Alec and Nathan's Incredible Pop-Culture Weblog

Disagreeing with you about pop culture and entertainment since 2012

Thank You, George Lucas: How Star Wars Made Me Who I Am Today

By Nathan

This is an article I meant to write near the end of last year, when Disney announced that it had acquired Lucasfilm and all its properties (although I’m not sure if they picked up Mishima: A Life in Four Chapters or not…). It’s also something I meant to write yesterday, what with it being Star Wars Day and all. But alas, I didn’t get around to it either of those two times, so it’s now that I sit down at my computer to plop this story onto the screen in front of me.

What is this story? It’s the story of two kids, one stuck on a moisture vaporator farm in the outer reaches of the Dune Sea, the other in his suburban home in Central Texas. This is the story of one kid who spent his days blasting womp rats in Beggar’s Canyon with his T-16, and another who took up his time reading encyclopedias and exploring the jungle-like drainage ditches behind his home. This is the story of Luke Skywalker and me.

http://i1-news.softpedia-static.com/images/news2/A-World-with-Twin-Sunrises-2.jpg

I don’t remember the first time I saw Star Wars, but I had to have been at least 4 or so. I have racked my brain so many times in an attempt to recover this misfiled memory, yet I can’t remember it. It’s too bad, as this is probably one of the significant moments in my young life. You see, Star Wars made me who I am today, probably more so than any other thing in my life that is not a living person. It’s probably impacted me more than most people, too. Without Star Wars, I would not be here at this exact moment in time at this precise point in space.

http://nowiknow.com/wp-content/uploads/luke_i_am_your_father.jpeg

Just like it is hard to remember the first time I saw Star Wars, it’s also hard for me to understand why it struck me in such a life-altering way. Maybe the archetypal themes and ideas explored within the films meshed with my juvenile need for order and stability, but I know that this is just a load of malarkey. Maybe it appealed to my childlike sense of curiosity and wonder. Or maybe I just liked space battles. The truth is that I will never know. The only things I can know are how I feel every time the 20th Century Fox fanfare begins playing, or the swelling I get when the main theme begins and the words “Star Wars” pull back into the far reaches of space, or the absolute awe I experience when the Rebel Blockade Runner darts through the blackness above Tatooine, hotly pursued by the jaw-dropping Imperial Star Destroyer. I can only express the bone-aching sadness I feel when I hear Luke scream “NO!,” the tenderness inside when Leia says “I love you” and Han calmly responds “I know,” the solemn strength I draw from the celebration scene on Endor and Darth Vader’s funeral. These are the only things I really know.

http://deathstarpr.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/HanSoloCantina.jpg

As a child, the idea that someone could dislike Star Wars or, perhaps worse, not even have seen it was completely unbelievable to me. So much of my world spun around the axis of these films. In elementary school, there were some people whom with the only ground I shared was Star Wars, and in this way, we were able to become friends. There were friends I had lightsaber duels with, friends I shared potential plot details of the next movies with, and even one friend I bonded with only because I knew he owned Lego Star Wars and I did not. Star Wars found its way into every conversation I had with others, into every drawing I doodled while listening to lectures at church I absorbed but didn’t really understand, into every story I wrote in my spiral-bound school notebooks. My early attempts to impress the womenfolk were drawn from things I had gleaned from Han Solo and, later, Indiana Jones (it took me awhile to get to Raiders of the Lost Ark because the face-melting scene absolutely destroyed my youthfully weak bladder), although my rendition of these lines lacked the finesse of their original deliveries. I read my collection of Star Wars visual dictionaries and guides over and over again until the words and images became firmly etched in the recesses of my mind. I remember one moment on the playground in which one of my friends told me that I knew more about Star Wars than anyone he had ever met. It was my proudest accomplishment, and I quickly became even more of an oracle of information about the Star Wars saga as I got a little older and a little more adept with both a library card and the internet, turning my sights to the paradise of the Expanded Universe. Soon I started taking in websites about Star Wars and reading even more books on the subject, and at present count, I own over 20 books and 50 action figures related to the Star Wars universe. I still have the ticket stub for when I went to see Revenge of the Sith and I still remember the warm rush of tears I felt down my face as my favorite film series ended.  At this time in my life, I was a little like Luke Skywalker, looking toward those twin suns with hope and wanderlust.

http://swoonsandsnarls.files.wordpress.com/2010/07/star-wars-episode-v-the-empire-strikes-back.jpg?w=538

Yet as I became older, Star Wars also made things more difficult for me, as it and my voracious appetite for history books began to lead me down the awkward road to nerdiness. I wore the badge of “geek” with pride, obtaining a wallet solely for the purpose of having something to carry around my Official Star Wars Fan Club membership badge with. As I entered middle school, my obsession grew stronger while others swiftly placed these childhood delights in their memories. I became a little like C-3PO, someone who took himself and his endeavors very seriously, yet someone who others just wished they could turn off. In quiet moments I sometimes even began to wonder if this was worth it. Was it worth enduring bullies and social ostracism just because I liked a movie every one else seemed to have forgotten years ago? Was it worth missing out on potential friends just because of the things I liked? There were periods of time where I forgot what I felt when I watched Star Wars and became embarrassed of my favorite movie, replacing it instead with The Godfather or Dirty Harry or whatever “grown-up” flick I had managed to catch an hour off on cable. I’ll be honest, I have always felt a slight discomfort around people who self-identify as “nerds,” mostly because the only thing that kept me firmly rooted in nerd-dom was Star Wars. While after fifth grade I got into things like Runescape and The Lord of the Rings and Frank Herbert’s Dune, and for a time even became a serious frequenter of blogs and websites run by adults who still built with Legos, I was never into, say, Dungeons and Dragons or anime or anything else that it seemed like I was required to like as a self-described “nerd.” Yes, I did my time as a serious-minded video-game aficionado, despite the fact that I barely owned any video games of my own, and I even became a heavy fan of geek rock and nerdcore musicians like Jonathon Coulton and MC Frontalot, but I think this was more of a way for me to fit further in with nerds, or the closest thing I had to a group of like-minded people. At the end of the day, I owe being a geek to Star Wars.

http://geektyrant.com/storage/2011-post-images/georgelucaskathleenkennedy-starwars-latestvideointerview.jpg?__SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION=1354576909063

While my interest in the Star Wars universe itself was swelling, my fascination with how these movies were made grew as well. I began reading about the life of George Lucas and the making of Star Wars, which lead me to other places in cinema history: it lead me to Pixar, to Steven Spielberg, to American Zoetrope, and eventually to the New Hollywood movement. George Lucas became my personal bearded savior, my guide to life and to the movies. He was my Obi-Wan, my Yoda. It is because of him that I realized my true passion: filmmaking. I began encountering names like Kurosawa and Godard, but I had no idea who these people were, or what they really had to do with anything. Nevertheless, as I mentioned in my recent post about Roger Ebert, the insatiable curiosity I had regarding anything Star Wars caused me to seek them and their works out. But seeing that I lived in a relatively small town in Texas with only a few small video stores to its name, my cinematic voyage would be delayed for a few more years, until the advent of Netflix.

http://ww4.hdnux.com/photos/01/44/15/410467/3/628x471.jpg

Which brings me to my next point- Star Wars and the Internet. I owe a great deal of who I am to the Internet, as it provided a refuge for someone like me, who often has a hard time fitting in. I many times became lost in a Wikipedia wormhole, discovering movies and people I had never heard of. As an 8th grader I was able to see Koyaanisqatsi thanks to George Lucas’ Wikipedia page, which told me he had produced its sequel, which told me about the first movie, which led me to do a Google search, which led me to Hulu (then in its infancy), where I could view the film in its entirety. A short time later my family signed up for a Netflix account, allowing me to finally view many of the films which inspired my hero, in turn giving me inspiration of my own.

