Random Musings

Best Albums of 2010

2010-12-28T12:04:00.000-08:00

Wow. It's over already, huh?

It seems like just last month that WOXY went off the internet after playing "Answer to Yourself" by the Soft Pack as its last tune.

Shit.

So looking back, 2010 was pretty good for music. Aside from the whole surf rock "slapping an echo on my voice is awesome" craze that bands like Best Coast reintroduced to us in the Big Dime, 2010 will go down in the record books as a solid, if not stellar year, for indie rock.

Here are some of the albums I had on heavy rotation this year....

1. Beach House, Teen Dream

Like The Wire, it's always awesome when something comes out of your hometown and completely knocks your fucking socks off. That said, Beach House could be from Iowa and that would not stop Teen Dream from being the absolute best album of the year and it's not even close. I discovered this album in January while painting a room in a blizzard and it will be something I remember for the rest of my life. It was one of those instant connections between an album and an action. Yeah, painting a room isn't as cool as cruising for chicks or a summer of baseball, but it will still always take me back to a moment in my life. On Teen Dream, Beach House took their cheap Casio keyboard drum machine sound and made it bigger without selling out. Now, instead of wishing Beach House songs were bigger, they are. It was like watching that scrappy shortstop come back after an offseason of hard work and hit 40 homeruns.

2. Arcade Fire, The Suburbs

I know what you're thinking. This album should be #1. And you may have a good argument as to why it should be. But #2 is still good, is it not? On The Suburbs, Arcade Fire strung a clothesline across the length of the album and hung their grievances with suburban sprawl on it. Although it's more restrained than their previous work, the band still knows when to turn it up and let it loose. This is the album we'll all come back to when we're forty, balding, with children who don't know us, and say "Fuck. Did these guys get it right or what?" And at the same time, our kids may be listening to the album thinking, "I'll never turn out like my parents" when we all know its inevitable.

3. The National, High Violet

If ever there was an album that upon first listen prompted disappointment and the feeling that "they'll never be like they were ever again" before giving way to acceptance and pure enjoyment, High Violet is it. For months, I couldn't get past a few songs on this album. The melancholy subject matter, the monotone way in which Matt Berninger delivers his lyrics, and the restraint the band showed throughout the album...it wore me out. It still does. At times I still think "this is the point where they're going to let loose" and then comes "Afraid of Everyone" and the band does the complete opposite. But in the end, I've come around. This is a great album to throw on when you're driving home after a hard day's work and you don't feel like feeling anything. And the National make that seem so easy.

4. The Walkmen, Lisbon

Lisbon, is basically High Violet times ten. If you know me, you know that The Walkmen can practically do no wrong, and with Lisbon, the same is still mostly true. But I still can't help but feel a little let down after what I thought was their best album, You & Me, where they reinvented themselves as a Sun Records revival act. On You & Me, everything worked. On Lisbon, there are hits and misses. Songs that were performed live a year ago are different on the record, and IMHO, different for the worse. "Juveniles", which was a country western tune, complete with whistling (!) when I heard it live in the fall of 2009, is now an almost cheesy lounge-act Rod Stewart wannabe tune. "Angela Surf City" was also much different live, but for whatever reason, the band changed it and it is what it is now -- one of my least favorite tracks on the album. But aside from that, Lisbon continues The Walkmen's evolution away from "The Rat", and whatever they got wrong before is made right with "The Sky Above". In the end, Lisbon is a great album, one of the best of the year, but an album that could have been better. The Walkmen, by default, usually have the top spot reserved when they make an album. Just not in 2010.

5. Wolf Parade, Expo 86

Maybe I didn't listen to enough music this year because Expo 86 fails to ignite much passion in me like the other four albums do. Yeah, that must be it. Maybe I need to go check out Kayne West's new album. Now that I think about it, Wolf Parade has let me down ever since their stellar 2005 debut, Apologies to Queen Mary. Maybe it's the dozen side-projects between them. Maybe it's just because their debut was just that good. Whatever he reason, Expo 86 is the band's most sonically crowded album to date, which is a change from a band that sounded like it was performing on the top of a scrap heap after an apocalyptic event with just a guitar, a crashing symbol and a synth keyboard straight out of a John Carpenter film. Now, there's too much drumming going on, as if every verse needs a breakdown ripped from the intro from "Hot for Teacher". Overall, Expo 86 reminds me that the bands I love will not always make music I love, and that I should be thankful for the ones that still do. There are some bright spots on Expo 86, but it's gotten to the point where this supergroup has stopped being super, and the band members' original/side-projects are where they make their best music.

Get on the bus, Gus

2010-12-27T09:04:00.001-08:00

The #40 QuickBus has been an effective addition to rapid transit in Baltimore.

For whatever reason, the bus gets a bad rap in Baltimore.

Maybe the beating of a white passenger, Sarah Kreager, in 2007 by nine black school children is still fresh in everyone's mind. But what I've come to find in my experience with the bus in Baltimore has been nothing but pleasant.

Coming from Frederick County, I've long been waiting for work on the red line to begin so I am able to get to Baltimore without having to drive on 695 to catch the light rail or metro subway. But since the red line has been held up in red tape for the last few years, I got antsy and wanted to find a different way to get downtown.

After looking at the MTA bus schedule, I quickly learned of a couple of routes called "QuickBus". These bus routes don't act like most other buses, in that they stop at key transfer points and major landmarks, whereas the local bus can stop every block or two, making for a very long bus ride.

Currently, there are only two full-time QuickBus routes, the #40, which runs from Woodlawn to Dundalk and the #48, which runs from downtown Baltimore to Towson.

So I investigated the #40 a little more, seeing that it could satisfy my fix for a mass transit option into the city from the west. When I found out that the bus ran right by the park and ride located at the end of route 70, I pulled up Google Maps and found that I would need to walk on the shoulder of the entrance ramp to route 70 in order to catch the bus at the Forest Park stop.

So therein lies the one catch with the QuickBus -- it doesn't take advantage of any park and ride lots to allow commuters who don't live on the immediate bus route to take the bus downtown. Had the MTA built a walkway from the park and ride lot to the Forest Park stop, they could advertise the QuickBus as an alternative to the light rail and metro subway as a way to get to work or other events in the city. For now, adventurous riders, like me, can park at the park and ride and hoof it down the entrance ramp to the Forest Park Avenue bus stop.

The #40 QuickBus has 15 minute headways all day, meaning that buses are scheduled to arrive at any stop every 15 minutes. So far in my experience, this has been pretty accurate with a few instances of having to wait longer, but on average, I've waited 5-10 minutes for a bus.

From Forest Park Avenue, the ride downtown takes about 25 minutes. It travels down Cooks Lane, makes a left on Edmonson Avenue and then takes a right on Franklin Street before taking the two mile stretch of the "Highway to Nowhere" before entering downtown Baltimore. The route is very similar to the route planned for the red line, so getting downtown is a cinch. The Baltimore and Paca Street stop is close to the stadiums and the Charm Bus route is just a block away if riders want to head to the Inner Harbor, Harbor East, Fells Point or Federal Hill.

Another major issue with the QuickBus is that it's currently designed for work-day commuters only. The bus stops running around 10 p.m., which means it's not a good option for Oriole games that commonly run later than 10 p.m. or other nighttime events downtown. For that, the MTA feels that the light rail and metro subway should suffice, since both run until midnight.

So while the QuickBus may not be the answer to your east/west transit blues in Baltimore, it could be a start, and hopefully it's a preview for what is to come with the red line.

Get to work

2010-11-10T12:56:00.000-08:00

It's time to make Baltimore's Red Line a reality.

The elections are over. Martin O'Malley defeated Bob Ehrlich. Now it's time to get the ball rolling on the Red Line.

O'Malley supported the Red Line, Ehrlich said he would scrap funding for it. So you can probably tell how I voted.

That's not to say Ehrlich hasn't done well with mass transit in the past. His Greater Baltimore Bus Initiative (GBBI) streamlined some of the MTA's meandering bus routes and added two "QuickBus" routes, including the #40 bus, which runs along much of the proposed Red Line route.

But when push came to shove, O'Malley backed the Red Line, which is something the city of Baltimore is desperately in need of. And now that the elections are behind us, it's time for O'Malley to put his money where his mouth is.

The many reports have been turned in, compromises have been made, and videos made, showing where the line will run and what it would look like.

And it all looks good to me.

Now it's time for the city to get to work!

Pumpkinhead & Evilspeak

2010-10-21T12:24:00.001-07:00

It's October. And it's that time of year when I get the itch for some good horror movies.

As a child of the 1980's, I like my horror movies from that era of the 70's and 80's -- when the slasher craze was booming and quality directors like John Carpenter, William Friedkin and Richard Donner were pushing the envelope with taboo themes and ample gore.

So while there are still dozens if not hundreds of horror movies from that era that I have yet to see, I can't help but feel like I've seen most of the great horror movies from the 70's and 80's.

And while watching Pumpkinhead, a movie that I had such high hopes for, and Evilspeak, a movie I knew would suck but wanted to watch it for nostalgic reasons, my fears were realized: Maybe I have seen all of the good horror movies from the 70's and 80's.

Pumpkinhead was made in 1988 by Stan Winston, who you may know as the special effects wizard from films such as The Terminator and Aliens. He's a true visionary. And so when he stepped behind the camera, you'd think the quality of his films would be in line with that of his special effects work.

Wrong.

I should have known there was a reason why Winston's only feature film directing credits are Pumpkinhead and a Gnome Named Gnorm. But that didn't keep me from wanting to like this movie. First, it's called Pumpkinhead. Great title. Second, it's Winston, so you know the make-up and creature effects should be great. And for the most part, they are. Third, the name alone is awesome. Fourth, Lance Henrikson is in it. Come on! That alone should make it awesome.

The plot also piqued my interest: A father invokes a demon to seek revenge on the teenagers who accidentally killed his son. But sadly, Pumpkinhead feels amateurish from the start and never improves. And where's the gore? I expected Winston to really show off the special effects here as a director, but aside from some nasty creature effects, the film was pretty tame by the standards of the 80's. By comparison, Raiders of the Lost Ark, a PG movie had more gore. All we get in Pumpkinhead is off-screen killings and after the fact blood.

On the positive side, the movie looks good despite the crappy DVD version I watched. Winston wisely borrowed James Cameron's steel-blue palate and incorporated some burnt oranges to give the film a nice visual feel that oozes Halloween.

But in the end, the idea of Pumpkinhead is better than the actual movie. And while I usually balk at the idea of horror movies being remade for modern audiences, I think Pumpkinhead could actually benefit from the recent remake craze. Just don't let Michael Bay get a hold of it.

Up next was the 1981 film Evilspeak starring Clint Howard, who's appearance alone made it a cult classic. I'd watched Evilspeak when I was twelve or so when our local TV station aired horror movies on Saturday's at 2 p.m. It was edited to hell, of course, but some of the images of the film had stayed with me over the years. And when I signed up for Netflix, I added Evilspeak to my queue, knowing that it wasn't a movie I could stroll down to the local video store to rent.

Evilspeak has some infamous qualities to it, since it was a Video Nasty in England back in the 80's and 90's. But while watching it, I wondered why. The first hour and fifteen minutes of the 95 minute film is just talk. That's right. We aren't even strung along with a random killing here and there. All we get is poor Stanley Coopersmith (Clint Howard) being relentlessly bullied and typing away crazily on a 1981 era computer to resurrect a Satanic spirit and get revenge on his classmates. It's really just a Carrie rip-off with really bad Atari graphics. And slllooooowwwww!

The last ten or fifteen minutes are almost worth the wait, but even the climax is too short. But get this. In the final act we get: a woman eaten alive by pigs, an upside-down impaling on a chandelier, a nail in the wrist of Jesus on a crucifix shoot into a guy's forehead, Clint Howard floating in the air wielding a giant sword, multiple beheadings, and a heart ripped out of a guy's chest!

If ever there was a horror movie that you could watch on You Tube, Evilspeak is it. Just watch the film's trailer and then the last fifteen minutes and you will have not missed a thing. I will give props to the makers of Evilspeak for the computer-being-used-for-bad themes that were about 20 years before its time. So while Evilspeak does have some things going for it, it's just too damn slow.

So yeah, I'm a little disappointed that I'm having trouble finding good horror movies from the 70's and 80's to wet my beak during this Halloween season, but it's still fun to watch a movie I haven't seen before or haven't seen in a long time.

And ironically, I've watched three excellent horror movies in the last year that were all made within the past three years: Trick r Treat, House of the Devil and Paranormal Activity. All of these films were made with the qualities of 70's and 80's horror movie -- "less is more".

So while I may not find many more good movies from my favorite era of horror films, at least some current directors are using what made horror movies so good back then, and transporting them to the present day.

I guess I can't complain.

A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010)

2010-10-15T06:14:00.000-07:00

I am all for remaking movies.

I'll use any excuse to revisit a beloved movie universe, whether it is via a remake or an unnecessary sequel. We watch movies to escape reality and feel a certain way, and I always welcome going back to the time when I first experienced some of my favorite childhood movies, regardless of whether they are actually any good. Like any good road trip, it's the journey and not the destination that makes it worth while.

However, the 2010 remake of Wes Craven's 1984 classic, A Nightmare on Elm Street is making me doubt this opinion. Here we have a remake that is totally devoid of the suspense and humor that made the original one of the better slasher movies of the 80's. Even Jackie Earle Haley, who was the lone bright spot in another lifeless film -- Watchmen -- fails to exude menace in his rebooted version of Freddy Kruger.

And that, in a nutshell, is the problem with this remake. The film has nothing to say. Any good remake takes the original film's central idea and runs with it -- often applying the themes and morals to the current times. But Nightmare fails to do any of this. How great would it have been for this film to say something about the over medication of today's children? That somehow ADD or anti-depression medication are somehow causing these nightmares to occur. Or make the origin of this film's Freddy Kruger a chat-room trolling pedophile. Anything to update the remake for the present day and age.

The only thing this remake has going for it is a character's surprising death about a half hour into the film. But if you've ever seen Psycho -- and yes, even the remake -- you may find yourself rolling your eyes. Even a supposed main character's surprising death early in a film is nothing new.

Platinum Dunes, the studio behind this useless piece of trash, is also responsible for the remakes of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Friday the 13th. Chainsaw boringly kept the movie setting in the 1970's, like the original, and Friday unwisely updated the film to present time when it could have mined the original's early 1980's setting for laughs and nostalgia. If Platinum Dunes have proven anything, it's that they are only in the horror movie remake business to make money. And yes, I know money is the bottom line for all movie studios, but the total disregard of quality in these remakes downright is shameful.

I guess I shouldn't expect anything more from the man who's directed all three Transformers movies.

In the end, A Nightmare on Elm Street is just that, a nightmare. And like any unnecessary remake, it only makes the viewer yearn for the original film.

Terminator 3000

2010-08-13T11:59:00.000-07:00

OK, now imagine him animated, and PG-13.

All I can say is...it was bound to happen.

Dark Horizons ,as well as several other movie news sites, are reporting that a new installment of the Terminator series is going into development. But here's the catch...the movie is going to be 3D, completely computer generated...and wait for it....PG-13.

Ugh.

I know, I know. It's not the best of news. But more Terminator is always good news, in my opinion. I just wish they would take the $70 million dollar price tag and make a more stripped down live action movie. The PG-13 rating doesn't even really bother me that much. Christopher Nolan has proven that you don't have to compromise by making a PG-13 film, as he has proven with The Dark Knight and Inception. I would prefer Terminator movies to be rated R, but let's face it, an R rating is not going to all the sudden make it good.

Also, it sounds like Terminator 3000 could be a reboot of sorts, using the original characters from the first two movies. And if that is the case, it sounds like this could just be a CGI version of The Sara Conner Chronicles. Why the need to make more movies that take place after T2? Was T3 that bad? Was Terminator Salvation that horrible? Sure those movies had their problems but they advanced the story line well and didn't embarrass themselves as many third and fourth installments so often do.

I guess I am just worried that my cold, hard and violent Terminator movies are going to get Disneyfied.

But I am willing to hold out hope. It looks like I don't have another choice.

Arcade Fire - The Suburbs

2010-07-27T07:54:00.000-07:00

With each album, the Arcade Fire have made a singular theme the focus of their work. On their 2004 debut, Funeral, loss was the nucleus of the album, hence the album's title. The loss came in many forms, whether it was death, loss of childhood innocence or loss of memory.

On 2007's Neon Bible, the Arcade Fire made the right wing Bush-era their target, and at one point front-man Win Butler even screamed "I don't want to love in America no more". And since the band hails from Montreal, Quebec, the Houston native Butler brothers -- as well as the rest of the band -- mean what they say.

Now the year is 2010. Barack Obama is in office -- someone that the Arcade Fire relentlessly supported during Obama's run for the presidency. So without a singular enemy to focus their angst upon, the band has aimed their sights at the suburbs. Hence, their third album's title.

The Suburbs is easily the band's most focused work. The songs build upon one another, Butler even repeats lyrics from earlier songs in later ones, driving the message home: the Arcade Fire hate the never ending sprawl of the suburbs and the loss of identity that comes with it. I hate it too...even though I live smack dab in the middle of the suburbs myself. Thankfully, my neck of the suburbs aren't crammed with "dead shopping malls rising like mountains beyond mountains", as Regine Chassagne points out on the albums best track, "Sprawl II (Mountains Beyond Mountains)".

So what does it all mean? I don't think Butler and the band have much of an idea about it either as evidenced in many of the lyrics featuring self doubt. On the opener,"The Suburbs", Win admits "sometimes I can't believe it/I'm moving past the feeling, again". I take that as Butler realizing he's getting comfortable as he gets older, and losing that rebellious fire we all had as teenagers and college students before the real world turned us all into zombies. And on "City With No Children", Butler riffs on millionaires and how they can't be trusted, but then laments that he feels himself becoming one of them himself. And in the final minute of the album, on "The Suburbs Continued" Butler admits "if I had it all back, I'd waste it again".

But most of The Surburbs is made up of the wasted hours of teenagers, late-night drives, and kids who are mad at the world for no reason. It all paints the picture of a man who is coming to see beneath the surface of his life, hates what he sees, but doesn't do anything to change it. We all sell out little by little, we all become the adults we rebelled against as kids, and The Suburbs so accurately nails this, time and time again.

Like the band's focus on their main theme, this album is the band's most sonically focused album yet. Sometimes it's a little too focused, and I miss the band's natural ability to come apart at the seams, to color outside the lines a bit and add some fuzz to their sound. Not here. Every note is measured. There is more of a electronic feel to the sound. The band sounds like it's a four or five piece at times, not the expansive seven piece it's been until now. And while it works at times, it also causes the band to lose some of things that made it so great. There are no impromptu choral singalongs like on"Wake Up" or "No Cars Go". The band has grown up a bit, moved to the musical suburbs themselves, and ditched some of the unpredictable characteristics that made their first two albums so amazingly fresh.

