Hi all. Well, it’s the beginning/middle of January, and you know what that means: Ryan’s belated blog about the best movies and music from 2009. I tried to get it done in a timely manner this year, and I did do better than last year, but a number of things conspired against me, including the stomach flu, getting a real job, busyness and not having Internet access. I’ve made a few changes this year. I’m going to include a few clunkers on some “Worst” sections, and I will also copy Roger Ebert and award a special jury prize whenever I deem it appropriate. Now, without further ado, here they are: the best of ’09.
Top Five Albums of 2009:
2009 was an interesting year for my musical tastes. Jars of Clay, my favorite band, released “The Long Fall Back to Earth,” but, some stellar songs aside, it wasn’t quite up to snuff with their best work. David Crowder released an interesting, well-produced but rambling effort, and Ben Folds followed up the disappointing “Way to Normal” with an oddball collection of college accapella groups singing his songs (if you’re unsure as to who that album is supposed to be aimed at, join the club. My best guess is that slim demographic of people who have always wanted to hear an accapella group use the F word).
However, the most significant musical shift for me was my decision to start listening to 89.3 The Current at one of my temp jobs. While they are oftentimes too occupied with their own pretension to notice how bad some of the indie music they play really is (plus they crank the truly awful Michael Franti now and then), I also discovered some good musical acts that I would have otherwise overlooked. One of those acts is on my list.
5. Forget And Not Slow Down, by Relient k
Genre: Pop/punk
If I was the revisionist type, I’d go back to my best of 2008 list and take RK’s “Bird and the Bee Sides” off of my top five. This album, however, is much better and more focused than that disjointed and oftentimes repetitive EP. Written entirely about Matt Thiessen’s painful breakup, “Forget” marks RK’s most organic and laid back album yet, although tracks like “Sahara” and “If You Believe Me” still crank it up every now and then.
Thiessen’s lyrical abilities are back in line too. While not as heartfelt and fitting as 2004’s watershed effort, “Mmhmm,” the writing on “Forget” is witty, earnest and poetic (although one pop culture reference seems like a step too far back. “I’m the Cusack on the lawn of your heart”? I know it’s supposed to be funny, Matt, but really?).
However, the most notable feature of RK’s sixth LP is its progression. Many of the songs are linked by little interludes, intros and outros, the most effective of which is the “Sahara/Oasis/Savannah/Baby” song arc. While the music can get a bit indistinguishable at times, RK has crafted their second best album and some catchy pop.
Standout tracks: “Sahara/Oasis/Savannah/Baby,” “This Is The End (If You Want It)”
(While I said I wasn’t the revisionist type, I may be forced to kick this album off of the list if I’m able to listen to more of “Aim and Ignite” by Fun pretty soon. I've really liked the little I've heard of it.)
4. The Incident, by Porcupine Tree
Genre: Prog rock, metal
First things first: this is not one of Porcupine Tree’s best albums. In fact, it’s probably one of the least excellent albums since frontman Steven Wilson decided to stop messing around with inaccessible oddities and form an actual band. However, notice that I said “least excellent,” not “worst.” Even on one of their duller gems, these British metal rockers still put on a heck of a show.
This time around, they split their album up into two discs. One disc contains the album proper, which is one long composition split into several tracks/minisongs, and the other disc contains a few extra tracks thrown in for good measure. Both discs contain music well worth listening to.
Thematically, the album isn’t a significant shift for the band; the primary theme seems to be the sterilization of real life, a topic often covered by Wilson (particularly in Porcupine Tree’s last album, “Fear of a Blank Planet”). However, it’s covered well as usual, and the secondary theme of aging seems to add a new dimension to the writing.
The music is good too, containing some of the hardest and softest sounds for the band. The album/song idea drags every now and then, but it’s usually pretty tight and is more than compensated for by “Time Flies,” the album’s almost-12-minute, fluctuating centerpiece and possibly the best song the band has ever written.
Standout tracks: “Time Flies,” “The Incident,” “Bleak House,” “Remember Me Lover”
For my sensitive readers: Casual swearing every now and then, with an occasional cavalier attitude to sexual encounters
3. Ellipse, by Imogen Heap
Genre: Electronic, pop
Say what you will about Imogen Heap, but she certainly knows her way around her music. This purely electronic effort might be a bit too dainty for some musical palettes, but no blip is out of place, no loop is looped wrong, and Heap’s airy voice weaves in and out of the music with perfect precision.
If you only have heard Heap’s famous “Hide and Seek,” don’t come here seeking more of the same. While the AutoTune does make itself heard every now and then, there’s a lot more than an altered voice going on this time around, and what’s going on is a lot more upbeat as well.
However, I’m not selecting this album simply for my admiration of her craft. There are some truly worthwhile songs on this album, and “Swoon,” with its flawless electric riff, passionate vocals and just-right lyrics … oh my. “Swoon” is unquestionably the song of the year.
Standout tracks: “Fast Train Home,” “Swoon”
2. The Open Door EP, by Death Cab for Cutie
Genre: Alternative
Is it bad to say that I like this release more than any of the superbly talented DCFC’s full length albums? Because I think I do. “The Open Door” is a collection of B-sides from “Narrow Stairs,” and it demonstrates what the already good “Narrow Stairs” could have been if it was tighter and not quite as odd.
It’s on a little more solid rock ‘n’ roll ground than its predecessor, but we still get a healthy dose of Ben Gibbard’s quirky, self deprecatory introspection. I just wonder why these tunes didn’t make it onto “Narrow Stairs” to begin with.
Standout tracks: “Little Bribes,” “My Mirror Speaks”
1. Fantasies, by Metric
Genre: Alternative
I discovered this band after hearing “Collect Call” on The Current, and I’m sure glad I did. This album is clever, tight and rocking, and one spin on the headphones reveals a whole new layer of aural and production complexity.
Lead singer Emily Haines' voice fits every line and every riff perfectly, and the songs range in topic from a casual dance number to a quasi-parable about greed to a comparison of the legacies of The Stones and The Beatles (that The Beatles come out on top is just one more reason to love this Canadian band). I hope there’s more to come from these guys, but, in the meanwhile, I have a back catalogue to catch up on.
Standout tracks: “Collect Call,” “Gimme Sympathy,” “Satellite Mind,” “Gold, Guns, Girls,” “Stadium Love”
For my more sensitive readers: The F word a few times on “Satellite Mind” and a satirically cavalier attitude toward sex on “Gold, Guns, Girls”
Special Jury Prize: The Beatles remastered catalog
If you’re a Beatles fan, and even if you’re not, you should check out at least one of these albums. The sounds are crisp and truly do mark a noticeable improvement in quality, and really, any excuse to buy a Beatles album is a good one. Another cool bonus is that the CDs are packaged in miniature facsimiles of the original album cases, which is fun.
Worst album (that I listened to, anyway. The real worst album is probably “The Fame,” by Lady Gaga): Raditude, by Weezer
Earlier this year, I had grown to somewhat respect some of Weezer’s work (most notably The Red Album). This respect was highly deflated after the tepid and insubstantial “Raditude," which can only boast one good song: the catchy “If You’re Wondering If I Want You To (I Want You To).”
Top 10 songs of 2009 (in no particular order, except that “Swoon” is the best one):
“Swoon,” by Imogen Heap: the perfect pop song, the perfect electronic song. Just listen.
“Panic Switch,” by Silversun Pickups: if the rest of their album was as catchy and urgent as this, I wouldn’t be able to stop listening.
“Headphones,” by Jars of Clay: ironically (and perhaps intentionally) this parable about tuning out the world sounds best when listened to through headphones.
“Time Flies,” by Porcupine Tree: the sonic twists and turns never cease to please, and the chorus sounds like it’s being sung by a man who is starting to figure out what it means.
“Gimme Sympathy (acoustic),” by Metric: unfortunately, this song is currently only available on a live Current album, but that doesn’t make it any less beautiful.
“At Least I’m Not As Sad As I Used To Be” by fun.: Zany and eclectic. That’s all there really is to say.
“Never Forget You,” by Noisettes: I only wish that the rest of their album, “Wild Young Hearts,” could have so perfectly captured the Aretha Franklin/Diana Ross crossbreed that was so wonderfully done here.
"God Almighty, None Compares," by David Crowder Band: While I’ve heard a fair amount of genre jumping from Crowder over the years, I never expected him to dabble in prog rock. And yet, here it is.
“Little Bribes,” by Death Cab for Cutie: one of the best rock songs DCFC has ever attempted.
“This Is The End (If You Want It),” by Relient K: this little ditty is actually two songs put together, but they combine to continue RK’s streak of excellent closing tracks.
Worst song: a three way tie between “Obama Song,” by Michael Franti, “LoveGame,” by Lady Gaga and “Boom Boom Pow,” by the Black Eyed Peas. These three songs rate very high, not only in my worst of the year list, but also in my list of worst songs ever, or indeed worst things ever.
Top Five Movies of 2009:
I didn’t see as many movies as I wanted to last year. Again, if I decide to be revisionist, some of these might come down in favor of movies like “Coraline,” "Up in the Air" or “The Informant!” For now, however, here’s what I’ve got.
5. Star Trek
Director: J.J. Abrams
Starring: Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto
While the unending supply of Young, Attractive People sometimes makes you feel like you’re watching “The Hills in Space,” the acting (by Pine and Karl Urban, aka Bones, in particular) is actually pretty decent, and Abrams accomplishes what no other Trek movie has been able to do: appeal to (most) Trek fans as a solid, story-driven and mythology-conscious entry in the storied franchise (the red shirt joke is a nice little addition too), and appeal to most other people as being a pretty good, pretty watchable film.
Is it the best Trek movie? Most fans would say not a chance, but then again, most fans think that an old guy wearing a fake muscle suit and William Shatner screaming “KHAAAAN!” are the highlights of Trek’s silver screen appearances. It’s definitely the most well made picture, and Pine, unlike Shatner, can actually act. However, my favorite still has to be “Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home.” I’d like to see anyone else get away with time travel, whales in space and a satire of the 80s all at once.
4. Taken
Director: Pierre Morel
Starring: Liam Neeson, Maggie Grace
Yeah, yeah, you can groan all you want, and to a certain point I’ll agree with you: this is far from cinema at its finest, and the Academy sure isn’t planning on showering “Taken” with awards anytime soon. And yet, there’s just a bit more here than meets the eye.
For one thing, Neeson actually does take a fairly good dramatic turn here. While there’s still something inherently hilarious in watching Qui-Gonn Jinn kick, punch and shoot the everloving crap out of everything in sight, Neeson definitely scores some legitimately heartfelt scenes as a dad who genuinely cares for his daughter. People forget about it, but I’d wager there’s a good half hour of character development before the brawling begins.
Now, granted, I’m not including this movie here because of Neeson’s acting chops. Rather, I’m including it for what really are some top-notch action scenes, made on a comparably shoestring budget, and the aforementioned ridiculousness of Neeson’s decision to play one of the most relentlessly, brutally hardcore action heroes in a long time. In a Hollywood climate where action stars need to be emotionally conflicted or merciful, it’s hard not to feel a mild strain of incredulity as the normally placid Neeson takes absolutely no prisoners.
3. Sherlock Holmes
Director: Guy Ritchie
Starring: Robert Downey Jr., Jude Law, Rachel McAdams
I really didn’t think I was going to like this movie, but I was very pleasantly surprised that Ritchie didn’t take one of my favorite literary characters and change him beyond all recognition. While he’s quite a bit more physical in this flick than he is in the books, even this aspect of his personality is handled in a way that points back to his entirely cerebral personality.
The script is also surprisingly clever, and it doesn’t cheat with modern language or even very many modern intimations. There’s also a legitimate mystery that Holmes legitimately unravels (although there’s a bit of cheating because the audience never had a chance of figuring out the ending, but that’s more than forgivable because a fair amount of Arthur Conan Doyle’s own stories do the same thing). Moriarty even makes a brief appearance, with promises of more in the sequel. Bring it on.
2. State of Play
Director: Kevin Macdonald
Starring: Russell Crowe, Ben Affleck, Rachel McAdams, Helen Mirren
There is almost no one reading this who will like this movie as much as I did, but I’m OK with that. While the film certainly has considerable cinematic merits, I was as charmed by its message and setting as I was by its plot. Now I just need to see the British miniseries it was based on.
“State of Play” is, at its heart, a love letter to journalism, or at least to the journalism that has been romanticized ever since Woodward and Bernstein first made Nixon sweat. Crowe’s character, Cal McAffrey, is an affable, pudgy reporter with a messy cubicle and an attention to detail, and he is unquestionably a hero. The film even defends the traditional newspaper format, with some subtle jabs taken at news blogs every now and then.
