Pandora’s Box Part 2

by Michael Newberry

… pathetically, only Hope remained inside. In the other version the box held all of humanity’s glories. When she opened the box progress, knowledge, and exaltation vanished into oblivion, forever lost to humanity. Art, in all its forms, plays an exalted role as one of humanity’s glories. It also plays a profoundly personal role. Think, for instance, of the impact your favorite artwork has had on your life. Has it moved you to tears, to resolution, to moments of joy? Have you felt that an artwork was as close to you as a lover, a friend, or a child? Have you imagined what your life would be like without art? Picture your most beloved painting or recall your favorite song or regard your most treasured book and ask yourself what if it had never existed. Would that leave a gaping hole in your soul where once something precious had been? When Pandora opened the box, marvelous things rose up and vanished into space before her eyes. Without grasping the nature of this phenomenon, she unleashed Postmodernism on humanity.Artistic creation is fragile. For most artists creation calls on the limits of their intellectual, sensory, and psychological resources; each artwork is, in essence, the artist’s summation of what is important from all of existence. Additionally, it is usual that an artist’s career calls on the limits of their financial resources. Given the nature of such a daunting task it is no wonder that artists suffer profound doubts in one form or another. Imagine young students impatient to express their visions and passions on canvas and imagine their vulnerability in hoping they will have what it takes to realize their dreams. Without the certainty of accomplished works behind them, they are, indeed, vulnerable to peer pressure, authoritative experts, and the influence of the icons of their day. If their profoundly personal visions and attempts are not acknowledged and supported, then it merely takes an air of disapproval to blow away the sparks that would blaze their future. Several years ago I taught foundation classes at Otis College of Art and Design, one of the most reputable art colleges in the United States. While there, I offered seven students a private apprenticeship program outside of their schoolwork. These students had everything one could ask for: they had fire, talent, intelligence, and drive; they had that “light-bulb” look in their eyes. They studied with other foundation teachers who taught them rock-solid basics, but in the following year they entered into the fine art program, which was dominated by postmodern teachers. During a critique, one teacher and his students called my 18-year old apprentice a “fascist”, an “imperialist pig”, and “naïve” because he had exhibited a realistic oil self-portrait with studies that documented his creative process, which was dramatically lit. He was not criticized for lack of sincerity, passion, or talent. By contrast, another student received the highest mark and praise for a goldfish cast in resin which had its eyes plucked out and sewn to its tail. A day after the critique my student came to me crying and passionately asked “why?” What horrible things did my student do to deserve such nasty condemnation from the teacher and his cohorts? Could it possibly be that they were chastising him because he displayed skill and passion in painting? Another apprentice of mine took classes with an abstract expressionist teacher (in the style of Pollock) who deflected answering to students’ direct questions. In the third week of class this apprentice came to me with tears bursting from her eyes and blurted out, “what does this teacher want from me?”  I guessed that the teacher was looking for expression divorced from thought so I recommended that my apprentice use a stream of consciousness technique for this class. I told her to unscrew her head and leave it on the shelf before entering this class. She followed my advice to the letter. She did not “think”, did not ask questions, and did nothing to aim for a realization. Later in that class, the teacher waltzed around the room with my apprentice’s “creation” and claimed that it was a museum piece and that she was a genius. Overnight she became the teacher’s star pupil. My apprentice said in a mood of distaste “that work took only 5% of my capacity”. Was this teacher so out of touch with these students that she confined their potential by ignorance? Or did she do it on purpose? During our apprenticeship program every one of the seven broke down in frustration due to their postmodern education. “What do they want?” Was the unanswerable query. After witnessing two years of these episodes, it became apparent to me that it wasn’t knowledge, dedication, skill, or love of art that was wanted by these teachers. It was both obvious and inconceivable that the teachers acted to thwart these students’ minds and abilities. Did the teachers really want to turn students into confused wrecks? What sort of people embrace such a stance? Rarely have I seen genius and rarely have I seen the completely hopeless. One student was sent to my class with the aim that she would finally pass, having failed the course given by other teachers twice before. She had no interest, had no touch, and had no understanding for drawing; she had no “light bulb” in her eyes. Shockingly, just before our holidays she presented me with an invitation to her exhibition at a modern art gallery. I will never forget the look on her face after she watched me read her invitation; she was gloating. I thought of the struggles of my apprentices pouring their passion, their egos, and their overtime into developing their potential for art; I thought of the psychological abuse they were taking for it, and I thought it unjust. Was it the way of the art world that this pathetic student should displace them? I don’t mean to imply that all postmodernists are untalented, but talent in the sense of mastery of drawing and painting is not a consideration for a postmodern art education. Before their second year, my apprentices were advised by the Dean of Otis College, by the Director of Foundation, and by the Director of Fine Art that if they wanted to continue drawing the figure they would have to go into Graphic Design and forgo Fine Art. If the postmodern community does not want skill, could it be that they want students who embody a “getting away with it” mentality? A few years ago I went to an artist’s talk given by a postmodern teacher/artist at a prestigious university gallery.   Prior to the talk I was embarrassed to find, after several minutes of looking around the gallery, that, in fact, there was an exhibition in the room, but I hadn’t seen it. Her works were camouflaged within the architectural setting. One of them was a 3″ x 1″ wide plaster band that wound around on the floor of the room. It was there to be “sensed” and to subtlely affect movement within the room, changing the traffic flow of the space intended by the architect. In her talk she proudly stated that she couldn’t draw, couldn’t paint, and didn’t know anything about architectural design. Yet all her works were dependent on architectural settings designed by others. She condescendingly referred to one of the buildings as a “fascist”. When asked if she had ever created directly from nature she said she had never “thought of that.” Without any skill in art she had several museum exhibitions in which she presented her deliberate acts of subtle subversion. Could it be possible that subversion was the standard by which this postmodern exhibition was chosen?With every postmodern exhibition, with every class, with every critic’s praise, clues emerge as to the motives of the postmodernists and the general direction of the postmodern movement. I believe there is a key concept guiding postmodernists but they, in their obscure way, don’t want us or perhaps themselves to understand what it is. Let us dig deeper and see if we can find what that key is.Museum directors are the guardians of art. They strive to protect art by heightening cultural awareness: they give artists venues in which to exhibit; they cultivate public interest in their exhibitions; they arrange recognition of artists through critics and media; they raise funds to pay for their initiatives; and they produce educational programs for adults and children. They have media, millions of dollars, and educational institutions at their disposal to influence culture. Directors are the middlemen between important new artists and the public; their influence is profound in shaping “high” culture. The mission statements of many contemporary art museums include aims to express the “aesthetics of our time,” to seek out artists that are creating “new inroads,” and to exhibit the “best” artists alive today. “Best” here does not have the meaning that it has in sports, where the winner is the better athlete. Artistic value is interpreted, meaning that it is up to the curators to evaluate who are the best artists based on contemporary aesthetics, which is postmodernism, and to support them accordingly. The Encyclopedia Encarta describes the aims of Dadaists’ (the first postmodern artists) works as “… designed to shock or bewilder, in order to provoke a reconsideration of accepted aesthetic values”. But postmodern art goes deeper than merely raising challenges to specific values; it is meant to disrupt your psychological and epistemological processes or, in other words, to shatter your sanity and throttle your mind.   To accomplish this, postmodern artists mangle either or both the content and means:1) They can choose a subject matter that will stretch your capacity for the unimaginable, usually by projecting a thoroughly disgusting state. Cultural Gothic by P. McCarthy is a good example of this in sculpture. It is a mechanized sculpture group in which a father encourages his adolescent son to fuck a goat. A Postmodern version of a close family? Branded by J. Saville is an example in painting. It is a self-portrait in which the obese woman thrusts out a fistful of her flesh towards us in an angry and defensive gesture. Incised scalpel-like wounds that spell out words “delicate” and “decorative” cover her rotten-colored flesh. Both these works intentionally take us into psychotic states. Saville, Self-portrait Parenthetically, it could be implied that I take issue with the artists’ right to express themselves, which is not the case. My point here is that these works are esteemed by the postmodern establishment for their shocking content and not for their quality as painting or sculpture. Strictly speaking, Saville and McCarthy aren’t postmodern purists; they compromise their postmodern, grotesque subject matters with figurative painting and sculpture. For purists, matching the means to the ends is a hallmark of the highest reaches of art, postmodern or not. “…art cannot be art and anti-art at the same time.” 2) The other method of shock aesthetics is to redefine art as anything but painting or sculpture. The classic example is The Fountain by Duchamp, a urinal presented as an artwork. The simple device of substituting anything but art, such as a toilet, as an artwork creates an epistemological disturbance in our minds. Think of substituting “table” for “egg”, “ice-cream” for “go”, “car” for “food”, etc. It is something like a computer virus that plays havoc with your system and ultimately renders your computer’s programs useless. In this way postmodernists have substituted Rauschenberg’s Erased De Kooning for drawing, Christo’s Umbrellas for sculpture, and Creed’s Empty Room for substance. Shock aesthetics are also commonly known in art history as part of the anti-art movement. Oddly, modern art historians gloss over the fact that, logically, art cannot be art and anti-art at the same time. In Part I of this series I stated that the theme of Christo’s Umbrellas magnified the contrast between the huge cost, effort, and scale of the project and its end of non-existence. The thematic idea is that this nihilistic work is not about “nothing” but it is about the non-existence, the absence, of something that had existed before. Stay with me on this idea; it is important because nihilism is one of the key aesthetic concepts of postmodernism. Now let us tweak the context and think of the entire postmodern art movement as one gigantic Christo project, in which “absence” is the theme. The postmodern movement has taken on the universality of representational art, with its history of 30,000 years, and succeeded in, in the eyes of the contemporary art world establishment, of virtually wiping it off the face of the planet. It has ripped the lid off Pandora’s box and replaced “progress, knowledge, and exaltation” with bile. Notice what this does to the status of the art director as a guardian of art, it creates a grotesque paradox; the directors of contemporary art museums are the promoters and protectors of anti-art. One important way in which they protect postmodernism is by ignoring any alternative; they are silent when it comes to value-orientated, representational art. Far from being harmless, silence from the art establishment delivers a deathblow to viable representational artists. I discussed this issue of postmodern silence with Dr. Chris Sciabarra and he replied: “[A] dominant ideology “brackets out” of the equation real alternatives: it just doesn’t allow fundamentally revolutionary alternatives to even be considered. I think this is not simply a conscious conspiracy, but a method of silence, of omission. It becomes part of the overall worldview, this tacit exclusion.” Silence is a very clever weapon for postmodernists to use; it implies that representational art is dead and that even if something is out there it doesn’t merit notice. Tom Wolfe tells the sickening story of young Fredrick Hart scanning art magazines, hoping for a review of Ex Nihilo, the facade of the Washington National Cathedral, an eleven-year sculpture project. “Months went by…nothing.” The exceptional representational artist faces another kind of wall of incomprehensibility as a consequence of this “silence.” In my long career as an artist I have met many “regular” people, who don’t know art in depth. Though some of them have mentioned the “silliness” of contemporary museum exhibitions. Yet, they have reverence for the title of “museum” and they do not understand why representational artists should have problems in getting critical recognition. They feel this is something that they cannot judge and it should be left to the experts to decide. The undertone of their unstated words is, “if the experts do not acknowledge you then there must be a good reason for it”. It is also unfortunate that if artists try to retaliate against the silence of the postmodern establishment, then it sounds like “sour grapes.” In an Agatha Christie story there is a small aside about the theft of a brooch. In the novel everyone suspected the maid, as she was the only one in the house at the time of the theft. No one accused her of the theft because she was an elderly woman and had always been very conscientious. The assumption of the locals and her employers was that she desperately needed money. The maid was terribly upset because she could see suspicion in their eyes and she could do nothing about it. The maid died before the mystery was solved. The brooch had been attached to a blouse that had been sent to the cleaners; the laundress had stolen it. The horror of this case was that the maid, in the absence of the solution to the mystery, died without ever being granted recognition for her goodness and honesty. Just as the solution to this mystery is crucial to clear up where the crime lay and redeem the innocent, understanding the mysterious motives of the postmodern movement is crucial to bringing about recognition of the goodness and honesty of benevolent, representational artists. Earlier I asked questions and raised the issue about the key concept guiding the postmodern movement. Now it should be clear. Postmodernism is literally an anti-art movement. Its objective, ostensibly, is the elevation of postmodern artists but its motive is the eradication of art. The postmodern aesthetic is a virus composed of the unstable components of nihilism for its means and disgust for its ends. It will take innovative contemporary representational art and reason-based aesthetic criticism to remedy this plague. Stay tuned for Pandora’s Box Part 3, the last of the series, in which I contrast two contemporary views of the sublime; the postmodern and the integrated. Michael Newberry 2002, revised in New York, 2006

Originally achieving some sort of semblance of fame as the singer-guitarist of ’80s alternative band Pop Will Eat Itself, Clint Mansell is today the man I will happily and enthusiastically call the best film score composer working today. Born in Coventry in 1963, Mansell’s work as an indie musician revealed a spirit keen to explore new ground, encompassing pop, hip-hop, electronica and rock over their 10 year existence from from ‘86 to ‘96.

