Winter Movies Ahead

If your anything like me, you probably have some DVDs somewhere on your Christmas list, if you can wait until Christmas. Some of the great movies I saw in the theaters that are now coming on DVD include: 1. Inglorious Basterds 2. District 9 3. Public Enemies 4. Star Trek 5. The Hangover 6. Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince.

Now we talked about good DVDs, let's mention what's coming soon theaters. Some coming in the next few months include A Single Man, Invictus, Crazy on the Outside, Prince of Persia, and Alice In Wonderland. I think the movie coming out soon that everyone's talking about is Avatar. I saw a 3D preview of it last weekend when I went to see Jim Carrey's A Christmas Carol. I have to say, it looks pretty awesome. I like a handful of James Cameron's films, specifically Aliens. What makes me curious though, is I wonder if everything is going to be in 3D soon. Clearly, I love 3D, however, I sort of wonder how this will affect the attitude toward smaller, independent films. On one hand, I think 3D helps the viewer feel to be more a part of the narrative. On the other, I feel it might distract what is interesting about the film. I'm pretty happy that the new Disney film, The Princess and the Frog is going to be hand drawn and in 2D, because I don't feel that there is enough of that.

Bus Crashes and Guitars

Sunday, just outside of Albany, New York, Weezer's tour bus crashed from an ice slip. There were a few injuries, the largest being lead singer and (on and off?) guitarist Rivers Cuomo who to a small cut to the spleen and a small puncture to the lung. Doctors report his injuries are not fatal. Reports claim the other injuries were less serious. Cuomo's wife and two year old daughter who were on the bus were unharmed.

Awkwardly and completely unrelated, Weezer has just released a new album named Raditude. It's the band's most Pop oriented album, that even features a club song I Can't Stop Partying which features rapper Lil' Wayne. Despite the new album's accessibility, the album's overall songwriting is a little stronger than their last few albums. In the mid-nineties, Weezer released an album this critics at the time hated called Pinketon. Despite the lack of sales and acclaim, in went on to be the most influential album in the second half of the 1990s, and was credited for inspiring the indie emo movement. Cuomo said he hated the album for years, and wouldn't play it live. Despite still refusing to play the songs like, Cuomo has recently come to like it and it's message. Do you think bands should be able to choose what songs they play life regardless of the audience?

You pick your friends, but what about your actors?

We filmed a movie for BVFA this past week, it was fun. We're having some technical difficulties, but it might turn out fine, we'll see. Anyway, it gave me an interesting idea to blog about.

Basically, when we, as college students, make films, we don't necessarily go through the same casting process that hollywood executives go through. To be judgemental and make a generalization, one of three things usually happen: 1. You give parts to your friends. 2. You hold auditions for people you know, who you may or may not know well. 3. You hold auditions open to the public.

This BVFA film was really the first film I directed when I wasn't directly people who I had mostly known for years. On one hand, I felt it was more appropriate because I didn't feel the need to give the actors roles that I thought they would like, because I felt it was more business. On the other, I kinda felt the communication was a little more awkward, I was kind of afraid to yell or give acting advice. However, the issue I have had in the past with directing people I've known for a very long time is that I'm afraid that some sort of disagreement or clash that I've had in the past with the person might screw up the work chemistry. So what do you think, who are you most comfortable working with?

Peace, Love, and Kissing Up

This sort of goes along with last week's chapter. Yesterday, I was all ready to go CVS to get the things I need for my dorm. But my friend called me to help out his radio show. So I went out of that for a little while. When I left, some girl I knew begged me to come watch a gentleman sing and play guitar who hired by the program committee. I felt really bad because there was no one there. He was pretty good and I enjoyed watching him, but I really had stuff to take care of. So when I got out, it was about 15 minutes short of 10 o 'clock. By the time I got to CVS, it was about 9:54, and when the clock struck 10:01, some worker yelled at me and told me I have to leave. I was so frustrated I didn't buy any of the things I had picked out, I just put them down and walked out the door.

