Surprisingly enough (given the title), this post is not about weed. It is about far more important matters (besides, I just spent the last week and a half writing an essay on the classification of Cannabis, so you'll forgive me if I want to take a break from it for a while). This post is about Decency, Morality, and... well, not being a fan of paedophiles...
We all knew the Dutch were a little strange, but nothing could have prepared me for THIS:
Is paedophilia not only legal, but actually condoned in the Netherlands? Are you honestly telling me that this isn't what it looks like? That this is just a harmless sing-song with absolutely no creepyness whatsoever? Why are those people clapping? WHAT IS WRONG WITH THESE PEOPLE?
In actual news, I'm writing a proper review at the moment, and I'm also quite far through No Country For Old Men now, having started reading it again last night when I finished my essay, so expect some slightly more relevent posts soon!
Thursday, 21 January 2010
Sunday, 17 January 2010
How Have I Not Seen These Before?
Saturday, 16 January 2010
"Stoner Doom Metal" (Text)
Over the past couple of days, I've been reading about Dappy from N-DUBZ and his sending of death threats to a single mother who dared to call him "Vile" in a text to Radio One - apparently not realizing that he was kind of proving her point...
This got me thinking about why we allow people such as this the publicity and exposure they receive. I had previously seen Dappy on "Never Mind the Buzzcocks", where he struck me as being a complete moron who took every opportunity he could get to insult the other panelists on the show (Phil Jupitus even walked off at one point he was so fed up - though he also no-doubt wanted to milk the comedic value a walk-off would have), and was just generally offensive to anyone who could hear his voice. A few weeks later, I read that he, and the other 2 members of N-DUBZ, had become the faces of the Government's newest anti-bullying campaign, and it just struck me as being ridiculous. Sure, they needed to find someone that todays youth could identify with, but Dappy seemed to me, having seen him on Buzzcocks, to be nothing more than an egotistical, Chavved up Bully himself, and surely was not an appropriate role model for young children? His record for assault didn't help too much with this image, either (and let's be honest, he looks like a prick dressed liked that - Call me a Bully, but you know I'm right). Now it seems to me that the Government's screwed itself, because they've actually encouraged Dappy's publicity, and now their anti-bullying campaigns will be forever tainted with this association.
This got me thinking, though - sure, I hate Dappy and N-DUBZ, and can't understand how such vile people can be popular among any group of society. But then it hit me - maybe I'm being a little Hypocritical. Afterall, whilst N-DUBZ encourage the Chav culture, and hold poor education, violence, and dressing like a pillock as badges of honour - those possibly aren't the worst things for a band to be encouraging.
In case you haven't read the title and you're wondering what exactly I'm talking about - I'm referring to the newest band to grace my Media Player, the Japanese "Stoner Doom Metal" band Church of Misery.
Church of Misery is a Metal Band, which includes in it's songs themes of murder and mutilation. More specifically, a number of their songs are written about specific serial killers, such as John Wayne Gacy, Gary Ridgeway, Ted Bundy, Aileen Wuornos, Charles Starkweather, and Peter Sutcliffe.
Like many people, I've always been fascinated by serial killers, wanting to know more about what drives a person to commit such acts. But something that's also concerned me is the effect of the Media on the creation of these people. I guess the best example to use is the movie Natural Born Killers by Oliver Stone. In the film, the killer duo Mickey and Mallory Knox (Based on Charles Starkweather and Caroll Fugate) drive across America, murdering countless people, but always leaving one person alive at each scene "to tell the story". Robert Downey, jr. plays a reporter (Wayne Gale), who is following this trail of death and destruction, and the main theme of the movie focuses on the role of the media in portraying and thereby enouraging such violent acts, and is a critique on the portrayal of violence we see on our TV screens, and hear about in the news.
Whilst many people do not acknowledge that watching a film, or listening to music can make someone kill - there is compelling evidence that such things can encourage the imitation of the behaviour they detail. For example, there was a case last year about a teenager who was murdered in the same manner as a character from the movie Severance, after the perpetrators watched the movie and decided to imitate it.
Now, I'm not saying everyone who listens to Church of Misery is going to start idolising serial killers, and decide to become one - but having said that, am I then in a position to say that anyone who listens to N-DUBZ is going to start idolising them, and turn into worthless Chavvy pricks themselves?
Regardless of what the answer is, I can still safely say this with my hand on my heart - I'd have Peter Sutcliffe round for dinner before Dappy any day.
This got me thinking about why we allow people such as this the publicity and exposure they receive. I had previously seen Dappy on "Never Mind the Buzzcocks", where he struck me as being a complete moron who took every opportunity he could get to insult the other panelists on the show (Phil Jupitus even walked off at one point he was so fed up - though he also no-doubt wanted to milk the comedic value a walk-off would have), and was just generally offensive to anyone who could hear his voice. A few weeks later, I read that he, and the other 2 members of N-DUBZ, had become the faces of the Government's newest anti-bullying campaign, and it just struck me as being ridiculous. Sure, they needed to find someone that todays youth could identify with, but Dappy seemed to me, having seen him on Buzzcocks, to be nothing more than an egotistical, Chavved up Bully himself, and surely was not an appropriate role model for young children? His record for assault didn't help too much with this image, either (and let's be honest, he looks like a prick dressed liked that - Call me a Bully, but you know I'm right). Now it seems to me that the Government's screwed itself, because they've actually encouraged Dappy's publicity, and now their anti-bullying campaigns will be forever tainted with this association.
This got me thinking, though - sure, I hate Dappy and N-DUBZ, and can't understand how such vile people can be popular among any group of society. But then it hit me - maybe I'm being a little Hypocritical. Afterall, whilst N-DUBZ encourage the Chav culture, and hold poor education, violence, and dressing like a pillock as badges of honour - those possibly aren't the worst things for a band to be encouraging.
In case you haven't read the title and you're wondering what exactly I'm talking about - I'm referring to the newest band to grace my Media Player, the Japanese "Stoner Doom Metal" band Church of Misery.
