My favorite Music of 2013

Some people say music isn't geeky and, to them, I say "HAVE YOU MET ME?" So, here are my top 10 lists for 2013. Keep in mind that this is by no means an impartial list, these just happen to be the albums that I got the most enjoyment from in 2013. Honestly, nothing really blew me away this year. At the end of the day, I'm a rock fan and rock didn't have a very good year.

Top 10 Albums

10. Random Access Memories - Daft Punk


In all honestly, this maybe isn't quite in my top 10 but, considering the fact that I normally loathe EDM music and I actually found this album enjoyable (with the second best tune I heard all year, no less), it earned its place here. Although, I have to point out that Daft Punk did set out to make this album as much NOT like an EDM album as possible, which might be why I like it. Key Tracks: "Get Lucky", "Lose Yourself to Dance", "Instant Crush" "Touch"


9. Mechanical Bull - Kings of Leon

I don't know why everybody wants to hate on Kings of Leon so
 much.  Soulful vocals, nifty guitar parts, lyrics that aren't terrible; they may not be the future and/or saviors of Rock music but they're a solid unit.  Key Tracks: "Supersoaker", "Temple", "Wait for Me",
"Coming Back Again"






8. New - Paul McCartney

Sir Paul's best music in about a decade. Even at 70, he's able to make an album of music that sounds this fresh (not to mention rock as hard as he did on last year's "Cut Me Some Slack" with the Nirvana guys). Key Tracks: "Save Us", "Alligator", "On My Way to Work", "New"

7. Lightning Bolt - Pearl Jam

This is probably the band's strongest album since No Code.
Granted it doesn't reach the raw power and immediacy of their early work, it's still nice to hear guitars played loudly sometimes and "Future Days" might be their finest ballad since "Wishlist". Key Tracks: "Mind Your Manners", "Lightning Bolt", "Future Days"

6. Amok - Atoms for Peace

I have the same relation to this album as I have had with pretty much every Radiohead album since Kid A.  That is, I don't care for it at first but, the more I listen to it, the more I dig it.
Key Tracks: "Before Your Very Eyes", "Ingenue", "Judge, Jury, Executioner"






5. Wolf's Law - Joy Formidable

Shoegaze guitars, a sweet female vocal, catchy tunes--- these guys would have been HUGE in 1995.
Key Tracks: "This Ladder Is Ours", "The Maw Maw Song", "The Turnaround"






4. The 20/20 Experience (1 and 2)- Justin Timberlake

I'm lumping both albums together because they really are part of a larger whole; part one is the stronger of the two but part two has the best song ("Take Back The Night"). JT continues to grow as an artist, making some of his most sophisticated music yet.  What he may lack as a lyricist he makes up for with knack for writing killer hooks. . Key Tracks: "Take Back The Night", "Mirrors", "Let the Groove Get In", "Pusher Love Girl", "Tunnel Vision"


3. Reflector - The Arcade Fire

While I find their artsier aspirations a bit pretentious if not obnoxious at times, they still managed to make the best rock album I heard all year. And, while I feel their pretentiousness sometimes gets in the way of their ability to just get in a room and play, it is  also why they were able to make the only rock album that was the least bit inventive. Key Tracks: "Normal Person", "Reflektor", "Joan of Arc"





2.  Yeezus - Kanye West

Yes, Kayne is an egotistical ass.  Yes, the fact that he's married to Kim Kardassian makes him even more obnoxious.  And, yes, that video for "Bound 2" was egotistical, obnoxious, and annoying. But, you know what, this album rocked harder than anything else this year. It's not the masterpiece that My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy was but, after a triumph like that, sometimes the best thing to do is to strip down and go in a different direction. Key Tracks: "Black Skinhead", "Blood On The Leaves", "I am a God", "New Slaves", "Bound 2"

1. Because the Internet - Childish Gambino

I loved the first Chidlish Gambino album; what Donald Glover may have lacked in subtlety and lyrical maturity, he made up for in sheer enthusiasm, energy, and wit.  It was a breath of fresh air that I felt mainstream Hip-hop was sorely in need of.  On Because the Internet, Glover improves on his flaws and maintains his strengths while further exploring new musical territories.  Key Tracks: "3005", "Telegraph Ave", "Shadows", "Life: The Biggest Troll", "Earth: The Oldest Computer (The Last Night)"

Top 10 tunes:

10. "I'm Talking About You"- The Beatles

Technically, this is 50 years old but this is the first time the Beatles have every released this song commercially and it rocks!

9. "Dope"- Lady Gaga

8. "3005"- Childish Gambino

7. "Holy Grail"- Jay Z and Justin Timberlake

Unfortunately, Magna Carta Holy Grail didn't live up to the promise of its opening track.

6. "Black Skinhead"- Kanye West

Attention Mr. West: the 300 were Greek not Roman....

5. "Take Back The Night"- Justin Timberlake

4. "Normal Person"- The Arcade Fire

This is exactly the kind of song I wish Arcade Fire would do more of...

3.  "Sacrilege" - The Yeah Yeah Yeahs

Easily the best thing they've done since "Maps".