I feel the same way sometimes when having conversations with people. For instance, on one hand, I feel there is no such thing as bad music, so I shouldn't say that I think Hillary Duff's So Yesterday is a terrible song if a friend likes it. On the other hand, I feel lame like I might lose my credibility if I am not honest about music. I think it works the opposite way too. When I'm with a group of guys and I admit that I didn't think the film Twilight had bad acting, that might not benefit me so well either.

Open Mic Night At BSC

I haven't played at open mic night here at BSC yet this semester. I went to see my friend sing a couple weeks ago, and sadly I missed her, however I got to see my other friend play, so that was cool. The moved it to the room next to the GLBTA room instead of having it at in the large ballroom. Now that I think about it, I think that was a good choice because last year everyone sort of had their back to the stage. It didn't really bother me when I performed, because well, you expect that when doing a little acoustic ditty at an open mic night. However, I thought it was sort of harsh for the comedians and spoken word poets because they weren't able to bounce off the audience. Therefore, I felt it was a better environment despite the fact it was a little harder to meet up with friends when in the audience.

I quite often tend to second guess myself when I do these types of things. I was original like, yeah, I'll do one of my songs and then cover "El Scorcho" by Weezer. But then I was like, I can't do that, it would be a sin to cut out of all the background vocal. So then I was like, "Well, I do a good version of Bob Dylan's 'Forever Young Continued'." But then I think, "I can't play that at an acoustic night, that's like playing 'Stairway To Heaven' at a guitar store!" Last I like, "Okay, I'll do 'Under the Milky Way' by Church." But then I think I might forget the words. The inner turmoil goes on...

Where Do You Get Your Music From?

Well, in short, I have this band called Ductape (we're considering changing our band name for the 5,000th time), and now that brother's football season has ended and winter break draws closer, we're working on getting back down to business. Back in the glory days of Ductape (Freshmen year of college) we used to get handfuls of people to come to our shows through myspace. There we would constantly have new music updated, a list of our concerts, and the opportunity to wish all of our fans happy birthday.

Now that we blinked our eyes, myspace doesn't seem very cool anymore. As a band, we've been rather lackadaisical with updating the myspace since these young hipsters (yes, I'm trying to sound square) seem to be more interested in facebook and twitter. Not to long ago, we made a facebook for ductape, but it didn't seem very assessable. There is no place upload your music and you can only add a few people at a time. Twitter, although I find it fun, is even less useful for music in nature. We have a link to our myspace page on facebook but I think people see myspace and think "losers". Other than making better music (I know you were thinking that Bruce Wayne, so I'll say that diss before you do), how to you think we can promote our band so we can play shows and have fun?

"This land is your land and this land is my land, sure, but the world is run by those who never listen to music anyway"-Bob Dylan

Is anybody else sick of politics by now? This is a question that I never thought I would ask, because well, I'm really interested in politics. However, recently, it just seems like I can't avoid politics at all. I can't walk to the RCC without seeing the "I get paid to give out pictures of Obama with a Hitler moustache" people. I can't go online without hearing some filmmaker complaining that the country needs full universal health care instead of a revised plan where 5% of people get free health care and the rest get affordable.

I can't turn on the television with out hearing how 65% of people feel Afghanistan war is no longer worth it, and 51% of people think Obama should listen to the generals (Which doesn't even make sense! The generals want to continue the war without an exit strategy, and then invade several other countries over the next 20 years. 65 + 51=116. That means 16% people are contradicting themselves! I'm failing statistics and I still figured that out! Okay, I had my moment). Not to mention the stupid polls seem to change 25 points a day. Who the heck are they polling? They haven't been calling me. I only got called up by the Catholic Church. It was a machine, and it said, "The new health-care bill is going to raise the abortion rate, are you pro-life?" That's a loaded question if I ever heard one. I wonder if the news programs do the same thing. What do they do interview one hundred people phone? I can think of one hundred people that wouldn't answer.

In the end, this is all sort of funny, because I remember in a conversation a few years back I blamed baby-boomers from becoming apathetic during the Clinton-era because times were good. I fear now if this apathy returns from people like me we may lose our voice as a people. But I myself haven't written a political song in months. It just seems as I get older I care more about people than politics. Maybe we need both.