Church of Misery is a Metal Band, which includes in it's songs themes of murder and mutilation. More specifically, a number of their songs are written about specific serial killers, such as John Wayne Gacy, Gary Ridgeway, Ted Bundy, Aileen Wuornos, Charles Starkweather, and Peter Sutcliffe.
Like many people, I've always been fascinated by serial killers, wanting to know more about what drives a person to commit such acts. But something that's also concerned me is the effect of the Media on the creation of these people. I guess the best example to use is the movie Natural Born Killers by Oliver Stone. In the film, the killer duo Mickey and Mallory Knox (Based on Charles Starkweather and Caroll Fugate) drive across America, murdering countless people, but always leaving one person alive at each scene "to tell the story". Robert Downey, jr. plays a reporter (Wayne Gale), who is following this trail of death and destruction, and the main theme of the movie focuses on the role of the media in portraying and thereby enouraging such violent acts, and is a critique on the portrayal of violence we see on our TV screens, and hear about in the news.
Whilst many people do not acknowledge that watching a film, or listening to music can make someone kill - there is compelling evidence that such things can encourage the imitation of the behaviour they detail. For example, there was a case last year about a teenager who was murdered in the same manner as a character from the movie Severance, after the perpetrators watched the movie and decided to imitate it.
Now, I'm not saying everyone who listens to Church of Misery is going to start idolising serial killers, and decide to become one - but having said that, am I then in a position to say that anyone who listens to N-DUBZ is going to start idolising them, and turn into worthless Chavvy pricks themselves?
Regardless of what the answer is, I can still safely say this with my hand on my heart - I'd have Peter Sutcliffe round for dinner before Dappy any day.
An open message to Marvel: Enough With the "Gritty Reboots" already! (text)
Recently, I learned (from Cracked.com's Dan O'Brien, no less) that Marvel has scrapped plans for filming "Spiderman 4", instead favouring "rebooting" the franchise with a far more gritty tone.
WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE?
This is SPIDERMAN we're talking about - It's meant to be a children's character! I hate how the success of The Dark Knight (a movie which I was not a great fan of) is affecting the development of any potential comic book movies so damn much! Granted, Batman Begins was the actual Batman "reboot", but Marvel didn't take too much notice of that - and that's how it should have stayed!
There is already a "gritty" Spiderman Spin-off - It's called "The Punisher". If you want to do a Spiderman story that's a little more gritty than the previous movies, feel free to use the characters you already have - you wouldn't hear any complaints from me if you did a Spiderman/Punisher crossover (can it still be called a crossover when they started in the same comic series? More of a return to form, really...), and that would give you plenty of opportunities to up the realism and grit of the film (The Punisher being one of the few "heroes" who actually kills).
But no, instead we're wiping away the previous 3 movies we spent getting to know the characters, and restarting the story again. Don't Marvel know how frustrating that is? One of the best things about "Punisher: War Zone" was that, despite the fact it had an entirely new cast and director, it didn't bother with any of this reboot nonsense - it carried on from the series - opening 6 years into Frank's killing spree. We've already had a movie telling us the backstory on how he became the Punisher, we don't want to sit through that again - and it's the same with Spiderman!
On top of this, don't they remember what happened when the first film came out? People actually complained about the realism of the violence - the scene where Uncle Ben gets shot by a carjacker was thought to be far too real to be included in a 12 rated movie. What they mean when they say "gritty reboot" is not "a more realistic movie", it actually means "a movie with Bourne-style hand-camera work for the action scenes that won't look anywhere near as nice". Now, I loved this style in the Bourne films, and thought it was incredibly effective in "Saving Private Ryan" - but not in Spiderman! Remeber in my War Zone review when I said how I loved the fact that Lexi Alexander had pretty well just transferred the content of the comics onto the screen? Why do the opposite, and turn a bright and cheerful kids cartoon into a Bourne-style action film? I just don't understand it.
Also, these "Gritty Reboots" inevitably aren't realistic, and tend to only detract from the comic book nature of the films. Whilst The Punisher is just about believable, mainly due to his not having superpowers, how can we treat a movie as being "real" if the plot revolves around a teenager who develops superpowers after being bitten by a radioactive spider, and dons a latex outfit in order to fight crime? Trying to make this story real is just going to ruin the fun, kid-friendly nature of the Spiderman films, and make it far less enjoyable. As I've said before, I much preferred Tommy Lee Jones' psychotic turn as Two-Face in Batman Forever to the mopey, sad portrayal of the character in The Dark Knight, because I go to see comic book movies for a reason - to see over-the-top and ridiculous villains, battling our heroes in preposterous circumstances you couldn't possibly perceive as being "real".
As for the realism thing - Compare The Dark Knight to American Psycho (a choice I made based on Christian Bale being the lead in both films); which one seems more realistic? The one that takes a comic book story and tries to be realistic, with it's shaky camera work and "very serious tone", or the one that takes a realistic story and portrays it in an over-the-top ridiculous manner, and eschews shaky hand camera work for good old fashioned stationary, beautiful cinematography?
That's what I thought...
Next thing we know, they'll be turning the "X-Men" into "Watchmen", and I don't know about you - but I think Wolverine would make a crap Ozymandias...
Although, on the plus side, this may mean we'll see Evil Dead 4 a little sooner than we otherwise would have...
WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE?
This is SPIDERMAN we're talking about - It's meant to be a children's character! I hate how the success of The Dark Knight (a movie which I was not a great fan of) is affecting the development of any potential comic book movies so damn much! Granted, Batman Begins was the actual Batman "reboot", but Marvel didn't take too much notice of that - and that's how it should have stayed!
There is already a "gritty" Spiderman Spin-off - It's called "The Punisher". If you want to do a Spiderman story that's a little more gritty than the previous movies, feel free to use the characters you already have - you wouldn't hear any complaints from me if you did a Spiderman/Punisher crossover (can it still be called a crossover when they started in the same comic series? More of a return to form, really...), and that would give you plenty of opportunities to up the realism and grit of the film (The Punisher being one of the few "heroes" who actually kills).
