2014 Favorites: Music

Well, it's been awhile but I've been pretty busy so, to begin wrapping up the year, here is my list of musical favorites for 2014.  Once again, I want to emphasize that this is my favorites, it is not an objective best of the year.  For example, Get Hurt was by no means a groundbreaking, earth shaking record; I just really happened to like it.

Honorable Mentions: Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers- Hypnotic Eye 

Just a good rock album by a good rock band.  Sometimes simple works.

Weird Al Yankovic- Mandatory Fun

Sure,  All has done more ingenius sets of comedy songs, even in recent years, but the ambitious promotion of 'a video a day for a week' combined with his first ever number one album (sure, it's with an * due to generally sluggish record sales... but still...) makes this well worth noting.



 

10.  Jack White - Lazzaretto

I wasn't feeling this one as much as previous Jack White projects, but it is still one of the musically more interesting albums of the year.  

9. Future Islands - Singles

These guys came out of nowhere.... it's pop music for grown-ups. 



8. Bruce Springsteen - High Hopes

For what is basically an odds and ends collection, this manages to sound fresh and hold together nicely.  The rocked out version of "The Ghost of Tom Joad" and "American Skin" had both been around as live versions for years but the proper studio recordings serve them well. 


7. Tweedy- Sukierae

A pleasant surprise for old-school Wilco fans.  Jeff Tweedy makes an album that harkens back to the days of Being There and Summerteeth.


6. U2 - Songs of Innocence 

Despite the controversy of its release, it's still a pretty good album.  Far from their best but still pretty far from terrible.  "Raised By Wolves" and "The Troubles" make up for the mediocrity of the lesser tracks. (seriously, though, that cover is totally creepy)


5. The Hold Steady - Teeth Dreams

An early contender for my favorite album this year, the early-Springsteen lyrics/vocals over Alt-rock/metal guitars delivers a unique punch.  They might be the world's best bar band.

4. The Black Keys - Turn Blue

New Wave and Disco infused Blues Rock?  Sure! Why Not!  I'm not a big Black Keys fan in general but this is my favorite thing they've done so far. 

3. Weezer - Everything Will Be Alright In the End

Is it as good as The Blue Album? No. Of course not. Is it as bad as The Red Album? No. Far from it. It might actually be the best album they've done since regrouping in 2001.... it's as least as good as The Green Album. And the "Return to Ithaca" guitar-symphony might be my favorite musical moment of 2014. 


2. The Gaslight Anthem- Get Hurt
 
Sure, Brian Fallon might be a hokey lyricist but, like his idol Bruce Springsteen (no stranger to the occasional bit of hokiness himself) he sings with enough conviction that it's mostly forgivable.


1. Foo Fighters- Sonic Highways

Some people complained that after the city-to-city roots exploration of the accompanying documentary series, Dave Grohl simply went and made another Foo Fighters album.... and that's kind of what I most want when I buy a Foo Fighters album.  Sure, while the album might not be filled with the local flavors that many were expecting, the journey did provide a certain amount of inspiration for the band in delivering a kick-ass set of tunes.


Top Tunes:

 5. "The Troubles"- U2
4. "What Did I Do?/God As My Witness"- Foo Fighters
3. "Rollin' and Tumblin" - The Gaslight Anthem
2. "Seasons (Waiting On You)"- Future Islands
1. "Low Key"- Tweedy

October's Album of the Month: Sukierae-Tweedy

Once again, I have decided to utilize the album of the month to highlight something new.  This time it is Tweedy's Sukierae. A double-album solo project by Wilco frontman, Jeff Tweedy.  With his son, Spencer, manning the drums & percussion, the album is released under the familial moniker of 'Tweedy'.  As the singer and primary songwriter/musical director of Wilco, Sukierae sounds, unsurprisingly, like a new Wilco album with, perhaps, a bit more focus on stripped down acoustic numbers (particularly on the second disc).  That being said, the album has some of the best tunes Tweedy has penned in years, especially the delightful "Low Key" which, I think, has already pretty much become my favorite song of 2014. The video is pretty awesome as well.

Key Tracks: "Low Key", "World Away", Diamond Light, Pt. 1", "I'll Sing it", "Fake Fur Coat"

U2's Songs of Innocence

There's been a lot of hubbub about the marketing gimmick used to launch this album, much of that has distracted from what the album is itself. This is by no means the band's finest work but that makes it no less interesting.  U2 albums are often cases where the whole is greater than the sum of its parts but, usually, at least a few of those parts rise to the top.  I'm not sure there are really any stand-out tracks here which might be why they decided to just release the album all at once.

In truth, this is an album they have tried to make before but I'm not referring to the abandoned Songs of Ascent from which most of these songs were ultimately culled.  In truth, this album's spiritual predecessor is, in fact, the band's sophomore effort October. Not only is there a sonic similarity in terms of the actual music but it revisits many of the themes of that album (and, to an extent, its predecessor Boy): youth on the cusp of adulthood, the 'Troubles', faith, and the loss of Bono's mother.
October itself is probably U2's weakest album; Bono famously lost his notebook containing his lyrics and had to start over from scratch.  As a result, that album has always felt somewhat undercooked and more than a little naive. It was an album made by a group that was little more than teenagers and perhaps its one redeeming charm is its naivete.

Even to the casual listener, Songs of Innocence is clearly about the band's genesis. The opening track "The Miracle (of Joey Ramone)" is not so much a straight up tribute or homage to the titular New York punk icon as it is about that first musical epiphany that anyone has, that first exposure to that artist that would, ultimately, change and influence their life.  A generation before, it was the Beatles. A generation later, it was Nirvana.  The effect, however, is always the same: pure joy.  That is what Bono & Co. attempted to capture here and, in their own U2 way (meaning lacking all subtlety), I think they accomplished that.

Another transformative event that would contribute of the evolution of Paul Hewson into Bono Vox, is the death of his mother (at the funeral of her father no less).  This has been addressed many times by Bono over the years: "I Will Follow", "Lemon", "MoFo" and, perhaps most directly, "Tomorrow" from the aforementioned October. However, in those songs, the experience was always obscured; Bono opted to insulate the experience in abstracts and universal ideas of mother and son.  Songs of Innocence  contains his most direct statement on the matter with "Iris (Hold Me Close)".