2. "Get Lucky"- Daft Punk

Noel Gallagher said it best recently when he stated that this is one of those songs that's so good that it just feels like it has always been around.

1. "Teenage Dream" (Live)- The Horrible Crowes

Brian Fallon & Co. turn Katie Perry's teen pop into a long lost Springsteen tune.... best thing I heard all year.

So, that's all for the NEW music I liked this year but what did I REALLY enjoy more than any of my other musical purchases this year?

The Beatles - Live at the BBC and On Air (Live at the BBC vol 2)

As I've already mentioned here on this very blog, The Beatles BBC collection was a pleasant reminder of what a great little Rock and Roll band the Beatles could be once you boiled them down to their basic elements.

But,even more than the fab four, was this

Viva Hysteria! Live at the Hard Rock Hotel and Casino- Def Leppard (CD/DVD combo)

Full disclosure: I am an old school Def Leppard fan and they were the first band I ever saw live.
No, it is not cool to like Def Leppard. I realize that. I am ok with this. I am enlightened. People often attribute the band's success to the studio wizardry of Mutt Lange but, what they often forget, is how awesome these guys are live; after all, they would have to be in order to create a reasonable facsimile of their studio creations.  This was recorded as part of their residency at the Hard Rock Hotel and Casino where they played their classic album Hysteria in its entirety.  And it's actually the best they've ever sounded live: the road worn hits hit harder and with more energy than their studio counterparts and the songs from Hysteria's 'Side Two' ("Don't Shoot Shotgun", "Run Riot"), often overlooked by most fans, are brought to life with more power than the band managed to capture in the studio 25 years ago.

But, for old school fans like myself, the real treat is a bonus disc that contains the show's opening act: Ded Flatbird.  In order to break up the monotony of playing the same thing every night, the band created an alter ego as 'the world's best Def Leppard cover band' and used it as an opportunity to perform long forgotten gems like the 1980 b-side "Good Morning Freedom"; they even performed 'Side One' to their woefully underrated 1981 album High N' Dry in its entirety. After years as a 'nostalgia act' who are forced to play the same greatest hits set-lists year tour after tour, you can tell the guys are really having fun pulling out some of their old favorites and hits that never were.

Key Tracks: "Women", "Rocket", "Don't Shoot Shotgun", "Run Riot", "Excitable", "Good Morning Freedom", "Rock Brigade", "Wasted", "Let It Go", "Mirror Mirror (Take a Look Into My Eyes)", "Bringin' On The Heartbreak".

So, what does it say about me that my favorite musical releases of the year were archival recordings of a band from 50 years ago and a live compilation from a band that hasn't been relevant in 20? I may be getting to old for this shit.

Christmas Music that Doesn't Suck

I love Christmas music--- BUT I reserve this love exclusively for POPULAR Christmas music.  "Joy to the World" and "Little Town of Bethlehem" have their place (it's called church); I prefer to celebrate my holiday season with the most weird, inappropriate, goofy, rocking, bizarre, or just plain fun  music I can find.... here are a few favorites....

"Mistress For Christmas"- AC/DC

Totally inappropriate but what else do you expect from the band that gave us "Big Balls"; my favorite part is at the beginning where Brian Johnson gleefully mumbles "Jingle Bell, Jingle Bell, Jingle all the day!" like an old blues man.

"Must Be Santa"- Bob Dylan

I initially purchased Bob Dylan's Christmas in the Heart for the sole purpose of annoying others and, truth be told, Dylan vocally butchers most of the songs. However, I found myself legitimately enjoying a couple of tracks; his take on "Here Comes Santa Claus" was rather endearing and this one is actually a lot of fun, note how he replaces the reindeer names with those of presidents Eisenhower through Clinton--- leaving out Ford and Carter for some reason. Plus, it has a creepy video with Bob Dylan wearing a Santa hat (and an assortment of other hats) and a wig (not a Santa wig mind you... just a weird wig).

"Dick in a Box"- The Lonely Island (Featuring Justin Timberlake)

Christmas is the season of giving....

"Little Saint Nick"- The Beach Boys/She & Him.

Because when I think of Christmas, I immediately think of beach music.... She & Him's mellow take on the tune from a couple of years back is pretty good too.

"Christmas Wrapping"- The Waitresses

From an age when rap music was still widely considered to be a novelty rather than an enduring art form the Waitresses, best known for their novelty hit "I Know What Boys Want", released their take on the emerging style in this holiday tune (Wrapping = Rapping... get it?) which remains the only other song of theirs that anyone else knows or cares about.... combining an early (and very white) take on rap music with the dominant New Wave styles of the era makes for a a fun little tune, it doesn't get more eighties than this....

Except for maybe this....

"Reggae Christmas"- Bryan Adams

So... this happened.... as far as I know, no official recording was ever released of this and it was part of an MTV Christmas special that featured Pee-Wee Herman.  I legitimately thought I had hallucinated this as, for years, I could find it (even on the internets). Enjoy....







"Little Drummer Boy/Peace On Earth"- David Bowie and Bing Crosby

Speaking of things that happened.... so did this.... As the story goes, Bowie either didn't like the song or felt that "Little Drummer Boy" didn't give him an opportunity to shine vocally.  The "Peace On Earth" bit was written on the fly and, despite the odd pairing and the last minute addition, I've always felt it worked beautifully.