But no, instead we're wiping away the previous 3 movies we spent getting to know the characters, and restarting the story again. Don't Marvel know how frustrating that is? One of the best things about "Punisher: War Zone" was that, despite the fact it had an entirely new cast and director, it didn't bother with any of this reboot nonsense - it carried on from the series - opening 6 years into Frank's killing spree. We've already had a movie telling us the backstory on how he became the Punisher, we don't want to sit through that again - and it's the same with Spiderman!
On top of this, don't they remember what happened when the first film came out? People actually complained about the realism of the violence - the scene where Uncle Ben gets shot by a carjacker was thought to be far too real to be included in a 12 rated movie. What they mean when they say "gritty reboot" is not "a more realistic movie", it actually means "a movie with Bourne-style hand-camera work for the action scenes that won't look anywhere near as nice". Now, I loved this style in the Bourne films, and thought it was incredibly effective in "Saving Private Ryan" - but not in Spiderman! Remeber in my War Zone review when I said how I loved the fact that Lexi Alexander had pretty well just transferred the content of the comics onto the screen? Why do the opposite, and turn a bright and cheerful kids cartoon into a Bourne-style action film? I just don't understand it.
Also, these "Gritty Reboots" inevitably aren't realistic, and tend to only detract from the comic book nature of the films. Whilst The Punisher is just about believable, mainly due to his not having superpowers, how can we treat a movie as being "real" if the plot revolves around a teenager who develops superpowers after being bitten by a radioactive spider, and dons a latex outfit in order to fight crime? Trying to make this story real is just going to ruin the fun, kid-friendly nature of the Spiderman films, and make it far less enjoyable. As I've said before, I much preferred Tommy Lee Jones' psychotic turn as Two-Face in Batman Forever to the mopey, sad portrayal of the character in The Dark Knight, because I go to see comic book movies for a reason - to see over-the-top and ridiculous villains, battling our heroes in preposterous circumstances you couldn't possibly perceive as being "real".
As for the realism thing - Compare The Dark Knight to American Psycho (a choice I made based on Christian Bale being the lead in both films); which one seems more realistic? The one that takes a comic book story and tries to be realistic, with it's shaky camera work and "very serious tone", or the one that takes a realistic story and portrays it in an over-the-top ridiculous manner, and eschews shaky hand camera work for good old fashioned stationary, beautiful cinematography?
That's what I thought...
Next thing we know, they'll be turning the "X-Men" into "Watchmen", and I don't know about you - but I think Wolverine would make a crap Ozymandias...
Although, on the plus side, this may mean we'll see Evil Dead 4 a little sooner than we otherwise would have...
Sunday, 10 January 2010
The Wire (Text)
My Uncle wrote this outstanding review on his first impressions of the series The Wire, in which he explains why, despite its critical acclaim and commercial success, he is not a fan of the series (as I am).
Aside from Brevity (a word which I am only familiar with thanks to the Coen Brothers' film "The Big Lebowski"), the main reason he gives for his dislike of the series is the fact that it is too real, and that with the knowledge of these communities that watching the opening of the series has given him, it seems "almost negligent to plan to spend sixty hours on the sofa when I could devote some of that time at least to the community-building activities – like childrens’ moral classes or inter-faith devotionals or events to empower junior youth – which will ultimately create a new world, in Baltimore and everywhere else."
While I cannot in any way disagree with the statement that these things do all need to happen, and that spending time working on such programs would be infinitely more useful to society as a whole than just sitting and watching TV, I would just like to make a couple of points of my own, in defence of my watching the entire 5 series over the summer...
1. Unfortunately, many of us are not concerned with what's happening to people on the other side of the world, and will only focus on the here and now. The very fact that this series has gotten my Uncle thinking about the conditions in the more deprived parts of cities such a Baltimore proves the worth of the series - if we were never told about what was happening in the rest of the world, we would never strive to change the world and correct these injustices. In a sense, the very existence of the series is helping people, and a direct case of this is:
2. Felicia Pearson. Pearson's parents were both incarcerated when she was born, and instead of going to school, she began drug dealing as a child. Aged 14, she was convicted of second degree murder, and served 6 years of an 8 year sentence at the Maryland Correctional Institution for Women in Jessup. Even though she earned her GED in prison, and made the decision to turn her life around, she found herself unable to get a job due to her criminal record. Pearson would almost certainly have returned to drug dealing just to survive at this point, were it not for the fact that she met Michael K. Williams (Omar) in a club one night, and he invited her to come to the set of The Wire. She met the producers, and they decided to hire her right away. Since then, she has gone on to write a book, star in 2 movies, and record an album, all thanks to The Wire. Now, I'm not saying that watching the show now it's finished will help anyone, but I just wanted to put things in perspective - had The Wire never existed, or been cancelled after the first Season or two due to poor ratings, this young girl (who is actually older than me, but I digress...) would almost certainly either be out on the streets, or in prison once again. As it is, she's riding high off the success of The Wire, and has really turned things around, I think the fact that the show has managed to have such a positive effect on even one life is a testament to the good that can come from the filming of such a program. Finally
3. The main purpose of the series is entertainment. If I'm honest with myself, I would have to admit that even if I did object to watching The Wire on the grounds that the time could be better spent helping develop community projects and youth outreach programs, I would probably just spend the actual times when I would be watching The Wire watching House, M.D. (or something similar) instead. Obviously, it's a good idea to put time aside to working on charitable projects, and helping people, but it's very unlikely that this will co-inside with what would otherwise be "TV time", as you tend to watch these shows late at night before bed, so would not want to work then, anyway.
Those are just my thoughts - and as I said, it's probably just rationalisation for my love of the show when confronted with the suggestion that I should probably be doing more worthwhile things with my time...
Like writing reviews???