On top of that, however, is a truly thrilling film, with good performances all around. It’s gripping, and you’ll very much care about the characters by the end of it. In fact, it would have been my best of the year, if it weren’t for the incredibly spectacular film that also was released in 2009.
1. Up
Director: Pete Docter
Starring: Ed Asner
What a fantastic movie. Pixar outdoes even the spectacular “Wall-E” and “The Incredibles” in this film, a modern day fantasy about disillusionment, aging and love.
It’s rare to see any movie, let alone an animated one, that’s as profoundly touching as this tale of Carl Fredricksen, an unhappy, retired balloon salesman whose beloved wife died too soon. The opening montage will find you holding back tears, and the turning point of the film – those who have seen it know what I’m talking about – is masterful in its timing and emotional impact.
What makes “Up” even more fascinating is that it succeeds with such disparate elements at its disposal. It’s part fantasy (the elderly superhero elements, the balloon conceit), part serialized adventure flick (Charles Muntz, the biplanes), part science fiction (the dogs), part classic mismatched sidekick movie and part love story (and even that is done in an odd way, as Carl’s beloved Ellie is primarily embodied in the couple’s floating house).That Docter was able to shape all of these genres into something other than a mishmash is surprising enough. That he created out of these elements a story with the depth, humor and meaning that “Up” has is almost unbelievable. If you haven’t seen this one, do so as soon as you can.
Special Jury Prize: 500 Days of Summer
Director: Marc Webb
Starring: Zooey Deschanel, Joseph Gordon-Levitt
This film, about 500 days of rocky relationship is interesting, and it certainly bears watching, but there’s an inexorable gloominess that hangs over it that makes it hard to love. It’s also all a bit too intentional.
There are some nice things here. It’s well acted, and you really do like both Deschanel and Gordon Levitt’s characters. It’s also done in an interesting non-linear style. I did like it, but there are a few things holding me back from a wholehearted recommendation.
For one thing, the soundtrack (including, most notably, two Regina Spektor songs), the dialogue and some of the shooting practically and almost cynically bashes you over the head with the fact that the film was clearly made for indie kids. Also, the non-linear style makes the movie a bit morose, as we’re never fully able to focus on the good parts of the couple’s relationship. The depression is only added to when you realize that one of the characters doesn’t believe in love, while the other believes in it but truly has no idea what it means. Check it out if you're looking for something unique, but be prepared for a bit of a downer.
Worst Movie: Year One
Jack Black and Michael Cera do their worst in this uninspired, crass and unfunny “comedy” about cavemen in Bible times. Geez, Mike, between your acting choices and "Sit Down, Shut Up," I'm almost afraid for the "Arrested Development" movie.
Top Five Books or Book Series that I Read for the First Time in 2009:
There are so many great books to read that I rarely get around to reading stuff that came out in the current year, and 2009 was no exception. Here are the best things I did read, however.
5. Y: The Last Man
By Brian K. Vaughan, Pia Guerra
Before I give you my review, let me just say that this book is very R-rated, mostly to its detriment. Some of the content is understandable from a story perspective, but much of it is not.
Problems aside, however, this graphic novel tale of a plague that wipes out all but one male human is a compelling, poignant, well written tale, and it even slips in some clever social commentary and good jokes. Check this one out if you can stand language, violence and other content.
4. Starman Saga (if you're checking it out, look up Starman Omnibus)
By James Robinson, Tony Harris, others
To be fair, I’ve only read through the first two volumes of the omnibus so far, but Robinson’s Starman, Jack Knight, is in my mind the only major competition with Batman in the DC Universe.
The visuals are unique, the writing is crisp and the story is unpredictable. Jack Knight is a reluctant superhero, but in an entirely new way: he almost finds heroics annoying, and he never lets the mantle of Starman become his driving persona.
This series also gets props for prominently featuring The Shade, unquestionably the coolest antihero I’ve ever seen in a comic book.
3. ‘Til We Have Faces
By C.S. Lewis
It’s not Lewis’ best work (look to “The Screwtape Letters” or the oft-overlooked “That Hideous Strength” for that), but this first person retelling of the Greek myth of Cupid and Psyche is one of his most unique.
The story almost defies a brief description, but the central theme is that of the justice and manifestation of God. That Lewis can, as usual, so wonderfully pull it off is a testament to his skills, as this is an idea I can not imagine any other Christian writer tackling.
2. Catch 22
By Joseph Heller
This weird, run-on sentence laden, rambling narrative succeeds where the same style in “The Catcher in the Rye” fails. Yossarian, the protagonist in this strange WWII comedy, is a singularly lazy and self-centered character, but we root for him anyway. The book is a bit self indulgent and sometimes a bit too off kilter (there’s also some sexual bits that some will not want to read), but it fires back with a joke again and again. Come on: the book’s best character is named Major Major Major Major. I think I’ll be a little forgiving.
1. The Harry Potter Series
By J.K. Rowling
I never knew until this summer: these books really are that good. I had always dismissed them as pop literature, but I was simply wrong. The first four books are wonderful children’s literature, with characters and situations rivaling the whimsy and charm of the Narnia books, and the last three books transcend the genre into … I’m not entirely sure, really. Somewhere much more mature, where Rowling creates an unbreakable mood of tension, oppression and real danger.
It’s interesting, really. I, who used to dismiss the HP books, now sometimes defend them from friends who read and liked them, “but not that much.” I don’t really care. This is one series I’d love to read again for the first time.
Top 10 Most Heard Albums of 2009:
Most of what I listen to isn’t exactly new. Here’s what it exactly was.
1. “Stringtown,” by Jars of Clay
2. “The Long Fall Back To Earth,” by Jars of Clay
3. “The Beatles” (The White Album), by The Beatles
4. “Blue on Blue,” by Leigh Nash
5. “Far,” by Regina Spektor
6. “Keep Color,” by Republic Tigers
7. “Rocket Man: Number Ones,” by Elton John
8. “Forget And Not Slow Down,” by Relient k
9. “Ellipse,” by Imogen Heap
10. “The Man Comes Around,” by Johnny Cash (listen to this. It’s so good)
Thanks for reading my list. Sorry if it seemed a little rushed. Please comment with agreements, disagreements, suggestions, etc. Also, stay tuned: coming up (hopefully) soon on this blog will be two best of the decade lists, as well as a "series so far" entry on the TV show "Lost."
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
Here's what I've been doing instead of writing this blog
Not that most of you care, but the reason I've not been writing anything lately is threefold. First, I've been writing a book for National Novel Writing Month, and I just finished three days ago. Second, I've been rewatching Lost like a madman so I can do the pre-final-season recap. Third, I've been reading the webcomic Achewood furiously, and I think that if I could rewrite my Ten Best list, I've move it to number two, right under Dino Comics.
Here's what I will be writing soon, however.
The Lost list: Best and worst characters, moments, episodes, mysteries, the works.
Best of the decade: the ten best albums and movies of the first decade of the millenium. And, unlike the silly NME list, the friggin strokes are nowhere to be found.
Best of the year: the second annual.
Review of the Christmas Carol: Maybe.
Here's what I will be writing soon, however.
The Lost list: Best and worst characters, moments, episodes, mysteries, the works.
Best of the decade: the ten best albums and movies of the first decade of the millenium. And, unlike the silly NME list, the friggin strokes are nowhere to be found.
Best of the year: the second annual.
Review of the Christmas Carol: Maybe.
Friday, October 9, 2009
Brief notes
I have been listening to, beginning to listen to and trying to listen to a fair amount of new/semi-new music lately, but I have been a bit lazy/busy as of late, so I'm going to give a series of updates and mini-reviews to clear up my backlog for an essay on indie music I've been meaning to write.
Listening to:
"Ellipse," by Imogen Heap
The electronically enhanced melodies of Heap's voice are often quite lovely, and the easy-listening feel is often punctuated by a surprising urgency and infectiousness. Most of the music might not be "real," but that doesn't detract from its beauty. This album will probably be on my albums of the year list, and "Swoon" might be the year's best song.
"Far," by Regina Spektor
While her intentional oddity might turn some people off, there is an overwhelming sense of buoyancy about this album that makes it both catchy and charming. I also find "Laughing With" to be quite thought provoking.
"Wild Young Hearts," by The Noisettes
I first heard about this band after hearing the absolutely fantastic "Never Forget You" on the radio, and I hoped for an equally fantastic album (their debut is of a completely different -- and not very good -- style). It's not a superb release, but it's growing on me. One of the things I appreciate the most about it is its intentional desire to feel like a throwback to some of of the 60's greatest female African-American artists, most notably Diana Ross. There's plenty of fun stuff here, too.
"Church Music," by David Crowder Band
Though it's not nearly as cohesive, lyrically inspired or original as the band's benchmark "A Collision," it's just as musically inventive and even more technically executed. It is very long and cut to seem like a continuous take, which can make it seem rambling at times, but the band's deft ability to change genres mid-album keeps things interesting. The two prog-rock songs at the end are must-listens.
Beginning to listen to:
"The Incident," by Porcupine Tree
This is a long album, and I've lacked time to listen to the whole thing, but I really like what I've heard. The lyrics are their usual blend of clever and thought provoking, and the music -- most of which consists of different segments of a long song -- is varied and ripe for immersion. While I prefer the pre-metal days of the band to the "In Absentia" and beyond releases, Steven Wilson & Co. still manage to consistently create admirable albums.
Wanting to listen to:
"I and Love and You," by The Avett Brothers
I've only heard two songs by this band, but both are fantastic examples of jangly folk-rock, and I'm a big fan of the vocals. Check them out.
"My Old, Familiar Friend," by Brendan Benson
Again, I've only heard the opening single "A Whole Lot Better," but I'm excited to hear more.
And lastly, after hearing John Lennon's "Mind Games" on the radio today, I wish to renew my quest to find out which of The Beatles would have made it as solo acts if not for the success of their original band. Paul would have succeeded without question, I'm thinking no with Ringo, and I'm not sure about George and John (although I'm leaning "no" with Mr. Lennon). We'll see what happens.
Listening to:
"Ellipse," by Imogen Heap
The electronically enhanced melodies of Heap's voice are often quite lovely, and the easy-listening feel is often punctuated by a surprising urgency and infectiousness. Most of the music might not be "real," but that doesn't detract from its beauty. This album will probably be on my albums of the year list, and "Swoon" might be the year's best song.
"Far," by Regina Spektor
While her intentional oddity might turn some people off, there is an overwhelming sense of buoyancy about this album that makes it both catchy and charming. I also find "Laughing With" to be quite thought provoking.
"Wild Young Hearts," by The Noisettes
I first heard about this band after hearing the absolutely fantastic "Never Forget You" on the radio, and I hoped for an equally fantastic album (their debut is of a completely different -- and not very good -- style). It's not a superb release, but it's growing on me. One of the things I appreciate the most about it is its intentional desire to feel like a throwback to some of of the 60's greatest female African-American artists, most notably Diana Ross. There's plenty of fun stuff here, too.
"Church Music," by David Crowder Band
Though it's not nearly as cohesive, lyrically inspired or original as the band's benchmark "A Collision," it's just as musically inventive and even more technically executed. It is very long and cut to seem like a continuous take, which can make it seem rambling at times, but the band's deft ability to change genres mid-album keeps things interesting. The two prog-rock songs at the end are must-listens.
Beginning to listen to:
"The Incident," by Porcupine Tree
This is a long album, and I've lacked time to listen to the whole thing, but I really like what I've heard. The lyrics are their usual blend of clever and thought provoking, and the music -- most of which consists of different segments of a long song -- is varied and ripe for immersion. While I prefer the pre-metal days of the band to the "In Absentia" and beyond releases, Steven Wilson & Co. still manage to consistently create admirable albums.
Wanting to listen to:
"I and Love and You," by The Avett Brothers
I've only heard two songs by this band, but both are fantastic examples of jangly folk-rock, and I'm a big fan of the vocals. Check them out.
"My Old, Familiar Friend," by Brendan Benson
Again, I've only heard the opening single "A Whole Lot Better," but I'm excited to hear more.
And lastly, after hearing John Lennon's "Mind Games" on the radio today, I wish to renew my quest to find out which of The Beatles would have made it as solo acts if not for the success of their original band. Paul would have succeeded without question, I'm thinking no with Ringo, and I'm not sure about George and John (although I'm leaning "no" with Mr. Lennon). We'll see what happens.
Thursday, October 8, 2009
Relient k does the breakup album
I've been awaiting Relient k's new album, "Forget and Not Slow Down," with cautious optimism. As I explained in a recent post, I hoped to see a move away from the poppier sounds of their last EP and album and a move back to frontman Matt Thiessen's consistently creative lyrics. In a nutshell, I wrote, "[the new album] needs to showcase how talented the band is rather than how talented it could be." Well, Oct. 6 has come and gone. How does the new album hold up? Quite well, actually.
