I remember getting ready to watch the film version of "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" for the first time. I was excited. I was not nearly the fan that I am now (I had only read the first three, and I believe the first one was the only one I had read multiple times), but I was still eager to see one of my favorite books brought to the screen.
Sadly, I was disappointed.
The casting for Arthur and Ford was perfect (or, for fans of the books, "prefect." haha). The voices for Marvin and the guide are also great, and the Heart of Gold is good for some gags. Most of the rest of the movie, unfortunately, falls short. Trillian is boring, Zaphod is awful (and his two-headedness is not handled correctly at all) and neither the spirit nor the events of the books are respected. There are some nods here and there, but that's all.
Now while some TV shows, books or video games aren't really adaptable to the silver screen, Hitchhiker's could have been done very well. It has worked in book form, as a TV show, as a video game (sort of) and in its original format as a radio broadcast. The manic absurdity could translate quite well to the big screen. But, alas, it didn't. What a disappointment for Douglas Adam's fans.
All of that to say that film adaptations of other things are tricky. Let's look at few, shall we?
Comic books are a mixed bag. Lord of the Rings-some loved them, others didn't (I being among the latter group, for the most part). Narnia-the director seems to have trouble balancing adventure with truism to the books. The Bourne movies-Well, all 8 fans of those books were probably disappointed. Dudley DoRight? Ugh. George of the Jungle? I haven't seen it, but I've heard ugh. Rocky and Bullwinkle? Well, I actually liked that one. As a fan of the show and of the movie, I liked that the goofball awful pun plot contrivance spirit of the show carried over. However, the point remains. When you make a film adaptation, someone is going to complain.
Get Smart would seem to be a perfect candidate for a film adaptation. There's slapstick, wordplay, funny gadgets and appeal to multiple age groups. Plus, it has Steve Carell, who can make almost anything funny, Anne Hathaway, The Rock, Alan Arkin and other stars. It could a be a film that's fun for the whole family. Right?
Shoulda woulda coulda, unfortunately. The plot sounds fun enough: Agent Maxwell Smart is promoted after all of the other agents' covers are blown. He and the one remaining covert agent go to Russia to find nuclear weapons held by terrorists. Max is betrayed, escapes, and foils the nuclear attack on the President (although the movie seems to indicate that if the President is Bush, death by radioactive explosion might not be so bad. More on that later). If any of that is a spoiler to you, you probably were expecting a completely different movie altogether.
The most unfortunate part is that Steve Carell does a great job, and the other actors do well too. There's even a quite funny cameo by Bill Murray. The writers, too, unearth a few gems in their screenplay (including a few genuinely funny show references, a sly remark about the self-importance of actors and a few other clever, unexpected jokes). However, when I say unearth, there's something the writers were unearthing it from.
A lot of reviewers are giving this film lower marks because they feel like it's uneven. They feel that the action scenes and some of the violence don't always mesh with the quirky comedy. I disagree. I think that the action works with the comedy, kind of because there are jokes thrown into the fight scenes so it's not action scene/comic scene/action scene/comic scene the entire movie. However, I did feel that the film was uneven.
Now, this is the point where, if my mom ever reads this, she will purse her lips slightly with mild, concerning disapproval (I really do appreciate your concern, Mom). I don't mind all sexual jokes. I occasionally tell sexual jokes. They can be funny if they aren't disgusting and if the movie isn't in love with them. But they can also be unfunny and stupid. This is what happened a lot of the time during this movie.
Whenever the movie was about to get into a comedic groove, the writers would throw in a couple of uncreative sexual jokes, including a homosexual sight gag that no one needed to see. In addition to this, the camera very annoyingly seems to find new angles and ways to ogle Anne Hathaway's body. She knows it too. You can tell just by subtle facial expressions that she gets when she thrusts out her chest during a dance or bares most of her leg; she's totally thinking, "Yeeeeah, I'm sexy. Get some." And it detracts from the film.
The other thing that I thought was stupid, and this is more just an aside about the movie biz in general, is the movie's "political satire" of George Bush. Don't get me wrong, satirizing politicians can be really funny. But this wasn't funny. Nor was it satire. The one bit of satire (the President reading books to kids in a library) is rather displaced, and it's not really even amusing. The rest of it, which includes the President falling asleep during a concert, the President laughing at a conductor getting tackled and the President taking juvenile joy in a man's exposed butt, isn't satire, nor is it something that ANYone hasn't seen before. Seriously, this is one of the oldest shticks that is still popular in Hollywood, and it needs to end. It reminded me of (the bad movie) Transformers, where the President has a southern accent and wants to eat some ding dongs, and this is satire somehow. Except not at all.
Overall, it was a moderately funny movie with some annoying persistent stupid gags. I'd watch it again, but not for a good amount of time.
Friday, June 20, 2008
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Beatle Blog - Revolver
"Revolver" is the first of the "later era" Beatles albums and it was a crossroads for the band: after tinkering with new musical sounds on their last effort, "Rubber Soul," The Fab Four began to really dig deep on Revolver, culminating in their months-long recording and mixing of their tour de force next album, "Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band." Revolver was a transition, not only for them, but for the music world. It was one of the first albums in which a band cared as much about the musical composition of the album as they did about touring.
As I said in my review of "Help!," albums were things that were made so that they could be sold at concerts. They weren't nearly as musically important as they are now. People didn't put nearly as much time into them. "Please Please Me," the Beatles' first album, was recorded in a single day. The album was about rock and roll alone. Musical innovation was saved for later.
So, how did this album make music history? Well now...
Let's start with the drugs. While many point to Sgt. Pepper's as the Beatles' obligatory drug-induced album, I would point to Revolver as the album in which drugs played a more influential role. Consider that Sgt. Pepper had one song that was about pot ("Fixing a Hole") that might have been (although the band denied it) about LSD, with a few rumored drug references in some of the other songs.
Revolver, on the other hand, has four songs that are about or directly inspired by drugs of different kinds ("She Said, She Said," "Tomorrow Never Knows," "Got To Get You Into My Life" and "Dr. Robert"). Once again, the Beatles helped usher a new musical element-the drug song-into the mainstream musical consciousness.
That wasn't the only druggy part of the album, either. One night, while Paul was significantly stoned, he accidentally threaded some tape backwards and was giddily delighted to discover the odd and frenetic sounds that came out of his tape player. Thus, backmasking, recording some of the elements of a song backwards, was born. Backmasking has been a huge element in recording since the time of Revolver, so I guess we have pot to thank for it.
Another huge innovation that appeared for the first time on this album was double tracking voices. Previously, if you wanted your voice to be accompanied or echoed a little by the same voice, you would have to record an entirely new track to do so. New technology allowed the Beatles to simply layer their voices over, saving lots of time and helping to enrich the musical atmosphere. Enough about how groundbreaking this stuff was though, let's get to the music.