After the band members went their separate ways, Mansell was approached by young filmmaker Darren Aronofsky to score his debut feature, π (sometimes written as Pi). Following the success of π, Aronofsky and Mansell collaborated again, resulting in one of the most iconic pieces of film composition of all time. Reused everywhere from the trailers for Lord of the Rings to Sky Sports News, ‘Lux Aeterna’, taken from Mansell’s soundtrack for Requiem for a Dream is a swirling, menacing orchestral arrangement that almost anyone will recognise if you sing it to them, even if they don’t know where it came from. The refrain of ‘Lux Aeterna’ appears in Requiem for a Dream in several different forms, as Mansell blends the classical strings piece with trip-hop, trance and techno versions, alongside made-up gameshow themes and crazed dance tunes. Aronofsky’s second film is a masterpiece for many reasons, but I’m certain nobody would disagree with the assertion that Mansell’s score is a very important part of that; the film’s infamously harrowing climax would be a lesser sequence without ‘Lux Aeterna’ on the soundtrack.

The soundtrack for Requiem for a Dream made Mansell’s reputation as a film score composer, and he began to accept regular jobs, including working on films as diverse as The Hole, Sahara and Doom.

In 2006, Mansell’s 3rd film with Darren Aronofsky, The Fountain was released. Although the film continues to divide critics and audiences, there can be no dispute that the score is one of the most moving, exhilarating film scores of all time. Made while working with the respected Kronos String Quartet and the Scottish post-rock band Mogwai, The Fountain includes several solo piano pieces, as well as Mansell’s more familiar electronic quirks and orchestral grandeur, and is arguably both the most ambitious and most successful musically of his work to date. Wherever you stand on the film as a whole (and I happen to regard The Fountain as one of the finest works of cinema it has ever been my privilege to see), the soundtrack just works perfectly, both with and without the accompanying visuals.

For Smokin’ Aces in 2007, the director, Joe Carnahan, gave Clint Mansell just six weeks to compose and record the entire score, with no guiding rough cut. And he did it. On time. Not only were Mansell’s fans satisfied with the work, but when the Smokin’ Aces soundtrack was released without Mansell’s compositions, Carnahan claims to have had fans driving past his house in the dead of night playing the Requiem for a Dream score at full volume. Carnahan even jokingly suggests that he had received threats of physical violence: true or not, the fans’ demands were heard, and Mansell’s score for Smokin’ Aces got an album release.

Over the last couple of years, Clint Mansell has worked again with director Darren Aronofsky on the Oscar-nominated The Wrestler, starring Mickey Rourke. Although The Wrestler does not have the same kind of scene-stealing music as Mansell’s previous work with Aronofsky, it is nonetheless an effective, subtler attempt at a score. This year, Mansell created a sparse piano, guitar, drums and effects score for Duncan Jones’s debut sci-fi, Moon. One of my favourite films of this year, Moon is a brooding, quiet, atmospheric movie that is really made great by four things: Sam Rockwell’s career-best performance; Jones’s assured, note-perfect direction; the eye-catching production design by Tony Noble; and Mansell’s routinely great score.

I haven’t heard nearly as much of his work as I would like to, but he’s a rare figure in cinema; a composer whose involvement in a project would be enough to make me see a film. Everything I have heard by Clint Mansell has been distinctive and beautiful in equal measure. I’m hoping that his work with Aronofsky will continue, and hope that he’ll be working on Duncan Jones’s second film, the sci-fi-noir Mute (currently set for release in 2011).

As I close this article up, the penultimate track of The Fountain is playing on my iTunes library. One of the tracks featuring both the Kronos Quartet and Mogwai, ‘Death Is The Road To Awe’ is an 8 minute epic of guitar, piano, orchestra, choir and percussion, with a chiming glockenspiel melody alongside the grand sweeping strings section. It’s a fitting sonic accompaniment to the end to one of the few films that I would identify as “life changing”.

David

Sometimes there are movies that because of high expectations, don’t quite live up to the hype, therefore people and critics shrug it off as a failure. There are also some movies that people just pan or shrug off based on it’s cast or premise. Although there are some occassions where I’ve had such thoughts, I like to give every movie a chance. There are times when I regret it but there are times when there is a true gem that most people just don’t care for without even seeing it, or they just don’t like it for the reasons I’ve mentioned.

My list is compiled of movies that “failed” due to high expectations as well as those that most think are truly horrible. I love all of these movies and I don’t feel ashamed for doing so.

Here are my top 10 most underrated movies of the decade.

10. Australia

Baz Luhrman | 2008

I guess that after the greatness of Moulin Rouge! there were high expectations for Lurhrman’s next project (mine were definitely like that). When it was announced that he would do an epic romance, I guess people thought that he was going to try to bring back the sub-genre, when in fact it was just an homage to those movies. Most people didn’t see it as the latter, which is why they hated it. However, there were a few of us who saw it for what it was and we loved it. The romance is great, the cinematography is amazing, the score fits the story, and the performances are great. Yes, the script had problems, but they can be easily forgiven thanks to the rest of the production.

9. The Fall

Tarsem | 2008

This movie originally played in the Toronto International Film Festival in 2006 and it was panned, with most critics calling it an inferior copy of anther festival darling from that year, Pan’s Labyrinth. Two year later, it was released independently to bad reviews. There were a few critics like Roger Ebert who actually saw it for what it was, a visual treat supported by a small story. It is a gorgeous movie filled with  remarkable images and featuring great performances by Lee Pace and Catinka Untaru. It may not have a very deep and thought provoking story, but the story confined with the magnificent production makes for a great experience.

8. Across the Universe

Julie Taymor | 2007

Most people who dislike this mostly complain about how “misused” the songs by The Beatles were, about how little story there is to support those historic lyrics. I guess their love for the songs did not allow them to see the beautiful production, the great direction, the great performances, the good arrangements of the songs. They missed out on all the fun.

7. Knowing

Alex Proyas | 2009

Nicolas Cage had not had a good decade. For every Lord of War ,The Weatherman, and Adaptation there are two National Treasures, one Next, one Bangkok Dangerous, one Ghost Rider, and one The Wicker Man. So I guess that when this came out the presence of Cage made most people dismiss it as another one of his attempts to become an action star so late in his career. However, the movie is not just Nicolas Cage. It was directed by one of the most interesting directors out there, the script, despite it’s huge flaws, had some interesting ideas that Proyas takes the most advatage of, and it also features Cage’s best performances since 2005 when he had both Lord of War and The Weatherman

6. Memoirs of a Geisha

Rob Marshall | 2005

The book on which this is based is amazing, so there is no way that the movie was going to live up to it. Despite that, I believe Rob Marshall did a great job in translating the story visually into the screen it is one of the best produced movies of the decade. Yes, the script is rather bad, but the behind-the-scenes people and the actors rise above the material. Should you expect a fast-paced movie? No, you should expect a slow-burning experience and take everything in to enjoy the great ending.

5. The Life Aquatic With Steve Zizzou

Wes Anderson | 2004

It may not be Wes Anderson’s best, but I’d say that it is his most interesting, visually, and it has some really funny moments, as well as plenty of heart felt ones. Plus, it sports Bill Murray’s best post-Lost in Translation performance, Angelica Houston, Owen Wilson, Willem Dafoe, Cate Blanchett, and a song by Sigur Ros. What more can you ask for?

4. Monster-in-Law

Robert Luketic | 2005

Does it have the most original story? No. Is It well written and directed? No. So why do I think it is underrated? Well, it is because of the actresses. Jane Fonda and Jennifer Lopez have great chemistry together, and that alone makes almost every joke work. Plus, there is the always-reliable Wanda Sykes and the always reliable assistant ready with a one liner for every situation.

3. The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy

Garth Jennings | 2005

Based on the books by Douglas Adams, I think the movies does a great job of translating the humor, which is not the humor that most people are used to. I does not have jokes that give you belly laughs, but the kind of humor that makes you go, “that’s funny.” Martin Freeman, Mos Def, Zooey Deschanel, and Sam Rockwell are perfectly cast and make everything work.

2. Speed Racer

The Wachowskis | 2008

“It looks like a videogame and it has no story” was the biggest complaint I heard about this movie. This was never supposed to be the next Matrix, it was supposed to be a movie for the whole family to enjoy. And that was what we got. It has a simple good vs. evil, family always sticks together story, combined with great, groundbreaking visual effects, and good performances to boot.

1. The Fountain

Darren Aronofsky | 2005

I guess the main reason why most people don’t like it is because of it’s non-linear narrative. I loved it from the first time I saw it, and has only gotten better with repeat viewings. Hugh Jackman gives what is his best performance to date, and Rachel Weiz is also quite good. Some parts are off-putting and you do wonder what part is actually happening, but that is only part of the beauty of it. This is definitely one of the best movies of the decade.

There are my 10 most underrated movies of the decade. Feel free to offer your opinion in the comments section.

Happy week before Thanksgiving! As always, I go through a period of not buying any new music for a while, then splurge all at once. My last post was about the great debut from Them Crooked Vultures, which I would probably give 3.5 out of 5 stars to, at least according to the Tfronky Rating System. While at ZIA Records off the I17 Freeway and Thunderbird on Wednesday I found some used stuff I wanted, including the new Flaming Lips disc Embryonic, and found the latest Echo and the Bunnymen disc The Fountain new.

Flaming Lips – Embryonic – 1 star
It pains me to write that, because I really do like this band. The Soft Bulletin was incredible, and Do You Realize is one of my all-time favorite tracks. I will have that song played at my funeral. But Embryonic is 18 songs of pure noise that if I did drugs at all still would not improve the quality of listening to this album. I may play frisbee with this.

Echo and the Bunnymen – The Fountain – 3 stars
A wonderful, plesant surprise. Echo is my all-time favorite band, and this album may keep them there for a while. I have been really disappointed in this band since 3/4 of the original line-up reunited in 1997. The four albums they have released since then have been, in my opinion, sub-par at best. Well, The Fountain may not be Ocean Rain or Porcupine, but I think it is the band’s best work since 1987’s self-titled fifth album, the last with the original line-up.

The Fountain is actually an album that sounds very similar to Echo and the Bunnymen, particularly to the lead track from that album The Game. Ian McCulloch and Will Sergeant are the surviving original members, and although Ian’s voice sounds a bit strained today and Will’s guitar work is not what is was during the band’s prime, the ten songs on this disc are welcome additions to the Bunnymen’s catalog. The Fountain is simply classic, mid-tempo Britpop, done Bunnymen style with plenty of Ian’s witty lyrics and Will’s guitar hooks.

Needless to say I am excited, it is great to hear the Echo I fell in love with over twenty years ago. I have not seen them since 1988, here is to that changing in 2010!