Aside from Brevity (a word which I am only familiar with thanks to the Coen Brothers' film "The Big Lebowski"), the main reason he gives for his dislike of the series is the fact that it is too real, and that with the knowledge of these communities that watching the opening of the series has given him, it seems "almost negligent to plan to spend sixty hours on the sofa when I could devote some of that time at least to the community-building activities – like childrens’ moral classes or inter-faith devotionals or events to empower junior youth – which will ultimately create a new world, in Baltimore and everywhere else."
While I cannot in any way disagree with the statement that these things do all need to happen, and that spending time working on such programs would be infinitely more useful to society as a whole than just sitting and watching TV, I would just like to make a couple of points of my own, in defence of my watching the entire 5 series over the summer...
1. Unfortunately, many of us are not concerned with what's happening to people on the other side of the world, and will only focus on the here and now. The very fact that this series has gotten my Uncle thinking about the conditions in the more deprived parts of cities such a Baltimore proves the worth of the series - if we were never told about what was happening in the rest of the world, we would never strive to change the world and correct these injustices. In a sense, the very existence of the series is helping people, and a direct case of this is:
2. Felicia Pearson. Pearson's parents were both incarcerated when she was born, and instead of going to school, she began drug dealing as a child. Aged 14, she was convicted of second degree murder, and served 6 years of an 8 year sentence at the Maryland Correctional Institution for Women in Jessup. Even though she earned her GED in prison, and made the decision to turn her life around, she found herself unable to get a job due to her criminal record. Pearson would almost certainly have returned to drug dealing just to survive at this point, were it not for the fact that she met Michael K. Williams (Omar) in a club one night, and he invited her to come to the set of The Wire. She met the producers, and they decided to hire her right away. Since then, she has gone on to write a book, star in 2 movies, and record an album, all thanks to The Wire. Now, I'm not saying that watching the show now it's finished will help anyone, but I just wanted to put things in perspective - had The Wire never existed, or been cancelled after the first Season or two due to poor ratings, this young girl (who is actually older than me, but I digress...) would almost certainly either be out on the streets, or in prison once again. As it is, she's riding high off the success of The Wire, and has really turned things around, I think the fact that the show has managed to have such a positive effect on even one life is a testament to the good that can come from the filming of such a program. Finally
3. The main purpose of the series is entertainment. If I'm honest with myself, I would have to admit that even if I did object to watching The Wire on the grounds that the time could be better spent helping develop community projects and youth outreach programs, I would probably just spend the actual times when I would be watching The Wire watching House, M.D. (or something similar) instead. Obviously, it's a good idea to put time aside to working on charitable projects, and helping people, but it's very unlikely that this will co-inside with what would otherwise be "TV time", as you tend to watch these shows late at night before bed, so would not want to work then, anyway.
Those are just my thoughts - and as I said, it's probably just rationalisation for my love of the show when confronted with the suggestion that I should probably be doing more worthwhile things with my time...
Like writing reviews???
Wednesday, 6 January 2010
NO to Inter-Species Relationships!
As a hyper intelligent, carnivorous, soul-eating evil pillow myself (see banner image), I must say that I was most disturbed to read this story about a man in Japan who appears to have bought one of our women-folk as a slave, and insists that she is his "girlfriend". This abduction and rape of our women must stop! I therefore call upon all pillows worldwide to unite and help bring down these so-called "otaku" (read: Organised Pillow Traffickers) before it's too late!
To join our noble cause, simply follow THIS LINK, and save the image as your profile picture on here. Or, alternatively, laugh at the next Japanese man you see. That should help... probably.
To join our noble cause, simply follow THIS LINK, and save the image as your profile picture on here. Or, alternatively, laugh at the next Japanese man you see. That should help... probably.
Short Films (From the Past!!!!) - (Video)
Just to keep you entertained since I won't be recording any new reviews any time soon, here's a couple of videos I recorded with some of my friends a couple of years ago (August '07 for the first one, Easter '08 for the second). I play Jesus in both films.
The first is our short Zombie movie "Jesus Versus The Zombie King" which we shot over the course of 2 days of silliness on a budget of just over £5 (mostly spent on ketchup and red fruit squash). We mainly filmed it just to test out my new HD camcorder. Have fun trying to spot all the movie references.
The second one is our short film "Teenage Wasteland", which I shot with my friend Rob in Easter '08. We shot it all in one afternoon, and the whole thing was improvised and made on a budget of £0.00
JESUS VS THE ZOMBIE KING
TEENAGE WASTELAND
I get 1 cent for every 50 times someone watches these on Blip, so show everyone!!!
Voice
The first is our short Zombie movie "Jesus Versus The Zombie King" which we shot over the course of 2 days of silliness on a budget of just over £5 (mostly spent on ketchup and red fruit squash). We mainly filmed it just to test out my new HD camcorder. Have fun trying to spot all the movie references.
The second one is our short film "Teenage Wasteland", which I shot with my friend Rob in Easter '08. We shot it all in one afternoon, and the whole thing was improvised and made on a budget of £0.00
JESUS VS THE ZOMBIE KING
TEENAGE WASTELAND
I get 1 cent for every 50 times someone watches these on Blip, so show everyone!!!
Voice
The 10 Best Wake-Up Songs Ever (currently on my Media Player) - (Text)
THE BEST WAKE-UP SONGS EVER (that I am currently aware of)
I am not a morning person. I hate having to get out of bed. It is by far and away my least favourite part of the day, and given the opportunity, I would not get out of bed until hunger or the need to piss forced me to. Unfortunately, much like you, I too am forced to get out of bed on occasion to do boring things like go to lectures or hand in dissertations, and I therefore require something strong to get me out of bed. Sure, coffee works fine, but you have to actually have the will to stand up and walk into the kitchen to make it. Cocaine’s great too, but I can hardly afford that on a student’s budget. No, I needed something that would work whilst I was still in bed, and that wouldn’t cost me 40 quid a day. And seeing as I hate alarm clocks and love music, I decided that listening to some awesome wake up songs was probably the best solution to my hatred of mornings. So here you have it – for your pleasure, my list of the 10 best wake up songs (currently on my media player).