I have always loved stories and images, as shown by my early dreams of being an author, a historian, and a computer game designer, but through Star Wars and these other films I was able to synthesize my passions and realize my true dreams. Because of Star Wars, I knew what I truly wanted to do. I wanted to make movies. I wanted to take the ideas in my head and throw them up on the big screen so I could share them with everyone. While the types of films I want to make have changed drastically over the course of my life, these ambitions and dreams have remained the same for a very long time, and it is because of Star Wars that I was able to realize them.

http://www.jedidefender.com/collect92/han%20anh.jpg

My love of Star Wars waned as I entered high school, not by choice, but mostly because my eyes were captivated by other films. But by sophomore year,  I recognized that it was okay to like Star Wars. I no longer had those quiet moments of doubt that I’d felt before. I was accepted into the film class at my school and found other like-minded people. For the first time in my life, thanks to Star Wars, I felt completely comfortable around a group of folks my age. I became less like C-3PO and more like R2-D2 or Chewbacca: a guy no one really understands but is still beloved by all, or at least many.

It was also sophomore year that I watched all the original Star Wars films again, as part of our unit on archetypes. While we viewed the 2004 special editions, which are obviously inferior in many ways to the original cut, I must say, there have been few movie-watching experiences as delightful as this. I felt that almost everyone in that classroom was as enraptured and in awe of the films as I was, even if they did keep talking. It was deeply powerful and I felt truly moved. But watching them again, I saw these movies in a different way.

http://collider.com/wp-content/uploads/star-wars-return-of-the-jedi.jpg

As a kid, Star Wars was perfect, and it felt so real. It was my world. But now, especially with the added digital effects of the special editions, it doesn’t feel as real. It doesn’t feel quite so perfect. I think, metaphorically speaking, that says something about me and how I’ve changed. As a kid, I don’t remember much going in the world around me. I don’t remember the Clinton presidency, or Kosovo, or Columbine, or anything leading up to 9/11. But now I’m hyper-aware of what’s going on in the world and I constantly worry. So I definitely recognize that the world has flaws, many of them. I see the world through different eyes than I did as a kid. I’m still able to look at the world with a sense of wonder, but I also see all its imperfections. I guess what happened was that I saw the flaws in the world and then I saw the flaws in Star Wars. But even though I now see some of the flaws in Star Wars, I still feel that sense of awe and wonder. Yes, it’s not perfect, but it’s powerful. I suppose that says something about life.

http://alecandnathan.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/cff4c-epiv_throne_room.jpg?w=553&h=418

There are a lot of people out there, even people who love Star Wars, who hate George Lucas. There may be periods of time where I am angry with the man, even furious, but I cannot bring myself to hate him. I was five when The Phantom Menace came out, so naturally I loved Jar-Jar Binks. I also grew up with the 1997 Special Editions, so it’s only through my grown-up eyes that I’m able to scowl at the new inferior-looking CGI effects. I only have a bunch of little tiny reasons to hate him. And all the reasons that I should love him outweigh those negatives. Without this quiet, steel-minded man, I would not be who I am today. You would not be reading this blog today if it was not for him and the film he made. I love Star Wars with all my heart, and the day I stop loving it is the day I stop living. I don’t know where the saga will go with these new films and I’m incredibly apprehensive. But at the same time, I still have that same sense of hope I feel every time I watch Star Wars. Even if J.J. Abrams ruins everything, even if the cow is milked until it can give no more, I will still have my memories and experiences, the ones that have molded my personality and shaped who I am.

http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c394/isil80/Star%20Wars/End.jpg

At the beginning of this piece, I said it was the story of Luke Skywalker and me. I think I’ve come full circle as I prepare to graduate high school and move into the world beyond, meaning that I think I’m like Luke Skywalker again. Maybe as a kid I was like Luke Skywalker in the first Star Wars, hopeful but a little over-eager and a touch too whiny. But now I think I’m like Luke Skywalker in Return of the Jedi. I’ve faced my demons and am prepared to move into the future with a stern resolve. I don’t know what the future holds, but I do know that no matter what happens or where I go, I will always have Star Wars. So thank you, George Lucas, and God bless you.

http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/starwars/images/4/49/FuneralPyre.png

(I know it’s a form of heresy to post a link to the 2004 Special Edition ending of Return of the Jedi, and I hate Hayden Christensen as much as the next guy, but I couldn’t find a clip on YouTube from the 1997 Special Edition, whose “Victory Celebration” is in my opinion superior to the original’s “Yub Nub.” Plus, this one had the funeral pyre, one of my favorite scenes in all of the movies. I think it’s a fitting ending to everything I’ve been feeling.)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRvAAYjmqkE

The Passion of the Cinema: Why You Need to Start Caring and Stop Going to See Iron Man 3

By Nathan

I don’t know what directly inspired this post, but I feel like it has been building within me for a long time. Maybe it was Steven Soderbergh’s recent keynote address, or my reading of Harry G. Frankfurt’s book On Bullshit, or the death of Roger Ebert, or the fact that I am graduating high school in a few weeks. Regardless of the initial cause, I believe these feelings are worth discussing and maybe, if I’m lucky, they will spark a new conversation. So here it goes.

Why don’t people care about things anymore? As both a critic and a person in general I’m wary of the collective nostalgia our society obligatorily feels for every scrap and kernel of history, yet I have to ask, has it always been this way? And if not, what caused our apathy and lack of passion? Who should we hold responsible? Was it Nirvana, punk rock, or Vietnam? Was it Marshall McLuhan, reality television, or Watergate? And if none of these things, then what? I don’t mean to descend into a rhetorically-questioning rant, but I just need some answers.

http://cdn.mos.totalfilm.com/images/i/iron-man-3-trailer-11-questions-raised-118967.jpg

These thoughts really came to fruition while I was sitting on the toilet thinking about Iron Man 3. I’ll be honest, that’s where I have most of my best thoughts, but that’s beside the point. Mostly I was asking myself what purpose Iron Man 3 serves, and if it even deserves to exist. I don’t know if it does or not. I don’t even know if that’s for me to decide. There have already been two Iron Man movies, yet somehow there has to be a third one- all the laws of nature seem to be in agreement about this. For some inexplicable reason it is a fact of life in 2013 Iron Man 3 has to exist, and no one questions its purpose, or its existence, or why it is here. Somewhere in the stars the ghost of Isaac Newton has scratched out a fourth law: “For every two Iron Man films, there must be a third and equally dull Iron Man.” The Iron Man franchise is like soil erosion: constant, accepted, and greeted with no more than a general shrug by anyone except for soil erosion experts.

http://spinoff.comicbookresources.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/iron-man-3-2.jpg

Now, I’m stating my thoughts on the Iron Man films as an outside observer, as someone who despite his love for the comic book character has no immediate intentions to see this new movie. There are many people who are genuinely thrilled for its arrival. But I still have to ask, how many of the thousands who this weekend will take in the new adventures of Tony Stark actually need to see it? How many will have their lives changed by it? Would the world still spin on if it was not here? Robert Downey Jr.’s pockets might be a little less padded and Walt Disney’s post-mortem laugh might be a little less maniacal, but in my assessment, I don’t think life would be that different.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/sites/default/files/2011/11/steven_soderbergh_venice_film_fest_a_h.jpg

Of course, this brings up a point Steven Soderbergh gently nudged against in his recent speech, which you should probably read if you have not. In a world with so much pain and suffering, what purpose do the movies really have? For something like Iron Man 3, the oft-toted answer is escapism. But in my personal opinion, these blockbuster escapist fantasies fail as legitimate “escapism.” They may provide a temporary numbness to our wounds, yet the counterfeit euphoria they supply does not offer a legitimate solution to our problems. I know I’m drifting toward elitism, but a fear of strong opinions is something that weak entertainment like the Iron Man films has indoctrinated us with. Because these movies do not engage our real emotions, we think these sentiments inside of us are weak and invalid, or worse, something to be afraid of. Modern movie marketing has convinced us that the dangers of emotion lie out there, in the real world, and that these difficult feelings are what we should be escaping from. But that isn’t true at all. In this modern world oozing with apathy and cynicism, the genuine emotional respite provided by the cinema is one of the only true forms of escapism left. We need to escape to emotion, not from it, as the land we are fleeing from is starving from a lack of sincerity.

http://www.cultureslap.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/GH-15832_R1.jpg