The first and most obvious feature is yet another genre switch. The powerpop of their last two albums is all but gone, replaced by some throwback punk-lite (most reminiscent of the band's third album "Two Lefts Don't Make a Right ... But Three Do"), some full-blown rock and even a sizable helping of folk-rock.
The first and title track kicks things off with some classic-if-forgettable Relient k sounds, but it sets the tone for the remainder of the album: this is a melancholy, yet hopeful, reflection on Thiessen's breakup with his girlfriend. While this is borne out in the lyrics (more on those later), the band crafts the musical framework to reflect the subject matter, and many songs have a rather wistful feel to them. The title track is followed by "I Don't Need a Soul," "Candlelight," "Therapy" and "Part of It." The placement of all of the songs seems good, a tribute to the band's ability to seamlessly transition between songs of drastically different genres. Much of the transition is aided by a musical device new to Relient k: song outros, specifically "Flare" (after "Candlelight") and "Outro" (after "Part of It").
"Forget..." as an album is an exercise in buildup, and the second half ups the ante, starting with the melodic "Over It." Then comes the fantastic combination of the rocking "Sahara" and the mellow "Savannah," bridged by the interlude "Oasis" and closed by the odd "Baby." It's rare to hear musical interludes used as well as they are here, and it ends up being one of the album's strongest points. After the "Saharah"/"Savannah" combo comes the power ballad "If You Believe Me" and the climactic closer "This is the End," followed by the piano-laden "(If You Want It)" another outro (but only kind of. It's actually about as long as the song it closes).
Musically, it's the most cohesive the band has ever been. There may not be as many "moments" as there are on their fourth (and best) album, "Mmhmm," but "Forget..." is consistently enjoyable throughout, and the genre-switching combined with the continuous flow makes for a lasting musical impression. It's also nice to see a departure from the electronic sounds that marked parts of their last two releases. While they were often used to good effect, the more natural sound of this record (which, the band reports, only used "real instruments") is a refreshing change.
"Forget..." doesn't disappoint lyrically, either. It's hands down the best written thing the band has released since "Mmhmm," and while it may not as often reach the heights of tracks like "When I Go Down" or "Life After Death and Taxes," some of Thiessen's best writing is here, from the melancholy "I Don't Need a Soul" to the playful "Candlelight" to the poignant "(If You Want It)."
Thematically, the lyrics are diametrically opposed to "Five Score and Seven Years Ago," the band's last album proper. While the former album is fully of bouncy love songs to Thiessen's then-girlfriend, "Forget..." speaks almost exclusively of dealing with that relationship's aftermath. However, Thiessen manages to walk this oft-tread upon ground without relying on cliches, refusing to fall completely into the "so over it" or the "woe is me" categories. Rather, the wistful music complements the wistful lyrics, surveying a relationship with an end that was painful (and not entirely forgotten) but also probably for the best.
This lyrical maturity is still complemented by Thiessen's trademark clever rhyming, and no song ever dips even close to the repetitiveness and poor quality that plagued recent songs like "Give Until There's Nothing Left" or "I Just Want You To Know." Thiessen seems to be saying that he wants to keep growing lyrically while retaining the aspects of his songwriting that have always worked.
In fact, that seems to be one of the messages of the album as a whole. While some classic Relient k sounds are certainly retained, the band seems to be putting their greater independence (they are now signed with and partially manage Gotee's indie music imprint, Mono vs. Stereo) to good use.
In short: Relient k has definitely exceeded my expectations. While "Forget and Not Slow Down" might not be quite as good as "Mmhmm," it sure comes close.
The first and most obvious feature is yet another genre switch. The powerpop of their last two albums is all but gone, replaced by some throwback punk-lite (most reminiscent of the band's third album "Two Lefts Don't Make a Right ... But Three Do"), some full-blown rock and even a sizable helping of folk-rock.
The first and title track kicks things off with some classic-if-forgettable Relient k sounds, but it sets the tone for the remainder of the album: this is a melancholy, yet hopeful, reflection on Thiessen's breakup with his girlfriend. While this is borne out in the lyrics (more on those later), the band crafts the musical framework to reflect the subject matter, and many songs have a rather wistful feel to them. The title track is followed by "I Don't Need a Soul," "Candlelight," "Therapy" and "Part of It." The placement of all of the songs seems good, a tribute to the band's ability to seamlessly transition between songs of drastically different genres. Much of the transition is aided by a musical device new to Relient k: song outros, specifically "Flare" (after "Candlelight") and "Outro" (after "Part of It").
"Forget..." as an album is an exercise in buildup, and the second half ups the ante, starting with the melodic "Over It." Then comes the fantastic combination of the rocking "Sahara" and the mellow "Savannah," bridged by the interlude "Oasis" and closed by the odd "Baby." It's rare to hear musical interludes used as well as they are here, and it ends up being one of the album's strongest points. After the "Saharah"/"Savannah" combo comes the power ballad "If You Believe Me" and the climactic closer "This is the End," followed by the piano-laden "(If You Want It)" another outro (but only kind of. It's actually about as long as the song it closes).
Musically, it's the most cohesive the band has ever been. There may not be as many "moments" as there are on their fourth (and best) album, "Mmhmm," but "Forget..." is consistently enjoyable throughout, and the genre-switching combined with the continuous flow makes for a lasting musical impression. It's also nice to see a departure from the electronic sounds that marked parts of their last two releases. While they were often used to good effect, the more natural sound of this record (which, the band reports, only used "real instruments") is a refreshing change.
"Forget..." doesn't disappoint lyrically, either. It's hands down the best written thing the band has released since "Mmhmm," and while it may not as often reach the heights of tracks like "When I Go Down" or "Life After Death and Taxes," some of Thiessen's best writing is here, from the melancholy "I Don't Need a Soul" to the playful "Candlelight" to the poignant "(If You Want It)."
Thematically, the lyrics are diametrically opposed to "Five Score and Seven Years Ago," the band's last album proper. While the former album is fully of bouncy love songs to Thiessen's then-girlfriend, "Forget..." speaks almost exclusively of dealing with that relationship's aftermath. However, Thiessen manages to walk this oft-tread upon ground without relying on cliches, refusing to fall completely into the "so over it" or the "woe is me" categories. Rather, the wistful music complements the wistful lyrics, surveying a relationship with an end that was painful (and not entirely forgotten) but also probably for the best.
This lyrical maturity is still complemented by Thiessen's trademark clever rhyming, and no song ever dips even close to the repetitiveness and poor quality that plagued recent songs like "Give Until There's Nothing Left" or "I Just Want You To Know." Thiessen seems to be saying that he wants to keep growing lyrically while retaining the aspects of his songwriting that have always worked.
In fact, that seems to be one of the messages of the album as a whole. While some classic Relient k sounds are certainly retained, the band seems to be putting their greater independence (they are now signed with and partially manage Gotee's indie music imprint, Mono vs. Stereo) to good use.
In short: Relient k has definitely exceeded my expectations. While "Forget and Not Slow Down" might not be quite as good as "Mmhmm," it sure comes close.
Monday, October 5, 2009
"The Invention of Lying" is both funny and flat
Imagine a world in which no one ever lies. Not only do they never lie, but they have no concept what a "lie" is. It reminds one of the eyeless Aunt Beast from "A Wrinkle in Time." If someone has never seen, how can he understand what seeing is? So it is with the denizens of "The Invention of Lying's" version of Earth: they have no word for truth because, for them, the truth truly is self-evident. There are no lies, no polite untruths, no deceptions, no fiction and, as an unintended consequence, little politeness, as complete honesty also means utter frankness. It is an altogether more depressing, if less confusing, place to live in.
It is a very depressing place indeed for Mark Bellison (Ricky Gervais, who also wrote and directed the film), a scriptwriter at Lecture Films, a film company that only produces historical scripts read by professional readers because fiction is unheard of and it would not be truthful to have actors play the parts of the historical characters (not that the characters recognize this. They just never have thought otherwise). Mark is rather overweight and ugly, which ruins his date with Anna (Jennifer Garner), who likes him but would never want to procreate with him because his genes would not make for attractive kids. He is also stuck with the unenviable job of writing scripts for the 14th century at work. Since no one wants to see a lecture film about The Black Plague, he is soon fired, but not before his secretary and one of his coworkers give him a brutally honest appraisal of their feelings towards him.
Things are certainly looking down for Mark, until he goes to the bank and the teller asks him how much money he has in his bank account (he planned to withdraw the entire amount, as he was about to get evicted from his apartment). While he only has $300, he discovers that he can tell the teller that he has $800 dollars. Since she has known from birth that everything that anyone ever tells her is correct, she simply assumes that there is a computer error and gives him the money.
Mark is thunderstruck. He has an incredible new ability, one that he doesn't even have a word to describe. His friends don't even understand what he's trying to explain to them, which leads to an amusing scene in which he tells them increasingly outrageous lies about himself which they believe without question or even much surprise.
When he realizes that he can lie with complete impunity, he immediately sets out to benefit himself as much as possible. This takes up the majority of the movie, and it never gets boring, thanks to the cast's ability to play their honest innocence completely straight and Gervais' nearly flawless comedic timing. Indeed, after seeing him in this movie and last year's criminally unappreciated "Ghost Town," I'd say that he joins fellow "Office"-terrible-boss-actor Steve Carell on the very top of the heap of modern comedic actors. The majority of the film plays like a long, brilliant Monty Python sketch, with the actors and their surroundings (including buildings, advertisements and even epitaphs) never missing a beat in their odd little world. The film even touches on philosophical points like our basic need for self-deception and the little white lies that each of us tell every day, all the while recognizing that in the end, the comedy is what's most important.
Until, that is, about halfway through the film, when Mark's mother is on her deathbed.
You see, it turns out that there is no religion in the land of truth, and Mark's mum is terrified of "an eternity of nothingness." Mark is heartbroken, and to comfort his mother in her final moments, he tells her that death is not the end and that after she dies she will go to a happy place where she will be with all of the people she loved. Unfortunately for Mark, his mother's doctors hear his fib, and the world soon waits at his doorstep, eager to hear from him about his afterlife revelation. What follows is a long scene in which Gervais, a lifelong atheist, makes up a story about "the man in the sky" and in so doing takes shot after shot after shot at any and all religions, all but abandoning the cleverness and subtlety that made the film's outrageous moments shine all the more.
After the aforementioned scene, the film regains some of its comic footing, but every now and then Gervais feels the need to take another cheap shot at a God that he doesn't believe in. To call it a satire or an argument against religion is laughable, as even moderately intelligent people should realize that all Gervais is doing is setting up straw men that he can immediately knock down. At times, it almost seems like Gervais is angry at God for supposed injustices but hasn't taken the time to figure out who this God really is or why He does the things that he does.
Even here, the film can be funny, although to laugh at some of these jokes will make most religious people a bit uncomfortable, and even the non-religious should be able to see past Gervais' rather sophomoric and vindictive gibes. But perhaps the most disappointing thing is to see such a poorly thought-out "message" shoehorned into what is otherwise one of the funniest movies I've seen in a long time (and one that is still worth viewing, if you are willing to sit through the heavy-handed moments).
Gervais is essentially preaching to the choir here. Anyone but the most staunch of atheists should be able to see that his "man in the sky" nonsense is not an accurate or even satirical look into the way Christians or anyone else thinks. In fact, the chillingly sad death scene of Mark's mother seems like a far better window into the mind of an atheist than any view of the religious that the film purports to offer. After all, if we are truly all that there is, what is there to hope for?
It is a very depressing place indeed for Mark Bellison (Ricky Gervais, who also wrote and directed the film), a scriptwriter at Lecture Films, a film company that only produces historical scripts read by professional readers because fiction is unheard of and it would not be truthful to have actors play the parts of the historical characters (not that the characters recognize this. They just never have thought otherwise). Mark is rather overweight and ugly, which ruins his date with Anna (Jennifer Garner), who likes him but would never want to procreate with him because his genes would not make for attractive kids. He is also stuck with the unenviable job of writing scripts for the 14th century at work. Since no one wants to see a lecture film about The Black Plague, he is soon fired, but not before his secretary and one of his coworkers give him a brutally honest appraisal of their feelings towards him.
Things are certainly looking down for Mark, until he goes to the bank and the teller asks him how much money he has in his bank account (he planned to withdraw the entire amount, as he was about to get evicted from his apartment). While he only has $300, he discovers that he can tell the teller that he has $800 dollars. Since she has known from birth that everything that anyone ever tells her is correct, she simply assumes that there is a computer error and gives him the money.
Mark is thunderstruck. He has an incredible new ability, one that he doesn't even have a word to describe. His friends don't even understand what he's trying to explain to them, which leads to an amusing scene in which he tells them increasingly outrageous lies about himself which they believe without question or even much surprise.