In fact, Songs of Innocence is perhaps Bono's most autobiographical set of lyrics.  "The Troubles" in Northern Ireland/Ireland have long been a subject of U2's music.  Their first attempt was, once again, on the flawed October. "I Threw A Brick Through a Window" features some of Bono's most cringe-worthy lyrics--- and that's saying a lot--- ("He was my Brother!) but it served as a sort of rough draft to the far more successful "Sunday Bloody Sunday".  It was a theme the band would revisit many times over the years, including the underrated "Please" from the underrated Pop. However, once again, it was always thematically abstract.  In "Raised By Wolves", perhaps the album's strongest track, Bono for the first time addresses the effect that a bombing in his own neighborhood had on his formative years and the sense of security he felt in his youth.  The lyrics are still a bit on the naive side, but the rage and trauma are still palpable in Bono's voice and Edge's guitar explosions.

Songs of Innocence may not be the band's best work.  In fact, I would categorize it among their weakest.  However, that doesn't mean it is bad by any means. It is the sound of a band looking to the past, to its origins, in order to, hopefully, find inspiration for the future. In any case, it's definitely worth the price I paid for it.  And, to paraphrase one of my favorite reviews, I give it 2 1/2 stars out of five: if you're a U2 fan, add a star; if you're not a U2 fan, subtract a star... and if you absolutely hate U2... why are you even worried about this?

Key Tracks: "The Miracle (of Joey Ramone)", "Iris (Hold Me Close)", "Volcano", "Raised By Wolves", "Cedarwood Road"

Guardians of the Galaxy: Is Plot Dead or Just Different?

 I originally started this blog in an attempt to get some semi-serious conversations going regarding my favorite goings on in the pop cultural landscape; here's my attempt to respond to, what I feel, is an unfair criticism of Guardians of the Galaxy; feel free to weigh in:

A Recent LA Times article accuses Guardians of the Galaxy of lacking a substantial plot.  Granted, it has a clear MacGuffin but that doesn't necessarily make a story perfect; as a recent episode of The Big Bang Theory pointed out even the greatest MacGuffin movie of all time has an major flaw in its plot:

I suppose you could argue that Raiders isn't about what happens to the Ark but about the characters but, really, what effect does the quest have on Indy? Is it really transformative in any way? How is he different in any way by the end of the film? In that respect the first two sequels, Temple of Doom and Last Crusade, are clearly more successful.  However, what Guardians does share with Raiders that I think is worth mentioning is this: they both introduce us to the characters and their world.

I think that what the author fails to realize about Guardians of the Galaxy, Avengers and most of the Marvel movies is that they are not stand alone films--- nor are they meant to be.  When viewing a fresh addition to the franchise, it is best to view it more as the first episode of a TV series.  Yes, the first Avengers can also be guilty of the absence of plot that was noted in Guardians as can Captain America: The First Avenger and Thor --- however, once we get to the films in what is being called Phase Two of The Marvel Cinematic Universe, Iron Man 3, Thor: The Dark World, and Captain America: The Winter Soldier, there is clearly a plot developing for each of these characters.  In fact, as I have pointed out before, Iron Man 3 works as a sort of 'season finale' for Tony Stark and, when viewed in the context of the first two Iron Man films, you get a fully realized story-arc.

So, I guess what I'm saying is this: don't dismiss the Guardians yet--- as the franchise develops (as all the Marvel Cinematic Universe films develop) so will their plots.  They're not absent, they're just decompressed; an entire story doesn't have to fit in one film anymore... or even within a single franchise. As we see more films, we will see more grounding in plot. Perhaps I'm more used to this idea because I grew up on comics--- I know what it is like to follow characters and see them develop over months or, even, years.  I also know how seemingly disparate plot points in different titles can lay the groundwork for concepts that payoff in a culmination of sorts among different franchises.  In fact, the practice has become downright exhausting in recent years.  However, thus far the Marvel films have done an excellent job of providing films that work by themselves but also feed into a larger world that they are building. 

September Album of the Month: Tom Petty's Greatest Hits

While I am generally of the opinion that greatest hits albums are for, "housewives and little girls", every once in a while, there is a greatest hits album of such transcendent perfection, one that manages to both showcase the highlights of an artist's career while also working as a cohesive work in and of itself that it defies convention.  Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers' Greatest Hits is just such a collection.

The album covers the first 15 years of Petty's career, one where his singles tended to overshadow the albums that they were drawn from.  Granted, Damn the Torpedoes is a fine album, in fact, 4 songs from that very album are included on Greatest Hits, but, among the remaining 5 songs, there aren't exactly any buried treasures waiting to be discovered. I would even argue that Torpedoes isn't even his best album; that title goes to 1994's Wildflowers.

In any case, Greatest Hits is a showcase for Petty's instincts as a master of pop song-craft.  It contains anthem after anthem and we even get a taste of experimentation with the classic, "Don't Come Around Here No More." As a nice added bonus, we get the wonderful "Mary Jane's Last Dance"; sure, the video got overplayed but it gave us the first taste of the Tom Petty/Rick Rubin collaboration that would ultimately produce Wildflowers. So, sorry Bruce McCulloch, I gotta go with the Greatest Hits for my favorite Tom Petty album.  

Key Tracks: All of them, it is a greatest hits album, but, most especially: "American Girl", "Refugee", "The Waiting", "You Got Lucky", "Don't Come Around Here No More", "I Won't Back Down", "Free Fallin'", "Mary Jane's Last Dance"

Robin Williams (1951-2014) - a 'spark of mandess' fades out....

I am deeply saddened by the passing of Robin Williams.  I was born in the late 70's and grew up in the 80's so, from reruns of Mork and Mindy, Live at the Met,  and Comic Relief to Good Morning Vietnam, The Fisher King, and Goodwill Hunting, he has been an ever present ingredient in my own voracious pop-culture diet.  Some of you may know that I do stand up and, while I can't say that I pattern myself on him in any way (mostly because I can't), to say that he in no way influenced my sense of humor or love of comedy would be a complete falsehood.

There have been many far more eloquent tributes and insights over the last couple of days, so I'll leave it at that but here are a couple that I found particularly insightful. This article examines what it was like to do improv with the man and here Norm Macdonald recalls what it was like for him meeting the funniest man in the world.

I leave you with this, my all-time favorite Robin Williams bit.

30 Years of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles

Friday will mark the release of the Michael Bay produced (although not directed) Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle live-action movie.  This year also marks the 30th anniversary of the Ninja Turtles themselves.  Granted, the team of heroes in the half-shell didn't enter mass consciousness until the 1987 animated series and accompanying toy line but their humble beginnings were in a simple, black and white comic that creators, Kevin Eastman and Peter Laird, self-published almost exclusively for sale at a local New Hampshire comic-con in the spring of 1984.