We’ve been led to believe that the only things worth concerning ourselves with are superheroic fantasies, or narrative intricacies, or photogenically-enhanced bodies gallivanting across a green-screen fresco face. One way in which this has occurred is an overemphasis on “spoilers.” The internet is all tied up with the yellow caution tape of “spoiler alerts,” and it’s even begun impacting the way we converse with one another in person. I enjoy a good surprise as much as the next guy, but that’s not why I go to the movies. When your only motivation for watching a film is to find out about the rumored killer plot twist at the end, you know something is wrong.

http://25.media.tumblr.com/2d2334ef53aefe6240be872719938e59/tumblr_miukbccYZo1s6mknho1_1280.jpg

Let me use an analogy. If you are a newly-converted Christian reading the Bible for the first time, would you be angered if someone spoiled it for you? Most likely you wouldn’t, because you aren’t reading the Bible to hear a good story. You are reading it for religious and/or spiritual reasons. This is why I watch movies. Many times to hear a good story, yes. But mostly for religious and/or spiritual reasons. The movies are my religion and the cinema is my temple. I know that regardless of where I am in the world I can step into the quiet confessional of a dark theater and have my soul cleansed. But this religion is under attack- from people who want to pepper it with an assaulting amount of advertisements, from people more interested in profit than poetry, from people afraid of their true emotions.

http://alecandnathan.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/8dff4-iron-man-3-art.jpg?w=548&h=360

Maybe I sound like an old crank. Maybe I sound like an elitist, too. I think, however, that many of misunderstood words like “elitism” and “pretentiousness” are bastardized vocabulary terms that we have been taught in order to avoid engaging with our emotions. Most of the time if you start talking about feelings in a pitch meeting, your potential investors will get real scared real fast. We have heard time and time again that emotions don’t sell. But why should film above all other art forms be interested in “sales”? Yes, it is an industry, but it should be one made of artists, of people who love what they do. To paraphrase the Soderbergh speech, you may know how to drive, but you wouldn’t tell an engineer how to drive a car.

http://www.joblo.com/newsimages1/sundance13_mud.jpg

I find it incredibly depressing when a truthful, honest, and beautiful film like Jeff Nichols’ recent Mud, a movie which by the way could be sold very easily to a mainstream audience, is overshadowed by Iron Man 3 just based on the fact that the latter had an onslaught of advertisements in its arsenal. We have become forced into being interested in products and commodities instead of transcendence and epiphany. While many people might not be interested in these things, they can still have their lives changed by them. Their emotional quality of life can be improved by a beautiful film. I know mine has.

http://www.panelsonpages.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Demolition-Man-pic.jpg

I’ll try to wrap it up with a few final thoughts. I have a friend in film school who recently made an absolutely beautiful short film, yet the teaching assistant in his class says he may not make a good grade as it does not have clearly-defined character motivations or much plot. Since when did these become the most important qualifiers in what makes something good or bad? I think there should be one qualification for what makes a film good and one alone: does it move you or does it not? I have no interest in films that do not at least try to move me emotionally, as what I am looking for is not to escape from my emotions, but to escape to them. I do not have time for anything not interested in doing that. Before you cry elitist, I recognize too that one can be moved by almost anything. I have been touched by Demolition Man and shed a few tears during “Come Sail Away” by Styx, so I’m not alien to engaging emotionally with culture that may on first glance appear to exist without merit. So maybe I shouldn’t write off Iron Man 3. Maybe the worth of its existence is for you to decide.

http://alecandnathan.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/e440b-quentin-tarantino-reservoir-dogs1.jpg?w=548&h=374

Movies are my one true love and passion in life. Some of the most beautiful memories in my life have involved movies, and many times I have sacrificed people in favor of films. This probably makes me a terrible person. I once had a friend say that my archnemesis Quentin Tarantino loves movies, not people. Maybe I have more in common with Quentin Tarantino than I initially thought. But at the same time, I don’t. Godard said that he loved women, not movies, because you cannot caress a movie; however, I believe that you can in a way caress people through movies. So maybe I’m not terrible. What I mean is that you can express your emotions for others through films, you can affect them and yourself and venture to a higher place. The cinema moves and takes us to somewhere we cannot reach on our own. It is a place of beauty and ecstasy and truth. Anyone who aims for less than that needs to go home and rethink their life, as Obi-Wan Kenobi once wisely told a Coruscanti drug dealer.

http://img2-3.timeinc.net/ew/i/2013/03/05/IRON-MAN-3_510x317.jpg

I might just be overzealous, but I think that what this world needs most of all now is passion. It needs dedication, sincerity, and honesty. It needs movies like Mud and people like Steven Soderbergh, not Tony Stark or Iron Man 3. I strongly believe that going to the movies can help us re-discover these ideals we seem to have lost touch of. At the same time, however, we also need to realize when to turn off the television or step outside of the dark theater and embrace the real world. Movies are a start, but it’s up to us, the audience, to finish the story. The emotional escapism provided by true cinema can begin in a theater, but we can carry it in our souls for the rest of our lives and use it to improve the world around us. If Iron Man 3 will change your life this weekend, then go see it. But if not, find something else that will. Find something that will send you in a better direction with increased understanding of life and how it works. Find something that will truly impact you. Find something that makes you want to care.

Album Roundup: February – April 2013

By Jack Evans

Yes, yes, I know, I’ve been slacking. I promised that I’d be doing large Album Roundups every month-and-a-half, and I haven’t really stuck to it. Well, I suppose I’ll just have to appease you with an extra-large Album Roundup. Alright?

Alright!

http://coolmaterial.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/David-Bowie-The-Next-Day.jpg

David Bowie – The Next Day–I won’t profess to be the biggest David Bowie fan in the world (not that I dislike him or his music); I’ll even admit that I’m not nearly as familiar with his vast body of work as I should be. Even so, when iTunes put The Next Day, his first new album in a decade, up for preview before its release in February, I immediately put it on play, and with positive results. The album finds Bowie in classic form: lyrically witty and poignant, musically checking off ballads to uptempo funk (the title track is especially noteworthy), and at its best, Bowie’s songwriting here is as good as it’s ever been. [8.4]

http://www.soundtravelmachine.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/The_knife_shaking_the_habitual_artwork_2013.jpeg

The Knife – Shaking the Habitual – The Knife are known for wearing grotesque masks, rebelling against traditional gender ideals, and transitioning from making catchy synthpop 10 years ago to redefining what darkness could sound like in electronic music with 2006’s seminal Silent Shout, so it’s safe to say that everyone would be a bit uncomfortable if they did something that didn’t go against the grain. When one of the songs on their highly anticipated new release is 19 minutes of feedback recorded in an old boiler room, though, their resistance to the norm doesn’t quite translate to tape. An unfortunate portion of Shaking the Habitual is made up of tracks like that one (“Old Dreams Waiting to be Realized”) for it to be a particularly enjoyable listen, as those songs bring down fantastic ones (oh, and there are some fantastic ones) like the singles “Full of Fire” and “A Tooth for an Eye” and saturate the album with a downpour of found-sound drone and feedback, making for an inconsistent, if not disappointing, outcome. [6.9]

http://www.twentyfourbit.com/news/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/the-strokes-comedown-machine-tracklist.jpg

The Strokes – Comedown Machine – And now on to a band that’s been disappointing people for years. It’s not entirely The Strokes’ fault; they did start off their career with an album that’s regarded as one of the best ever made and followed it up with another great one. Comedown Machine, their fifth, has been substantially better received than their last two outings, and it’s one that fully indulges the band’s love for 80s pop, complete with bouncy synth and guitar riffs, high, crooning vocal lines, and a song called “Welcome to Japan.” There’s filler – that’s typical of their post-Room on Fire output – but when they hit their stride, The Strokes can still be as good as they were at the turn of the century. [7.5]

http://musictrajectory.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/phoenix-bankrupt-album-cover.jpg

Phoenix – Bankrupt! – Phoenix’s follow up to the beloved Wolfgang Amadeus Phoenix is one that sees them incorporating even more synthesizers and experimenting with different styles and structures. The increased electronic presence is a welcome one, especially when they couple it with the Asian flavor sprinkled over the album, and their take on ballads (“Bourgeois”) and clubby slow-jams (“Chloroform”) fit in with their signature high-energy indie pop. When they try a little too hard to step outside of themselves, as they do on the title track, the album loses some of its steam. Luckily, those moments are scarce enough to prevent Bankrupt! from crashing. [8.2]

http://www.thewildhoneypie.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/justin-timberlake-20-20-experience.jpg