The album starts out a rockin' tune: the first George Harrison track to be really good, Taxman. This was as close to political as the band ever got, with Harrison complaining about how both sides of the political aisle are responsible for oppressively high taxes. The lyrics are witty, but the highlight of the track is a blistering guitar riff by Paul McCartney.
The Beatles were foraying across all kind of musical territory with this release, and they followed up the rocky Taxman with the urgent, string laden ballad "Eleanor Rigby." This was one of their #1 singles, and it's one of the saddest songs in the Beatles' catalog.
The third track, "I'm Only Sleeping," was one of the songs in which musical innovation played a key role. In order to get a wispy, dreamlike feel for the song, the band supplemented the casual bassline and light drumming with a guitar solo by Harrison. The twist? Harrison practiced playing the solo backwards, and he recorded it backwards onto a forward recording tape. He then rethreaded the tape so that the tape was playing backwards, thus playing the guitar solo forwards yet giving it an altogether different sound. It works, too.
After I'm Only Sleeping comes "Love You To," one of George's more unfortunate attempts to sound Indian, and "Here, There, and Everywhere," one of Paul's more popular melodic pieces. Now, before I go any further, let me say a brief word about what might be the Beatles' most maligned track, "Yellow Submarine."
First of all, the song is meant to be a nursery rhyme. John and Paul wrote it as such, and they wrote it for Ringo to sing, which explains the voice. So, while to criticize it as a normal song is unfair, it actually holds up rather well in musical complexity. Laden with submarine clips and a bridge with a nautically-placed on-board conversation, the song also conveys its party atmosphere quite well, with a large, raucous, laughing chorus to sing the last part of the song. So don't be hating on the Beatles because of this song. That would, quite honestly, be a bit ignorant of you.
Following Yellow Submarine is "She Said, She Said," a song that Lennon wrote about an experience during a bad trip. It has one of Ringo's more admired drum tracks on it, providing an atmospheric shell to the song, while the guitar riffs echo the vocal lines.
After this, we enter the "Paul is really awesome" section of the album with "Good Day Sunshine." While the chorus is repeated a bit too much, his cheerful, upbeat voice and one of the happiest pianos you'll ever hear combine to make a song you can't help but be charmed by. After this is "And Your Bird Can Sing," a John song with a really good guitar riff and energetic vocals.
Paul hits you with some more awesome on "For No One," a song with piano and string bits emphasizing the beautifully sad vocals. It used to bother me that this song ends relatively abruptly, but I think that perhaps Paul meant it to sound that way. It seems to mirror the lyrics, about a love that was cut off too soon.
"Dr. Robert" follows For No One. It's a standard rock song, not a lot standing out. After that is George's "I Want to Tell You," which is pretty interesting. The song is about how George has trouble expressing himself in words to people. While the lyrics are rather simplistic, the most noticeable part of the song is a few notes played repetitively throughout the piece. They are mildly dissonant the entire time, making the listener uncomfortable and allowing George's point about his verbal discomfort to be illustrated aurally. It's a good effect.
Now we come to the album's standout track, Paul's "Got To Get You Into My Life," an ode to marijuana (although its vagueness initially led some to believe it was a love song). Paul styled this album in the ways of the Motown and soul genres, and the main instruments on the track are horns. The star of the track is Paul's voice, however, as he tears through this track with some of his best reaches in any of the Fab Four's albums. This is a must-hear.
The album ends with an odd, yet influential, John creation: "Tomorrow Never Knows." Not content with inventing world music on Rubber Soul and backmasking on this album, John decides here to invent psychedelic music. Inspired by LSD and the Tibetan Book of the Dead, John created this trippy song's lyrics. The music, however, was supplied by all of the members. While it is notable for Ringo's drumming, which fits the song while somehow being separate from it, it is most noted for two musical innovations: tape loops and the echo on John's voice.
Paul discovered that a weird saturation effect occurred when you messed with tape loops in a certain way. The loops kept on running over themselves, giving anything you recorded an infinite loop sound. The band looped several different instruments and sounds, then edited them before putting them into the song. The sounds make for a distinct, surreal atmosphere.
The voice came from John's desire to sound like a monk singing from a mountaintop. He told his producer, George Martin, that perhaps they could hang him by a rope from the studio ceiling and then swing him around the microphone. Martin wisely nixed this idea, telling John he'd look into it. What they ended up doing was routing John's voice through a Leslie speaker cabinet, a speaker usually used for the vibrato electric organs heard on so many 60s rock tracks. The vibrato is transferred to his voice.
In short, Revolver is one of the most influential albums of all time. It is ranked as the number one album of all time by some music sources, and it is home to some of the Beatles' best work.
What it did for the Beatles: Helped George emerge more as a songwriter, established their desire to make truly innovative studio work, started their psychedelic phase, established the artistic freedom they needed to make Sgt. Pepper, etc.
What it did for the music world: Hard to overemphasize this. Introduced backmasking, one of the first psychedelically-tinged albums, showed nearly unprecedented craftsmanship in album-making, introduced double tracking and editing voice through Leslie speakers, probably some other stuff that I don't know. Seriously folks, this is a big one.
Album Highlights: Taxman, Eleanor Rigby, Good Day Sunshine, And Your Bird Can Sing, For No One, Got To Get You Into My Life, Tomorrow Never Knows. Yes, I know that that's half of the album.
Ryan's Beatle Ranking: #3 out of 12, just behind Sgt. Pepper's and Abby Road.
Next on Blogging the Beatles: Rubber Soul
As I said in my review of "Help!," albums were things that were made so that they could be sold at concerts. They weren't nearly as musically important as they are now. People didn't put nearly as much time into them. "Please Please Me," the Beatles' first album, was recorded in a single day. The album was about rock and roll alone. Musical innovation was saved for later.
So, how did this album make music history? Well now...
Let's start with the drugs. While many point to Sgt. Pepper's as the Beatles' obligatory drug-induced album, I would point to Revolver as the album in which drugs played a more influential role. Consider that Sgt. Pepper had one song that was about pot ("Fixing a Hole") that might have been (although the band denied it) about LSD, with a few rumored drug references in some of the other songs.
Revolver, on the other hand, has four songs that are about or directly inspired by drugs of different kinds ("She Said, She Said," "Tomorrow Never Knows," "Got To Get You Into My Life" and "Dr. Robert"). Once again, the Beatles helped usher a new musical element-the drug song-into the mainstream musical consciousness.
That wasn't the only druggy part of the album, either. One night, while Paul was significantly stoned, he accidentally threaded some tape backwards and was giddily delighted to discover the odd and frenetic sounds that came out of his tape player. Thus, backmasking, recording some of the elements of a song backwards, was born. Backmasking has been a huge element in recording since the time of Revolver, so I guess we have pot to thank for it.
Another huge innovation that appeared for the first time on this album was double tracking voices. Previously, if you wanted your voice to be accompanied or echoed a little by the same voice, you would have to record an entirely new track to do so. New technology allowed the Beatles to simply layer their voices over, saving lots of time and helping to enrich the musical atmosphere. Enough about how groundbreaking this stuff was though, let's get to the music.