Many fans are lamenting what horrors Michael Bay and company will visit upon the Turtles.  Many details have leaked as to the various ways Bay is being unfaithful to the original concept but, there is an inherent problem with taking the Ninja Turtles this seriously:  they were never meant to be taken this seriously.  Many fans would be shocked at how dark that first, independently published comic was.  Perhaps this is where the myth of 'serious' Ninja Turtles comes from.  The problem is that it's not so much 'dark' as it is a 'parody of darkness'.
You see, the first issue of Eastman and Laird's Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles was intended as a send up of some of the most popular comics of the day:  they were Teenage because of Marv Wolfman and George Perez's popular New Teen Titans, Mutant because of Marvel's X-men and New Mutants and, finally, Ninja because of Frank Miller's Daredevil (which incorporated Ninjas in the form of a clan called The Hand and Daredevil's retconned sensei, Stick --- this is where we get The Foot and Splinter... get it? Get it?!?!). You'll also notice how the prose mimics Miller's own appropriation of the 'hard-boiled' aesthetic.

However, after the success of the first issue, the series quickly evolved to have a much lighter tone (albeit, still a far cry from the animated series).  In fact, while I, like every ten-year-old of the time, was introduced to the Turtles through the animated series and toy line, once I became more sophisticated (11 or 12), I learned about the original, independent comics. To this day, my favorite version of the Turtles remains the one in those first couple dozen independently published comics.  I owned a compilation that collected the first 10 or 11 issues of the series along with the individual turtle's 'micro-series' one-shots.  In fact, a couple of recent hardcover collections have collected those same issues (there is also a colorized version but I feel the art shines better in the original black and white).

Many fans might be shocked that, in these initial stories, there is a distinct lack of catchphrases such as "Cowabunga" and "Turtle Power" and the team's trademark love of pizza (I'm pretty sure they ate pizza at one point, just not exclusively). These were all the product of the cartoon and toy line's marketing department.  In addition, the early comics were black and white; the only color was on the covers where all four turtles wore red bandanas/masks.  Nevertheless, the series was a lot of fun with inter-dimensional space travel and a lot of Jack Kirby-esque action (the Donatello one-shot is an all-out tribute to Kirby).  In fact, the first live action TMNT movie from 1990 owes a great deal to the more terrestrial adventures of these early comics and it more closely resembles those than it does the super-silly cartoon of the same era.

However, what I find most interesting, was that all of these entities, the indie comic, the cartoon, the movie, managed to exist alongside one another.  Archie Comics even did a series that initially started as a close adaptation of the cartoon but, very quickly, developed its own continuity and fan base. Eastman and Laird had shrewdly managed to license their characters without giving up total creative control.  In an industry where there are dozens of stories about creators being screwed over while their employers make millions (and, now, billions) of dollars off of their creations, Eastman and Laird are a rare exception.

In fact, the sillier the licensed Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles commercial juggernaut became, the more interesting the work on that original series became.  As Eastman and Laird became more invested in the day-to-day management of their property, the original series became more of an anthology series with indie comics legends like Mark Martin, Rick Veitch, and Richard Corben stepping in with their own distinctive visions of the terrapin heroes,  including a hyper-realistic version by Michael Zulli (famed for his wildlife drawings in his own Puma Blues) that was decidedly NOT for kids and which is, even now, a little bit creepy.


Yet, at the same time this was going on, the mainstream Turtles were embarking on the 'coming out of their shells tour' (which was really nothing more than a massive promotional tool for Pizza Hut).





A couple of years later, the Turtles would get their own live-action show so as to more effectively compete with the Power Rangers (this is the one with the female turtle, Venus).  Meanwhile, Eastman and Laird would merge their own studio with Image Comics, the foremost proprietor of the 'grim and gritty' era of comics, and the stories would get even darker.  Turtles were mutilated, lost limbs, were turned into cyborgs... in  fact, this era may have gotten a little too dark as Kevin Eastman has pretty much disowned the stories of this era and has since rebooted the series himself.


I guess my point is this, the ninja turtles have always been this weirdly mercurial property; they have been shaped and reshaped again to assume multiple incarnations for a variety of different audiences, often at the same moment in time.  The new movie will probably be terrible but, so what, that doesn't mean you can't still enjoy YOUR favorite version of the Turtles.  For me, personally, it's the original black and white comic and that very first live-action movie from 1990.... oh, and I do enjoy saying "Go Ninja, Go Ninja, Go!" from time to time....

And, if the Turtles can survive Vanilla Ice, I think they'll safely make it passed Michael Bay relatively unscathed as well....

August Album of the Month: Guns N' Roses - Use Your Illusion I & II

While the band's debut album, Appetite for Destruction, seems to get the most love these days, few people seem to appreciate how awesome their first their first proper follow-up was.  The preceding release, Lies, was a combination of a previously 'independently released', 'live' EP and four new acoustic numbers. And, while the band did score a major hit from that release with the lovely "Patience", the Use Your Illusion albums are the true successor to Appetite. 

Guns N' Roses always seemed liked one of those bands that was destined to burn out rather than fade away (which they sort of did--- only, miraculously, without fatality) so these two albums seemed like an effort to get as much of their material committed to tape as possible in as short a time as possible because, I mean, who knows how long they're going to be around? 

Released separately on the same day, the two albums are, for all intents and purposes, a double album. Allegedly, the only thing that separates them is fact that Use Your Illusion I is primarily composed of songs that were written before Appetite for Destruction and its ensuing success and Use Your Illusion II is primarily songs written in the interim between.  There would seem to be some truth to this as, not only are "Don't Cry" (with its original lyrics) and "November Rain" among what are widely considered the oldest songs in the band's repertoire but Illusion I seems to be the rawer, more blues based of the two. 

It has often been said that the  Illusion albums represent a conflict between Axl Rose's desires to construct more epic, multi-layered material (like "November Rain" and "Estranged") and the hard rock sensibilities of the rest of the band yet, somehow, the two seemingly contradictory aesthetics blend into what remains a sprawling, epic journey over the course of a whopping 30 songs.  This is their White Album and, I have to say, it probably comes closer to that album in terms of sheer ambition than just about any album before or since.

Slash is often championed as Axl's foil, the blues-based yin to Axl's piano-ballad obsessed yang. However, Axl's real partner-in-crime (and the most crucial ingredient IMO of a true G N' R reunion) is actually rhythm guitarist, Izzy Stradlin.  A perusal of the writing credits reveals that, either alongside Axl or on his own, Izzy was one of the dominant tunesmiths within the band (in fact, evidence suggest that many of the band's earlier songs--- while credited to the whole band--- were actually Rose/Stradlin or Stradlin compositions).  In fact, he even takes lead vocals on a song from each album.

That's not to say that Slash is by any means a slouch; on "Estranged" Axl even thanks him for the 'cool riffs' and "Locomotive" is the most guitargasmic epic the band every crafted. 