"Your So Indie-Rock, It's Almost An Art"

Tonight, while enjoying a funky-blue gatorade while watching The Artic Monkeys on Last Call with Carson Daly, I would like to take a moment to type about the battle between Indie and mainstream. Of course, an infinite amount of books could written on this subject on only one form of media. I'm going to use music examples because I'm sucha rookie when it comes to filmmaking that I don't think I can generate very good film examples.

To be indie, or not to be indie, that is the question. For the record, I'm not talking about high budget versus low budget necessarily, I'm talking about accessibility. What I'm referring to is when an artist has to decide whether to go for something comfortably polished and popular, or for something more challenging that is more likely to target the smaller "hipper" audience. This audience is sometimes disdainfully called "The Hipper Than Thou Audience".

Personally, after years of listening to mainstream rock bands like 3 Doors Down and Creed when I was younger, I now tend to favor alternate or so called "indie" rock to the post-grunge bands that top the mainstream charts. However, just because I favor a band such as Manchester Orchestra over Saving Abel doesn't mean I refuse to listen to something popular, I just find the alternative artists to be more interesting than mainstream artists the majority of the time.

However, I sometimes find that bands on the quest for authenticity can be a negative thing. For instance, I saw an interview with the drummer 1970s punk band Crass and he went on and on about much it bothered him seeing Joe Strummer getting out of a jumbo jet. If I was the interviewer I'd ask him, "Who really cares?" Crass was always a brilliant band, but I think their avant garde style is sometimes a bit much for me.

Last question, Why was "Since You Been Gone" by Kelly Clarkson a hit? Kelly Clarkson is a great vocalist, but that song is not catchy at all to me.

I do believe in spooks, I do believe in spooks

I'm watching Jimmy Kimmel and there's older gentlemen as a guest that is considered a mentalist. I didn't really understand exactly what he was saying, and he claimed it wasn't a magic trick, but basically an hour earlier he had a bunch of audience members put their hands on a table. When they came back in the same positions and did it again, the tables vibrated and moved across the floor. He described as some sort of weird kinetic energy, although I thought it was weird that he could control it that well. He also stated that it wasn't ghosts or anything line that.

I saw this guy on the news once that was supposed to be the world's smartest mentalist something like that, and in short he could basically always tell if people were lying. He explained that he's not a psychic or anything he just has the ability to read what people say through their facial emotions. However, somehow he had a theater full of people write down a number and then had an assistant add them together, and he was able to guess the number of the first try. I know that sounds somewhat fake but it was 60 minutes or something like that.

My girlfriend Mandy likes to watch the show Ghosthunters, whether it's because she likes ghosts or because they guys that are the ghosthunters are from our home town in Rhode Island, so once in a blue moon I'll watch it with her. I must say that I rarely find anything on the show at all convincing, probably because I have no way of knowing if the tools they use actually measure anything at all. However, usually about once a show something will happen weird enough where it can't be blamed on say, wind.

How do you feel about all this crazy paranormal mentalist stuff? Can really The Men That Stare at Goats really do this crazy stuff? Or is it just camera tricks and magician garbage?

First Blood vs. Rambo

Right now the original film First Blood is on AMC. What's interesting is that when people think of the character Rambo, they usually think of how the Rambo character developed starting in First Blood Part 2. First Blood is a film about a character Rambo, who is a Vietnam War Veteran who is struggling to function in everyday society, and also battling mistreatment. The film is based on a film by David Morell. Actor Kirk Douglas dropped out of making the film because it did not follow the book closely.

Nonetheless, in the film, Rambo is a somewhat sympathetic character that is a by-product of a harsh Vietnam War. The film even questions the war's harsh existence. First Blood is the reflection of a confused American still in the cloud of Vietnam. However, in First Blood Part 2, Rambo is a character comparable to Arnold Schwarzenegger's character in Commando. Think, (he shoots a bow and arrow) "Look! A building just blew up!" Yes, First Blood Part 2 was a part of Reagan Macho America. My question, relates to now:

"Where America was in the original First Blood, is comparable to now. Will the same type of Macho Patriotism reappear?"

