So it's about time I started talking about my favorite music of 2013. Since little-to-nothing has come out this year that I care about, I'm gonna tell you about the four rock shows I've been to this year.
03/22/13: The Saw Doctors at the Vic Theater, Chicago. The Saw Doctors are an Irish folk-rock band with heavy classic rock and American country music influences. I've been into them ever since a friend hooked me up with copies of The Cure and Live in Galway in late 2006, and the strains of "Out for a Smoke", "N-17", and "If Only" echoed through my freezing cold apartment. This was the second time I've seen them, and it was not as good as the first. Granted the band's getting up there in years, but there just wasn't that much energy in the room. There's nothing worse than wanting to get really amped at a show, and realizing you're the only one*. Fun setlist, though. "Michael D Rockin' in the Dail" (A song about the current president of Ireland, who was a college professor of one of the Doctors), "Music I Love" (A song about not doing anything, just chilling and listening to music), and all their live staples.
05/17/13: Roger Clyne & The Peacemakers and Sons of Bill at Abbey Pub, Chicago. Roger Clyne and his drummer P.H. Naffah were in the first rock band I ever saw live back in '96, The Refreshments. Then more than a decade later, Roger, P.H., and the other two guys who make up The Peacemakers packed Joe's Bar and played for three hours, bouncing between then-new cuts from "No More Beautiful World" and fan favorites from The Refreshments era. Every single person in the crowd sang every single word. There was tequila, love, and rock and roll and it was one of the greatest concert experiences of my life**. The way Roger plays off the crowd, and the crowd plays off him, is a special thing that I'm sad to say I've come to take for granted over time. I've seen the Peacemakers more times than any other band save Local H, and every time, I leave happier than I came. Now we're in 2013 and this was my first concert after I swore off liquor, which was awkward because Roger Clyne shows and tequila are basically inseparable. Still, a few beers and a few hours of the nation's finest dirt rock suits me just fine. Sons of Bill is a country-rock outfit from Virginia, and their 2012 album Sirens is just about flawless. My friend and concert companion had seen them open for Roger several times, but this was my first taste of live Sons of Bill. I was blown away by the intensity and chemistry they showed onstage, to the point where I wondered aloud what they were doing opening for anyone. Then they closed with "Santa Ana Winds", their best song, and as I watched their frontman declare "Tonight I'm gonna light that San Fernando/ with kerosene instead,"*** my jaw dropped in awe of the rock I saw before me. Then Roger and the boys came out and proceeded to do what they do, which is something everyone should see at least once. The set from the Abbey Pub might as well have been tailor made for me, with semi-obscure awesomeness like "Buffalo" and "Your Name on a Grain of Rice" to go along with staple rockers "Hello New Day", "I Don't Need Another Thrill", and "Lemons". What I look for now in a RCPM show are songs I haven't seen them play before, and I got that too in "Heaven on a Paper Plate" and "Dolly". Plain and simple, this was a night I won't soon forget.
09/01/13: Collective Soul and The Lovehammers at Rotary Hill, Naperville. The good people at the Naperville jaycees (whatever that is) do a great job of bringing out the nostalgiaheads for their late summer/ early fall festivals. I've seen They Might Be Giants, Soul Asylum, and Everclear at the same venue over the years, to the delight of my inner thirteen year old. I figured Collective Soul would fit right in there, as a band I was once obsessed with but had long since stopped thinking about. But first was The Lovehammers, led by the mad genius that is Marty Casey. This was my third time seeing them, the first being at the same venue. They rock hard every time, with a solid mix of material from their four albums. The usual set starter "Straight as an Arrow" is worth the price of admission by itself, but throw in another dozen good songs and an impromptu cover of "La Bamba" and you've got another band that should never be opening for anyone^. Then it was Collective Soul time. Based on how other bands from the alt-rock era have aged, I wasn't expecting much, but next time I see Collective Soul- and there will be a next time- I'll know to expect something great. Frontman Ed Roland has aged very well, both in appearance and voice. The band was on point as they careened through a set of their greatest hits, including "Heavy", "Listen", "Gel", "December", and then some. After they'd been playing for about an hour, Ed announced that the show would have to be truncated due to weather, so we got "The World I Know" and a brief acoustic rendition of "Shine" before everyone headed for shelter. As much as I would have liked to stay there all night listening to Collective Soul, it was still a memorable end to a surprisingly great night.
09/14/13: Rancid, Violent Femmes, and Blink 182 at Riot Fest, Humboldt Park, Chicago. When I woke up Saturday afternoon, I had no idea my day would turn out like this. But one overheard mention of "Riot Fest" and "Rancid" later, I was on Craigslist seeing how much it would cost and how quick I could get there. See, there's still plenty of great bands I've never seen- Radiohead, NoFX, Live, and Veruca Salt currently top my list- but before Saturday night, one band's presence on that list was more important than all the rest combined. That band was Rancid. I'm currently wearing an "And Out Come the Wolves" t-shirt that barely qualifies as clothing anymore, seeing as how I've had it for 18 years and it's been ripped to rags. Even when I bought it, before my forays into alternapop and harder grunge, I knew "...And Out Come the Wolves" was a modern masterpiece. Its predecessor "Let's Go!" and its successor "Life Won't Wait" are almost as good. So Rancid's been right around that upper echelon of rock bands for over half my life, yet I'd never seen them play. I couldn't be happier or prouder to have changed that. We showed up with 15 minutes to spare, so I caught the tail end of Blondie, beered myself, and prepared to make my life complete. From the moment Tim started with the line "Never fell in love till I fell in love with you" till the last and final "Ruby Ruby Ruby Ruby SoHo", I did not stop jumping, I did not stop headbanging, I did not stop singing. Cause that's what you do when you're seeing Rancid. They played half of "Wolves". They played the best song from "LWW". They threw in a scattered sampling of "Let's Go!". Did I mention THEY PLAYED HALF OF AND OUT COME THE FUCKING WOLVES?? I was on such a high, it barely registered that the Violent Femmes played their entire debut album as their set^^, and while we stuck around till the end of Blink 182, I just didn't care. If Blink had taken a cue and played "Dude Ranch" and "Enema" instead of packing their set with stuff from "Blink 182" and "Neighborhoods", it could have been a pleasant and entertaining end to the night. Instead, I got to see what Blink looks like now that they've grown up, and I kind of hated it. When I last saw them, 11 years ago, they made dick jokes and played songs with titles like 'When You Fucked Grampa". It was loose, it was goofy, it was as much cartoon as it was rock show. This particular group of guys making records like "Blink 182" and "Neighborhoods" is like Jim Carrey going from Ace Ventura to "Eternal Sunshine"'s Joel to "The Number 23"'s Walt Sparrow^^^. It's a massive bummer and a waste of potential.
*My apologies to anyone who saw Third Eye Blind and Tonic at the Riviera Theater in 2000. I was, how you say, a spazz.
**Off the top of my head, only three concerts top that first RCPM show: Green Day in 2001 at the Aragon ballroom. Pearl Jam in 2006 at the United Center. Jamboree '99 at Tinley Park featuring Lit, 2 Skinnee J's, Blink 182, Local H, Hole, The Offspring, Red Hot Chili Peppers, and other bands.
***There aren't too many bands who can pull off a really good song about arson. Sons of Bill are such a band.
^: I was actually hoping for more songs off their latest record, the excellent Set Fire, but it's really hard to nitpick a show when all the songs are good.
^^: OK, I still thought that was awesome once I heard how many kickass songs were on that one album. Gimme the Car? Please Do Not Go? American Music? Yes please.
^^^: Eternal Sunshine is a solid B+ for originality alone, and I think The Number 23 is one of the best movies of the 21st century. Carrey could have made a dozen more "Me, Myself, and Irene"s, but he chose not to do the expected. I respect that choice and I'm grateful he made it, but it sure pissed a lot of people off.
Sunday, September 15, 2013
Saturday, August 31, 2013
The Dog Days are Over
I haven't written anything this summer, because a part of my past that I thought was cured forever has made a sudden reappearance in my life. After it came on strong in my early 20's, threatening every other aspect of my life, some very smart and hard-working people did their best to rid me of it back in 2004. I am grateful for that. After the events of that autumn I could not- would not- allow myself to imagine a future with it in my life. And for a few glorious years, I was free of it. I have to admit, as time passed I noticed some warning signs this day would come. Not full-on symptoms, just a twinge every now and then to remind me it was there, and in some ways it always will be. So it wasn't a total shock when the full recurrence set in. Sometime between January and March of 2013, I decided I was going to be a Magic: the Gathering player again. Not in a "I have a deck, we could play a few games for fun" kind of way. In a "Where am I supposed to find the Mutavaults to keep playing Standard next month? Man, my box of Theros better be all kinds of awesome or I'm gonna have to sell a kidney or something." kind of way. So that's where I've been. I've been having fun with it and it turns out that years of experience at something do make you better. If I can find a way to write about Magic that will make sense to people who didn't understand a word of this, I might do it. It's social and creative, and it's great practice for not being a jerk.
But for right now, 10 weeks of baseball passed and I haven't said a word. With just one month left in the regular season, it's time to start thinking about who's going to win it all. If you want to know who's going to make the playoffs, you can either wait a month, or you can read everyone else on the internet's guesses. I'm going to look at the four teams to take most seriously today.
Division I: The Favorites
1. Detroit Tigers. Everyone knows about Miggy, and the three guys who have each pitched like an ace at times this season. Let's not downplay the coolness (if meaninglessness) of Max Scherzer's shiny win-loss record. And let's recognize that Miggy does things with a bat that we've never seen in our lifetimes, and other than the lifetime of PED whispers he's in for, nothing sucks about that. But ever since they've moved Benoit to the ninth inning, they've been able to close out games and the biggest "Yeah, but..." about Detroit is gone. It barely seems worth it to mention how their huge division lead means the whole pitching staff will be rested going into the Division Series. But that too, anyway.