That isn't to say The Suburbs isn't fresh or amazing. It's so good it's heartbreaking. It's the band's most measured album to date. An instant classic that will stand on its own well into the future. And I can say that after only having listened to the album a few times through.

Sometimes it takes a while to realize greatness, and for me that was Radiohead's Kid A, which took me almost 10 years to appreciate. But with the Arcade Fire, I have always known, right from the start, that the band and their music are something special.

The Suburbs is no different.

The end of an era

2010-05-25T07:07:00.000-07:00

Lost began airing in 2004.

24 began airing in 2001.

Two nights. Two finales. And the end of what I call the Golden Age of Modern Television.

It all began around 1999 with the launch of HBO's The Sopranos. Sure, there had been some shows that had pushed the boundaries of censorship on television before (NYPD Blue, which began airing in 1993, comes to mind), but on HBO, The Sopranos were able to do pretty much anything that any R-rated movie could do, and they could do it on TV. And other HBO shows such as The Wire, Rome and True Blood carried on that ability.

And that same "push the envelope" style eventually trickled down to network dramas, such as The Shield (FX), Alias (ABC) as well as Lost and 24. Granted, these shows were on the major networks, so what they could get away with paled in comparison to shows on HBO. But in the end, shows like 24 and Lost pushed the boundaries of what could be done in the hour-long format on television. I mean, the last few episodes of 24 included a disembowelment, a skewering, various head-shots, and a bitten-off ear!

What 24 and Lost represented was viewer commitment. These weren't shows that you could drop in and out of. They demanded consistent loyalty and viewership, or you could find yourself asking "what the hell is going on?" This was especially true of Lost, which routinely puzzled its viewers with elaborate mysteries week after week. Sometimes, just watching each episode of Lost wasn't enough, you needed to research each episode on websites like Lostpedia or on chat rooms and message boards to discuss different theories to stay up to speed.

But the demand for viewer loyalty is where the similarities of these shows ended. At their core, the Lost and 24 couldn't be any more different.

24, which took place in "real time", was all action and adventure; with an endless barrage of double-crosses, major character deaths, and races against the clock to prevent national terrorist attacks.

Lost, on the other hand, dealt with a much more weighty issues: faith, fate vs free will, religion, and redemption. It also relied heavily on symbolism and allusion, referring to numerous books, movies, and other forms of art to entice the viewer and prompt discussion. If the water cooler discussion for 24 usually involved "I can't believe Jack did that last night!", the discussion for Lost was more like a college seminar on mythology and literature, and each discussion could last just as long. And the Lost 101 professor was Jeff "Doc" Jensen, a TV reporter for Entertainment Weekly, who gained fame for his extensive Lost re-cap articles, in which he broke down pretty much every scene of each episode and pontificated aloud for a dozen or so pages every week. The same just couldn't be done for 24 unless it included obituaries for each of the characters killed every week.

That isn't to say that its deep subject matter made Lost better than 24. It's a matter of opinion as to which show you prefer: the breezy, break-neck speed of 24 or the slow-burn novelistic approach to Lost.

What I use to judge the shows is this: How much did I look forward to watching each show? With Lost, I was excited to watch each episode -- from the pilot to the finale -- and then read Jensen's article in EW. With 24, I caught the first three seasons on DVD, and found myself saying "just one more episode" after I had already watched three in a row. But in the end, I felt that 24 couldn't sustain its format. After eight seasons, it seemed like the writers employed the same plot twists each season, with the characters and situations just changed. The "real time" format, which was originally a nifty story-telling device, became redundant, and unrealistic. Characters would routinely be shot, stabbed, have heart attacks or who knows what else, only to be up and about in the next episode, which was less than an hour's time.

And because of this, 24 became somewhat of a chore.

Lost, for me, never felt that way. Sure, there were times when Lost could test your patience (I feel the same about The Sopranos), but that what was so great about it -- its ability to drive you mad with anticipation for an answer to one of its many mysteries: What's in the Hatch? Who are The Others? Who is Jacob? What is the Smoke Monster? What is the island? And by series end, we learned the answer to just about every major mystery, without those answers being spoon-fed to the audience to the point where multiple viewings of Lost become useless. If anything, a repeat viewing of the entire series will be more rewarding than the first, since you know how it all ends and won't be demanding answers.

Unlike Lost, however, the 24 franchise is not over. If the 24 series finale told us anything, it's that there is much more to come. The finale of 24 kept Jack on the run from the authorities and basically left things open-ended for movies, which have been in the works for years. With Lost, the writers were clear, this was definitely "The End". I do think there is an opportunity for a series of Lost inspired books or comic books to spin-off and fill in some of the unanswered questions, but I think the canon of the series is definitely over. And I am glad. There was no more a fitting ending than what was presented last Sunday night. When I think about it, I still get the shivers.

With 24, I expect there to be many more double-crosses, character deaths, and pulse-pounding action sequences for years to come. And I look forward to see that happen on the big screen. I just hope the move to the big-screen gives the franchise a much-needed breath of fresh air.

Actually, it's ironic that 24 is going to the movies. It was 24, and other "boundary-pushers" like it that made me stay at home, and watch a few episodes instead of going out to the movies. The reward with television shows has always been greater, and most of the time, they're free.

In the end, both the 24 and Lost series finales closed the door to what was, without a doubt, the best decade for television, ever. They were often imitated, but never duplicated, and they both leave massive voids for the major networks to fill.

And I doubt they ever will be.

Seeing Red

2010-03-23T06:45:00.001-07:00

The proposed route for Baltimore's Red Line. Click here for a bigger picture.

I like to use public transportation. I like the freedom of leaving my car at home or in a parking lot far from the hectic downtown area and taking a train or bus into a city and roaming its streets, hopping on and off the train, and soaking up everything a city has to offer. This is largely why I love traveling to Europe, where you can get around major cities with ease. Most European cities have comprehensive subway systems, street trams, and buses that are easily laid out, cheap and simple to use. And getting from city to city in Europe is also cheap and easy, compared to America where Amtrak has a monopoly and can charge expensive prices for tickets.

So it sucks for me that I live in Baltimore, where the mass transit options are limited. Even worse, there seems to be a bias against mass transit in Baltimore. People here in Maryland love their cars, which explains why Maryland is currently the fifth worst state for traffic gridlock in America according to UrbanTrekker. The light rail is commonly referred to as the "loot rail" and it seems like the local bus has been left to the bottom rung of society according to the middle class.

That said, the light rail and subway are crowded on Sundays when the Ravens are in town. If the light rail does one thing well, it ushers thousands of fans to M&T Bank Stadium with ease. But during weekdays, ridership drops to 34,000 a day. The subway has 57,000 riders a day, making the total ridership of rail-based mass transit in Baltimore approximately 91,000 for a city with 600,000 residents and a metro area of more than 2.6 million people, meaning that only 3% of the Baltimore metro population regularly uses rail-based mass transit in Baltimore.

The Maryland Mass Transit Bias (I shall dub this the MMTB) is probably the biggest reason for the low ridership, but there are other factors to consider as well. The light rail only serves suburbs north and southwest the city leaving the entire eastern side of Baltimore County without a rail-based line to get downtown. The subway serves only the upper-west side of Baltimore County (Owings Mills), and terminates at Johns Hopkins University, which is centrally located in Baltimore. If the subway continued east down the Route 40 corridor to Rosedale or Essex, it would open a much needed line to and from the east side of the city.

Another inconvenience: the light rail makes frequent stops as it travels through the downtown area of Baltimore. And although traffic lights are programmed to turn red for the train as it gets close, riders can still wait at traffic lights on the light rail as if they were sitting in their car. After Ravens games, I've seen traffic police holding up trains while cars and pedestrians cross over Howard Street. This is unacceptable. The common rule of thumb is for mass transit to have right of way over everything -- especially cars. This is just another reminder of where mass transit is in the Baltimore pecking order.

And while the subway doesn't have to deal with the city traffic, it does suffer from long waits between trains on weekends. On weekdays it looks like both the light rail and the subway run on 10-15 minute schedules, which is common for a city the size of Baltimore. It would be nice to see the city recognize the increased demand for trains after major sporting events, however. Waits for subway and light rail trains can take longer than 20 minutes.

All of this brings me to the meaning of this article (sorry for taking so long to get to it) -- the Red Line. The Red Line is a proposed east-west light rail track that starts at Security Square Mall on the west side of the city and runs through the city on the Route 40 corridor, including the center median on the infamous "Road to Nowhere" -- a section of Route 70 that was built before the extension of Route 70 to I-95 near Caton Avenue was halted back in the early 1980's. The Red Line would then travel underground through downtown Baltimore and return to street level as it traveled through Fells Point and Canton where it would either terminate in Canton or continue east to Dundalk.

In short, the Red Line would bring Baltimore mass transit options up to where it should be for a city this size. It would give residents who live west of the city in Howard and Carroll Counties a way to get downtown via a station at the Route 70 park and ride and open that much needed line to the east side of Baltimore County.

Right now, I use the light rail for Ravens and Oriole games. If the Red Line were built, I would be able to drive down from New Market on Route 70, park at the lot at the end of the highway (where the current park and ride lot is located) and hop onto a train for easy access to the downtown area. I'd never have to get off Route 70. And neither would many other people who come down the Route 70 corridor for Ravens games or work, which would go a long way in alleviating traffic on the congested 695 Beltway.

The problem is this: people don't want the Red Line built, namely people in Edmonson Village and Canton, who don't want a train running through their neighborhoods. These people are referred to as NIMBY's (Not In My Back Yard), and they are the biggest obstacle in getting most mass transit lines built, whether in Baltimore or Budapest. As with most mass transit opposition, crime, noise and inconvenience are the biggest concerns.

According to the Red Line's Facebook page, the Red Line would bring 10,000 jobs to Baltimore. There is also a link to a short video about Seattle's most recent light rail line, and how it's been a major part of helping the redevelopment of some of the city's isolated neighborhoods. This is commonly referred to as "Smart Growth", connecting isolated communities to the downtown area and building new communities around mass transit stations. Common examples of Smart Growth are only a short ride from Baltimore, in Bethesda, MD and Rosslyn, VA. Yet in Baltimore, Smart Growth is mocked and shunned while mass transit is commonly linked to crime and the decline of neighborhoods.

The link between crime and mass transit is commonly used by detractors of mass transit, but never officially proven. And in the cases of Edmonson Village and Canton, neighborhoods where crime is the number one reason against the Red Line, mass transit already exists -- it's called the local bus.

So ironically, the Red Line has gotten caught up in red tape. With the economic downturn, the Red Line has been put on the back burner for the time being, along with other civic improvement plans, such as a new arena. It's disappointing, really, to see a city fail to take advantage of options and strategies that could transform it into something better. It costs money, sure, but the long-term payoff is always worth it.

In the meantime, I'll cross my fingers and hope that some real progress on the Red Line takes place. Until then, this fan of public transit is seeing red.

Christian Bale -- Good Actor?

2010-03-22T08:03:00.000-07:00

I am ripped, yes, but I am not that good of an actor.

Do you consider Christian Bale a good actor? I don't.

Sure, he's in good movies, but think about some of the recent movies he's been in...and how poor his performance has been in them.

I watched Public Enemies last night, and I really enjoyed it. Johnny Depp was good as John Dillenger, and Tommy from Snatch was a great Baby Face Nelson. But Bale as Depp's foil was just "meh". His 1930's era Chicago accent was bad. Come to think of it, Bale has several problems with his voice in movies.

In Batman Begins and The Dark Knight, his grumbly Batman voice was horrible...even fans who loved those movies were critical of Bale's voice. In Terminator Salvation, again he went for a gruff voice which came off as monotone, and ultimately lead to many people criticizing his flat performance. And in Enemies, his voice sounded like Fred Armisen impersonating Barack Obama on Saturday Night Live.

Bale does have a knack for picking solid scripts and working with established directors. Chances are, when Bale is in a movie, it's going to be good, which is why many fans hopes were raised when he joined Terminator Salvation. But Bale's participation in Salvation was an ego-trip. He signed on to play John Connor, who originally had a three-minute role at the end of the film. So Bale demanded the role be fleshed out, and it was, ultimately rendering the Connor part of the film irrelevant compared to the role of Marcus (Sam Worthington), which was the driving narrative force behind Salvation.

Bale is often shown up by other actors in the same movie, too. In The Dark Knight it was Heath Ledger. In 3:10 to Yuma it was Russell Crowe (although Ben Foster upstaged them both). In Terminator Salvation it was Sam Worthington and Anton Yelchin. And in Public Enemies it was Johnny Depp and Tommy from Snatch. This happens so often because Bale is a one-note actor and can't breathe any depth into his roles.

To be fair, Bale has done some good work as an actor. His performance in American Psycho was both dark and humorous. Bale's flatness actually worked in that role. And in Rescue Dawn, Bale did a wonderful job portraying a POW who escapes captivity and makes a run for it in the harsh jungles of Vietnam, all while on the verge of suffering a mental breakdown. It's probably Bale's best performance in a career of mediocrity. Bale is also known for taking on physically demanding roles. In The Machinist he lost 80 pounds and shed lots of weight for Rescue Dawn. He's also put on weight and gotten ripped for other roles.

So what is it about Christian Bale that gets people excited? Surely it's not his acting ability. It's his good decisions. When Bale is in a movie, chances are, it's going to be good. Also, being a good looking guy with rigid features doesn't hurt.

So I, as well as millions of other moviegoers, will still continue to see Christian Bale on the big screen. And despite his obvious lack of acting ability, I still consider him a good actor because he chooses good scripts and occasionally turns in a good performance.

The biggest rivalry going today...

2010-03-05T06:40:00.000-08:00

Yankees & Red Sox?

Nope.

Duke & UNC?

Wrong.

Ravens & Steelers?

Think again.

Republicans & Democrats?

DING! DING! DING!

I love it when people criticize sports fans. They say "you're cheering for spoiled athletes who make millions". And when you think about it, being a devoted sports fan is kind of funny. You're basing your happiness or despair on the accomplishments of others. People you've never met. People who wouldn't give you the time of day if you met them on the street.

But for some reason, political fans get a pass. And if you ask me, political fans are a million times worse than any sports fan. Well, most of them.

Here's why.

Have you see the Barack Obama picture where he's painted as the Joker? The word "Socialism" is printed beneath the picture.

What is the point of that picture? What does it accomplish?

Nothing!

It's no different than the bumper sticker of Calvin pissing on a Ford logo. Or a Steelers logo. It does nothing but incite hatred and ignorance. It's an avatar for a group of fanatics who feel they must align with one side of the political spectrum. God forbid they try to stay centered, or think for themselves. Nope. If you believe in one ideal, you have to believe in all the others that go along with it. It's like ordering cable. You just want HBO? Too bad. You have to get two dozen other channels you don't care about and you have to pay for them too.

Heading into work today I saw a bumper sticker that read, "Independence Day: 1/20/2013".

It's the day that a Republican president would take office if they won the 2012 election. Maybe you remember the countless stickers saying the same thing about George W. Bush's last day in office. Both sides of the spectrum are guilty of the same hate-mongering. It's just the Republicans turn to spew their venom right now.

And unlike sports, where most athletes and fans can shake hands after a game before going their separate ways, in politics, there is no meeting in the middle. If you believe in something different than one group you're instantly labeled a communist, socialist, right-wing nutjob -- or my favorite -- un-American.

WTF is "un-American" anyway? What is "American" in the first place?

Listen to the talk shows. The hosts don't just preach to the choir -- they scream and yell at the choir. More flame-fanning. More hate-spewing. Where will it end? Nazi Germany? I don't think we're too far off to be honest.

Back to sports metaphor: The biggest problem with baseball today is that the Red Sox and Yankees are the two most popular teams, and the media has no problem whipping up the frenzied masses who follow these 2 teams. It's as if the media is telling sports fans to pick a side. Are you going to be a Red Sox fan or a Yankees fan? Because if you are a fan of another team, you're just wasting your time.

And it's the same thing with politics, except there are no other teams. You have to choose a side. Don't even think about staying in the middle.

That's why I try to stay out of it.

I'd much rather root for the "spoiled millionaires who cheat on their wives" than throw my support behind a spoiled millionaire who cheats on his wife while telling you not to cheat on your wife.

Muse @ Baltimore Arena

2010-03-04T07:22:00.000-08:00

Am I a Muse fan? Kind of. I prefer the less theatrical Radiohead, of which Muse is endlessly compared. I think of Muse as a Radiohead-meets-Queen stadium band that is mostly good from a distance. Too much of the band at once wears me out. Singer Matt Bellamy's overtly political lyrics can grow tedious at times, and their operatic sound can get cumbersome. However in 2003, I was in love with the band's third album, Absolution, which satisfied my taste for computer space rock before I discovered the more subtle joys of Radiohead.

So when I saw that Muse would be coming to Baltimore's 1st Mariner Arena along with Silversun Pickups on March 3rd, I decided to see them in person. Their style of loud-guitar driven rock would surely sound great live, and Silversun Pickups aren't a shabby opening act either. Plus I wanted to drag my friend Tim to a live show, since his live music experiences usually come from cover bands. It was time to show him what the real thing sounds like.

Silversun Pickups did a breeze forty minute opening set, featuring their better known hits like "Substitution" and "Lazy Eye". They played the fluffer role for the crowd nicely.

But everyone was here to see Muse. And they didn't disappoint.

They kicked off with the song "Uprising" from their newest album, The Resistance, and then segued right into the title track from the album. The band then cherry-picked songs from their last 4 albums, ranging from "Plug-in Baby" from 2001's Origin of Symmetry, "Hysteria" and "Stockholm Syndrome" from 2003's Absolution and "Starlight", "Supermassive Black Hole" and "Knights of Cydonia" from 2006's Black Holes and Revelations.

The stage design was impressive, featuring three "skyscraper" screens that featured video and images throughout the show. There were three small stages in the middle of each skyscraper where a member of the band stood, and they were able to be raised and lowered throughout the show. The laser show was worth the price of admission alone. Best. Lasers. Ever. And another cool stylistic wrinkle were huge eyeball beach balls that were dropped into the crowd. When popped, confetti exploded from them.

The band sounded great, and the sound at the 1st Mariner Arena still compares nicely to other large venues in the area. It's nice to see Baltimore getting some better shows that would usually go to Washington, DC or Philadelphia instead.

I caught the light rail at Nursery Road instead of driving into the city at rush hour and paying $20 for parking in a garage that is notorious for long back-ups after shows let out. Like the arena, the light rail is routinely criticized for not serving the city to its potential, but last night I was very pleased with the entire experience.

Muse rocked the house, and I went home to watch the Maryland/Duke basketball game that I had recorded. Maryland won.

All in all it was the perfect evening.

82nd Academy Awards Preview

2010-02-23T12:10:00.000-08:00

Believe it or not, the Academy Awards are just a couple of days away. Am I the only one finding it hard to stop writing 2009 on things?