The Voice of a Generation

As a young college student, I feel as though my generation doesn't have the same voice that past generations have had. Searching through wikipedia, I read up quite a bit about writers of the beat poets of the 1950s and 1960s such as Allen Ginsberg, William S. Burroughs, and Jack Kerouac. Following in both their footsteps, was a journalist never to be forgotten named Hunter S. Thompson. Some writers followed afterward, yet, they had a much smaller impact such as Terry Southern.

In the world of music, the phrase "The Voice of a Generation" often refers to Bob Dylan. Some other musicians around that time in the 1960s and 1970s, such as John Lennon and Johnny Cash, also had considerable success in speaking on behalf of the youth at the time. In the 1980's the Man most known as the generation's voice was Bruce Springsteen. Springsteen brought popular "Van Morrison" style big band rock to folk songwriting. Following him, the biggest name that comes to mind is Kurt Cobain. Although he was outspoken to press, the ambiguity of his lyrics distanced him from social commentary, or even social theory.

There are certainly people today who have provided excellent social commentary for our generation. However, I just can't name a 21st Century Journalist that writes about current culture that stands up to those names. Personally, I think that blogger/filmwriter Brooke "Diablo Cody" Busey is closest to having a grip on the current generation. As far as musicians, I think the Connor "Bright Eyes" Oberst has the most socially aware lyrics. As far everyday life storytelling, I think MCR are good lyricists as well. Still, I don't think any of these names have the ability to reach as large an audience as the earlier people did.

Fiasco Outside of RCC

It might be somewhat hard to blog about this with a bipartisan hat on, but I'll give it my best shot. I did a radio show today and read over air that talk radio and television host Glenn Beck said that President Obama treats Fox News the way that Hitler treated Jews in the Holocaust. What I said on-air was that I felt that this statement was very unfair because Mr. Beck is comparing a non-violent communication issue to a sad point in history when a man and his followers murdered, harassed, tortured, etc. millions of people. Though I didn't say this on-air, I personally found the statement insensitive to victims of the Holocaust and their families.

What I did say on air was that I don't think people should compare other people to Hitler as well unless they are actually guilty of a legitimate Holocaust. I specifically named former-President Bush and how I felt he shouldn't be compared to Hitler either. Coincidentally, when the show ended I walked out and saw something interesting out the window. On one side of the building, there was a van with people near it handing out fliers and holding a giant poster of President Obama with a Hitler moustache. At the bottom of the poster read, "I've changed". They may have been BSC students, but I didn't recognize them. On the other side of the building, there were some familiar students with a "Support Obama" poster. The "O" in Obama was drawn a peace symbol.

I could tell there was some screaming going back and forth, but I couldn't hear any of it. A police officer soon came by and said something to both sides. After that, I noticed the "Big Obama Hitler Moustache Poster" was loaded into the van and there was only a "Small Obama Hitler Moustache Poster". There were a few more fliers handed out, a few more people added to the Pro-Obama group, and few more curses I couldn't hear go back and forth. Then the van started getting packed, and there was cheer by the pro-Obama group. The Pro-Obama group stayed a bit longer, yet, they did leave within ten minutes after the "Obama has a Hitler Moustache group" took off.

Are you offended by Hitler Comparisons?

Musical

It's getting that time of year again to get ready for campus movie fest!........well, actually, no it's not. However, after doing two improved slapstick comedies two years in a row, I feel like its time that I do something more scripted and prepared. I actually believe I am going to do a two song musical. I don't want to give my entire plot idea away already, however, I want to try and do something different than what everyone else is doing.

Basically, I watched the Beatles movie Help recently, and I want to make a five minute film that has that same kind of quirkiness. The basic plot I have thought out right now is a guy and a very studious girl go out on a date. The guy runs into another girl that seems to be his ex-girlfriend. The ex-girlfriend slips something into the studious girl's drink. The girl then has this trippy "dream-sequence" type of thing.

During this "dream-sequence", shots alternate between what the girl is seeing and what is really happened. Inside what the girl is seeing, to songs will be sung to her, one by the x girlfriend taunting her, and by the bartender sings a song to her claiming that her date is into her ex-boyfriend. The short ends with a funny clip of how the character reacts after her dream sequence is over.