Cheers!
Frank

20 Watts played Asobi Seksu, DJ Shadow and more on WERW

Eric, Chris and Caitlin are in the studio this evening spinning an hour of new music, an hour of trip-hop and an hour of local songs! Tune in by opening iTunes and selecting radio > college radio > WERW or by clicking this link. We’ll be in the studio until 1 a.m.!

Want to talk to us or request a song? IM werw1570, tweet @20_watts or call (315) 443-1278. The third caller gets Chris Parker’s voice on their voicemail… it doesn’t get much better than that.

New tracks are in bold, local artists are italicized.

And don’t forget to tune in to 20 Watts’ Audiocandy+ shows on Wednesday and Thursday from 9-11 p.m.!

artist: Asobi Seksu [read our review of Transparence]
title: New Year
album: Rewolf

artist: Echo and the Bunnymen [13/20 watts -- read the review]
title: Life of a Thousand Crimes
album: The Fountain

artist: Omar Rodriguez Lopez
title: Azoemia
album: Xenophanes

artist: Pants Yell!
title: Rue de la Paix
album: Received Pronunciations

artist: Wale [15/20 watts -- read the review]
title: Chillin’
album: Attention Deficit

artist: Yeasayer
title: Ambling Alp (Memory Tapes Remix)
album: Ambling Alp

artist: Memory Tapes
title: Bicycle
album: Seek Magic

artist: Future Islands
title: Little Dreamer
album: Post Office Wave Chapel

artist: Grizzly Bear
title: Slow Life
album: New Moon OST [read our coverage of New Moon]

artist: Bibio [16/20 watts -- read the review]
title: Lovers’ Carvings (Leatherette Remix)
album: The Apple and The Tooth

artist: Arcade Fire [by request -- thank you for listening!]
title: Lenin
album: Dark Was The Night Compilation

artist: Atlas Sound
title: Doctor (Five Discs Cover)
album: N/A

artist: A Sunny Day in Glasgow
title: Shy (Ernest Gonzalez Remix)
album: N/A

READ THE 20: YOUR ESSENTIAL GUIDE TO TRIP-HOP

artist: DJ Shadow
title: Midnight in a Perfect World
album: Endtroducing

artist: Portishead
title: Glory Box
album: Dummy

artist: Massive Attack
title: Unfinished Sympathy
album: Blue Lines

artist: Tricky
title: Hell Is Round the Round the Corner
album: Maxinquaye

artist: Kid Koala
title: Fender Bender
album: Carpal Tunnel Syndrome

artist: Portishead
title: Machine Gun
album: Dummy

artist: Rob Dougan
title: Clubbed to Death
album: N/A

artist: Blockhead
title: Triptych PT 1
album: Music by Cavelight

artist: Wagon Christ
title: Tally Ho
album: Tally Ho

artist: Red Snapper
title: Like A Moving Truck
album: Making Bones

artist: Becoming X
title: Sneaker Pimps
album: Sneaker Pimps

artist: DJ Shadow
title: What Does Your SOul Look Like Pt. 2
album: Preemptive Strike

artist: Massive Attack
title: Inertia Creeps
album: Mezzanine

artist: No Connection
title: The Weight
album: Lovely Devils

artist: Lemuria
title: Mechanical
album: Get Better

artist: Mayflower
title: Movie Quotes & Inside Jokes
album: Awesome Stuff

artist: Alex Kerns
title: Clamor On
album: Lovely Letters

artist: This Day & Age
title: The Bell And The Hammer
album: The Real Stuff

artist: Goo Goo Dolls [by request -- thank you for listening!]
title: Iris
album: Not Good

artist: The Screw-Ups
title: Don’t Care Much About Reggae
album: EP

artist: The Felice Brothers [see photos from last night's show]
title: Greatest Show on Earth
album: The Felice Brothers

artist: Moustache [by request -- thank you for listening!]
title: That French Song
album: Love is French

RocknRolla

I know it’s a little late for this movie considering it came out last year but I just had to write it up. After watching Revolver I hadn’t written off Guy Ritchie but I had serious doubts over his next project. Directors stumble all the time, Darren Aronofsky, one my favourite directors had his own Revolver moment with his existential “experiment” The Fountain. While I’m sure both of them thought their movies were masterpieces, it wasn’t exactly my cup of tea.

Revolver was a little slow to start but I almost wonder if that wasn’t on purpose. Once things start swinging the movie Ritchie gets back to his roots and what made him great! It has the standard Guy Ritchie, multiple plot lines, converging at the climax with some sort of surprise. Even though now thinking back I can see the similarities to his other movies but he was still able to make it fresh. The Russians were a first rate addition, and I loved how with the lighting and filming techniques he made the film almost anime.

Little surprised about Jeremy Niven’s character I mean I know he’s probably trying to break away from the crazy agent character he is typecast as but what else has he got? And the drug lord from The Wire is British? Were there any Americans on that series? Also, I know when the credits rolled there were some loose ends but as this is the first instalment of a trilogy I guess unresolved plot lines will be tied up.

Slumdog Millionaire

I had resisted this movie for so long because of the hype. The last thing I wanted to see was an Indian version of Good Will Hunting with some boy genius beating the system. But I was presently surprised. Not only did it not follow that plot but it has this sweet gangster angle that told through a child’s eyes is quite interesting. What I’m really surprised about is how Indian critics have created a love fest for this movie. Don’t get me wrong, it’s a great movie but in the film I can’t think of one thing positive about India, definitely not a tourist promo. That said, I guess Indian critics can transcend nationalism and recognize a good movie when they see it. Hats off to you.

Soloist

It’s hard to believe that just a few years ago Robert Downey Junior was in and out of rehab more times than Lindsey Lohan. Yet now any project he so much as looks at turns to gold. Sure he doesn’t give an Oscar winning performance but Jamie Foxx certainly gives his all and he does so, ironically I might add, by following the age old advice … “don’t go full retard” which he does masterfully.

Another thing it gets right, crazy people are CRAZY! They’re not pretending, they can’t just pull up their socks and get better; they’re not waiting for a special someone to save them. They have a chemical imbalance in their head that pre-empts Hollywood endings. I know, you’re thinking, “but Tom Cruise said mental illness was fiction! All you need is the guiding hand of scientology!” Well sorry but as much as I respect the teaching of Xenu, the Emperor of the Galactic Confederacy, people not well in the head have a real sickness that needs proper treatment tailored to their needs. Those that can’t afford that level of care are well … screwed.

Anyone still expecting a genuine renaissance from Echo & the Bunnymen will surely be left disappointed by new LP ‘The Fountain’. Frankly it’s the Bunnymen for fans of Coldplay. The darkness and the mystery are long gone and, on the evidence of the last 5 Lps, never likely to return.

McCulloch has stated that he has never sounded better but if the majority of the material is this uninspired then it really doesn’t matter how it’s sung. The big problem is that most of the tunes are Bunnymen on auto-pilot – they’re simply not memorable.

To be fair the record is not entirely without merit as there are a handful of decent tunes on here. The fact that three of these are the opening 3 songs briefly, but ultimately misleadingly, raises hopes. But the rest of the record is a struggle with only the atypically piano led ‘Proxy’ any sort of highlight.

From anyone else ‘The Fountain’ may just about be acceptable, but this is the Bunnymen and it adds nothing to their legacy.

Here’s a live performance of lead single, ‘I Think I Need It Too’, one of the bettere songs on the album:

Echo & The Bunnymen's Latest Release

PREVIEW: VISIT Echo & The Bunnymen’s Website
WE GIVE IT: 13/20 Watts

Post-punk masterminds Echo & The Bunnymen are launching their first studio album in almost four years, but The Fountain leaves much to be desired. More recently, the group has fallen into a generic alternative rock groove, and their eleventh studio release stumbles to the same beat. Lead singer Ian McCulloch leads the band efficiently though, with each track sounding tight and cohesive. Innovation-wise, however, The Fountain settles for mediocrity.

Amidst an album filled with throwaways, The Fountain does manage a few standout tracks. “Life of 1000 Crimes” harkens back to the band’s genre-bending days. The nostalgic sound is buried deep in the album’s track list, yet stands as a glowing gem to the band’s glory days. “Proxy” also hints at post-punk roots. Vocally and instrumentally, both songs give a nod to Echo & The Bunnymen’s 1987 self-titled release.

However, The Fountain maintains a constant tone similar to that of an early U2 cover band. Slower ballads move at a tired pace and simply fade into oblivion, while up-tempo songs sound gimmicky and depleted of energy. “Think I Need It Too” opens the album, but makes no convincing invitation for listeners to stick around. Mildly creative lyrics bound with lackluster instrumental ingenuity define The Fountain from start to finish.

While bands should be free (and encouraged) to explore new genres and expand upon their original sound, the evolution should undoubtedly be in a positive direction. Pure and simple, The Fountain lacks effort. Upon further exploring alternative rock, Ian McCulloch himself doesn’t sound convinced that his band has moved into the genre. Echo & The Bunnymen should be reinventing their sound in a modern genre, yet they barely step out of their comfort zone on The Fountain.

Echo & The Bunnymen stray from their roots on The Fountain, but come away with very little to show for the adventure into alternative rock. Hopefully the band’s next meeting will include a thorough re-evaluation of what it means to be one of the founding members of post-punk.

– Chris Parker

“Death is a disease, it’s like any other. And there is a cure. A cure. And I will find it.”

Dans ma collection de films maudits, The Fountain occupe une place très speciale. Peu de films ont autant exploré les thèmes de l’amour et de la mort. D’abord mis en chantier en 2002, avec Brad Pitt en tête d’affiche, The Fountain devra repartir à zéro lorsque sa star du honorer d’autres engagements. Darren Aronofsky, déjà le génial auteur de Pi ainsi que de Requiem for a dream, ne pu se résoudre à en rester là. Quatre ans plus tard, il convainc Hugh Jackman et sa propre femme, Rachel Weisz de participer à l’aventure. La seule condition des studios sera que le film devra être tourné pour deux fois moins de budget, Jackman n’était pas aussi bankable que Pitt. Du script original, Aronovsky en tirera un graphic novel. C’est donc une autre version de The Fountain qui se retrouva dans les salles en 2006.

De nos jours, Tommy lutte de toutes ses forces pour trouver un remède au cancer qui ronge Izzy, sa femme. Scientifique, il passe de plus en plus de temps dans son labo, à expérimenter, qu’aux côtés de sa compagne qui s’éteint. Car plus Izzy arrive à faire la paix avec l’idée de mourir, plus la colère et l’obstination emporte son mari. Du temps des conquistadors, Thomas se voit confié par la reine Isabelle la mission d’aller débusquer l’arbre de la vie, qui confère la vie éternelle. Ce, peu importe les mutins et autres indigènes qui se dresseront sur son chemin. A une époque inconnue, Tom voyage dans l’espace avec un arbre dans une bulle d’oxygène. L’homme qui occupe son voyage par la méditation, hanté par des visions de son amour défunt, espère atteindre une nébuleuse pour revitaliser le végétal dont il tire sa longévité en mangeant son écorce.

Et là déjà je suis sympa de vous expliquer le pitch. Car The Fountain est très déconcertant. Les trois fils narratifs se croisent tout au long du film sans que l’on sache vraiment quel est le lien, qui est qui. Le long métrage apporte quelques éléments de réponse, le graphic novel offre d’autres pistes. Reste l’expérience sensorielle, à commencer par la beauté des images (qui ne sont pas en scope, mais putain de sa race quel choix artistique de connard !), magnifiques car comme toujours, un petit budget force à de grandes expérimentations. Jackman trouve là son meilleur rôle tandis qu’il est impossible de ne pas tomber amoureux de Rachel. Pour quiconque se laisse porter par The Fountain, les thèmes et enjeux d’une histoire alambiquées survivront au fond du crane pendant des jours, des semaines, des années. La preuve, je vous en parle.

Œuvre d’art, film d’auteur aux interprétations multiples, Aronovsky à accouché d’un monstre de beauté et de sensibilité, bien plus poignant et puissant que le gadget masturbatoire pour bobo qu’est The Wrestler.