The year seemed to zip by...but not from the amount of quality movies. Overall, I thought 2009 was a weak year for movies, and ironically, the Academy expanded their Best Picture field to 10 movies in a year where they would have been hard pressed to pick 5 movies that really deserved to be nominated.

I do like the decision to nominate 10 films, as it does give acclaim to more commercially successful movies that wouldn't have been nominated had the field still included 5. But, even though there are 10 best picture nominees, there are probably 7 or 8 films that don't stand a chance of winning, making the expansion a moot point.

And let's face it, the move to 10 nominees is about increasing the Oscar TV rating, which have been slumping over the last several years. The Academy is hoping that fans of more commercially successful films such as Avatar, The Blind Side and Up will tune in.

There still were some really good movies in 2009. And most of them were actually nominated for Best Picture. But what I found lacking in 2009 were the amount of standout performances. Only Christoph Waltz from Inglourious Basterds really jumps to mind when I think of great performances of the year. Maybe Mo'Nique from Precious gets in there too. But George Clooney was George Clooney again in Up in the Air. Did he really need to be nominated? Seeing Jeff Bridges nominated for Crazy Heart is cool, since the performance is very close to his performance as The Dude in The Big Lebowski, a role he wrongly wasn't nominated for. But Bridges can play those roles in his sleep by now. And oh yeah, Meryl Streep was nominated for like the 82nd time in a row. Big surprise there!

But enough rambling. Let's take a look at the important categories.

BEST PICTURE

What's nominated (picks in bold represent the movies nominated if the field was still five): Avatar, The Blind Side, District 9, An Education, The Hurt Locker, Inglourious Basterds, Precious, A Serious Man, Up, and Up in the Air.
What should have been nominated: Star Trek lacked the political messages in District 9, but Trek was much more fun. Crazy Heart should have been nominated in place of The Blind Side which was basically an overly sentimental made for TV movie that happened to feature a solid performance by Sandra Bullock. And while the first 15 minutes of Up was on par with the best of any nominee, the second half of the film was your typical Disney goofiness. I would have liked to see (500) Days of Summer or Sugar in its spot.
What will win: Avatar won the Golden Globe and still might be the favorite based on its technical achievements, financial success and treehugging political message, but my money is on The Hurt Locker, which has been gaining steam in recent months thanks to the buzz surrounding director Kathryn Bigelow, who is only the third female director nominated for Best Director.
What should win: I enjoyed The Hurt Locker, but I absolutely loved Quentin Tarantino's Inglourious Basterds. His alternative take on WWII was a funny and suspenseful film that featured the most tense scene of 2009, and possibly, of all time (basement bar scene).

BEST DIRECTOR

Who's Nominated: Kathryn Bigelow, James Cameron, Lee Daniels, Jason Reitman, Quentin Tarantino.
Who Will Win: Kathryn Bigelow. I think the Academy will make a statement (and history) by giving the statue to a female director for the first time ever.
Who Should Win: James Cameron. He created the technology used in Avatar, from performance capture to the next generation 3-D. And while Best Director is not a technical award, Cameron created the world in Avatar, he didn't just hand off the special effects to someone else. His stamp is all over this film.

BEST ACTOR

Who's Nominated: Jeff Bridges, George Clooney, Colin Firth, Morgan Freeman, Jeremy Renner.
Who Will Win: Jeff Bridges with Renner the second horse in this race.
Who Should Win: Jeff Bridges. His performance gives Crazy Heart its...crazy heart. Yeah, I just said that.

BEST ACTRESS

Who's Nominated: Sandra Bullock, Helen Mirren, Carey Mulligan, Gabourey Sidibe, Maryl Streep.
Who Will Win: Sandra Bullock. It was a good performance by an actress who has been the same in pretty much ever role she's ever had and made a ton of money in 2009. She's the hot pick.
Who Should Win: Gabourey Sidibe. Her performance in Precious was raw, heartbreaking and uplifting all at once.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR

Who's Nominated: Matt Damon, Woody Harrelson, Christopher Plummer, Stanley Tucci, Christoph Waltz.
Who Will Win: Christoph Waltz. He was the one standout performance of the year.
Who Should Win: Christoph Waltz. He was the one standout performance of the year.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS
Who's Nominated: Penelope Cruz, Vera Farmiga, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Anna Kendrick, Mo'Nique.
Who Will Win: Mo'Nique. Her performance as a despicable inner city mother in Precious is good we can't allow ourselves to sympathize with her when her character finally sees the error of her ways.
Who Should Win: Mo'Nique.

So there you have it. Do you agree with my picks? Let me know in the comment section below.

They don't make 'em like this anymore

2010-02-12T10:57:00.001-08:00

I've always been kind of fascinated with the Italian horror movies of the 1970's and 1980's but never really followed that up by actually watching them. After all, you can watch all of the films' famous gory bits on You Tube these days and the movies themselves are infamous for incoherent plots, bad acting, and even worse dubbing.

So why waste the time?

Anyway, a friend lent me his copy of Lucio Fulci's The House by the Cemetery the other day so I popped it in last night while fighting the urge to watch I Love You, Man for the twenty-third time this month. I really need to stop watching that movie.

The plot, if you can call it one, is simple. A family moves into a house near Boston so that the father can continue some research that was put on hold when his colleague mysteriously killed his mistress and then hung himself. But little do they know that a zombie doctor is living downstairs in the basement, murdering his victims so he can harvest their organs to stay alive.

And while THBTC commits all of the sins of Italian horror (incoherent plot, bad dubbing, etc), it still manages to be a good and creepy little movie. These Italian horror movies are known first for their gore, and THBTC doesn't disappoint in that regard. But perhaps the second best aspect of Italian horror films are their atmosphere, and THBTC nails the dreamy and creepy atmosphere that most modern horror movies have forgotten about.

I mean, there's a freaking tomb in the floor of the house! How freaking creepy and awesome is that? Also, the house is located right next to a cemetery (hence the title, duh) and horror movies can always use more cemeteries. Perhaps the film's best scene is when mother and son are searching the basement for proof that the child just saw the head of his dead babysitter roll down the stairs (yes, I just wrote that). As they are searching the basement, the killers' eyes pop out of the darkness. It's something you don't expect and while it doesn't cause you to jump out of your seat like the loud jumps that most horror movies employ these days, it does send shivers down your spine.

THBTC is a relic from an era when film makers wanted to genuinely scare you, not treat the movie as if its a roller coaster ride. And that's what I miss about these kinds of horror movies.

But despite as much as THBTC gets right, it gets as much wrong. I mean really, how can the filmmakers ignore such blatant inconsistencies?

Take for instance the family's babysitter, cleaning up the blood from the previous night's murder. The mother notices the sitter cleaning the blood and just asks "what are you doing?" I don't know about you, but if I woke up to find a massive blood smear on my floor, leading to the basement, I'd call the freaking cops! After that scene, I started thinking that maybe the sitter was a protector of the zombie doc, but then she gets killed. There goes that theory!

The film's ending is also a mind-F of the worst kind. We're lead to believe different things throughout the film (is the little girl real?) but at the end, nothing is explained or made clearer. A quote at the end of the movie, attributed to poet Henry James, is actually Fulci's, and does nothing but make the proceedings even more confusing.

But let's be real. We don't watch these movies for the seamless film making. THBTC is basically a prono. You can watch the best parts on line. After all, why sit through all the exposition when all we want to see is people fucking?

So do I recommend THBTC? Not exactly. If you find yourself bored by today's horror movies and miss the atmospheric creepers from the past, check it out.

But I would recommend Ti West's The House of the Devil to a fan of film in general, as it's just a great movie, and not just something for fans of cult movies.

Beach House

2010-02-01T11:51:00.000-08:00

Beach House's third album, Teen Dream, received a 9 out of 10 rating from Pitchfork.

Hailing from Baltimore, I've found it difficult to get into the city's musical offerings. Occasionally my musical tastes mesh up with quasi-Baltimore act Animal Collective, but most times I shrug off their nauseating repetitiveness which is basically Caucasian vegan Baltimore club music, circa 1994, when DJ Boobie was still making mix-tapes.

That is until Beach House arrived on the scene. Their self-titled 2006 debut caught my ear when I heard "Master of None" on Sirius radio. However, their first two albums were downtrodden and difficult to sit through in their entirety. Instead, I opted to be a fan of the band in small doses. "Yeah, Beach House, they're from Baltimore. I like a couple of their songs, and I want to like them, but..."

Then came Teen Dream, officially released last Tuesday, despite having been leaked last November. The wait was worth it. Teen Dream is by far the band's best album to date.

Beach House, made up of French-born Victoria Legrand and Bmore native, Alex Scally, push their core minimalist sound to the limit in Teen Dream, resulting in an album of more movement and layers. The band previously consisted of Legrand on vocals, Scally on guitar, and a drum machine rivaling the cheapness of the one that Terrance Howard's character found in Hustle & Flow. Now, there is a drummer (I think, or they bought a better sounding drum machine) and organ-sounding keyboards at the band's disposal. They make great use of the new wrinkles, but this is still very much a Beach House record.

Thematically, Teen Dream evokes the 80's as seen by a depressed teenager who watches too many John Hughes movies. I mean, come on...it's dream-pop at its best. But I've never experienced so much beautiful sadness on an album. In that regard, Beach House isn't for everyone. Despite it's revamped sound, this is still a slow album, one that takes it's time getting to where it wants to go, and even in some cases, still takes too long getting there.

And in a year that looks to be filled with new albums from some of my favorite bands (The Walkmen, Arcade Fire, The National, Stars, Radiohead, etc.), it's ironic that an album that I wasn't expecting comes out of nowhere and hit me so hard.

Teen Dream is going to be tough to wake up from.

You can check out their album at lala.com here.

Price is right

2010-01-26T11:50:00.001-08:00

In addition to guest writing for The Wire, Price has written eight novels and several screenplays, including The Color of Money and Shaft (2000).

On my lunch break just now, I got up from the couch in my office with a smile on my face. Why you ask? After all, it's not Friday, yet. No, I was reading Clockers, by Richard Price.

"Where does the smile come from?", you ask. It's in the beauty of Price's writing. And as corny as that sounds, it's absolutely true.

If you've watched The Wire (and judging by the show's huge following, you have), you're familiar with some of Price's work -- and how he can capture the tragic beauty, and comedy, in the midst of all urban decay that pollutes so many American cities today. Price was a guest writer on The Wire, and the now-famous "Good night, fiends. Good night, hoppers. Good night, hustlers." scene in season 5 was ripped from the pages of Clockers.

Clockers was written in 1992, but if it came out yesterday it would still be as hard-hitting and truthful as it was back then. Maybe you're familiar with the 1995 film, which was directed by Spike Lee. I haven't seen it yet, but it's coming up on my Netflix queue. I'll watch it once I finish the book. But I can guarantee that Spike Lee, even on his best day, couldn't capture half the emotions that Price jam-packs into his novels so effortlessly.

What sets Price's books apart from most others, like The Wire from other shows, is the unjudging look at people -- good or bad. Just because someone is a cop or a drug dealer, Price doesn't judge. They are still people with feelings, and in most cases, even a moral compass, as corrupted as it may be.

If you're looking for a plot, Price not may be for you. His books are not meant to be read on the beach, although I wouldn't hesitate to do just that. Instead, Price is more fascinated with his characters and the tricky situations they get themselves into, and out of, depending on the sacrifices they are prepared to make. But believe me, it all makes for intense reading. Despite their slow pace, Price's books are page turners.

And what's funny, is that while I read Price, I usually see and hear characters from The Wire, as if the actors who played characters in that show are playing the characters from the novel in my head. Right now, the character of Rodney in Clockers is being played by the same guy who played Prop Joe on The Wire. And it's eerily accurate.

You should give it a try sometime. But beware.

As a novice writer, who's dabbled in fiction, reading Price makes me feel like I'm painting in watercolors while looking at the Sistine Chapel. It's hard. Sometimes I feel like throwing away everything I've written because of this guy. Seriously. He's that good.

But I keep reading -- keep torturing myself -- because his writing, as raw and as heartbreaking as it is, makes me smile. And I did a lot of that while watching The Wire.

For the love of God, please stop!

2009-12-21T13:41:00.000-08:00

After a recent entry on sequels I'd like to see, I realized that there are probably just as many sequels I don't want to see. So, in typical year-end fashion, I've complied another list.

10. Animated Sequels. Disney and Pixar can make as many animated movies as they want, but please, stop after first one. Did we really need 3 Ice Age movies?
9. Meet the Parents. I really liked the original movie a long, long time ago. It was funny and sweet and proved that a PG-13 rated comedy could actually be funny. But then the filmmakers crapped out Meet the Fockers and I didn't crack a smile once. Well, OK, the part where Dustin Hoffman lays down in front of the RV had me laughing, but the baby learning sign language did not! And since Little Fockers has been announced, I am ready to not laugh once again.
8. Resident Evil. I'm still pissed that one of the best video games ever made, and one that could have been an amazing film adaptation, was fumbled by hackmaster Paul WS Anderson (Aliens vs. Predator). Very little of what made the games such a creepy (and fun) experience was brought to the screen. And for some reason, 3 sequels were made to the original movie, each diverting further and further from the video game. It was at one time rumored that Anderson was going to direct the forthcoming Castlevania movie, but thankfully, he left the project.
7. Harry Potter. I know, they are based on the books (can't remember how many there actually are), but when is it going to end for good? Maybe I will sit down and watch them all one long weekend, but until then, I'll just laugh when I think about the "Harry Twatter" joke from 40 Year-Old Virgin.
6. Fast and the Furious. This franchise has always been geared toward the texting-while-driving crowd and maybe that explains why the scripts to these movies felt like they were typed on someone's cell phone. What could have been a fun dumb movie was just dumb, and then they churned out 3 sequels, each with varying cast members returning but the end result always being the same -- a movie that made you feel like you were stuck in traffic.
5. Ocean's [insert number here]. The first one was fun but overhyped, the second one completely sucked, and I couldn't finish the third one out of boredom, even while being trapped on an airplane. The thrill of seeing all those big actors on the screen together wore thin half way through Ocean's Eleven.
4. Saw. I'll just say this. Whoever walked out of Saw 5 and said to their friend, "I can't wait for Saw 6" should be kidnapped and put into one of those torture devices from the movies. If ever there is a film franchise that represents the downfall of America, it's the Saw movies. Oh and any film franchise that has a movie come out a year apart - instant suckage.
3. Shrek. If ever there was a movie that was old after its first entry, it's Shrek. I mean, I get it, Eddie Murphy is a talking donkey. Hil-arious. Whereas Michael Myers was once one of my favorite comedic actors, now I just wonder what the hell he is thinking half the time and The Love Guru proves my point. At least he had the good sense to do a cameo for Inglourious Basterds.
2. Pirates of the Caribbean. Ah, 2003. Everyone and their mother was in love with Johnny Depp after seeing this movie. Except me. I thought it was good enough, but didn't understand in insane hype-machine surrounding it. The second one, I felt, was the best of them all, despite it being really long and confusing at times, and the third one just seemed to throw everything at the wall in hopes a few story lines would stick. Rumor is that a fourth movie is in the works. Let's hope that it never sees the light of day.
1. Transformers. OK, the first one was a big dumb movie with cool enough special effects and Megan Fox to keep you from noticing that the plot was completely insane. Plus, for someone like me, it was a way to relive your childhood a bit, since I grew up watching, and playing with, Transformers. But the limited goodwill of the first movie was completely railroaded by the idiotic and bloated sequel. Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen proved that special effects aren't very special without a good story line to tie them together, and at over two and a half hours long, the movie felt like it would never, ever, end. Not only do I hope that they never make another Transformers movie (fat chance) it was so bad I hope that Michael Bay never makes another movie (another fat chance).

Top 10 Shows of 2000's

2009-12-14T08:35:00.001-08:00

10. The Office, NBC. The Office is one of those shows that I just want to watch each week. Some shows are a chore, but with this, I know that I am going to either: A) Laugh or B) Be made to feel uncomfortable a couple of times during each episode. Yes, some of the episodes feel flat or are too crazy for my liking, but on the whole, The Office is one of the most consistent shows on TV as far as entertainment value is concerned. I might be labeled a blaspheme for saying this, but it's waaaaaaay better than the British version too.
9. How I Met Your Mother, CBS. Remember when NBC was busy racing around trying to find the next Friends? Remember Coupling? Well, if ever there is a show that is the next Friends, it's How I Met Your Mother. What makes HIMYM so great is its total lack of regard for the standard sitcom formula. Sure, there is a laugh track, but HIMYM is actually funny minute to minute. The jokes aren't rationed out per episode and telegraphed from a mile away like most sitcoms. Also, the plot is actually linear throughout the show's history, instead of being self-contained in each episode. And Neil Patrick Harris as Barney? Legend...wait for it...ary.
8. Big Love, HBO. Aside from too much "Paxton ass" in its first season, Big Love is a drama that would feel at home on any of the major networks. There is not much language, little violence and the family, while polygamists, are a good portrait of a troubled, but loving, modern American family. And that is essentially what Big Love is, a family drama. HBO has a way of raising your expectations for shows, and for good reason, but with Big Love, its important to appreciate it for what it is, not what it isn't.
7. Alias, ABC. JJ Abrams left a big mark on TV in the 2000's, and while Felicity was the show where he found his footing, Alias was the show where it all took off. At its core, Alias was Felicity with spies and it also foreshadowed the kind of mystery that Abrams and Co. would later employ in Lost. Like 24, Alias trailed off quickly after its first 3 seasons, but those first 3 seasons...wow.
6. 24, FOX. If ever there was a show living off its previous glory, it's 24. What has become a tired show, recycling previous plots and characters several times over, 24 was once one of the most gripping shows on TV. It still has its moments, but for me, the first 3 seasons of 24 will go down as some of the best in TV history. And given its now-mediocre existence, Keifer Sutherland's Jack Bauer is still reason enough to tune in each week.
5. The Shield, FX. The Shield proved that cable could do TV just as good, and as racy as HBO. Despite its somewhat tedious first 2 seasons, The Shield grew into a show where every action had a reaction, as Michael Chiklis' corrupt cop, Vic Mackey, dealt with the consequences of something he did in the show's pilot -- all the way to the series finale. Whereas most TV shows have plots which are self-contained within a single episode or season, The Shield carried out one linear plot for its entire run.
4. Rome, HBO. Rome lived a short life on HBO. What was originally to be a mini-series became a 2-season show, which is now rumored to be continued again as a theatrical movie. We can only hope to see Kevin McKidd and Ray Stevenson on screen together again as the troubled widower Lucius Vorenus and the violent but loyal Titus Pullo.
3. Friday Night Lights, NBC. Shows based on movies rarely ever work. Anyone remember the TV show version Ferris Bueller's Day Off? I do. FNL is true to the film in that it tells raw stories about people who happen to be related to the town's high-school football team in one way or another, but that's it. There are no other comparisons to be made. FNL works because its largely improvised, which elicits realistic performances from its actors, and the writing is not content to spin generic TV drama yarns about characters getting pregnant or coming back from the dead. It's about real people. Good people. FNL doesn't need villains.
2. Lost, ABC. It's really unfair to Lost that The Wire existed in the same decade, because put simply, Lost is the greatest network show ever created. It transformed the serial and then turned it on its ear. Has a show ever been as rich in detail as this? I mean, Lost has its own wiki-page -- and it's about as vast as Wikipedia! At times the show can be frustrating, but as we've recently seen, it does intend to answer most of the questions it has asked over the course of its run.
1. The Wire, HBO. What else can I say about a show that has been hailed as the best TV show ever?