2. Los Angeles Dodgers. Two months ago, these guys were six games under .500 and thirteen games behind the best record in the NL- then the Pirates. Now they're 3 back of the league's best record, they're going to coast to an NL West crown, and they have the best possible game 1 starter in Clayton Kershaw. Maybe Puig shuts down against postseason pitching. Maybe Matt Kemp doesn't make it all the way back, but they have too many guys playing well for any of that to sink them. The people who run this team wanted to build an instant contender, and they actually got it done. Nice.
3. Boston Red Sox. I guess the other end of the Adrian Gonzalez trade worked out ok, too. I didn't think either the existing core nor Ben Cherington's free agent signings were anything to get excited about. Apparently, as a fan with no experience working in the game and only minimal experience writing about it, I still have things to learn. Every position player decision- Napoli, Victorino, keeping Ellsbury- they've all worked out perfectly, and the team scores runs like nobody's business. I still wouldn't put money on a team running out Peavy, Lester, and Lackey in a postseason series, but you never know who's going to randomly throw seven shutout innings in the playoffs.
4. St. Louis Cardinals. Of course Matt Carpenter shows up from the minors, plays second base every day, and leads the league in runs. And of course Lance Lynn, Joe Kelly, and Shelby Miller are all good enough right now to fill out a major league rotation, even if Miller didn't have a great August and maybe he'll get Strasburged. It's not exciting, what the Cardinals do, unless you like winning. No matter how it looks on paper, this team's core players and reputation make any team playing them an underdog.
But for right now, 10 weeks of baseball passed and I haven't said a word. With just one month left in the regular season, it's time to start thinking about who's going to win it all. If you want to know who's going to make the playoffs, you can either wait a month, or you can read everyone else on the internet's guesses. I'm going to look at the four teams to take most seriously today.
Division I: The Favorites
1. Detroit Tigers. Everyone knows about Miggy, and the three guys who have each pitched like an ace at times this season. Let's not downplay the coolness (if meaninglessness) of Max Scherzer's shiny win-loss record. And let's recognize that Miggy does things with a bat that we've never seen in our lifetimes, and other than the lifetime of PED whispers he's in for, nothing sucks about that. But ever since they've moved Benoit to the ninth inning, they've been able to close out games and the biggest "Yeah, but..." about Detroit is gone. It barely seems worth it to mention how their huge division lead means the whole pitching staff will be rested going into the Division Series. But that too, anyway.
2. Los Angeles Dodgers. Two months ago, these guys were six games under .500 and thirteen games behind the best record in the NL- then the Pirates. Now they're 3 back of the league's best record, they're going to coast to an NL West crown, and they have the best possible game 1 starter in Clayton Kershaw. Maybe Puig shuts down against postseason pitching. Maybe Matt Kemp doesn't make it all the way back, but they have too many guys playing well for any of that to sink them. The people who run this team wanted to build an instant contender, and they actually got it done. Nice.
3. Boston Red Sox. I guess the other end of the Adrian Gonzalez trade worked out ok, too. I didn't think either the existing core nor Ben Cherington's free agent signings were anything to get excited about. Apparently, as a fan with no experience working in the game and only minimal experience writing about it, I still have things to learn. Every position player decision- Napoli, Victorino, keeping Ellsbury- they've all worked out perfectly, and the team scores runs like nobody's business. I still wouldn't put money on a team running out Peavy, Lester, and Lackey in a postseason series, but you never know who's going to randomly throw seven shutout innings in the playoffs.
4. St. Louis Cardinals. Of course Matt Carpenter shows up from the minors, plays second base every day, and leads the league in runs. And of course Lance Lynn, Joe Kelly, and Shelby Miller are all good enough right now to fill out a major league rotation, even if Miller didn't have a great August and maybe he'll get Strasburged. It's not exciting, what the Cardinals do, unless you like winning. No matter how it looks on paper, this team's core players and reputation make any team playing them an underdog.
Wednesday, June 12, 2013
I Already Live With Too Many Ghosts
I'm obviously pacing myself with these shock movies, but here's five more. This installment features two of the most disgusting movies ever made, and I wanted to wait until I was actually in the mood to see them. The next five, along with some sort of baseball post, will be along eventually.
Martyrs (2008)- In another gruesome French film, two young women named Anna and Lucie (Morjana Alaoui and Mylene Jampanoi) seek revenge on the people who imprisoned and tortured Lucie when she was a child. Lucie is haunted by a grisly, vaguely female creature- the embodiment of her guilt over not rescuing the one person she had a chance to save when she escaped her captivity, as well as her fear that those days will return. When Lucie finds the guilty couple, the Belfonds, she murders them as well as their two children with a shotgun, then calls Anna for help when this doesn't subdue the 'creature'. All this takes place in the first fifteen minutes of the film. The purpose behind the Belfonds' actions is soon revealed: along with many others like them, the Belfonds did not seek to create victims but martyrs. Fully explained by a character's monologue (Show, don't tell. C'mon, everyone knows that), it ends up making some sense and providing a tenuous basis for the second half of the film. That said, everything from the moment Anna finds the secret basement till the end lands squarely in Pretentious Town for me. Even the ending, which is stunning, eye-popping, and impossible to unsee, is too far up its own ass to be as raw and nightmarish as it really should be. In some ways I'd prefer a popcorn slasher, because at least those movies don't lay claim to some sort of quasi-philosophical high ground. The better movies I have reviewed so far all use pain as the canvas, as an ever-present and unrelenting background factor upon which the story can be told. But in Martyrs pain and suffering are the paint, and the picture is of a seriously questionable greater purpose. I can sum that up by quoting a character from Funny Games. When asked "Why don't you just kill us?", he replies "You should never underestimate the value of entertainment." I think that's the right answer, and Martyrs is the wrong answer. I'm giving it a C, because while I didn't get a moment that stayed with me, I can see how some people might. Some people might also appreciate the horror makeup and effects more than I did.
Kill List (2011): In that this is a British action/suspense movie, it already sticks out like a sore thumb amongst all this over-the-line horror. It also stands out because 98% or so is a comfortable watch as such. A hitman screws up, and after eight months, he needs money so he gets back in the game for one last big job. And somehow, Kill List makes that worthwhile. Maybe it's that he needs his money to feed his family. Maybe it's the thick English and Irish accents that make everyone sound like they're talking about soccer all the time. Or maybe it's the fact that, despite the old "One last score" schtick, the plot is complex and engaging. As a change of pace I enjoyed it pretty well, and would give it a B on its merits as an action movie. But that's not what this project is about. It's about being affected, in the right amounts at the right time. It's about hating the filmmakers after you see it, but grudgingly admitting that they did a good job on it. Some movies maintain a high level of intensity throughout for effect, and you can argue Kill List at least attempts this. Then some movies are known for the lines they cross in specific scenes. Kill List does break a taboo or two, and does so unflinchingly. So it's got a little something going for it. But was any of it done with any apparent intent, be it to entertain or make a point? No, not really. C+.
A Serbian Film (2010): Based on what I read, A Serbian Film seemed like the kind of movie most people wouldn't be able to make it through. I am not most people. It's about Milos, a retired male porn star who's offered an insane amount of money to star in one last movie- but the director refuses to tell him anything except how much money he'll make. To its credit, even if the explicit sex and violence is too much, the first half of the film raises a lot of good points for discussion. The director of the movie-in-the-movie sees Serbia as a backward, useless, moribund place and believes that it would take something extraordinary to even get Serbia noticed. Even though I know very little about Serbia, the conversation on national identity is valid worldwide and it rings true. Another potent idea comes from a conversation between Milos and the porn director about the purpose of the adult film genre. The director's idea is to create something that transcends "Something losers who can't get laid can get off to", something with an emotional, psychological, possibly even spiritual component. I admire the vision, seeing as how 99.99999% of porn is utterly unambitious and I find it sad, but at this point the movie stops playing around with intelligent discourse and starts getting really screwed up. Milos is drugged repeatedly with bull aphrodisiac and speed, and if you can imagine something unspeakable, it's probably somewhere in the second half of A Serbian Film. After two particular scenes, I completely understood why "The film has been banned in Spain, Australia, New Zealand, Malaysia, and Singapore, rejected in Norway, and temporarily banned from screening in Brazil where a decision to repeal the film has not been made yet." (Wikipedia). If you're banned in Brazil, I think it's safe to say you've gone too far. But as I've always been one to test my own limits, and I'm no stranger to mental instability, my viewing experience is probably unique. I'd see something horrible happen and think "Yeah, I came up with that years ago. What else you got?" The great thing about this film is that it didn't run out of answers to that question until the credits started rolling. It's super-intense, perverse enough to be objectionable to just about everyone, and it goes completely off the rails into pure evil more than once . I don't know if I could look someone in the eye and justify the existence of A Serbian Film, but I don't have to. It gets an A.
Salo (or: The 120 Days of Sodom) (1957): I know I already un-recommended every movie from this project, but I'll do it again for this one in particular. Do not watch. It gets an F from me. Now that we've gotten that out of the way... Set in northern Italy toward the end of World War II, four of the most powerful men in the nation gather at a secluded mansion. Joining them are a cadre of young men who fill the dual role of guards and sexual playthings; nine teenage boys and nine teenage girls, kidnap victims all; and the "Storytellers", four older women who we quickly find out are lifelong sex workers. Over the course of weeks, the aristocrats live out all their most depraved fantasies while degrading, torturing, and abusing the eighteen adolescents. The violence is raw, the sex acts are explicit, and the film crosses one line I'd rather never see crossed. Not gonna lie; I threw up a little. First time one of these movies has done that. Now, I appreciate that the world was a radically different place in 1957, and the unabashed pansexuality was probably just as scandalous as the violence at the time. But from my point of view, it was just scenes of unpleasant sex interspersed with scenes of abject filth interspersed with scenes of unchecked sadism. Sure, I could describe A Serbian Film the same way, but Salo never gets the viewer to invest in its characters like A Serbian Film does. You're appalled at the lack of humanity at first, but when the perpetrators are so nonchalant and the victims so resigned and dazed, it stops being shocking and starts getting pointless and repetitive. The fifth time someone is dragged to a private rape room is less horrifying than the first, basically. Even as the aristocrats each take a house-spouse from among the teenage boys, nobody in the movie shows a distinct personality or anything to distinguish himself from his fellow perps or victims. It's a heartless film, and unlike most heartless films, it doesn't even beat you over the head with a pompous pseudo-intellectual message. If it's supposed to be a statement about absolute power corrupting absolutely, that isn't news. If you didn't know that already, then a psychopath who looks like Trapper John brutalizing teenagers with a creepy, tight-lipped grin on his face probably isn't going to help you understand. And if you're incapable of imagining how limitless power manifests, such that you need to watch someone else's idea of it, then I'd suggest you start using your imagination more. Your ideas might still be filthy, but at least that's filth you can call your own.