TRAILER STAGE !!!

katik pažiūrėjau Tik po viso filmo susigaudžiau kas čia tikslaii įvyko. Po pirmų 20minučių filmas pasidarė įdomus.

My Blueberry Nights es la última peli de Kar Wai Wong que llegó a Colombia y es del 2007. No hemos sido muy afortunados con el cinema chino pues a pesar del gran éxito que ha tenido en Venecia o Cannes siempre nos llega muy tarde este material si es que llega, esta peli por ejemplo sólo llego a las videotiendas. Y aunque sólo tuvo dos nominaciones Wong es un director que merece estar en nuestras carteleras con mucha más presencia.

Aunque la peli es bastante bonita, no deja de parecerme un poco pasajera. Un melodrama de una mujer traicionada por su novio, crédula, noble e ingenua y un dueño de un café solitario, aún enamorado, aún herido. Sin embargo las historias de la ex-esposa del policia alcohólico, la mujer atrapada en su adicción por el juego y el mismo policia son para mi los que salvan la peli.

Destaco la belleza inconmesurable de Rachel Weisz que se ve mejor que nunca (las mamás tienen un toque erótico muy basto y la Weisz acababa de filmar The Fontain de Aronofsky y tener su hijo; dicen en esta peli filmaba mientras lo amamantaba – por dios que imagen), la actuación espectacular de David Strathaim como policia alcoholizado, muy bien por Natalie Portman que aparece completamente se reta con papeles que no la encasillan y muy bien por Norah Jones con su primera peli como actriz principal. Jude Law bastante regular pero tampoco desentona.

No es mi peli favorita, siento que aunque bonita se siente la ausencia de Christopher Doyle quien era una insignia en las pelis de Wong y hay una presencia musical muy importante que logra ambientar en una sensación plausible toda la peli.

Buena para un domingazo.

]]> http://auriculardigital.wordpress.com/2009/10/26/echo-the-bunnymen-y-su-nuevo-disco-the-fountain/ Mon, 26 Oct 2009 05:00:15 +0000 elauriculardigital http://auriculardigital.wordpress.com/2009/10/26/echo-the-bunnymen-y-su-nuevo-disco-the-fountain/

Ya hemos escuchado The Fountain, el décimoprimer álbum de estudio de los británicos Echo & The Bunnymen que se puso a la venta el pasado 12 de octubre y ya podemos dar una opinión sobre él. Se han hecho de rogar porque lo habían anunciado para el 2008 pero finalmente ha salido este mes. La reciente muerte de su teclista Jake Brockman el 1 de septiembre ha podido trastocar también los planes del grupo.

Han pasado 4 años desde el anterior, el formidable Siberia, que sacó la mejor versión de los de Liverpool en los últimos tiempos (hace tiempo reducido a dúo) aunque pasara desapercibido fuera de las islas como casi toda su obra desde los 90 principalmente. Si bien sus discos han mantenido siempre un nivel de calidad medio-alto, se echaba de menos una colección de canciones como las que incluyeron en el 2005. También es verdad que mi opinión es subjetiva (como todas, vaya) ya que siempre han sido uno de mis grupos favoritos desde que los descubrí en 1987 con canciones como The Game, Lips Like Sugar o Bombers Bay.

De esta nueva entrega lo que llama primero la atención es que el vocalista del grupo Ian McCulloch hace labores también de productor, además junto al reputado guitarrista de jazz John McLaughlin y Simon Perry. A su vez, estos últimos también colaboran en la composición de algunas canciones. Con tanto gallo en el corral, el resultado bien podría haber sido un pastiche de mucho cuidado pero el balance final es equilibrado. Echo & The Bunnymen nunca han dado giros estilísticos bruscos y siempre han mantenido un sonido personal e identificable. En The Fountain ocurre lo mismo. Uno de los responsables de que haya sido así es Will Sergeant (único miembro original junto al cantante), cuyas guitarras aparecen una vez más como catalizadoras de unas melodías que llevan el sello inconfundible del grupo. Así como contiene canciones rápidas, en su mayoría predominan los medios tiempos. Las más aceleradas son el primer single Think I Need It Too, Do You Know Who I Am? (próximo single posiblemente) y Shroud Of Turin (con un punteo impactante) tres ejemplos brillantes de lo que nos podemos encontrar después. Su música tal vez no nos haga saltar pero no por ello desmerece sino todo lo contrario, siempre es agradable su escucha para los oídos. Una colección de 10 canciones que nos han dejado un buen sabor de boca aunque si vamos buscando el recuerdo nostálgico de sus mejores momentos allá por los 80, no lo encontraremos. No porque no tengan nada que ver con ese cuarteto que marcó tendencia en la Inglaterra de aquella época (junto a Les Pattinson y al desaparecido Pete De Freitas) sino porque, como les suele pasar a muchos grupos de esta y otras generaciones, el nivel alcanzado fue tan alto que volver a conseguirlo se antoja muy complicado. En Siberia sí percibí más reminiscencias del pasado que en este disco, pero sin llegar a los momentos tan álgidos que nos dieron su magnífico disco de debut Crocodiles, su segundo Heaven Up Here (que no paré de escuchar en la cinta grabada que me pasó un compañero de clase en BUP) y su obra maestra Ocean Rain.

A mi nunca me defrauda Echo & The Bunnymen, espero que a vosotros tampoco si os decidís a escucharlo. Y creo que no lo hará. Pinchando en la carátula del disco os lo podréis descargar y confirmar (o no) lo que os digo. Os incluyo también 2 actuaciones en televisión en la que tocan el single de presentación y el probable sencillo Do You Know Who I Am?, y cerrando con The Fountain en la que colabora Chris Martin de Coldplay, un admirador confeso del grupo desde siempre, y que en este espacio así lo recordamos con una de las versiones que hizo Coldplay de Lips Like Sugar.

The Fountain

Due to circumstances beyond my control (work), I didn’t get the chance to see that many films this day. I did, though, have an unpleasant encounter with a member of the film jury, which – if not anything else – convinced me that the winner of the festival’s jury prize will be left entirely to chance and incompetence. I wish the festival leaders had considered their jury choices a bit more carefully. More on this later.

I first became aware of Belgian director Jaco van Dormael with his 1993-film Toto the Hero, which generally got rave reviews and which I liked. I seem to recall that I felt it put an unnecessary sentimentalism to the world of the child protagonist, but I think that was part of its theme. Not having seen the film since its cinema run 16 years ago, I don’t want to compare it with his latest work, which was my first film of the day.

Mr. Nobody is by far his most ambitious project to date. It cost close to $50 million and features at least B-list Hollywood actors. It is filmed at several locations; Belgium, the famous Studio Babelsberg in Germany, in Canada and at several other places. Most of the money, though, must have gone to the impressive special effects which are very, very good. Very complicated fx shots integrate seamlessly with the “real” world and a number of editing tricks and film styles are on display.

The film is not only ambitious from a financial or technical perspective. The story seeks to sum up the entirety of the universe’s existence, and not only this universe. It is at times a period film, a science fiction story and a contemporary love story. It is about storytelling, parallel universes, time travel, religion, immortality and death. Most importantly it is about love.

Jared Leto plays the grown up version of the protagonist Nemo Nobody and he does it well. I think this is his first leading role in a film of this magnitude. Then again, there are not that many films of this scope. In a way I felt the film was never quite only itself, but borrowed from a number of films and from the history of film. Perhaps it had to, but I felt at times that the director had seen the works of other directors he admired and tried to emulate them and, by combining their tropes, hoped to find something personal enough to call his own.
There is a bit of Darren Aronofsky’s the Fountain here, but on an even bigger thematic scale. Kubrick’s 2001 is quoted in some images. In a scene depicting humanity’s pre-existence, the moments before we are conceived, Van Dormael used the Melanesian music from Terrence Malick’s The Thin Red Line while at the same time putting this music to images of white and black children playing innocently together in a heavenly innocent state. So, in other words, welcome to the beginning of The Thin red Line! The basic concept of splitting destinies – of turning into several future versions of oneself – based on a choice made while standing by a train, is found in the less ambitious Gwyneth Paltrow vehicle Sliding Doors. The drowning in a car scene reminded me of Lars Von Trier’s Europa (By the count of ten you will be dead, as Max Von Sydow laconically narrates in that film). In a way Mr. Nobody is two and a half hours awaiting said count. I could go on, but you get the point.

It is not easy to sum up what this film is about. When the protagonist is forced to make a faithful choice at the age of nine (I think), he is separated into two persons, depending on which choice he makes. Within these two possible characters comes a further three choices – which makes it six characters(?) – based on his choice of girlfriend as an adolescent. One version of himself turns out to be a lecturer in astrophysics, who sometimes enters the action to lecture the viewer about the history and philosophy of the universe. He says there are seven dimensions in the universe; six of these are spatial, while the seventh is temporal. He then poses the question of whether the temporal – time – inhabited more than one dimension. (I take this from memory, so forgive me for any inaccuracies!) To complicate matters further, another one of these personalities takes up writing, creating a fictional world that in the film is presented as just as real as the non-fiction worlds. This fiction takes the action to space (to Mars) and the future. However, another future is also depicted in the film, a future where the protagonist is the last mortal human alive (and thus, the last who remembers love and lust; you don‘t need children if you live forever…) There is a point to this, but I won’t discuss it here, so as not to spoil the film.

While the plot of the film seems incredibly advanced and ambitious, to its credit, we are never lost and most times understand perfectly where we are in the story and what is depicted. Actually, I had no problems with the science fiction elements of the tale. They are well thought and very well executioned. It is in the way the film revolves around the concept of love that I feel it loses itself a bit; it becomes a bit too much.

One kind of love that is decisive for Mr. Nemo Nobody is the child’s love for his parents. Another kind of love is the puppy love between nine year olds, then the lustful love between adolescents and finally the emotional, during and at times hard and stressful love between spouses. Put together, this becomes a whole lotta love, as the song says. Now, if the love theme had been presented a bit more smartly, I wouldn’t have any problems with it. (While it is presented in a complicated tale, this doesn’t make the kind of love on display any more “intelligent” or new to the viewer). Especially irritating is the extremely cliché ridden music the director has chosen for the soundtrack. There are just so many times you can hear Mr. Sandman, bring me a dream… Almost every scene has music that has been used so often before in films that it brings you as a viewer out of the film’s universe and at least I began pondering boredom and references rather than the action taking place before me.

Another unfortunate effect of the music has to do with its placement. When the protagonist as a young boy sees a girl his age, nine, swimming, a lusty soul-number is played, thus turning her into a kind of sex object. This is disturbing and can’t have been the director’s intention. While he wants to tell us that the protagonist falls in love at this moment, there must surely be better ways to sonically enhance this element!

Then there is the fact that all of Nemo’s love stories revolve around three girls that he meets as a young child. I find it a bit far fetched that these same girls shall also be his only interests in adolescence and in marriage. The film is, then, not only about premeditation, but about an emotional stiltedness, as if Nemo doesn’t really evolve during the film and this is the reason for his future being so clearly delineated into his separate possible selves. The name Nemo, by the way, does not refer to the captain of the Nautilus. You’re better served by reading it backwards.

In closing, I’ll venture to say that the word ambitious will surely be used in pretty much every review of this film. (It wasn’t finished in time for Cannes, so it hasn’t been shown that many places yet). While it is certainly intricate, it ultimately doesn’t convince me. While I’m perfectly willing to take any leaps of logic that the film requires of me, I’m not sure that it ultimately adds up. I have a strong feeling that there are internal discrepancies within the fantastic logic. This should have been worked out a bit better, but I think I will need to see the film a second time to really pinpoint these errors. (And the ones I could point out would ruin the ending, so I’ll refrain).The problem is that, as much as I admired the film for what it’s trying to do, it was just a bit too long and ultimately not all that it could have been, so a second viewing will probably not take place in the immediate future. But if you are in the mood for a lengthy love story told in a brilliant technical style and with a basic sience fiction concept underlining it all, by all means take a chance on the film! I think it deserves an audience and it is without doubt a much better film than The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, which was half the rave at this year’s Oscars, and which it also shares some sensibility with. Being the better film of the two, I’m also sure that it won’t find half the audience of Fincher’s unfortunate detour into drivel and mediocrity.