Bloated? Yes.  In your face? Yes. A product of the Hard Rock Excess that Nirvana and their ilk would shortly wipe from the face of the earth?  Oh, hell yes! But, is it still awesome after all these years?  You better believe it.

Key Tracks: "Live and Let Die" "Don't Cry" (both original and alternate lyrics), "Civil War",  "Knockin' on Heaven's Door", "14 Years", "November Rain", "You Could Be Mine", "The Garden", "The Garden of Eden", "Breakdown", "So Fine", "Coma", "Double Talkin' Jive", "Dust N' Bones",
"Dead Horse", "Estranged"

Guardians of the Galaxy: Indiana Jones + Star Wars + Comic Books = Awesome!

While I knew very little of the current Guardians of the Galaxy team before seeing the trailer, I have had very high hopes for this film and it somehow managed to exceed them.  In a way, that is to be expected; it is a team of comic book heroes that combines Star Wars with Raiders of the Lost Ark. There is no better recipe for a film that Scott will love! On the other hand, many lesser films have tried and failed in the past  to create this formula and the results are usually a dismal failure(Ice Pirates, anyone?). Fortunately, James Gunn is just the mad genius to pull this off.

Chris Pratt's Star-Lord manages to successfully merge Luke Skywalker and Han Solo into one character (which would actually make his most direct cinematic predecessor Bill Pullman's Lone Star from Mel Brooks' Spaceballs). Pratt is the perfect mix of comic charm and wide-eyed enthusiasm to make this character work.  Rocket could very easily have fallen into being mere comic-relief (unintentionally if not done well) but Gunn goes deeper with the character.  He doesn't even waste time doing this; all the depth Rocket needs is established by allowing us to linger for a few seconds on the character's bare-back to see the remnants of the experiments that made him what he is.  Sure, the character makes you laugh but you're always laughing with him or because of him, never at him. Zoe Saldana's Gamora successfully passes the Sexy Lamp Test ... even if only barely (maybe she'll get a bit more development in the sequel).  At first, Dave Bautista's performance as Drax the Destroyer may seem bit wooden  but, as we soon learn that his species is one that sees the world only in the most literal sense, it actually makes sense in a way.  And Groot, well, Groot is probably the most lovable sidekick to grace a space opera since R2-D2.

What more can I say other than the film manages to work on every level: it moves at a lightning pace but still manages to give us enough character development for us to be emotionally invested.  It's fun and funny and never takes itself too seriously.  It might be the best movie yet from the Marvel Cinematic Universe but, it doesn't even need to exist in that world; it's great on its own merits.

Also: Best. Soundtrack. Ever! (well, maybe not EVER but... still... pretty damned good).  American Hustle drew songs from roughly the same era but Guardians' soundtrack crushes them like a grape: David Bowie's "Moonage Daydream" played over the team touching down in KNOWHERE (the decapitated head of an ancient 'Celestial' giant)?  Yes, please! The Runaways' "Cherry Bomb" as the team suits up for the climactic battle?  I'll take two!  And just wait until you see how "Ooh, Child" is used!

Sure, Guardians of the Galaxy may have been conceived as a way to introduce the cosmic elements of the Marvel universe to movie-goers, but the film manages to do so much more.  In fact, this might be the finest Space Opera to hit since a little story that took place a "A Long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away...."  I've said it before, I'll say it again, JJ Abrams had best be taking notes; THIS is your competition.

MAJOR SPOILER: So, does the post-credit scene mean we finally might get a good Howard the Duck movie?

July Album of the Month: A Hard Day's Night

Earlier this year marked the 50th anniversary of The Beatles invading America; this month marks the 50th anniversary of my favorite early Beatles album, A Hard Day's Night.  Now, to clarify, the version of the album to which I am referring is the original British version which, since 1987 and the initial release of the band's catalog on CD, has been the dominant form available to most fans.  In the states, through an agreement with United Artists, a soundtrack album was released that contained about half the songs from the album and a bunch of instrumentals  that served as the score to the accompanying film (more on that later).

Not only is this my favorite album from the 'Beatlemania' era of the band, it is, in many ways, the first true Beatles album.  First of all, it is the first album to contain no early Rock 'N' Roll covers; the album consists solely of Lennon-McCartney originals.  Secondly, it is the strongest set of originals that the band had yet released.  Many of the originals on the band's first two albums, Please Please Me and With The Beatles (and their American Counterparts Introducing.... The Beatles and Meet The Beatles) wore their influences on their sleeves.  In other words, they weren't all that different from the songs they were covering by other artists (i.e. "I Saw Her Standing There" is, basically, a Little Richard song, "Love Me Do" is The Everly Brothers and "P.S. I Love You" and "Do You Want to Know a Secret?" were fairly indistinguishable from dozens of other pop songs of the era).  The band had already had a significant breakthrough late the previous year with its final two singles of 1963, "She Loves You" and, especially, "I Want to Hold Your Hand".  With these singles, the band began to establish a unique sonic vocabulary and these were, perhaps, the first songs that can truly be described as 'Beatle-esque'.  However, on A Hard Day's Night, we are given a collection of 13 such songs. On top of that, every single song on the album could have been a hit single. And, the albums first single, "Can't Buy Me Love" is a work of such simple brilliance that one can't imagine how it could not have been written.

There is also a growing sophistication in the songwriting; sure, there's the traditional teeny-bopper fare in "I'm Happy Just To Dance With You" (and never had such a song been done better) but we also have "If I Fell" where Lennon sings, not to the one to whom he has pledged himself, but to another who seeks to tempt him away (by 1964 standards, pretty racy stuff). 

Finally, on a technological level, this was the first album to be recorded by the Beatles entirely using four-track recording technology (the first two albums, believe it or not, had been recorded using only two tracks; "I Want to Hold Your Hand" and its UK b-side "This Boy" were the first recordings made by the band using four tracks).  As a result of this leap in technology, the album sounds far more fresh and modern than their previous records.  I remember hearing "Things We Said Today" in the early 90s and assuming that the song was from McCartney's solo career and was recorded sometime in the 80s!

To me, this will always be the album where the Beatles became the Beatles; sure, Rubber Soul and Revolver broke even further musical ground and are even better albums but, when I think of the loveable mop tops from Liverpool that first charmed the world, this is the album that is foremost in my mind.