Snowtown (2011): Also known as The Snowtown Murders, this one is based on the true story of Australia's most notorious serial killer, John Bunting. Sixteen-year-old Jamie, his brothers, and his mom live in a South Australia slum, surrounded by pedophiles, drug addicts, and other winners. One such winner is Jamie's older brother, who rapes him with some regularity. Things seem to turn a corner when his mother meets John, a well-spoken and intelligent man who gets along well with her kids despite his vocal homophobia and other prejudices. When the less-desirable elements of the community start vanishing, Jamie suspects John immediately. Those suspicions are confirmed when John shows him two bodies,one a transvestite, the other, Jamie's junkie friend. The next victim is Jamie's older brother, and after John and his sidekick torture him, Jamie is the one to finish him off in an act of mercy. More acts of torture and murder follow. In his feature-length debut, director Justin Kurzel tells the story with a quiet calm that belies the horror going on- to the film's detriment, in my opinion. In one early scene, John agitates his friends and neighbors until they all sound like Fox News guests, but nobody but John thinks there's anything to it other than blowing off steam. After about twenty minutes of What's Eating Gilbert Grape-style small town hopelessness, the gory truth starts to come out, one corpse at a time. Then we're right back to small town hopelessness until the next victim is chosen. I felt like Kurzel buried the lead a little with this; it's so matter-of-fact, quiet, and dispassionate there's no chance of getting sucked into the twisted world of the serial killer. The graphic scenes of violence don't so much provide shock value as much as confusion, because the film doesn't really establish any sort of tension build. It's just like, "Oh, look, they tore that guy's toenail out. Good for them." Good for my mental health, bad for the purposes of this project. I give it a C-.
Martyrs (2008)- In another gruesome French film, two young women named Anna and Lucie (Morjana Alaoui and Mylene Jampanoi) seek revenge on the people who imprisoned and tortured Lucie when she was a child. Lucie is haunted by a grisly, vaguely female creature- the embodiment of her guilt over not rescuing the one person she had a chance to save when she escaped her captivity, as well as her fear that those days will return. When Lucie finds the guilty couple, the Belfonds, she murders them as well as their two children with a shotgun, then calls Anna for help when this doesn't subdue the 'creature'. All this takes place in the first fifteen minutes of the film. The purpose behind the Belfonds' actions is soon revealed: along with many others like them, the Belfonds did not seek to create victims but martyrs. Fully explained by a character's monologue (Show, don't tell. C'mon, everyone knows that), it ends up making some sense and providing a tenuous basis for the second half of the film. That said, everything from the moment Anna finds the secret basement till the end lands squarely in Pretentious Town for me. Even the ending, which is stunning, eye-popping, and impossible to unsee, is too far up its own ass to be as raw and nightmarish as it really should be. In some ways I'd prefer a popcorn slasher, because at least those movies don't lay claim to some sort of quasi-philosophical high ground. The better movies I have reviewed so far all use pain as the canvas, as an ever-present and unrelenting background factor upon which the story can be told. But in Martyrs pain and suffering are the paint, and the picture is of a seriously questionable greater purpose. I can sum that up by quoting a character from Funny Games. When asked "Why don't you just kill us?", he replies "You should never underestimate the value of entertainment." I think that's the right answer, and Martyrs is the wrong answer. I'm giving it a C, because while I didn't get a moment that stayed with me, I can see how some people might. Some people might also appreciate the horror makeup and effects more than I did.
Kill List (2011): In that this is a British action/suspense movie, it already sticks out like a sore thumb amongst all this over-the-line horror. It also stands out because 98% or so is a comfortable watch as such. A hitman screws up, and after eight months, he needs money so he gets back in the game for one last big job. And somehow, Kill List makes that worthwhile. Maybe it's that he needs his money to feed his family. Maybe it's the thick English and Irish accents that make everyone sound like they're talking about soccer all the time. Or maybe it's the fact that, despite the old "One last score" schtick, the plot is complex and engaging. As a change of pace I enjoyed it pretty well, and would give it a B on its merits as an action movie. But that's not what this project is about. It's about being affected, in the right amounts at the right time. It's about hating the filmmakers after you see it, but grudgingly admitting that they did a good job on it. Some movies maintain a high level of intensity throughout for effect, and you can argue Kill List at least attempts this. Then some movies are known for the lines they cross in specific scenes. Kill List does break a taboo or two, and does so unflinchingly. So it's got a little something going for it. But was any of it done with any apparent intent, be it to entertain or make a point? No, not really. C+.
A Serbian Film (2010): Based on what I read, A Serbian Film seemed like the kind of movie most people wouldn't be able to make it through. I am not most people. It's about Milos, a retired male porn star who's offered an insane amount of money to star in one last movie- but the director refuses to tell him anything except how much money he'll make. To its credit, even if the explicit sex and violence is too much, the first half of the film raises a lot of good points for discussion. The director of the movie-in-the-movie sees Serbia as a backward, useless, moribund place and believes that it would take something extraordinary to even get Serbia noticed. Even though I know very little about Serbia, the conversation on national identity is valid worldwide and it rings true. Another potent idea comes from a conversation between Milos and the porn director about the purpose of the adult film genre. The director's idea is to create something that transcends "Something losers who can't get laid can get off to", something with an emotional, psychological, possibly even spiritual component. I admire the vision, seeing as how 99.99999% of porn is utterly unambitious and I find it sad, but at this point the movie stops playing around with intelligent discourse and starts getting really screwed up. Milos is drugged repeatedly with bull aphrodisiac and speed, and if you can imagine something unspeakable, it's probably somewhere in the second half of A Serbian Film. After two particular scenes, I completely understood why "The film has been banned in Spain, Australia, New Zealand, Malaysia, and Singapore, rejected in Norway, and temporarily banned from screening in Brazil where a decision to repeal the film has not been made yet." (Wikipedia). If you're banned in Brazil, I think it's safe to say you've gone too far. But as I've always been one to test my own limits, and I'm no stranger to mental instability, my viewing experience is probably unique. I'd see something horrible happen and think "Yeah, I came up with that years ago. What else you got?" The great thing about this film is that it didn't run out of answers to that question until the credits started rolling. It's super-intense, perverse enough to be objectionable to just about everyone, and it goes completely off the rails into pure evil more than once . I don't know if I could look someone in the eye and justify the existence of A Serbian Film, but I don't have to. It gets an A.
Salo (or: The 120 Days of Sodom) (1957): I know I already un-recommended every movie from this project, but I'll do it again for this one in particular. Do not watch. It gets an F from me. Now that we've gotten that out of the way... Set in northern Italy toward the end of World War II, four of the most powerful men in the nation gather at a secluded mansion. Joining them are a cadre of young men who fill the dual role of guards and sexual playthings; nine teenage boys and nine teenage girls, kidnap victims all; and the "Storytellers", four older women who we quickly find out are lifelong sex workers. Over the course of weeks, the aristocrats live out all their most depraved fantasies while degrading, torturing, and abusing the eighteen adolescents. The violence is raw, the sex acts are explicit, and the film crosses one line I'd rather never see crossed. Not gonna lie; I threw up a little. First time one of these movies has done that. Now, I appreciate that the world was a radically different place in 1957, and the unabashed pansexuality was probably just as scandalous as the violence at the time. But from my point of view, it was just scenes of unpleasant sex interspersed with scenes of abject filth interspersed with scenes of unchecked sadism. Sure, I could describe A Serbian Film the same way, but Salo never gets the viewer to invest in its characters like A Serbian Film does. You're appalled at the lack of humanity at first, but when the perpetrators are so nonchalant and the victims so resigned and dazed, it stops being shocking and starts getting pointless and repetitive. The fifth time someone is dragged to a private rape room is less horrifying than the first, basically. Even as the aristocrats each take a house-spouse from among the teenage boys, nobody in the movie shows a distinct personality or anything to distinguish himself from his fellow perps or victims. It's a heartless film, and unlike most heartless films, it doesn't even beat you over the head with a pompous pseudo-intellectual message. If it's supposed to be a statement about absolute power corrupting absolutely, that isn't news. If you didn't know that already, then a psychopath who looks like Trapper John brutalizing teenagers with a creepy, tight-lipped grin on his face probably isn't going to help you understand. And if you're incapable of imagining how limitless power manifests, such that you need to watch someone else's idea of it, then I'd suggest you start using your imagination more. Your ideas might still be filthy, but at least that's filth you can call your own.
Snowtown (2011): Also known as The Snowtown Murders, this one is based on the true story of Australia's most notorious serial killer, John Bunting. Sixteen-year-old Jamie, his brothers, and his mom live in a South Australia slum, surrounded by pedophiles, drug addicts, and other winners. One such winner is Jamie's older brother, who rapes him with some regularity. Things seem to turn a corner when his mother meets John, a well-spoken and intelligent man who gets along well with her kids despite his vocal homophobia and other prejudices. When the less-desirable elements of the community start vanishing, Jamie suspects John immediately. Those suspicions are confirmed when John shows him two bodies,one a transvestite, the other, Jamie's junkie friend. The next victim is Jamie's older brother, and after John and his sidekick torture him, Jamie is the one to finish him off in an act of mercy. More acts of torture and murder follow. In his feature-length debut, director Justin Kurzel tells the story with a quiet calm that belies the horror going on- to the film's detriment, in my opinion. In one early scene, John agitates his friends and neighbors until they all sound like Fox News guests, but nobody but John thinks there's anything to it other than blowing off steam. After about twenty minutes of What's Eating Gilbert Grape-style small town hopelessness, the gory truth starts to come out, one corpse at a time. Then we're right back to small town hopelessness until the next victim is chosen. I felt like Kurzel buried the lead a little with this; it's so matter-of-fact, quiet, and dispassionate there's no chance of getting sucked into the twisted world of the serial killer. The graphic scenes of violence don't so much provide shock value as much as confusion, because the film doesn't really establish any sort of tension build. It's just like, "Oh, look, they tore that guy's toenail out. Good for them." Good for my mental health, bad for the purposes of this project. I give it a C-.