While Mr. Nobody may be flawed, it is at least interesting enough for me to have given it more attention and space than most films. This is more, much more than I can say for the next film I had the misfortune to attend this day. I guess I should have seen the warning signs; it being French the clearest.

Un Lac – A Lake – is a minimalist work about an epileptic boy, his sister and family in an unknown wintry location. This is the second film as writer/director for Philippe Grandrieux, his fourth as director. On this film, he also serves as cinematographer, so he is an auteur in the real sense. The problem is that he is just not a very interesting one. Most of the actors are, for some reason Russian, and it is filmed in France and Switzerland. And the landscape does seem wonderfully oppressing and beautiful at the same time. That is, if any of the images had been in focus. (The images of the brother and sister found to the left are pretty much the only two clear images of the film)

Grandrieux uses a handheld camera style that is extreme in its use of closeups and movements following the characters so closely that we are supposed to see the world as they themselves do. The mother of the family is blind, though it took me some time to decipher this. Many of the scenes are filmed in near darkness and the ones that are not are foggy and out of focus. The brother has a close relationship with his sister, possibly incestuous, but I was never able to tell for sure. His epileptic fits grows in frequency. He is at times very happy for no apparent reason, at times he is moody. One day he is by the cold lake that seems to be the only contact with a wider world. A young man arrives. He says his name is Jurgen. Soon this man starts a relationship with the sister and finally they sail off on the same lake. This is the film. Or what I managed to see of the film.

Do not misunderstand me. I have no problems with challenging films, be it in narrative or in film style. This film, however, is ridiculous, very boring and unbearably pretentious. The dialogue is almost non-existent. Perhaps this is a good thing, for when they speak, they speak platitudes. “You are my sister”, the brother says. Then he adds: “I am your brother”. Yes, well, you had me at sister…

Of course one can read something symbolic out of the minimalist setting and action. The more minimalist a work is, the easier to regard it as symbolical of something. But here even the symbolic meaning is trite and clichéd. Perhaps the director wants to deal with archetypes, with a biblical simplicity. If so, he fails miserably. Is he interested in hidden pockets of humanity, of humanity’s place in an unforgiving and uncaring nature? Well, he doesn’t come even close. Perhaps he wants to talk about female sexuality and awakening. If so, he says nothing new and certainly nothing of interest. – If you want an arty film about this, watch Picnic at Hanging Rock again! You will be grateful for it. Do not waste your time with Un Lac. With the basic setting of these characters in this kind of nature, you have to be pretty incompetent not to make it even slightly interesting or even beautiful even in a harrowing sense. Unfortunately, competence has no place here.
It strikes me that writing even disparagingly about the film, I make it sound better than it is. Give me a camera, this location and these characters and I would have made a better film. Look away, there is nothing to see here! By the way, this was a film I had high hopes for and that I really wanted to like. More the fool me.

Share

“Therefore, the Lord God banished Adam and Eve
from the Garden of Eden and placed a
flaming sword to protect the tree of life.”
- Genesis 3:24
(from the opening frames of The Fountain)

.

It may not be a mortal wound to the body. Nevertheless, it threatens to bring death in its wake. For Tom’s wife is dying, or maybe she’s already dead: no matter how hard he tries, or where he looks, he cannot find his wedding ring. Caught in the unimaginable torment of a life without his Beloved, he compensates for her absence, stabbing ink into skin. A tribute to the love he has lost, and a feeble grasp at the kind of permanence life was unable to provide. Soon, this single band will multiply, spreading across his limbs, giving witness to the passage of time like an ancient tree, less a measure of his loss than a sign of the fire that consumes him, leaving him capable of only one thing: repetition, until eternity. Confronted by a gaping void and incapable of consolation. Paralyzed in the face of death.

This is the “heart” of The Fountain, a film that left most critics baffled, if not angry, even as they admired the stunning visual and aural feast laid out before them. A story of a woman’s embrace of the hereafter, and her husband’s inability to match her courageousness in the face of extinction.

The three “timelines” of the film are but narrative devices that provide a panoramic view of this awful struggle. They also hint at the promise of what is to come. Hence, despite speculation about which of these times is real and which are imaginary, the simple truth is this: none are real, for the “real” has already passed, and what we are witness to in its stead is a meditation on the painful process of discovery when faced with the Impossible. The different incarnations of this man – Tom, Tomas, Tommy – are nothing but versions of Thomas (“the twin”) attempting to wrench sense from the pit of meaningless, battling the demons of the inchoate.

The Fountain of Youth

As the film opens, we see Tomas kneeling in front of a makeshift shrine built in honor of Queen Isabel, recalling the sacred mission she had entrusted to him. As he prepares for battle, he allows himself to touch the ring he carries with him, a physical reminder – from Her – of the consecrated task that awaits him. Making the sign of the cross, he speaks the words that signal his resolve and his commitment: “Let us finish it.”

.

We may call this “mythical time.” It is the story given to Tom by his wife as she lay dying, the novel on which she had been working but which remained incomplete. She had told him his job was to give it an ending, the closing chapter it still lacked. Her final request, so to speak. This charge would give him much grief, for the ending would continue to elude him. But even as her life was slowly being siphoned from the world they shared, she would counsel him against his uncertainty and the danger of becoming overwhelmed by fear: he would know how the story ends. His desperate and frantic search for that which remained beyond his grasp would come to be the source of an inside joke, one that would take him years to fully understand. For in the days immediately preceding her death, she would tease him, lovingly and tauntingly, as my conquistador, her words’ breath carrying an embrace as well as the sting of recognition. Of what he was unwilling – and, hence, unable – to see.

This is the “conquerer” that we find roaming the forests of the New World, his voyage of discovery fueled by a search of that which would bring eternal life, motivated less by an interest in endings than in the possibility of prolonging the present. However, despite his superior weaponry, this Thomas – Tomas the Conquistador - is ambushed and captured by Mayan warriors who throw him to the ground at the base of a temple, his captors indicating that he is expected to mount the staircase he finds before him, seemingly built to provide mere mortals access to the heavenly beyond.

To his death, perhaps? Is he to be sacrificed there?

Upon reaching the summit, he is greeted by the silhouette of an ornamented figure, a man we can only presume to be the high priest of this monument to the gods and keeper of the sacred knowledge of his people. But rather than being treated to an exotic display or a halting exchange of mutual respect, Tomas slowly begins to realize that this man has something else in store. Something more sinister. The priest’s headdress resembles a bird of prey and around his neck hangs a garland of skulls. As he approaches the Conquistador, he will speak in a strange tongue (translated for our benefit).

First Father sacrificed himself for the tree of life.
Enter and join his fate.
Death is the road to awe.

Before Tomas can brace himself and prepare for an armed confrontation, he finds that he has been struck. Stabbed by what would appear to be a flaming sword.

Time that Falls

A strangled cry. A startled face. As if roused from a nightmare …

Draped in the dark of night and shorn of all hair, Tom floats in mid-air, surrounded by the cosmos and sealed within a bubble ascending to a place unseen. A dying tree dominates this hermetic world, an altar (and stand-in) for the dead. The tree also serves as his only source of nourishment, even as he realizes how this can only sap it of its remaining life. But he cannot help himself. He cannot refrain from these feedings, taunted as he is by visions – of Her – that delight and torment. Snippets of time, echoes from another place. The sounds of laughter, the brush of skin. And moments of regret.

It is this with which he struggles, the knot of memories that have left him bound to another. Dwarfed – and entranced – by that which has already passed, he is consumed by what exists only in his imagination. It is a torment that draws upon and nourishes a vision of happiness, a version of himself he is unable and unwilling to relinquish: a man in possession of a loving wife.

But this is no mere escapist fantasy, for he is haunted by the one he mourns. His visions of her cannot be controlled. They intrude, even as he grieves over her absence, reminders of what has been left unfinished. Shouting at the apparitions will not make them disappear; neither will a turned back banish them to the place from whence they came. Like a recurring nightmare, they will not go away.

An elaborate and rehearsed ritual unfolds before us, as if he’s preparing to write. Black ink is extracted from the coals of a fire, and an old-fashioned pen is readied for its work. But rather than tracing the lines of an unfinished story, the pen is turned into a weapon of pain. This instrument of remembrance, his sole companion in this floating world, connects him to the world of another, giving evidence to the sweet pain of what has passed, as much an homage to what has been lost as a monument to the overwhelming absence that is his present. Stuck between the life that was and the life that has yet to come.

Yet, even as he is absorbed in this holy rite, a familiar voice calls out to him, bringing him a message. One filled less with reassurance than a gentle reprimand:

Finish it.

Chronicle of a Death Foretold

We are not told much about the nature of his wife’s suffering – the film is about Tom learning to finish the story, after all – but this much we do know, told through the personage of Queen Isabel:

The beast runs amok in my kingdom.
He has isolated me,
and now he is sharpening his talons for one more fateful push.

Like Tomas the Conquistador, Tom the Scientist will do anything in his power to save her from this fate. Both seek to destroy the one that threatens her. For Tomas, it is the inquisitor who has set his sights on the Queen; for Tom, it’s the mysterious tumor that grows in Izzy’s brain, bringing her ever closer to death’s embrace. However, in each case, she dissuades him from such a manly (i.e., “heroic”) defense of his Beloved, convincing him to turn his attention to another, more difficult, pursuit.

Salvation lies in the jungles of New Spain. … Here, in the center, in the core of the once-great Mayan civilization, we will find a lost pyramid. No, not lost (but) hidden: The hidden pyramid of the Mayan myths.

The myths tell us of a holy pyramid, built upon the navel of the earth, the birthplace of life. A special tree sprouts there …

Remember, our own Bible confirms it. In Genesis, there are two trees in the Garden of Eden: the Tree of Knowledge and the Tree of Life. When Adam and Eve disobeyed the Lord and ate from the Tree of Knowledge, the Lord banned them from the Garden and hid the Tree of Life.

It is no wonder that Tom will struggle to finish Izzy’s story. For how can he complete a task for which he has not been trained, one for which even the best equipped laboratory cannot help? Neither does it identify a foe that the conquistador knows how to attack. Instead, the Thomas Twins are sent on a nebulous quest based on myth and rooted in the sacred. - How does one go about finding the Tree of Life? - For this awesome task, eyes must be turned away from the world of the senses, learning to trust a different form of sight.

If Tom allows himself pause, he will remember that Izzy had already pointed the way. For in final days leading up to her death, she had quite excitedly told him about her discovery of a Mayan codex, and the words of promise the Queen was later given to speak.

That’s First Father. He’s the very first human.
- Is he dead? -
He sacrificed himself to make the world.
The Tree of Life’s bursting out of his belly.

So, what do you think?
- About? -
That idea: death as an act of creation.

Much like other spiritual traditions, this story speaks of sacrifice. First Father – specifically through his death – is the one who lays the ground for the founding of the (new) world. It is an idea that Tom the Scientist will find repellent, since his mission until now has been the preservation of life. But Izzy’s enthusiasm about this discovery will turn his world, and his life’s work, upside down … and leave him baffled, struggling against the very absence of meaning brought about by this reversal of established truth.

How can death – especially her death – be an act of creation?
And what is one to make of a tree that sprouts from the belly?

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .
[ click on pictures for larger image ]

There are, however, parallels to this Mayan myth, ones that find their origins closer to Spain and with roots in a tradition more familiar to Queen Isabel and the Conquistador. One in particular concerns the Tree of Jesse, a popular subject for medieval Christian art. As with the story of the First Father, these portraits depict a tree sprouting from a man’s belly. While it’s not always clear whether he is merely resting, sleeping, or in the midst of meditation, his reclining figure is always overshadowed by that which emerges from the core of his being, peopled by a host of figures that can only be taken to represent a world different from – and more holy than – the one he currently inhabits.