Justin Timberlake – The 20/20 Experience – If you think Justin Timberlake is just another hitmaking pop superstar, think again. There are the song lengths on The 20/20 Experience, for one thing: eight of the albums ten tracks push over six minutes, something you aren’t likely to see on a release by, say, Taylor Swift or Will.i.am. Nor is the variety of sounds he’s working with, from old-school soul and jazzy textures to forays into hip-hop and electronic R&B. Those song lengths work hand in hand with the song styles, too, as most of the songs turn halfway through, keeping the song’s general feel but doing a stylistic 180: opening track “Pusher Love Girl,” for instance, starts with string flourishes that wouldn’t sound out of place in a 1940s film, drops into a nice little 5-minute R&B tune, and disassembles and reassembles itself into a Frankenstein hip-hop version of itself. Have fun with those radio edits, pop stations. [8.4]

http://vinylmag.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/the-terroflaminglips.jpg

Flaming Lips – The Terror

Narrator: You deserve a new album from The Flaming Lips. But something in your brain is afraid to switch.

Wayne Coyne: It’s time to… retrain your brain.

*Man hugging shark; walking brain*

Whispering Women: The Terror…

Narrator: All the bizarre, borderline terrifying experimental indie-prog you want. (On the Spotify stream, you can) listen to one song at a time or all ten at once. With unlimited alien keyboards, unlimited pulsating bass, unlimited Wayne Coyne. Don’t listen to things you don’t need to.

Whispering Women: Like that new Megadeth song!

Narrator: Think of your eardrums.

Wayne Coyne: Think of the lobster!

Why are you still sitting there? Listen! To The Terror.

Hand-Clapping Wayne Coyne: The Flaming Lips!

Narrator: Change is good!

Whispering Women:It’s time to listen to The Terror.[8.6]

http://soundisstyle.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/James-Blake-Overgrown-Deluxe-Version-612x612.jpg

James Blake – Overgrown – James Blake’s 2011 debut was a collection of bent and fractured yet soulful electronic music that Wikipedia genrephiles have stuck with the “post-dubstep” tag (see also: Mount Kimbie, Jamie xx, and Purity Ring, apparently). His follow-up, Overgrown, is far removed from such tags, with Blake instead presenting ten tracks of vocally prodigious electronic R&B built on hovering piano chords and beats dipped in sweet molasses. At once, it leaves more breathing room than his debut while still being breathtakingly intimate – evoking a picture of an empty room with Blake, a piano, a laptop, and nothing else. [8.7]

http://youaintnopicasso.com/images/phosphorescent-muchacho.jpg

Phosphorescent – Muchacho – On the stunningly gorgeous “Song for Zula,”Muchacho’s first proper song, Matthew Houck (via his Phosphorescent project) lifts the opening lines from Johnny Cash’s “Ring of Fire,” only to follow them up with a couplet of his own, lamenting, “Oh, but I knew love as a fading thing, just as fickle as a feather in a stream.” Those first four simple lines are an indication of what Houck is offering on Muchacho. Some might tempt to call it country (or some subgenre containing the word “country), but really it’s a derivation of the genre, sun-cracked, whiskey soaked, and laced with glistening synth arpeggios as Houck pours his heart out it on tracks that range from fractured bar rock to dreamy indie folk. Brutally self-honest and pleasantly eclectic, Muchacho is, at the least, an oasis in what’s become a generic desert of Americana (not to mention, my most loved kind-of-country album ever). [8.9]

http://cdn.stereogum.com/files/2013/01/Youth-Lagoon-Wondrous-Bughouse-608x608.jpg

Youth Lagoon – Wondrous Bughouse – Trevor Powers wrote the songs for his 2011 debut, The Year of Hibernation, in his bedroom in Boise, Idaho. The songs on it are fragile and starkly confessional, dripping with isolation and guitar riffs that Isaac Brock would be proud of. With Wondrous Bughouse, Powers is still recognizably the same artist, but his sound has grown substantially. Produced by Ben H. Allen (Animal Collective, Deerhunter), Wondrous Bughouse’s full-bodied psychedelia adds polished production and live drums to Powers’ deceptively innocent-sounding indie pop. Even though the shift causes Youth Lagoon to lose some of the sheer pathos of the debut, what it gains in psychedelic pop know-how is something that Animal Collective wannabes would kill for. [8.4]

More Releases:

http://www.cvltnation.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/OLE-1009-Iceage-You%E2%80%99re-Nothing.jpg

Iceage – You’re Nothing – Angry Danish youths bring even more nihilism, wicked post-punk to their sophomore album. [8.4]

http://screeninvasion.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/tyler-wolf.jpg

Tyler, the Creator – Wolf – Tyler’s first album since skyrocketing into hip-hop ubiquity loses some of the shock factor, replaces it with more Frank Ocean. [7.7]

http://www.independentmusicpromotions.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Mosquito-by-Yeah-Yeah-Yea-0011.jpg

Yeah Yeah Yeahs – Mosquito – A couple of the songs on here really bite, but most of them are far from sucking. [7.5]

http://prettymuchamazing.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/WAVVES-Afraid-of-Heights.jpg

Wavves – Afraid of Heights – Beach rock’s reigning king couldn’t really top FIDLAR within the genre this year, but he knows how to write a damn catchy power-pop song. [7.6]

Ghost B.C. – Infestissumam – Sweden’s favorite masked, hooded Satanic hard-rockers are Satan-ier and hard rock-ier than ever. [8.1]

Inter Arma – Sky Burial – The southern sludge metallers hit their stride at the place where bone-crushing riffs and beautiful acoustic interludes unite. [8.0]

Doldrums – Lesser Evil – Airick Woodhead’s debut has unpredictable arrangements, danceable beats, and a dystopian science fiction narrative. In other words, something for everyone. [8.4]

How to destroy angels_ – Welcome Oblivion_ – Trent Reznor’s newest band falls flat, need time constraints, suffer from underscore overdose. [5.0]

Even More Releases: Intronaut – Habitual Levitations[8.5]; Waxahatchee – Cerulean Salt [8.9]; KEN mode – Entrench [7.9]; CHVRCHES – Recover EP [7.3]; Autre Ne Veut – Anxiety [7.2]; Kvelertak – Meir [7.0]; Mike Patton – Place Beyond the Pines OST [7.1]; IO Echo – Ministry of Love[7.6]; Anciients – Heart of Oak [7.9]

Stuff I Missed Last Time: Cult of Luna – Vertikal[7.5]; Milo – Things That Happen At Day/Things That Happen At Night[8.7]

If you think that there’s any more Stuff I Missed, this time or last, let me know!

Roger Ebert: A Personal Memoriam

On April 4, 2013, the beloved film critic and self-styled “newspaper man” Roger Ebert passed away at the age of 70. He began his career at the Chicago Sun-Times and reviewed films there from 1967 until the day of his death. His words were more widely consumed than those of any critic in history, and he revolutionized criticism through his public television program Siskel & Ebert At the Movies. While he is most known for being the first film critic to win a Pulitzer Prize and having the most famous pair of thumbs in America, my connection with him is much more personal.

http://img2.timeinc.net/ew/i/2013/04/05/Roger-Ebert_612x451.jpg

In many obituaries, the author has a tendency to overstate their relationship with the subject. Hopefully I can avoid this, but I doubt I will be able to. I never met Roger Ebert, or even really knew him, but it feels as if I did. It’s taken me a long time to write this piece, as I’ve struggled to find the words in this situation, especially when, as another critic stated, Roger always seemed to have the right ones. To a lot of people he might have just been a film critic, but to me he was more than that.

http://wac.450f.edgecastcdn.net/80450F/starcrush.com/files/2013/04/roger-ebert.jpg

Roger’s work has always been a part of my life, as I remember his face leaping off the bookshelf and staring at me from the cover of an early copy of his Home Video Companion, which we picked up at a public library book sale at the end of the last century. But I never read his work seriously until my sophomore year of high school, when my mom checked out a copy of his The Great Movies III at the Larry J. Ringer Library, up the road from my home in College Station, Texas.