"A Christmas Duel" - The Hives and Cyndi Lauper

This track  is a lot of fun; it's done in the style of one of the 1960s R & B Christmas tunes--- a la "Christmas (Baby, Please Come Home)"---  but the lyrics recount the tale of a dysfunctional couple who probably should not be spending Christmas (or any other day for that matter) anywhere near one another as they ask for forgiveness for their transgressions of the previous year so that they can spend Christmas together because, "Hey, why not?"  Favorite line: "Oh, please dear, excuse my behavior, I hired a hitman, I changed your will, now it's all in my favor"

"I Wish It Was Christmas Today"- Julian Casablancas



Originally done in a minimalistic style as a bit on SNL featuring Horatio Sanz on guitar and vocals, Jimmy Fallon on Synthesizer (which he used solely to trigger the simplest of drum machine tracks and, later, random sound effects) and backing vocals, Chris Kattan on... holding the Synthesizer, and, last but surely not least, Tracey Morgan on.... running in place? It was a cute bit that the show resurrected a few times but, a couple of years back, Strokes frontman Julian Casablancas turned it in to a full-blown holiday pop tune. It's actually quite good....

 

 

"Merry Christmas (Don't Want To Fight Tonight)"- The Ramones

Another song that draws its inspiration from early 60's Motown/R&B Christmas tunes, who doesn't enjoy a little punk rock for Christmas? Heck, who doesn't enjoy a little Ramones any time of year?

"Santa Claus Is Coming to Town"-Bruce Springsteen and the E Street Band

The most traditional tune on this post BUT it's performed by Bruce Springsteen and the E Street Band.  My favorite part is the little spiel at the beginning where he asks Clarence if he's been good so Santa will bring him a new saxophone.....

    

"Christmas In Hollis"- Run DMC

I used to think that I only liked this song ironically but, it's just so damned fun and done with such a spirit of holiday joy and silliness, that it is now legitimately one of my favorite things to hear around the holidays and the video is pretty awesome too... they don't make 'em like that anymore.... all music videos should have a maximum budget of  $250 dollars....

 "Christmas (Baby, Please Come Home"- Darlene Love

I was originally introduced to this song through U2's cover on the first A Very Special Christmas album. The original, however, is superior in every way. Phil Spector's wall of sound was absolutely perfect for incorporating those holiday flourishes. The result is a majestic pop masterpiece that is almost too good to be confined to just a few weeks out of the year (but, then again, that only adds to its specialness). Truly, this is the finest pop-Christmas tune ever recorded.

The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug

Unlike many of my geekier friends, I never particularly enjoyed reading the Lord of the Rings trilogy and have always derived greater enjoyment watching the films.  This can mostly be attributed to the fact that, unlike my friends, I didn't grow up reading them so there was less of a nostalgic attachment for me.  I enjoyed how the films condensed what was in the books in to a leaner tale of adventure. Part of the density of those tomes is Tolkien's detailed descriptions of middle-earth and the filmmakers used this to created a rich world full of history and character.  As a result, the films could concentrate on the plot and let the environment speak for itself.

I actually read The Hobbit last (after wading through The Simalrillion) and I enjoyed its simplicity and playfulness in comparison to the other books.  Granted, it was written for children but, still, it was a breath of fresh air after the density of The Lord of the Rings.

And that is where Jackson and company have gone wrong with the series of Hobbit movies: rather than playing off the innocence and simplicity of The Hobbit, they feel bound and determined to outdo what they did with  the Lord of the Rings.  I have no problem when certain aspects that are present in the book are fleshed out a bit.  The dwarves, for example, are almost entirely interchangeable in the book; all we know is Thorin is the leader and Fili and Kili are the youngest.  So, giving each dwarf a distinct look and personality is a nice flourish.  So is elaborating on their history, however, some of the flashbacks didn't need to be as detailed or, more importantly, as long; I get that it looks really cool but it does tend to make the story drag a bit.

I don't mind Gandalf's adventures being elaborated on either; after all, they are merely showing things that Gandalf tells Bilbo about later and some things are much better seen than heard.  Even Radaghast's addition to the cast doesn't bother me; sure, he's mentioned only once in the book but his depiction is faithful to that brief description and it fits in with the story (and I'm a sucker for wizards).  The same goes for Bard's back story and character; it's implied in the book, there's no harm in elaborating.

What I do have a problem with, and The Desolation of Smaug is the worst offender so far, is the addition of stuff that is neither implied in the original novel nor any of Tolkien's many appendices to the Lord of the Rings.  Case in point: Legolas. Granted, he is the prince of the elves of Mirkwood who do appear in The Hobbit and, I suppose, one could easily infer that he would have been present at the time of their imprisonment, but his appearance would best be relegated to a brief cameo or a scene or two.  Instead, we get, not only Legolas, but Tauriel, a female elf that is entirely a creation of Jackson, in a love triangle with the dwarf, Kili. To an extent, I get it; Legolas is popular and the ladies love him.  Also, a little romance might help the films appeal to a wider audience (i.e. females of the non-geeky variety).  But couldn't a romance between she and Legolas suffice?  Must we go inter-species? Especially when this storyline serves no conceivable narrative purpose other than adding to the film's run time.