Such creation stories, whether they be Mayan, Christian, or from another spiritual tradition, need not be reduced to quaint tales about the origins of the material world. Rather, they can be seen as stories about the emergence of the sacred, and the conditions under which it springs: from inner turmoil and the churning of oceans. What follows on the heels of torment can only be described as a blossoming, for it brings forth what, until that point, could only be imagined but not understood. A flowering – and a proliferation – that grows of its own accord, without human direction and independent of conscious intent.

The name the Mayans gave to the place of torment was Xibalba – “It was their underworld, the place dead souls go to be reborn” – and it served as the necessary prelude for what was yet to come. It is the dark and “empty time” in which we initially find Tom, surrounded by the ghosts of his past.

Unbeknownst to Tom, the warbles of light that fill his vision, the circles that crop up everywhere, and the tunnels inviting passage, all of which bring him endless confusion, harken back to what was there at the beginning as he sought blessing from the Queen on bended knee. It is the invisible third, the empty space-that-separates and its capacious embrace, the mysterious elixir of life that enables the marriage of soul and spirit. It will be many years before Tom, still shrouded in the dark of night, will finally give up on his crusade and turn his attention, instead, to to what was hidden … but not lost. Finally able to recognize what had already been there, he will learn to step into what – in his previous incarnation – only seemed intent on his very extinction: the void that marked the location of the pyramid built upon the navel of the earth.

Only then will he understand the words that began the Conquistador’s journey:

Will you deliver Spain from bondage?
- Upon my honor and my life. -
Then you shall take this ring to remind you of your promise.
You shall wear it when you find Eden, and when you return, I shall be your Eve.
Together, we will live forever.

.

27x40 Movie Poster

 

Village of the Giants is a 1965 science-fiction/comedy movie with many elements of the beach party film genre. It was produced, directed and written by Bert I. Gordon, and based loosely on H.G. Wells’s book The Food of the Gods. The story revolves mostly around a chemical substance called “Goo”, which causes giant growth in living things, and what happens after a gang of rebellious youngsters get their hands on it. The cast was mostly teens, or young actors playing teens, and The Beau Brummels and Freddy Cannon make musical guest appearances. The movie was a low-budget exploitation film and not a huge hit (released mostly to drive-ins as part of a double bill), but had some notable use of special effects and undoubted sex appeal, and went on to become a cult classic. The movie proved far more successful years later, when released on home video.

Tagline:  They’re 30 feet tall!

Trivia:

• In one scene one of the giants reads an issue of “Famous Monsters of Filmland” with another Bert I. Gordon film, War of the Colossal Beast (1958), in the cover.
• Exteriors were shot on the Columbia Studios backlot (now part of the Warner Bros. Backlot), the same lot as the exteriors for the TV series “Bewitched” (1964) and “I Dream of Jeannie” (1965). Many scenes were shot on Courthouse Square at Universal Studios, which doubled as Hill Valley in Back to the Future (1985).

Buy this Title on DVD

• Loosely based on the H.G. Wells story “The Food of the Gods”, about a substance that causes giant mutations in growing organisms. Children fed the substance become giants (capable of producing giant offspring), who choose to fight when their existence is threatened by adult authorities.
• The brand of chicken that the giant teenagers eat is a tie-in to the once-famous restaurant chain called Chicken Delight. The chain was known for home delivery of chicken and ribs, as well as it’s catchy motto: “Don’t cook tonight, call Chicken Delight.” A banner for the restaurant chain can be seen on a wall behind the adults who turn in their rifles.
• The beer that the delinquent teens drink after crashing their car is the once popular Blatz Beer.
• The fountain that Freddy Cannon sings in front of is the same one seen in the opening of “Friends” (1994).
• An alternate version of the theme music – “The Last Race” – was reused by Quentin Tarantino in Death Proof (2007).
• The “Teen Magazine” that Merrie (Joy Harmon) reads was an actual issue of the magazine published in July 1965.
• Ron Howard plays a boy genius who invents a super growth formula. He later played the same kind of role in “Land of the Giants: Genius at Work (#1.21)” (1969)
• Filmed in “Perceptovision”.

Joy Harmon

THE FOUNTAIN av Darren Aronofsky (2006)
Med Hugh Jackman, Rachel Weisz, Ellen Burstyn

SPOILERVARNING

Tre parallella berättelser.

En grundberättelse i nutid om en forskare (Hugh Jackman) som genom djurförsök på rhesusapor letar efter ett botemedel mot cancer och får veta att hans fru (Rachel Weisz) är döende i cancer samtidigt som han hittar ett botemedel i form av saven från ett sydamerikanskt träd; en berättelse som egentligen består av en roman som forskarens döende fru skriver, om en conquistador på spanska medeltiden (Hugh Jackman) som av den spanska drottningen (Rachel Weisz), hårt ansatt av invadörer, får i uppdrag att hitta Livets träd i Edens lustgård; en framtidsberättelse om en rymdresenär (Hugh Jackman, fast skallig) som i ett ekorymdskepp med ett träd i är på väg mot en supernova.

De här tre berättelserna är parallella, men sammanflätade. Trädet i rymdskeppet motsvaras av Livets träd i conquistadorberättelsen och trädet i Sydamerika i nutidsberättelsen. Supernovan, en döende stjärna, får Hugh Jackman i nutidsberättelsen av sin hustru veta var dödens gud i Mayafolkets religion och conquistadorerna besöker förstås Mayafolket. Och det är som sagt Rachel Weisz i nutid som skriver berättelsen om conquistadoren i medeltidens Spanien. Och så vidare.

Tanken är förstås att de här tre berättelserna ska vara inte bara sammanflätade – de ska dessutom belysa varandra. För temat är detsamma i alla tre: livet och döden, och försöken att besegra döden. På olika sätt, men med samma skådespelare i olika tider.

Den här sortens mycket konstruerade filmer kräver stor skicklighet från kanske framförallt regissörens sida. Den skickligheten saknar Darren Aronofosky. The Fountain är till en början obegriplig, därefter begriplig men överdramatisk och konstlad och full av alltför tvära kast mellan de tre berättelserna, och slutligen fylld av stundtals vackra bilder men i grund och botten ointressant, vilket är synd. För det hade den inte behövt vara. Men den lastar på med flera ton och stråkmusiken är smäktande och det är meningen att vi ska hisna, men jag kom på mig själv med att i stället leva mig in i några av de mer suggestiva scenerna och tänka ut helt andra berättelser utifrån dem.

Berättelser som jag ärligt talat tyckte var mycket bättre än filmens.

Och det blev behållningen av att ha sett den.

Kör hårt,
Bellis

THIS IS THE LAST 100 THINGS POST!!! …at least for a while. I may just continue doing a “twenty things that I . . .” post every now and then. It’s way fun.

OK. This collection of twenty things, in conclusion of my 100 random facts about me series, concerns movies.

God, I love movies.

I consider myself a cinephile, and I’m forcing myself to branch out and see things that I wouldn’t normally see (especially if the film contains suggestive material) simply because there are some great movies out there just waiting to be enjoyed! That’s why God gave us the Fast-Forward button the remote, right? Here, here!

So now the list. These twenty films extend from my childhood and into my present. Some are new. Some are really old. Some are just plain random. At any rate, these are the movies that I will want to watch for no reason at all, given that I have the proper amount of time free to enjoy a motion picture. I love these movies, and they love me back.

1. Say Anything.

You all knew this would be first. Say Anything is the movie that (1) made me love John Cusack, (2) made me love Peter Gabriel, and (3) made me love Cameron Crowe. Ever since this movie, Cameron Crowe has become my favorite director. I love his movies (even Singles and Vanilla Sky). I can’t get enough. He has a gift with showing humanity in simplicity and reality. You’ll find several other Crowe films on this list.

“I”m looking for a dare-to-be-great situation.”

—

“I gave her my heart. She gave me a pen.”

—

“Don’t be a guy. The world is full of guys. Be a man. Don’t be a guy.”

—

“This rain on my car is a baptism. My assault on the world begins now.”

—

~*~

2. Grosse Pointe Blank.

I think the reason I love this movie isn’t its 80s music or because John Cusack stars in it (well, OK. Maybe a little). What I love about this movie is its humor–it’s smart humor! John Cusack as a professional killer is a great way to make a movie simply because he doesn’t really seem the type to kill the president of Paraguay with a fork. Also, just like Say Anything, pens become meaningful.

“Where are all the good men dead–in the heart or in the head?”

—

“So what do you do for a living, Martin?”

“I’m a professional killer.”

“Oh, do you get dental with that?”

—

~*~

3. The Godfather

OF COURSE THIS IS ON MY LIST! I freaking love this movie. Stellar performances from Marlon Brando, Al Pacino, Robert Duvall, James Caan–my God! I honestly couldn’t move from my seat the first time I watched this. For nearly three hours of my life, I sat motionless, completely engrossed in the goings-on of the Corleone family.

“Don Corleone, I am honored and grateful that you have invited me to your home on the wedding day of your daughter. And may their first child be a masculine child.”

—

“Leave the gun. Take the cannoli.”

—

“We go to the mattresses.”

—

~*~

4. Pride and Prejudice

Um. Duh. You all know how my affections for Matthew Macfadyen as Mr. Darcy force me to watch this movie over and over. I even like Kiera Knightley as Elizabeth. Seriously. When does that happen? It’s like Lois Lane–you always hate anyone who plays Lois Lane (partially because you really hate Lois Lane as a character) because they don’t seem to do it right. Well, Kiera Knightley does a fine job–perhaps due to the chemistry between her and Matthew. Oh, and I also downloaded the complete soundtrack from iTunes and listen to it in my car. I’m such a nerd.

“I can’t help thinking that at some point someone is going to produce a piglet and we’ll all have to chase it.”

—

“”I love you. Most ardently.”

—

“Well, if Jane does die, it will be a comfort to know she was in pursuit of Mr. Bingley.”

—

~*~

5. Donnie Darko

I still don’t think I’ve understood everything in this movie, and I don’t think I ever will. Nevertheless, I loved everything about this–the creep factor, the constant “What the hell’s going on?” and, ultimately, the happy/sad/what? ending. The ending reminded me of David Lynch’s Blue Velvet in theme–the bright, pretty face of suburbia is simply that–a face. Underneath is a seedy underbelly filled with all sorts of nastiness.

“First of all, Papa Smurf didn’t create Smurfette. Gargamel did. She was sent in as Gargamel’s evil spy with the intention of destroying the Smurf village. But the overwhelming goodness of the Smurf way of life transformed her. And as for the whole gang-bang scenario, it just couldn’t happen. Smurfs are asexual. They don’t even have… reproductive organs under those little, white pants. It’s just so illogical, you know, about being a Smurf. You know, what’s the point of living… if you don’t have a dick?”

—

“Why are you wearing that stupid man suit?”

—

“28 days… 6 hours… 42 minutes… 12 seconds. That… is when the world… will end.”

—

“Donnie Darko? What the hell kind of name is that? It’s like some sort of superhero or something.”

“What makes you you think I’m not?”

—

WARNING: EXPLICIT LANGUAGE!

~*~

6. The Lord of the Rings Trilogy

Everything about all three of these films captures me every time I watch them. The cinematography, the writing, the direction–everything. My mom and I watch these movies every year at Christmas–one a day until Christmas Eve when we wrap up The Return of the King and then open presents, and I look forward to that tradition even in the summer! I can’t get enough. I find myself quoting these movies all the time–sometimes at appropriate intervals, others at completely random moments. <3

“Smaegol lied.”

—

“It comes in pints?! I’m getting one.”

—

“I can’t carry it for you, but I can carry you!”

—

“A red sun rises. Blood has been spilt this night.”

—

“The stars are veiled.”

—

“For Frodo.”

—

“Go back to the shadow!”