Contenders: Big Brother, The Contender, Damages, Gossip Girl, Tell Me You Love Me, True Blood.

Note: Shows such as The Sopranos, which started in the 90's didn't qualify.

Top 10 Movies of 2000's

2009-12-14T07:49:00.000-08:00

10. Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World (2003). Peter Wier authentically takes us back to the early 1800's in a film that balances swashbuckling action with fascinating takes on sciences and philosophy. Russell Crowe and Paul Bettany are excellent foils, and surprisingly, the fireworks come more from their clashes on war and science than the action itself.
9. Lord of the Rings: The Followship of the Ring (2001). The odyssey begins in an epic fashion. We're introduced to the characters we'll follow for the next 2 movies, and thankfully, FOTR does more than just set-up those next 2 films, like most introductory movies in a trilogy tend to do. Put simply, FOTR made the year-long wait between LOTR movies almost unbearable. That's how good it was.
8. Black Hawk Down (2001). Ridley Scott turned in the most accurate portrayal of modern war in this adaptation of the book, based on the 1993 incident in Mogadishu, Somalia. At times its exhausting, and confusing, since most of the cast looks similar in their buzzcuts and fatigues, but it all lends itself to the cluster-fuck that is modern warfare.
7. Brokeback Mountain (2005). Yeah, I did it. I've included "that gay cowboy movie" on this list. You know why? It deserves to be here. At times it's shocking, especially for heterosexual males, but before long, it becomes a tragic love story. It could really be about any couple, gay or straight, and that's credit to director Ang Lee, who doesn't hover on the gay subject matter. Instead, he makes the film more about forbidden love and loss. It also doesn't hurt to watch as Heath Ledger transforms from teen heartthrob to brilliant character actor right before our eyes.
6. Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon (2000). Director Ang Lee showed stubborn American audiences what they were missing by ignoring foreign-made movies. CT,HD contains some of the most beautifully filmed and choreographed action scenes of all time.
5. Gladiator (2000). Ridley Scott and Russell Crowe relaunched the epic sword-and-sandal genre with much success. The fact that scenes from Gladiator are played at football stadiums across America is proof that the movie struck a chord, especially with men. The underdog Maximus is one of the most iconic characters of the decade, and Jaoquin Phoenix's douche bag villain, Commodus, is a worthy foil to Crowe's tragic hero.
4. The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford (2007). Brad Pitt turns in his most impressive acting job to date, and Casey Affleck proves he's the Affleck sibling with all the talent in director Andrew Dominik's epic bio-pic about the outlaw Jesse James. Dominik's straight-forward directing style gives the film and its characters a timeless feel, and the dialog, also written by Dominik, is flawless and authentic.
3. There Will Be Blood (2007). Paul Thomas Anderson's complex character study of selfish oil tycoon Daniel Plainview elicited the best performace of the 2000's (Daniel Day-Lewis). The soundtrack, by Radiohead guitarist Jonny Greenwood, is the film's other equally as impressive highlight.
2. Kill Bill, Vol. 1 (2004). Kill Bill, much LOTR is one big movie. However, Quentin Tarantino wisely decided to split the film in two, right when the tone shifted from epic Kung-Fu flick to Spaghetti Western. The second half of the film is slower-paced than the first, and somewhat anti-climactic, but the first-half is action packed and features one of the best action sequences ever captured on film (House of Blue Leaves). I didn't think QT had it in him to do action like this. I was wrong.
1. Lord of the Rings: Return of the King (2003). Peter Jackson's trilogy reaches its high-point in the epic finale. The Oscars waited for this film to be released to bestow it with Best Picture, and deservedly so. The trilogy was made all at once and are essentially different chapters in the same movie. In an era of bloated special effect-laden films, Jackson remembered that humanity is more important than "wow", and it's the biggest reason why ROTK is the best film of the decade.

Contenders: The Departed, Inglourious Basterds, Kill Bill Vol. 2, Memento, No Country for Old Men, Zodiac.

Top 10 Albums of 2000's

2009-12-14T07:46:00.001-08:00

10. Stars, Set Yourself on Fire. Sometimes Stars can be too "cute". But on this album, they resist the urge to be too cutesy and offer up some great though-provoking songs, such as the excellent album opener, "Your Ex-Lover is Dead". The album was eventually covered by several Canadian indie-artists on Do You Trust Your Friends?, thus sealing its legacy as one of the decade's best albums. And after hearing some of the odd interpretations of songs from the album, it makes you appreciate the original album even more.
9. Pete Yorn, Musicforthemorningafter. In a decade that produced dozens of "singer songwriter" douchebags (John Mayer, Jason Mraz), Yorn set himself apart by writing vague lyrics that demanded repeat listens as opposed to the "I got it the first time" songs written by the aforementioned asshats.
8. Radiohead, Kid A. Looking around a lot of "best of 2000's lists", I am finding that Kid A is often ranked at #1. I can see why. Radiohead transformed themselves on this album, after they had transformed themselves on 1997's OK Computer (the best album of that decade), and still managed to sell a shitload of albums while doing it. Kid A not only challenged listeners, it baffled them, which is why I often put Kid A back on the shelf and listened to Computer or The Bends instead. But after years of wearing me down, Kid A has won me over. Songs like "The National Anthem", "How to Disappear Completely", "Optimistic", and "Motion Picture Soundtrack" are some of the best songs the band has ever written. You just won't hear me rave about "Treefingers".
7. Ours, Distorted Lullabies. Ours' frontman, Jimmy Gnecco, has repeatedly been compared to the late Jeff Buckley, and it's as apt a comparison as it is tiresome. Look up any article on the band and you're bound to see the comparison made in the first paragraph. But once you get past the haunting similarities in both singers' voices, you'll find that Ours is more of a Cure-meets-U2-meets-Radiohead blend of melancholy lyrics that somehow uplift instead of depress.
6. Neko Case, Fox Confessor Brings the Flood. Case doesn't sing songs, she tells stories, and there is no better example of this than the album's first two tracks, "Margaret vs Pauline" and what is perhaps the best song of the decade, "Star Witness". Case's voice is haunting, and so are her lyrics.
5. Wolf Parade, Apologies to the Queen Mary. Dan Boeckner and Spencer Krug hand the mic off to one another on the band's debut, but eerily their voices and lyrics start to blend together over the course of the album as they sing about cities, whales, wedding cakes, fathers, sons and ghosts. It might just be the most challenging album of the 2000's to get into (it took me a couple of years to break through and appreciate the album), but it's also perhaps the decade's most rewarding.
4. Radiohead, In Rainbows. Radiohead returned to glory with this 2007 album, which they released on their own, on a "pay what you want" format. In Rainbows is also a return to an easier Radiohead sound, hearkening back to earlier albums such as The Bends or OK Computer. Whereas Kid A challenges the listener's patience at times, In Rainbows does nothing but satisfy.
3. The Strokes, Is This It. The Strokes brought in the aughts with a much hyped debut album that resurrected post-punk-garage-rock with some pop thrown in for good measure. It was such a good album, that it inspired dozens of bands to adopt similar band names (The Shins, The Stills, The Sounds, etc...) and even rip off some of The Strokes' now-identifiable sound. Is This It is probably the album that best captured the sound of indie rock the 00's.
2. The Walkmen, You & Me. I was torn on this one, but ironically, I was always going to choose from two different Walkmen albums, the other being 2004's Bows + Arrows. Whereas that album has about 5 of the best songs the band has ever recorded on it, it also suffers from some lazy throwaway tracks. That's not the case on You & Me. Every song is a masterpiece, from "Donde Esta La Playa" to the album closer, "If Only it Were True".
1. Arcade Fire, Funeral. This album still gives me goosebumps, right from the first note of "Neighborhood #1 (Tunnels). Arcade Fire runs the gamut of emotions from loss (hence the album name), sadness, nostalgia, love, and finally, optimism. In a decade of great albums, Funeral is the one I go back to the most, and I'm blown away each time I revisit it.

Contenders: The National, Boxer; Arcade Fire, Neon Bible; Camera Obscura, My Maudlin Career; Bloc Party, Silent Alarm; Radiohead, Hail to the Thief.

Sequelitis

2009-11-17T12:46:00.000-08:00

Kill me, I love sequels. I get a kick out of going back to a world I loved the first or second time around.

Now, I'm not usually into the massive Hollywood sequel machine. I wasn't clamoring for Transformers 2. But I like sequels if for no other reason than to go back to the warm and fuzzy place I was when I watched the original.

And I may be in the minority, but I don't believe that sequels somehow tarnish the movies before it. If anything, I think as the sequels progressively get worse, as is mostly the case, it makes the original that much better by comparison.

So, here is my list of sequels I'd like to see get made.

10. The Exorcist 4. I know. All the sequels since the original have sucked. Actually, Part III wasn't too bad despite a weird dream sequence featuring Patrick Ewing. Anyway, even though most the other sequels and both prequels to the film buried the franchise in crap, I'd still like to see another installment get made. Return the series to Georgetown, bring back Linda Blair, and treat the film as seriously as William Friedkin treated the original. Probability Factor: 4. Both prequels are infamous for losing money for the studio, but with many horror franchises getting the reboot treatment these days, there's always hope that the pea soup will fly once again.

9. Cliffhanger 2. I'll admit, I'm a Sylvester Stallone apologist. I've always liked him even when he was making crap like Get Carter and Eye See You. So I'd be up for seeing another installment of one of Stallone's better action movies, which was released right before his career went into the tank. And hey, if Stallone can resurrect Rocky and Rambo and have those movies not suck, then I'd be willing to watch him bring this back too. Probability Factor: 5. There were rumors floating around the internet in the late 90's about a sequel entitled, The Dam, but nothing ever came of it. Based on Stallone's recent career resurgence, he might blow the dust off that script and put it into quick turnaround.

8. Dumb and Dumber 2. Forget the "prequel" ever happened. Re-teaming Jim Carrey and Jeff Daniels for a sequel and getting the Farrelly Bros. to direct is the only way another Dumb and Dumber movie can ever be made. And based on their respective slacking careers, everyone involved might be up for another go around. Probability Factor: 6. It wouldn't surprise me one bit to hear this sequel get announced tomorrow or in a couple of years.

7. Bram Stoker's Dracula: The Un-Dead. Stoker's descendant just published a squel to his great-granduncle's original book, and it's said to be more like The Da Vinci Code than the original novel. I don't care. Just get Francis Ford Coppola back in the director's chair, Wojciech Kilar back at the composer's stand, and Gary Oldman back in that awesome red robe! The 1992 Dracula film remains to this day my #1 guilty pleasure film of all time and I would love to see the same crew tackle the new Dracula book, which has already been optined for a movie. Probability Factor: 9. The movie is going to be made, but I seriously doubt whether any of the cast or crew from the 1992 film will sign up. That said, I am a big Dracula fan, so barring Uwe Boll becoming the director, I'll be there on opening night.

6. Gladiator 2. The original Gladiator was a financial and critical success. If it weren't for the pesky fact that Maximus (Russell Crowe) died at the end of the film, I bet that a second Gladiator would have been out years ago. Despite his character's death in the first film, Crowe and director Ridley Scott were so interested in making a sequel they went to singer/screenwriter Nick Cave (The Proposition) and asked him to write a script. Cave did and it's one of the most buzzed about scripts floating around the internet today. According to a lucky bastard who read it, Cave's script is both bizzare and fascinating, as the now-dead Maximus is rented out by the Roman gods to do their dirty work. This means being reincarnated, of course. The kicker is that toward the end of the film, Maximus is granted immortality on Earth (he really just wants to join his wife and child in the afterlife), and in a montage it's revealed that Maximus has lived on and fought in every war that has ever been waged since the fall of the Roman Empire. The closing shot is of Maximus looking at himself in a Pentagon bathroom mirror. Woah. Probability Factor: 2. Studios balked at the metaphysical mumbo-jumbo sprinkled throughout the script and Crowe and Scott moved on to other projects. It probably would have been made by now if it's ever gonna happen, and Crowe and Scott aren't getting any younger. Don't think about it for too long at the risk of feeling old, but it's almost been 10 years since the original Gladiator was released. That said, Cave's script has generated somewhat of a cult following on the internet, so there's a small chance that someone could shrug their shoulders one day and say "let's make this bloody movie!"

5. Halloween 9. I hated Rob Zombie's remake. I never saw his version of Halloween 2 and it sounds like the rumored Halloween 3-D is going to be another blatant money-grab. What I long to see is a return to the series' roots, which was about actually scaring the audience. Not beating them over the head with torture-porn or watered down origin stories (what the hell was all that Thorn shit anyway?), just a return to a well-made slasher film about a guy stalking teenagers on Halloween night in suburbia. When Quentin Tarantino was attached to Halloween 6 (yes, you read that right. Producer Moustapha Akkad said QT's version would be "too bloody" and then went with a version of Halloween 6 which featured a guy's head exploding), he said his vision for a sequel would be a lot like the beginning of Halloween II, when Michael Myers was trying to get out of Haddonfield. There is a lot of potential for good characters and stories in a voyeuristic Halloween sequel. I also envision a very DePalma-esque feel, too. Cameras moving through walls, long takes -- all the stuff that made the original movie one of the best horror movies ever made. Probability Factor: 6. Not counting Halloween 3-D, I'm betting there will be another sequel made to the franchise's original storyline. Finding someone who will treat it as something more than a stepping stone to a bigger career in movies is the challenge.

4. Terminator 5. I'll be the first to admit that Terminator Salvation was a very flawed film, which is why I want to see another sequel improve upon that film. Salvation's script went through several writers and versions and it feels like it when you watch the movie. But when I first saw it in theaters, it felt like there was a very good movie in there somewhere. It also begged for an Extended Cut with more exposition and character development. But still, what ended up on the screen wasn't all bad, and both Sam Worthington and Anton Yelchin kicked ass in their roles while Christian Bale was flat as John Conner. There are also so many directions the series can go in, and director McG has stated that he sees this as a new trilogy. The rights to the Terminator series are up for grabs as we speak, so it's likely that some studio will make a run at a fifth movie, which means that the return of McG, Bale or anyone else from Salvation is up in the air. But based on the troubling finished product that was Salvation, that may not be a bad thing. Probability Factor: 8. When the rights are purchased, the studio who ponied up the cash to buy it will likely put a sequel into quick turnaround to protect their investment.

3. The Little Lebowski. The Coen Bros. have never made a sequel, but if ever there was a Coen Bros. movie ripe for one, it's The Big Lebowski. I'd pay money to see Jeff Bridges and John Goodman read a telephone book as The Dude and Walter Sobchak, so it goes without saying that I'd love to see them deal with The Dude, Jr. in a potential sequel. Remember, Maude (Julianne Moore) wanted a baby, and she practically knew the Dude gave her one right after they finished having sex. Plus, seeing the return of Jesus (John Turturro, who has hinted that a sequel based on his character could be made) and the dozen other memorable characters from the film would be well worth it. Probability Factor: 5. If the Coen Bros. really, really want to please their fans, and make lots of money, they will return to the world of the tumbling tumbleweeds.

2. Star Wars - A Third Trilogy. What George Lucas says and what George Lucas does are usually two different things. He's said he'll never make another Star Wars trilogy, but everything he's doing (making a Star Wars live action TV show, countless Star Wars cartoons and releasing the films on Blu-Ray) points to a new trilogy happening at some point. And to tell the truth, Lucas can have as little involvement in a new trilogy as he wants. He wrote and directed all 3 of the latest films, and to be honest, they sucked when compared to the originals (Lucas only wrote and directed A New Hope). Lucas is a great idea guy, but should leave the details to someone else. I see Lucas doing just that if there is a new trilogy made at some point. Probability Factor: 7. Lucas can't let this franchise go and he shouldn't. It's what he's known for and the fans will always line up for more movies, and probably a couple years in advance.

1. The Godfather, Part IV. I know, I know. Part III was a mess and the Michael Corleone story was tied up into a nice bow back in 1990 when Part III was released in theaters. And when Mario Puzo died, Francis Ford Coppola swore off making another Godfather movie. (The two men were in the early stages of writing a script for a Part IV in the late 90's).

Even more difficult to get around -- any reoccurring characters featured in a potential sequel would either have to be recast due to the age of the actors playing them or lots and lots of age-reversing make-up would have to be used. But gosh darnit, I really want to go back to that world. I was 18 when I first saw these movies and they were instantly cemented into the #1 spot of my "Favorite Movies List". I also believe that there is an interesting story to be told post-Part III. When we left the Corleones, Vincent (Andy Garcia) was the Don of the family, and we all know what happened to the mob in the 80's -- it practically ceased to exist. So I'd like to see the final downfall of the Corleone family in the 80's while not treading into Goodfellas or The Sopranos territory. The Godfather movies have always had their own trademark stamp on them, and setting a sequel in the 80's would be risky. Probability Factor: 2. Unless FFC's wineries go bankrupt again, he won't return to the director's chair without Puzo and it's unlikely any new director worth their salt picks up the reigns. That said, when asked about another Godfather sequel, FFC grinned and said he'd never say "never" to anything. But this sequel remains the most unlikely of this list. And probably for good reason.

So there you have it. What sequels would you love to see get made?

The House of the Devil

2009-10-30T10:50:00.000-07:00

I've always been a sucker for horror movies from the 1970's.

The Exorcist, The Omen, Halloween...

Each of those movies had something that's usually missing in modern-horror films: tension and atmosphere.

So when a modern horror movie is actually able to hearken back to those better times, I make it a point to check it out.

Such was the case with The House of the Devil, which aired on HDNet Movies last Wednesday night before getting a very limited release in theaters this weekend.

The House of the Devil was made by Ti West, a low-budget director (The Trigger Man, Cabin Fever 2) who obviously feels the same way I do about horror movies. There must be loads tension and atmosphere, and West gives us just that during the first hour of his film. He also sets the film in the early 80's, a time when horror movies just felt smarter and people were less connected. IE, no cell phones.

The plot is simple and doesn't try to be original. A girl named Samantha (Jocelin Donahue, a dead ringer for Kate Bosworth), who needs money to move out of her shitty dorm and into an apartment, responds to an ad for a babysitter. But the job turns out to be something totally different than she originally thought. Turns out the Ulmans (Tom Noonan & Mary Woronov with their creep-o-meter jacked up) don't have a child, at least not one who needs babysitting. Instead, they want Samantha to watch over his mother.