Key Tracks:  All of them?  but especially: "A Hard Day's Night", "I Should Have Known Better", "If I Fell", "I'm Happy Just To Dance With You", "Can't Buy Me Love", "Things We Said Today", "You Can't Do That"

A quick note on the movie:

The film was once called "the Citizen Kane of Jukebox Musicals"; this is actually an enormous understatement.  In order for that to be accurate, of all the movies ever made, Citizen Kane would have to be the only great movie ever made.  A Hard Day's Night is really the only example of this particular type of movie as vehicle for pop-group/performer that manages to completely transcend the typical aspirations of such a work.  There is nothing else in that category that comes close to being as good; even the band's own Help! pales in comparison (Purple Rain? --- which just celebrated an anniversary of its own--- have you watched it lately? Aside from the musical performances, it is terrible).  Its faux-documentary style manages to naturally reflect the band's personalities without anyone having to 'act' too much and the script is charming and light-hearted and even manages some subtle satire regarding the youth culture of the era.  Dick Lester also managed to create a new vocabulary for filming rock bands; previously, the technique had been: close-up of the singer, cut to the guitar player for solo. cut!  But, since the Beatles had no one star, Lester showcased the whole band throughout each performance using pans, close-ups, and other techniques that I don't have the technical vocabulary to fully articulate.  In short, A Hard Day's Night remains a unique artifact: a low budget, Rock N' Roll musical made in order to quickly cash in on the popularity of an artists that is actually good and, like the Beatles themselves, it has managed to endure.
 

Batman 25 Years Later

It was 25 years ago today that the film that would prove to be the most successful super-hero/comic book film ever (at least up until that point) was released.  I'm talking, of course, about Tim Burton's Batman. In the summer of 1989, it was an inescapable phenomenon; George Lucas may have started the traditional merchandising onslaught with Star Wars but Batman perfected it:  There were toys, comic book adaptations, t-shirts, baseball caps, leather jackets, haircuts, and a soundtrack from Prince (while "Batdance" is undeniably horrible, the other songs-the ones featured in the film- are worth a second listen). In fact, This Forbes article speculates that it might be the birth of the modern summer blockbuster marketing machine as we know it today.

It proved that a super-hero film could be for more than just a kiddie audience (which Donner's Superman: The Movie had done as well--- but, at the end of the day, that was very much a kid's movie).  They could be dark, edgy and modern. It ushered in an era of adaptions of superheroes that, unfortunately, ended up being a pretty mixed bag:  Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles and The Crow were both pretty good; Dick Tracy, Captain America, and The Punisher were not (the latter two being Marvel's first attempts at the big-screen, both of which ended up being, pretty much, straight-to-video releases).   In fact, it would be another 10 years with the release of Singer's X-men until Superheroes would become a permanent and reliable fixture of the summer blockbuster season (although, the results are often still mixed).

Unfortunately, the film's sequels proved far less satisfying.  Due to the success of Batman, Burton was given much greater artistic freedom on Batman Returns which resulted in a really weird movie that alienated most of the fans of the first installment.  And, of course, the less said about Batman Forever and Batman and Robin the better (although the former did give us a pretty kick-ass soundtrack).

For modern comic book fans, Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy has supplanted Burton's film as the definitive cinematic vision of the Caped Crusader; however, I feel that Burton's '89 film remains the best Batman movie.  That's right; I said that the 1989 Batman is better than even the exalted Dark Knight.  I can hear comics purist the world over ripping their hair out right now. But, honestly, what sins Batman commits in terms of not adhering to the comic traditions (Joker killed Bruce's parents ?!?!?) it makes up for by being a more consistent film over all. True, Nolan's film is more consistent with currently accepted versions of continuity and the depictions of characters in the current comics (Gordon and Dent in particular) BUT, as an entity unto itself, Batman works.  It's kind of like this: Nolan's films are the faithful cover version of Batman; Batman is less faithful but more interesting interpretation. Sure, Michael Keaton doesn't look like the Bruce Wayne of the comics but he still works as the version of Bruce Wayne we are given in this movie.

Burton's Batman, while limited in terms of technology, works a many levels that Nolan's simply does not.   However, Nolan's greatest failing is making Batman movies where Batman himself seems out of place.  For all of his technical prowess as a director, Nolan takes himself way too seriously. He was determined to create a more realistic and "believable" Batman than the previous films. And this was his greatest mistake; Nolan's Gotham is so naturalistic that, when Batman shows up, he looks out of place.  Batman is a weirdo; Burton understands this, Nolan does not.

Take a look at the following scene from The Dark Knight in which Batman makes his first appearance:

When I first saw the movie, I didn't so much feel as though Batman had shown up as 'a-guy-in-a-Batman-suit' had shown up; there was very little difference to me between Batman and the imposter Batmen that he chastises for dressing up like him and using guns.

This is where Burton succeeds; rather than going for a realistic film, he goes for a surrealistic film.

 His Gotham is dark, smoky, and full of shadows.  It resembles a real city but, at the same time, it is an exaggerated, nightmare version of the city. Also, notice the two crooks:  they are sweaty, pale skinned, and pock-marked.  They're grotesques of what we think a street hood should look like.  Burton creates a world straight out of the 1930's pulps that inspired the character in the first place. It is also notable that, while the film is intended to be set in 1989 much of the set and costume design has a distinctly 1930s/40s vibe to it.  As a result, when Batman shows up in Burton's film, he makes sense; he is a natural extension of the world that Burton has created.  I prefer this strange, operatic version of the character to Nolan's more straight-faced depiction of the character and his world. After all, Batman should be a little bit weird.

Album of the Month: Led Zeppelin II

In anticipation of tomorrow's release of newly remastered versions of Led Zeppelin's first three albums, I thought I would make this month's pick my favorite of these: Led Zeppelin II.  It's a far more streamlined version of its predecessor; while the first album relies on extended blues explorations like "Dazed and Confused" and "How Many More Times", Zeppelin II is far more direct in its approach and the band mission statement couldn't have been more clear in "Whole Lotta Love"; a plodding dirge of pure sex.  In addition, "Thank You" might well be the first 'Power Ballad' and "Heartbreaker" was probably the best riff Jimmy Page ever wrote (and that's saying A LOT). Also, I would be remiss on a blog dedicated to general geekery if I didn't mention the casual reference to Gollum and Mordor in the excellent "Ramble On".  It was this album that laid the foundation of hard rock for the next 40 years.
Key Tracks: "Whole Lotta Love", "Thank You", "Heartbreaker", "Ramble On"

X-Men: Days of (Back to the) Future Past

SPOILERS!

One of my favorite reviews that I ever read was for a Rush album; the reviewer simply gave the album 3 stars and wrote "If you're a Rush fan, add two starts; if you're not, subtract two".  X-men: Days of Future Past is kind of like that.  Fans of X-men and the series of films in particular, will love it. Honestly, I'm not sure what someone who is completely unfamiliar with the franchise would make of it.  Granted, this sort of thing is less problematic these days as fewer sequels are being made as stand alone films; you can't just watch the last Harry Potter movie without watching the first. 