—

“Arise! Arise, Riders of Theoden! Spears shall be shaken, shields shall be splintered! A sword day… a red day… ere the sun rises! Ride now! Ride! Ride to ruin and the world’s ending! Death!”

—

“Hold your ground, hold your ground! Sons of Gondor, of Rohan, my brothers! I see in your eyes the same fear that would take the heart of me. A day may come when the courage of men fails, when we forsake our friends and break all bonds of fellowship, but it is not this day. An hour of woes and shattered shields, when the age of men comes crashing down! But it is not this day! This day we fight! By all that you hold dear on this good Earth, I bid you stand, Men of the West!”

—

“I am no man!”

—

“I know your face.”

—

“I’m glad to be with you, Samwise Gamgee, here at the end of all things.”

—

“Where is the horse and the rider? Where is the horn that was blowing? They have passed like rain on the mountain, like wind in the meadow. The days have gone down in the West behind the hills into shadow. How did it come to this?”

—

*tear*

~*~

7. The Fall

First of all, Lee Pace is INCREDIBLE. There is friendship, betrayal, death, rebirth–all of it! The storytelling, the beautiful cinematography, the adorable little girl all captured me as I watched this film unfold. If you haven’t seen this movie, SEE IT. Netflix, Blockbuster, Best Buy–however you can get your hands on this movie. It is beautiful.

“Are you trying to save my soul?”

—

“All right. Close your eyes. What do you see?”

“Nothing.”

“Rub them. Can you see the stars?”

“Yes.”

—

“Why are you making everyone die?”

“Because everything dies.”

—

~*~

8. Tombstone

I’ve always loved this movie, ever since I was a kid. My aunt and I would watch it all the time a couple of years before she died from brain cancer, and I still laugh at the same lines that I find myself quoting every now and then. This has to be Val Kilmer’s best film role–he really does a great Doc Holliday. Also, this is the only film where I can tolerate Bill Paxton.

“I’m your Huckleberry.”

—

“Listen here, Mr. Kansas Law Dog. Law don’t go ’round here.”

—

“Why, Johnny Tyler! Madcap!”

—

“That’s GREAT!!!”

—

“In vino veritas.”

—

“You’re no daisy. You’re no daisy at all.”

—

~*~

9. Driving Lessons

This movie is so great on many levels: Rupert Grint’s excellent acting, Julie Walter’s superb personality, and the overall happy feeling I got from watching this movie. I enjoy British films, especially when they’re incredibly awkward (i.e. Robert Pattinson’s How To Be!!! Loved it in its awkwardness). Brilliant.

“You’re very angry, aren’t you? Don’t be. You’re still God’s gift. Every day God gives us a gift. What’s why we call it the present.”

“Fuck off, Sarah.”

—

“You may have noticed that Mr. Fincham has started dressing in my clothes. We must assume that this is part of his recovery.”

—

“The doctor said the only reason I survived is because I drive an economy car. God is truly a friend to the thrifty.”

—

~*~

10. A Goofy Movie

HOLY COW I LOVE THIS MOVIE!!!! It’s so great in every aspect–great music, great fun, and a great story. This is another movie that I always quote. This movie introduced me to the Bee Gees, and I always wanted to go on a road trip.

“Mazuuuur! What’s up, bro?”

—

“You, Stacy! Talk to me, talk to me, talk to me, babaaaay!”

—

“Why are you doing this to me, Dad?”

“Because I don’t want you to end up in the electric chair!”

—

“Whooooo’s your favorite possuuuuum?”

“Lester!!!”

—

“You look just like I did at your age.”

“Please don’t say that, dad.”

—

“Yeah! Dance with her! Groove with her!”

—

“Powerline—the greatest rock start on the planet.”

—

~*~

11. Stardust

I loved this movie, and I loved its book! Neil Gaiman is a superb writer. I’m loving everything of his that I’m reading. And this movie is pretty close to the book with only a few real changes. I can just watch this movie anytime, anywhere, and not get sick of it. Plus Ben Barnes makes a cameo appearance at the beginning, so that’s DEFININTELY a treat for me! =P Aaaand Robert De Niro as a homosexual pirate captain is simply fantastic.

“It’s all right, Captain. We always knew you were a whoopsie.”

—

“I can’t believe your crew fell for that! And where in God’s name did you get that mannequin?”

—

“Would I be correct in thinking that you can neither see nor hear me? Then I’d like to tell you that you smell of pee. You look like the wrong end of a dog. And I swear, if I don’t get my Tristan back as he was, I’ll be your personal poltergeist!”

—

~*~

12. Snatch

This movie was so fun to watch! I think Brad Pitt earned a little bit more respect from me because of this movie.  While the filming and action are all pretty great in this movie, the best part, in my opinion, are the quotes. Gut Ritchie is a pretty talented director, but his writers are the people responsible for the movie’s overall success. For example:

“My name is Turkish. Funny name for an Englishman, I know. My parents to be were on the same plane when it crashed. That’s how they met. They named me after the name of the plane. Not many people are named after a plane crash. That’s Tommy. He tells people he was named after a gun, but I know he was really named after a famous 19th century ballet dancer.”

—

“No, Tommy. There’s a gun in your trousers. What’s a gun doing in your trousers?”

“It’s for protection.”

“Protection from what” ‘Zee Germans’?”

—

“I don’t like leaving my own country, Doug, and I especially don’t like leaving it for anything less then warm sandy beaches, and cocktails with little straw hats.”

—

~*~

13. The Fountain

HOLY COW THIS MOVIE’S INCREDIBLE. Aside from the fact that I’ll pretty much watch anything with Hugh Jackman, this movie really rocked my world. Dr. Buck’s Myth and Legend class came to life in this film. Sometimes I get the urge to watch it when I’m in the middle of work or something else, and I think about the beautiful story, the breathtaking cinematography, and the outstanding special effects. I seriously screamed out loud at the ending. I’m not even kidding. LOVE.

“Together we will live forever.”

—

“You pull me through time.”

—

“Our destiny is life!”

—

“I’m going to die!”

—

~*~

14. Real Genius

Ah hahaha! I freaking love this movie for its 80s nostalgia and for Val Kilmer’s smartass badass persona. So great! And John Gries is awesome as Laslo (he later becomes Napoleon’s Uncle Rico!!). I watched this movie every time it came on television until I broke down and bought my own DVD. Every 80s-themed movie marathon must include this film. Must. Mandatory. Oh, and Val Kilmer’s shirt = I HAVE TO HAVE IT. It’s online somewhere, I just know it. Birthday *wink wink*???

—

“Do you mind if I name my first child after you? ‘Dipshit Knight’ has a nice ring to it.”

—

“Oh, Kent, that is so unfair! And we were going to make you King of the Winter Carnival.”

—

“He said he didn’t feel like it. And I said, you’d better! And he said, or what? And I said, or else you’re gonna be in trouble. And he said jam it.”

“That’s a wonderful story, Bodie. I noticed you’ve stopped stuttering.”

“I’ve been giving myself shock treatments.”

“Up the voltage.”

—

~*~

15. The Truman Show

Oh, I love everything about this movie–it’s voyeurism pointing a finger to every reality show out there (except, of course, Deadliest Catch…) and how every actor does an incredible job in this film. Ed Harris is always great, in my book, but Jim Carrey really surprised me. I can’t imagine what it would be like to discover that the world you’ve known your entire life was built and constructed by one person in order to make a television show the first of its kind. I teach from this movie, and my students love it.

—

“We accept the reality of the world with which we are presented.”

—

“Cue the sun!”

—

“Good morning, and in case I don’t see ya, good afternoon, good evening, and good night!”

—

“For God’s sake, Chris! The whole world is watching. We can’t let him die in front of a live audience!”

“He was born in front of a live audience.”

—

~*~

16. Elizabethtown

Ah! This movie is so great!! Any Cameron Crowe film is worth my time, and Elizabethtown is no exception. Again, Cameron Crowe has a talent with showing humanity and people at their best, their worst, and in between. I never tire of his films, and I especially never tire of this movie. I love how the small town life is not mocked but praised in this movie and that family is more important than anything life throws at you. Sigh. So good.

—

“DID I MISS 60B!??!”

—

“I’m going to have to call you back.”

“Juts dial HELL and I’ll answer!”

—

“I’m impossible to forget but hard to remember.”

—

“Drew, it was real and it was great. And it was really great.”

—

“Men see things in a box, and women see them in a round room.”

—

~*~

17. What’s Eating Gilbert Grape?

Oh, MAN! This has to be one of my top fave Depp movies. He’s fantastic, not to mention I don’t absolutely hate Leonardo DiCaprio in this movie (loved him in R+J, loved him in Titanic, haven’t really been a fan since). But this movie really ripped my heart out and showed it to me. Poor Gilbert. Poor everybody. The one part of the movie where I was a basket case was when Gilbert’s mother had to go to get Arthur, leaving the house to be seen for the first time in ages. And people whisper about her, stare at her–that really broke my heart. Gah! Freaking movies that make me cry!!!

—

“I love the sky. It’s so limitless.”

“It is big. It’s very big.”

“Big doesn’t even sum it up, right? That word big is so small.”

—

“I want to be a good person.”

—

~*~

18. Almost Famous

Two words: Tiny Dancer. That’s one of the biggest scene of any Hollywood film, and it belongs to Cameron Crowe, just like Lloyd Dobler and the radio over his head. How does he do it–how does he make incredible movies? Well, maybe that’s because his characters are just people. Maybe the plots are really sorta believable because they’re just people doing people things. I wonder how long these movies sit inside of his head until they come out to be worked and reworked until they’re masterpieces. I wonder. This movie is altogether incredible–one of my all time favorites (duh, it’s on this list). <333!!!

—

“I AM A GOLDEN GOD!”

—

“The only true currency in this bankrupt world… is what you share with someone else when you’re uncool.”

—

“FECK YOU!”
“HEY!”
“This is a house of lies!”
“Well there it is, your sister used the ‘F’ word.”
“I think she said ‘feck.’”
“What’s the difference?”
“The letter ‘u.’”

—

~*~

19. Meet Joe Black

What draws me to this movie? It certainly isn’t Brad Pitt, although he is exceptionally handsome in this movie (and shows his skill as well) because I was never influenced by his looks. It isn’t Anthony Hopkins, although he’s esteemed in Hollywood. I think it’s the multi-dimensional storytelling that takes place in the film–you have Anthony Hopkins’ character who faces death, Brad Pitt’s who is possessed by the Angel of Death, and the two sisters where (1) one receives favortism from their father in spite of her best efforts to receive approval, praise, and attention, and (2) the other’s feelings for Brad Pitt’s character who will take her father away on his birthday.

Yeah. That’s it.

—

“Love is passion, obsession, someone you can’t live without. If you don’t start with that, what are you going to end up with? Fall head over heels. I say find someone you can love like crazy and who’ll love you the same way back. And how do you find him? Forget your head and listen to your heart. I’m not hearing any heart. Run the risk, if you get hurt, you’ll come back. Because, the truth is there is no sense living your life without this. To make the journey and not fall deeply in love – well, you haven’t lived a life at all. You have to try. Because if you haven’t tried, you haven’t lived.”

—

~*~

20. Bourne Supremacy

THIS MOVIE IS SO B.A.!!! I really don’t care much about Matt Damon, but Jason Bourne is incredible. I love all three of these movies and sometimes really crave them. I was raised on action flicks, so the Bourne trilogy is accepted in my house. My mom, dad, and I always watch it together if one of us starts it. It’s funny–somehow all three of us migrate to the living room. The second movie, though, is my favorite of the three. As soon as Marie dies, he goes off the deep end and really gives Langley hell, and I love every minute of it!

—

“Get some rest, Pam. You look tired.”

—

“You told me I had one month off.”

“You told me Jason Bourne was dead.”

—

“You’re in a big puddle of shit, Pam, and you don’t have the shoes for it.”

—

~*~

There you have it–my top 20 movies! I’ll let you guys know if anything should be added to this list.