Samantha almost leaves when she's thrown the curveball, but the Ulmans raise the rate, and money-hungry Samantha can't resist. "I'll basically get $400 for just watching TV", she tells her friend, Megan (Greta Gerwig), who's given her a ride to the house. After all, mother is said to be sleeping.

But is mother really sleeping? Is there even a mother at all? And is it a coincidence that all this is happening during a lunar eclipse?

Sounds like it could be the plot of any horror movie from the last 30 years, right?

But the difference with The House of the Devil is the execution. Pretty much nothing happens during the film's first hour. OK, something shocking does happen about twenty minutes in, and it's enough to keep us glued to the screen for the remainder of the slow build-up. And thankfully, Donahue is appealing enough to keep us entertained as she huffs her way through the house with boredom and then starts to get creeped out the longer she's in the house.

But other than one good shock and a slow middle portion, it's really just a set-up for the film's final twenty-five minutes.

And when those final twenty-five minutes arrive, you'll realize why the wait was worth it.

I also won't spoil any of the surprising details.

The House of the Devil transports viewers back to a simpler time when horror movies were smart and left the viewer on edge for long periods of time instead of trying to make them jump in their seats with loud noises and false alarms.

It might be a challenge to find the movie, but if you do, you can thank me later.

Baltimore deserves new arena -- and possibilities that come with it

2009-10-27T13:03:00.000-07:00

It's not me, it's you.

I've been on a new arena kick lately, as the plans for a new Baltimore arena have been caught up in the red tape that seems to cover all of downtown.

The plans do seem to be moving along, albeit at a snail's pace, at least according to my old friend Chris Stoner's blog, Baltimore Sports & Life. But there's no denying that this new arena talk seems trapped in suspended animation.

I'm all for a 18-20K seat arena built at the current site of the First Mariner Arena. The light rail and metro subway already service the location and the proposed Red Line (I call it the Red Tape Line) would run close by.

And even though tearing down the First Mariner Arena would force out the arena's current tenants, most notably, the Baltimore Blast, I say it's high-time that Baltimore got a new arena. Besides, the Blast draw approximately 7K per game and the Towson Center at Towson University holds 5K. Cole Field House at the University of Maryland is currently sitting vacant and can accommodate many more fans.

The First Mariner Arena is 47 years old. It's a relic. Dozens of arenas across the country have been built and demolished during that time, and yet ours keeps chugging along, seemingly indestructible. It's actually still a profitable asset for the city, much in the way that an old car is still profitable for a driver. No car payments, great, but the gas mileage sucks.

The First Mariner Arena still attracts some decent concerts and other events. But it is what it is. A 11,000 seat dinosaur. With a stage.

A new arena would do so much more for the city, starting by helping revitalize the west side of downtown Baltimore. The Hippodrome remodeling project went a long way to restore the west side's past high-class heritage, but the sudden downturn in the economy froze the remainder of that urban renewal project.

That's where a new arena comes in. It gives local businesses a shot in the arm. It brings in people who spend money in a neighborhood that looks more like a ghost town than a downtown. It'll force crime out of the area with more police patrol and security guards. It'll attract more homeowners to the area.

And it'll do what a new arena does best -- bring more top-tier events to Baltimore.

NCAA Tournament games. Better concerts. And dare I say, it might even attract a troubled NBA or NHL team.

You say the NBA or NHL will never work in Baltimore? Well, I'm tired of Baltimore being told that they can't have this or that.

After the NFL went out of their way to deny Baltimore a football team throughout the 80's and 90's, I've become greedy when it comes to my city. We should have it all. A comprehensive mass-transit system, a state of the art arena, and NBA and a NHL team, if we want one.

Yeah, I said it.

Google "Baltimore NHL or NBA team" and listen to people say it won't work. That we're too close to Washington DC or Philadelphia.

Pfft.

They said the same thing when we were trying to bring an NFL team back to Baltimore. Yet the Ravens have sold out every single game since they moved into M&T Bank Stadium.

That's right. Every. Single. Game.

Even with the Redskins 40 miles down the road and the Eagles 90 miles to the north. Oh and with more Steeler fans in the area than imaginable. Even with all that going against her, Baltimore still supports her own.

And I believe she'd be able to support an NBA or NHL team without a problem.

Baltimore is the 20th biggest city and metro area in the United States. It's one of the most affluent metro areas in the country. It has some of the country's biggest employers located within or near its borders. Social Security Administration, Johns Hopkins University, T. Rowe Price.

Baltimore can support at least one more pro team, if not two. All it takes is a new arena.

Build a new arena and Baltimore instantly becomes a contender for relocation the next time a NHL team in Phoenix or Nashville or an NBA team in New Orleans or Memphis has trouble at the gate.

Like they say in the movies...If you build it they will come.

But even without a NHL or NBA team, a new arena still makes sense for the city.

I'm just tired of being told we can't have what we want...what we deserve.

And Baltimore deserves a new arena and the possibilities that come along with it.

Don't you agree?

Trick r Treat

2009-10-27T07:37:00.000-07:00

I always wondered why there aren't more Halloween-themed horror movies.

One thing that I loved about the original Halloween was the idea that all of it was taking place on Halloween night. Trick or treaters were out on the street, parties were taking place all over town, and yet in the middle of all that commotion, someone was being stalked by a behemoth in a William Shatner mask.

But despite the built-in creepy factor of movies set during Halloween night, there aren't many movies that take place during the holiday. Most horror movies are set around generic teenage rituals like the prom, a random house party, a school event, or nothing in particular at all. Hell, even the lamer-with-each-installment Halloween sequels and remakes are released at the end of summer (!) instead of being released at uh...Halloween?

Thankfully, Michael Dougherty (Superman Returns, X-Men 2) understood the need for movies taking place on Halloween night and made Trick r Treat. But the road from production to release was not an easy one. Maybe studio heads have something against Halloween-set horror movies. Who knows?

Trick r Treat was filmed and completed way back in 2006 and was originally intended for an October 2007 release. For whatever reason, Warner Bros. pulled it from that release date, perhaps fearing the stranglehold that the Saw films had on October release dates. But then 2008 came and went and still no release date was announced.

Finally, Trick r Treat saw its release come in the form of direct-to-video earlier this fall, something that's usually foreshadows a movie's quality. Meaning, there is none.

But Trick r Treat could quite possibly be the best direct-to-video movie of all time. And it still baffles me how studio heads could let this film, with its Halloween antics, fall through the cracks without an October theatrical release.

The film is an anthology, much in the vein of the Creepshow movies, or Tales from the Crypt. There are several stories being told at once, and sometimes they cross paths. This just adds to the feeling that there is a lot going on this Halloween night.

I won't say too much about the plot of each story because they are best to be discovered on your own, and much of the fun is seeing where they bleed into one another and how a character from one story shows up in another. But I will say that each story hearkens back to the days of childhood, where a scary story could terrify you, and keep you wanting more, all at once.

As for Halloween as a holiday, Dougherty nails it. He litters each scene with creepy Halloween imagery, be it dozens of glowing Jack-O-Lanterns, fog, leaf blown streets, a party in the woods, or an abandoned rock quarry. The film just oozes Halloween at every turn.

Surprisingly, some familiar faces also show up in the film. Brian Cox (Troy, The Bourne Identity), Anna Paquin (True Blood) and Dylan Baker (Spider-Man 2) all have major roles. And for a movie that was kicked to the direct-to-video curb, the film looks great. At no point do you feel like you're watching a low-budget horror movie. This is the real deal, folks.

So, unless your reading comprehension is pre-school level, I absolutely loved Trick r Treat. It could quite possibly be the best Halloween movie of all time, behind the original Halloween, of course.

Did I really just buy that?

2009-10-26T12:06:00.000-07:00

I finally bought a Blu-Ray DVD player recently, after waiting out the HD-DVD/Blu-Ray war. So this past weekend, I decided to buy a good BR disc, one that would show off my new 7.1 Dolby Digital set-up as well as display a razor sharp image.

And as fate would have it, Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen was just released on DVD. So I bought it, knowing ahead of time that it would be a big dumb movie with lots of special effects. I also enjoyed the first movie a little more than I should have, and also have it on DVD, so what the hell.

I turned down my IQ-o-meter before throwing the disc into my DVD player and sat back ready to be entertained for 147 minutes.

Wait, 147 minutes? Are you kidding me?

Sadly no. And that is Revenge of the Fallen's major flaw -- it's just too damn loaded with nothingness. Sitting through this movie was like going to McDonald's and forgoing a combo meal for five milkshakes. You'll feel bloated when it's all over and done with, but you won't have any pleasant memories of the experience, and you'll be hungry for some sustenance in no time.

But that's what Michael Bay is, right? A flashy director who does and says nothing with his movies? I enjoyed his Bad Boys films, The Rock, and I'll even admit that Pearl Harbor isn't as bad as people make it out to be.

But even Bay reached a new low with Revenge of the Fallen.

Whereas the original Transformers movie was in itself a very bloated movie, it at least told a simple story that was pretty easy to follow. At its heart, it was a movie about a teenager and his first car. Everyone can understand that, right?

Well, in this movie, Bay and the film's writers, Ehren Kruger, Roberto Orci, and Alex Kurtzman (look up those guys on IMDb and be amazed at the movies they've written that haven't sucked) decided to throw the "less is more" mantra out of the window at the outset of production.

Not only does Shia LeBeouf's Sam Witwicky go to college in this film, he deals with his long-distance relationship with Mikaela (Megan Fox), he meets a new girl who may not be human, meets his comedic "relief" roommate, deals with his parents' separation anxiety, gets implanted with random robot knowledge, gets transported to Egypt, dies, and comes back to life.

That also doesn't factor into lots of screen time for the various military characters who are all brought back, and about a dozen expository speeches about Transformer-lore complete with flashbacks. None of it, however, makes any sense.

Oh, and then there are a couple of action sequences where you can't figure out what the hell is happening.

But maybe that was my problem...that I went into this movie expecting to watch an actual movie. Maybe I should have just skipped from scene to scene, jacked up the volume, and been blown away by the movie's awesome technical specs, which is the only thing it has going for it.

The movie is filmed in 5.1 True HD Dolby Digital, and it sounds...well, there hasn't been a word invented yet to describe the sound. Even if the movie did suck ass, it was at least a good movie to introduce me to the world of Blue-Ray. The visuals are just as impressive, with certain scenes filmed in an IMAX-mode, which ditches the black bars at the top and bottom of the screen and the picture gets, believe it or not, sharper.

So all in all, I guess it gets balanced out. I will never watch Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen from start to finish ever again. But I will put it in my DVD player from time to time and get blown away by the crazy-good A/V specs.

Terminator Salvation

2009-05-22T07:59:00.000-07:00

The Terminator series is near and dear to me since I grew up watching these films throughout my childhood. Terminator 2: Judgment Day was one of the first R-rated films my parents allowed me to watch. And the original film scared the crap out of me. Arnold’s T-101 killer just... wouldn’t... die.

In 2003 I welcomed Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines despite James Cameron being replaced by Breakdown and U-571 director Jonathan Mostow. And while T3 surely wasn’t up to par with the first two films, it was a worthy continuation of the series.

I watched all 3 films over the course of a few nights earlier this week in anticipation of Terminator Salvation being released this weekend, and what struck me was how well each film advanced the Terminator mythology.

The plot of T1 and T2 are well known. Terminators are sent back in time to wipe out either Sarah (Linda Hamilton) or John Connor (Edward Furlong). Connor, after all, will eventually become the leader of the resistance in the war against the machines. After T2, we assumed that Sarah and John were successful in defeating SkyNet and avoiding Judgment Day.

But then T3 came along and changed all the rules.

In T3, the major theme is that the future is set. There is fate, regardless of what we make, which is why the events in T2 only delayed Judgment Day from happening. In addition to T3 changing the rules, we also learn that John Connor (Nick Stahl) will be killed by a T-101 sometime in the future and that he will marry Kate Brewster (Claire Danes), a simple gal who is about to marry her fiancé.

So if the first two movies were about preventing the future, T3 and to a lesser extent, Salvation are about accepting fate.

Cameron’s first 2 films are classics. There is nothing to say that hasn’t already been said. They are some of the best sci-fi/action movies in the history of cinema. But if Salvation is to become a new trilogy, then T3 was the perfect bridge between the two sets of films. Most importantly, it’s fun. Sure it has its flaws, but what third entry in a franchise doesn’t?

Terminator Salvation picks up the action in 2018, 15 years after the events in T3. The resistance is up and running and John Connor (Christian Bale) has risen to the top of the pecking order with his knowledge of what’s to come.

However, the leader of the resistance, General Ashdowne (Michael Ironside) doesn’t believe in Connor. Instead, he believes the resistance has found a way to defeat SkyNet. Connor is on board with the plan until he meets up with Marcus Wright (Sam Worthington), a former death-row inmate who upon his execution in 2003, signs his body over to science. He wakes up in 2018 with no knowledge of Judgment Day or the resistance. But there is something different about Marcus. And he hasn’t aged a day since 2003.

Meanwhile, John’s father, Kyle Reese (Anton Yelchin), who is now just a teenager, is captured by SkyNet. And if Connor is to exist, he has to free Kyle so he can eventually be sent back in time to protect Sarah Connor, as well as impregnate her so John can be born. And as Sarah Connor says on one of John’s old cassette tapes, “you can go crazy thinking about this”. Such is the case with all time-travel scenarios.

So can Connor and Marcus work together to rescue Kyle and defeat SkyNet? I’m pretty sure you know the answer, but the fun is getting there anyway.

McG (Charlie’s Angels, We Are Marshall) takes over for Mostow behind the camera, and while he makes the action gritty and somewhat realistic, he can’t milk emotional performances from his actors, save Worthington and Yelchin.

Christian Bale’s Connor is somewhat flat, but Bale is quickly becoming a flat actor. Bryce Dallas Howard’s Kate Connor, not looking a day older than Claire Danes in T3 despite it being 15 years later, is basically a cameo performance. She holds her pregnant belly and opens her eyes wide a lot. The rest of the supporting cast (Common, Moon Bloodgood, Jadagrace) sometimes aggravate with their one-note performances, and are other times mediocre-at-best.

I don't know what to make of the script, originally written by T3 duo John Brancato and Michael Ferris. Early on, reports were that Marcus had a bigger part than Connor, which may explain why the script's original ending had Connor dying and Marcus remade in Connor's likeness to lead the resistance in the next 2 movies. Since then, the likes of Paul Haggis, Shawn Ryan and Jonathan Nolan polished the script even though Brancato and Ferris were credited in the film. The end result of the script is mostly just a few words here and there to advance the plot and fill in the audience with some back story.

But the biggest drawback of the film is the editing. Some scenes end abruptly. Characters appear in places without the audience knowing how they got there. And crucial plot points are glossed over quickly to get to the action sequences. It feels like there is a good chunk of footage missing, and all reports indicate that there will be 30-40 minutes of extra footage on the DVD release. So the jury’s still out on whether Salvation is just a moderately good Terminator movie, or a great Terminator movie.

Yes, it is good, despite the mid-30’s rating that it’s currently getting over on Rotten Tomatoes. It should please the hard-core Terminator fans that haven’t been scared away by the PG-13 rating or McG with several references to the older films. My favorites were the fuel cells from T3 and a fun placement of Guns N Roses’ “You Will Be Mine” late in the film.

It’s also important to keep in mind that Salvation is supposed to be the first film in a new trilogy. Because of that, the film should have felt more epic, as it set up the characters and situations to come over the next 2 films. Perhaps the extended version of the film on DVD will do that.

But it all depends on how Salvation will perform at the box office. It’s unlikely that the film will make back its whopping $200 Million budget in the theater alone, meaning that success on DVD is crucial. And if there is in deed an extra 30-40 minutes to be put back into the film, I think Salvation will do just fine on DVD.

I liken Terminator Salvation to Superman Returns. It’s a worthy addition to the franchise, but has its flaws. And because of these flaws, the future of Salvation is up in the air at this point. Bale has said he won’t make another Terminator film, meaning that the role will have to be recast yet again. But that’s not necessarily a bad thing either.

I personally hope there are 2 more movies. I hope that we get to see the future war evolve into the war we saw in Cameron’s films (laser guns and lots of human skulls!) and we see the series come full circle, with Kyle Reese sent back in time to protect Connor’s mother. And most importantly, I’d like to finally see the human resistance defeat SkyNet.

Only then will I feel like the Terminator series is finished. So until then I’ll keeping hoping that these movies “will be back”.

The Dark Knight

2008-07-23T13:02:00.001-07:00

Never been a big Batman guy.

I don't know if there is something missing from my DNA that makes me indifferent toward the caped crusader or what. I've always been more of a Punisher kind of guy when it comes to dark and troubled vigilantes.

But I'm clearly in the minority there.

What's great about the new Christopher Nolan Batman films is that they disregard the previous 4 films, most of which were campy fun, and treat Batman as a character that exists in the real world.

The original Batman Begins was a step in the right direction, but I still felt that it lacked that extra something that would have launched it into the upper echelon of superhero movies.

Whatever Batman Begins lacked, The Dark Knight makes up for it in spades. Quite simply, TDK is the best superhero movie of all time, and features one of the most haunting portrayals of a villain in Heath Ledger's Joker. Not only is it a superhero movie, it's a crime drama along the same vein of The Departed and dare I say, Heat. Don't get me wrong... TDK is not quite on that level of film, despite what the fools over at IMDb think. They've currently got it rated #1 on the IMDb's top 250 movies of all time, ahead of The Godfather and Citizen Kane.

The Dark Knight is good, guys. But not that good. We'll see how long that lasts.

Really though, TDK is excellent. The realism, the labyrinthine-like plot, and the performances... boy are the performances good... make TDK an all-around success story.

First, there is always going to be an elephant in the room when discussing TDK, and that is Heath Ledger, who died a few months before the film was released. His role as the Joker was his last finished role on film, and he sure went out with a bang.

Ledger transforms, more like mutates into the Joker and with slathered-on make-up, almost becomes a horror movie villain. His Joker dominates the film with tension, and puts the viewer on edge, making them think the Joker can show up at any moment in the film. It's unclear whether the Academy will allow themselves to be forced to nominate Ledger for this role, since that's what the general public is screaming for, but if he is in deed nominated, it will be well deserved. Ledger's turn as the Joker pretty much makes this film.

Next up is Aaron Eckhart as Harvey Dent, Gotham's doomed District Attorney. Eckhart creates a sympathetic character who we expect to turn bad at some point before he becomes Two-Face, but never does. He's a guy who wants to do the right thing, and does, but ultimately falls victim to the Joker's mind games. Dent represents what the Joker can do -- take good people and make them turn bad. By the time Eckhart becomes Two-Face, he loses some of the spark he had earlier in the film, but does manage to be a solid second fiddle to Ledger's Joker.

As Bruce Wayne, Bale is great as the showboating millionaire, but as Batman, he's almost laughable. His deep, gruffled voice really took me out of the film and made me wonder why he was talking like that. However, Bale was the straight man here, just a foil for Ledger and Eckhart to overshadow. Morgan Freeman and Michael Caine are solid as always as Wayne's go-to guys. And Maggie Gyllenhaal fills in nicely for Katie Holmes, creating a less-whiny love-interest for both Wayne and Dent.