10 – Drive in Saturday by David Bowie
I feel kind of bad for not including Born in the USA by Bruce Springsteen on this list, but although the tone of the song is incredibly upbeat and cheerful, the lyrics are so damn depressing that if you used it as a wake up song long enough to actually hear what he’s saying, you’d never want to leave the comfort of your warm bed ever again. This list shall therefore begin with one of my favourite Bowie songs – one that seems to describe young love as perfectly as I’ve ever heard, and in doing so manages to be one of Bowie’s most uplifting and happy songs that he recorded. It also makes for one hell of a wake-up track.
9 – It Was a Good Day by Ice Cube
Now, I know what you’re thinking: “A rap song on a list of wake up tracks? Is this guy out of his mind?” and the answer is “quite possibly”. However, with it’s very morning-y opening (“just waking up in the morning gotta thank God”) and upbeat tone (it’s about what it feels like to have a good day, and unfortunately those tend to only come when you actually get out of bed and do something with your day, unless you like sports and have a TV in your room like 25% of the men in the world – and yes, that is a made up statistic; aren’t you smart?) this song is the perfect way to start a day. Well, if you’re in to rap music, that is (hence the low spot). The song that this track samples, “Footsteps in the Dark” by the Isley Brothers, is also an awesome wake up track.
8 – Power of Love by Huey Lewis and the News
Forget for a second that Patrick Bateman loves Huey Lewis and the News, and that I love Patrick Bateman, and forget for a second just what a good band Huey Lewis and the News are. Forget their catchy yet often intelligent lyrics, and their super cool eighties feel. Forget that this song is so light and happy, yet so powerful that it just makes you want to leap out of bed and dance and sing along to it. Forget all those things, and just think: This song was the theme to Back to the Future – How could it not make the list? And on the subject of 80s cheese...
7 – Keep Feeling Fascination by The Human League
Unfortunately, embedding has been disabled on all the versions of this video I can find on Youtube, for reasons completely unkown to me - so if you want to hear it, click the link above.
This song is so ridiculously cheesy, I guarantee that if you hear it first thing in the morning, you won’t be able to help yourself from getting out of bed and jumping in front of the mirror, singing along with it. Or at least, you won’t if you’re clinically insane. Still, you’ve got to admit, it’s just about upbeat enough to make you want to keep on living when you’re woken by it at 6 AM when your alarm goes off. Plus, it totally sounds like a Flight of the Conchords style parody of the 80s.
6 – The Joker by Steve Miller Band
I don’t know why, but whenever I try and picture myself waking up, as though watching a movie of my life, this is always the song that’s playing as I get out of bed (unless I’m literally watching that movie we filmed where I get out of bed, in which case it’s “Dangerous Man” by Trace Adkins). It’s such a chilled out and relaxed track, with such a cool undertone to it, that it just seems like an ideal song to wake up to. Plus, the bassline’s pretty awesome. However, this track always seems cooler to wake up to when you’re thinking about it the night before than it actually is – the reason being it’s so chilled out, it often just causes you to think “oh, man – how laid back would it be to just spend the day in bed?” and then promptly return to sleep. The same is somewhat true for the next track on this list...
5 – The Man in Me by Bob Dylan
For fans of the big Lebowski, this list ends here. There’s nothing that can top Bob’s soothing, laid back tune and cool, intelligent lyrics when it comes to a wake up song. However, the only way you’re getting out of bed after hearing this is if you get a sudden craving for a Wake ‘N’ Bake. This song will actively make you look forward to the morning, but I guarantee you it won’t make you get out of bed any faster! And speaking of Bob...
4 – All Along the Watchtower by Jimi Hendrix
Much as it pains me to say it, there are occasions when the original Dylan versions of songs aren’t appropriate – and this is one of them (The other is playing the original version of “Knocking on Heavens Door” at a Douchebags’ Convention – as they genuinely seem to believe that Guns ‘N’ Roses wrote the song... and why waste art on people who spray themselves orange, and always pose with their lips pursed, as though they intend to kiss anyone they see with a camera as a reward for photographing their douchiness). The reason for this is that the Hendrix cover has a much heavier opening beat, and this energy continues throughout the entire song. The result of this is that it gets you pumped up, and ready to face the day. Also, it was in Watchmen. This is probably the first song mentioned on the list that will actually make you want to get out of bed, if only for the 3 and a Half minutes you’ll be air-guitaring before falling back to sleep.
3 – Here Comes Your Man by The Pixies
It’s just the Bassline. How do I explain it? It makes me want to leap out of bed and go surfing, despite the fact I have no idea how to surf beyond ‘you stand on the board, and the waves carry you along’. This song is just so damn awesome – if I lived in Mexico or Hawaii or anywhere tropical on a beach, I can imagine myself waking up to this same song at sunrise every day for the rest of my life, and dying a happy man. Unfortunately, that is a dream world, and where I am now, there are other, more appropriate, tracks to wake up to. Such as...
2 – Free Falling by Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers
Most people know this song from the film Jerry Maguire, or possibly from that YouTube video of Tom Cruise driving off a bridge...
Wherever you know it from, however, it is impossible to deny that this is one hell of a wake-up song, incredibly powerful and upbeat in tone, even if the subject matter is very dark (though for all I know all those rumours of the song being about a girl’s suicide could be completely false, just like the time I was told the song “In the Air Tonight” by Phil Collins was “About that guy who could have saved that other guy from drowning, but didn’t, and Phil saw it all and then at his show he found him”. Oh wait, that was Stan... Still, the point remains) . This is one of the greatest sounds you can possibly hear first thing in the morning – Lucky from King of the Hill singing upbeat rock – inspiring stuff. It makes me feel like I should just go out and seize the day – that I can accomplish anything. And that is why it takes the number 2 spot on this list. However, no matter how good this song is, it just can’t compare to the Number One wake up song ever recorded. Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you:
1 – More Than A Feeling by Boston.