http://rack.2.mshcdn.com/media/ZgkyMDEzLzA0LzA4L2RmL1JvZ2VyRWJlcnQxLmExNDQ2LmpwZwpwCXRodW1iCTk1MHg1MzQjCmUJanBn/8ddf1fdc/af2/Roger-Ebert1.jpg

My long love affair with the cinema began in the 7th grade, when Star Wars dominated my life and a war-weary biography of George Lucas served as my simultaneous survival guide and Bible. I read about Francis Ford Coppola buying a gun for George Lucas, John Milius making movies and surfing on the California beach, and other prehistoric lore about Spielberg, de Palma, and the movie brats, causing my head to fill with visions of living in a bunker with a Super 8 Camera in my hand and a KEM editing flatbed in the corner. Other kids were dominated by the typical dreams of puberty; I fantasized about slitting and slicing and splicing film with a hot mess of chemicals and adhesive glues staining the sweaty beds of my fingernails; about running around the campus of the University of Southern California with an Arriflex camera set up on a dolly rig; about going off into the woods and making movies of my own.

http://images.sodahead.com/profiles/0/0/1/9/6/9/5/8/3/roger-ebert-105107465008.jpeg

At first it started casually, the rubber rewind button on my remote slowly wearing away to neatly fit the grooves in my thumb. I experienced the orgiastic sensation of viewing my first DVD (I believe it was Mr. Mom), the thrill of receiving my first movie via Netflix in the mail (It was Steven Spielberg’s television movie Duel), the awe of simultaneously seeing my first foreign film and first movie by Kurosawa (Yojimbo, and actually, it was my first consciously viewed foreign film; in third grade my teacher showed us Jean Cocteau’s Beauty and the Beast, but I hardly remember it).

http://cdn.ph.upi.com/sv/upi/UPI-86031365107081/2013/1/b4d7cb765a7a4ef237abc5fbd55ad1c5/Chicago-Sun-Times-film-critic-Roger-Ebert-dead-at-70.jpg

While my knowledge at this point was mostly limited to what I had learned about movies from numerous biographies and Wikipedia entries, Roger’s writing was a natural stepping stone for my budding cinephilia. I had encountered the likes of Jean-Luc Godard and Akira Kurosawa and Paul Schrader in some of my readings, but barely knew where to begin. I hadn’t found many of the truly great films yet.

http://cinespect.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Roger-Ebert-620x350.jpg

I remember my very first interaction with Roger. As I mentioned before, it was through his book The Great Movies III. Seeing the jeweled green cover was like seeing the Emerald City in the distance and knowing the secrets, the magic, the wonder that lie within. I cracked it open and a new world exploded. Roger’s conversational yet lucid prose opened my eyes to the true beauty of cinema, to the mystery of the shadows and the power of dreams. I learned names like Ozu, Fellini, Wim Wenders, and Billy Wilder. To quote my favorite film, I had taken my first steps into a larger world, with Roger Ebert serving as my Obi-Wan Kenobi. I explored the galaxy of international cinema swimming like a celestial body around me, one that I had been previously blind to, and saw my first films by Werner Herzog (Fitzcarraldo), Jacques Tati, (M. Hulot’s Holiday), and Francois Truffaut (Small Change).

http://i2.wp.com/www.eurweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/roger-ebert-1-thumb-up.jpg

I quickly devoured everything he had written that I could get my hands on. Soon I discovered the wonders of his website and blog, learning more about the man while I learned more about the movies. Over time he introduced me to other film writers as well- to the neon lightning quips of Pauline Kael, the daring courage of James Agee, the almost scientific theory of David Bordwell, the radicalism of Steven Boone. Roger was someone who could appreciate a film like Solaris while also famously finding merit in one like Speed 2: Cruise Control. He taught me that criticism could be funny (as I learned from his review of Battle: LA, hich he said was a film he would like to cut up and clean his fingernails with) while also being transcendently personal (like in his thoughts on The Tree of Life), and led me to begin forming my own opinions about movies and not be afraid to speak up.

http://cdn.urbannewsroom.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/roger-ebert.jpg

I became a frequent commenter on his blog, always hoping that maybe he would speak to me. And once, he did. That was our only interaction. He responded to a comment I posted and said that great things would happen to me in life. Of all the words I have ever seen or heard in my life, I don’t think any have meant as much to me as those. What Roger demonstrated in his life, above all, was not just the beauty but the power of words. With words, anything can be accomplished.

http://img2-2.timeinc.net/people/i/2013/news/130415/roger-ebert-3-600.jpg

Roger wasn’t just witty; he was deeply insightful and incredibly spiritual. His musings on the afterlife, evolution, prayer, religion, and death helped shaped my own personal beliefs at a time when I was lost. He once wrote, “I believe that if, at the end, according to our abilities, we have done something to make others a little happier, and something to make ourselves a little happier, that is about the best we can do. To make others less happy is a crime. To make ourselves unhappy is where all crime starts. We must try to contribute joy to the world. That is true no matter what our problems, our health, our circumstances. We must try. I didn’t always know this and am happy I lived long enough to find it out.” That’s what I believe too.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v348/siochembio/roger-ebert-470_zpsf8ebadf3.jpg

The pain he felt in his last few years, after dealing with many bouts of cancer and surgeries gone wrong, caused him incredible suffering, yet he serves as an incredible example to anyone who undergoes extreme hardship. When he lost the ability to speak and eat, he became heard even more, releasing a cookbook and increasing his output enormously. In fact, two days before he died, he announced even more projects he would be undertaking despite a short leave of absence. His work ethic was remarkable and almost heroic. The dedication he had to his work should serve as an example to us all.

http://gapersblock.com/merge/rogerebertpulitzer.jpg

His thirst, to paraphrase Thoreau (and Robin Williams in Dead Poets Society, a film Roger thought was mediocre), to suck the marrow out of the bones of life was unending. Whether he was off gallivanting with Russ Meyer on the set of Beyond the Valley of the Dolls, or spinning a story at his favorite bar, O’Rourke’s, he recognized the value of experience and people. While a good portion of his life was spent sitting in the dark, he knew that sometimes it was just as important to turn the lights. This was the man, after all, who bravely asserted that video games are not art, who was selected to pen the never-made Sex Pistols movie, who (maybe) dated Oprah Winfrey. He was not just capable of seeing the life in movies, he saw the movie-ness in life, the magic and joy and art that exists in every human interaction, in every day that goes by. To quote the first sentence of his memoir, “[he] was born into the movie of my life,” much as we all are, yet he saw that life is just as miraculous and majestic as movies can be.

http://www.csmonitor.com/var/ezflow_site/storage/images/media/content/2013/4-4-13-roger-ebert/15460529-1-eng-US/4-4-13-Roger-Ebert_full_600.jpg

Roger Ebert was undoubtedly the most beloved and prolific film writer of his time, but he was also one of our nation’s greatest voices and a wonderful human being. He didn’t just love movies. He loved people. He loved life. His unending sense of wonder and awe never ceased to amaze me. If you get the chance, I’d encourage you all to read his memoir Life Itself. It’s one of the most beautifully-written and inspiring works I’ve ever read.

http://media.avclub.com/images/427/427565/16x9/627.jpg?1904

He has had an incalculable effect on my life and I will miss him dearly. It is strange, I always felt like I sort-of knew him, or I would at some point. Maybe I’m selfish for focusing on how he impacted my life, but I think that if there’s one thing Roger Ebert will be remembered for, it will be his unending love for other people, and how he impacted everyone who knew him, even if they only knew of him.

http://img2-2.timeinc.net/people/i/2013/news/130415/roger-ebert-6-600.jpg

It’s been hard, but I’ve found these words, some of the finest he ever wrote, of comfort lately. “I was perfectly content before I was born, and I think of death as the same state.” Regardless of where we go after we die, I can’t help but think that I’ll see him at the movies.