Click here (Myspace page for Clint Mansell). Listen to “Lux Aeterna.” Sound familiar? Listen to “Death Is The Road To Awe.” Ditto?

Mansell, formerly of Pop Will Eat Itself, has since earned himself some pretty snappy composer credits. “Lux Aeterna” appeared in Requiem For a Dream. “Death Is The Road To Awe,” in The Fountain. Internet Movie Database lists scores for nearly three dozen films or television episodes. Here’s a sip, from Smokin’ Aces:

Pearl Jam
Há algum tempo, Alisson do oasisnews, me “presenteou” com o novo disco do Pearl Jam – Backspacer, fiquei com um pé atrás, pois há muito tempo não fico surpreendido com um disco do Peal Jam. Depois de 30 perguntas resolvi botá-lo pra tocar. Achei d+! A primeira coisa que fiz foi copiar uma pasta de mp3 para o Adriano, Warlen e Paulo (errado isso?). O disco é refrescante!

Echo & The Bunnymen
Agora chega às minhas mãos The Fountain, novo disco do Echo & the Bunnymen. O mesmo aconteceu, fique com um pé atrás. Gostei do single colocado para download no site da banda, mas um disco inteiro, com dez faixas, é difícil de acreditar de cara. Mas eis que Will e Ian fizeram um disco muito bom, quer dizer, nota-se que o Echo não é mais só Sargeant e McCulloch, a banda está coesa, afiada. O disco é muito agradável de ponta a ponta, tem bons refrões, e guitarras muito bem combinadas. A minha canção predileta é “Shroud of Turin”, mas “Do You Know Who I Am” não fica atrás. Wellcomeback!

Bad Lieutenant – Never Cry Another Tear
Este é o novo projeto de Bernard Sumner e Stephen Morris, ou seja, o New Order sem Peter Hook literalmente. Até convidaram vários baixistas, como Alex James do Blur, para criar algumas linhas de baixo. Quem gostou de “Waiting for siren’s calls” vai adorar, se for um cara que prefere o Hook no baixo, não.

Big Star – Keep an eye on the sky
Foi lançado no mês passado uma caixa com a grande banda dos anos 70, Big Star. As “tracks” vão de 1968 à 1975, embora a banda tenha lançado discos até 1994.
Por que a banda é importante?
Bem, tirando o fato de que eles influenciaram todas as bandas alternativas da década de 80 e 90, como R.E.M.; Teenage fan club, Dinosaur JR.; entre outras, foi uma banda que resgatou o pop dos anos 60, sendo totalmente original.
É isso,
Abraço,
B.

To be fair: watching The Fountain recorded from digital TV, the compression turning any dark scene into black (“none more black”) with a handful of flecks of light, isn’t really the best way to see the film for the first time. Darren Aronofsky’s follow-up to his much-lauded Requiem for a Dream, the kind of film even I can’t describe as bitter-sweet, is intensely visual, and if the first five minutes turn into a frantic game of “It’s a… it’s an elephant, I think. A black elephant. At night. No, it’s a spaceship. At night. And it’s black. Is the TV on?”, the film suffers. (Or, depending on how you look at things, the audience suffers.)

The rare moments when I could not only see what was going on on-screen but actually saw enough of the image to appreciate it, the film definitely proved to be a feast for the eyes. And it wasn’t just pretty – much of what Aronofsky shows us is evocative and beautiful. (Pretty is to Beautiful as Liv Tyler is to Cate Blanchett, if you ask me.) There’s one image in particular, Queen Isabella’s chamber lit by hundreds of tiny lamps hung from the ceiling, that I found quite stunning.

But while some of the imagery is sublime, some – especially in the last half hour of the film – are plain silly. I don’t mind the latent (or not so latent) ‘New Ageyness’ of The Fountain, because as a visual poem on love, death and a man’s inability to let go the film works for me. But then you got bald yoga master Hugh Jackman in the lotus position, floating towards some cosmic birth canal, and awe is replaced by incredulous giggles. Same goes for the scene where Jackman, as a Spanish conquistador, is consumed by flowers sprouting from his torso as if he was the world’s sexiest, silliest Paul Daniels magic trick. I get what the scene’s trying to do, but it just looks… well, naff. Combine that with the film’s po-faced tone and the film doesn’t do itself any favours.

At some point I hope to watch the film again, with subtitles (so I can figure out what those Spaniards are shouting in the rain) and adequate visual quality. I expect that it’ll pull me in more, which in turn might make me forget (or at least forgive) the unintentional humour of scenes that would have had Dr Manhattan raise one implacable, blue eyebrow. Clint Mansell’s lyrical score will definitely help – it did the first time, to the extent that I was more captivated by the end credits than by what had been going on ten minutes before.

Right now, though, I think that The Fountain works much, much better as the comic book version, which the script was turned into after a first attempt to film it failed. It has all the elements of Aronofsky’s movie, but what looks silly in the film works much better in the stylised drawings (somewhat reminiscent of Dave McKean’s work on Arkham Asylum, although less abstract). It still borders on New Age kitsch, but as far as I’m concerned it pulls it off. Perhaps the best thing would be to read the comic while listening to Mansell’s soundtrack. And, if that’s your cup of tea, fantasising about Hugh Jackman.

P.S.: Much more nudity in the comic. (Both Rachel Weisz and Hugh Jackman remain chastely dressed throughout the film.) But it’s artistic nudity (“and in the end, isn’t that the real truth?”). And not even close to the full-on pornography of a Lost Girls.

Poster Pontypool

Buenas, después de mis grandes dosis de películas en Sitges y sus consiguientes horas de sueño, vuelvo a las andadas.

La peli que hoy os traigo se llama Pontypool, del director Bruce Mcdonald (Roadkill, Highway 61, Dance me outside, Hard core logo, The Tracey fragments) nos viene esta historia de infecciones víricas un tanto raras, de la cuál ya tenemos programada una secuela para el 2010 llamada Pontypool changes, sinceramente, la esperaré con ansias

Grant Mazzy (Stephen McHattie)

Nos presentan al elenco principal en nuestro único escenario, la emisora de radio CLSY en el pueblo perdido de Pontypool. El locutor de radio Grant Mazzy interpretado por Stephen McHattie (A history of violence, The fountain, 300, Watchmen), este locutor, recién contratado, no tiene pelos en la lengua. La jefa Sydney Briar, interpretada por Lisa Houle y por último, la bella Laurel Ann, interpretada por Georgina Reilly.

Estamos viendo en vivo la emisión del programa de nuestro locutor Big Muzzy, ah no, Grant Mazzy (broma para niños torturados por sus padres con el inglés), nos conectan con Ken Loney, nuestro “hombre en el aire” para que nos diga como se ven las cosas desde el “helicóptero”, a parte de pequeñas claro. A media conexión nos clavan al asiento con la locución de unas escenas que esta presenciando Ken justo delante suyo de una muchedumbre de gente con malas intenciones acumulándose en las afueras del pueblo al rededor de la consulta del Doctor Méndez (Hrant Alianak).

Nos van dando información sobre un brote de violencia que se va contagiando entre la gente, con llamadas telefónicas de vecinos, conexiones con Ken, todo a cuentagotas, dentro de la emisora, encerrados y con la sensación de que en el exterior se está armando una revolución de gente que va matando y comiéndose a la peña y que además se va propagando la “infección”. Una atmósfera claustrofóbica muy bien conseguida.

El sistema de transmisión de la infección, que no voy a revelar, es de la manera más rebuscada, increíble, absurdas y genial al mismo tiempo. Un aplauso por mi parte aunque es una película que tienes que mirar en serio para intentar pillar la idea final y sin esperar ver grandes dosis de sangre aunque la situación lo permitiría, eso si, rompería la atmósfera conseguida.

Una paja mental en toda regla, muy interesante, con buenas ideas, toques de humor perfectamente encajados y en la dosis justa, una peli que recomiendo si queréis pasar un buen rato con una buena peli.

Laurel Ann (Georgina Reilly)

Apuntes de la película:

- Esta película fue estrenada el 6 de setiembre de 2008 en el festival internacional de Toronto.
- Los productores escogieron producir esta película en Febrero del 2008 y en 3 meses consiguieron el dinero para producirla yendo de puerta den puerta pidiendo pasta a los colegas.
- La película se basa en la novela “Pontypool changes everything” adaptada por su propio escritor Tony Burgess.
- La emisora donde transcurre todo es el sótano de una antigua Iglesia, dónde también se grabó el piloto de la serie Fringe. Se tardó 3 semanas en acondicionar el sótano.
- La película se grabó en 15 días y secuencialmente.
- La película se grabó en la nueva cámara HD “Red One”, que opta a ser la sucesora de los 35mm y que convierte a esta película en la primera película canadiense hecha en este formato.
- Los efectos visuales están hechos por “Mr. X special effects house”, culpables de Max Payne, Resident Evil, Eastern Promises, Dawn of the dead.

Gene Siskel hat sie gehasst und das Kino stets erst betreten, wenn sie vorbei waren. Heutzutage neigen sie dazu die gesamte Filmhandlung zu verraten und vor keiner Wendung zurückzuschrecken. Trailer!

Wer hat nicht den Herrn der Ringe gelesen und dann nach dem ersten Film seine buchunkundigen Freunde überzeugt, dass Gandalf wirklich richtig tot ist. Dann: plop ist er im ersten Trailer für die zwei Türme wieder da. Toll gemacht.

Hier im Trailerpark zeige ich einige dieser furchtbaren Spoilertrailer aber vor allem einige meiner Lieblingstrailer. Denn Trailer können wirklich großartig sein. Quasi schon eine eigene Kunstform, die den Zuschauer in die Stimmung für den Film versetzt, ohne viel zu verraten.

Die Seite IFC.com hat die “besten 50 Trailer” zusammengestellt und dabei eine sehr gute Auswahl getroffen (persönliche Tips: “Strange Days” und “Psycho”) und mir damit den Großteil der “Arbeit” abgenommen. Ich versuche mal noch ein paar weitere beizutragen.

Tolle Trailer für gar nicht mal so gute Filme:

Man kann über Resident Evil: Apocalypse sagen was man will (“ziemlicher Mist” wäre ein guter Anfang) aber der Trailer ist gelungen:

und hier ist eine Ei oder Henne Frage:

Aber kommen wir lieber zu guten Trailern zu guten Filmen, wie Eternal Sunshine Of  The Spotless Mind

The Fountain

The Brick

und Låt den rätte komma in (So finster die Nacht), den jeder von Euch jetzt schauen sollte. Den Film nicht den Trailer. Also den auch aber hinterher dann den Film.

Fortsetzung folgt. . .

Look. This band needs no introduction. The band were a perfect blend of the Doors, Bowie and the last vestiges of punk. A lead singer who not only was cool but personified the word and gave it a new meaning and thus offering a blueprint for future frontmen to adopt and follow. A guitarist who knew very few rivals, if any. Add in one of the more underrated rhythm sections of the day and you get Echo and the Bunnymen. Beginning with the epic debut single Rescue to era-defining hits like The Cutter, The Back Of Love & Lips Like Sugar, the Bunnymen were always a band to be reckoned with.  In fact, I’ve always been of the opinion that if it wasn’t for the more important and challenging bands such as Echo, the Smiths, the Sound, etc falling by the wayside in 1987, U2 never would have become the one-eyed monster they were to become.  Echo were simply that good.

The band are back now with a new single called Think I Need It Too. It’s a slow burner but it’s a good one. It features the signature Will Seargeant guitar sound as it carries Ian McCulloch’s smoke-drenched vocals. It must be said that in his prime that very few could wail like Mac and the smokes over time have done quite a number to his vocals.  That minor complaint aside, the single is the lead track taken from the brand new record The Fountain due out next week. Play it once, play it the rest of the day and groove. This is the sound of cool.

Echo & The Bunnymen on MySpace
Echo & The Bunnymen on Facebook
Echo & The Bunnymen on Twitter

“Think I Need It Too” by Echo and the Bunnymen, taken from the forthcoming release, “The Fountain”