Finally, the person who really needs to be credited for TDK is the man behind the curtain -- or camera -- Christopher Nolan. His Batman-as-real approach has worked wonders for this franchise whereas other superhero movies appear more like cartoons than anything resembling reality. Nolan, along with Peter Jackson and Guillermo Del Toro, has established himself as one of the next-gen directors who will revolutionize filmmaking the way Francis Ford Coppola, Steven Spielberg and George Lucas did in the 1970's

Without Nolan at the helm, I really wonder if the new Batman franchise has the legs to keep going after TDK.

I guess we'll just have to wait and see if he answers the Bat-signal.

FILM SCORE: ***1/2 (out of ****)
BEST SCENE: Any scene with the Joker.
FILM STATUS: Best superhero movie ever.

The Walkmen

2008-07-21T08:04:00.000-07:00

The Walkmen are hard to pin down.

They debuted with a low-key album called Everyone Who Pretended to Like Me is Gone, which was a critical success, but failed to launch the band into the spotlight the way that debut albums from bands like Arctic Monkeys, The Strokes and Vampire Weekend have. Other than "We've Been Had" being featured in a Saturn car commercial, I'm not sure anyone knew the album existed. Regardless, EWPTLMIG was drenched in wintry jingle bells and whip-fast distorted guitars with Hamilton Leithauser's Dylanesque vocals connecting the sparse dots of the album together. On EWPTLMIG, one thing was clear, The Walkmen had a big and unique sound that was going to make or break them.

The Walkmen did eventually get on the map with their sophomore album, Bows + Arrows, and even landed a gig on the Fox show, The O.C. More of a single-oriented album, Bows + Arrows featured tracks like "The Rat", "Little House of Savages", "The North Pole" and "Thinking of a Dream" that set themselves apart from the rest of the album. And while the Rolling Stone initially dissed it, pretty much ever other musical critic with a brain praised it as one of the best albums of 2004 and the high-water mark for the band thus far, and rightfully so. With B+A, the Walkmen had arrived and everyone took notice.

After B+A, the Walkmen knew they needed to make a change to their sound to avoid becoming redundant the way that The Strokes keep seeming to make the same record with each album. So on 2006's A Hundred Miles Off, band members shuffled instruments and added some horns to their sonic portfolio. The result was a mixed bag of hits and misses. The first single, "Louisiana", could be their best single yet, and other tracks like "All Hands and the Cook" and "Good's for You is Good for Me" rose above a somewhat middling third album featuring loud and unorganized punk melodies and somewhat uninspired lyrics. Still a decent album by today's indie-standards, but The Walkmen have the highest of standards. So A Hundred Miles Off was like a straight-A student handing in a C+ paper. You just knew they could have done better.

Later that year, The Walkmen released a track-by-track cover of the John Lennon/Harry Nilsson Pussycats album, which raised even more questions about the band. While their signature sound allowed them to feel right at home covering songs like The Drifters' "Save the Last Dance", the rest of the album meandered much like the original Pussycats album, and left fans collectively scratching their heads. Were the Walkmen losing their creative drive and becoming a glorified cover band? Or were they trying to kick-start a process that had worn a little thin by going back to simple melodies and lyrics?

The band continued touring in between albums, although their live shows had become tedious and noisy. I've seen them three different times, and each time the band seemed to get lazier with short and messy sets becoming a common occurrence. The last Walkmen show I attended sounded like an orchestra warming up more than anything else. The opening act was White Rabbits, and they blew them off the stage with more energy and a clearer goal of what they wanted to do. And as I left that show I wondered, will the Walkmen be able to come back from this? I had my doubts.

About a year later, the band announced the release of their fifth album (fourth original). With a title like You & Me, it sounded more intimate and more focused than anything else they've done, as previous album titles have been vague at best. Their press releases also told of a desire to return to classic melodies and vocals. They mentioned Roy Orbison, Elvis Presley and Bob Dylan. So it was clear they were setting the bar high for themselves.

After getting my hands on an advance copy of You & Me, I can tell you, The Walkmen have rediscovered what works for them and Y&M is their most focused, if not best album, yet. The album, as the title suggests, covers your standard-issue relationship blues, and is sure to be the soundtrack to many a break-up this summer and fall. A sample of some of the lyrics featured on the album are "You are the morning/I am the night", "I kissed her by the window/she covered her face", and "I miss you/I miss you there's no one else/I do... I do."

There are great singles, such as the gradually roaring "In the New Year" and and the waltzy and somber "Red Moon" where Leithauser moans "You shine/Like the steel/On my knife." Deeper tracks like Canadian Girl show off Leithauser's 60's era R&B chops. And while there is clearly a nostalgic feel to You & Me, the signature Walkmen "sound" is still dominant... fuzzy/jangly guitars and drums take up a lot of the soundscape, but the jingle bells seem to have been replaced by horns. No complaints here.

So the lofty press release was spot on. The Walkmen met and surpassed the high goals they set for themselves. Many songs hearken back to 60's rock with simple melodies, vocals, paint brush drums, echoes of calypso music and booming bass lines. I think the band has spent as much time watching Walk the Line as I have, and are determined to bring back the Rock-A-Billy sound with a vengeance. It's because of this old-is-new approach, You & Me returns The Walkmen to the forefront of today's indie scene.

Once again, the Walkmen know who they are and what they want to do, and people will be forced to take notice.

ALBUM SCORE: **** (out of ****)
BEST TRACK(S): Red Moon, Canadian Girl, In the New Year
SEE THEM LIVE?: They seem to have found some easy-to-play melodies, so their concerts shouldn't be disorganized anymore. Hell to the yes!

Ours - Mercy (Dancing for the Death of an Imaginary Enemy)

2008-04-11T06:54:00.000-07:00

I discovered Ours while working long hours at BWI Airport. I was able to listen to WRNR, an independent radio station out of Annapolis, that luckily for me, played music not heard on commercially-owned radio stations.

I instantly fell in love with the acoustic version of "Sometimes" that they occasionally played, and after doing some searching on the web, I was able to find out the name of the band.

The next day, I bought the album, called Distorted Lullabies, off the strength of that one song, and after skipping through the rest of the CD, I was proud of myself for discovering a little-known band that kicked the living shit out of most bands played on commercial radio.

Jimmy Gnecco's voice was an instrument all it's own, and at the risk of sounding pretentious, it ripped through my soul and spoke to me in a way that few bands did. Maybe it was the connection I had with them, since I felt like I had discovered them, and I recommended them to friends whenever I had the chance.

But then again, maybe it was just because they were an excellent band, and Gnecco's lyrics were moody, depressing, and dark -- and that's usually the kind of music I like.

After relentlessly spinning the album for months, I grew tired of it, and hung it up to dry.

Then September 11th happened.

And it the midst of doing some serious soul-searching during the aftermath of that horrible day, I found myself listening to Lullabies again, and was amazed at how much the album spoke to the current times, despite being released almost a year before 9/11. Songs and lyrics took on different meanings, and it really opened up another window for me to discover this band and this album.

Luckily for me, I didn't have to wait long for their follow-up to Distorted Lullabies, as the band released their sophomore album, Precious, in the fall of 2002.

At that time, I had just gotten married, and was beginning a life on my own, free of my parents house and their authority. Precious was there for me at another important time in my life, and it will always be special to me because of that, even though it was a lacking album in many ways.

In listening to Precious, you could tell the band was being pushed in directions they didn't really want to go. Still, Gnecco's influence was able to shine through on certain songs, and his voice and lyrics were as strong and haunting as ever.

But when I listened to their flat cover of "Femme Fatal" by Velvet Underground, I had a feeling that Gnecco had compromised himself in a way that would change him and the way he dealt with his music in the future.

Boy was I right.

It is now 2008, a full five and a half years since Ours has released an album. It has been delayed numerous times, survived a record label dispute and label change, and even more delays.

Luckily, Ours toured frequently in-between albums, and kept promising his small but extremely loyal fan-base that a new album was forthcoming. Their live shows featured the newly written songs that Gnecco hoped to get recorded, and they were great songs, which made the wait that much more frustrating.

I saw the band for the first time in August of 2004 at Fletcher's in Fells Point, Baltimore. It's a small upstairs venue and the crowd was sparse but energetic. The band had sound problems and the show started an hour later than scheduled.

To make up for the delay, Gnecco played a 2+ hour long set, and when the band took breaks, he remained on stage, playing acoustic versions of previously recorded songs, as well as new ones.

After the electric set was finished, my wife and I headed for the exit, but when I heard Gnecco come on stage again, I immediately raced back into the club and listened as Gnecco played another acoustic set which lasted another half an hour and pushed his strained voice to the breaking point.

Gnecco is known for his fan appreciation and has been known to play short acoustic sets in the parking lot after shows for the few remaining fans. Unfortunately, that didn't happen for me.

Over the years, without a new album to look forward to, Ours disappeared from my radar. I discovered new bands like Arcade Fire, Wolf Parade and The Walkmen. But I always looked forward to a new Ours album, and hoped that someday it would find a release date.

And finally, on April, 15th, Ours will release their third album entitled, Mercy (Dancing for the Death of an Imaginary Enemy), and one thing is for sure despite the long break in-between album releases -- this is the album Gnecco wanted to make.

He teamed up with super-producer Rick Rubin, who signed the band to his American label, a sub-genre offshoot of Columbia. It's the same label Johnny Cash was on late in his career. But whereas Precious producer Ethan Johns suffocated the band in forced trendiness, Rick Rubin guided Gnecco, giving him advice when needed, and allowed Gnecco to do what he wanted to do.

At first listen, Mercy is very much an Ours album. The soaring vocals of Gnecco are still there, but it's much more focused than Precious, and hearkens back to the epic moodiness of Distorted Lullabies. The glimmers of U2, Radiohead and Jeff Buckley are all still there and in full effect.

I'm still in the beginning stages of listening to this album, and I've barely touched the second half, but I can say this, Mercy is Gnecco's album and it's the one he wanted to make. So far, so good.

It was well worth the wait.

ALBUM SCORE: *** (out of ****)
BEST SONG: I Ran Away To Tell The World
SEE THEM LIVE: Yes! Expect to be there at least 2 hours.

2007 Oscar Nominations

2008-01-27T06:25:00.001-08:00

OK, so I finally got around to seeing all of the nominated films for Best Picture. Here are my thoughts on...

Atonement
Juno
Michael Clayton
No Country for Old Men
There Will Be Blood

I think it's safe to say that NCFOM and TWBB are the two best films of the nominees for Best Picture. NCFOM was a tense thriller involving engaging and terrifying characters forced into situations that would make normal men crumble. It's without a doubt one of, if not, the best film the Coen brothers have ever made. However, I think the last half an hour of NCFOM was a bit weak, a downer to an exciting film up to that point. And for that reason, I don't think it should beat out the year's best film, There Will Be Blood.

TWBB is a character study from Paul Thomas Anderson (Boogie Nights, Magnolia) of Daniel Plainview (Daniel Day-Lewis), a corrupt oil tycoon in turn of the century Texas. Day-Lewis' portrayal of Plainview is downright gripping, and in my opinion one of the best performances I've ever seen, right up there with Marlon Brando's Vito Corleone in The Godfather, and Robert Duval's Apostle E.F. in The Apostle. It's a performance full of depth and discussion points. People will no doubt be talking about Daniel Plainview well into the future. Oh and by the way, Day-Lewis' performance isn't the only great thing about TWBB. Paul Dano (Little Miss Sunshine) gives a solid performance as Plainview's rival, false prophet Eli Sunday. Kevin J. O'Conner, Stephen Sommers' (The Mummy) comedic go-to-guy, shines in a small amount of screen-time as a drifter claiming to be Daniel's brother, and Johnny Greenwood's (Radiohead) score is haunting. It brings me deep regret to inform you that his score was unfortunately disqualified for Best Score because a portion of it was not written for the film. And like Day-Lewis' performance being one of the best I've ever seen, Greenwood's score is one of the best I've ever heard. Meanwhile, Paul Thomas Anderson has cemented his status as one of the most focused and intriguing directors working today and deserves the statue for Best Director. There Will Be Blood is quite possibly the best film of the decade thus far.

The rest of the field is filled with solid films in their own right, but none of them can match the intensity and complexity that TWBB and NCFOM bring to the table. Atonement does everything well, but does nothing great. It's lead actors (James McAvoy and Keira Knightly) manage to portray heartbreaking young lovers who are torn apart by a deceitful lie in a limited amount of screen time, but the shift in the film's focus is jarring, albeit necessary. However, this causes Atonement to be two different films in one, neither of which are grandiose enough to steal the Oscar from TWBB or NCFOM.

Michael Clayton is an engaging corporate and legal thriller, and George Clooney shines as the title character, a down on his luck legal "janitor" who gets caught up in crisis of morals when one of his colleagues stops taking his medication and suffers a breakdown of conscience in the middle of a high-profile corporate case. Clooney is essentially himself in every role, but here he manages to inject the right amount of desperation into Clayton, and manages to keep his cool at the same time. In the end, MC is another corporate scandal movie, and at least half a dozen of these potboilers are released each year. The only difference here is Clooney's performance and sure-handed script and direction from Tony Gilroy.

Rounding up the year's Best Picture nominees is the general public's darling film, Juno. Ellen Page gives a great performance full of sarcasm and wit, but first-timer Diablo Cody's hip dialog is forced at times and the film wears its art-house movie heart on its sleeve. There are at least 5 movies that deserve to be nominated over Juno, but that's not to say it's a bad film. Just overrated. And since it's so popular, Juno stands a good chance to take home the trophy. It just doesn't deserve to.

Of the films that were slighted, Zodiac is the biggest tragedy. David Fincher's workmanlike study of the terrifying Zodiac serial killer case is a two and a half hour Unsolved Mysteries episode in the vein of All the President's Men. There is a lot of talking, but Jake Gyllehaal, Robert Downey Jr., and Mark Ruffalo all make their characters interesting. But the star of the movie is the Zodiac case itself, which lends itself well to today's age of media blitz events like the Beltway Sniper.

Sean Penn's Into the Wild was another movie that deserved more recognition. Emile Hirsch plays the troubled Christopher McCandless, a rich-kid who decides to trek across the country when he graduates college instead of follow in his parents footsteps. This allows him to meet some fascinating supporting characters such as Hal Holbrook's mournful turn as a lonely old man seeking to adopt McCandless, knowing that Chris headed toward trouble in Alaska. Hirsch, like Ben Foster and Ryan Gosling, is one of young Hollywood's best actors and this is his movie, and he doesn't disappoint. He brings the right amount of angst and humility to a man who didn't know what he wanted, but not knowing what he wanted was the exact thing he did want.

And finally, the other film that deserved more recognition this Oscar season was the non-traditional musical, Once. Instead of being another tedious dialog-as-song musical, Once is actually about music and musicians, not demon barbers or jailed songbirds. Once tells the story of a starving artist songwriter who meets and eventually falls for a piano-playing Czech girl in modern-day Dublin. The two record an album together while mending each other's broken hearts. But it doesn't turn out like you think it would. After all, this isn't the Hugh Grant/Drew Berrymore rom-com, Music and Lyrics. At any rate, the music in Once is great, but sadly, the film was practically shut out, earning only one nomination for Best Song when all five nominations for Best Song could have easily come from this film. Shockingly, the Disney film Enchanted earned three for Best Song alone. And if that's not a crime, then I don't know what is.

So this Oscar season is no different from any other. A lot of films do get the recognition they deserve, but a lot of other films don't. And while many people dismiss the Academy Awards for its pretentiousness, they still do a good job selecting the year's best films. At any rate it gives us something to talk about.

Vampire Weekend

2008-01-15T09:23:00.000-08:00

Every so often, a band comes along with so much hype, that their actual music is lost in the shuffle. Hype inspires backlash before one single note is even heard. So when a band like The Strokes, The Arctic Monkeys or Arcade Fire is crowned a legendary act before they even release a debut album, I try my hardest to wait until I hear a song before I state my opinion.

Vampire Weekend appears to be the next band victimized by the hype machine. Hailing from New York City, and bringing with them a unique sound, they've been labeled everything from the next Strokes to the saviors of ska music.

Easy there, fella.

After listening to their self-titled debut the entire way through for the first time, I couldn't help but feel let down. First off, the entire album clocks in at about 30 minutes, so there isn't much time to hold onto a certain song or image before the song ends and the next one starts. I initially thought that VW seemed more like a ska-influenced Weezer, with lead-signer Ezra Koenig intent to become the next Rivers Cuomo, penning two and a half minute ditties designed to get toes tapping. The band's tongue in cheek videos don't hurt either.

But after repeat listens, I was able to get beyond the hype and the brevity of the songs to appreciate what is there, and it is dominated by some damn fine instrumentation. The guitar work on this album is worth the price of admission alone. The opener, "Mansard Roof", begins with some puffs of an organ before erupting into a stringy volcano of deliciousness during the refrain.

"Oxford Comma" keeps the organ puffs but manages to be more drum-driven, which helps accentuate the lyrics which show off Koenig's witty wordplay. Then comes "A-Punk", a highway speed chase of a song, with more of the warp-speed guitar work heard on "MansardRoof". It's probably the albums most accessible song, and the music video is a perfect fit.

The second half of the album drags a bit as the band struggles to stretch their ska-influenced sound over an entire album, but there some standouts such as "Campus" and "Walcott".

Vampire Weekend is probably going to become a popular band, and that might instantly turn off some fans who "liked them first" and/or rebel against anything "commercial". But VW is a fun band. They're not going to force you to examine the world today like Arcade Fire or reinvent modern rock like the Strokes, but they will make you smile, and sometimes that's all you need.

ALBUM SCORE: *** (out of ****)
BEST SONG: A-Punk
SEE THEM LIVE?: Yes

3:10 to Yuma

2008-01-14T13:34:00.000-08:00

Ah, the Western.

What was once a staple in Hollywood has now been relegated to generic western entries such as American Outlaws and Texas Rangers. That isn't to say there haven't been some solid westerns of late, namely Open Range and The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford.

So when the overly positive reviews for 3:10 to Yuma popped up upon its release, I took one look at the cast and said "I want to see that."

I didn't get to see it in theaters but I did manage to catch it on DVD recently. And the buzz was spot-on. This was a great neo-western film.

On paper, the recipe for success is all there. First, get James Mangold, director of Walk the Line, to direct another stellar cast made up of Christian Bale (who is arguably the hottest actor working today, and no I don't mean by looks), Russell Crowe (who's had a bit of a downturn in his career lately but seems to be bouncing back nicely) and Ben Foster (a young actor who is right there with Shia LaBeouf and Ryan Gosling as the next big thing).