Wednesday, May 15, 2013
We're all gonna die (No matter what the plastic surgeon told ya)
So I've been working on a project for the past two months or so. I love rock and roll, baseball, and television, about all of which I've written thousands of words. I've always loved movies just as much, be they hilarious, horrifying, or just plain real- yet I haven't written a word about them. I didn't want to just churn out a "here's my ten favorite movies" post, because that's kind of a malleable list and I wouldn't learn anything from typing it. So in an effort to sound informed, I combed list after list of great films. I took movies from AFI's 100, Oscar history, cult classics, modern day masterpieces... whatever. If I hadn't seen it and felt like I should, I listed it and watched it. After a few weeks of this, I got bored because if a movie was a total waste of time (I'm looking at you, Paul Thomas Anderson) I didn't really feel like it earned the right for me to type a paragraph about it. If a movie was truly something special (Mystic River, Network) my thoughts could be distilled down to "OMG see this immediately." If it fell somewhere in between, I would end up convincing myself I loved or hated it by the time I was done writing about it. In the end, I was happy I'd put the time into watching those movies, but I wasn't the least bit happy with the writing results.
How do I change that? Simple, I have to care more. I have to have passionate feelings about anything I write about, and "Anyone who doesn't think this is an amazing movie can go suck eggs!" is not a passionate feeling to me. It's fanboyism, and if I want to be a fanboy I'll just start writing about bands I like. So I needed to figure out how to care- a common theme in my life- and this time I found the solution in my past.
I've dealt with mental illness for about half of my life, but at the time I saw Requiem for a Dream back in early 2002, I was unmedicated, unchecked, and as unstable as I ever was. My taste for substances was not yet mature, but through sleep deprivation, the occasional smoked bowl, and various other habits it was not uncommon for me to experience both ends of bipolar in a single day, or even an hour. It was a Sunday afternoon, at the top of one of these downswings, that a friend suggested we watch Requiem for a Dream. Even though I plunged into a severe depression after viewing and I complained incessantly about the people who 'made' me sit through the movie, it was a learning experience for me. The lessons took years- way longer than I'd like to admit- but eventually I realized that A) fiction can't hurt you, and B) movies don't have to make you feel good to be good. It is these lessons that I'm putting to work here, because in a silly, nostalgic, bored, and emotionally reckless way, it makes me sad that no movie since has impacted me the way Requiem for a Dream did. I've been actively avoiding aggressive negativity, protecting my own contentment with tenacity that surprises even me. I've decided, in order to be a more psychologically rounded person, that it doesn't have to be that way. So I did some research on lists titled various things like "Movies you'll never want to watch more than once", or "The most disturbing films of all time", and the early results have been very promising as far as the stated objective goes. Based on how I've recommitted myself to the idea, it would appear I'm more excited to watch French Horror than anything starring Humphrey Bogart or Liz Taylor. Sue me. So, I'm five movies deep into the "messed up movies" list, and here's what I've uncovered so far. Let me make it clear before I continue that these movies are NOT for everyone. In most cases, you can make the argument that they never should have been made to begin with in order to protect the greater good, and I don't disagree with that. So don't watch 'em; you'll regret it if you do.
Requiem for a Dream (2000): This is sort of cheating, because I haven't seen this movie in about 11 years. On the other hand, I never would have started this project without it. So here's the synopsis: Ellen Burstyn is a lonely widow, obsessed with TV infomercials and her own weight. She eventually resorts to starving herself and taking amphetamines to control said weight. Also, the infomercial host is none other than the guy who played the bad guy in both Happy Gilmore and Norm MacDonald's tour de force Dirty Work. Jared Leto plays Burstyn's son. He, his girlfriend Jennifer Connelly, and his friend Marlon Wayans are all hardcore drug users. Their lives revolve around speed and blow, but mostly smack. There's your setup, and for the next hour and a half, everything gets much, much worse. No spoilers here, but the final sequence of the film brought so much disgust, fear, and outrage to a 20-year-old Everlasting Dave that it was a couple of days before he was willing to speak again. Particularly, there is something that The Everlasting Dave enjoyed greatly at the time, and still enjoys greatly to this day, that was very nearly ruined by the end of Requiem. Now, I can't give it too good a grade because I consider it completely unwatchable. But in the words of Hawk Harrelson, it was "right size, wrong shape." It's one of the most powerful movies I'm aware of in terms of direction, acting, and editing, and just because it took me somewhere I didn't want to go doesn't mean it didn't get there. I gotta give it a B. If I was less of a pussy it'd be an A.
Funny Games (2007): I chose the remake over the 1997 original because, well, that's what was available. Naomi Watts and Tim Roth play a couple who take their young son up to a lake house for the weekend. Two preppy-looking young men (Michael Pitt is the leader, Brady Corbet the lackey) show up claiming to be working at a neighbor's house, and asking to borrow eggs. They 'accidentally' drop the eggs, they 'accidentally' drop Naomi Watts's phone in the sink, disabling it, and they 'accidentally' drop the eggs a second time. Then, as Watts and Roth begin to show frustration, the young men demonstrate what has got to be the single biggest overreaction to impoliteness of all time. I was struck by the film's nihilistic slow burn, the general air of unpredictability that comes from good actors playing well-written psychotic roles, and the gen-x parody of human behavior shown by the antagonists. At various points, Pitt turns to the camera and asks the viewer directly what (s)he'd like to see. It's a middle finger to sadists and psychopaths everywhere, to throw up a mirror and say "This is what you are. Do you like it?" But for a legitimate movie, loaded with acting talent, to play with conventions as abruptly and decisively as Funny Games does is kind of exhilarating in a cheap thrill kind of way. I'm giving it an A- for originality and the deliberate, chilling pace at which all avenues of escape are closed for the victims.
Inside,’ or ‘A l’interieur (2007): Most of the movies that constitute this project come with a warning, something to the effect of "This movie will scar you." I ignore those en masse, because I like to think of myself as so jaded nothing gets me off except freebasing ground-up moon rocks. Inside sure did its best to scar me, though. It's the story of Sarah (Alysson Paradis), a pregnant woman whose significant other dies in a car wreck in the first scene of the film. Four months later, both mother and fetus are healthy, and she is set for induced labor on Christmas Day. The film takes place on Christmas Eve, when a mysterious- and unnecessarily gorgeous- woman (Beatrice Dalle) arrives on her doorstep asking to use the phone. Depressed and paranoid, Sarah had told everyone from her family, work, and private life to stay away, and refuses the woman's request as well. At this point the other woman reveals she knows quite a bit about Sarah, and is really there to steal her baby. That's when the breaking-and-entering scenes begin, which are well executed in their play with calm and tension. When the mysterious woman finally makes it inside, one saddening and shocking piece of violence after another is the result, with the movie twisting and turning in all kinds of surprising ways, leading to a final shot that out-haunts Requiem for a Dream and probably every movie ever made. If you see it and find a way to get it out of your head, please let me know. I'm unlikely to ever watch this one again- the shock value would have worn off and the blood would get tedious- but I'm not sad I watched it once. It gets a B- from me. It's no higher because you'd have to be more messed up than me to 'like' it in any sense of the word I'm familiar with. I can't put it any lower because it does everything you want in horror- it makes you forget you're watching a movie, makes you care about the victim, and truly, viscerally, horrifies the viewer.
Dear Zachary: A Letter to a Son About His Father (2008): Every movie I plan on watching for this is original and lacks comparables, but someday there will be another Requiem or Inside. Hopefully, there will never be another Dear Zachary, as it's the only nonfiction documentary currently on my list. Knowing these things really happened makes it just a little harder to escape the brainspace of the film. In making this film for MSNBC- Yes, they televised it- Filmmaker Kurt Kuenne tells the story of his lifelong friend Andrew Bagby, who is found dead in a park in his hospital scrubs, shot seven times. The obvious suspect is the correct one: Dr. Shirley Turner, one of Andrew's coworkers, an ex-girlfriend thirteen years Andrew's senior. After the arrest, Shirley reveals that she's carrying Andrew's child and the film from that point follows two disconnected, but related, threads: Kuenne tours the entire United States and Newfoundland, Canada, talking to anyone he can find who knew Andrew or Shirley. Meanwhile, he covers the struggles of Andrew's parents as they fight the Canadian legal system to keep Shirley in prison and gain custody of baby Zachary- a story that takes place during the filming and contributes 100% of the gut-wrenching drama. Kuenne edits his documentary much like Michael Moore would, relentlessly bombarding the viewer with interviews, photographs, and the rapid-fire progress of the legal story while allowing his emotions to overcome his narration multiple times. It's a depressing and frightening story, but right up to the third-act twist and beyond, Kuenne's storytelling shines a spotlight on what I can only call the humanity of the story. I'm giving Dear Zachary a solid B, mostly on the strength of Kuenne's aesthetic rather than the story he tells.
Irreversible (Le Temps detruit tout (Time Destroys Everything)) (2002)- (*THIS MOVIE CANNOT BE DISCUSSED WITHOUT SPOILERS. YOU ARE WARNED*.) Of all the plots in all the world, the one that least lends itself to reverse storytelling is the rape revenge story. This doesn't stop writer/director Gaspar Noe, who starts with our hero Marcus (Vincent Cassel) being carted out of a gay club and driven away in an ambulance. He's brutalized and barely alive, with the EMT's and police all calling him a "fag". As each scene draws out more of the story, we find that Marcus's girlfriend Alex (the breathtaking Monica Bellucci) has been beaten and raped and Marcus's investigation led him to the gay club, looking for a man known as "The Tapeworm". The rape itself is what makes this film a shock piece. It's nine straight minutes of The Tapeworm holding Alex down on the ground in a subway tunnel while he struggles to stay on top of her. The camera does not look away, even though it's almost impossible to watch the entire sequence. The told-in-reverse background to the incident adds almost nothing to the story: Marcus's friend Pierre is Alex's ex, but he bears no ill will. Marcus is a childish hedonist, but Alex likes him anyway. And of course, Alex is pregnant with Marcus's child, and they want to keep the baby. Seeing these meaningless setup scenes at the end rather than the beginning made this movie, especially the second half, feel like a total waste of time. I'm giving it a D, for "Don't bother".