When he realizes that he can lie with complete impunity, he immediately sets out to benefit himself as much as possible. This takes up the majority of the movie, and it never gets boring, thanks to the cast's ability to play their honest innocence completely straight and Gervais' nearly flawless comedic timing. Indeed, after seeing him in this movie and last year's criminally unappreciated "Ghost Town," I'd say that he joins fellow "Office"-terrible-boss-actor Steve Carell on the very top of the heap of modern comedic actors. The majority of the film plays like a long, brilliant Monty Python sketch, with the actors and their surroundings (including buildings, advertisements and even epitaphs) never missing a beat in their odd little world. The film even touches on philosophical points like our basic need for self-deception and the little white lies that each of us tell every day, all the while recognizing that in the end, the comedy is what's most important.
Until, that is, about halfway through the film, when Mark's mother is on her deathbed.
You see, it turns out that there is no religion in the land of truth, and Mark's mum is terrified of "an eternity of nothingness." Mark is heartbroken, and to comfort his mother in her final moments, he tells her that death is not the end and that after she dies she will go to a happy place where she will be with all of the people she loved. Unfortunately for Mark, his mother's doctors hear his fib, and the world soon waits at his doorstep, eager to hear from him about his afterlife revelation. What follows is a long scene in which Gervais, a lifelong atheist, makes up a story about "the man in the sky" and in so doing takes shot after shot after shot at any and all religions, all but abandoning the cleverness and subtlety that made the film's outrageous moments shine all the more.
After the aforementioned scene, the film regains some of its comic footing, but every now and then Gervais feels the need to take another cheap shot at a God that he doesn't believe in. To call it a satire or an argument against religion is laughable, as even moderately intelligent people should realize that all Gervais is doing is setting up straw men that he can immediately knock down. At times, it almost seems like Gervais is angry at God for supposed injustices but hasn't taken the time to figure out who this God really is or why He does the things that he does.
Even here, the film can be funny, although to laugh at some of these jokes will make most religious people a bit uncomfortable, and even the non-religious should be able to see past Gervais' rather sophomoric and vindictive gibes. But perhaps the most disappointing thing is to see such a poorly thought-out "message" shoehorned into what is otherwise one of the funniest movies I've seen in a long time (and one that is still worth viewing, if you are willing to sit through the heavy-handed moments).
Gervais is essentially preaching to the choir here. Anyone but the most staunch of atheists should be able to see that his "man in the sky" nonsense is not an accurate or even satirical look into the way Christians or anyone else thinks. In fact, the chillingly sad death scene of Mark's mother seems like a far better window into the mind of an atheist than any view of the religious that the film purports to offer. After all, if we are truly all that there is, what is there to hope for?
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
It's not music, it's not muzak, it's Muse-ic
I'm not really sure how I missed out on Muse until this year. They are, after all, one of the most popular rock bands in Europe, if not the most popular. However, I can be a bit behind with the musical times (I'm still trying to figure out what this whole "Coldplay" business is about), so perhaps it's not that surprising that I never really listened to Muse until my friend Jacob introduced them to me in January. I'm still catching up on their back catalogue (I'm not that familiar with "Showbiz" or "The Origin of Symmetry" yet), but I absolutely love the marriage of technical ability and raw energy that is showcased on "Absolution" and "Black Holes and Revelations." With their latest album, "The Resistance," I was hoping for more of the marriage and more of the variety that keeps their other releases fresh and distinct.
I'm not entirely sure what I got, exactly.
I am sure that the album is flawed, but I'm also sure that the album is a great display of musicianship. I'm sure that the album is pretentiously epic, but I'm also quite positive that sometimes that works. Let me explain.
The first of the two most noticeable flaws in the album is the rather languid pace of almost every single song. It's almost a subconscious thing, but it's one that greatly affects the replay value. As I said before, "Absolution and "BHAR" both abounded with an unbridled verve that ripped through their fast-paced songs (see, for example, "Hysteria") and writhed just beneath the surface of their more laid back songs ("Starlight," "Supermassive Black Hole"). With "The Resistance," it seems like just the opposite. A musical haze seems to have settled over the arrangements this time around, with even the more energetic songs sounding like they could use a shot in the arm. A notable example of this is the first track and first single "Uprising," which, for all of its fight-the-power spirit and chunky guitar riffs, feels like it should pack a little bit more of a punch.
The other flaw that is immediately apparent is the attitude that the musical proceedings of the album's 54 minutes are big news. Every flourish seems to be an epic event to be accompanied by a choir and strings, many of the tracks have lyrics that vaguely suggest fighting the man (ironic considering the band's very in-the-mainstream status), and even the names of the songs suggest a bunch of pretentious art students dismissing the Philistines who dare to question their work. Seriously, "The United States of Eurasia," "Undisclosed Desires," "Unnatural Selection"? Tell me that doesn't sound like an abstract painting display, I dare you.
However, the album is not without its charm. Muse is still Muse, so you can expect quality arrangements and impressive musical chops. The album also gets better (and a bit more energetic) as it progresses, with the languor-free "MK Ultra" being a late highlight. The three part rock "symphony" is appropriately impressive, and I'm sure I will appreciate it even more with repeated listens (it purportedly features the talents of something like 40 different musicians). Is it in the range of greatness inhabited by the likes of "Absolution" and "BHAR"? No. Is it still worth a spin on the CD player once in a while? For sure.
In a way, there is a lone feature of the album that summarizes both its positive and negative aspects. That epic power ballads are the bread and butter of Muse is no question; indeed, some of the most over-the-top grandiose moments on the album (see the inner-Queen-coming-out "...Eurasia") are also the most fun. However, the complete abandonment of any sort of musical modesty on "The Resistance" makes for an album that almost wears you out and at times borders on self-parody. Muse has made good music many times before. This time, they've settled for good Muse-ic.
I'm not entirely sure what I got, exactly.
I am sure that the album is flawed, but I'm also sure that the album is a great display of musicianship. I'm sure that the album is pretentiously epic, but I'm also quite positive that sometimes that works. Let me explain.
The first of the two most noticeable flaws in the album is the rather languid pace of almost every single song. It's almost a subconscious thing, but it's one that greatly affects the replay value. As I said before, "Absolution and "BHAR" both abounded with an unbridled verve that ripped through their fast-paced songs (see, for example, "Hysteria") and writhed just beneath the surface of their more laid back songs ("Starlight," "Supermassive Black Hole"). With "The Resistance," it seems like just the opposite. A musical haze seems to have settled over the arrangements this time around, with even the more energetic songs sounding like they could use a shot in the arm. A notable example of this is the first track and first single "Uprising," which, for all of its fight-the-power spirit and chunky guitar riffs, feels like it should pack a little bit more of a punch.
The other flaw that is immediately apparent is the attitude that the musical proceedings of the album's 54 minutes are big news. Every flourish seems to be an epic event to be accompanied by a choir and strings, many of the tracks have lyrics that vaguely suggest fighting the man (ironic considering the band's very in-the-mainstream status), and even the names of the songs suggest a bunch of pretentious art students dismissing the Philistines who dare to question their work. Seriously, "The United States of Eurasia," "Undisclosed Desires," "Unnatural Selection"? Tell me that doesn't sound like an abstract painting display, I dare you.
However, the album is not without its charm. Muse is still Muse, so you can expect quality arrangements and impressive musical chops. The album also gets better (and a bit more energetic) as it progresses, with the languor-free "MK Ultra" being a late highlight. The three part rock "symphony" is appropriately impressive, and I'm sure I will appreciate it even more with repeated listens (it purportedly features the talents of something like 40 different musicians). Is it in the range of greatness inhabited by the likes of "Absolution" and "BHAR"? No. Is it still worth a spin on the CD player once in a while? For sure.
In a way, there is a lone feature of the album that summarizes both its positive and negative aspects. That epic power ballads are the bread and butter of Muse is no question; indeed, some of the most over-the-top grandiose moments on the album (see the inner-Queen-coming-out "...Eurasia") are also the most fun. However, the complete abandonment of any sort of musical modesty on "The Resistance" makes for an album that almost wears you out and at times borders on self-parody. Muse has made good music many times before. This time, they've settled for good Muse-ic.
Saturday, September 12, 2009
Thoughts on the future of Relient k
Relient k is an interesting band. The five-piece group, led by frontman Matt Thiessen, has shown marked musical progression since its mostly-bad-but-still-occasionally-charming eponymous debut album in 2000, and the band's commitment to release new music every year (a commitment that has only been broken once) means that there's always something new to listen to. The band's rise in proficiency is well documented, and Thiessen & Co.'s upward trending musical ability is matched by a simultaneous but gradual transition in the band's genre, progressing from garage punk to punk/pop to slick powerpop.
In short, Relient k has not been content with rehashing previous albums, and each release showcases a group that has grown more technical and production-savvy since the last outing. Thiessen's deft songwriting ability should put the icing on the cake of a band that has the chops to be successful without being dull and popular without being the lowest common denominator. And yet, their upcoming album, "Forget and Not Slow Down," may be the last RK album that I ever purchase.
There are a few reasons that my enthusiasm for the band has waned a bit. One reason might be as simple as the fact that it's not the same band that I went through high school with. The band's "classic lineup" began to disintegrate after their fourth (and best) album, 2004's "Mmhmm," with the departure of the original bassist, Brian Pittman. Longtime drummer Dave Douglas left after their next album, and the one-two departures (and the three replacements they spawned) have made the band seem like a revolving door of backups to Thiessen. Add that to the fact that the new members were already notable in the Christian music scene prior to their RK tenure, with resumes that include the likes of the Supertones, Audio Adrenaline, Ace Troubleshooter and others and sometimes it feels like a Christianized version of The All-Starr Band.
Another reason is that I'm not the same person who listened to Relient k in high school. While I would reject the notion that all of the band's music is targeted at the high school demographic, it's undeniable that most of their first three albums and much of their later work has appealed to that age group. I still appreciate Thiessen's inventive turns of phrase, but I don't always appreciate the subjects whose phrases he's turning. Likewise, as I progressed through college, my musical horizons continued to broaden. While I certainly recognize that the band is proficient at the mildly-fuzzy, radio friendly punk-lite of their early work, it's just not something that I'm that into anymore.
However, the primary reason that I'm contemplating leaving the RK fold after "Forget..." is that, though the band remains talented, it has not lived up to its potential.
The year is 2004. Relient k has released "Mmhmm" to much success, due in part to their decision to co-sign with Capitol Records in addition to their small Christian label, Gotee. The album is home to many current concert staples, including "Life After Death and Taxes," "I So Hate Consequences" and, of course, "Be My Escape." But it is more than just a commercial milestone for the group. It marks a transition in style and songwriting.
Thiessen had always been clever, but the lyrics on "Mmhmm" packed an emotional punch that was never reached in his prior work. With few exceptions, gone were the songs about 80s pop culture and... well, no, 80s pop culture about covered most of their silly songs, now that I think about it. In those songs' place were honest, insightful rockers covering the shortcomings that everyone faces. "Mmhmm" ended up being just what Relient k needed: it shot them to national prominence while establishing them as a band with musical chops and lyrical skill (for their genre, anyway). Their success allowed them more flexibility in the studio and more recognition from producers. That means better music, right?
Well, no, but it does mean better produced music. In 2007, the band released "Five Score and Seven Years Ago," which, while undeniably well executed, still seemed to come up short. The shortcomings of the album were only highlighted in the double album length "EP" of 2008, "The Bird and the Bee Sides" (attentive readers will note that this disc made my five best list of 2008. Subsequent listens have soured me on it to a certain extent).
The most obvious shortcoming is the fact that Thiessen often seems to undergo mental lapses in his writing. I'm not sure if I've ever come across another album that contains such a contrast between lyrical brilliance and lyrical dregs as "Five Score" does. Yet, as odd as it seems, "Deathbed," an 11 minute ballad that eloquently examines the life of a dying man, exists only seven tracks away from "Give Until There's Nothing Left," a sappy, simplistic throwaway that Thiessen had no business writing at all, let alone placing on an album.
The contrast remained on "The Bird...," with songs like "Curl Up and Die" and "The Stenographer" showcasing Thiessen's abilities while clunkers like "The Lining is Silver," "There Was Another Time in My Life" and "I Just Want You to Know" simultaneously undermined them. These tracks are repetitive and trite and seem like better produced songs from the band's infancy.
It's obvious that Thiessen is capable of consistently good songwriting. Perhaps he has become a little too self-confident in his talents, presuming that whatever flows from his pen is lyrical gold. I hope he wises up soon. I'm not too keen on albums where I consistently skip three tracks or more because of cruddy writing.