The album starts out a rockin' tune: the first George Harrison track to be really good, Taxman. This was as close to political as the band ever got, with Harrison complaining about how both sides of the political aisle are responsible for oppressively high taxes. The lyrics are witty, but the highlight of the track is a blistering guitar riff by Paul McCartney.
The Beatles were foraying across all kind of musical territory with this release, and they followed up the rocky Taxman with the urgent, string laden ballad "Eleanor Rigby." This was one of their #1 singles, and it's one of the saddest songs in the Beatles' catalog.
The third track, "I'm Only Sleeping," was one of the songs in which musical innovation played a key role. In order to get a wispy, dreamlike feel for the song, the band supplemented the casual bassline and light drumming with a guitar solo by Harrison. The twist? Harrison practiced playing the solo backwards, and he recorded it backwards onto a forward recording tape. He then rethreaded the tape so that the tape was playing backwards, thus playing the guitar solo forwards yet giving it an altogether different sound. It works, too.
After I'm Only Sleeping comes "Love You To," one of George's more unfortunate attempts to sound Indian, and "Here, There, and Everywhere," one of Paul's more popular melodic pieces. Now, before I go any further, let me say a brief word about what might be the Beatles' most maligned track, "Yellow Submarine."
First of all, the song is meant to be a nursery rhyme. John and Paul wrote it as such, and they wrote it for Ringo to sing, which explains the voice. So, while to criticize it as a normal song is unfair, it actually holds up rather well in musical complexity. Laden with submarine clips and a bridge with a nautically-placed on-board conversation, the song also conveys its party atmosphere quite well, with a large, raucous, laughing chorus to sing the last part of the song. So don't be hating on the Beatles because of this song. That would, quite honestly, be a bit ignorant of you.
Following Yellow Submarine is "She Said, She Said," a song that Lennon wrote about an experience during a bad trip. It has one of Ringo's more admired drum tracks on it, providing an atmospheric shell to the song, while the guitar riffs echo the vocal lines.
After this, we enter the "Paul is really awesome" section of the album with "Good Day Sunshine." While the chorus is repeated a bit too much, his cheerful, upbeat voice and one of the happiest pianos you'll ever hear combine to make a song you can't help but be charmed by. After this is "And Your Bird Can Sing," a John song with a really good guitar riff and energetic vocals.
Paul hits you with some more awesome on "For No One," a song with piano and string bits emphasizing the beautifully sad vocals. It used to bother me that this song ends relatively abruptly, but I think that perhaps Paul meant it to sound that way. It seems to mirror the lyrics, about a love that was cut off too soon.
"Dr. Robert" follows For No One. It's a standard rock song, not a lot standing out. After that is George's "I Want to Tell You," which is pretty interesting. The song is about how George has trouble expressing himself in words to people. While the lyrics are rather simplistic, the most noticeable part of the song is a few notes played repetitively throughout the piece. They are mildly dissonant the entire time, making the listener uncomfortable and allowing George's point about his verbal discomfort to be illustrated aurally. It's a good effect.
Now we come to the album's standout track, Paul's "Got To Get You Into My Life," an ode to marijuana (although its vagueness initially led some to believe it was a love song). Paul styled this album in the ways of the Motown and soul genres, and the main instruments on the track are horns. The star of the track is Paul's voice, however, as he tears through this track with some of his best reaches in any of the Fab Four's albums. This is a must-hear.
The album ends with an odd, yet influential, John creation: "Tomorrow Never Knows." Not content with inventing world music on Rubber Soul and backmasking on this album, John decides here to invent psychedelic music. Inspired by LSD and the Tibetan Book of the Dead, John created this trippy song's lyrics. The music, however, was supplied by all of the members. While it is notable for Ringo's drumming, which fits the song while somehow being separate from it, it is most noted for two musical innovations: tape loops and the echo on John's voice.
Paul discovered that a weird saturation effect occurred when you messed with tape loops in a certain way. The loops kept on running over themselves, giving anything you recorded an infinite loop sound. The band looped several different instruments and sounds, then edited them before putting them into the song. The sounds make for a distinct, surreal atmosphere.
The voice came from John's desire to sound like a monk singing from a mountaintop. He told his producer, George Martin, that perhaps they could hang him by a rope from the studio ceiling and then swing him around the microphone. Martin wisely nixed this idea, telling John he'd look into it. What they ended up doing was routing John's voice through a Leslie speaker cabinet, a speaker usually used for the vibrato electric organs heard on so many 60s rock tracks. The vibrato is transferred to his voice.
In short, Revolver is one of the most influential albums of all time. It is ranked as the number one album of all time by some music sources, and it is home to some of the Beatles' best work.
What it did for the Beatles: Helped George emerge more as a songwriter, established their desire to make truly innovative studio work, started their psychedelic phase, established the artistic freedom they needed to make Sgt. Pepper, etc.
What it did for the music world: Hard to overemphasize this. Introduced backmasking, one of the first psychedelically-tinged albums, showed nearly unprecedented craftsmanship in album-making, introduced double tracking and editing voice through Leslie speakers, probably some other stuff that I don't know. Seriously folks, this is a big one.
Album Highlights: Taxman, Eleanor Rigby, Good Day Sunshine, And Your Bird Can Sing, For No One, Got To Get You Into My Life, Tomorrow Never Knows. Yes, I know that that's half of the album.
Ryan's Beatle Ranking: #3 out of 12, just behind Sgt. Pepper's and Abby Road.
Next on Blogging the Beatles: Rubber Soul
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
What a super list!
All that talk about comic books and superheroes got me thinking about super hero movies. Thus, I have compiled a list of my top ten comic book/superhero movies. Keep in mind that I have not seen every superhero/comic book movie, so if you are sad that:
Either Fantastic 4 movie
The Punisher
The old Superman flicks
The old Captain America flicks
Either Hulk
Sin City
Supergirl
Men in Black II
A History of Violence
V for Vendetta
The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen
Daredevil
Elektra
My criteria for this list was that the movie had to be either based on a comic book or done in a comic book style, and it should contain adventure action (so, no Garfield. Sorry folks).
A good comic book story has lots of neat action, but it also has a good story and themes to think about. However, as you'll see from my list, some of the best comic book movies that have been adapted don't accomplish this all of the time. Comic books have been an often-mined-yet-not-done-incredibly-well genre up until the last few years. I think there have been strides made as of late, but the industry has a way to go. Here's my list.
