn’s Harvey Milk possesses. He states repeatedly that it’s not about him or any personal agenda. It’s about the cause, about the movement. He felt thrust into the role he was in–the right person for the job who had to work hard to advance the cause for a better tomorrow. As he spoke near the end of the film (to paraphrase), it’s not just about gays– but blacks, Latinos, senior citizens; all the “us’s” out there that find themselves outside of the mainstream without anyone looking after their best interest.
It’s strange and sad how relevant the same cause is today; in the 70s Milk and his supporters sought to defeat Prop 6, a California ballot initiative that aimed at allowing school teachers to be fired for being gay and of their fellow teachers that supported them to be fired as well. 2008s “Prop 8” is the next round in the same fight, but this time it passed, making all marriages previously legal now illegal in CA. Anita Bryant and her “moral” supporters waged war on homosexual rights in the 70s; today you can catch newer Anita’s waging the same war. Everything old is new; and the same civil rights war is being fought.

Anyway, it’s a remarkable film. Seeing it ties in a lot with a few things I’ve been reading and writing which I’ll post at a later date. Here a bit of these thoughts came out as a response to a friend’s blog on the debate regarding Rick Warren’s selection as minister for the inauguration (for the record I think it’s fine for Warren to pray there, Obama would be hard-pressed to find a minister that would please all of us).

As I’ve pretty much told you when speaking with you, I really do think it’s ignorant to do as Hitchens does and say that a Christian who believes salvation lies in Christ aloe is a bigot. I myself as a Christian do feel that Christ is the way for me and that he is my I AM, my entrance to positive global service that those raised in the Eastern World might find in Buddha or Allah. I do not however feel that thinking Christ alone is the way makes one a bigot. I respect Warren for his poverty stance, his call to a stronger and more proactive church. I do, though, feel that he is missing the point in his stance on homosexuality. I feel that the gay rights movement is our civil rights movement today. I feel we must evolve beyond our current church perceptions to a more inclusive and loving manner–I feel that homosexual relationships should be morally judged on the same level that heterosexual relationships are judged–on monogamy, honesty and equality. That’s why this issue is so touchy. To deny that it is as important as the civil rights movement is to view it with blinders on-religious, social or hereditary blinders. Scripture was misused to condemn minorities, interracial marriage, and to promote slavery. Scripture was used to keep “women in their place” and was misused in highly misogynistic ways. Police have beat blacks just for being black and gays just for being gay. Racists have screamed “Nigger” at blacks and homophobes have screamed “Faggot” at gays to equal hatred. The truth is, I believe Christ would love all gays and urge them to follow him along the same path he urges straight folks. I think he would criticize laws and practices that denigrate homosexuals. I feel he would unconditionally love them and hope they could follow the same moral code he asks all of us to follow. Jesus was a devout Jew who memorized the Torah but sifted it and shed it of its baggage, emphasizing its most important aspects. He gave no indication as to indicate he ever intended any new scripture to replace its holy writings, yet he showed the path through his life and action that brought it into the light. Since the Christian church did add new scripture, should we not today, since we are to be as Christ was, not be able to sift the early church’s scripture to emphasize its most important aspects? Christ subverted traditional wisdom and replaced it with the rule of compassion. He summed up the law with one simple rule: love your god with all your heart, and love your neighbor.” That rule tells me my gay brothers have every right I have. So, those that flinch at Warren’s attitude do so only because they feel he is doing like the otherwise good and moral folks who used inadequate religion to subjugate the African Americans. Christianity must evolve, change and take into account History, Culture, Time and Place.

The Best Films of 2008

I put off my Best of Films recap for 2008 mainly because I know of a few films that would likely rank high on the list if I had a chance to see them- – “Milk,” “Doubt,” and “Frost/Nixon” primarily. I guess not being able to see “Milk” angers me the most. It’s been fully released for going on two months now and out of a dozen or so theaters within an hour’s driving distance of where I live, none of them are showing it. Since it’s been consistently raved about and applauded for its cast, acting, direction and story I can only assume it’s not in local theaters due to prejudice. Thus far the closest I’ve found it showing is in a fairly large city about two hours driving distance from me, so I’ll see it when I’m there in a couple of weeks. As for “Doubt” and “Frost/Nixon” I’m not sure when I’ll catch them. Anyway, my solid ranking number 1 pick has already been discussed previously in its own article, “The Dark Knight,” so check out my “Plea to the Academy” on this site from a few weeks ago to read more about it if you missed it then. Here’s the best of what’s rest, in my opinion (and un-ranked due to factors discussed above).