The other way that the band has failed to live up to its potential is its genre choice since "Mmhmm." While "Mmhmm" was their most energetic and riff-laden album yet, "Five Score" saw a foray into pop music that showed no signs of stopping when "The Bird..." came out. Now, there's nothing wrong with well-executed pop, and Relient k does execute it well, but their last two releases have sounded, as a general rule, just like any other band who can write well-executed pop. Their recent success has given them more musical flexibility, and they have responded by becoming more color-inside-the-lines commercial. They've reached a point where their popularity would survive and probably thrive in risk-taking, but instead they've taken no real risks. Their music sounds great, but there are fewer great sounds.
So, what does "Forget and Not Slow Down" need to do to hold my interest in Thiessen & Co.? Simple: it needs to showcase how talented the band is rather than how talented it could be. I want solid, creative lyrics and musical twists throughout. Maybe rock a little harder. They certainly are capable of it.
I'm cautiously hopeful that they will come through. The title track is up on Myspace, and it's not anything super-special, but the album blurb promises a more organic, rockier album than the past two efforts. Thiessen also advertises thoughtful lyrics, the result of sequestering himself in a backwoods lake house for over two months. The ingredients are there, but are the boys up to using them well?
We'll find out on October 6.
In short, Relient k has not been content with rehashing previous albums, and each release showcases a group that has grown more technical and production-savvy since the last outing. Thiessen's deft songwriting ability should put the icing on the cake of a band that has the chops to be successful without being dull and popular without being the lowest common denominator. And yet, their upcoming album, "Forget and Not Slow Down," may be the last RK album that I ever purchase.
There are a few reasons that my enthusiasm for the band has waned a bit. One reason might be as simple as the fact that it's not the same band that I went through high school with. The band's "classic lineup" began to disintegrate after their fourth (and best) album, 2004's "Mmhmm," with the departure of the original bassist, Brian Pittman. Longtime drummer Dave Douglas left after their next album, and the one-two departures (and the three replacements they spawned) have made the band seem like a revolving door of backups to Thiessen. Add that to the fact that the new members were already notable in the Christian music scene prior to their RK tenure, with resumes that include the likes of the Supertones, Audio Adrenaline, Ace Troubleshooter and others and sometimes it feels like a Christianized version of The All-Starr Band.
Another reason is that I'm not the same person who listened to Relient k in high school. While I would reject the notion that all of the band's music is targeted at the high school demographic, it's undeniable that most of their first three albums and much of their later work has appealed to that age group. I still appreciate Thiessen's inventive turns of phrase, but I don't always appreciate the subjects whose phrases he's turning. Likewise, as I progressed through college, my musical horizons continued to broaden. While I certainly recognize that the band is proficient at the mildly-fuzzy, radio friendly punk-lite of their early work, it's just not something that I'm that into anymore.
However, the primary reason that I'm contemplating leaving the RK fold after "Forget..." is that, though the band remains talented, it has not lived up to its potential.
The year is 2004. Relient k has released "Mmhmm" to much success, due in part to their decision to co-sign with Capitol Records in addition to their small Christian label, Gotee. The album is home to many current concert staples, including "Life After Death and Taxes," "I So Hate Consequences" and, of course, "Be My Escape." But it is more than just a commercial milestone for the group. It marks a transition in style and songwriting.
Thiessen had always been clever, but the lyrics on "Mmhmm" packed an emotional punch that was never reached in his prior work. With few exceptions, gone were the songs about 80s pop culture and... well, no, 80s pop culture about covered most of their silly songs, now that I think about it. In those songs' place were honest, insightful rockers covering the shortcomings that everyone faces. "Mmhmm" ended up being just what Relient k needed: it shot them to national prominence while establishing them as a band with musical chops and lyrical skill (for their genre, anyway). Their success allowed them more flexibility in the studio and more recognition from producers. That means better music, right?
Well, no, but it does mean better produced music. In 2007, the band released "Five Score and Seven Years Ago," which, while undeniably well executed, still seemed to come up short. The shortcomings of the album were only highlighted in the double album length "EP" of 2008, "The Bird and the Bee Sides" (attentive readers will note that this disc made my five best list of 2008. Subsequent listens have soured me on it to a certain extent).
The most obvious shortcoming is the fact that Thiessen often seems to undergo mental lapses in his writing. I'm not sure if I've ever come across another album that contains such a contrast between lyrical brilliance and lyrical dregs as "Five Score" does. Yet, as odd as it seems, "Deathbed," an 11 minute ballad that eloquently examines the life of a dying man, exists only seven tracks away from "Give Until There's Nothing Left," a sappy, simplistic throwaway that Thiessen had no business writing at all, let alone placing on an album.
The contrast remained on "The Bird...," with songs like "Curl Up and Die" and "The Stenographer" showcasing Thiessen's abilities while clunkers like "The Lining is Silver," "There Was Another Time in My Life" and "I Just Want You to Know" simultaneously undermined them. These tracks are repetitive and trite and seem like better produced songs from the band's infancy.
It's obvious that Thiessen is capable of consistently good songwriting. Perhaps he has become a little too self-confident in his talents, presuming that whatever flows from his pen is lyrical gold. I hope he wises up soon. I'm not too keen on albums where I consistently skip three tracks or more because of cruddy writing.
The other way that the band has failed to live up to its potential is its genre choice since "Mmhmm." While "Mmhmm" was their most energetic and riff-laden album yet, "Five Score" saw a foray into pop music that showed no signs of stopping when "The Bird..." came out. Now, there's nothing wrong with well-executed pop, and Relient k does execute it well, but their last two releases have sounded, as a general rule, just like any other band who can write well-executed pop. Their recent success has given them more musical flexibility, and they have responded by becoming more color-inside-the-lines commercial. They've reached a point where their popularity would survive and probably thrive in risk-taking, but instead they've taken no real risks. Their music sounds great, but there are fewer great sounds.
So, what does "Forget and Not Slow Down" need to do to hold my interest in Thiessen & Co.? Simple: it needs to showcase how talented the band is rather than how talented it could be. I want solid, creative lyrics and musical twists throughout. Maybe rock a little harder. They certainly are capable of it.
I'm cautiously hopeful that they will come through. The title track is up on Myspace, and it's not anything super-special, but the album blurb promises a more organic, rockier album than the past two efforts. Thiessen also advertises thoughtful lyrics, the result of sequestering himself in a backwoods lake house for over two months. The ingredients are there, but are the boys up to using them well?
We'll find out on October 6.
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
Ten Best: Webcomics
Let's face it: newspaper comics just aren't what they used to be. Granted, it's not as if they're a cultural wasteland or anything - Zits, Dilbert, Get Fuzzy, Non Sequitur and what's left of Foxtrot all have at least occasional flashes of genius - but formats for comics have gotten much more strict (read: confining and small) since the days of Krazy Kat and the like. Add that to the fact that the two greatest cartoonists of the 90s - the aesthetic groundbreaker Bill Watterson (Calvin and Hobbes), and the king of absurdity Gary Larson (The Far Side) - have left the scene, and you get a comics page that is dominated by the likes of Cathy, Mutts, Beetle Bailey, and the once-funny Garfield: rigid, formulaic strips that substitute an "Aack!" or a fourth wall sarcastic glance for a joke.
If the rise of webcomics is any indication, a generation accustomed to Internet use agrees with me. The Internet's freedom to self-publish breaks down many of the boundaries that newspaper comics function within.
Webcomics have several advantages over their print-based counterparts, most of which can be summed up in two categories: form and content. The form (ie: graphical elements, size, presentation and even animation) is restricted only by bandwidth and the cartoonist's imagination and skill, and the content (ie: subject matter and dialogue) is entirely up to the comic's creator. Content's non-restriction also enables more niche humor to be published, and many webcomics devoted to nerds or videogames or what have you have enjoyed much success online. However, this virtually unlimited freedom does have one major drawback: the vast majority of webcomics suck.
Oh sure, there's a fair share of gems out there (hence this list), but even some of the more popular comics (Ctrl+Alt+Delete, just to name one of many) are terrible. Having an editor may mean that you can't publish everything, but it also means that you can't publish just anything. How, then, can you expect to successfully navigate the hostile deserts of webcomicdom to find the sweet oases of good comics? Simple; just read this list.
First, however, I have a couple of disclaimers. These are not the only good webcomics out there. Some readers may be unhappy that a couple of their favorites (mostly I am thinking of Penny Arcade) didn't make the list, but that doesn't mean I am consigning them to the Internet dumpheap. Since most of you (wink) have good taste, it most likely it means that I find the humor just a little bit too specific or inconsistent. The other disclaimer is that the tearing down of content restrictions means that most of the comics on this list have at least some content that could be deemed offensive, be it swearing, sexual humor, etc. There are a couple that are perhaps more offensive than the others here, and I will point those out, but be forewarned that webcomics are, in general, not for those who can't stand language or suggestiveness. OK, enough of this; on to the list!
In order to better describe the types of humor you might encounter in these comics, I have arbitrarily set up a genre classification system for them (yes, I know that there are other kinds, but no "soap opera" or biographical strips will be appearing on this list). A "storyline" comic is a comic in which the humor is derived from the cast of characters and an ongoing story arc of their predicaments. "Punchline" comics are obviously more traditional. "Situational" comics are ones in which the joke is in the set-up and the setting rather than a defined punchline, and "surrealist" comics are those in which the humor is derived from sheer weirdness or shock value.
10. Thinkin' Lincoln
Author: Miles Grover
Style: surrealist, punch-line
Thinkin' Lincoln is a comic about the daily adventures of a group of historical figures' anachronistic talking heads. While many historical and not-so-historical figures appear frequently throughout the comic, Thinkin' Lincoln's main focus is reserved for Abraham Lincoln, a simplistic and overenthusiastic nitwit, George Washington, Abe's snide rival, and Queen Elizabeth II, a kind of motherly figure for the other characters. The comic is also frequently visited by the likes of Freud, Darwin, Otto Von Bismark, Poe and other weirder characters like Skeleton Shakespeare and Zombie Mark Twain (both exactly what they sound like).
While a lot of the humor is derived merely from these famous characters spouting clearly uncharacteristic dialogue, Grover often goes one step further and invokes the true historical facts about these people, creating a humorous mishmash.
Recommended for: history buffs, people who like Monty Python
Favorites: http://www.thinkin-lincoln.com/index.php?strip_id=261, http://www.thinkin-lincoln.com/index.php?strip_id=876, http://www.thinkin-lincoln.com/index.php?strip_id=838
9. Terror Island
Authors: Ben Heaton and Lewis Powell
Style: storyline, surrealist
Terror Island has probably the weirdest premise of the comics on this list. It is a photocomic dealing primarily with the struggles of two roommates who are both determined to get the other one to buy groceries. Also, almost all of the characters are played by pieces from popular board games. While this probably doesn't sound like a premise that could keep a comic afloat, the subplots and arcs become pretty complex and surprisingly hilarious. My favorite character is Jame, so named because he thinks that "James" is plural.
Recommended for: Fans of deadpan, Demetri Martin style comedy
Favorites: You've got to read this one from the beginning to grasp the humor. Since the comic came to a close after strip 300, it shouldn't be that hard to finish.
8. Unwinder's Tall Comics
Author: Eli Parker, alias Parker Wilson
Style: situational
Unwinder is a kid (possibly alien?) from Minnesota who is an over-the-top-satire of the pop culture saturated indie guy. Everything he does is a conscious effort to appear cool and different (that is, everything that doesn't involve harassing his friend Barbecue Sauce). While Parker usually sets his sights on self-congratulating preeners, no cultural bastion is safe from his pen, be it corny science fiction novels, gossip tabloids, or Tag body spray. However, the most distinctive feature of this comic is its height. It is, as the name suggests, a very tall comic.
While there is a kind of demented genius behind much of this comic, it loses points for an inconsistent update schedule (I know, I know, Eli, you have an actual job) and the fact that some comics are just so completely out of left field that they're less funny than confusing. Still, however, a solid comic (and he updates it more frequently than he sent The Column his newspaper comics, so there's that too).
Recommended for: people who have indie friends or who know a lot about pop culture
Favorites: http://tallcomics.com/index.php?strip_id=6, http://tallcomics.com/index.php?strip_id=32 (really, anytime he writes script treatments are completely worthwhile), http://tallcomics.com/index.php?strip_id=25
7. Achewood
Author: Chris Onstad
Style: surrealist, storyline
WARNING: This strip is one of a couple wherein the humor can become entirely inappropriate, and if you are unwilling to sift, then this comic is definitely not for you (in fact, if you are not willing to sift, do not even go to the comic that is on the main page at the time of posting). However, if you are willing to sift, Achewood will certainly yield some gems.
Achewood is a comic about a large friend/acquaintance group of animals and other creatures/robots/etc (many of whom were originally stuffed animals, although it is unclear whether that is still canon or not) who embark on sundry adventures and absurd exploits. The backlog for this comic is immense, and it's probably best if you start reading from the beginning.