Ok, so I'll admit it, my first entry on this list completely negates my good plot, good action bit in the above paragraph, but that's ok with me. Here's why I like this movie when everyone else hates it: it's a spoof. There is no way a movie that is this absurd can't be a spoof. While there is a light mocking of Batman through the ages that pops up all over the film, it's primarily concerned with mocking the Batman TV show. The campy lines, the wonderfully impractical gadgets, the implausible and over-the-top villains. All of that is ripped right off of the TV show and put to a more modern skewering. The funny thing is that the TV show (and the TV show movie, which is good in its own way) was skewering the original comics. People complain that some people view Batman as a joke because of the show, but the oldest strips weren't fearsome. They were amusingly silly stories and horribly expositionary dialogue. The show just riffed on it, and Batman & Robin riffs on the show. Plus, how can you not like Mr. Freeze? "Let's kick some ice!"
The X-Men series is incredibly uneven, but the first one I liked well enough to want to continue watching. Mostly because of Magneto. Magneto is one of the best villains in any superhero movie. He's cold, vengeful and motivated, but he can show his human side when he wants to. Thus, while I wasn't big on some of the other X-Men in this film (read: Sabretooth and Toad), there were enough cool things and a good enough plot to keep it interesting. Favorite part: Magneto blatantly ignoring the laws of magnetism by controlling bullets.
I know, I know. This isn't a superhero movie. However, it is based on a comic book, and there are cool gadgets and stuff, and they do heroic things. So, it's kind of like a wise-cracking Batman. Oh wait, that's Iron Man. But still.
7. Spiderman
6. Superman Returns
5. Spiderman 2
4. Iron Man
3. The Incredibles
Not a comic book, but an homage to several and done in the style of a good one. Besides, I hear that the movie is more faithful in some aspects to The Fantastic 4 than the actual movie was. Great dialogue, great story, great villain.
2. X2: X-Men United
This is by far the best out of the three X-Men movies. The story is complex and engaging, the villains are, well, Magneto, the action is good and the acting is the best of the series. Good stuff. Favorite part: "Too much iron in your blood" and the aftermath.
1. Batman Begins
Excellent themes, engaging and twisting plot, true to the comic books, believable (for a comic book movie), action-packed and gripping. Batman is great hero, and this movie finally does him justice.
Comic sans ridicule
So, at the end of this last school year, I started reading comic books. I have, as I'm sure most of you have, seen many comic book superhero movies, and I wanted to see what was behind the inspiration for these movies. I wanted to immerse myself in just one title, so I could really get into the stories, so, after some research to decide which comic book series sounded the coolest (yes, I did comic book research. Yes, I'm a nerd), I picked Batman. And I am now slightly addicted.
Comics are really a new medium for me. It's kind of a cross between a movie and a book. In a book, the story is moved forward entirely in the reader's imagination. Obviously, the writer gives the reader signposts to base their imaginings on, but it really is up to you.
With movies, it's the opposite. Movies are purely the triumph of the filmmakers' imagination. We see all sorts of truly impressive things, but we're (for the most part) just taking in the creativity of other people.
Comics are a different format than both books and movies for two reasons. The first reason is that they feature a unique blend of showing you the action and letting you imagine the action.
They have plot exposition, but only enough to show you what's going on. You get the rest by reading the dialogue and--primarily--by looking at the artwork. They have fight scenes, but not enough panels to show you all the action. You get the entire scene in your head, with the artist showing you some of the most impressive frames. You see the fear in criminals minds, the menace of the evil masterminds, but it's up to you to fill in the backlog of escapades that have made each character so legendary.
The other difference is that, in some ways, comic books can be more visually expressive than either other medium. Granted, books truly are limitless. You can have a writer like Terry Pratchett, who has made up the color octarine, or you can have other writers who speak of multidimensional beings, but even these descriptions are limited by our imagination. Sure, we can read about octarine, but it is impossible for us to think of a color that we've never seen before, let alone one that doesn't exist. The other thing with books (and don't get me wrong, books are still my favorite medium, by far) is that the images that books create, while vivid, don't have any way of being viewed other than in our mind's eye. In a comic book, the writer, penciller and inker work together to show what their image was supposed to look like.
With a movie, well, as much as everyone wants to talk about how movies are now, basically, limitless, this is just not true. With live action, no one will be able to fully pull off the manic evil or the rictus grin of the Joker. In animation, well, you'd think it would be better, but sometimes still images still pack a more visceral punch than animation. Observe a two images from the most common animated Joker.
Now, a picture of Jack Nicolson, that other guy from the 60s and Heath Ledger as the Joker:
Here are some comic book versions of him:
I think the comic book Joker comes out on top, and I can't think of how those images could be fully transferred to the screen. I'm not blasting the film or animated versions of Batman (although some of them, like Batman Returns, are pretty darn awful). But the source really is the best here.
Anyway, I really am getting into Batman. He's really cool for one thing, and a lot of his comics offer interesting themes. For example, in one of the classic Batman tales, "The Dark Knight Returns," Bruce Wayne comes out of retirement to be Batman in his later years. This book explores aging and feeling out of place, as well as satirizing political correctness and the endless "rehabilitating" of criminals. Oftentimes, comics will delve into the practicality and common sense of whether Batman's decision not to use lethal force is a good one.
Another reason I like Batman is that most of his villains are pretty iconic, and they aren't dumb or campy. For example, Superman's biggest villains are Lex Luthor (ok, so he's pretty cool), an alien, a "Superman" who does the opposite of him, a man made of Kryptonite and this funny looking interdimensional midget. Spiderman, while having a few cool villains, also has a guy that can turn into sand, a strong guy in a rhino suit, a guy made of water, etc. Also, most of his villains are the result of an industrial accident.
While some of Batman's villains are the result of an accident, most of his good villains aren't endowed with powers from their accidents, just creepy psychosis. For example, the Joker, while getting his creepy look from an industrial accident, is insane. He doesn't have some sort of "chemical power." Black Mask has a horribly scarred face, but he's not supernatural. Granted, Poison Ivy and Mr. Freeze both have accident specific abilities, but I will readily admit that Poison Ivy is not a good villain, and Mr. Freeze is a lot more scientific. He can't just shoot ice out of his hands.
I watched "Batman Begins" the other day. It was the first time I had seen it since I started reading the comics. While Begins is a good movie regardless of whether you have read the comics, I liked it even more because it stayed true to the spirit of the books in a way that the other movies don't even come close to. The entire point of Batman is that he strikes fear into the hearts of criminals. The Batman of the 90s movies isn't scary. Maybe a bit in the first movie, but if Michael Keaton prancing around in a Batsuit that can barely move is your hallmark of scariness, you have a problem. The Batman of Begins is a hero you could actually picture villains being scared of.
With comic book movies, you're more concerned that they stick to the spirit of the books. Some events should be kept too, but events are retconned in the comics so much that it's the spirit that's really important. Begins sticks to the spirit. I hope The Dark Knight will as well. Heath looks really, really scary as the Joker, which is good, but he doesn't look happy enough. When the Joker is battling Batman, he's in his element. He's incredibly, insanely happy. That's the unnerving thing about him. I hope they keep that.
Meanwhile, I'll still keep reading the books. I am trying to find some more comics with The Riddler, Two Face and The Penguin in them. It would be nice to find more with Mr. Freeze or Black Mask too. Poison Ivy and Catwoman? Meh.