Perhaps the greatest crime of all is that, with all the additions and elaborations, one very important element of the story gets lost in the shuffle: Bilbo.  You know THE hobbit? The one from the frickin' title of the movie? This is especially disappointing when Martin Freeman was absolutely the perfect choice for the reluctant adventurer and hero (and, when given the opportunity, he does shine in the role).

You know what else might have been nice to see in The Desolation of Smaug? The actual desolation of Smaug! Book fans will know what I mean when they see the movie.

The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug is by no means a bad movie. It's actually quite enjoyable, particularly on a visual level.  To his credit, Jackson makes the 2 hour and 40 minute run-time move by at a fairly brisk pace but, when all is said and done, the series really could have been two-movies of about that length rather than three. In fact, rather than the extended cut that is sure to be released a year from now (just in time for Christmas!), when all is said in done, I think I would prefer an abbreviated cut which boils all three films down to the single 3-hour epic that it should have been in the first  place.

Oh, and one last thing, whatever the film's faults, SMAUG LOOKS FRICKIN' AWESOME!!!!!

The Beatles: Live at the BBC revisited

In college, I knew these guys who were in a band and all lived together. They played shows regularly and, about once a month, they would put on shows at their own rented house where they and other local bands would play in the basement.  On one of the support beams in the basement, there was a list of about 200 songs, a mixture of originals and covers; these were the songs could play on the fly, no rehearsal necessary.

It may be hard to believe but, before Sgt. Pepper, before Rubber Soul, even before Ed Sullivan, this was pretty much exactly what the Beatles were: a tight little rock and roll combo with an arsenal of a few dozen rock tunes that they could bust into at a moment's notice. The two volume collection, Live at the BBC and On Air- Live at the BBC Volume 2 capture this period in the band's career. In all, the collection contains over 30 tunes never released by the band on any album, EP, or single before the 1994 release of the first volume. Over 80 different songs are performed over the two volume, 4 CD collection and it is a testament to how versatile and tight the band was as a live unit.

The first volume was originally released in 1994 and I owned it on cassette, which was still a viable audio format at the time. It was, in fact, my introduction to the early Beatles as the only other Beatles cassette I owned at the time was the so-called 'Blue Album' which collected their best between 1967-1970.  And early is the operative word here, most of these recordings date from 1963, when Beatlemania was a national rather than an international phenomena and the band had time for their own weekly show (as well as regular appearances on other shows) on the BBC.

The band showcased the depth of their pop knowledge, performing hits and lesser known material from such early Rock N' Roll pioneers as Chuck Berry, Elvis Presley, Carl Perkins and Little Richard as well as early Motown and, really, just about anything they could get their hands on.  Some of these songs were hits for the original artist ("Johnny B. Goode", "Lucille") others weren't and the Beatles actually managed to transform those into their own ("Hippy Hippy Shake", "Some Other Guy").  In fact, their "Some Other Guy", despite not being officially released until 1994, was arguably more associated with The Beatles than the song's original performer, Richard Barett.

The second volume, On Air- Live at the BBC Volume 2 was just released this fall and, while it doesn't come close to unearthing the number of buried treasures its predecessor did (in fact, their is quite a bit of redundancy between the two), it is still just as charming and continues to capture the warmth and energy of the previous collections live performances. In fact On Air seems less concerned with unearthing new tracks than it is in documenting the performances of more well known tracks from the Beatles 'official' recordings. In fact, many of the band's early hits and standbys that were conspicuously absent from the first collection appear here.  Among these are "Twist and Shout", "Money", "Please Mr. Postman", "I Want to Hold Your Hand", and "She Loves You".

That being said, it is not without its surprises.  What the band's take on the long forgotten Chuck Berry number, "I'm Talking About You" may lack in terms of quality of recording, it makes up for in sheer ferocity of performance with John Lennon screeching his vocals a la "Twist and Shout" and rest of the band playing at their most raw and raucous. Meanwhile, the band's thirty second performance of "Happy Birthday Dear Saturday Club" might be the first recorded example of what would later become known as punk rock.

All in all, Live at the BBC and On Air-Live at the BBC Volume 2 serve as a pleasant reminder of what the Beatles really were when all was said and done:  a rock band.

Key Tracks: Live at the BBC- "Some Other Guy", "Soldier of Love", "I'm Gonna Sit Right Down and Cry (Over You)", "Crying, Waiting, Hoping", "The Hippy Hippy Shake", "Ooh! My Soul", On Air- "Words of Love", "Boys", "Please Please Me", "Please Mr. Postman", "Twist and Shout", "She Loves You", "I Want to Hold Your Hand", "Money (That's What I Want)", "Beautiful Dreamer", "I'm Talking About You"

James Bond Credit Sequences may be Better Than Bond Movies....

I've never been a big Bond guy but, every year around Thanksgiving, I end up watching part of the Bond marathon on the SyFy channel and find my interest in the series piqued.  I haven't seen many Bond films at all all the way through; honestly, I think I can count the ones that I have seen on one hand.  This year, as I watched Thunderball, a thought occurred to me: my favorite part of most Bond movies is the title sequence.