I've already wrote both the songs and they seem pretty cool. How do you think this will work? Do you think that it might be interesting? Or do you think that it might be too complicated for a five minute plot.

Hollywood and Women

A couple weeks back, I "dboarded" a bit about how I felt some critics misinterpreted the film Jennifer's Body because of some pre-conceived notions Male critics have about Women in film. Today (or tonight), I would like to elaborate on that a little bit. I'll begin with a quick bit about the movie, and then I'll chat about some of the ideals I mentioned before.

Without any spoilers or giving away too many plot points, the movie is this girl Needy, her boyfriend, and her friend Jennifer. Needy, portrayed by Amanda Siegfried from Mama Mia, is the narrator/main character and is somewhat comparable to the main character Diablo Cody's first film, Juno. Like Juno, she has a slightly gawyky boyfriend, and a popular "cheerleader" friend. The difference is that her boyfriend is edgier, she longs to be popular instead of being content with her scene, and her friend Jennifer could eat Olivia Thurby's character (Juno's friend) for lunch. Cut to the chase, Jennifer and Needy go to see an Indie Rock band, and Jennifer comes back some sort of Cannibal/Vampire/Demon. She needs to eat people to get power, so she eats guys at school. As the story progresses, there is also some question of the band's involvement in her condition.

Now, I know that after reading this paragraph, there are people at home that think this sounds like some B-movie horror plot with big budget actors and actresses thrown in. But here's the thing, it's a comedy! And it's not a sloppy "Disaster Movie" kind of cheap slapstick laughs, it has clever and funny dialogue incorporated to a script that has strong characters making difficult decisions. I think just because Megan Fox is in it, everyone just assumes that it has to be bland as Transformers 2. I don't have a problem with the Transformers films, I'm just saying that since they're not plot driven, critics wrongly assume the talent in the film will be unable to act in others films just because they did one CGI series. Personally, I interpret a lot of the Megan Fox comments from critics online as misogyny. She's a woman that speaks her mind to the press and doesn't always say the predictable answers in interviews, why is that a bad thing. Who cares if she is interested in modeling etc., it doesn't mean she can't act. Nobody says that Bruce Willis can't act when he appears on magazines.

... Make That 2 Coffees

ANYWAY, for COMM 224 I of course have pick a top to write about for the semester. This is a weird/goofy topic, but I wanted to do politics of superhero movies. I just find it interesting that almost every superhero movie recently has some sort of Libertarian, or least some sort Libertarian ideologies. Watchmen, Batman, and Judge Dread to name a few. Sam Raimi, the gentleman who directed Spiderman, interestingly campaign donations to several Democrats, and one to a Republican, one named George W. Bush. It's almost like he was trying to send them out in enough different ways that fans of his movies wouldn't know how to pin him down. Which brings me to another point.

Don't get me wrong, Watchmen and V for Vendetta are most likely my two favorite movies. But how come ever since the original Hellboy has every superhero movie been about some sort of anti-hero. I love anti-hero films, but it's starting to turn into some sort of reverse formula. It seems as though Hollywood can only have either have cheesy heroes "G.I. Joe," or alcoholic anti-heroes "Hancock." I miss some films like the Spiderman 1 or X-Men 1 where characters could have depth and reflect humanity without being exaggeration or robotic. Richard Roeper said the world needs a superhero support group, and I'd probably have to agree.

I'm Gonna Need Coffee in the Morning!!!!!!!

I finally got the correct Real Player download so stayed up and late (and still am up) watching Outfoxed and the CSI programs. After watching Outfoxed, and namely that terrible CSI pilot (why is everything in CSI orange and blue) it made me think of possible bad media jobs. Thinking more negatively, I started to think of deaths of popular people from the media. Heath Ledger, Brad Delp (the singer of Boston), and Michael Jackson to name a few.

In Dennis Leary's brilliantly awkward book "Why We Suck," he points out that Ron Howard and Jodie Foster are the only two child actors that managed to stay in Hollywood and stay out of major trouble. I sometimes wonder that being in the media and being mentally stable is just straight up impossible. I wonder if having a camera jammed in your face 24/7 is just too much to handle.