The highlight of this strip is its ability to evoke hilarity from complete and utter absurdity. Many times, I have finished laughing at a strip only to wonder how Onstad even thought to combine the strange pairings of dialogue, characters and setting. And it's not just a giant Python skit either. Most of the main characters are very well developed and even have motivation behind their actions (some of them even have in-character blogs loosely maintained by Onstad). If you don't mind a rotten apple every so often, this is definitely a strip to check out.
Recommended for: fans of the Douglas Adams style of developed absurdity
Favorites: It would take me far too long to search through the backlogs for my favorites, and I haven't even read the whole comic. I would recommend starting at (or at least toward) the beginning.
6. Pictures for Sad Children
Author: John Campell
Style: surrealist, situational
This is an odd comic that the author describes as being "about a bad feeling you get when you are feeling good, or a good feeling you get when you are feeling bad." It's (almost) all in greyscale, with no caps and sometimes no obvious punchline. That being said, it's sometimes hit and miss, but when it's good, it's pretty darn funny.
PFSC started out mainly as a comic about a ghost named Paul, although the character and his storyline have mostly been abandoned in favor of short, unrelated storylines or one-offs. When the comic is at its best, it points out weird ways of seeing everyday things or just revels in absurd situations. When it's not at its best, it can be boring or offensive, so be forewarned. However, the good here definitely outweighs the bad.
Recommended for: people who are too introspective
Favorites: http://picturesforsadchildren.com/index.php?comicID=28 (this is in the middle of a storyline, but I love it), http://picturesforsadchildren.com/index.php?comicID=237, http://picturesforsadchildren.com/index.php?comicID=257
5. Perry Bible Fellowship
Author: Nicholas Gurewitch
Style: surrealist
Once again, be forewarned: this is far and away the most offensive comic I have linked to. You absolutely should not browse this website if you are not OK with viewing some things that will offend you. That being said, it is also occasionally genius and frequently hilarious.
Gurewitch draws and writes (well, drew and wrote; the comic is essentially defunct now) the comic in a variety of different styles and about a variety of things, all intended to shock or surprise the reader into laughter. His range and ability to mesh different ideas is usually quite impressive, unless it is offensive (which, as I said, it can be, and even then it still can be pretty funny).
Recommended for: fans of The Onion (particularly the news videos) and Monty Python
Favorites: http://www.pbfcomics.com/?cid=PBF210-Wishing_Well.gif, http://www.pbfcomics.com/?cid=PBF149-Svens_Revenge.jpg, http://www.pbfcomics.com/?cid=PBF084-No_Survivors.gif (shock value on display here)
4. Daisy Owl
Author: Ben Driscoll
Style: storyline, situational
Daisy Owl is a year-old comic dealing with the daily lives of an owl named Mr. Owl, his two (human) kids Daisy and Cooper, and Mr. Owl's polar bear friend Steve. These four frequently interact with other members of their weird universe, including Steve's grizzly bear brother, a magician who does very little actual magic and the giant queen bee in the honey research lab in which Steve and Mr. Owl are sometimes employed.
The comic has a charm that rivals most of the best newspaper comics, and each of the main characters has a distinct personality that you could almost imagine inhabiting a close friend. Indeed, that is one of the main draws of the strip: the world of Daisy Owl, minus a few surreal elements like the honey lab and the fact that most of the cast is comprised of anthropomorphous animals, seems very much like our own, only slightly nicer and just a bit exaggerated for comical reasons. If you give this comic a chance (I would recommend reading from the beginning), I'd be willing to bet that you'll soon be taken in by the clever writing and humorously quaint characters.
Recommended for: fans of clever-but-charming newspaper strips
Favorites: http://daisyowl.com/comic/2008-09-29 (no one understands why I enjoy this so much, but I just do, ok?), http://daisyowl.com/comic/2009-06-29 (background: this is from an origin story of the characters. Cooper and Daisy have just crash landed in a rocket outside of Mr. Owl's tree), http://daisyowl.com/comic/2009-05-08
3. Wondermark
Author: David Malki ! (yes, he always includes an exclamation mark after his name)
Style: punchline, surrealist
This is an odd one. The panels are mostly cobbled together from illustrations found in Malki's extensive antique book collection. The humor is almost always derived from the anachronistic juxtaposition of modern-day language onto the old and oftentimes unexplainable illustrations.
This website is fascinating to me because, in addition to being hilarious, Malki is also very clearly intellectual. He occasionally publishes essays on his under-the-comic blog, and he used to publish brilliant and funny critiques of popular newspaper comics, the archives of which are still available on his site here. This is definitely one to check out.
Recommended for: anyone who is able to appreciate jokes both historical and flatulence-related. It's a very broad comic.
Favorites: http://wondermark.com/463/ (make sure to read the alternate panels below this one), http://wondermark.com/218/, http://wondermark.com/508/
2. xkcd
Author: Randall Munroe
Style: situational, punchline
This is the one that started it all for me. I was only vaguely aware of what webcomics were until I clicked on a link to this strip. If you aren't a fan of Orson Scott Card, don't worry: this comic is so great because of its relatability.
While Munroe is a skilled writer who can conjure a ridiculous punchline just as well as the next guy, this strip is at its best when he's making fun of things that we've all subtly or unconsciously observed (and, in some cases, feared) in the world. His best humor comes when he points out things that we've never truly thought about but immediately recognize.
There are also a fair amount of math and computer jokes in this strip, and since I'm not a math buff (nor a huge computer buff), I usually find strips with those themes to be incomprehensible. However, if that's what you're into, you may like this strip even more than my number one choice.
Recommended for: nerds and obsessives of all kinds
Favorites: http://xkcd.com/245/, http://xkcd.com/310/, http://xkcd.com/346/
1. Dinosaur Comics
Author: Ryan North
Style: surrealist, situational, punchline
Dinosaur Comics is a hilariously written comic about the musings and ambitions of a t-rex named T-Rex. He is overly enthusiastic, vain, lazy, lacking in common sense and far too obsessed with the English language, but he is still a pretty good guy. He is joined in every strip by his friends Utahraptor and Dromiceiomimus, who often comment on his outrageous behavior or ideas.
The instantly noticeable quality of Dinosaur Comics is that it is a constrained comic, or one that operates under certain arbitrary artistic parameters. In DC's case, the parameter is that virtually all of the comics use the exact same art in the exact same panel order and formation (minus a few clip art additions in a few strips, and some alternate universe storylines in which the same art is used, only backwards). However, if you think that this approach would limit the creativity or humor in DC, you couldn't be more wrong.
North has published, at the time of writing, 1,511 comics. Minus a few guest comics, every single one of these comics has followed the exact same artistic structure, and the comic still manages to be the most hilarious comic on the World Wide Web. The secret is found in both the vague art and the ingenious writing.
If you look at the panels, you'll notice that any number of things could be going on in them, provided the proper contextual dialogue. Yes, T-Rex appears to be conversing with Utahraptor in the fourth and fifth panels, and he appears to be pretty enthusiastic in all six panels, but if the writer recognizes those artistic boundaries, he can shape the art to fit the dialogue. North is a hilarious writer, and every word that is said by any of the three characters (or by DC's versions of God and the devil, who also speak in the strips from time to time) fits perfectly. The topics DC covers range from philosophical and scientific difficulties to video games to grammar to historical facts to anything in between, all with a hilarious twist. If this doesn't get you laughing, something might be broken.
Recommended for: intellectual fans of absurdity
Favorites: http://www.qwantz.com/index.php?comic=584, http://www.qwantz.com/index.php?comic=1481, http://www.qwantz.com/index.php?comic=1380
If the rise of webcomics is any indication, a generation accustomed to Internet use agrees with me. The Internet's freedom to self-publish breaks down many of the boundaries that newspaper comics function within.
Webcomics have several advantages over their print-based counterparts, most of which can be summed up in two categories: form and content. The form (ie: graphical elements, size, presentation and even animation) is restricted only by bandwidth and the cartoonist's imagination and skill, and the content (ie: subject matter and dialogue) is entirely up to the comic's creator. Content's non-restriction also enables more niche humor to be published, and many webcomics devoted to nerds or videogames or what have you have enjoyed much success online. However, this virtually unlimited freedom does have one major drawback: the vast majority of webcomics suck.
Oh sure, there's a fair share of gems out there (hence this list), but even some of the more popular comics (Ctrl+Alt+Delete, just to name one of many) are terrible. Having an editor may mean that you can't publish everything, but it also means that you can't publish just anything. How, then, can you expect to successfully navigate the hostile deserts of webcomicdom to find the sweet oases of good comics? Simple; just read this list.
First, however, I have a couple of disclaimers. These are not the only good webcomics out there. Some readers may be unhappy that a couple of their favorites (mostly I am thinking of Penny Arcade) didn't make the list, but that doesn't mean I am consigning them to the Internet dumpheap. Since most of you (wink) have good taste, it most likely it means that I find the humor just a little bit too specific or inconsistent. The other disclaimer is that the tearing down of content restrictions means that most of the comics on this list have at least some content that could be deemed offensive, be it swearing, sexual humor, etc. There are a couple that are perhaps more offensive than the others here, and I will point those out, but be forewarned that webcomics are, in general, not for those who can't stand language or suggestiveness. OK, enough of this; on to the list!
In order to better describe the types of humor you might encounter in these comics, I have arbitrarily set up a genre classification system for them (yes, I know that there are other kinds, but no "soap opera" or biographical strips will be appearing on this list). A "storyline" comic is a comic in which the humor is derived from the cast of characters and an ongoing story arc of their predicaments. "Punchline" comics are obviously more traditional. "Situational" comics are ones in which the joke is in the set-up and the setting rather than a defined punchline, and "surrealist" comics are those in which the humor is derived from sheer weirdness or shock value.
10. Thinkin' Lincoln
Author: Miles Grover
Style: surrealist, punch-line
Thinkin' Lincoln is a comic about the daily adventures of a group of historical figures' anachronistic talking heads. While many historical and not-so-historical figures appear frequently throughout the comic, Thinkin' Lincoln's main focus is reserved for Abraham Lincoln, a simplistic and overenthusiastic nitwit, George Washington, Abe's snide rival, and Queen Elizabeth II, a kind of motherly figure for the other characters. The comic is also frequently visited by the likes of Freud, Darwin, Otto Von Bismark, Poe and other weirder characters like Skeleton Shakespeare and Zombie Mark Twain (both exactly what they sound like).
While a lot of the humor is derived merely from these famous characters spouting clearly uncharacteristic dialogue, Grover often goes one step further and invokes the true historical facts about these people, creating a humorous mishmash.
Recommended for: history buffs, people who like Monty Python
Favorites: http://www.thinkin-lincoln.com/index.php?strip_id=261, http://www.thinkin-lincoln.com/index.php?strip_id=876, http://www.thinkin-lincoln.com/index.php?strip_id=838
9. Terror Island
Authors: Ben Heaton and Lewis Powell
Style: storyline, surrealist
Terror Island has probably the weirdest premise of the comics on this list. It is a photocomic dealing primarily with the struggles of two roommates who are both determined to get the other one to buy groceries. Also, almost all of the characters are played by pieces from popular board games. While this probably doesn't sound like a premise that could keep a comic afloat, the subplots and arcs become pretty complex and surprisingly hilarious. My favorite character is Jame, so named because he thinks that "James" is plural.
Recommended for: Fans of deadpan, Demetri Martin style comedy
Favorites: You've got to read this one from the beginning to grasp the humor. Since the comic came to a close after strip 300, it shouldn't be that hard to finish.
8. Unwinder's Tall Comics
Author: Eli Parker, alias Parker Wilson
Style: situational
Unwinder is a kid (possibly alien?) from Minnesota who is an over-the-top-satire of the pop culture saturated indie guy. Everything he does is a conscious effort to appear cool and different (that is, everything that doesn't involve harassing his friend Barbecue Sauce). While Parker usually sets his sights on self-congratulating preeners, no cultural bastion is safe from his pen, be it corny science fiction novels, gossip tabloids, or Tag body spray. However, the most distinctive feature of this comic is its height. It is, as the name suggests, a very tall comic.
While there is a kind of demented genius behind much of this comic, it loses points for an inconsistent update schedule (I know, I know, Eli, you have an actual job) and the fact that some comics are just so completely out of left field that they're less funny than confusing. Still, however, a solid comic (and he updates it more frequently than he sent The Column his newspaper comics, so there's that too).