Just listen.
‘Nuff said.
I am not a morning person. I hate having to get out of bed. It is by far and away my least favourite part of the day, and given the opportunity, I would not get out of bed until hunger or the need to piss forced me to. Unfortunately, much like you, I too am forced to get out of bed on occasion to do boring things like go to lectures or hand in dissertations, and I therefore require something strong to get me out of bed. Sure, coffee works fine, but you have to actually have the will to stand up and walk into the kitchen to make it. Cocaine’s great too, but I can hardly afford that on a student’s budget. No, I needed something that would work whilst I was still in bed, and that wouldn’t cost me 40 quid a day. And seeing as I hate alarm clocks and love music, I decided that listening to some awesome wake up songs was probably the best solution to my hatred of mornings. So here you have it – for your pleasure, my list of the 10 best wake up songs (currently on my media player).
10 – Drive in Saturday by David Bowie
I feel kind of bad for not including Born in the USA by Bruce Springsteen on this list, but although the tone of the song is incredibly upbeat and cheerful, the lyrics are so damn depressing that if you used it as a wake up song long enough to actually hear what he’s saying, you’d never want to leave the comfort of your warm bed ever again. This list shall therefore begin with one of my favourite Bowie songs – one that seems to describe young love as perfectly as I’ve ever heard, and in doing so manages to be one of Bowie’s most uplifting and happy songs that he recorded. It also makes for one hell of a wake-up track.
9 – It Was a Good Day by Ice Cube
Now, I know what you’re thinking: “A rap song on a list of wake up tracks? Is this guy out of his mind?” and the answer is “quite possibly”. However, with it’s very morning-y opening (“just waking up in the morning gotta thank God”) and upbeat tone (it’s about what it feels like to have a good day, and unfortunately those tend to only come when you actually get out of bed and do something with your day, unless you like sports and have a TV in your room like 25% of the men in the world – and yes, that is a made up statistic; aren’t you smart?) this song is the perfect way to start a day. Well, if you’re in to rap music, that is (hence the low spot). The song that this track samples, “Footsteps in the Dark” by the Isley Brothers, is also an awesome wake up track.
8 – Power of Love by Huey Lewis and the News
Forget for a second that Patrick Bateman loves Huey Lewis and the News, and that I love Patrick Bateman, and forget for a second just what a good band Huey Lewis and the News are. Forget their catchy yet often intelligent lyrics, and their super cool eighties feel. Forget that this song is so light and happy, yet so powerful that it just makes you want to leap out of bed and dance and sing along to it. Forget all those things, and just think: This song was the theme to Back to the Future – How could it not make the list? And on the subject of 80s cheese...
7 – Keep Feeling Fascination by The Human League
Unfortunately, embedding has been disabled on all the versions of this video I can find on Youtube, for reasons completely unkown to me - so if you want to hear it, click the link above.
This song is so ridiculously cheesy, I guarantee that if you hear it first thing in the morning, you won’t be able to help yourself from getting out of bed and jumping in front of the mirror, singing along with it. Or at least, you won’t if you’re clinically insane. Still, you’ve got to admit, it’s just about upbeat enough to make you want to keep on living when you’re woken by it at 6 AM when your alarm goes off. Plus, it totally sounds like a Flight of the Conchords style parody of the 80s.
6 – The Joker by Steve Miller Band
I don’t know why, but whenever I try and picture myself waking up, as though watching a movie of my life, this is always the song that’s playing as I get out of bed (unless I’m literally watching that movie we filmed where I get out of bed, in which case it’s “Dangerous Man” by Trace Adkins). It’s such a chilled out and relaxed track, with such a cool undertone to it, that it just seems like an ideal song to wake up to. Plus, the bassline’s pretty awesome. However, this track always seems cooler to wake up to when you’re thinking about it the night before than it actually is – the reason being it’s so chilled out, it often just causes you to think “oh, man – how laid back would it be to just spend the day in bed?” and then promptly return to sleep. The same is somewhat true for the next track on this list...
5 – The Man in Me by Bob Dylan
For fans of the big Lebowski, this list ends here. There’s nothing that can top Bob’s soothing, laid back tune and cool, intelligent lyrics when it comes to a wake up song. However, the only way you’re getting out of bed after hearing this is if you get a sudden craving for a Wake ‘N’ Bake. This song will actively make you look forward to the morning, but I guarantee you it won’t make you get out of bed any faster! And speaking of Bob...
4 – All Along the Watchtower by Jimi Hendrix
Much as it pains me to say it, there are occasions when the original Dylan versions of songs aren’t appropriate – and this is one of them (The other is playing the original version of “Knocking on Heavens Door” at a Douchebags’ Convention – as they genuinely seem to believe that Guns ‘N’ Roses wrote the song... and why waste art on people who spray themselves orange, and always pose with their lips pursed, as though they intend to kiss anyone they see with a camera as a reward for photographing their douchiness). The reason for this is that the Hendrix cover has a much heavier opening beat, and this energy continues throughout the entire song. The result of this is that it gets you pumped up, and ready to face the day. Also, it was in Watchmen. This is probably the first song mentioned on the list that will actually make you want to get out of bed, if only for the 3 and a Half minutes you’ll be air-guitaring before falling back to sleep.
3 – Here Comes Your Man by The Pixies
It’s just the Bassline. How do I explain it? It makes me want to leap out of bed and go surfing, despite the fact I have no idea how to surf beyond ‘you stand on the board, and the waves carry you along’. This song is just so damn awesome – if I lived in Mexico or Hawaii or anywhere tropical on a beach, I can imagine myself waking up to this same song at sunrise every day for the rest of my life, and dying a happy man. Unfortunately, that is a dream world, and where I am now, there are other, more appropriate, tracks to wake up to. Such as...
2 – Free Falling by Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers
Most people know this song from the film Jerry Maguire, or possibly from that YouTube video of Tom Cruise driving off a bridge...