Comics are really a new medium for me. It's kind of a cross between a movie and a book. In a book, the story is moved forward entirely in the reader's imagination. Obviously, the writer gives the reader signposts to base their imaginings on, but it really is up to you.
With movies, it's the opposite. Movies are purely the triumph of the filmmakers' imagination. We see all sorts of truly impressive things, but we're (for the most part) just taking in the creativity of other people.
Comics are a different format than both books and movies for two reasons. The first reason is that they feature a unique blend of showing you the action and letting you imagine the action.
They have plot exposition, but only enough to show you what's going on. You get the rest by reading the dialogue and--primarily--by looking at the artwork. They have fight scenes, but not enough panels to show you all the action. You get the entire scene in your head, with the artist showing you some of the most impressive frames. You see the fear in criminals minds, the menace of the evil masterminds, but it's up to you to fill in the backlog of escapades that have made each character so legendary.
The other difference is that, in some ways, comic books can be more visually expressive than either other medium. Granted, books truly are limitless. You can have a writer like Terry Pratchett, who has made up the color octarine, or you can have other writers who speak of multidimensional beings, but even these descriptions are limited by our imagination. Sure, we can read about octarine, but it is impossible for us to think of a color that we've never seen before, let alone one that doesn't exist. The other thing with books (and don't get me wrong, books are still my favorite medium, by far) is that the images that books create, while vivid, don't have any way of being viewed other than in our mind's eye. In a comic book, the writer, penciller and inker work together to show what their image was supposed to look like.
With a movie, well, as much as everyone wants to talk about how movies are now, basically, limitless, this is just not true. With live action, no one will be able to fully pull off the manic evil or the rictus grin of the Joker. In animation, well, you'd think it would be better, but sometimes still images still pack a more visceral punch than animation. Observe a two images from the most common animated Joker.
Now, a picture of Jack Nicolson, that other guy from the 60s and Heath Ledger as the Joker:
Here are some comic book versions of him:
I think the comic book Joker comes out on top, and I can't think of how those images could be fully transferred to the screen. I'm not blasting the film or animated versions of Batman (although some of them, like Batman Returns, are pretty darn awful). But the source really is the best here.
Anyway, I really am getting into Batman. He's really cool for one thing, and a lot of his comics offer interesting themes. For example, in one of the classic Batman tales, "The Dark Knight Returns," Bruce Wayne comes out of retirement to be Batman in his later years. This book explores aging and feeling out of place, as well as satirizing political correctness and the endless "rehabilitating" of criminals. Oftentimes, comics will delve into the practicality and common sense of whether Batman's decision not to use lethal force is a good one.
Another reason I like Batman is that most of his villains are pretty iconic, and they aren't dumb or campy. For example, Superman's biggest villains are Lex Luthor (ok, so he's pretty cool), an alien, a "Superman" who does the opposite of him, a man made of Kryptonite and this funny looking interdimensional midget. Spiderman, while having a few cool villains, also has a guy that can turn into sand, a strong guy in a rhino suit, a guy made of water, etc. Also, most of his villains are the result of an industrial accident.
While some of Batman's villains are the result of an accident, most of his good villains aren't endowed with powers from their accidents, just creepy psychosis. For example, the Joker, while getting his creepy look from an industrial accident, is insane. He doesn't have some sort of "chemical power." Black Mask has a horribly scarred face, but he's not supernatural. Granted, Poison Ivy and Mr. Freeze both have accident specific abilities, but I will readily admit that Poison Ivy is not a good villain, and Mr. Freeze is a lot more scientific. He can't just shoot ice out of his hands.
I watched "Batman Begins" the other day. It was the first time I had seen it since I started reading the comics. While Begins is a good movie regardless of whether you have read the comics, I liked it even more because it stayed true to the spirit of the books in a way that the other movies don't even come close to. The entire point of Batman is that he strikes fear into the hearts of criminals. The Batman of the 90s movies isn't scary. Maybe a bit in the first movie, but if Michael Keaton prancing around in a Batsuit that can barely move is your hallmark of scariness, you have a problem. The Batman of Begins is a hero you could actually picture villains being scared of.
With comic book movies, you're more concerned that they stick to the spirit of the books. Some events should be kept too, but events are retconned in the comics so much that it's the spirit that's really important. Begins sticks to the spirit. I hope The Dark Knight will as well. Heath looks really, really scary as the Joker, which is good, but he doesn't look happy enough. When the Joker is battling Batman, he's in his element. He's incredibly, insanely happy. That's the unnerving thing about him. I hope they keep that.
Meanwhile, I'll still keep reading the books. I am trying to find some more comics with The Riddler, Two Face and The Penguin in them. It would be nice to find more with Mr. Freeze or Black Mask too. Poison Ivy and Catwoman? Meh.
Tuesday, June 3, 2008
Beatle Blog: Help!
I like to split the Beatles albums (they made 12 - not counting the Yellow Submarine soundtrack, which they barely contributed to - 12 albums in seven years!) into early albums and later albums. Since 12 is a good even number, I split them between their sixth album, "Rubber Soul," and their seventh album, "Revolver." The early albums, while still mostly excellent, reflected the current musical thinking of the time, namely that, rather than the main focus of the band, albums were things that you put out in between tours. It seems odd now, but that's basically what albums were back then: catchy promotional material.
Perhaps "Help!" was even more of a promotional album, considering that half of the songs from the album were from the Beatles' movie of the same name. The movie is pretty funny, basing much of its comedy on what made their first movie so popular: Ringo Starr both looks and sounds funny. This apparently never bothered him, and jokes about his nose appear in both flicks (their next movie was the critically-panned "Magical Mystery Tour").
Even so, for promotional material, no one was better than the Beatles. This is one of my favorite albums from their early work.
The album is influenced a bit by the songwriting and musical stylings of Bob Dylan. While I don't really like Bob ("HA duz eet feeull?") because of his absolutely horrendous singing voice, he is a good musician and an ok songwriter, so the influences are welcome on this album. It should be noted that Dylan also introduced the band to pot, which led to all sorts of other drugs (not to mention caused them to often forget their lines during the filming of the Help! movie).
The album opens with the title track, which has a very energetic beginning with some strong bass notes before getting into the rest of the song, which is upbeat folk-rock in nature. This characterizes a lot of Help!, actually, as it often contains jangly tambourine percussion and upbeat acoustic guitar, laced with some subtle vocal harmonies in the chorus. It also contains some of John's best songwriting. The title track is an autobiographical song about John losing control of his life, and he bangs out a few other good tunes on this album as well.
The beginning of the album really is great, as track two is "The Night Before" by Paul McCartney. Paul's vocal range really is astounding at times, and this song showcases it well. This song is also very upbeat, with an energetic bassline and a small electric guitar solo by George.