That's not to say that I don't enjoy the films that follow.  I thought Skyfall was fantastic; its credit sequence, however, was breathtaking and may, in fact, be the finest of the bunch.

My friend thinks that I like the stylized summary; it's like an abstract short of the film that follows.

This sort of sequence was actually quite common in the late 50's and early 60's, when the Bond films debuted, however, it has become more of a novelty in recent years.  One of the more notable examples was Catch Me If You Can which, of course, was set in the early 1960's and was intentionally meant to be evocative of the era.

Not to mention the fact that it is always scored to a song that is often equal parts awesome and awful. Usually, it is performed by a current hit-maker.  The current hit-maker chosen for the earliest Bond film I can remember? Duran Duran with View to a Kill, widely considered to be one of the worst of the franchise.  Maybe that's why I could never really get into the series.  Still, the credit sequence is pretty awesome (I'm particularly fond of the part where the woman's cleavage unfolds to reveal the '007' logo). It may not be true of all of them but, for this one, it truly was the greater work of art than the film that followed.

December's Album of the Month: A Very Special Christmas

This is probably my favorite Christmas album next to that one Disney album where Goofy consistently fumbles the "Five Golden Rings!" line in "12 Days of Christmas."  It's such a weird relic of the late 80's.  The compilation album is such an oddity these days anyway; why would someone wanting to hear a Lil' Wayne song also purchase a Miley Cyrus song, a Nickelback song and a half dozen other songs they don't care about?  However, at the time, these were some of the biggest names in music: Run DMC, U2, Madonna, Bruce Springsteen, Sting, John Cougar (yes, he was still using 'Cougar' at the time) Mellencamp, Bon Jovi, Bruce Springsteen, and Whitney Houston.  There were also a few who had been big earlier in the decade but were on their way out (The Pointer Sisters, The Eurythmics).

I bought the album for the U2 song: a cover of Darlene Love's "Christmas (Baby, Please Come Home)" (the original version has since become my favorite Christmas song--- more on that in a later post) but the other songs quickly became part of my Christmas tradition.  I had the song on cassette and, from High School through college, you could count on its presence in my car stereo from the day after Thanksgiving until Christmas.

There was something here for everyone: Bruce Springsteen's "Merry Christmas Baby" (his far superior performance of "Santa Claus is Coming to Town" is not contained here) and Bob Seger's soulful take of "Little Drummer Boy" (which might be the best thing to happen to the song since the Bowie/Crosby duet) were there for the classic rock fans, Madonna and Eurythmics for pop fans, Whitney Houston and the Pointer Sisters for the R & B/Soul crowd, heck, even rap and hard rock fans were catered to with Run DMC's "Christmas in Hollis" and Bon Jovi's "Backdoor Santa".  Some songs were done with tongue planted firmly in cheek (Madonna's "Santa Baby"), some with complete  and utter sincerity (The Pretender's "Have Yourself a Merry Little Christmas"), and some you desperately wish were a joke (Stevie Knick's "Silent Night"). By no means is it a work of art and my attachment to it is based more on sentimentality more so than an intrinsic artistic value that it might have but, at the end of the day, it's a fun little album.

Oh, and it also benefits the Special Olympics and the series (there have been about 7 collections released over the years) has raised over 100 million dollars for the charity.  In a way, each collection was a snapshot of its era (1997's A Very Special Christmas 3 contained tracks from the Smashing Pumpkins, Sheryl Crow, and the Dave Matthews Band) but the original will always be the best one.  

Brent Reviews: The Hunger Games: Catching Fire

Brent Saltzman, a former student of mine, gives a wonderfully snarky review of The Hunger Games: Catching Fire. I still haven't seen it yet as I plan to check it out after Thanksgiving.

http://www.thedailymarvel.com/1/post/2013/11/brent-reviews-the-hunger-games-catching-fire.html

Why Superman Shouldn't Kill

Man of Steel was released on Blu-Ray and DVD today, so I thought it would be a good time to bring out something I originally posted on Facebook a few months back.

Okay, by this point, most of you are probably are aware that, in Man of Steel, Superman kills General Zod; more specifically, he twists his neck until he's dead in order to prevent his heat vision from turning a handful of innocent bystanders into ash. This, of course, sparked immediate debate among the fan community with some insisting that, "Superman does NOT kill" while others responding that "He HAS killed" and, still others, reasoning that, "in the modern world, he would HAVE to kill in order to be effective."  I hope to address each of those positions in this post and, maybe, give you a bit more insight into why this is such an important issue for superfans.