Recommended for: people who have indie friends or who know a lot about pop culture
Favorites: http://tallcomics.com/index.php?strip_id=6, http://tallcomics.com/index.php?strip_id=32 (really, anytime he writes script treatments are completely worthwhile), http://tallcomics.com/index.php?strip_id=25
7. Achewood
Author: Chris Onstad
Style: surrealist, storyline
WARNING: This strip is one of a couple wherein the humor can become entirely inappropriate, and if you are unwilling to sift, then this comic is definitely not for you (in fact, if you are not willing to sift, do not even go to the comic that is on the main page at the time of posting). However, if you are willing to sift, Achewood will certainly yield some gems.
Achewood is a comic about a large friend/acquaintance group of animals and other creatures/robots/etc (many of whom were originally stuffed animals, although it is unclear whether that is still canon or not) who embark on sundry adventures and absurd exploits. The backlog for this comic is immense, and it's probably best if you start reading from the beginning.
The highlight of this strip is its ability to evoke hilarity from complete and utter absurdity. Many times, I have finished laughing at a strip only to wonder how Onstad even thought to combine the strange pairings of dialogue, characters and setting. And it's not just a giant Python skit either. Most of the main characters are very well developed and even have motivation behind their actions (some of them even have in-character blogs loosely maintained by Onstad). If you don't mind a rotten apple every so often, this is definitely a strip to check out.
Recommended for: fans of the Douglas Adams style of developed absurdity
Favorites: It would take me far too long to search through the backlogs for my favorites, and I haven't even read the whole comic. I would recommend starting at (or at least toward) the beginning.
6. Pictures for Sad Children
Author: John Campell
Style: surrealist, situational
This is an odd comic that the author describes as being "about a bad feeling you get when you are feeling good, or a good feeling you get when you are feeling bad." It's (almost) all in greyscale, with no caps and sometimes no obvious punchline. That being said, it's sometimes hit and miss, but when it's good, it's pretty darn funny.
PFSC started out mainly as a comic about a ghost named Paul, although the character and his storyline have mostly been abandoned in favor of short, unrelated storylines or one-offs. When the comic is at its best, it points out weird ways of seeing everyday things or just revels in absurd situations. When it's not at its best, it can be boring or offensive, so be forewarned. However, the good here definitely outweighs the bad.
Recommended for: people who are too introspective
Favorites: http://picturesforsadchildren.com/index.php?comicID=28 (this is in the middle of a storyline, but I love it), http://picturesforsadchildren.com/index.php?comicID=237, http://picturesforsadchildren.com/index.php?comicID=257
5. Perry Bible Fellowship
Author: Nicholas Gurewitch
Style: surrealist
Once again, be forewarned: this is far and away the most offensive comic I have linked to. You absolutely should not browse this website if you are not OK with viewing some things that will offend you. That being said, it is also occasionally genius and frequently hilarious.
Gurewitch draws and writes (well, drew and wrote; the comic is essentially defunct now) the comic in a variety of different styles and about a variety of things, all intended to shock or surprise the reader into laughter. His range and ability to mesh different ideas is usually quite impressive, unless it is offensive (which, as I said, it can be, and even then it still can be pretty funny).
Recommended for: fans of The Onion (particularly the news videos) and Monty Python
Favorites: http://www.pbfcomics.com/?cid=PBF210-Wishing_Well.gif, http://www.pbfcomics.com/?cid=PBF149-Svens_Revenge.jpg, http://www.pbfcomics.com/?cid=PBF084-No_Survivors.gif (shock value on display here)
4. Daisy Owl
Author: Ben Driscoll
Style: storyline, situational
Daisy Owl is a year-old comic dealing with the daily lives of an owl named Mr. Owl, his two (human) kids Daisy and Cooper, and Mr. Owl's polar bear friend Steve. These four frequently interact with other members of their weird universe, including Steve's grizzly bear brother, a magician who does very little actual magic and the giant queen bee in the honey research lab in which Steve and Mr. Owl are sometimes employed.
The comic has a charm that rivals most of the best newspaper comics, and each of the main characters has a distinct personality that you could almost imagine inhabiting a close friend. Indeed, that is one of the main draws of the strip: the world of Daisy Owl, minus a few surreal elements like the honey lab and the fact that most of the cast is comprised of anthropomorphous animals, seems very much like our own, only slightly nicer and just a bit exaggerated for comical reasons. If you give this comic a chance (I would recommend reading from the beginning), I'd be willing to bet that you'll soon be taken in by the clever writing and humorously quaint characters.
Recommended for: fans of clever-but-charming newspaper strips
Favorites: http://daisyowl.com/comic/2008-09-29 (no one understands why I enjoy this so much, but I just do, ok?), http://daisyowl.com/comic/2009-06-29 (background: this is from an origin story of the characters. Cooper and Daisy have just crash landed in a rocket outside of Mr. Owl's tree), http://daisyowl.com/comic/2009-05-08
3. Wondermark
Author: David Malki ! (yes, he always includes an exclamation mark after his name)
Style: punchline, surrealist
This is an odd one. The panels are mostly cobbled together from illustrations found in Malki's extensive antique book collection. The humor is almost always derived from the anachronistic juxtaposition of modern-day language onto the old and oftentimes unexplainable illustrations.
This website is fascinating to me because, in addition to being hilarious, Malki is also very clearly intellectual. He occasionally publishes essays on his under-the-comic blog, and he used to publish brilliant and funny critiques of popular newspaper comics, the archives of which are still available on his site here. This is definitely one to check out.
Recommended for: anyone who is able to appreciate jokes both historical and flatulence-related. It's a very broad comic.
Favorites: http://wondermark.com/463/ (make sure to read the alternate panels below this one), http://wondermark.com/218/, http://wondermark.com/508/
2. xkcd
Author: Randall Munroe
Style: situational, punchline
This is the one that started it all for me. I was only vaguely aware of what webcomics were until I clicked on a link to this strip. If you aren't a fan of Orson Scott Card, don't worry: this comic is so great because of its relatability.
While Munroe is a skilled writer who can conjure a ridiculous punchline just as well as the next guy, this strip is at its best when he's making fun of things that we've all subtly or unconsciously observed (and, in some cases, feared) in the world. His best humor comes when he points out things that we've never truly thought about but immediately recognize.
There are also a fair amount of math and computer jokes in this strip, and since I'm not a math buff (nor a huge computer buff), I usually find strips with those themes to be incomprehensible. However, if that's what you're into, you may like this strip even more than my number one choice.
Recommended for: nerds and obsessives of all kinds
Favorites: http://xkcd.com/245/, http://xkcd.com/310/, http://xkcd.com/346/
1. Dinosaur Comics
Author: Ryan North
Style: surrealist, situational, punchline
Dinosaur Comics is a hilariously written comic about the musings and ambitions of a t-rex named T-Rex. He is overly enthusiastic, vain, lazy, lacking in common sense and far too obsessed with the English language, but he is still a pretty good guy. He is joined in every strip by his friends Utahraptor and Dromiceiomimus, who often comment on his outrageous behavior or ideas.
The instantly noticeable quality of Dinosaur Comics is that it is a constrained comic, or one that operates under certain arbitrary artistic parameters. In DC's case, the parameter is that virtually all of the comics use the exact same art in the exact same panel order and formation (minus a few clip art additions in a few strips, and some alternate universe storylines in which the same art is used, only backwards). However, if you think that this approach would limit the creativity or humor in DC, you couldn't be more wrong.
North has published, at the time of writing, 1,511 comics. Minus a few guest comics, every single one of these comics has followed the exact same artistic structure, and the comic still manages to be the most hilarious comic on the World Wide Web. The secret is found in both the vague art and the ingenious writing.
If you look at the panels, you'll notice that any number of things could be going on in them, provided the proper contextual dialogue. Yes, T-Rex appears to be conversing with Utahraptor in the fourth and fifth panels, and he appears to be pretty enthusiastic in all six panels, but if the writer recognizes those artistic boundaries, he can shape the art to fit the dialogue. North is a hilarious writer, and every word that is said by any of the three characters (or by DC's versions of God and the devil, who also speak in the strips from time to time) fits perfectly. The topics DC covers range from philosophical and scientific difficulties to video games to grammar to historical facts to anything in between, all with a hilarious twist. If this doesn't get you laughing, something might be broken.
Recommended for: intellectual fans of absurdity
Favorites: http://www.qwantz.com/index.php?comic=584, http://www.qwantz.com/index.php?comic=1481, http://www.qwantz.com/index.php?comic=1380
Saturday, May 30, 2009
Looking "Up"
I've been a Pixar fan for a long time. The animation studio's knack for creating a truly engaging story out of unlikely premises is essentially unparalleled in today's film industry. And (my apologies to all of you who like the two "Toy Story" movies the best) they've generally just continued to improve.
However, none of their movies have been able to match the perfect blend of good writing, visual impressiveness, humor and message that was concocted in 2004's "The Incredibles." That movie, a tale of a family of discontented superheroes forced to keep their powers under wraps, is sharply written, animated with lush colors, funny at all the right times and able to deliver important messages about the importance of family and the need to keep the world from downplaying uniqueness (it also goes out of its way to pay some fun homages to several comics, most notably "Watchmen" and The Fantastic Four). While Pixar has served up genius both before (the "Toy Story" films, "Monsters Inc.") and after ("Ratatouille," "Wall-E") "The Incredibles," Brad Bird's directorial debut remained my favorite entry in the studio's lineup.
Until, possibly, now.
After the disappointing "Cars" (arguably even after the solid "Finding Nemo," with the exception of "Cars") Pixar has been less about making high-quality family entertainment and more about making high-quality, meaningful movies that will also entertain children. This shift saw the production of "Ratatouille," another Brad Bird movie about the proper treatment of greatness (also about a rat cooking things), and "Wall-E," an almost avant-garde work that belies the importance of human connection in an increasingly digital world. Both were well written and exquisitely animated ("Ratatouille" even received an Oscar nomination for Best Screenplay, and I have a quote from that film adorning the top of my blog), but Pixar's latest feature, "Up," manages to not only best the studio's last two outings, but perhaps even "The Incredibles."
I've never quite seen a movie like it. It attempts from start to finish to place one foot firmly in reality and the other just as solidly in fantasy, and it succeeds wholeheartedly. I'll attempt to give a brief synopsis without giving away any too much of the plot.
Carl Fredricksen was just a young, quiet, pudgy boy who dreamed of one day being an explorer in the vein of his childhood hero, a brilliant, fantastical (and apparently discredited) explorer named Charles Muntz. On the way back from a theatre newsreel detailing Muntz's latest exploits, Carl meets a girl who is, in many ways, his opposite: a tall, skinny, outgoing and loud girl named Ellie. Although the two couldn't be more different, they are united by Ellie's unabashed friendliness and a mutual love of Muntz and adventure stories in general. Following this childhood meeting, the film presents a touching montage of Carl and Ellie's life together, including their marriage, a tragedy and the bumps and pleasures of life. Carl is a balloon salesman, Ellie is a zookeeper, and the pair lives in the house in which they met. They are happy. Throughout it all, the couple attempts to save money to visit Paradise Falls, Peru, the site of the most legendary of Muntz's exploits.
Unfortunately, life repeatedly gets in the way of their dreams, and Ellie dies before such a trip can be taken. Carl becomes a grumpy recluse, content only while basking in the memory of his wife. Even this is bittersweet, as he feels just a bit guilty for not taking her to Paradise Falls like they'd always planned. Then, an uncomfortable accident occurs, and people begin to question whether the octogenarian can live on his own anymore, in his treasured house that is the last remaining symbol of his former happiness. It's very heady stuff for an animated film, but it's handled very skillfully here.
However, all of the above lays the groundwork for the actual events of the movie, which manage to simultaneously be one of the more outlandish yet simple stories Pixar has presented: Carl, faced with a nursing home, opts instead to rig a large amount of balloons to his house and fly to Paradise Falls as a tribute to Ellie. A young boy scout accidentally stows away, and the two embark on a series of jungle adventures, Carl most begrudgingly.
Even that brief description belies one of the most striking things about this film: its interplay between fantasy and reality. While Carl's tragedy and personality are presented as very serious and real, the vibrant colors and crazy characters surrounding him recall the Looney Tunes classics of old. He behaves like a man who has suffered real loss, but he attempts physical feats in the film that very few people, and certainly no one his age, would be able to do. So too, is the animation scaled back from the hyper-realism of the last two Pixar offerings. Here, the landscape is unbelievably lush, and the characters' appearances are clearly designed to accentuate personality traits.
However, rather than creating an awkward juxtaposition, the film benefits from the hodgepodge of styles. Carl's adventures serve as object lessons and metaphors for the way his life has turned out, but they also function as tributes to old adventure flicks and classic children's animation. At times, they become almost allegorical, because the film never loses sight of the fact that the real story to be told is the story of Carl's life: the beautiful love of a dedicated marriage, the sadness that comes when that union ends, and a reflection on what is really important. Ultimately, Carl's journey to Paradise Falls reveals to him that he didn't need to become an explorer to find fulfillment; rather, being thankful for what has passed and willing to embrace the future becomes an exciting exploration all its own.