John is up again with the Dylanesque "You've Got to Hide Your Love Away," which is mostly just John playing the guitar with a tambourine in the background. It's very good, however, with John making his voice a bit more forlorn and shouting "Hey!" into the mic during every chorus. This one will get stuck in your head.
The Beatles, while sometimes behaving like jerks to outsiders, usually protected each other and made musical concessions to all of the members. As such, on most of their early albums, John and Paul would let George write and sing a few songs (even though they didn't think much of his songwriting ability), and they would write or pick a song for Ringo to sing. Ringo has an odd nasally sounding voice, but it usually suits the music he sings. Not so on Help!, as he sings lead on a cover of "Act Naturally." This song forced Ringo to go a lot higher than he usually does, resulting in a slightly off-key, shrill sounding song (as much as a nasally deep voice can be shrill). George's first lyrical contribution is also not too great on this album, with "I Need You" feeling slow and unoriginal.
I Need You is followed by "Another Girl," an catchy enough song by Paul with just enough flourish on the electric guitar to keep it interesting.
One interesting facet of the Beatles' early work is that, while they do show skill in their instrumentation, the instrumentation often takes a back seat to their vocal abilities, which are very, very good (this swung the opposite way once they made "Revolver"). This album often shows symptoms of this, with electric guitar flourishes and vocal acrobatics being the only "finishing touches" put on a basic rhythm track, like on Lennon's "You're Going to Lose that Girl." However, the vocals are so good that the song is still fun to hear.
After the aforementioned song, one of the Beatles' #1 singles, "Ticket to Ride," is on the docket. While not one of my favorite singles, it has a fun bass line and it's catchy.
After a few rather inconsequential songs, the back end of the album really shines. First, there is the obviously folk-influenced "Tell Me What You See," with some fun electric piano fills. There is also some really neat extra percussion used in this song. Then, well...
Sometimes, when I listen to a Beatles album, I am overcome by an "Oh-my-gosh-Paul-McCartney-is-so-awesome" moment. This happens every time I hear "I've Just Seen a Face," one of Paul's best compositions. It's a pretty simple track, containing just minimal percussion and three acoustic guitars (George's was a 12-string, but I'll save discussion of that for "Hard Day's Night"). But simplicity in this case is musical genius, as Paul expresses his excitement over falling for a new girl. He speeds through the lyrics and the guitars run along with him, giving the track an enthusiastic optimism that one is hard pressed to find anywhere in music.
After this song, well, there's this little ballad that is probably the most popular song in the entire world, ever. And no, I'm not exaggerating. According to wikipedia, Paul's "Yesterday" is the most covered song in the entire world, boasting over 3,000 different recordings. Read that again. Three. Thousand. Recordings. The song was the most played song on American radio for eight years. Possibly the most ironic thing is that the other Beatles didn't really like the song, feeling that a sentimental ballad went against their style. The song is quite beautiful, consisting solely of Paul playing a melancholy acoustic guitar and singing, with his beautiful voice, about the girl who left him. He is accompanied by a string quartet.
The album finishes up with a fun cover, "Dizzy Miss Lizzie."
Analysis: Overall, this album is the Beatles' fun, catchy tribute to folk-rock. It also contains a lot of their iconic early years material. The cohesive style holds the rollicking, sunny album together, and the tunes will surely be fighting for space in your head. Definitely check this one out.
What it did for the Beatles: Well, since "Yesterday" gained prominence as a single, not as a song on this album, this album mostly served to promote their movie and their new single, Help!
What it did for the music world: Folk was not a very popular genre in the early 60s (this album came out in 1965), which is not unsurprising when you consider that the king of folk at the time was Bob Dylan, who people enjoy now but honestly sounds as if a cheese grater is being yanked over his vocal cords. Groups like The Lovin' Spoonful; Peter, Paul, and Mary; the Mamas and the Papas and (with this album) the Beatles helped to make folk more palatable to the public.
Album Highlights: Help!, You've Got to Hide Your Love Away, I've Just Seen a Face, Yesterday
Ryan's Beatle ranking: #7 out of 12
Next on Blogging the Beatles: Revolver
Perhaps "Help!" was even more of a promotional album, considering that half of the songs from the album were from the Beatles' movie of the same name. The movie is pretty funny, basing much of its comedy on what made their first movie so popular: Ringo Starr both looks and sounds funny. This apparently never bothered him, and jokes about his nose appear in both flicks (their next movie was the critically-panned "Magical Mystery Tour").
Even so, for promotional material, no one was better than the Beatles. This is one of my favorite albums from their early work.
The album is influenced a bit by the songwriting and musical stylings of Bob Dylan. While I don't really like Bob ("HA duz eet feeull?") because of his absolutely horrendous singing voice, he is a good musician and an ok songwriter, so the influences are welcome on this album. It should be noted that Dylan also introduced the band to pot, which led to all sorts of other drugs (not to mention caused them to often forget their lines during the filming of the Help! movie).
The album opens with the title track, which has a very energetic beginning with some strong bass notes before getting into the rest of the song, which is upbeat folk-rock in nature. This characterizes a lot of Help!, actually, as it often contains jangly tambourine percussion and upbeat acoustic guitar, laced with some subtle vocal harmonies in the chorus. It also contains some of John's best songwriting. The title track is an autobiographical song about John losing control of his life, and he bangs out a few other good tunes on this album as well.
The beginning of the album really is great, as track two is "The Night Before" by Paul McCartney. Paul's vocal range really is astounding at times, and this song showcases it well. This song is also very upbeat, with an energetic bassline and a small electric guitar solo by George.
John is up again with the Dylanesque "You've Got to Hide Your Love Away," which is mostly just John playing the guitar with a tambourine in the background. It's very good, however, with John making his voice a bit more forlorn and shouting "Hey!" into the mic during every chorus. This one will get stuck in your head.
The Beatles, while sometimes behaving like jerks to outsiders, usually protected each other and made musical concessions to all of the members. As such, on most of their early albums, John and Paul would let George write and sing a few songs (even though they didn't think much of his songwriting ability), and they would write or pick a song for Ringo to sing. Ringo has an odd nasally sounding voice, but it usually suits the music he sings. Not so on Help!, as he sings lead on a cover of "Act Naturally." This song forced Ringo to go a lot higher than he usually does, resulting in a slightly off-key, shrill sounding song (as much as a nasally deep voice can be shrill). George's first lyrical contribution is also not too great on this album, with "I Need You" feeling slow and unoriginal.
I Need You is followed by "Another Girl," an catchy enough song by Paul with just enough flourish on the electric guitar to keep it interesting.
One interesting facet of the Beatles' early work is that, while they do show skill in their instrumentation, the instrumentation often takes a back seat to their vocal abilities, which are very, very good (this swung the opposite way once they made "Revolver"). This album often shows symptoms of this, with electric guitar flourishes and vocal acrobatics being the only "finishing touches" put on a basic rhythm track, like on Lennon's "You're Going to Lose that Girl." However, the vocals are so good that the song is still fun to hear.