How do I change that? Simple, I have to care more. I have to have passionate feelings about anything I write about, and "Anyone who doesn't think this is an amazing movie can go suck eggs!" is not a passionate feeling to me. It's fanboyism, and if I want to be a fanboy I'll just start writing about bands I like. So I needed to figure out how to care- a common theme in my life- and this time I found the solution in my past.
I've dealt with mental illness for about half of my life, but at the time I saw Requiem for a Dream back in early 2002, I was unmedicated, unchecked, and as unstable as I ever was. My taste for substances was not yet mature, but through sleep deprivation, the occasional smoked bowl, and various other habits it was not uncommon for me to experience both ends of bipolar in a single day, or even an hour. It was a Sunday afternoon, at the top of one of these downswings, that a friend suggested we watch Requiem for a Dream. Even though I plunged into a severe depression after viewing and I complained incessantly about the people who 'made' me sit through the movie, it was a learning experience for me. The lessons took years- way longer than I'd like to admit- but eventually I realized that A) fiction can't hurt you, and B) movies don't have to make you feel good to be good. It is these lessons that I'm putting to work here, because in a silly, nostalgic, bored, and emotionally reckless way, it makes me sad that no movie since has impacted me the way Requiem for a Dream did. I've been actively avoiding aggressive negativity, protecting my own contentment with tenacity that surprises even me. I've decided, in order to be a more psychologically rounded person, that it doesn't have to be that way. So I did some research on lists titled various things like "Movies you'll never want to watch more than once", or "The most disturbing films of all time", and the early results have been very promising as far as the stated objective goes. Based on how I've recommitted myself to the idea, it would appear I'm more excited to watch French Horror than anything starring Humphrey Bogart or Liz Taylor. Sue me. So, I'm five movies deep into the "messed up movies" list, and here's what I've uncovered so far. Let me make it clear before I continue that these movies are NOT for everyone. In most cases, you can make the argument that they never should have been made to begin with in order to protect the greater good, and I don't disagree with that. So don't watch 'em; you'll regret it if you do.
Requiem for a Dream (2000): This is sort of cheating, because I haven't seen this movie in about 11 years. On the other hand, I never would have started this project without it. So here's the synopsis: Ellen Burstyn is a lonely widow, obsessed with TV infomercials and her own weight. She eventually resorts to starving herself and taking amphetamines to control said weight. Also, the infomercial host is none other than the guy who played the bad guy in both Happy Gilmore and Norm MacDonald's tour de force Dirty Work. Jared Leto plays Burstyn's son. He, his girlfriend Jennifer Connelly, and his friend Marlon Wayans are all hardcore drug users. Their lives revolve around speed and blow, but mostly smack. There's your setup, and for the next hour and a half, everything gets much, much worse. No spoilers here, but the final sequence of the film brought so much disgust, fear, and outrage to a 20-year-old Everlasting Dave that it was a couple of days before he was willing to speak again. Particularly, there is something that The Everlasting Dave enjoyed greatly at the time, and still enjoys greatly to this day, that was very nearly ruined by the end of Requiem. Now, I can't give it too good a grade because I consider it completely unwatchable. But in the words of Hawk Harrelson, it was "right size, wrong shape." It's one of the most powerful movies I'm aware of in terms of direction, acting, and editing, and just because it took me somewhere I didn't want to go doesn't mean it didn't get there. I gotta give it a B. If I was less of a pussy it'd be an A.
Funny Games (2007): I chose the remake over the 1997 original because, well, that's what was available. Naomi Watts and Tim Roth play a couple who take their young son up to a lake house for the weekend. Two preppy-looking young men (Michael Pitt is the leader, Brady Corbet the lackey) show up claiming to be working at a neighbor's house, and asking to borrow eggs. They 'accidentally' drop the eggs, they 'accidentally' drop Naomi Watts's phone in the sink, disabling it, and they 'accidentally' drop the eggs a second time. Then, as Watts and Roth begin to show frustration, the young men demonstrate what has got to be the single biggest overreaction to impoliteness of all time. I was struck by the film's nihilistic slow burn, the general air of unpredictability that comes from good actors playing well-written psychotic roles, and the gen-x parody of human behavior shown by the antagonists. At various points, Pitt turns to the camera and asks the viewer directly what (s)he'd like to see. It's a middle finger to sadists and psychopaths everywhere, to throw up a mirror and say "This is what you are. Do you like it?" But for a legitimate movie, loaded with acting talent, to play with conventions as abruptly and decisively as Funny Games does is kind of exhilarating in a cheap thrill kind of way. I'm giving it an A- for originality and the deliberate, chilling pace at which all avenues of escape are closed for the victims.
Inside,’ or ‘A l’interieur (2007): Most of the movies that constitute this project come with a warning, something to the effect of "This movie will scar you." I ignore those en masse, because I like to think of myself as so jaded nothing gets me off except freebasing ground-up moon rocks. Inside sure did its best to scar me, though. It's the story of Sarah (Alysson Paradis), a pregnant woman whose significant other dies in a car wreck in the first scene of the film. Four months later, both mother and fetus are healthy, and she is set for induced labor on Christmas Day. The film takes place on Christmas Eve, when a mysterious- and unnecessarily gorgeous- woman (Beatrice Dalle) arrives on her doorstep asking to use the phone. Depressed and paranoid, Sarah had told everyone from her family, work, and private life to stay away, and refuses the woman's request as well. At this point the other woman reveals she knows quite a bit about Sarah, and is really there to steal her baby. That's when the breaking-and-entering scenes begin, which are well executed in their play with calm and tension. When the mysterious woman finally makes it inside, one saddening and shocking piece of violence after another is the result, with the movie twisting and turning in all kinds of surprising ways, leading to a final shot that out-haunts Requiem for a Dream and probably every movie ever made. If you see it and find a way to get it out of your head, please let me know. I'm unlikely to ever watch this one again- the shock value would have worn off and the blood would get tedious- but I'm not sad I watched it once. It gets a B- from me. It's no higher because you'd have to be more messed up than me to 'like' it in any sense of the word I'm familiar with. I can't put it any lower because it does everything you want in horror- it makes you forget you're watching a movie, makes you care about the victim, and truly, viscerally, horrifies the viewer.
Dear Zachary: A Letter to a Son About His Father (2008): Every movie I plan on watching for this is original and lacks comparables, but someday there will be another Requiem or Inside. Hopefully, there will never be another Dear Zachary, as it's the only nonfiction documentary currently on my list. Knowing these things really happened makes it just a little harder to escape the brainspace of the film. In making this film for MSNBC- Yes, they televised it- Filmmaker Kurt Kuenne tells the story of his lifelong friend Andrew Bagby, who is found dead in a park in his hospital scrubs, shot seven times. The obvious suspect is the correct one: Dr. Shirley Turner, one of Andrew's coworkers, an ex-girlfriend thirteen years Andrew's senior. After the arrest, Shirley reveals that she's carrying Andrew's child and the film from that point follows two disconnected, but related, threads: Kuenne tours the entire United States and Newfoundland, Canada, talking to anyone he can find who knew Andrew or Shirley. Meanwhile, he covers the struggles of Andrew's parents as they fight the Canadian legal system to keep Shirley in prison and gain custody of baby Zachary- a story that takes place during the filming and contributes 100% of the gut-wrenching drama. Kuenne edits his documentary much like Michael Moore would, relentlessly bombarding the viewer with interviews, photographs, and the rapid-fire progress of the legal story while allowing his emotions to overcome his narration multiple times. It's a depressing and frightening story, but right up to the third-act twist and beyond, Kuenne's storytelling shines a spotlight on what I can only call the humanity of the story. I'm giving Dear Zachary a solid B, mostly on the strength of Kuenne's aesthetic rather than the story he tells.
Irreversible (Le Temps detruit tout (Time Destroys Everything)) (2002)- (*THIS MOVIE CANNOT BE DISCUSSED WITHOUT SPOILERS. YOU ARE WARNED*.) Of all the plots in all the world, the one that least lends itself to reverse storytelling is the rape revenge story. This doesn't stop writer/director Gaspar Noe, who starts with our hero Marcus (Vincent Cassel) being carted out of a gay club and driven away in an ambulance. He's brutalized and barely alive, with the EMT's and police all calling him a "fag". As each scene draws out more of the story, we find that Marcus's girlfriend Alex (the breathtaking Monica Bellucci) has been beaten and raped and Marcus's investigation led him to the gay club, looking for a man known as "The Tapeworm". The rape itself is what makes this film a shock piece. It's nine straight minutes of The Tapeworm holding Alex down on the ground in a subway tunnel while he struggles to stay on top of her. The camera does not look away, even though it's almost impossible to watch the entire sequence. The told-in-reverse background to the incident adds almost nothing to the story: Marcus's friend Pierre is Alex's ex, but he bears no ill will. Marcus is a childish hedonist, but Alex likes him anyway. And of course, Alex is pregnant with Marcus's child, and they want to keep the baby. Seeing these meaningless setup scenes at the end rather than the beginning made this movie, especially the second half, feel like a total waste of time. I'm giving it a D, for "Don't bother".