Bale plays Dan Evans, a beaten down Civil War soldier with an artificial leg. The railroad wants his land, and the man who owns it is intending to sell, regardless of what Dan thinks. His son thinks his father is yella, and his wife secretly doubts his ability to stand up for his family as well.

Even worse, Dan's livestock has escaped their holding cell and have wandered half-way across the state. While he tries to round them up, Dan and his sons stumble across Ben Wade (Crowe) and his gang, including second-in-command, Charlie Prince (Foster), who've just knocked off a armored wagon filled with Uncle Sam's money. Wade is the kind of guy who will make you famous, but also seems to have morals, as loose as they may be. So he lets Dan and his sons go, but relieves them of their horses so Dan won't go running back to town, shouting about Wade's newfound riches.

Eventually, Ben and his crew wind up in Dan's town anyway, and Ben goes and gets himself caught when he shacks up with a bar maid. And when the law needs volunteers to get Ben Wade to the 3:10 train to Yuma prison, Dan volunteers, in need of the money that's being offered.

Along the way, Dan and Ben realize that they are each other's equal when it comes to values and morals, and even though Ben repeatedly admits to being no good, stating "doing good deeds would be contagious so I never did any". Meanwhile, Dan thinks that there might be something worth while in Ben and things get even worse when Dan's older son tags along, and appears to respect Ben Wade more than his dear old dad.

Eventually, Ben's gang catches up with Dan, and are hellbent in rescuing him. And although the script is vague with this notion, we begin to wonder where Charlie's desire to free Ben comes from. Is he secretly in love with Ben? Does he just look up to him as a father? Or is he just evil enough to believe that no one in their gang should be locked up, regardless of the crimes they've committed?

Up until the ending, 3:10 to Yuma manages to be slightly above average, and somewhat of a disappointment considering the talent involved with the film. Bale, one of my favorite actors, fails to inject Dan with anything that resonates with the viewer, besides just being a shade above pathetic. Crowe manages to create a nice balance of pathos and decency in Ben, but it's Foster who again steals the show with his psychotic portrayal of Charlie. Sadly, his screen time is limited.

However, the ending is tense and extended, which heightens the suspense even more. It's like the shootout in Heat, but at the end of the film where it should have been all along. And when the final frames roll, we're blown away with what we've just witnessed, asking ourselves if the heavy decision a character makes is believable. And the more one thinks about it, the more realistic it becomes.

3:10 to Yuma knows it has a good hand, holds it until the perfect moment, and then slaps it down on the table to the dismay of the rest of the players. The ending is a stunner, and makes the somewhat average proceedings all the worthwhile.

FILM SCORE: ***1/2 (out of ****)
BEST SCENE: Film's extended climax.
FILM STATUS: A classic neo-western that should help the genre's resurgence.

Live Free or Die Hard

2007-12-27T12:26:00.000-08:00

I don't know why, but I have a strange obsession with this movie.

It's kind of like the strange obsession I have with the quarterback of the Baltimore Ravens, Kyle Boller.

I shouldn't have such an unhealthy obsession on something so crappy as Kyle Boller, but I do. I root for the kid every week, hoping that this is the week he suddenly turns into John Elway or at least Jay Cutler.

After all, Boller was a high draft pick, so there were high expectations when the Ravens selected him in the first round. But since he was drafted, Boller has been a roller coaster ride of ups and downs.

The same can be said of Live Free or Die Hard.

When the film was finally announced (it had been rumored for years), I was excited to see John McClane back on the big screen. Yet when I saw the film, I couldn't help but be let down, like I was watching Kyle Boller play.

For one, the theatrical release of the film was PG-13. It was a slap in the face of Die Hard fans. The first three films had been prototypical R-rated action films made for adults but aimed directly at the G.I. Joe generation. And I grew up on these films, watching them back to back late one night while the parents were asleep. So when I heard about the PG-13 rating, I was instantly let down, the same way I was when I heard that Aliens Vs. Predator was going to be PG-13.

And as I walked out of the theater upon first viewing the film, I came to the following conclusions:

1. This wasn't a Die Hard film. First, it wasn't rated R and second, McClane had been turned into an invincible action hero. He threw cars at helicopters, jumped off spiraling-out-of-control F-35 fighter jets, and even worse, became CGI likeness of Bruce Willis at one point in the film. I felt like I was playing the old PlayStation game Apocalypse again. If ever there was a flesh and blood action hero that could be killed, it was John McClane. But not here. It was like he grabbed the star from Super Mario Bros. and ran with it for the entire movie.

2. The plot was lame because computers aren't scary. If my Mac freezes up (which it does all the time), it's a pain in the ass. I reboot. If my bank's computers went crazy and I lost all my money, I'd expect it to be fixed in a reasonable amount of time. So when LFODH is about computer hackers trying to bring down America's computerized infrastructure, excuse me if I'm not thrilled. Handled differently, I think it could have been effective, but as it was, it sounded like a lot of techno-babble and nothing as immediately dangerous as any of the threats in the first three films.

3. Too much time was spent on characters who are useless. Cliff Curtis is an excellent actor. He's been great in more movies than you probably realize. But here, he is wasted as some government suit, barking orders at his subordinates. If he ever joined in the action the way that Al Powell did in the original film, his character may have become something other than a way for the writers to explain what was going on to the viewer. Instead, he came off like an unwanted Greek chorus .

4. The villain sucked. Timothy Olyphant, like Curtis, is a solid actor. He's got a great deadpan delivery that makes you wonder if he is joking or serious. But as Thomas Gabriel, he comes across as a stubborn geek who doesn't like it when McClane messes with his plans. And we know, right off the bat, that McClane can kick his ass mano y mano.

That said, LFODH still manages to be a fun ride. And it has a lot of good things going for it.

Justin Long is serviceable, if not likable, as McClane's techno-wiz sidekick, and Mary Elizabeth Winstead manages to inject that McClane moxy into her character in limited screen time. Her character should have been expanded. The movie also looks, and sounds great. And despite being a PG-13 film, the body count is high and there are still some good one-liners.

But it all still managed to come up short in the end.

So did the Unrated version of the film help things? Yes and no.

For one, there is a lot more language in the unrated version. I counted about a dozen and a half F-bombs. And while that might sound trivial, cussing is what made John McClane who he is -- someone who would rather be anywhere else than where he is, and he'd let you know it with a well-placed blue streak. Thankfully, this comes across better in the unrated version.

Second, there is more violence, but it's mostly CGI blood bursts when someone is shot. In my opinion, this was added after the original release was completed to satisfy the fans who complained upon hearing of a PG-13 rating. And after seeing I Am Legend, where all the zombies were needlessly computer generated, I can't help but look back on the good old days when blood squibs were used for gunshot wounds and make-up artists earned their paychecks instead of opting for cheap and easy CGI.

But in the end, all the extra violence and cussing in the world can't save a Die Hard film that was flawed from the beginning. Even though Len Wiseman tries to inject some old flourishes of the series into this new installment, LFODH just comes across as a modern-age action movie with the Die Hard stamp affixed on it's movie poster and a few references tossed into the script to keep fans loyal.

Is it a fun film? Hell yeah. And the DVD is put together nicely. The sconces on my wall sounded like they were going to shatter or break off the wall when the action began.

But in the end, it just doesn't feel like a Die Hard film the same way that Kyle Boller doesn't feel like an NFL quarterback.

And I'm still disappointed even thought it could be worse.

FILM SCORE (out of ****): Theatrical Version **1/2, Unrated Version ***
BEST SCENE: Apartment shoot-out.
FILM STATUS: Die Hard film in name only, but still worth a watch.

La Dolce Vita

2007-09-28T07:35:00.001-07:00

With a trip to Italy approaching fast, I decided to check out some Italian cinema. It is something I desperately need to see more of, since Cinema Paradiso and Suspiria have been the extent of my limited Italian cinema experiences.

Having seen Cinema Paradiso back when I was in high school and loving it, I tried to rent it, but to no avail. So after a friend from work recommended Frederico Fellini's La Dolce Vida, I decided to check it out from the local library since, let's face it, there's no chance it'll be at the local Blockbuster store.

And at the risk of sounding like a brainless movie-goer, I found La Dolce Vita to be extremely boring.

The movie is divided up into 3 or 4 segments, mostly independent from the other, each involving the main character, Marcello, and his quest for "the sweet life", or the "la dolce vita" of the title.

Marcello is a journalist in Rome, circa 1960, where the jet-set crowd has created the need for 24-hour coverage by the exploitive media, thus creating the paparazzi. Interestingly enough, the film actually invented the term "paparazzi", as one of the characters in the film is a cockroachy photojournalist named Paparazzo who is everywhere, flashing his camera into the face of his target.

The problem is, Marcello doesn't know what he wants. He has a girlfriend who is suicidal, thanks in part to Marcello's endless mind games, he has another girlfriend who he likes to hook up with in the bedroom of strangers he meets in the city, and he lusts after an American actress who comes to Rome to shoot a movie.

Marcello also enjoys time with his elitist friends who like to spout poetry, making themselves feel "creative" all while getting hammered or stoned. His good friend, Steiner, seems to have found the sweet life, as he is married with children and gives Marcello good advice on how he too can find la dolce vita. But Marcello's idea of the sweet life is turned on its ear when Steiner kills his children and then himself.

The plot, on paper, sounds interesting, and if it had been handled in a chronological way, it might have been. But Fellini divides the segments of the film into almost independent parts, which feel like unrelated chapters in a book.

Just as Anita Ekberg's American actress Sylvia heats up the screen and starts to create some chemistry with Marcello by dancing in the Trevi fountain, her character is gone for good. Then we're given a disjointed scene where Marcello covers a "miracle" as two children have just seen the Madonna standing beneath a tree in a desolate field outside Rome. Then we meet Marcello's father who on the surface is a happy person but ultimately turns into a sad and distant man. Then there are endless parties. And by the time the final scene on the beach occurs, and Marcello surrenders to the life he leads, we realize that we have come to the end of a fruitless journey ourselves, and have thereby wasted 3 hours of our life.

Fellini may be a genius, but I wouldn't know, since this is the first of his films I've seen. And if his work isn't for every one, I can understand.

Cut down to 2 hours or maybe even a little less, La Dolce Vita would have felt like a more manageable movie. And while the film is dated, it does speak to the modern times of the paparazzi in America and around the rest of the world. But with that said, La Dolce Vita is a meandering film of separate parts that never adds up to anything urgent or timeless. I know I will get blasted for saying this, but it's the way I feel.

Believe me, I wish I could have enjoyed this film. It's a critically acclaimed film (Entertainment Weekly's #6 best film of all time) and I can't help but feel like I am missing something I should have picked up on. But I understood the basic themes and got most of the imagery. I guess the sweet life is just too sour for my tastes.

FILM SCORE: ** (out of ****)
BEST SCENE: Anita Ekberg in the Trevi Fountain
FILM STATUS: Overrated Italian "masterpiece."

The Lovely Bones

2007-09-28T06:54:00.000-07:00

When I heard that Peter Jackson (The Lord of the Rings) was going to direct the film version of Alice Sebold's critically acclaimed book, The Lovely Bones, with Ryan Gosling, Rachel Weisz, and Susan Sarandon rounding out the cast, I decided I might as well see what all the fuss was about. After all, The Lovely Bones has been a book-club favorite since it's release in 2002.

The plot centers around Susie Salmon, who is raped and murdered by creepy-but-seemingly-normal-neighbor George Harvey, before the book begins. From Heaven, Susie watches her family and friends cope with her death for the next 10 years in a coming-of-age Wonder Years/Ghost mash-up kind of way. Sebold paints a family portrait with small, delicate strokes, giving us even the smallest details of the Salmons and lets them grow until they become something that resembles a real post-tragedy family:

Mother Abigal deals with her sadness by having an affair with the detective assigned to their case and father Jack is the penultimate family man, holding the family together, even while he seeks revenge. Sister Lindsey finds a boyfriend and doesn't let herself crack under the stress. Meanwhile, friend Ruth and boyfriend Ray become friends when they find a connection with the dead.

It'll be hard for Jackson to translate the book to the silver screen. After all, Susie is a character who watches life on Earth from a gazebo in Heaven and occasionally appears to family and friends as a ghost or a figment of their imagination. I especially can't wait to see how he handles the controversial scene where Susie comes back to Earth, having possessed her friend Ruth to settle some unfinished business. Handled the wrong way, the film could become a corny ghost story instead of the raw human drama that it really is. But Jackson deserves the benefit of the doubt. He flawlessly updated The Lord of the Rings and his remake of King Kong was an ambitious film with as much heart as special effects.

One thing is for sure, bring tissues to the theater. The beauty and the sadness of The Lovely Bones is sure to create some lovely tears.

Tell Me You Love Me

2007-09-13T12:16:00.000-07:00

HBO’s new show, Tell Me You Love Me, is making headlines for all the wrong reasons. Its graphic depictions of sex are garnering a lot of "can they really do that on TV?" responses, but what the show really succeeds in doing is presenting the awkward parts of relationships.

The show, created by Cynthia Mort (Roseanne), centers around 3 couples, who are experiencing problems in each of their relationships. On the surface, it sounds like your usual drama. But being on HBO, you know there has to be a spin.

And boy is there a spin.

The show is uncensored, very uncensored, and at times comes off as soft-core porn. During sex scenes, you’ll be wondering if the actors involved are really having sex. But rest assured. Even though it looks for real, it’s not. And that’s what makes TMYLM different from any other drama to be on television. It doesn’t hold back at all.

And even when there aren’t any on-screen hand-jobs being given to the point of ejaculation (even though it’s a prosthetic penis), the show remains very raw.

David and Katie are a long married couple with children. They also haven’t had sex in almost a year. David is a loving husband, but he just doesn’t want to have sex with his wife. Instead, he’d rather wait until his wife is in the shower and pleasure himself. Katie, meanwhile, is teetering on the edge of depression because of this lack of sex, even though David is a perfectly capable husband in every other sense of the word.

Palek and Carolyn are married and having lots of sex, but only because Carolyn wants kids. Bad. So much so that she’s turned Palek off to sex. It may have been cute on Friends when Monica badgered Chandler into having sex with her when she was ovulating, but here, it’s downright disturbing to see Palek go from horny 30-ish man to someone who realizes he’s being used and that all the fun has been drained from sex.

And rounding out the trifecta of depressing couples is Josh and Jaime who are having lots of sex too, but they are not married. They’re engaged. But when Josh is brutally honest with Jaime, admitting that he’ll more than likely be attracted to another woman during their marriage, Jaime freaks out and calls off the wedding.

Even more disturbing than some of the graphic sex scenes is the emotional wasteland that most of these characters live in. David and Katie are most uncomfortable couple to watch on screen, their faces showing their feelings, but their mouths unable to speak them. So instead of talking through their problems before they go to bed, they simply turn their backs on one another and fall asleep unsatisfied in more ways than one.

And that is something that we all can relate too. Watching this show I couldn’t help but relate to some of the situations on screen, and feeling guilty that I have allowed my feelings to fester at times, instead of talking through them with my wife. And because of this, I’ve experienced some uncomfortable mornings before work. No marriage is perfect, but there is always room for improvement, whether it’s on-screen or in real life. And if this show gets one couple to address its problems, it's been a success in my opinion.

And that’s what makes TMYLM so good, it doesn’t hold back in any area. It addresses relationships head-on, whether it is a subtle facial expression of hurt that says more than words could ever say, or a no holds barred sex scene.

It may make some people uncomfortable. The sex scenes are shocking, but even more disturbing, is the sadness that these couples constantly wallow through. TMYLM is very relatable, very personal. And like the couples featured on the show, hopefully the couples watching, can survive it.

SHOW RATING: *** (out of ****)
BEST PART: Unflinching look at couples' lives, ie, the sex.
STATUS: Shocking, yet relevant show. It's definitely not porn.

Disturbia

2007-09-08T19:58:00.000-07:00

Every so often a movie comes out of nowhere and pleasantly surprises you so much that you just want to grab its head and pull it in for a nice wet kiss.

That's what I wanted to do with Disturbia.

When it came out last April, I knew little about it except that it had the kid that was going to be in Transformers (Shia LaBeouf) in it and it looked kinda lame.

However, the reviews were positive and the movie stayed at the top of the box office list for a few weeks. So I admitted I could have been wrong and made a mental note to check it out when it came out on DVD.

So the wife and I popped it in and watched it tonight, buzzing from the good word of mouth surrounding it, and I must say, it was well deserved.

The film starts with a shocking set-up that realistically explains why LaBeouf's character, Kale, is under house arrest. It also takes time to establish Kale's surroundings, when most movies want to get right to the action. The main plot of the film, for instance, doesn't begin until about 45 minutes in, and I was vibing off the characters so much that I almost wasn't ready for it to begin.

Anyway, the plot centers around Kale getting bored under house arrest and spying on various neighbors and realizing that the creepy guy next door who likes to bring club chicks home with him could possibly be a serial killer. The possible killer is played by veteran actor David Morse who ironically comes off creepier than Michael Myers ever has in any of the Halloween sequels, and probably even the remake.

What is so good about Disturbia is the streamlined professionalism it contains in every aspect of the film. LaBeouf is charismatic as always. Morse is creepy. Sara Roemer is sexy. And Carrie-Ann Moss is the anti-Trinity as Kale's concerned but absent mother. Director D.J. Caruso (Taking Lives) just lets the actors go to work, but drapes a suspenseful curtain over the film, so that anything can happen at any time. Again, it's nothing we haven't seen before, but do cheeseburgers cease to be good even though you've had those before?

In the end, Disturbia won't win any awards that aren't out by MTV, and it will probably be completely forgotten about in a few months. But it is a fun movie to watch with a date, who will no doubt be clutching your arm during the numerous tension-filled scenes toward the end of the movie.

Plus it gives us another look at LaBeouf, who will play Indiana Jones' sidekick in the new Indiana Jones movie coming out next year. LaBeouf will no doubt bring a youthful energy to that film, picking up where Harrison Ford left off.

FILM SCORE: *** (out of ****)
BEST SCENE: Tension filled climax.
STATUS: Professional thriller for teens and adults.

Superman Returns

2007-09-05T13:29:00.000-07:00

Superman Returns in HD on HBO...

*does best Superman wielded powerless by Kryptonite voice*

Can't... look... away...

Like Ang Lee's Hulk, Superman Returns received some so-so press that I felt was undeserved at the time. Hulk was definitely a fumbled mess, but it was an ambitious fumbled mess, and that's something that most comic-book movies are not -- ambitious. And being a huge Ang Lee fan, I was willing to give him a benefit of the doubt with his film.

Plus I have a soft-spot for ambitious fumbled messes, which explains why Francis Ford Coppola's Dracula is one of my favorite films.

Superman Returns, however, had some bigger red boots to fill.

I grew up with these movies, as did millions of others like me, and Superman plain and simple, is the penultimate superhero. And after a 17 year hiatus, his return to the screen better be something special.

Unfortunately, Superman Returns is not very special in any way. However, that doesn't mean that I don't appreciate it for what it is. All too often, movie fans get caught up in black or white reviews of films. In their eyes it either sucked ass or was awesome.