* Changeling- – Clint Eastwood is apparently incapable of directing a bad film – - from “Unforgiven,” to “Million Dollar Baby,” “Mystic River,” and now this years “Changeling,” he’s consistently excellent. The scriptwriter, J.Michael Stracynzki, is one of my favorite comic writers. He made his career in television, specifically writing “Babylon 5,” and I guess the reason for the delays on his superb run on “Thor” this year were due to his phenomenal script for this film, based on a true story from the 1920s. “Changeling” showcases a tremendous performance by Angelina Jolie as a mother who’s child goes missing. The LAPD bring back to her a child they swear to her is hers and she swears he is not. John Malkovich is perfect as a minister who devotes his life to outspoken pursuit of justice and reform. The story is troubling, depressing yet often inspiring in its call to act and overcome. A great film.

*Bolt – “Bolt’ is worth the price of admission for seeing Rhino the hamster, the most hilarious family friendly animated character in years. Add in excellent voice acting by John Travolta and Miley Cyrus, digital 3-D showings complete with glasses and a fun song by Jenny Lewis that fits into the film perfectly? Plus a moving and funny script? Disney’s best work in quite some time, and one in which the whole family actually can enjoy .

*Zack and Miri Make a Porno
Kevin Smith has admittedly not made a film worth critical raving since “Chasing Amy,” and none as hilarious as this since his first effort, “Clerks.” As a Smith and View Askew fan I’ve enjoyed most all of the other efforts but feel this is the first time he’s made a film that reaches beyond his cult of fans in a long time. “Zack and Miri” is raunchy, vulgar and blue as all get out but it really never seeks to offend for the sake of offending. It’s just a fun, dirty adult comedy with heart and story to back up the jokes. Smith casts many of his usual crew, but in open and non-repetitive roles. With Seth Rogen in the lead the casting plays off like a mash-up of Apatow’s crew and Smith’s Askewverse group. The laughs never let up, and the romantic conclusion is given but still appreciated. A more hilarious time at the movies wasn’t’ to be had this year.

*Shine a Light
Scorcese must be a fervent rock and roll fan in addition to being one of the best directors of our time. His “The Last Waltz” is one of the absolute best concert films ever made, his Dylan biopic “No Looking Back” was amazing and this year’s “Shine a Light” gives us the Stones in their late sixties giving it their all. With flashback interviews and current performances inter-mingling, Jagger’s voice a bit aged but his movements scarily agile, Keith Richard’s defiantly awesome undying rock and roll persona, and guest backup by folks like Jack White and Christina Aguilera its the best rock doc all year, and a great precursor to Scorcese’s upcoming George Harrison biopic.

*W
Critics loved Brolin’s performance but weren‘t overly enthusiastic about this film as a whole. All of Stone’s films require at least two viewings and many have been certifiable classics. So, “W” doesn’t live up to Stone’s best work (“Wall Street,” “Born on the Fourth of July,” “Natural Born Killers”) or even his previous presidential themed films (“Nixon,” “JFK”). But it is a solid film, with great performances. The fact that all actors managed to look, talk, walk and act like the current real life figures they were portraying was amazing. As an audience it seemed we were watching Bush, Cheney, Rice, Powell and Rove on the screen. The story made even the most fervent Bush opponents look at him like an actual person. If Bush is actually like the Bush that Brolin portrayed, he seems like a good man with good intentions yet in the completely wrong job acting in misguided ways, being advised by men that aren’t so good. His character seems on a perpetual mission to live up to his father but unable to do so and the film makes it (plausibly so) seem that he would have been better off working in Major League Baseball. Colin Powell seems to be the only cabinet member with good and accurate intentions and common sense and he is soon silenced into agreement with the others. “W” was notable for dramatically showcasing people and places even handedly as they were still fresh and ongoing in current events.

*Iron Man / Hulk
Though neither of Marvel’s great summer films matched the greatness that was “The Dark Knight” but both were excellent action packed comic book films. Robert Downey Jr. and the entire cast of Iron Man combined with top notch special effects and a realistic yet fantastic sci-fi edge combined to make Marvel Studio’s best work yet. Right behind that was the superb “Hulk” starring Ed Norton which gave us deep personal drama and psychological thrills as well as all out monster battles.

*Forgetting Sarah Marshall

Judd Apatow and his group of young stoner, comic loving, self described “Jew Tang Clan” have been the best thing going from way back on Apatow’s TV series “Freaks and Geeks,” and “Undeclared” through “Knocked Up” “40 year Old Virgin,” and “Superbad.” This years “Forgetting Sarah Marshall” gave Jason Segel a chance to shine and featured a terrific Kristen Bell from “Veronica Mars.”

So, those are just what I thought was best at the cinema this year, at least at the local ones. Some of the absolute best may have to wait for DVD and I can rank all of these accurately by spring next year I suppose.