Okay, first of all let me address the "Superman has killed before" argument: more specifically, he has killed General Zod before, in both the comic books and the movies.  Most famously, he killed Zod in Superman II, the film that is often cited as the best Superman movie.  This can be excused for a couple of reasons:

1. Rather than squeezing the life out of him with his bare hands, as he does in Man of Steel, Superman tosses Zod into a smoke filled chasm.  Any comic book fan can tell you, this does NOT mean that Zod is dead; as long as there's no body, they can come back (and sometimes even when there is--- Jason Todd, I'm looking at you).  Sure, the assumptions is that he 'died' but this was in the Fortress of Solitude; for all we know, those chasms were the gateway to the Phantom Zone or something.  In fact, there are cut scenes (which were re-inserted for certain re-releases and telecast) where it is revealed Zod was not actually killed and Superman happily drops off the newly de-powered villains in an earthly prison.
2. Even if we assume that it was the filmmakers' intention to have Superman kill Zod (the deleted scenes would indicate it wasn't) the makers of Superman II can be forgiven for one simple reason:  They didn't know any better! You see, this was a film made by a bunch of middle-aged guys who hadn't read a comic book since they were kids and, while they were certainly familiar with the basic premise of the character (strange visitor from another planet, more powerful than a locomotive, faster than a speeding bullet, etc.), they may not have been as familiar with some of his more subtle characteristics; in other words, they weren't exactly fanboys. And, Let's be honest, these guys should just be applauded for successfully moving the live-action superhero beyond the 1960's Batman.

As for other instances (particularly in the comics) where Superman has killed, the answer is a bit more complicated.  You see, Superman is a character with a 75 year publication history; dozens, if not hundreds, of creators have interpreted and re-interpreted the character in, literally, thousands of stories and, yes, a few of them have had Superman take lives (note:  when one looks at EVERY story EVER told with a superhero, I doubt you can find ANY superhero who is NOT guilty of manslaughter.... except maybe Captain Marvel).  Previous stories are often reworked or just out and out ignored by subsequent writers. So, let's simplify it a bit:  to all the stories where Superman takes a life that were written before, say, 1985, I will also give them the "they didn't know any better pass."

You see, in the mid-1980's, works like The Dark Knight Returns and Watchmen ushered in an era where superheroes were analyzed much more closely.  They were deconstructed and picked apart and the little things that made them distinctive, rather than being guidelines, now became guiding principles for the characters.  It wasn't just a 'general rule' that Superman didn't kill; it was a defining part of his persona.  So, let's look at the instances since this point where Superman has killed.  First of all, there aren't many; these days when Superman kills somebody, more often than not, it turns out to be some sort of alternate reality where Superman ends up setting up some sort of new world order that he rules with an iron fist. In fact, that is the entire premise of the new video game Injustice.

As for the mainstream continuity stories, there are two of note:

1. Superman, again, executes General Zod.  This was in the late 80's during John Byrne's run where he attempted to redefine and modernize the character.  Superman, executes a trio of Kryptonian villains fearing what might happen if three evil versions of himself were ever unleashed on the earth. First of all, this story was intentionally supposed be shocking; it was meant to play off of the expectation that Superman does NOT kill.  Secondly, over the course of several issues, there is fallout from this that sends Superman into a downward spiral of despair and results in his vowing to never kill again.  Also, this story has pretty much been ignored for most of the last 25 years and, in comics, when a story is ignored long enough--- you can pretend it didn't happen.
   
2. Doomsday: This one is tricky.  It was a fight to the death but, what most tend to remember about this fight is not Doomday's death but Superman's.  The final blow killed BOTH characters.  Also, it turned out that neither one really died--- also, this story was basically just a way to sell comics by 'killing' Superman.  Also, it was a pretty stupid story.

So, there are a couple of instances where Superman has killed in the last 25 years or so--- but they're mostly either ignored or just shitty writing; the best stories stick with the 'no kill rule'.  Which brings me to my next point:  In the best Superman stories, Superman is depicted has having an absolute no kill rule.  Among the three best Superman stories ever told are Alan Moore's Whatever Happened To The Man of Tomorrow?, Grant Morrison's All-Star Superman, and Mark Waid and Alex Ross's Kingdom Come. Superman's no kill rule is explicit and unbending in all of these; in fact, Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow ends with a Superman so distraught over having to kill one of his foes that, as penance, he exposes himself to Gold Kryptonite, wiping out his own powers forever.

So, in short, Superman has been allowed to kill in some stories but never in the best ones.

So, what about the idea that a 'more realistic' Superman would have to kill in order to be effective. True, in the real world, heroes, especially in the case of police and military, have to kill but, you know what's great about Superman?  He doesn't live in the real world.  If you're going to approach him realistically, you're already kind of missing the point.  Superman isn't supposed to be a reflection of reality; he is supposed to represent an ideal.  In the real world, sometimes it is necessary to kill but, in an ideal world, it shouldn't be.  We should aspire to be something greater.  That is what Superman represents; he is able to achieve the things that we cannot achieve.  In fact, I would argue that, the more bleak the real world becomes, the more important it becomes that Superman retains his principles. What's great about all fiction is that it isn't bound by the rules of reality.

So, in the end, the question is not has Superman killed nor is it would Superman kill but should Superman kill?  More specifically, when re-introducing this character to a new generation, if you're going to be true to the ideals that the character has come to represent over his 75 year history, SHOULD  you allow him to kill? The answer is no.