Terrible TV: American Idol 12 Final Performance Show
Well, I made it. It's the last week of Idol, and I found something to say about every week till now. That's not as easy, fun, or useful as it sounds. I've missed on my predictions for weeks on end, but the finale of Candice vs. Kree was possible, if not preordained, from the start. Amber had the best voice, Angie was the most marketable, but they made the mistake of being good looking enough to be threatening to the people who vote for this show. Shoulda thoughta that before wearing leather pants every week, Angie. Ah, who am I kidding, those pants were one of the best things about this season. On that note, here's my ten favorite things from American Idol Season 12 in no particular order:
-Angie's pants
-When Seacrest confused one of our contestants' moms with her stepmom because all women look alike to him
-Candice's family's accents
-Candice's "Love Song", the hands down best performance of the season
-Every time anyone else had to talk about how Lazaro's badness affected their group performance
-The judges completely ignoring the fact that Amber Holcomb is basically a 17-year-old Whitney Houston
-Our finalists' performances of "One" and "She Talks to Angels", two truly great songs that somehow snuck past the producers
-Burnell's "You Give Love a Bad Name", the only non-Lazaro VFTW performance of the year
-The day I decided to stop listening to Mariah Carey
-Devin Velez taking every opportunity to say something that made AI voters like him less
OK, so the finale will be three rounds in an hour: producer Simon Fuller's choice, the contestants' first single, and finally, the contestants' favorite performance of the season. Kree kicks it off with- gasp- a good song: "Angel" by Sarah Mclachlan. There's a little slide guitar to give it a country vibe, but it's not obtrusive. I kind of like it. Kree's voice is a great fit for the song. It feels a little short and a little unambitious, but i enjoyed hearing it. Kree does a lot of performances like that. They don't go to the judges, which makes me a happy Dave.
Candice gets another good song, "Chasing Pavements" by Adele. I'm psyched. She's spot on for the beginning, and then just starts doing runs. It's pretty good, but I give the slight edge to Kree. She felt more in the zone. Randy and Mariah get to comment on Round One, so nothing gets said except Randy didn't like the songs. Nobody will miss you when you leave, Randy. You've got the down-home humility of Kris Kardashian and the intellectual integrity of Paul Ryan.
Before we get to round two, we get to the crowdsourced Carly Rae Jepsen performance. Since it's about taking pictures, there's someone taking pictures of her on stage. It's too bad nobody who contributed to the performance said "Maybe we should get someone who isn't terrible." That was nowhere near the level of unintentional comedy I've come to expect from Idol Finale performances. By the time this show is over I will have completely forgotten about it. Boo!
Kree's first single, should she win, is called "All Cried Out". Is this a new song written for Kree? I have no idea. If you'd told me this was a Carrie Underwood song, or a Miranda Lambert song, I wouldn't know the difference. Nothing really wrong with it, but nothing stands out either, as I don't even know how many country ballads I've seen on this show. Mariah and Keith give her a standing O.
Candice's song is called "I Am Beautiful". About 20 seconds in, there's no denying the score. I've said it many times this season, but Candice's voice is for real, and this is up there with her best performances. She's just getting bigger songs, bigger moments, better arrangements. This performance is the eighth-inning two run double that should put the game out of reach. Nicki says Kree had good composure and her performance showcased her range, but she liked Candice's song better. Keith calls the competition "Soul vs. soul", not soul vs. country. Keith and Nicki are split on who won round 2.
Kree's favorite performance of the season was "Up to the Mountain", from the Vegas weeks. Crystal Bowersox kicked this song's ass Season 9 and still couldn't beat Lee Dewyze. Kree's gotten three midrange ballads, and even though her voice has probably never sounded better, it's a sandbagging of the first order. Nobody's going to care if she's technically perfect if Candice gets bigger notes. Kree does hit some wonderful high notes on this one, though. The judges stand up. I'm not sold sold on Kree in the sense that I'd pay to see her, but if she goes on to be very successful, I won't say she doesn't deserve it. Keith: "It's all connected, baby." Nicki: "All three performances showcased your beautiful voice and your beautiful soul." Randy: "That right there is a winning-type performance."
Candice gets to throw down last, with "I (Who Have Nothing)". A brilliant a capella first verse, going big right away on the chorus, this is a victory lap. Better than Jordin Sparks' winning performance from Season 6, and really, it was a LOT better. Standing O from all four judges. Keith: "It's like a planet exploding to life." Nicki: "Did your legs just make a debut on American Idol? I loved that performance." Randy: "That's, like, a winning performance!" Mariah, fittingly, gets the last judge's word. More like the last thousand words, but still.
Anyway, regardless of who was better, there's always the chance America gets it wrong. Allen over Lambert. Dewyze over Bowersox. Season 10, where the best person was voted off something like 5 weeks in a row. Phillips over Sanchez. All mistakes. Harrison over Glover wouldn't even crack the five biggest Idol voting screwups ever. I'll be back tomorrow if the Finale gives me anything worth writing about. If not, Terrible TV will be on hiatus until I figure out the next show to cover. Probably X Factor. Maybe Master Chef. We'll see.
-Angie's pants
-When Seacrest confused one of our contestants' moms with her stepmom because all women look alike to him
-Candice's family's accents
-Candice's "Love Song", the hands down best performance of the season
-Every time anyone else had to talk about how Lazaro's badness affected their group performance
-The judges completely ignoring the fact that Amber Holcomb is basically a 17-year-old Whitney Houston
-Our finalists' performances of "One" and "She Talks to Angels", two truly great songs that somehow snuck past the producers
-Burnell's "You Give Love a Bad Name", the only non-Lazaro VFTW performance of the year
-The day I decided to stop listening to Mariah Carey
-Devin Velez taking every opportunity to say something that made AI voters like him less
OK, so the finale will be three rounds in an hour: producer Simon Fuller's choice, the contestants' first single, and finally, the contestants' favorite performance of the season. Kree kicks it off with- gasp- a good song: "Angel" by Sarah Mclachlan. There's a little slide guitar to give it a country vibe, but it's not obtrusive. I kind of like it. Kree's voice is a great fit for the song. It feels a little short and a little unambitious, but i enjoyed hearing it. Kree does a lot of performances like that. They don't go to the judges, which makes me a happy Dave.
Candice gets another good song, "Chasing Pavements" by Adele. I'm psyched. She's spot on for the beginning, and then just starts doing runs. It's pretty good, but I give the slight edge to Kree. She felt more in the zone. Randy and Mariah get to comment on Round One, so nothing gets said except Randy didn't like the songs. Nobody will miss you when you leave, Randy. You've got the down-home humility of Kris Kardashian and the intellectual integrity of Paul Ryan.
Before we get to round two, we get to the crowdsourced Carly Rae Jepsen performance. Since it's about taking pictures, there's someone taking pictures of her on stage. It's too bad nobody who contributed to the performance said "Maybe we should get someone who isn't terrible." That was nowhere near the level of unintentional comedy I've come to expect from Idol Finale performances. By the time this show is over I will have completely forgotten about it. Boo!
Kree's first single, should she win, is called "All Cried Out". Is this a new song written for Kree? I have no idea. If you'd told me this was a Carrie Underwood song, or a Miranda Lambert song, I wouldn't know the difference. Nothing really wrong with it, but nothing stands out either, as I don't even know how many country ballads I've seen on this show. Mariah and Keith give her a standing O.
Candice's song is called "I Am Beautiful". About 20 seconds in, there's no denying the score. I've said it many times this season, but Candice's voice is for real, and this is up there with her best performances. She's just getting bigger songs, bigger moments, better arrangements. This performance is the eighth-inning two run double that should put the game out of reach. Nicki says Kree had good composure and her performance showcased her range, but she liked Candice's song better. Keith calls the competition "Soul vs. soul", not soul vs. country. Keith and Nicki are split on who won round 2.
Kree's favorite performance of the season was "Up to the Mountain", from the Vegas weeks. Crystal Bowersox kicked this song's ass Season 9 and still couldn't beat Lee Dewyze. Kree's gotten three midrange ballads, and even though her voice has probably never sounded better, it's a sandbagging of the first order. Nobody's going to care if she's technically perfect if Candice gets bigger notes. Kree does hit some wonderful high notes on this one, though. The judges stand up. I'm not sold sold on Kree in the sense that I'd pay to see her, but if she goes on to be very successful, I won't say she doesn't deserve it. Keith: "It's all connected, baby." Nicki: "All three performances showcased your beautiful voice and your beautiful soul." Randy: "That right there is a winning-type performance."
Candice gets to throw down last, with "I (Who Have Nothing)". A brilliant a capella first verse, going big right away on the chorus, this is a victory lap. Better than Jordin Sparks' winning performance from Season 6, and really, it was a LOT better. Standing O from all four judges. Keith: "It's like a planet exploding to life." Nicki: "Did your legs just make a debut on American Idol? I loved that performance." Randy: "That's, like, a winning performance!" Mariah, fittingly, gets the last judge's word. More like the last thousand words, but still.
Anyway, regardless of who was better, there's always the chance America gets it wrong. Allen over Lambert. Dewyze over Bowersox. Season 10, where the best person was voted off something like 5 weeks in a row. Phillips over Sanchez. All mistakes. Harrison over Glover wouldn't even crack the five biggest Idol voting screwups ever. I'll be back tomorrow if the Finale gives me anything worth writing about. If not, Terrible TV will be on hiatus until I figure out the next show to cover. Probably X Factor. Maybe Master Chef. We'll see.
Wednesday, May 8, 2013
Terrible TV: American Idol 12 Top 3
Well, we lost Amber last week and Kree gets another shot. Here's hoping for another show without duets, and for at least one performance that entertains me. First we see clips from their hometown visits- what do you know, there's cheering crowds and they're amazed by the outpouring of support. Just once I'd like to see a finalist from a town that doesn't watch this show. Like, at all. There are three solo rounds tonight: Round one will be Jimmy's choice, round two the judges, and round three the producers.
Kree kicks it off with Jimmy's pick for her, Pink's "Perfect". Her twang brings something to this song, but it's still a pretty typical Idol performance. Not the showstopper she needs. Keith says that she sang it like a country song, but doesn't say whether that's good or bad. Nicki said it was easygoing and more relaxed than last week, and says she should wear flat cowboy boots that she can move in. Randy didn't like the song and said it came off a little flat. I don't disagree. Seacrest asks her what her comfort level is with pop music- seems kind of a dumb question, I mean, haven't we figured that out over the last 4 months?