However, since I am, in fact, one of those aforementioned X-men fanatics I can say this: I loved it!  This is, basically, the X-men movie that I have wanted to see since I was 13-years-old.  And that's really who this movie is mad for: the 13-year-old comic fan who doesn't give a rat's ass what anyone else thinks of the movie--- it should only give him what he wants to see.  And that it does....

Still, this movie could have been mess; it probably should have been a mess.  After all, it attempts to tie together 6 movies of varying quality and plot consistency (although, honestly, we can probably ignore the two Wolverine films as they don't really factor that much into the plot--- even the origins material was covered sufficiently in X2). Add to that a time travel storyline that, when examined with any scrutiny, creates more questions than answers (as is illustrated here). 

What allows me to suspend my disbelief is that, despite whatever plot holes are produced by the convoluted plot, the film maintains a strong emotional center.  As it was in First Class, this emotional core is built around the triumvirate of Charles Xavier, Magneto and Mystique.  Xavier has fallen into a depression following the failure of his school; however, it quickly becomes clear, that depression can be traced back earlier, to the loss of his childhood friend, Raven/Mystique to Magneto's cause.  It was a loss that he is not quite as at peace with as he seemed to be at the conclusion of First Class. He blames his old friend, Erik/Magneto, for her desertion and that has only served to further widen the rift in their friendship (that, and he also believes Magneto was behind the JFK assassination).

Once again, McAvoy and Fassbender bring depth and humanity to these men; they are not yet the iconic figures they will someday become, each representing a different side of the mutant issue; at this point, they are two friends on different sides of an argument. For her part, Jennifer Lawrence does a great job as we see Mystique's transformation into the femme fatale she will become in the original films; unlike First Class where she came across very much like the girl next door (and, quite frankly, Lawrence's performance seemed phoned in). We're now seeing a character more akin to the one who, in X2, slides through a closing doorway while giving her enemy the finger.  Whether it's her Oscar Winning, Hunger-Games-starring mojo at work or the fact that, maybe, she just found the development of her character more fun this time around, Lawrence owns the role (Sidenote: the first time I taught my Superhero and Ethics class, I was surprised at the number of my young, female students who named Mystique as their favorite superhero; this was shortly after First Class had come out and I'm sure Lawrence's portrayal had some small role in that and, after Days of Future Past, I'm sure she'll have an even bigger fan base).

On a more superficial level, the movie just looks really cool.  The future sequences look absolutely epic! The opening fight scene is brilliant.  This is, in fact, the first time in an X-men movie (and maybe even any superhero movie---excepting maybe Avengers) where we see a group of X-men fighting and using their powers in tandem with one another, playing off of each others powers to fight their enemies.  Coolest of all is Blink (the role doesn't have a lot of character depth to it but, damn, she looks cool as hell!) whose teleportive abilities are used to brilliant effect in combat against the sentinels.

Speaking of great sequences, Quicksilver's big moment in the pentagon jailbreak sequence is brilliant and a true highlight of the film.  It has already been confirmed that the character will have a larger role in X-men: Apocolypse and he deserves it. I'll bet even Whedon himself is now a little nervous about how his version of the character will be received in Avengers 2.

Also, thankfully, the CG Beast of First Class has been ditched in favor of practical make-up (fur is one of the most difficult things to animate realistically... duh!).

BIG SPOILER: 

I think I'm not alone in my enjoyment of the film's conclusion; they lift a page right out of Back to the Future and, rather than simply re-establishing the status quo of the present, they improve it.  Most notably, since Scott and Jean are now alive, it would seem as though X-men: The Last Stand, the weakest in the series, never happened (and for that matter, much of X-men Origins: Wolverine and  The Wolverine probably never happened either).  In fact, the refined present was so ideal that I half expected older Professor X and Magneto to come in from their tennis match to find a box filled with Professor X's newest book on Mutant/Human harmony and assuring Wolverine that he can accomplish anything if he puts his mind to it....

In more ways than one, X-men: Days of Future Past serves to reshuffle the deck on the franchise in a way that the future films will have a fresh start; how well that plays out remains to be seen.  We already know that X-men: Apocalypse and a third Wolverine are in the works.  Beyond that, who knows?  Will they go back and do an X-men 4, picking up where Days of Future Past left us? It has already been confirmed that  Apocalypse will take place in the 80's and feature the First Class line up --- so will this further explain what happened in the time between the past and future of Future Past?  But, for what it's worth, Days of Future Past manages to work on multiple levels and, quite frankly, maybe they should just leave well enough alone.  They tied together most of the loose ends, smoothed over some inconsistency, and even undid some of the errors they made with the weaker links in the franchise--- so why not just go out on a high note?

X-men Movies: Worst to Best

As the release of  X-men: Days of Future Past is upon us, I thought I would take a look back what the franchise has brought us so far; so here they are: worst to best. 

X-men Origins: Wolverine
  

X-men Origins: Wolverine is a train wreck on every level: plot, performances, casting, effects... it's just terrible.  It tries to somehow condense Wolverine's backstory (which is pretty convoluted in the comics) into a coherent plot that somehow ties into the rest of the franchise.  The result is a mess. Note: Ryan Reynolds was a perfect choice for Deadpool---- too bad they sewed his mouth shut by the time he actually became the character.  The "merc with a mouth" thing doesn't work when he has no mouth. Supposedly he will get a chance to talk in the spin-off which is currently in development hell.

The Wolverine

Not as bad as its predecessor, but still pretty bad.  The first act is actually pretty good, the second act is boring, and the third  act an overblown mess.  If it had just remained faithful to the Claremont/Miller Wolverine series it was based on, it would have been much better.  I really wish Aaronofsky had remained involved.  I'm interested in seeing what he would have done.

X-Men: The Last Stand

This one really isn't as bad as a lot of people have made it out to be; the plot is serviceable and the real problem lies in the script: cringe-worthy dialogue and some annoying plot discrepancies.  It has its moments: Kelsey Grammar as Beast was a good if underdeveloped choice, Magneto revealing his holocaust tattoo as explanation of why he doesn't bear a mutant one, and I loved the "I'm the Juggernaut, Bitch!" bit--- and, when I found out this was based on an internet gag, that made it even better. I also don't have a problem with the way they handled Dark Phoenix; explaining the whole cosmic entity thing could be a bit much for the average movie goer.