The positive side of me hopes that if I was in that position I'd try to make the right decisions even if it didn't work out. I just don't think I have the ability, connections, or talent (hate that word) to ever get to that point. It would be easy for me sit at home watching David Caruso and say, "I can do that!" However, I watch him when he used to be on NYPD Blue and I realize he was actually a good actor at one point so my dreams are crushed.

Looking Through A Glass Onion

In honor of the release Rock Band: The Beatles, along with a rerelease of the entire catalogue of The Beatles, I have decided to write a short think-piece on what I feel made The Beatles the greatest band ever.

To begin, I would like to state that I do believe that the Beatles are the greatest band ever. However, what exactly made them the greatest band ever? Was it talent? Creativity? Songwriting? Their Looks? Their Movies?

A great deal of critics quite often throw the word around talent like grass at Ozzfest. Well, I'm not going to sit here and tell you talent doesn't exist. However, there's another word for talent, ability. You see it when you see Randy Moss out run an entire team, or when Shaquille O'Neal catch a basketball above everyone's head. You even see it when your Mother can put her hands in extremely hot water and not get burnt. Talent is 100% physical.

Does talent exist in music? Of Course! Long fingers, for piano, strong forearms for bass guitar, fast hand coordination for electric guitar, and superior breathing skill for vocals are all talents. But do think the reason The Rolling Stone named Sergeant Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band the Greatest Album of All Time was George Harrison's fingers? That seems quite unlikely to me, not to mention that Harrison's fingers were actually quite normal size. It might me be a stronger argument to propose that The Beatles had more vocal talent than the other rock bands. This is actually true. Although the Beatles had some growled rockers such as Helter Skelter and Revolution 1, Paul McCartney, John Lennon, and George Harrison not only displayed great vocal range while showcasing the ability to sing as smoothly as the Pop and R&B artists of the time. Even the weakest vocalist in the band, Ringo Starr, certainly had the ability to be a lead singer.

However, when vocal ability was a large part of The Beatles' success, it seems unlikely it was the core of their magic. For instance, one of the most impressive vocal performances by The Beatles is John Lennon's "Yer Blues." While this was song was successful, it did not reach as many people as did "With A Little Help From My Friends," a very simple McCartney-penned tune sung by Starr. So therefore, it was skill and not talent that made The Beatles the greatest band ever...well actually it wasn't that either. The Beatles definitely had acquired a degree of skill that put them up with the best. George Harrison often would play guitar so much that his fingers would actually bleed. All members of the band were multi-instrumentalists and skilled in several instruments. That was definitely a part of the magic. Not the biggest part, though.

The second biggest part (without telling you the first, yet) is songwriting. The Beatles were arguably the best composers to ever write popular music. Their compositions are creative, progressive, beautiful, edgy, catchy, and contain anything else you might want in to see or in songwriting. I sit here and continuously try to "out-art" myself with adjectives, but I'll quit that while I'm ahead. However, there five letters missing from all these elements of genius The Beatles have. Those five letters are R-I-N-G-O. Yet, the truth is, Ringo is a big part of the magic.

Think of the drum beat at the beginning of "Ticket to Ride." It's short, simple, somewhat sloppy, and not even a part of the song's composition. BUT IT ROCKS! That loud slightly early hit of the snare has been borrowed by everyone from Green Day to Coldplay. Or how about Paul McCartney's "Helter Skelter" Vocal? Is it possible to hear that song without jumping up and down? It isn't for me. And how cool was it when John Lennon used feedback intentionally at the beginning of "I Feel Fine," or when George Harrison ripped out his sitar in "Norwegian Wood"?

The Beatles weren't trying to prove themselves as some sort of virtuosos. They found ways of portraying human emotion through music. Some of those emotions we can't even describe by words. There music is just a Steven Spielberg film or Leonardi Di Vinci painting. The Beatles knew how to send any emotion satisfyingly at any time. And that is why, I believe The Beatles are the greatest band of all time.