After the aforementioned song, one of the Beatles' #1 singles, "Ticket to Ride," is on the docket. While not one of my favorite singles, it has a fun bass line and it's catchy.
After a few rather inconsequential songs, the back end of the album really shines. First, there is the obviously folk-influenced "Tell Me What You See," with some fun electric piano fills. There is also some really neat extra percussion used in this song. Then, well...
Sometimes, when I listen to a Beatles album, I am overcome by an "Oh-my-gosh-Paul-McCartney-is-so-awesome" moment. This happens every time I hear "I've Just Seen a Face," one of Paul's best compositions. It's a pretty simple track, containing just minimal percussion and three acoustic guitars (George's was a 12-string, but I'll save discussion of that for "Hard Day's Night"). But simplicity in this case is musical genius, as Paul expresses his excitement over falling for a new girl. He speeds through the lyrics and the guitars run along with him, giving the track an enthusiastic optimism that one is hard pressed to find anywhere in music.
After this song, well, there's this little ballad that is probably the most popular song in the entire world, ever. And no, I'm not exaggerating. According to wikipedia, Paul's "Yesterday" is the most covered song in the entire world, boasting over 3,000 different recordings. Read that again. Three. Thousand. Recordings. The song was the most played song on American radio for eight years. Possibly the most ironic thing is that the other Beatles didn't really like the song, feeling that a sentimental ballad went against their style. The song is quite beautiful, consisting solely of Paul playing a melancholy acoustic guitar and singing, with his beautiful voice, about the girl who left him. He is accompanied by a string quartet.
The album finishes up with a fun cover, "Dizzy Miss Lizzie."
Analysis: Overall, this album is the Beatles' fun, catchy tribute to folk-rock. It also contains a lot of their iconic early years material. The cohesive style holds the rollicking, sunny album together, and the tunes will surely be fighting for space in your head. Definitely check this one out.
What it did for the Beatles: Well, since "Yesterday" gained prominence as a single, not as a song on this album, this album mostly served to promote their movie and their new single, Help!
What it did for the music world: Folk was not a very popular genre in the early 60s (this album came out in 1965), which is not unsurprising when you consider that the king of folk at the time was Bob Dylan, who people enjoy now but honestly sounds as if a cheese grater is being yanked over his vocal cords. Groups like The Lovin' Spoonful; Peter, Paul, and Mary; the Mamas and the Papas and (with this album) the Beatles helped to make folk more palatable to the public.
Album Highlights: Help!, You've Got to Hide Your Love Away, I've Just Seen a Face, Yesterday
Ryan's Beatle ranking: #7 out of 12
Next on Blogging the Beatles: Revolver
Sunday, June 1, 2008
Blogging the Beatles
I have decided, after a bit of thought, to review all of the Beatles' albums in between my normal reviews. The reasons I have decided to do this are threefold:
1. I know a lot about the Beatles, and I think writing about them is fun.
2. Hopefully, other people who like the Beatles will learn or take something from what I write.
3. Perhaps, the musically uneducated--those who talk about how the Beatles weren't so great and always attempt to "prove" their point by singing the chorus to "Yellow Submarine"--will read some of these blogs and realize what the Beatles did for music.
However, before I jump into reviewing, I thought I'd give a bit of a background on the group and some of the other players in their lives. The reason I'm doing this is because I'll attempt to explain different things about each album, like what influenced it and how it influenced music, and background information will be needed.
First, the band:
Paul McCartney
"The Cute Beatle"
Paul McCartney is perhaps the most gifted natural musician ever. By natural, I mean that he can't read music. This has not stopped him from being awesome at it, as he plays guitar, piano, bass, drums (he played all four of those during his Beatle tenure), ukulele, has a great singing voice, has composed a classical music album and--this last part is all instruments that are credited to him on his second to last release, according to Wikipedia--can also play synthesiser, harmonium, flugelhorn, autoharp, organ, spinet, melodica, vibes, glockenspiel, cello and recorder. That's right, folks. Not only is Paul McCartney cool enough to not be ridiculed for including a recorder on an album, but he is also proficient in probably about five instruments that you've never heard of. Also, it should be noted that just being proficient at the melodica alone is incredibly awesome, as you will see by reading the wikipedia entry on it.
Anyway, Paul was and is a great musician. He was also a good lyricist, as you see in my reviews. He tried to be the public face for the band, mostly just to soften to blows that came from John Lennon being a huge idiot all the time. He was probably the most dedicated to the band.
Musical Talent: best
Lyrical Talent: best
John Lennon
"The Political Beatle"
The first thing you should know about John is that, while Ringo was a nice guy, the other three Beatles had their unsavory sides. However, John made Paul and George look absolutely saintly by comparison. The man was a complete and utter tool, which can only partially be blamed on his mother's rotten husbands and subsequent death . John would go up to WWII veterans who had had amputated limbs and pretend to try to shake their hands, he was always ready with an insult for everyone, he absolutely tormented the Beatles' manager and he had a general apathy about kindness, goodwill and all that stuff (how ironic that he would pen "All You Need Is Love").
That might surprise some of you, as John is generally looked on as some kind of saint today, always talking about peace and love and happiness. Most people know his solo song Imagine, which, after it runs all organized religion, particularly Christianity, through the wringer, talks about how if only we all loved one another and worked together, how great it would be. Not only is the song unoriginal, boring, unrealistic and repetitive, it is also markedly different from the way John lived his life.
Anyway, the music. John usually just sang and played guitar and piano. He was good at singing and guitar playing, and he was passable at piano. He was also (contrary to what you might "Imagine") a good song writer, penning such greats as "Revolution."
John started the Beatles, and he was the nasty, insulting public face that squared off against Paul's, nice, slightly ingratiating public face.
Musical talent: third best, just under George
Lyrical talent: second
George Harrison
"The Weird Beatle"
George sang and played the guitar and sitar. While this may seem inferior to the work of John and Paul, George was absolutely crazy good at playing said guitar. Most of the riffs and lead guitar work in the band was performed and recorded by him. George also was talented at the ukulele, bass and other instruments.
George got into Hinduism during his time with the Beatles, and he wrote a bunch of songs about it, most of which aren't very good, although some of the other songs he penned are quite good. However, his looking into Hinduism also resulted in him learning how to play sitar and basically inventing world music, so that's cool. George was probably the most introverted Beatle, although he had a great sense of humor if you could get it out of him.
Musical talent: second, just above John
Lyrical talent: third
Ringo Starr
"Ringo Starr"
Nicknamed due to the excessive amount of rings that he always wore, Richard Starkey replaced the Beatles old drummer, Pete Best, right before the Beatles made it big. This is good because, while Ringo is not the greatest drummer of all time, Pete Best was probably one of the worst. While Ringo is mostly known for having a gigantic nose, he played drums and occasionally sang for the band.
He also wrote two songs of his own during his tenure with the Fab Four.