Wherever you know it from, however, it is impossible to deny that this is one hell of a wake-up song, incredibly powerful and upbeat in tone, even if the subject matter is very dark (though for all I know all those rumours of the song being about a girl’s suicide could be completely false, just like the time I was told the song “In the Air Tonight” by Phil Collins was “About that guy who could have saved that other guy from drowning, but didn’t, and Phil saw it all and then at his show he found him”. Oh wait, that was Stan... Still, the point remains) . This is one of the greatest sounds you can possibly hear first thing in the morning – Lucky from King of the Hill singing upbeat rock – inspiring stuff. It makes me feel like I should just go out and seize the day – that I can accomplish anything. And that is why it takes the number 2 spot on this list. However, no matter how good this song is, it just can’t compare to the Number One wake up song ever recorded. Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you:
1 – More Than A Feeling by Boston.
Just listen.
‘Nuff said.
No Videos For A While
Being the genius I am, I seem to have left my camera at home, so will not be making any videos for the next couple of weeks. I will, however, continue to upload text reviews, as well as Cracked-style lists, for your viewing pleasure. It's especially annoying that I don't have a camera here because there is snow everywhere, and I would have liked to have gotten some footage of it, but I'm sure I'll get over it. In the meantime, enjoy the posts I upload.
Tuesday, 5 January 2010
First Impressions: No Country For Old Men (Text)
As a general rule, if you enjoy a book, you should avoid any film adaptations of it, as they almost never cease to disappoint. Even small changes to the plot or characters that wouldn’t bother the average movie goer will enrage fans of the original books, sometimes a lot more so than you feel they really should. I recall the outrage expressed by fans of Watchmen when the movie reached its climax, and no giant alien squid appeared. In the book (or graphic novel, I should say), the squid was merely a plot device, not a significant character; it could have been anything else, or even not existed (as in the film), and would not have affected the story. Yet fans of the graphic novel went crazy over its exclusion. There’s probably even someone out there who stormed out of Lord of the Rings when he realized Tom Bombadil had been cut. People just can’t stand to see stories they love being butchered to make them more exciting from a cinematic perspective.
On many levels, this is true when it goes the other way, too. Almost everyone I know who read The Bourne Identity after having seen the film hated it, whilst those who read it before watching the movie loved it. The same is true for many other books, even Jurassic Park. If you enjoy a story in one medium, you probably won’t enjoy it in another, because the changes necessary to make a book into a film will almost certainly modify the story by a huge amount, possibly even beyond recognition.
It’s interesting, then, that a mere 40 pages into Cormac McCarthy’s No Country for Old Men, I feel as though I’ve just been reading an incredibly detailed movie synopsis someone’s printed off IMDB. All the elements I remember from the film, which I watched when it was first released, are there in vivid detail, and it’s incredibly easy to picture the scenes unfolding, much more so than with most other books of this type. However, there is another reason why I have likened it to a synopsis from the internet Movie Database, and that is that it’s incredibly difficult to read, despite the language being very simple.
Since the last couple of sentences may sound completely contradictory, I shall explain further. The descriptions of people and places are extremely detailed, but only where they need to be. Whilst Stephen King may spend a page or two explaining exactly what it feels like to smoke your first cigarette, McCarthy is more than happy to just give one word explanations. However, the detail contained within the few words that he uses is incredible. Rather than give a simple explanation of “The rifle was custom built, with a telescopic sight mounted on top”, McCarthy describes the weapon as “a heavybarreled .270 on a ’98 Mauser action with a laminated stock of maple and walnut”. This description tells us everything we need to know about the rifle, without spending an entire paragraph detailing the action on the Mauser ’98, or explaining the advantages of a .270 calibre to a .308 when hunting deer. It’s simple, but at the same time detailed. Whilst in sentences such as the one above, this style of writing is brilliant, keeping the story going along at a good and fast pace, while at the same time giving us a clear picture in our heads of how the scene would appear on film or in real life, it often makes reading sentences tedious. Unfortunately, in order to simplify descriptions of events, and to keep the story moving, McCarthy very rarely uses commas, and floods his sentences with the word “and”. The result of this is that you can’t pace the sentence naturally in your head, and I often found myself having to read long sentences 2 or 3 times just to make them sound right, and get the emphasis in the right places. This is a major distraction when reading, and I found it very often destroyed the images of the scenes I was picturing in my head whilst reading, instead replacing them with nothing but a train of thought on how I would go about saying certain sentences were I to attempt to read the book aloud.
To help put this into context, I shall now give you the same sentence in 4 different styles: the over-simplified, the normal, the over-complicated, and the Cormac McCarthy.
Over Simplified:
Jerry Seinfeld told a funny joke and the audience clapped.
Normal:
Jerry Seinfeld finished telling the joke. As the applause grew, it became clear to those watching that this man was a one of a kind comedic genius, and that his brand of sarcastic humour was going to be incredibly popular.
The Over Complicated:
Jerry Seinfeld finished his joke. The facetious tone of the joke, although entertaining, was, in the end, erroneous, as the anecdote itself was more than enough to cause the audience to grow more vociferous than could be reasonably expected; the laughter and applause of the raucous crowd echoing throughout the grand concert hall, growing and growing, like a balloon of raw energy, encompassing all within earshot of the riotous comedian. Indubatively, It was clear to all present that this man would go on to do great things.
The Cormac McCarthy:
Jerry Seinfeld finished telling the joke and paused for effect. The audience began to laugh and applause and soon enough there was a standing ovation and the entire crowd cheered for Jerry. Seinfeld thanked the audience and waved goodbye and left the stage and the crowd kept on cheering. He was going to be huge.