X-Men

I recently re-watched this and it is much better than I remember it being.  The first two-thirds of the film in particular are rich in character development and a lot of nice, small moments that are true to the characters comic book origins.  My biggest problem has always been with the movie's central 'MacGuffin' as it were: Magneto's 'Mutant Making' machine.  It was always a bit too 'Dr. Evil' for me.  Also, the costumes, not only did they not look that great, but they restricted the movements of the actors so much that, in the film's climax, you'll notice that, for a team of superheroes, these guys sure do spend a lot of time walking briskly.

X2: X-Men United

Considered by many to be the best in the franchise (and, at the time of its release, it was) it improved upon the original exponentially with a stronger plot and greater character development.  Also, it avoided those damn costumes until the very end.  There were plenty of Easter eggs and cameos for hardcore fans; I'm a bit disappointed that they made Nightcrawler such a sad sack, he was always such a fun, swashbuckling character in the comics, although the inclusion of his faith was a nice touch.

X-men: First Class

A dark horse contender no doubt; it was a movie I had very little hope for but it has since become my favorite in the series.   No doubt seen by many as the last gasp of the franchise, it had a more modest budget, however, the result is a stronger plot and better characterization. Sure, people may have complained about some finer plot points not matching up with the others in the series, but that wasn't really a problem for me as I saw it more as a reboot; well, that and the fact that, as a comic book fan, if  you try to reconcile every plot inconsistency you encounter, your head will explode.  Oh yeah, and it didn't feature Wolverine (except for one brilliant cameo). So what?  A true X-fan knows there is more to the team than Wolverine.  McAvoy and Fassbender are brilliant as Charles Xavier and a pre-Magneto Erik Lensherr.  Whereas the other films in the series seemed to have started with a big action set piece and then built around it, First Class has a plot that seems to evolve more organically.  Best of all, the climax manages to not only be action packed but emotionally satisfying as Magneto accepts his nature and that the differences between he and Charles Xavier can never be reconciled.  My hope is that Days of Future Past doesn't lose the emotional resonance in the shuffle of a complex plot, bigger budget, and 3D effects.

Note: The film's weakest point in my opinion was January Jones' wooden performance as Emma Frost; if you wanted to cast a Mad Men actress in the role, put Christina Hendricks in a blonde wig--- The White Queen isn't Betty Draper; she's Joan Holloway!

The Amazing Spider Man 2.... and 3.... and part of 4....

The first Amazing Spider-Man is really quite good and I have never been able to quite put my finger one why I don't like it more.  However, I know exactly why I'm not thrilled with the sequel: way too much plot.  It feels as thought the studio was trying to cram two movies into one complete with a preview of a fourth.  There are way too many stories going on here: Peter hiding his identity from Aunt May, Peter's relationship with Gwen, Peter's relationship with Harry, the origin of Electro, Harry dealing with his father's legacy, Harry becoming the Goblin, Peter dealing with HIS father's legacy.... so many plot threads to keep track of you forget that you're there for a Spider-Man movie. I don't know why they packed so much into one movie; maybe they were just afraid that Andrew Garfield wouldn't sign on for a third movie without (real life girlfriend) Emma Stone on board or maybe they just couldn't secure her for a third film (that shouldn't be a spoiler for anyone who has ever read a comic book)

One plot element that could have been chucked quite easily the one involving Peter's parents; I always hated when the comics tried to explain this, period; Aunt May and Uncle Ben are his parents---'nuff said! However, I always found it especially irksome when they tried to somehow connect his parents with his origin or powers in some way. In the film, it turns out that the spider Peter was bitten by in the first movie was developed by his father using his own blood so that only someone of his bloodline could benefit from it! My problem with this is that it makes Peter's story one of destiny; he was somehow meant to have these powers.  Part of the appeal of Peter to me is that he has always been the superhero everyman; he never asked for or wanted these powers--- he was just some poor schmuck who happened to be in the right place, at the right time (or wrong place depending on how you see it). He, at first, abuses those powers (as the average person one) but then, of course, learns that "with great power, comes great responsibility".  His story is not one of destiny it is one of chance and choice.

As for the other plots, Harry shouldn't have yet become the Goblin; his transformation feels rushed and almost tacked on.  After injecting himself with the 'super-spider' venom, he collapses and, even though he just entered the facility 30 seconds earlier, somehow knows to crawl directly to the body armor and glider that will preserve his life; it's a mess.  And all for only about 5 minutes of screen time as the Goblin.  Think about that for a minute: the Green Goblin, Spider-Man's deadliest foe, shows up for 5 minutes and has one fight with Spider-Man.... really? They should have simply introduced Harry in this movie and then had the transformation take place in a third film (and, hey, then maybe Emma Stone could have stuck around a little longer). Also, he looks pretty stupid as the Goblin.

On top of that, the number plots slows the pacing to a grind and, the more plots you have, the more plot holes. They should have trimmed down the story; just make it Spidey Vs Electro with a subplot of furthering the romance between Peter and Gwen.  Save the Goblin for part three. 

Also, the CG is bad... I mean, really bad in places; the Rhino almost looks like something out of a Sci-Fi original movie; what's weird is that it is inconsistent in its badness.  In some places, it's decent; in others, awful.  As though some scenes were left unfinished and completed in a rush. 

It's not that there isn't anything to like: Andrew Garfield is great as Parker/Spidey, Emma Stone is delightful and has great chemistry with Garfield... oh, and they finally made Spidey funny!  I've longed for a movie Spider-Man who slung jokes just as much as webs.  Also, the first third of the movie is actually a lot of fun before it trips up and gets lost in its own plot.

May's Album of the Month: Radiohead- Pablo Honey

Ok, so we all owned Pablo Honey at some point in 1993, and we mostly just owned it for one reason: "Creep". By 1994, most of us had traded that CD back in to the store thinking that Radiohead were flash-in-the-pan, one-hit-wonders. But, there was that one friend, who was really into the album who insisted that there was more to the band than "Creep" and that they were the future of rock.  Turns out, of course, that he was right.  By 1995, Radiohead released The Bends and showed everyone that they were a force to be reckoned with.  However, at least stateside, their debut album remains vastly underrated (I did some checking and, as it turns out, the album did have a bigger impact in the UK).

The Bends is usually held up as an exemplar of the group as a 'rock' band, however, in many ways, Pablo Honey actually rocks harder; The Bends was a great leap forward for the band, and it's definitely a bit more polished but Pablo Honey is more raw, more immediate. Thom Yorke's vocals have never soared quite as high as they do on this album, especially on more recent albums where he tends toward more subdued vocals or falsetto. Also, it is also a lot more ambitious than people remember; the guitar freakouts on this album could be just as avant-garde as anything on Kid A or Amnesiac.