Steal This Music: Black Pleasure- Cities Aviv

Black Pleasure cover art

Taking a cue from Mr. Abbie Hoffman, I’ve decided to start a semi-regular series called Steal This Music, in which we document and share the best free or dirt-cheap tunes floating around the interwebs. Most of these will probably be mixtape, but thanks to the dirth of content out there in the nethersphere, we’ll try to have some variety.

First up is Cities Aviv’s mixtape Black Pleasure. Although most articles about the Memphis musician cite his punk roots, the influence of his former genre is less palatable than it is in the work of, say, P.O.S. Rather, Cities Aviv takes his cues from some fantasy-land that exists between 808s and Heartbreaks and Electric Youth, a drum-synth-and-sample-heavy cocktail where the vocals are buried deep in the mix. It’s dance music for sad people that’s enjoyably obnoxious, the kind of music created by a rapper who spends his time listening to Joy Division and surfing the AM radio-waves for UFO signals. One of the songs is called “IDrankUpAllTheClouds,” and that’s a perfect way to describe Aviv’s music. It’s cumulonimbus-flavored cough syrup that sounds bad in a self-conscious, self-referential manner. The music jumps, spazes, and settles down, and it’s flawless in a self-destructive way. Well, it doesn’t sound bad, but in many instances you can’t hear the vocals, although it’s obviously intentional. It probably sounds like I’m talking the tape down, but it’s really great, this sort-of weird Blade Runner rap. You might even call it epileptic rap, or leather backpack hip-hop that sounds like you bought it in a drive-thru pharmacy on a floppy disk,  the score to a movie starring Ryan Gosling and David Bowie. It’s terribly raw, the sort of stuff I imagine Hiro Protagonist listening to during one of his deliveries  in Snow Crash. The blog which released this album, mishka, also put out a pseudo-soundtrack to Neal Stephenson’s cyberpunk power trip, but I think this album be more appropriate for the job. Shout out to Sushi K, yo.

Download and listen here: http://mishkanyc.bandcamp.com/album/black-pleasure-2

Best of 2012: Music

Nathan:

Bob Dylan, Tempest

In 2012, Bob Dylan released a better country album than any “country” artist has in the past few years. It’s just good, and contains one of the best songs I’ve heard this year, “Roll On John.” I don’t have a lot to say about it that hasn’t already been said. It’s just good.

Milo, things that happen at day / things that happen at night

I realize this came out on the first day of 2013, but I suppose that I can bend the rules of space/time/year-end critical lists, right? As I adoringly described in my Best Mixtapes list, Wisconsin rapper Milo is pretty much the finest hip-hop lyricist working today, and his double-EP things that happen at day / things that happen at night sees a giant sonic step for the young MC (ha). While he had previously just used instrumental tracks from other artists, tthad is produced by Riley Lake and tthan by Analog(ue) Tape Dispenser. Having each EP produced by a different individual doesn’t create a clashing sound; rather, the sounds blend together perfectly into a cohesive entity. The double-EP as a whole has a very aquatic texture, one that accentuates the soothing confusion of Milo’s lyrics. The album is filled with beats that gently nudge the listener along (with the percussion on “legends of the hidden temple” being particularly beautiful), along with creative sampling and electronic whisperings. His beats tremble. The whole instrumental effort is swirling, ambient, and just gorgeous, while also managing to compliment the emotional and incredibly clever writing he delivers over it. Lyrically, Milo is as referential and self-doubting as always, but he hasn’t become a stock character or reduced himself to simple shtick, mostly due to the complex nature of the mental imagery he creates. It’s an album that pushes the listener in multiple ways, full of philosophical and psychological conflict. I also relate to it on a deeply personal level that I have yet to reach with almost any other music. It finally feels like someone has made a record for me, one that understands and provides solace for many of my struggles and internal battles. But that doesn’t mean I’m the only one capable of enjoying or identifying with it. tthad / tthan is truly a sonic journey to an entirely different place, an album that will take you to the “almond milk paradise.” Milo’s one of the most promising rappers of our age and he hasn’t let me down yet. Like I said earlier, he’s the finest hip-hop lyricist working today, and I’d go as far to say that Milo’s probably one of the best rappers overall. My praise is as sincere as his music.

Open Mike Eagle, 4NML HSPTL

Let’s just put this one in the ever-growing “everything Open Mike Eagle does is perfect” file. Open Mike Eagle had a particularly strong year, with a trip to Uganda bringing a collaboration with Ras G, Mon MC, and other Ugandan rappers that was in my opinion one of the best mixtapes of the year. Few in hip-hop seem to have the work ethic and the linguistic ability of Open Mike Eagle, who continually shows off his flair for both humor and the heartfelt on 4NML HSPTL. I also think that few in hip-hop are capable of telling as well-crafted stories as Eagle seems to conjure up, creating songs that are equally inventive, original, and full of fresh opinions.

Purity Ring, Shrines

The “brostep” movement/non-movement of 2011 and 2012, headed by individuals like Skrillex and deadmau5, who have more in common with Michael Bay’s sound crew than actual musicians, has left me with a distaste for much modern electronic music. One exception to this sentiment, however, is Purity Ring, the Canadian duo which their Wikipedia page calls “post-dubstep,” and on particularly less moderated days, “indietronica.” Purity Ring’s debut album manages to carry the weight of intense electronic beats while also creating a sensation that is haunting and thought-provoking, as the lyrics stab a rusted knife into any sense of traditional beauty created by the instrumentation. It bears some similarities to dubstep in its sonic heaviness, but is much more reserved, moving at a pondering, glowing pace. So I suppose it’s like dubstep, but for people who think.

Rodriguez, Searching for Sugar Man Soundtrack

I made the mistake of putting a soundtrack on my top music list for 2011, but this one deserves its place. While none of these songs were actually released in 2012, last year’s documentary Searching for Sugar Man definitely raised the profile of folk-y Detroit singer Rodriguez to such a degree that I think this deserves to be called “new.” Bob Dylan comparisons abound in any conversation about Rodriguez, and while there’s plenty of politically-charged imagery on this record, it lacks the occasional desperation one feels in some of Dylan’s songs as he searches for an unusual rhyme. Which isn’t to put Dylan down, or to say that Rodriguez doesn’t have his share of early 70s psychedelic-esque lyrics about planting flowers in comic books, but Rodriguez is able to build a comfortable home his lyrical simplicity. Many may argue that the production on all of these tracks is incredibly over-done, and to some extent it is, as the loud bass guitar and horns are over-bearing in many sections. But the weeping strings on a song like “Cause” and the haunting proximity Rodriguez’ voice bears to your eardrum is both empowering and devastating. It’s beautiful music and I’m glad Rodriguez has finally gotten his due in America.

For more of my favorite music from this year, check out my Best of 2012: Mixtapes list.

Other great records from this year: Kendrick Lamar- good kid, m.A.A.d. city, Frank Ocean- Channel Orange, Busdriver- Beaus$eros

Review: House of Cards

It’s tempting to say that House of Cards is notable only for its experimental distribution method. It is solid and entertaining throughout, but it doesn’t really have an edge or big selling point other than its distribution method. House of Cards is worthy of HBO or AMC, but it’s more of a Rubicon than Breaking Bad: very good, just not particularly special.

Obviously, a review of the show must focus on its all-episodes-at-once release on Netflix. One positive of this method of distribution is the variable length of episodes. The shortest episode was around 46 minutes, the longest around 54. Network television is forced to conform to commercial-friendly formats, but a House of Cards episode is able to go on just long enough to finish its story. However, the Netflix distribution method also tends remove the sense of the show having distinct episodes. Outside of a few side-story episodes, such as Frank visiting his home district, the episodes tend to blend into one another. They’re even titled generically, just “Chapter One” through “Chapter Thirteen.” It’s obvious the show was designed to be consumed in a few big pieces rather than as episodes; House of Cards is one unit, not a set of thirteen episodes. Is this a good or a bad thing? I can’t say for sure. I think the focus away from telling individual stories removed some of the punch from the show, but television is headed toward a more novelistic direction, and this is the obvious next step. Overall, though, I don’t think the distribution method made that much of a difference; I didn’t feel much different marathon-watching it than I would Breaking Bad or Lost.