So, a few ways the filmmakers could have done it better:

1. Obviously, he doesn't  kill Zod; make the stakes something else.  Perhaps he has to choose with preserving Krypton's knowledge or saving a human, or make it so his actions result in Zod's death but it's not his hands around his neck; maybe it turns out that, not growing up here, Earth's atmosphere is toxic to him--- so Superman can either let the terra-forming continue, which would allow Zod's survival, or allow Zod to die--- it's not perfect, but you see where I'm going with this? This is off the top of my head, certainly given enough time the writers could have come up with something better.
2. He still kills Zod but the stakes are much higher: In the film, Zod is killed because he attempted to kill a small group (about a dozen) people with heat vision. If you really want to justify Superman using lethal force, put the whole city of Metropolis (hell, the whole planet earth) at risk.  Superman kills Zod or millions die; that's more feasible.
3. He eventually has to kill but NOT IN THE FIRST MOVIE, you build up to it; establish the rule, thus it is that much more significant when it is broken.

Also, they can redeem themselves in the sequel.  I'll give them credit, in the film, Superman is obviously remorseful for his actions.  Maybe they'll bring this up in the sequel; perhaps it will haunt him and be the reason he vows to never again take a life.  Maybe this was the plan all along but, given the sloppiness surrounding some other plot details, I doubt it.

In conclusion, I just want to note that Man of Steel is by no means a bad movie; it's good summer fun with lots of Superman punching things but, much like Superman itself, it should aspire to be something better.

Thor: The Dark World

This movie should have been a mess. It draws inspiration from Walt Simonson's seminal 1980's run on the Thor comic which was an odd blend of sci-fi, superheroes, and sword and sorcery.  Pulling off a concept such as this in a big-budget blockbuster is a challenge to say the least but, somehow, it works.

The film clocks in at just under 2 hours but it certainly feels longer.  It doesn't exactly drag but there is a lot of plot packed into that time. Some might even say the plot is overly complicated or convoluted. Fortunately, Thor: the Dark World has one overwhelmingly positive trait that allows you to look past its flaws: it's fun! In fact, while it is not the best Marvel movie by a long shot, it might be the most fun outside of Avengers. Not to mention the fact that, despite having neither Robert Downey Jr. or Joss Whedon, it still manages to have the sharpest wit of any of the films (with the possible exception of Avengers).

After the in-depth character study that was Iron Man 3, Thor: the Dark World comes as a refreshing surprise.  After all, you can look under the armor and explore who Tony Stark really is but, with Thor, there is no need; Thor, simply, is Thor.  These characters are gods and, therefore, archetypes.  They aren't meant to be multifaceted.  That doesn't mean that they aren't without complexity and the familial relationship between Thor, his brother, Loki, and the Asgardian royal family is mined to give the story some emotional depth but, at the end of the day, Thor is still the noble warrior and protector and Loki is still the treacherous villain. No in-depth psychological profiles are needed. 

It surpasses its predecessor in every way.  Mostly, it does this by taking the parts of that movie that worked best (Asgard and Thor smashing things with his hammer) and gives us a lot more of those.  In the case of Asgard, while the first film was about 30% Asgard, 70% Earth, Thor: The Dark World doesn't just reverse that dynamic but does it one better with a ratio of about 80% Asgard versus 20% earth.  Most of the earthbound sequences involve a lighthearted sub-plot featuring Darcy, her intern (yes, the intern gets her own intern), and Eric Selvigg trying to re-establish a link with Asgard.  It's welcome comic relief and helps keep the film grounded whenever it verges on becoming a bit heavy handed.

 The cast is excellent; I found Kat Dennings delightful as Darcy (which only serves as a testament to how truly bad Two Broke Girls must really be as I can't make it through 5 minutes of that show without wanting to claw my eyes out) and, of course, Tom Hiddleston steals every scene he's in as Loki.  Stellan Skaarsgard also provides a lot of the film's laughs, reprising his role as Erik Selvigg from the first Thor and Avengers and showing that not every mortal who finds himself caught up in superheroics manages to come out of things with all of their faculties in place.

The film looks awesome as well.  A lot of big budget blockbusters have been skimping when it comes to cinematography but not Thor: The Dark World; it is probably the most visually striking of any of the Marvel movies.

At the end of the day, Thor: The Dark World is by no means a work of art but it certainly is a lot of fun.

After Credit Thoughts: The after-credit scenes, which have now become ubiquitous in the Marvel movies, have now taken on a new role.  There is now a 'mid-credits' scene (the one that takes place right after the main credit sequence).  This started with the Thanos tease in Avengers and usually serves to tease a future film.  This allows the audience to leave the theater without feeling that they are missing something (with Thor: TDW it is a tease for next summer's Guardians of the Galaxy).  There is then another 'post-credits' sequence that is mostly a little something extra for the fans; the schwarma  scene from Avengers, Tony Stark's 'therapy' scene from Iron Man 3, and, for Thor: TDW, I'll just say stick around for the super-happy ending of the movie.

   

November's Album of the Month: Queen- The Game

I think this might be my favorite Queen album after A Night at the Opera.  In many ways, those two albums most represent Queen as a band.  A Night at the Opera is Queen at their most grandiose, a fun sort of tongue-in-cheek kind of prog-rock. The Game represents another aspect of what made Queen great: they're musical chameleons.  The album's opener, "Play the Game", and closer, "Save Me", are the only two tracks that are distinctly 'Queen'; the rest of the album they change up styles and, in doing so, become unrecognizable.