Key Tracks: "You", "Creep", "Anyone Can Play Guitar","Thinking About You", "Ripcord", "Blow Out"

Captain America: The Darkest Avenger

In truth, Captain America: The Winter Soldier is just as much a Nick Fury/SHIELD/Black Widow movie as it is a Captain America movie. As such, it is basically a a political espionage thriller and draws heavily from the Bourne Identity series and the more recent Bond films.  As a result, it is possibly the most violent of the Marvel Cinematic Universe movies yet.  Sure, there's been plenty of action in the previous films of the franchise but it was all more fantastic. Captain America: The Winter Soldier is a film full of assassins, soldiers, and spies; we are in combat conditions and, because of this, people are bound to get shot, stabbed and thrown into the occasional Quinjet turbine.

While some may be uncomfortable with the film's level of violence, it's part of what makes the film work.  In fact, many times I forgot that it was a superhero movie that I was watching.  However, whenever I forgot, I was quickly reminded when Steve Rogers would use his shield to dispatch somebody or when the disembodied consciousness of Armin Zola (you may remember him as the Red Skull's sidekick from the first Captain America movie) is living in a room full of ancient pre-PC (as in personal computer) super-computers.  The effect is less jarring than you might think and, in many ways, it is a tribute to some of the more bizarre elements of Cap's comic book mythos.  After all, it was within pages of Captain America that we first encountered M.O.D.O.K. (Mental Organism Designed Only For Killing) who is, quite possibly, the most ridiculous comic book villain of all time.


 Other aspects of the film keep it firmly in the realm of super-heroic fantasy as well: in addition to the Falcon's high-tech flying gear and a small fleet of heli-carriers, the film's central MacGuffin is an 'algorithm'  developed by Zola to weed out the worst of humanity before it has a chance to cause any trouble.  Whenever any of the more absurd elements of the film stretch beyond the limitations of what one would expect from a Spy-Thriller, you can just remind yourself that Captain America: The Winter Soldier takes place within a universe that is also home Asgardians and aliens.


For the most part, however, the film manages to play the story pretty straight.  Once again, they keep Evans out of the costume for most of the film and, even then, for the first two-thirds of the film, it is the modified SHIELD/Super-Soldier version of the costume which is a little less garish than the full on stars and stripes gear.  And when Cap finally does suit up, they decide to put him in his old-school WWII threads which always seemed a bit more functional to me than the outfit he sported in Avengers.

The cast is firing on all cylinders this time out and, once again, Evans manages to do earnest without being naive; he understands why SHIELD operates the way it does, he even understands the times he came from weren't as innocent as they seem, but that doesn't mean he has to like it. In his sixth time out in the role (seventh if you count his appearance on Agents of SHIELD), Samuel L. Jackson finally gets to show us a bit more depth to his Nick Fury rather than just simply being the epitome of cool and general badassery.  Meanwhile, Scarlett Johanssen steals the show and gets the best lines of the film playing the foil to Evans' uber-earnest Cap.

In the end, Captain America: The First Avenger was about a simpler, more innocent time.  The good guys were good and the bad guys were bad and one couldn't be more different from the other.  Captain America: The Winter Soldier is about a loss of innocence; this story exists in a time post-JFK, post-Vietnam, post-Watergate, post-9/11, where the lines between who is good and who is bad have become far more blurred.  It's about how many bad things we can do for the right reasons before we start doing them for the wrong reasons.  The aforementioned violence only serves to emphasize this much more brutal world that Cap finds himself in. Ultimately, Cap manages to rise above it, Black Widow questions a system that she had put her faith in and, more than anyone, Nick Fury learns that there is a price to pay when you cross one too many lines.

A Look Back at Captain America The First Avenger

As the release of Captain America: The Winter Soldier is upon us, I thought I would take a look back at the first installment.

I was legitimately impressed by Captain America: The First Avenger; this is mostly because I was probably looking forward to this the least of all the MCU movies.  Cap isn't a character who translates very well to film.  A lot of it is that costume; he's one of the most garish supehroes: decked out in red,white, and blue and, if that wasn't subtle enough for you, he has a big frickin' 'A' right on his forehead.

But, somehow, this movie manages to work.  A big tip of the hat should be given to the film's production team and director Joe Johnston for hitting the perfect tone for the film.  In many ways, Johnston was the perfect man for the job: he served as a second unit director on the Indiana Jones films and helmed the woefully overlooked The Rocketeer so he is no stranger to blending WWII iconography with fantastical stories and the golden aged nostalgia of the latter was particularly necessary for Captain America: The First Avenger.

This is one of the keys to making Captain America: The First Avenger work.  This is not the real WWII we are seeing; it is not meant to be Saving Private Ryan. Instead, Johnston gives us one of those Norman Rockwell-esque propaganda posters come to life.  Throughout the entire film (with the exception of the last few moments), everything has a slight golden hue to it.  This recalls not only the 'Golden Age' of comics but also a 'Golden Age' of America.  We often refer to the generation that fought the war as "The Greatest Generation" and this film paints an idealized portrait of the era.  The golden hue hints at a rose tinted vision of the past.  This WWII era America had no Japanese internment camps and, apparently, had already desegregated its Army (something that wouldn't happen in reality until the 1950's).

The second element that makes the film work is its emphasis on an often overlooked element of the Captain America's character: his origin story.  What makes Marvel characters great is it isn't the powers or the costume or gadgets that make them but, as Professor Erskine so kindly points out in the film, "who you are underneath."  And The First Avenger reminds us that, deep down inside, Steve Rogers is this skinny little guy who wouldn't back down from a fight.  Not because he was too stupid or because of some deep-seeded need to commit violence but simply because he doesn't like bullies. He stands up for what is right even when the odds aren't in his favor.  In many ways, he's a stand-in for every skinny little comics nerd who got pushed around. He's every kid who wishes they were stronger, not so they could get even, but so they could stand up for what's right. He's the kid who gets himself beat up for standing up for the even smaller kid. This is the film's heart and Chris Evans deserves endless praise for managing to pull off a character who is innocent without being naive.

April's Album of the Month: Teeth Dreams- The Hold Steady

I going to change things up for this months album of the month and plug my favorite new album, Teeth Dreams, by the Hold Steady.  This is an example of the band doing what they do best, combining early-Springsteen-style narrative with 90's alt rock guitars.  The aforementioned happen to be two of my favorite things so I'm currently in love with this album. The addition of a second guitar player has added to the bands crunch and, on a few tracks, the guitar playing borders on hair-metal extravagance.

Key Tracks: "Let's Get On With The Business", "Big Cigs", "I Hope This Whole Thing Didn't Frighten You", "Almost Everything"