Ironically, past the hype, House of Cards is a pretty conventional series. It feels very similar to series like Mad Men and the previously mentioned Breaking Bad, which I think was a smart move for Netflix: it shows they can handle real TV shows rather than just experimental fare. It stars Kevin Spacey as Frank Underwood, a Congressman from South Carolina and the Democratic Whip. After being denied the office of Secretary of State by the President after it was promised to him, he vows revenge, orchestrating a Machiavellian plot into which he ropes Zoe Barnes, a reporter for the Washington Post stand-in The Washington Herald and Peter Russo, a younger Congressman from Pennsylvania with an excessive fondness for booze, cocaine, and hookers. It’s a pretty simple premise, but it works because of how thick and complicated it gets. Plus, everyone loves a good revenge story.

Kevin Spacey’s performance in the lead role is great, as we’ve come to expect from him. Oozing a carefully manufactured charisma, Spacey makes viewers root for what should be a deplorable character and masterfully pulls off concepts that might otherwise have been spotty, such as frequent fourth-wall breaks and long-winded speeches. He’s basically a more affable Walter White. One of the most interesting parts of the show is Frank’s relationship with his wife Claire. Theirs is not a carefully calculated political marriage; the two care deeply for each other, though Frank has numerous sexual affairs (which his wife always knows about) and Claire has a short fling with an old boyfriend (whom Frank does not know about). The two are held together with their ambition, and it’s interesting to watch how Claire fuels her husband while keeping an eye on her own goals. The cast is House of Cards‘s strongest suit, especially Corey Stoll as Russo, the show’s only overtly sympathetic character. The show’s writing is a bit weaker; the plot gets so thick that the dialogue devolves into pure exposition for short stretches, and the writing can get pretty soapy. Kevin Spacey seems to understand this, though, giving his dialogue the obviously campy touch it needs.

Overall, the show is more dependable than groundbreaking. While there were very few episodes I thought were overtly great, I didn’t think there were any real duds either. House of Cards was obviously built to look competent rather than to take risks to show that Netflix could crank out a series without failure. It apes Breaking Bad and Mad Men pretty liberally without really adding more to their premises. But House of Cards doesn’t need to be the next big thingIt doesn’t take a huge time investment from viewers, and it’s not something designed to be talked about around the water cooler between episodes. People will watch it, then forget about it until the next season. It may be slight, but it’s enjoyable.

The anti-hero character study has become something of a TV cliche nowadays. House of Cards certainly doesn’t do anything new with the genre, and it would probably have been quickly forgotten if not for its much-hyped Netflix release. Still, its intricate revenge-driven plot and strong performances mean it’s more than just a gimmicky business venture. House of Cards may not have knocked me off my seat, but I’ll be there for season two.

Sonic Cinema: Phantom of the Paradise

Although he’s not necessarily the best of his generation, it’s my belief that American filmmaker Brian de Palma is a perfect synthesis of everything representing the “Movie Brat” era. This is for two reasons, those two reasons being the two things I see when I take a look at his oeuvre. The first thing is other people’s movies. The second thing is cocaine. You heard me right. In my opinion, Brian de Palma, at least for the first half of his career, is/was a visual drug dealer, taking the works of others and letting them run wild with his own personal fantasies. When you think about it, Carrie is just The Exorcist, Blow Out is just Blow Up, Dressed to Kill is just Psycho, and Scarface is, well, Scarface. Yet the major difference is that de Palma essentially puts these films on cocaine: he takes the ideas of others and mutates them, amps them up, causes the frame to burn to a crisp with seething energy. He takes his camera, with its blue steel shimmering like the barrel of a gun, and shoves it up against the heads of Hitchcock, Friedkin, Antonioni, and Cagney, whispering the words “Snort up, son,” in their ears. And when you consider that most of those works were visually energetic enough to begin with, it creates an experience lodged directly at the intersection of “visceral” and “surreal.”

http://image.toutlecine.com/photos/d/e/0/de-palma-brian-tour-01-g.jpg

But his 1974 film The Phantom of the Paradise doesn’t fit as neatly into this categorization as many of his other films. The whole thing has its nose buried in cocaine, but it’s harder to detect the source material in this case. It’s more like an Aleister Crowley-directed education film on entertainment law than anything else, The Phantom of the Opera but with Alice Cooper instead of Lon Chaney, Citizen Kane but with Brian Wilson instead of Orson Welles.

Like de Palma’s early films often tend to be, Phantom is also a break down and appropriation of cinematic tropes and tendencies, dripping with satirical excess. But unlike Hi, Mom! or Blow Out, it’s impossible to figure out what exactly the film is satirizing. The slavish nature of the entertainment industry? The gaudiness of shock rock in the 1970s? I’m not totally sure, but all I do know is that this film is terribly weird, and in a strange way, terribly sad.

The film tells two stories: the film’s main story concerns Winslow Leach, a struggling Harry Nilsson-esque songwriter who sacrifices his songs and life to the music titan Swan. The second story deals with the fall of Swan, a boy genius who has taken charge of the entire music industry with the firm assistance of Satan. The film begins simply enough, but it soon transforms by eating up the plot lines of a thousand other stories: The Phantom of the Opera, The Picture of Dorian Gray, Faust, The Rocky Horror Picture Show, Tommy, most of Meat Loaf’s discography… It’s impossible to state what exactly this film is trying to be in terms of its influences.

http://www.sundancechannel.com/sunfiltered/wp-content/uploads/paul-williams-phantom-of-the-paradise-560.jpg

There are two things about Phantom of the Paradise that contribute to my sadness. The first is the tragedy of the songwriter, with everything robbed of him except for the melody bleeding from his fingers, wailing out of a small tinny box and into a soundbooth receiver. After being imprisoned by Swan in an out-of-place slapstick-like gag scene, the protagonist has his head crushed in a record press, causing him to transform into a mechanical beast that looks a bit like a medieval RoboCop. It’s a bit of a metaphor for the plight of songwriters, I suppose. If used in the right way, I think this, and the film’s small love story, could be used to great effect. But they are instead thrown right into the pot of weirdness that de Palma appears intent on turning the film into, lacking the delicate attention they need to be transformed into something beautiful. The second sad bit of this film deals with the music. Phantom of the Paradise actually has a fantastic soundtrack, but for a film so concerned with the music industry, it receives little of de Palma’s adrenaline-hungry attention span. We mostly hear a few alright Paul Williams tracks, repeated themes, and slightly boring melodic phrases. The great music in the film, the astounding shock rock and the weird “nostalgia wave” music that helped lift Swan to his place in entertainment, is featured, but only to a certain degree. The “nostalgia wave” music in particular is a bit of forward-thinking satire on the part of de Palma, as it has become ever-apparent in our society that we are inflicted with a bad case of collective nostalgia for a past that never even existed, but this music plays such a small role in the film that it doesn’t ultimately create a deeper meaning.

http://www.getyourfilmfix.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Network.jpg

It’s a little bit of an overstatement, but in a certain sense, Phantom of the Paradise is the musical  equivalent of Network- a satire that might seem ridiculous but also has to some degree come true, with many individuals throughout modern history having “sold their souls” for entertainment. It’s also a musical take-down of the decade De Palma loves so dearly, the 1970s, with media obsessions and gaudy dreams being the film’s major topics. In a manner similar to Network, It ends in an on-TV assassination and terrifying orgy-like romp, with the camera swirling up above the Paradise’s debauched denizens, but it isn’t nearly as effective as Network. Phantom’s ultimate fault is that it attempts satire without properly choosing its target; Network is clear in its targeting of the modern television industry, and while there are definitely several people or ideas being lampooned in Phantom, there’s honestly just too much going on for it to have any proper meaning. It ends up seeming more flamboyant than insightful, which I suppose makes a point about satire itself, as it’s often hard to toe the line between “clever and creative commentary” and “over-the-top on-screen orgy.”

http://alecandnathan.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/paulrevereandtheraiders.jpg?w=548&h=405

With all this in mind, Phantom of the Paradise reminds me of a musical group that’s about as misguidedly mediocre as the film itself. It’s the always loveable anti-British Invasion group Paul Revere and the Raiders, with their song “Kicks” reminding me most of this movie. Both could have been great satires of the national zeitgeist at their respective times, but they become too absorbed in excess to actually meaning anything. A lot of people in this movie want to get their kicks, and I want to get my kicks watching it, yet we both don’t end up finding them.