"Up" is truly a well-made, touching film. I even cried during a couple of parts (you'll probably be able to guess where once you see it), and I rarely ever do that during a movie. Do I like it better than "The Incredibles"? I don't know; further viewings may tell.
Either way, it's simply great.
However, none of their movies have been able to match the perfect blend of good writing, visual impressiveness, humor and message that was concocted in 2004's "The Incredibles." That movie, a tale of a family of discontented superheroes forced to keep their powers under wraps, is sharply written, animated with lush colors, funny at all the right times and able to deliver important messages about the importance of family and the need to keep the world from downplaying uniqueness (it also goes out of its way to pay some fun homages to several comics, most notably "Watchmen" and The Fantastic Four). While Pixar has served up genius both before (the "Toy Story" films, "Monsters Inc.") and after ("Ratatouille," "Wall-E") "The Incredibles," Brad Bird's directorial debut remained my favorite entry in the studio's lineup.
Until, possibly, now.
After the disappointing "Cars" (arguably even after the solid "Finding Nemo," with the exception of "Cars") Pixar has been less about making high-quality family entertainment and more about making high-quality, meaningful movies that will also entertain children. This shift saw the production of "Ratatouille," another Brad Bird movie about the proper treatment of greatness (also about a rat cooking things), and "Wall-E," an almost avant-garde work that belies the importance of human connection in an increasingly digital world. Both were well written and exquisitely animated ("Ratatouille" even received an Oscar nomination for Best Screenplay, and I have a quote from that film adorning the top of my blog), but Pixar's latest feature, "Up," manages to not only best the studio's last two outings, but perhaps even "The Incredibles."
I've never quite seen a movie like it. It attempts from start to finish to place one foot firmly in reality and the other just as solidly in fantasy, and it succeeds wholeheartedly. I'll attempt to give a brief synopsis without giving away any too much of the plot.
Carl Fredricksen was just a young, quiet, pudgy boy who dreamed of one day being an explorer in the vein of his childhood hero, a brilliant, fantastical (and apparently discredited) explorer named Charles Muntz. On the way back from a theatre newsreel detailing Muntz's latest exploits, Carl meets a girl who is, in many ways, his opposite: a tall, skinny, outgoing and loud girl named Ellie. Although the two couldn't be more different, they are united by Ellie's unabashed friendliness and a mutual love of Muntz and adventure stories in general. Following this childhood meeting, the film presents a touching montage of Carl and Ellie's life together, including their marriage, a tragedy and the bumps and pleasures of life. Carl is a balloon salesman, Ellie is a zookeeper, and the pair lives in the house in which they met. They are happy. Throughout it all, the couple attempts to save money to visit Paradise Falls, Peru, the site of the most legendary of Muntz's exploits.
Unfortunately, life repeatedly gets in the way of their dreams, and Ellie dies before such a trip can be taken. Carl becomes a grumpy recluse, content only while basking in the memory of his wife. Even this is bittersweet, as he feels just a bit guilty for not taking her to Paradise Falls like they'd always planned. Then, an uncomfortable accident occurs, and people begin to question whether the octogenarian can live on his own anymore, in his treasured house that is the last remaining symbol of his former happiness. It's very heady stuff for an animated film, but it's handled very skillfully here.
However, all of the above lays the groundwork for the actual events of the movie, which manage to simultaneously be one of the more outlandish yet simple stories Pixar has presented: Carl, faced with a nursing home, opts instead to rig a large amount of balloons to his house and fly to Paradise Falls as a tribute to Ellie. A young boy scout accidentally stows away, and the two embark on a series of jungle adventures, Carl most begrudgingly.
Even that brief description belies one of the most striking things about this film: its interplay between fantasy and reality. While Carl's tragedy and personality are presented as very serious and real, the vibrant colors and crazy characters surrounding him recall the Looney Tunes classics of old. He behaves like a man who has suffered real loss, but he attempts physical feats in the film that very few people, and certainly no one his age, would be able to do. So too, is the animation scaled back from the hyper-realism of the last two Pixar offerings. Here, the landscape is unbelievably lush, and the characters' appearances are clearly designed to accentuate personality traits.
However, rather than creating an awkward juxtaposition, the film benefits from the hodgepodge of styles. Carl's adventures serve as object lessons and metaphors for the way his life has turned out, but they also function as tributes to old adventure flicks and classic children's animation. At times, they become almost allegorical, because the film never loses sight of the fact that the real story to be told is the story of Carl's life: the beautiful love of a dedicated marriage, the sadness that comes when that union ends, and a reflection on what is really important. Ultimately, Carl's journey to Paradise Falls reveals to him that he didn't need to become an explorer to find fulfillment; rather, being thankful for what has passed and willing to embrace the future becomes an exciting exploration all its own.
"Up" is truly a well-made, touching film. I even cried during a couple of parts (you'll probably be able to guess where once you see it), and I rarely ever do that during a movie. Do I like it better than "The Incredibles"? I don't know; further viewings may tell.
Either way, it's simply great.
Saturday, May 2, 2009
Excitement meets nostalgia in "State of Play"
This is reposted from the April 23 issue of The Column.
I wasn’t expecting a lot. I had seen the trailer for “State of Play” a few times, and it looked interesting enough. There was a passing (and, I assumed, token) reference to journalism, so I told our feature editor Ben that we should go see it. Shortly thereafter, we got two free passes to a prescreening (just one perk of our prestigious – OK, not really – Column jobs), and soon we were waiting expectantly for the movie to begin.
What followed was a lot more than I had expected.
In the first few minutes of the film, two people in Washington D.C. are shot dead by a mysterious man with a metal briefcase. Soon thereafter, an important aide to a congressman is found dead, ruled suicide. The congressman tears up during his announcement of her death, and it soon becomes clear that the two were having an affair. All things considered, it is a busy day for The Washington Globe, where the scruffy but clever Cal McAffrey (Russell Crowe) works as an old school investigative journalist.
McAffrey is originally in charge of reporting the double murder (thought to be a routine drug killing), but the congressman in question, Stephen Collins (Ben Affleck), is an old college friend of his, and, after Collins comes to him with a claim that the aide was murdered, McAffrey wants the story covered properly. By properly, he mostly means “not by a blogger,” namely Della Frye (Rachel McAdams). Frye is a young “online journalist,” who sometimes annoys McAffrey because she’s more interested in the quick scoop than in fact checking. However, he senses some genuine enthusiasm for the truth in Frye, so he allows her to partner with him on the story while he teaches her some good old-fashioned journalistic method. Meanwhile, Collins is attempting to reconcile with his wife, all the while trying to hold down his position on a committee investigating alleged atrocities committed by a military contracting company. Are these events connected in any way? If so, who’s behind it all, and what will the consequences be for those who dare to uncover the plot?
To tell you much more about the film’s story would be both unnecessary and unfortunate, as “State of Play” is a movie best experienced with little sense of what’s going to happen next. Its circuitous plot twists and turns right through to the conclusion, but it also never stops making sense if you’re paying attention.
It’s clearly an intelligent film, and it’s one that expects its viewers to be intelligent as well. Terms like “collusive” pop up, and the viewer is expected to know or figure out what they mean. Ethical questions appear from time to time as well. Is McAffrey’s involvement a conflict of interest? If so, where does he cross the line? We’re encouraged to think it through.
The ethical questions are only compounded by the fact that even McAffrey has been prone to misdeeds in the past. The movie creates very real characters as sure to develop viewer attachment as they are to make you think. Overall, “State of Play” is a fast-paced, cerebral thriller, sure to excite and surprise. However, there was another reason that I liked it even more.
The movie plays like a sort of love song to journalism and newspapers. McAffrey and his cranky editor (Helen Mirren) bemoan the fact that The Globe is losing money, and much is made of the conflict between print newspapers and online sources.
The film’s conclusion? Blogs might get you a story faster, but newspapers deliver the complete – and accurate – report. The newsroom is presented as that lovable, noisy place where hard-working but fun-loving journalists pound out their stories on deadline, not caring much about decorum or cleanliness.
It’s obvious that the film owes much of its inspiration to “All the President’s Men,” the classic Robert Redford and Dustin Hoffman flick chronicling the true story behind Woodward and Bernstein’s uncovering of the Watergate cover-up. They are obviously held in high regard by the filmmakers of State of Play, as are all journalists who strive for the truth.
However, “State of Play” is not ignorant of the fact that newspapers are not in the best of shape these days. The Globe’s ownership is trying all sorts of gimmicks to increase its readership, and it’s up to the down-to-earth journalists like McAffrey to keep the press from being a non-mobile version of TV.
I appreciate that in a film. In today’s world of hustle and bustle, instant news, constant channel flipping and tab switching, I think that the focused information and perspective found in newspapers is still a worthwhile pursuit. And, if you made it to the end of this review, thanks.
Who knows? Perhaps you think that newspapers are worth something too.
I wasn’t expecting a lot. I had seen the trailer for “State of Play” a few times, and it looked interesting enough. There was a passing (and, I assumed, token) reference to journalism, so I told our feature editor Ben that we should go see it. Shortly thereafter, we got two free passes to a prescreening (just one perk of our prestigious – OK, not really – Column jobs), and soon we were waiting expectantly for the movie to begin.
What followed was a lot more than I had expected.
In the first few minutes of the film, two people in Washington D.C. are shot dead by a mysterious man with a metal briefcase. Soon thereafter, an important aide to a congressman is found dead, ruled suicide. The congressman tears up during his announcement of her death, and it soon becomes clear that the two were having an affair. All things considered, it is a busy day for The Washington Globe, where the scruffy but clever Cal McAffrey (Russell Crowe) works as an old school investigative journalist.
McAffrey is originally in charge of reporting the double murder (thought to be a routine drug killing), but the congressman in question, Stephen Collins (Ben Affleck), is an old college friend of his, and, after Collins comes to him with a claim that the aide was murdered, McAffrey wants the story covered properly. By properly, he mostly means “not by a blogger,” namely Della Frye (Rachel McAdams). Frye is a young “online journalist,” who sometimes annoys McAffrey because she’s more interested in the quick scoop than in fact checking. However, he senses some genuine enthusiasm for the truth in Frye, so he allows her to partner with him on the story while he teaches her some good old-fashioned journalistic method. Meanwhile, Collins is attempting to reconcile with his wife, all the while trying to hold down his position on a committee investigating alleged atrocities committed by a military contracting company. Are these events connected in any way? If so, who’s behind it all, and what will the consequences be for those who dare to uncover the plot?
To tell you much more about the film’s story would be both unnecessary and unfortunate, as “State of Play” is a movie best experienced with little sense of what’s going to happen next. Its circuitous plot twists and turns right through to the conclusion, but it also never stops making sense if you’re paying attention.
It’s clearly an intelligent film, and it’s one that expects its viewers to be intelligent as well. Terms like “collusive” pop up, and the viewer is expected to know or figure out what they mean. Ethical questions appear from time to time as well. Is McAffrey’s involvement a conflict of interest? If so, where does he cross the line? We’re encouraged to think it through.
The ethical questions are only compounded by the fact that even McAffrey has been prone to misdeeds in the past. The movie creates very real characters as sure to develop viewer attachment as they are to make you think. Overall, “State of Play” is a fast-paced, cerebral thriller, sure to excite and surprise. However, there was another reason that I liked it even more.
The movie plays like a sort of love song to journalism and newspapers. McAffrey and his cranky editor (Helen Mirren) bemoan the fact that The Globe is losing money, and much is made of the conflict between print newspapers and online sources.
The film’s conclusion? Blogs might get you a story faster, but newspapers deliver the complete – and accurate – report. The newsroom is presented as that lovable, noisy place where hard-working but fun-loving journalists pound out their stories on deadline, not caring much about decorum or cleanliness.
It’s obvious that the film owes much of its inspiration to “All the President’s Men,” the classic Robert Redford and Dustin Hoffman flick chronicling the true story behind Woodward and Bernstein’s uncovering of the Watergate cover-up. They are obviously held in high regard by the filmmakers of State of Play, as are all journalists who strive for the truth.
However, “State of Play” is not ignorant of the fact that newspapers are not in the best of shape these days. The Globe’s ownership is trying all sorts of gimmicks to increase its readership, and it’s up to the down-to-earth journalists like McAffrey to keep the press from being a non-mobile version of TV.
I appreciate that in a film. In today’s world of hustle and bustle, instant news, constant channel flipping and tab switching, I think that the focused information and perspective found in newspapers is still a worthwhile pursuit. And, if you made it to the end of this review, thanks.
Who knows? Perhaps you think that newspapers are worth something too.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