Candice is doing U2's "One", probably the best song performed on the show this season. She's picking it up with the second verse and gets right to the heart of the song, which sounds weird to me. She's hitting big notes, but it seemed really short, like to fit every good part of the song in, no part could last as long as it was supposed to. I liked it better than Kree's but neither one was of championship caliber. Nicki gave Jimmy props for the song choice and said Candice did it justice. Randy said the emotion was on point. Seacrest lets us know that she'd never heard any version of the song until a week ago.
Angie gets Elton John's "Sorry Seems to Be the Hardest Word". She's not at the piano, and when she's just singing, it's always hella theatrical. This managed to be both boring AND dramatic. Randy asked about the piano, and went on for a while, but eventually gets around to saying he really liked it anyway. Keith said she could have showed more restraint and done something subtle but amazing. Nicki said it was a stellar vocal that didn't hit her emotionally like she wanted it to. Jimmy, in wrapping up round one, gives the edge to Angie. I'd go along with that, but none of them really showed me anything special.
They shuffle the order for round two, and Candice goes first. They show a long piece from her home visit to St. Helena Island, including former workplace, home, and church. The people she lives around have some pretty great Jamaican-meets-Creole accents, so that's something. The judges picked a song called "Next to Me" for her second song. I don't know the song, and the performance doesn't really make me want to change that. This feels like a sandbagging, but she got "One" last time, so I dunno. Keith praised her for going off melody. Nicki almost starts crying, and just says congratulations. Randy gives mad props to the judges for picking the song.
Angie went home to Beverly, Massachusetts. Her on-camera energy and positivity are off the charts, and I just can't pay attention to this. Especially when they're playing that Jessie J song in the background. I didn't hear what the judges picked for her, but she's not at the piano this time either. This is just as vapid as "Who You Are", and maybe even worse. Just because it burns doesn't mean you're gonna die? Try, try, try? Either Angie is so far ahead it doesn't matter what she does, or they don't really want her in the finals. She really does do better the dumber the song is, though. I can't deny that. Keith: "You've never looked so comfortable without the piano". Nicki repeats that and adds that Miley Cyrus and Angie are related in her mind. My mind too, but for different reasons. Horrifying, disgusting reasons. Randy again praises himself for the song choice.
Kree's from Woodville, TX. Mostly her home visit is about how her parents are dead and everything is tinged with tragedy. Good times, Kree. Then she goes to a rodeo. Oh, rural folk. She's doing "Here Comes Goodbye" by Rascal Flatts. Again, kind of boring. Not a raising of the game. Nicki says she's strong for being so young and not having parents. Randy praises himself yet again. Keith loved it. Jimmy says again how hard it is to sing when you're choked up, and said Kree got the edge in round two- slightly over Angie, and Candice's song was a bad choice.
Angie's producer pick is "Maybe", by the same person who did her last performance, and she's back at the piano. Another waily, overly emotional vocal from Angie. I barely even noticed if she played the piano. Randy said she became a complete performer tonight. Keith: "Next week, sing a song under the piano!"
Kree's got The Band Perry's "Better Dig Two", or something like that. This is far better than her first two tries- more of a connection, more confidence, a little more intensity, and finally a song that suits her voice. On a weak night, I'm inclined to call this the best of the night. Keith didn't think it was a good song choice. Nicki agreed, but said whenever Kree leaves the show, she's buying her album. Randy: "Definitely on your way, but that was way too ordinary, but you know, props to Kree." Thanks, Randy! I think Kree's had too many just-ok performances in a row. I'd be surprised if she makes the finale after all this.
Candice has been given a song from West Side Story to close the show. Come on, guys. People have to watch this crap, you know? I guess this is the big moment, the standing O song, the OMG you're so amazing song. I don't even know if it was the best of her three performances, but whatever. Keith: "How do you do that?! If you want to vote for Candice, dial the number on your screen. If you don't, call your doctor." Nicki: "Four words: See ya next week." Randy: "Another one of the best performances in Idol history." Yeah, alright.
So, I think Kree got bussed this week. Of course, I thought the same thing last week and I was wrong. I'm gonna stick with her as my go-home pick anyway.
Kree kicks it off with Jimmy's pick for her, Pink's "Perfect". Her twang brings something to this song, but it's still a pretty typical Idol performance. Not the showstopper she needs. Keith says that she sang it like a country song, but doesn't say whether that's good or bad. Nicki said it was easygoing and more relaxed than last week, and says she should wear flat cowboy boots that she can move in. Randy didn't like the song and said it came off a little flat. I don't disagree. Seacrest asks her what her comfort level is with pop music- seems kind of a dumb question, I mean, haven't we figured that out over the last 4 months?
Candice is doing U2's "One", probably the best song performed on the show this season. She's picking it up with the second verse and gets right to the heart of the song, which sounds weird to me. She's hitting big notes, but it seemed really short, like to fit every good part of the song in, no part could last as long as it was supposed to. I liked it better than Kree's but neither one was of championship caliber. Nicki gave Jimmy props for the song choice and said Candice did it justice. Randy said the emotion was on point. Seacrest lets us know that she'd never heard any version of the song until a week ago.
Angie gets Elton John's "Sorry Seems to Be the Hardest Word". She's not at the piano, and when she's just singing, it's always hella theatrical. This managed to be both boring AND dramatic. Randy asked about the piano, and went on for a while, but eventually gets around to saying he really liked it anyway. Keith said she could have showed more restraint and done something subtle but amazing. Nicki said it was a stellar vocal that didn't hit her emotionally like she wanted it to. Jimmy, in wrapping up round one, gives the edge to Angie. I'd go along with that, but none of them really showed me anything special.
They shuffle the order for round two, and Candice goes first. They show a long piece from her home visit to St. Helena Island, including former workplace, home, and church. The people she lives around have some pretty great Jamaican-meets-Creole accents, so that's something. The judges picked a song called "Next to Me" for her second song. I don't know the song, and the performance doesn't really make me want to change that. This feels like a sandbagging, but she got "One" last time, so I dunno. Keith praised her for going off melody. Nicki almost starts crying, and just says congratulations. Randy gives mad props to the judges for picking the song.
Angie went home to Beverly, Massachusetts. Her on-camera energy and positivity are off the charts, and I just can't pay attention to this. Especially when they're playing that Jessie J song in the background. I didn't hear what the judges picked for her, but she's not at the piano this time either. This is just as vapid as "Who You Are", and maybe even worse. Just because it burns doesn't mean you're gonna die? Try, try, try? Either Angie is so far ahead it doesn't matter what she does, or they don't really want her in the finals. She really does do better the dumber the song is, though. I can't deny that. Keith: "You've never looked so comfortable without the piano". Nicki repeats that and adds that Miley Cyrus and Angie are related in her mind. My mind too, but for different reasons. Horrifying, disgusting reasons. Randy again praises himself for the song choice.
Kree's from Woodville, TX. Mostly her home visit is about how her parents are dead and everything is tinged with tragedy. Good times, Kree. Then she goes to a rodeo. Oh, rural folk. She's doing "Here Comes Goodbye" by Rascal Flatts. Again, kind of boring. Not a raising of the game. Nicki says she's strong for being so young and not having parents. Randy praises himself yet again. Keith loved it. Jimmy says again how hard it is to sing when you're choked up, and said Kree got the edge in round two- slightly over Angie, and Candice's song was a bad choice.
Angie's producer pick is "Maybe", by the same person who did her last performance, and she's back at the piano. Another waily, overly emotional vocal from Angie. I barely even noticed if she played the piano. Randy said she became a complete performer tonight. Keith: "Next week, sing a song under the piano!"
Kree's got The Band Perry's "Better Dig Two", or something like that. This is far better than her first two tries- more of a connection, more confidence, a little more intensity, and finally a song that suits her voice. On a weak night, I'm inclined to call this the best of the night. Keith didn't think it was a good song choice. Nicki agreed, but said whenever Kree leaves the show, she's buying her album. Randy: "Definitely on your way, but that was way too ordinary, but you know, props to Kree." Thanks, Randy! I think Kree's had too many just-ok performances in a row. I'd be surprised if she makes the finale after all this.
Candice has been given a song from West Side Story to close the show. Come on, guys. People have to watch this crap, you know? I guess this is the big moment, the standing O song, the OMG you're so amazing song. I don't even know if it was the best of her three performances, but whatever. Keith: "How do you do that?! If you want to vote for Candice, dial the number on your screen. If you don't, call your doctor." Nicki: "Four words: See ya next week." Randy: "Another one of the best performances in Idol history." Yeah, alright.
So, I think Kree got bussed this week. Of course, I thought the same thing last week and I was wrong. I'm gonna stick with her as my go-home pick anyway.
Wednesday, May 1, 2013
Terrible TV: American Idol 12 Top 4 Redux
So nobody went home last Thursday, but we know going into tonight that Candice and Amber were the bottom two and those votes carry over into this week. I'm curious how this is going to affect voting. Angie could probably have a Lazaro-caliber night and still be safe, but Kree won't get the "OMG we need to keep our favorite safe" bump that both Candice and Amber should get with even an adequate night. So I'll be watching to laugh at Angie and hope for something awesome from Candice and Kree. I'm really sick of this duets crap, though. Please let it be three solo performances each. And please, let Mariah be sober and properly medicated. I know I'm asking too much. First theme is songs from 2013, and the second theme is "standards". And Harry Connick, Jr is the mentor. OK, more of the same. This might be a short recap. I want to leave this record to prove I really did watch this entire season, but I am not optimistic about caring tonight.
Angie leads off with Rihanna's "Diamonds" and there's an extended nails-on-a-chalkboard sequence with Harry. Who do I blame for making people think this awkward nonsense is funny? The creator of New Girl? Maybe Kristen Wiig? Yeah, I think I'm picking Wiig. Another week, another reason to hate Angie. The vocal's a little strained but not bad enough to put her in danger, either. She sounds right on really stupid songs. Keith says something that gets booed, Nicki calls it bland and lackluster, Randy says yo, then name dropped the songwriter AND Rihanna. At least I think that's what that was. He's not great about completing his sentences.