Superman Returns was neither, but it was still a solid film.

Brandon Routh will never be able to fill out the tights like Christopher Reeve did, but let's face it. Anyone who filled out those tights was not going to surpass Reeve as Superman. Routh, however, did fill the red boots out nicely. I was worried he'd pull a Hayden Christiansen with the role, but other than a few wooden lines (Routh still doesn't seem too comfortable with "I'm always around), Routh does fine.

And can you imagine the oft-rumored Nicholas Cage or Josh Hartnett as Superman? I can't. Unless it's a comedy.

Kate Bosworth as Lois Lane was a misfire in the casting department. Bosworth is too young and too young-looking to fill in for Margot Kidder who looked old even in the original Superman film. I would have preferred Keri Russel (who was rumored for the part) in the role. Russel would have been better suited to portray the pissed-off-but-I-still-love-you emotions that Lois Lane was going through in the film after her role as the neurotic main character on Felicity.

Kevin Spacey as Lex Luthor was an inspired bit of casting, but something still didn't feel right with the performance. Too much humor was missing from Spacey's Lex and he came off too mean. Gene Hackman will always be Lex Luthor in my mind, like Reeve will always be Superman. Spacey didn't do bad though, but he's still looking for that post-American Beauty comeback performance in my opinion.

The special effects are amazing, but even they are nothing we haven't seen a million times before. Plus Supes looks too cartoony at times. A minor qualm, I know, but it's a trend that unfortunately has taken over special-effect laden films -- cartoony-looking action scenes .

The plot was kinda trite as well. I enjoyed most of the Supes/Lois storyline, and I was confused as to why most people weren't understanding how Supes and Lois had a child together when the film first came out. Does anyone remember their romp in the Fortress of Solitude during Part II when Supes became human? That might also explain why the kid only has traces of Superman's strength.

The kryptonite continent was a nice idea, but I don't see how Superman could have lifted the thing out of the ocean. I know it almost killed him but still.... I ain't buying it. A small kryptonite necklace would have drowned him if it weren't for Miss TessMACHER(!) in Part I.

So overall, Superman Returns wasn't quite the return we all had hoped for, but it does give me hope for further sequels. And like sports, there's always next season.

Seems like it applies to popular film now too.

FILM SCORE: *** (out of ****)
BEST PART: Action packed airplane rescue.
STATUS: Superman does indeed return, just not as grand as you may have expected.

Stars

2007-08-30T12:49:00.001-07:00

I was getting worried there for a bit.

I saw that Stars would be coming to the 9:30 Club on October 20th on the band's website, but when the 9:30 Club released the calendar for their fall shows, the Stars show wasn't listed.

Finally, I got the e-mail last night. Stars will indeed be performing at the 9:30 Club on October 20th, so I bought 2 tickets faster than you can say "Your Ex-Lover is Dead."

What can I say, I love this Montreal-based alt-pop band and I'm not ashamed to admit it.

Amy Millan's voice is like a soft-spoken seductress whispering in my ear and Torque Campbell hits all the emotions a man feels while in a relationship but never dares confess. And while they can get a little corny every now and then, Stars usually hits every note they aim for.

For people not familiar with the band, Stars will be the "oh, that's who does that song" kind of band.

Their first album, Nightsongs, I never bought, but from what I can tell from listening to the 30 second snippets from iTunes, it sounds like their weakest album. I'll get around to buying it eventually.

Their next album, Heart, was hit or miss, but when they hit, they hit the bullseye. The opener, "What the Snowman Learned About Love" is an epic track, beginning with a simple techno-esque drumbeat intro that instantly does a 180 and becomes something completely different. Slowly, one-by-one, more musical layers are added and the lyrics don't kick in until about 2 minutes into the song.

"What the Snowman Learned About Love" is where Stars begins for me and it's the album opening track that I compare all others to.

But wait, it gets even better. "Elevator Love Letter" is a bouncy, yet melancholy ode to one's job getting in the way of love.

Unfortunately, the rest of the album fumbles over itself a bit, before being salvaged by "Time Can Never Kill a True Heart", "Look Up" and the tragic "Don't be Afraid to Sing."

And while I may be a little hard on Heart, it's still an amazing album, which would have been hard to top, but Stars did just that with Set Yourself on Fire.

Simply put, Set Yourself on Fire is one of the best albums to come out of the alt-pop scene in the 2000's. It's chock full of amazing songs, from the death of a relationship in "Your Ex-Lover is Dead" to the optimistic epic "Ageless Beauty."

But the real zinger on the album is the title track. Usually, title track songs are muddled attempts at saying something important. I don't know... all I can say is that I usually find them to be letdowns.

Not here.

"Set Yourself on Fire" is hands-down Stars' best track in their history. At first listen, the song may appear to be a jumbled mess, with too many musical layers and too many sound changes. But this is the kind of song you let yourself sink into like quicksand, slowly making yourself aware of what's going on around you. And in the end you'll be asking yourself "what is that one thing?"

SYOF was such a hugely successful and popular album that the album was re-released in 2007 as Do You Trust Your Friends, with each song being covered by the band's closest friends, mostly indie-Canadian alt-rock bands.

So after SYOF, I didn't expect Stars to top that album with their next release, In Our Bedroom After the War, but I was pleasantly surprised when it was released. Currently listed with a release date sometime in mid-September, the band opted to release the entire album digitally -- get this -- only 4 days after the album was completed back in July.

Is that cool or what?

Rather than let the album get pirated and downloaded illegally in the time before its release, the band allowed people to purchase the album from iTunes and other legal music download sites.

IOBATW was an initial disappointment. I thought the Stars sound was too stripped down. I thought they sorely missed the synthesized sounds that engulfed most songs on SYOF. But as I listened, the album continued to grow on me. "The Night Starts Here" is an excellent song to have on in the background before a night on the town, "Take Me to the Riot" is Stars at their mid-relationship argument best and "Life 2: The Unhappy Ending" is a slick tale about yearning for the life-affirming feelings of pain and loss instead of numbing suburban happiness.

I'd probably put IOBATW between SYOF and Heart as Stars' second best album. It's more consistent than Heart, but it doesn't come close to the grandness that is SYOF.

At any rate, I could sit here all day and tell you how great this band is, but you just need to experience the band on your own if you haven't already. At first you may dismiss them as hokey-sounding, pussy-rockers, but take another listen and shed the pretentiousness you may carry around with you as a music fan.

I can't freaking wait to see this band live. And while I think Stars may be the rare band where it will be hard for them to duplicate their complex sound on stage, I am eager to find out.

American Beauty

2007-08-29T11:17:00.001-07:00

The year was 1999.

Star Wars was back. Y2K was upon us. And late in the year, after the summer buzz surrounding The Blair Witch Project and The Sixth Sense wore off, the Oscar season began, and American Beauty, the movie that would eventually win Best Picture, and for good reason, was released. And with a growing fervor that lasted until after the awards, American Beauty won the hearts and minds of the American movie-going audience.

I re-watched this movie last night, and I must say, it's held up.

Kevin Spacey is amazing in his performance as Lester Burnham, a family man in the middle of a mid-life crisis. Spacey's facial expressions, delivery and body movements are all perfectly telegraphed. For me it's a toss up as to which is the better Spacey performance: Lester Burnham or Verbal Kint.

And the excellent cast doesn't end with Spacey.

Annette Benning is also perfect as Carolyn, a failing real estate agent who is desperately trying to one-up Lester in her own mid-life crisis. Chris Cooper is effectively creepy and then oddly sympathetic as the ex-military next-door neighbor. Wes Bentley is cool as the calm but mysterious Ricky, Thora Birch as Jane is full of repressed angst, and Mena Suvari is naively seductive as the object of Lester's misplaced desire.

Director Sam Mendes hasn't yet lived up to his debut, although both Road to Perdition and Jarhead were both solid follow-ups. Instead of using fancy tricks, Mendes just points and shoots and his simple directing style heightens the tension that is always taking place between the characters.

But what is probably the most memorable thing about American Beauty is this, the humor. It's wickedly funny. Spacey steals the show as a man with nothing to lose, blackmailing his boss all the way down to working at a burger joint and Benning scores huge with her hysteric outbursts in response to Lester's antagonizing ways.

At age 20, this movie had a huge impact on me, and it still does. Watching it last night it reminded me not to take the people I love for granted, and to appreciate the things I have, but not let them control me.

And that's hard to do sometimes.

FILM SCORE: **** (out of ****)
BEST PART: The whole thing.
STATUS: Millennial classic.

Snakes on a Plane

2007-08-29T07:04:00.000-07:00

With the wife out of town and nothing to do last night, I turned on HBO and saw that the infamous Snakes on a Plane would be coming on next. I shrugged my shoulders, grabbed a Yunegling and some Wheat Thins, and plopped down on the leather sofa to be entertained for 90 minutes.

Maybe I should have had a few more Yuenglings, perhaps all 6 of them, because damn this movie was horrible. I understood the internet hype surrounding the film before its release. The title alone is B-movie awesomeness. But as most things with a built-in hype machine go, SOAP was a massive let-down.

First off, the film takes itself too seriously. David Ellis is no Spielberg, but he has directed decent movies before (Cellular, Final Destination 2). Maybe New Line should have gone with a real B-list director. Someone who could have really upped the cheese-factor like Fred Olen Ray (Hollywood Chainsaw Hookers) or Brian Trenchard-Smith (Leprechaun 4: In Space).

Ellis makes the film too polished, too pristine. A B-movie needs a dirty picture and lots of grain. Make this movie look like it was shot on a shoestring budget (not the $35 million it was made with) and make it look like it should have debuted late at night on the Sci-Fi Channel on a double-bill with Octopus.

The acting is a problem too. It's too normal.

Sam Jackson hams it up the best he can when the script lets him, but even he turns in a standard performance. Yes, his "I've had it with these muthafuckin snakes on this muthafuckin plane" line is great, but we need more, dammit! We need semi-flubbed lines! We need actors staring off into space when they're supposed to be looking at one another! Too bad that SOAP came out before Grindhouse, because done right, SOAP could have easily trumped that film in it's purposeful badness.

Yes, the gore is rather plentiful, and as you can expect, there are plenty of snake bites on rather unpleasant body parts. But as it stands, SOAP, while a bad film, is just too good and too serious to be the bad B-movie it wants to be. There's a reason this thing was a failure after it was released. I'm just glad I didn't spend a cent on this "phenomenon."

FILM SCORE: ** (out of ****)
BEST PARTS: High heel in the ear (not even snake related!)
STATUS: Failed B-movie phenomenon and for good reason.

Philly

2007-08-28T09:26:00.000-07:00

I went to Philadelphia last week for a Wolf Parade show at the Theater of Living Arts. My friends and I missed out on tickets for the D.C. show at the Black Cat, but coming from Baltimore area, the it really makes little difference.

Philly is a little less than 2 hours from Baltimore and the downtown area is a breeze to get to from I-95. To get to D.C., one must brave the perma-jammed Beltway and then navigate their way through numerous back roads riddled with stoplights in order to get to the Black Cat or 9:30 Club. And in the end, the difference in drive-time between D.C. and Philly is smaller than one might expect.

Once we got to Philly, we didn't even need a map, since the city is laid out in a grid-like fashion, with numbered streets running north and south. So we took our exit intending to head straight for the venue, but decided last minute that some Philly cheese steaks would hit the spot before the show. So we drove to the approximate place we remembered Geno's and Pat's to be located, and after making one simple right hand turn, we found the cheese steak capital of the world, no problem.

Since we had been to Pat's the last time we were in Philly, we opted for Geno's this time. And I'm glad we did. The lady at the window was nice and patient while my friends made up their minds. The cheese whiz was used sparingly and the bread was soft. Surprisingly, the sub was smaller than I expected and my stomach was still roaring with hunger after I was finished. So we shrugged our shoulders and headed across the street to Pat's, agreeing that the only way to definitely decide which was better was to eat them both back to back.

At Pat's, the guys working the counter were your standard Philly guys. They had no patience for menu gazing while in mid-order, but they rang you up and gave you your sub in record time. I also enjoyed the signs that read "Speak English when ordering" next to the window.

As I sat down, I was amazed at the amount of cheese whiz dripping from the sub. Not a good sign. Also, the bread was a little tougher than at Geno's.

Overall, I give the nod to Geno's for less cheese whiz and softer bread, but if you like cheese whiz, then Pat's will be the spot for you.

Little did we know we'd regret the decision to slam 2 cheese steak subs in a row later on in the night.

Anyway, we parked the car in a garage near the TLA and headed toward South Street, the cultural center of the city. We had a few drinks at a bar where another typical Philly guy was throwing a fit. I don't know what it was about but he purposely slammed into some stacked chairs while going to the bathroom and didn't bother to pick them up. Turns out he was the bartender's girlfriend or something.

After being frozen out by the wind from a rare mid-summer rainstorm whipping through the open doors, we headed to an Irish bar with a closed door across the street and watched the first quarter of a pre-season NFL game. Barely paying attention to it, we shot the shit as our stomach's punished us for drowning them in cheese whiz, grease and now Yuengling lager.

After nearly puking, we headed over to the TLA at 9 p.m. Perfect timing. The second opening act, Plants and Animals, was about to start.

The lead singer looked like he belonged in the gunfight at the O.K. Corral, but they were just standard retro alt-rock hipsters from Montreal, the city where all the new bands seem to come from nowadays. Anyway, they filled the time and space with decent music for about 40 minutes and got off stage fast enough so that Wolf Parade could set up their instruments.

A half an hour later Wold Parade was on-stage, opening with "It's a Curse". They proceeded to play a lot of new stuff, which sounded great. I can't wait for the rumored new album. As a matter of fact it can't come out soon enough. My list of favorite bands is a constantly changing one, and after seeing them live, Wolf Parade now sits atop that list.

I was surprised to see a mosh pit by the stage, as Wolf Parade hardly screams MOSH!, but after all, this is Philly, so I guess people are used to beating up on each other, shaking hands and then buying each another a beer. The highlight of the moshing culminated when a kid was crowd surfing and then opened an umbrella while the band played "Shine a Light."

Pretty cool.

My friend joked that Dan Boeckner looked like death personified. I thought he looked like a fish singing into the microphone. Regardless, he rocked the fuck out of the joint, has a hot wife and is currently a member of one of the hottest indie-bands out there today.

Meanwhile my friends are I are pasty middle-class drones working our lives away in offices. I don't think Dan will mind our feeble attempts to make ourselves feel better.

In the end, seeing Wolf Parade, one of my favorite bands, in person was definitely the highlight of the trip. But just being back in Philly was the second. I just love it. And even though Philly doesn't necessarily love me back, I still love it anyway.

And maybe that's what they mean by brotherly love.

Escape from New York

2007-08-28T08:03:00.000-07:00

I know I'm 26 years late to the party but I finally saw Escape from New York last night.

And I may ruffle some feathers here, but while watching the film, I couldn't help but think how much better it will be once it gets remade with Gerard Butler as Snake Plissken.

Now, I loved Gerard Butler in 300. Hell, I even loved the guy in Tomb Raider 2 and Dracula 2000. The guy can flat out own the screen. But he won't come close to Kurt Russell's bad-ass performance as Snake, although every other aspect of the remake should surpass the original.

EFNY just seemed too clunky. I know Carpenter isn't exactly a narrative director, but some pacing would have been nice every now and then. And if modern Hollywood is good for one thing, they know how to churn out economical thrillers. There were just too many wandering scenes in the original EFNY, and I think more plot devices and action set pieces will make the remake more entertaining.

I'm not expecting the remake to be anything more than a mindless action flick. But if done on the level of another Carpenter remake, Assault on Precinct 13, the remake of Escape from New York could be a lot of fun. More fun, even, than the original.

I am starting to feel for my man John, though. The man can't catch a break. Hollywood is having a feeding frenzy on his early work, with Assault from Precinct 13, Halloween, The Fog and now Escape from New York all having been already remade or scheduled for remakes soon.

So as long as Hollywood stays away from the classics, remakes could update some uneven cult movies and make them fun for the rest of us.

FILM SCORE: ** (out of ****)
BEST PART(S): Russell as Plissken, Barbeau's boobs, the last 10 minutes of the film.
STATUS: Remake should surpass original's fun factor.

White Rabbits - Fort Nightly

2007-08-27T19:48:00.001-07:00

I don't know about you, but I am always trying to find good new music. And when I first came across White Rabbits on Sirius radio's Left of Center, I was eager to dive into the NYC 6-piece band's debut offering, Fort Nightly.

The White Rabbits sound is very reminiscent of The Walkmen, circa Everyone Who Pretended to Like Me is Gone. Except here, the arrangements are much more polished and the band has fused their sound with a very agreeable, albeit minor, Latin/Calypso flavor. And while Fort Nightly could very easily turn into a commercial for a Caribbean island, White Rabbits do a good job of keeping the Latin/Calypso influence from taking over the entire record.

The band fills out the rest of their musical space with a a slightly out of tune piano, razor sharp guitar licks, maracas, tamborines and fuzzy drums. And it's a plus that there is so much happening in the background, since Matthew Clark's vocals lack an edge and are usually free of emotion. Whereas bands like Wolf Parade, Arcade Fire, and The Walkman have an instantly recognizable lead vocalist, Clark fails seduce the viewer into hanging onto every word he sings. Clark has the pipes, but all too often he comes across as cover-band generic.

That said, the arrangements really work wonders to compensate for the lack of a gripping vocalist. The first 7 or 8 songs of the album are close to perfection, but the album does tend to slack off toward the end. "The Plot" is sure to be the hit of the album, containing an aggressive guitar riff that picks up from the beginning of the song and lasts until the very last note. Clark's anonymous delivery actually benefits on this track, as he becomes a narrator using catchy cinematic wordplay: "He gets up late/He gets upset/I watch it all happen from the foot of the bed" before erupting into a chorus of "He's not impressed." Without a doubt, "The Plot" is the album's most polished and catchiest track.

If there is one drawback to Fort Nightly, it's this. The album is all there in the first listen. You may pick up on a certain aspect of a song in repeat listens, but it won't conjure up many emotions or images the second or third time through. And that comes from the White Rabbits knowing exactly what they want to do. Had they searched around helplessly in the dark for a feeling or an image every once in a while, they may have given this album a deeper layer that it desperately needs to hold up in repeat listens.

That said, this is an enticing debut album from an enticing band. And you know what they say about rabbits, so I'm sure we'll be hearing from this band in the future. I only hope they take a step back and come to the table a little less sure of themselves the next time around.

Fort Nightly isn't going to make you stand up and demand change, and it isn't going to help you get over a broken relationship. But it is great music to have on as you're about to go have a night out on the town. It's full of energy and it's loud, and sometimes that's all you need.

ALBUM SCORE: *** (out of ****)
TOP SONGS: "Kid on My Shoulders", "The Plot", "Navy Wives" and "While We Go Dancing"
SEE THEM LIVE?: Yes