Nostalgia for the Light: A Look Back at Terrence Malick’s The Tree of Life

By guest contributor Maurice Vellas

Hello, all! I’m glad to be writing for this fantastic blog again. I’m sure all you cinephiles have seen the trailer for To the Wonder, which was released a couple months ago, and I’m sure the first thing everybody said when they saw it was, “It looks just like The Tree of Life!” Well, yes, it’s all there on the surface at least: a free floating camera, bold and beautiful renditions of nature, voiceovers about the power of love, and big-name stars that Malick loves to put in his films. But before we go ahead and say that To the Wonder is going to be another Tree of Life (let’s actually take the time to see what the latter film was about, as it’s much more than its outer form. That’s just what brings it to life.

http://collider.com/wp-content/uploads/tree-of-life-movie-image-brad-pitt-04.jpg

It has been almost two years since Malick’s Palme d’Or winner was released to the public. The film has seen its fair share of gushing praise and also a bit of contempt from critics feigning to be offended by its “bombastic” nature. I think many on either side have missed the point. They get caught up in brief descriptions of the film’s outer form and inner content without adequately explaining what each does for the other. Moreover, they attempt to analyze it as an ordinary film, when what actually makes The Tree of Life such a masterpiece is its effortless creation and use of a new cinematic language to tell a story so strikingly relatable that portions of it can only be described as pure truth. (I know, a bold statement to make considering what I just wrote about other critics.) This film takes a new path in all of the major forms of production, as its acting, writing, cinematography, and overall direction are all vastly different from any film in the vicinity. If you still haven’t seen this gem, you are long overdue for a viewing. If you are one of those who has seen the film and remain dubious of the its worth, I hopefully will convince you to take the time to watch it at least once more.

http://cineffect.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/tree-of-life69.png?w=568&h=288

The Tree of Life, as many critics have said, is not an easy film to summarize. But to give those not familiar with it an idea, the film starts by revealing that a boy of 19 years has passed on, by showing the reactions of his various family members. The rest is essentially a massive childhood memory of the boy’s brother Jack, juxtaposed with a few out-of-this-world sequences that serve as metaphors to be compared with the main story.

http://alecandnathan.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/tree-of-life-036.jpg?w=574&h=308

The images that occupy the frame of The Tree of Life evoke some of the most powerful human emotions because they are things we have all felt before. Sometimes they make our hearts burn with love, and sometimes they sting with the loss of it. This is only magnified by the fact that these images are shown through the perspective of a child. Jack has two brothers, a mother, and a father, the latter two being enormous forces in his life. He is constantly stuck between the harsh toughness his father expects of him and the freeness that his mother embraces. We see this through family dinners where the children are asked to leave the table before a fight breaks out between the dad and his boys. We see it through the time mom spends frolicking around the yard with the kids while dad is away. And we see it when Jack takes his jealousy out on his younger brother by taking advantage of his innocence. Imbued occasionally throughout all of the poetic-realism of the film are voice-overs by the main characters, which are Malick’s way of asserting what he has shown. These illuminate the few concrete messages director Terrence Malick wishes to impose. Some may be turned off by these parts of the film. I’ve often heard the complaint that they make it too preachy, although I disagree. When we process the “lessons” Malick gives us, we are hearing a voice of reason through Jack’s head. We don’t have to accept that, “Unless you love, your life will flash by,” but I sure found it beautiful to behold Jack’s reaction to that. It is the great human connection that, for me, is what makes film great. Malick also uses spectacular images of the universe and natural phenomena set against the intimate gaze of this small family, a family that, portrayed against the enormity of all this, should mean nothing, but somehow manages to touch something deep inside us.

http://alecandnathan.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/the_tree_of_life_2011_1224x679_980098.jpg?w=558&h=309

One of the most compelling reasons to watch The Tree of Life is that it is something completely new in the world of cinema. It introduces revolutionary styles of cinematography and editing that lend to its natural feel.

http://collider.com/wp-content/uploads/tree-of-life-movie-image-jessica-chastain-01.jpg

The cinematography of The Tree of Life is a crucial part of its success in rendering a fictional world that feels effortlessly real. Almost the entire film was shot without studio lights. Virtually the only lighting used was practical light (lights visible in the frame) and sunlight. In the first days of the shoot lights were brought in, but soon sent back because of the unnatural feel they lent. Cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki remarks, “It’s like you’re setting a tone and artificial light feels weird and awkward after that.” The other major part of the cinematography in this film was camera movement. About ninety percent of the film was shot on a camera stabilizer. This causes a beautifully flowing and constantly moving camera that feels much less formal and much more natural than in a traditional narrative. The camera stabilizer also allowed shooting to be much more spontaneous, which allowed the genuine unscripted moments of acting to show through. Because of the cinematography, you don’t feel like you are watching a regular movie. You feel like you are remembering moments of life because the purpose of the lighting and camera movement is not to shape perceptions or embolden particular scenes, but to place you in the memory and see it unfiltered and bare, which happens to be more beautiful than any studio set could aspire to be.

http://alecandnathan.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/tree2bof2blife2b-2b.jpg?w=556&h=300

You will immediately encounter a pacing that general audiences are not used to. Initially, this could be frustrating for viewers who simply want to watch their ninety minutes of movie and leave, but those open to a new kind of experience will find this fresh and perhaps more effective than regular pacing. Instead of the traditional scenes that are used in most films to unravel the plot, Tree really only consists of three or four different segments. In fact, there isn’t really much plot at all. Whereas most movies are very deliberate with the patterns they take in their story arcs, this film is about letting the unintentional and the natural flow through as much as possible. The lack of plot is essential to the pacing of the film because it is not one planned scene coming after another to build on one great statement. The film is largely about interpretation. And really wouldn’t it be cheating to say something is up to interpretation when the filmmaker is in total control of how the visual and narrative information is presented?

http://thefilmstage.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/tree_of_life_7-650x341.png

To understand how this type of pacing is achieved, we need to look to the editing process of the film. After the plethora of footage was shot Malick worked with editor Mark Yoshikawa to create a pacing that flowed without tiring. In American Cinematographer magazine Yoshikawa stated, “If something felt intentional to Terry, be it a performance, a camera move, or a sound, he would react against it [in the edit]… We ended up just cutting anything that felt, and that gave way to the jump cuts, which give the movie its elliptical feeling.” You would think that a segment of a movie that lasts a good hour or so without changing much would get boring, but because only the most genuine moments were presented in the final edit, the effect is quite the opposite. Everything we see is fresh and exciting, and we are constantly connecting with the film, seeing this nostalgic memory just as Jack sees it.

http://www.ifc.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/tree-of-life-06242011.jpg

All of these formal aspects, which create Tree’s own unique cinematic language, serve the film’s strongest aspect, its ability to interact deeply with human emotions and sensibilities. Roger Ebert, who gave the film four out of four stars, focuses mostly on this in his review. After describing how the film reminded him so much of his own childhood, he writes that “most of us, unless we are unlucky, have something of the same childhood, because we are protected by innocence and naïveté.” This means that you don’t need to have grown up in Waco, Texas in the 1950s to feel a connection to this film. What is really important is how perfectly Malick contemplates all the ways in which a child experiences and thinks about things. For Ebert it is the fact that the “scenes portray a childhood in a town in the American midlands, where life flows in and out through open windows. There is a father who maintains discipline and a mother who exudes forgiveness, and long summer days of play and idleness” that touch home. For others it may just be other personal events that these images evoke.

http://thefilmstage.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/tree_of_life_2-650x320.png

I hope it is quite obvious. I recommend this film entirely. It is not to be watched once and then forgotten. That’s not the type of film this is. This is a film you may watch for the first time and be a bit confused by. Maybe it all goes over your head. But this is the type of film that takes some time to process, as it is not just instant gratification. It is a beautiful interaction between humanity and art. I have always thought that the ultimate goal of a film, or any story, should be to connect with what makes us human. And that is what The Tree of Life does.

Post Navigation

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.