Amber's up next and says she's looking forward to redeeming herself for last week. She's doing a Pink song, "Give Me a Reason" or something. She doesn't know the words, and Harry 'could care less' about that. It's kind of hard to watch, in a she-could-crash-any-second kind of way. Nicki says performance-Amber and offstage-Amber are two different people and she doesn't like performance-Amber. Randy kind of gets her to admit that she didn't have fun on the performance, and said she was nervous. Mariah says something profoundly stupid: learning a brand new song from scratch (As Amber did this week) is somehow harder than learning an already-existing song you've never heard (As she's done many, many times).
Candice is doing "When I Was Your Man" by Bruno Mars, and makes it clear she knows she's not a man. She's doing it without changing the lyrics to make literal sense, so this might be interesting. I don't hate this, but the judges are probably going to call her out for going big again. Third performance, and better than the first two. Randy "Yo"'d the hell out of his minute. Keith: "When you sing like that, you could sing 'When I was your giraffe' and it would still be great." Nicki insists they give her a standing O upon further review.
Kree gets asked about the rough judges' comments from last week, which don't mean a thing given her first or second-place standing as of now. She's doing "See You Again", a song Carrie Underwood just did on a results show. Harry is crazy about Kree, says he likes her version more than Carrie's, and then they speak a little Creole. That was weirdly hot. I'm not crazy about the performance; she's straining at times and undersinging at others. She did connect a little better than last week, though. Mariah praises her authenticity in a way that's coherent, well put, and something I agree with. Wow. Keith didn't like the arrangement or the stage setup. Nicki loved it, and said she "sang with her eyes". Randy said Carrie's career path could be a blueprint for Kree's, which works out great with his previous speculation that Kree could be a 'real' country singer. It makes sense if your memory is only 12 seconds long.
Keith's t shirt says "I am the stig.", and he is asked what the stig is. His response, 'nobody cares', is something I wanted to challenge, so I looked it up. Turns out he's right, I read what the stig is and I still couldn't tell you. So for the "standards" theme, Angie is singing "Someone to Watch Over Me" for her mom. It's sleepy and Broadway and all kinds of not awesome. The theme takes some of the blame, yes, but she should know better than to do it like that at this point. Keith asks why she picked the song, even though that's been explained. He asks "Does 'then' have to be so 'then'?" Nicki calls her a Disney princess and Broadway but better than the first performance. No, no, no. That's the opposite of "better". I think the idea is to aim higher than singing at Disney World, yeah? Randy calls the arrangement 'confusing' and calls himself a musician. Mariah and Nicki talk simultaneously for a couple days.
Amber is reprising "My Funny Valentine", a song she already did in the pre- live show part of the season. Harry makes it clear she has no idea what the song is about, but apparently they remedy that. This sounds more like Amber than Amber doing a Whitney impression, so it's pretty good for her. The problem with old-fashionedness wasn't as bad for Amber as it was for Angie. Nicki loved it, Amber starts crying, and Nicki tells her not to worry about votes. I don't know if that was the time to worry; it's not like she could have done any better. Randy and Keith both give mixed praise. Seacrest then implies that if she and her dad cry on camera more, she might get more votes.
Harry says the contestants are adding runs and unnecessary notes to their performances. Yeah dude, have you ever seen this show? Candice is singing "You've Changed". Harry says some of the 14-year olds might not get it, but he's willing to take that risk. She goes over the top again, doing the opposite of everything Harry just said, and it's strong. Her voice is pretty crazy. This pushes her past Amber in my view, but Kree has yet to go. If she bombs, maybe this is all irrelevant. Standing O for Candice. Randy: In it to win it. Keith: Really great. Nicki passes on commenting.
Kree's picking "Stormy Weather", and Harry's saying once again that she's taking away from the melody and singing way too many notes. Nobody's listened to him yet and the judges are crazy about everybody. I kind of get what Harry's saying, she does it for no reason at times. And she loses the melody completely halfway through. Her timing is off a little too. The whole second half is a total mess for me. Other than that it's great. Everyone gives rambling semi-critique but it's clear they wanted it to be awesome but it wasn't. Harry calls Randy out on one of his many contradictions: "We want you to be Kree, but do the Etta James version." You could pick out so many nonsense comments, but at least one's getting exposed to the harsh light of reason.
Then there's some hideous disaster of a group number with tons of dancers and a dominant pre-recorded vocal track. This is enough to make me hate everyone involved. This is one of those things that happen where you can't imagine how nobody stepped in and stopped it before it was too late. I got my wish of no duets, but at what cost? AT WHAT COST?? Now I want all four of them to go home tomorrow. Cancel the homecoming trips, cancel the stupid Carly Rae Jepsen song, and make it so I don't pay attention to Mariah Carey anymore. Failing that, I'd like Angie to go home but I think it's gonna be Kree. She's better than she's been the past few weeks, but who votes and can remember that far back? Candice was the clear best tonight, Amber's the likely sympathy vote, and Angie's probably not going anywhere.
Angie leads off with Rihanna's "Diamonds" and there's an extended nails-on-a-chalkboard sequence with Harry. Who do I blame for making people think this awkward nonsense is funny? The creator of New Girl? Maybe Kristen Wiig? Yeah, I think I'm picking Wiig. Another week, another reason to hate Angie. The vocal's a little strained but not bad enough to put her in danger, either. She sounds right on really stupid songs. Keith says something that gets booed, Nicki calls it bland and lackluster, Randy says yo, then name dropped the songwriter AND Rihanna. At least I think that's what that was. He's not great about completing his sentences.
Amber's up next and says she's looking forward to redeeming herself for last week. She's doing a Pink song, "Give Me a Reason" or something. She doesn't know the words, and Harry 'could care less' about that. It's kind of hard to watch, in a she-could-crash-any-second kind of way. Nicki says performance-Amber and offstage-Amber are two different people and she doesn't like performance-Amber. Randy kind of gets her to admit that she didn't have fun on the performance, and said she was nervous. Mariah says something profoundly stupid: learning a brand new song from scratch (As Amber did this week) is somehow harder than learning an already-existing song you've never heard (As she's done many, many times).
Candice is doing "When I Was Your Man" by Bruno Mars, and makes it clear she knows she's not a man. She's doing it without changing the lyrics to make literal sense, so this might be interesting. I don't hate this, but the judges are probably going to call her out for going big again. Third performance, and better than the first two. Randy "Yo"'d the hell out of his minute. Keith: "When you sing like that, you could sing 'When I was your giraffe' and it would still be great." Nicki insists they give her a standing O upon further review.
Kree gets asked about the rough judges' comments from last week, which don't mean a thing given her first or second-place standing as of now. She's doing "See You Again", a song Carrie Underwood just did on a results show. Harry is crazy about Kree, says he likes her version more than Carrie's, and then they speak a little Creole. That was weirdly hot. I'm not crazy about the performance; she's straining at times and undersinging at others. She did connect a little better than last week, though. Mariah praises her authenticity in a way that's coherent, well put, and something I agree with. Wow. Keith didn't like the arrangement or the stage setup. Nicki loved it, and said she "sang with her eyes". Randy said Carrie's career path could be a blueprint for Kree's, which works out great with his previous speculation that Kree could be a 'real' country singer. It makes sense if your memory is only 12 seconds long.
Keith's t shirt says "I am the stig.", and he is asked what the stig is. His response, 'nobody cares', is something I wanted to challenge, so I looked it up. Turns out he's right, I read what the stig is and I still couldn't tell you. So for the "standards" theme, Angie is singing "Someone to Watch Over Me" for her mom. It's sleepy and Broadway and all kinds of not awesome. The theme takes some of the blame, yes, but she should know better than to do it like that at this point. Keith asks why she picked the song, even though that's been explained. He asks "Does 'then' have to be so 'then'?" Nicki calls her a Disney princess and Broadway but better than the first performance. No, no, no. That's the opposite of "better". I think the idea is to aim higher than singing at Disney World, yeah? Randy calls the arrangement 'confusing' and calls himself a musician. Mariah and Nicki talk simultaneously for a couple days.
Amber is reprising "My Funny Valentine", a song she already did in the pre- live show part of the season. Harry makes it clear she has no idea what the song is about, but apparently they remedy that. This sounds more like Amber than Amber doing a Whitney impression, so it's pretty good for her. The problem with old-fashionedness wasn't as bad for Amber as it was for Angie. Nicki loved it, Amber starts crying, and Nicki tells her not to worry about votes. I don't know if that was the time to worry; it's not like she could have done any better. Randy and Keith both give mixed praise. Seacrest then implies that if she and her dad cry on camera more, she might get more votes.
Harry says the contestants are adding runs and unnecessary notes to their performances. Yeah dude, have you ever seen this show? Candice is singing "You've Changed". Harry says some of the 14-year olds might not get it, but he's willing to take that risk. She goes over the top again, doing the opposite of everything Harry just said, and it's strong. Her voice is pretty crazy. This pushes her past Amber in my view, but Kree has yet to go. If she bombs, maybe this is all irrelevant. Standing O for Candice. Randy: In it to win it. Keith: Really great. Nicki passes on commenting.
Kree's picking "Stormy Weather", and Harry's saying once again that she's taking away from the melody and singing way too many notes. Nobody's listened to him yet and the judges are crazy about everybody. I kind of get what Harry's saying, she does it for no reason at times. And she loses the melody completely halfway through. Her timing is off a little too. The whole second half is a total mess for me. Other than that it's great. Everyone gives rambling semi-critique but it's clear they wanted it to be awesome but it wasn't. Harry calls Randy out on one of his many contradictions: "We want you to be Kree, but do the Etta James version." You could pick out so many nonsense comments, but at least one's getting exposed to the harsh light of reason.
Then there's some hideous disaster of a group number with tons of dancers and a dominant pre-recorded vocal track. This is enough to make me hate everyone involved. This is one of those things that happen where you can't imagine how nobody stepped in and stopped it before it was too late. I got my wish of no duets, but at what cost? AT WHAT COST?? Now I want all four of them to go home tomorrow. Cancel the homecoming trips, cancel the stupid Carly Rae Jepsen song, and make it so I don't pay attention to Mariah Carey anymore. Failing that, I'd like Angie to go home but I think it's gonna be Kree. She's better than she's been the past few weeks, but who votes and can remember that far back? Candice was the clear best tonight, Amber's the likely sympathy vote, and Angie's probably not going anywhere.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)