The most famous example, of course, is "Another One Bites the Dust."  It's well documented that, due to the track's success on Black radio, that many assumed that Queen were actually a Black band.  Most also know "Crazy Little Thing Called Love", the band's dead on take on rockabilly but the entire album is an experiment in musical dress up.

"Need Your Loving Tonight" is a Cars style, new wave number, "Rock It (Prime Jive)" is an attempt at heartland rock and "Don't Try Suicide" is clearly influenced by the Police (I can't find anything to confirm this, but my guess is that it might actually be Queen's way of addressing the controversy surrounding the Police's own suicide themed single, "I Can't Stand Losing You", which had been banned by the BBC the previous year).  Also, "Dragon Attack" is just a great tune that splits the difference between the funk of "Another One Bites the Dust" and Queen's typical, hard rock style.

Key Tracks: "Play the Game", "Another One Bites the Dust", "Dragon Attack", "Crazy Little Thing Called Love"

Halloween Movies for People who Don't Like Horror

I'm not a huge horror movie fan, but here are some of my favorite movies to watch on Halloween that can appeal to non-horror fans:

Fright Night

Campy fun, doesn't take itself too seriously.  Roddy McDowall is great as the Late Night Creepshow host/Vampire Hunter....

Cabin in the Woods

Joss Whedon has some meta-textual fun with the 'teen slasher' film genre.  Best Scene:  the discovery of the 'menagerie' filled with horror movie archetypes.

Young Frankenstein

A spoof of the classic universal horror films but, as Mel Brooks was a big fan of horror movies, it is one that is done with love.

The Sixth Sense

Admittedly, this film loses something after the first viewing but, still, it is an interesting and compelling story.  Also, take out some of the gore, and it's actually a pretty good family friendly film (as are most of Shamylan's earlier films).

Scream 

When all is said and done, Scream is just a slasher film but it's probably one of the most clever slasher films ever made.  It introduced the idea of deconstructing the genre that Cabin in the Woods would play off of years later, but it did it in much more accessible way that didn't go over the heads of the average horror fan (as Cabin in the Woods kinda did).

Shaun of the Dead

The brilliance of the Wright/Pegg/Frost collaborations (this is also true of this year's World's End) is the fact that you forget that you're watching a genre film (in this case, a Zombie movie) and you get caught up in the stories of the people involved.  Too often, zombie movies are about the zombies, Shaun of the Dead is definitively about Shaun and his friends.

Grind House: Planet Terror and Death Proof

Looking for a double feature?  Look no further! I have already covered this in more detail on this blog, so I will just say that Planet Terror is pure fun--- it might be a bit too gross for the squeamish but is a perfect homage to classic low-budget zombie movies.  Death Proof is a bit more difficult but, the best part, are the phony trailers between the two movies (available on the Blu-Ray edition).

Ghostbusters

My personal choice for Halloween viewing, Ghostbusters is a great comedy with just enough scares to qualify it as a genuine horror movie rather than a spoof and, on top of all that, it's also a big budget action blockbuster!  What more could you want?

Best. Ending. Ever. : The Graduate

I'm thinking of doing a series on this site Best. _____. Ever. where I examine my all time favorite... well, whatever it happens to be.  I think I'll start with the ending of The Graduate which happens to be my favorite ending of all time.  What are some of yours?

The final few minutes of The Graduate has become one of the most parodied/homaged sequences in film history and the basic trope of this ending has become one of the most imitated.  Countless romantic comedies have ended with a boy/girl rushing to stop the wedding/departure/bar mitzvah of the object of their affection.  This can be seen in movies as diverse as Crocodile Dundee, Runaway Bride, My Best Friend’s Wedding and pretty much every other Julia Roberts vehicle.

The difference in The Graduate comes about in that final thirty seconds before the credits roll.  First of all, there is the use of “Sound Of Silence”; not only is this song far from celebratory in its tone but it has also served as a theme of uncertainty and lack of direction throughout the film.  Then, we also have that moment where Ben and Elaine stare forward and take a deep breath before the smiles slowly fade from their faces.  I once heard this referred to as the movie’s “Oh, Shit!” moment.  This is the moment where the consequences of their actions finally set in; both have become so desperate to escape their past that they are willing to burn every bridge behind them by storming out of the wedding.  They have also invested a great deal of their future happiness in one another, in a relationship that still has a lot of issues that need to be worked out, mainly, that they don’t even really know each other that well (they’ve had one date and a few days of Ben pestering Elaine), not to mention the fact that he had and affair with her mother and that Elaine is, technically, married to someone else.  It is only in the final few seconds, however, that they realize all of this.  Their only hope is that their future life, however uncertain, is better than the lives that they are leaving behind.

Had the movie ended thirty seconds earlier, it still would have been a great movie. Perhaps it would still even be a classic but those final seconds that turn all the conventions of  ‘Happily Ever After’ on its ear, beautifully emphasized through the use of “Sound of Silence”, are what truly make this film a masterpiece.