My Plea to the Academy: Consider “The Dark Knight”

This is my personal plea to the Academy, disregarding the fact that they’ll never read it; at least I wrote it: do not overlook “The Dark Knight” for a Best Picture nomination. Seriously. I know that very competent, capable and captivating films will be up for Best picture. I’m not a naïve or bitter fan boy who feels that the “real best” pictures are over-looked. Winners and nominees from the past few years have truly displayed the best that modern motion pictures have had to offer: No Country for Old Men, There Will be Blood, The Departed and Million Dollar Baby, to name a few, truly deserved the recognition and awards that they received. Although I’m a comic fan, I don’t think many films based on comics have been worthy of Academy consideration. Such adaptation films have gotten increasingly good: Ghost World, V for Vendetta, Sin City, Iron Man, and 300 to name a few; but none yet have deserved “Best Picture” status. And although I’m a Batman film, I would not in a million years make the claim that the entertaining Tim Burton version from 1990 nor the excellent Nolan prequel to Knight, “Batman Begins,” deserved it either. But “Dark Knight” truly does. Subtext, depth, actors working in top caliber performances, excellent dialogue, a pitch-perfect script: all of these are qualities previous winners had, and these are qualities that “Dark Knight” has as well.

Critics and movie-goers alike have clamored for Heath Ledger’s recognition for his perfect performance as the Joker. His getting a posthumous Oscar for best supporting actor is almost, but not quite, a given, and deservedly so. His performance is scary, dramatic, edgy, darkly humorous and full throttle. He completely disappears into his character to the point you do not recognize him: his speech, his body language and his entire persona resonates as the Joker. I wonder if this terrific performance would have been fully acknowledged if not for his untimely death, however. I know that early reaction to test shots and PR of the performance had critics raving in droves, but would the academy have thought to acknowledge it if not for the personal tragedy causing them to take notice? I say this not to belittle the performance, but to describe what it took to get such a supposed “fan boy/popcorn” film noticed.

Because Ledger was not the only amazing performance on display. Sure, Christian Bale’s performance as Batman didn’t scream “Superb!”, but his Bruce Wayne was spot-on. Everyone else knocked it out of the park…Aaron Eckhart, Morgan Freeman, Maggie Gyllenhal, Michal Caine, Gary Oldham all give career highlight displays of their talent.

The underlying depth of Dark Knight is what sends it over the top. “You either die a hero or live long enough to become the villain,” is the over-stated message we hear a few times quite bluntly. More subtly is the concept that society feels it must vilify its heroes and raise its villains to heroic status for the supposed betterment of all. The film presents us with overwhelming evil, a type of person who does wrong for no real reason. “Some men just want to watch the world burn,” Michael Cain as Alfred says to Bruce Wayne at one point. This type of evil enters an already rotten and corrupt atmosphere. Gotham, especially as depicted in the Nolan films, is a place so wicked and corrupt it simply has to have a Batman to protect it. Yet the presence of such a person as Batman inspires the evil people of the city to get progressively wilder. So what measures does such a Batman have to take when presented with the evil of someone like the Joker? What all possible actions can be committed by “good” people that will allow them to remain classifiable as such? We see how such people and such actions affect truly good, decent and honorable men by watching the progress of Harvey Dent, as played by Aaron Eckhart. Eckhart’s performance can’t be mentioned enough, it’s truly incredible. We seem him live and breath the part, we watch how he is as a righteous man in a corrupted city, an honorable attorney in a crooked court system. We see how he rises to the challenge but also how he ultimately is affected when true evil hits close to home. We see how plans by the Joker seek to use Dent as his ultimate statement and how the Batman and the city responds– Dent is Gotham’s White Knight, Batman is its Dark Knight and the reality of each is different than their respective public personas.

Visually this film never ceases to stun. It’s very evident that what many films use digital affects to portray, this film actually does in the old-school style. In one memorable scene a building is blown up, reportedly really done for filming, and in another a semi truck is completely flipped in a rotating 180 degree shot. Certainly computers are used to polish and add to the action sequences, but this balance of real–the use of models, and real, coordinated stunts–and digital, computer based affects results in a gritty, realistic, astounding picture.

Films like “There Will Be Blood” and “The Departed” convey such deep and real conflicts and themes but they admittedly require your careful attention and efforts. This often results in the deepest connection and effects of films, by creating a give and take relationship and effort on the viewers part. “Dark Knight” just takes that attention by never letting up, though. It’s commendable that such a summer blockbuster and somewhat “popcorn” film can succeed in entertaining you, exciting you and keeping you on the edge of your seat while also providing deeper themes, concepts, moral ambiguities, philosophies and also display top-of-the-line acting, directing, production and musical score. Most summer blockbusters, regardless of how entertaining they may be, do not deserve academy recognition. This film does. Please give it the nomination, academy. Ultimately a film like such buzzed works as Changeling, Australia, Milk and others may deserve and win the trophy, but at least give this film the credibility it deserves by giving it a ballot spot. Thank you. For regular readers or those that may visit again, I’ve written my spiel for this film. When it comes time to mention it’s place in my year end recap, I’ll be brief.