All 4 styles have their benefits, and all convey the same event in a slightly different manner, but I just cannot get over the constant use of “and” which McCarthy employs. Look at that last sentence, and tell me that you would use that one if you intended to describe the scene depicted. Sure, if you changed it around to read “Seinfeld thanked the audience and waved goodbye. He left the stage, and the crowd kept on cheering”, I may well agree with the statement, but as far as I’m concerned, if you use “and” more than about twice in a sentence, it just doesn’t flow, and becomes annoying to read. Before you say I’m exaggerating, I would just like to quote a line from No Country for Old Men:
“Then [Chigurh] picked up his air-tank and the stungun and walked out the door and got into the deputy’s car and started the engine and backed around and pulled out and headed up the road” (McCarthy; No Country for Old Men: Page 7)
I distinctly remember a child in my class in year 2 writing a story much like that in Primary school, and being told by the teacher that he needed to break up his sentences more, otherwise no-one would be able to read it. When 7 year old kids know more about writing than a Pulitzer Prize winner, I find myself losing faith in humanity.
Oh yeah, and McCarthy doesn’t use speech marks, either.
Nevertheless, I find myself captivated and enthralled by the story itself, no matter how much I despise the writing style of the author at times, and will no doubt continue to read it, to see how the story and characters develop, and hopefully I will get to the point where the draw of the story is so intense that no number of uses of the word “and” could put me off reading it. Either that or I’ll just watch the film again.
On many levels, this is true when it goes the other way, too. Almost everyone I know who read The Bourne Identity after having seen the film hated it, whilst those who read it before watching the movie loved it. The same is true for many other books, even Jurassic Park. If you enjoy a story in one medium, you probably won’t enjoy it in another, because the changes necessary to make a book into a film will almost certainly modify the story by a huge amount, possibly even beyond recognition.
It’s interesting, then, that a mere 40 pages into Cormac McCarthy’s No Country for Old Men, I feel as though I’ve just been reading an incredibly detailed movie synopsis someone’s printed off IMDB. All the elements I remember from the film, which I watched when it was first released, are there in vivid detail, and it’s incredibly easy to picture the scenes unfolding, much more so than with most other books of this type. However, there is another reason why I have likened it to a synopsis from the internet Movie Database, and that is that it’s incredibly difficult to read, despite the language being very simple.
Since the last couple of sentences may sound completely contradictory, I shall explain further. The descriptions of people and places are extremely detailed, but only where they need to be. Whilst Stephen King may spend a page or two explaining exactly what it feels like to smoke your first cigarette, McCarthy is more than happy to just give one word explanations. However, the detail contained within the few words that he uses is incredible. Rather than give a simple explanation of “The rifle was custom built, with a telescopic sight mounted on top”, McCarthy describes the weapon as “a heavybarreled .270 on a ’98 Mauser action with a laminated stock of maple and walnut”. This description tells us everything we need to know about the rifle, without spending an entire paragraph detailing the action on the Mauser ’98, or explaining the advantages of a .270 calibre to a .308 when hunting deer. It’s simple, but at the same time detailed. Whilst in sentences such as the one above, this style of writing is brilliant, keeping the story going along at a good and fast pace, while at the same time giving us a clear picture in our heads of how the scene would appear on film or in real life, it often makes reading sentences tedious. Unfortunately, in order to simplify descriptions of events, and to keep the story moving, McCarthy very rarely uses commas, and floods his sentences with the word “and”. The result of this is that you can’t pace the sentence naturally in your head, and I often found myself having to read long sentences 2 or 3 times just to make them sound right, and get the emphasis in the right places. This is a major distraction when reading, and I found it very often destroyed the images of the scenes I was picturing in my head whilst reading, instead replacing them with nothing but a train of thought on how I would go about saying certain sentences were I to attempt to read the book aloud.
To help put this into context, I shall now give you the same sentence in 4 different styles: the over-simplified, the normal, the over-complicated, and the Cormac McCarthy.
Over Simplified:
Jerry Seinfeld told a funny joke and the audience clapped.
Normal:
Jerry Seinfeld finished telling the joke. As the applause grew, it became clear to those watching that this man was a one of a kind comedic genius, and that his brand of sarcastic humour was going to be incredibly popular.
The Over Complicated:
Jerry Seinfeld finished his joke. The facetious tone of the joke, although entertaining, was, in the end, erroneous, as the anecdote itself was more than enough to cause the audience to grow more vociferous than could be reasonably expected; the laughter and applause of the raucous crowd echoing throughout the grand concert hall, growing and growing, like a balloon of raw energy, encompassing all within earshot of the riotous comedian. Indubatively, It was clear to all present that this man would go on to do great things.
The Cormac McCarthy:
Jerry Seinfeld finished telling the joke and paused for effect. The audience began to laugh and applause and soon enough there was a standing ovation and the entire crowd cheered for Jerry. Seinfeld thanked the audience and waved goodbye and left the stage and the crowd kept on cheering. He was going to be huge.
All 4 styles have their benefits, and all convey the same event in a slightly different manner, but I just cannot get over the constant use of “and” which McCarthy employs. Look at that last sentence, and tell me that you would use that one if you intended to describe the scene depicted. Sure, if you changed it around to read “Seinfeld thanked the audience and waved goodbye. He left the stage, and the crowd kept on cheering”, I may well agree with the statement, but as far as I’m concerned, if you use “and” more than about twice in a sentence, it just doesn’t flow, and becomes annoying to read. Before you say I’m exaggerating, I would just like to quote a line from No Country for Old Men:
“Then [Chigurh] picked up his air-tank and the stungun and walked out the door and got into the deputy’s car and started the engine and backed around and pulled out and headed up the road” (McCarthy; No Country for Old Men: Page 7)
I distinctly remember a child in my class in year 2 writing a story much like that in Primary school, and being told by the teacher that he needed to break up his sentences more, otherwise no-one would be able to read it. When 7 year old kids know more about writing than a Pulitzer Prize winner, I find myself losing faith in humanity.
Oh yeah, and McCarthy doesn’t use speech marks, either.
Nevertheless, I find myself captivated and enthralled by the story itself, no matter how much I despise the writing style of the author at times, and will no doubt continue to read it, to see how the story and characters develop, and hopefully I will get to the point where the draw of the story is so intense that no number of uses of the word “and” could put me off reading it. Either that or I’ll just watch the film again.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