Musical talent: fourth
Lyrical talent: fourth
Ok, now that that's out of the way, the other players. I won't list everyone here, but I will list the people who had significant impact on multiple Beatles projects.
George Martin: He was the Beatles' producer. He often played piano for them if they needed it, and he seemed to always know when to reign in the boys and when to let their musicality roam into uncharted territory.
Brian Epstein: Brian was the Beatles' troubled, insecure, closeted homosexual manager. He got them record contracts, promotional deals and the like. He was a good businessman; however, he sometimes got the raw end of some of the deals he made (like it mattered, the Beatles still had enough money to practically hemorrhage it). While the Beatles often didn't realize it, Brian helped to keep them grounded.
Yoko Ono: John's second wife. Ok, this is important. Even though all of the stories say that Yoko was the one who broke up the Beatles, remember this: really, she was the one who broke up the Beatles. An artist whose "art" included having sex in a burlap bag, Yoko was incredibly possessive of John, and she demanded to be part of the Beatles' decision-making processes. To show you about how much musical ability she had, one of the albums that John and her released together had a complete album side that consisted only of them screaming each others' names. She enjoyed provoking the other members of the band, and she liked to get John in on the act too (not that he needed any encouragement). So yeah, remember this: Yoko Ono = Beatles killer.
Ok, there's the setup. Now, I will, whenever I feel like it, blog about one of the Beatles albums, selected semi-randomly. The first one on the docket ... their second film soundtrack, "Help!"
1. I know a lot about the Beatles, and I think writing about them is fun.
2. Hopefully, other people who like the Beatles will learn or take something from what I write.
3. Perhaps, the musically uneducated--those who talk about how the Beatles weren't so great and always attempt to "prove" their point by singing the chorus to "Yellow Submarine"--will read some of these blogs and realize what the Beatles did for music.
However, before I jump into reviewing, I thought I'd give a bit of a background on the group and some of the other players in their lives. The reason I'm doing this is because I'll attempt to explain different things about each album, like what influenced it and how it influenced music, and background information will be needed.
First, the band:
Paul McCartney
"The Cute Beatle"
Paul McCartney is perhaps the most gifted natural musician ever. By natural, I mean that he can't read music. This has not stopped him from being awesome at it, as he plays guitar, piano, bass, drums (he played all four of those during his Beatle tenure), ukulele, has a great singing voice, has composed a classical music album and--this last part is all instruments that are credited to him on his second to last release, according to Wikipedia--can also play synthesiser, harmonium, flugelhorn, autoharp, organ, spinet, melodica, vibes, glockenspiel, cello and recorder. That's right, folks. Not only is Paul McCartney cool enough to not be ridiculed for including a recorder on an album, but he is also proficient in probably about five instruments that you've never heard of. Also, it should be noted that just being proficient at the melodica alone is incredibly awesome, as you will see by reading the wikipedia entry on it.
Anyway, Paul was and is a great musician. He was also a good lyricist, as you see in my reviews. He tried to be the public face for the band, mostly just to soften to blows that came from John Lennon being a huge idiot all the time. He was probably the most dedicated to the band.
Musical Talent: best
Lyrical Talent: best
John Lennon
"The Political Beatle"
The first thing you should know about John is that, while Ringo was a nice guy, the other three Beatles had their unsavory sides. However, John made Paul and George look absolutely saintly by comparison. The man was a complete and utter tool, which can only partially be blamed on his mother's rotten husbands and subsequent death . John would go up to WWII veterans who had had amputated limbs and pretend to try to shake their hands, he was always ready with an insult for everyone, he absolutely tormented the Beatles' manager and he had a general apathy about kindness, goodwill and all that stuff (how ironic that he would pen "All You Need Is Love").
That might surprise some of you, as John is generally looked on as some kind of saint today, always talking about peace and love and happiness. Most people know his solo song Imagine, which, after it runs all organized religion, particularly Christianity, through the wringer, talks about how if only we all loved one another and worked together, how great it would be. Not only is the song unoriginal, boring, unrealistic and repetitive, it is also markedly different from the way John lived his life.
Anyway, the music. John usually just sang and played guitar and piano. He was good at singing and guitar playing, and he was passable at piano. He was also (contrary to what you might "Imagine") a good song writer, penning such greats as "Revolution."
John started the Beatles, and he was the nasty, insulting public face that squared off against Paul's, nice, slightly ingratiating public face.
Musical talent: third best, just under George
Lyrical talent: second
George Harrison
"The Weird Beatle"
George sang and played the guitar and sitar. While this may seem inferior to the work of John and Paul, George was absolutely crazy good at playing said guitar. Most of the riffs and lead guitar work in the band was performed and recorded by him. George also was talented at the ukulele, bass and other instruments.
George got into Hinduism during his time with the Beatles, and he wrote a bunch of songs about it, most of which aren't very good, although some of the other songs he penned are quite good. However, his looking into Hinduism also resulted in him learning how to play sitar and basically inventing world music, so that's cool. George was probably the most introverted Beatle, although he had a great sense of humor if you could get it out of him.
Musical talent: second, just above John
Lyrical talent: third
Ringo Starr
"Ringo Starr"
Nicknamed due to the excessive amount of rings that he always wore, Richard Starkey replaced the Beatles old drummer, Pete Best, right before the Beatles made it big. This is good because, while Ringo is not the greatest drummer of all time, Pete Best was probably one of the worst. While Ringo is mostly known for having a gigantic nose, he played drums and occasionally sang for the band.
He also wrote two songs of his own during his tenure with the Fab Four.
Musical talent: fourth
Lyrical talent: fourth
Ok, now that that's out of the way, the other players. I won't list everyone here, but I will list the people who had significant impact on multiple Beatles projects.
George Martin: He was the Beatles' producer. He often played piano for them if they needed it, and he seemed to always know when to reign in the boys and when to let their musicality roam into uncharted territory.
Brian Epstein: Brian was the Beatles' troubled, insecure, closeted homosexual manager. He got them record contracts, promotional deals and the like. He was a good businessman; however, he sometimes got the raw end of some of the deals he made (like it mattered, the Beatles still had enough money to practically hemorrhage it). While the Beatles often didn't realize it, Brian helped to keep them grounded.
Yoko Ono: John's second wife. Ok, this is important. Even though all of the stories say that Yoko was the one who broke up the Beatles, remember this: really, she was the one who broke up the Beatles. An artist whose "art" included having sex in a burlap bag, Yoko was incredibly possessive of John, and she demanded to be part of the Beatles' decision-making processes. To show you about how much musical ability she had, one of the albums that John and her released together had a complete album side that consisted only of them screaming each others' names. She enjoyed provoking the other members of the band, and she liked to get John in on the act too (not that he needed any encouragement). So yeah, remember this: Yoko Ono = Beatles killer.
Ok, there's the setup. Now, I will, whenever I feel like it, blog about one of the Beatles albums, selected semi-randomly. The first one on the docket ... their second film soundtrack, "Help!"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
