Kingdom of Heaven (Ridley Scott, 2005)

God will understand. And if he doesn't, then he is not God and we need not worry.

Ridley Scott's been around a pretty long time, and he's covered the gamut of genres and settings, but in the last decade or so he became enamored with historical epics, producing Gladiator, Kingdom of Heaven, and Robin Hood. Gladiator was a success, Kingdom of Heaven met a rather mixed reception, and I haven't heard a word about Robin Hood which I'm taking as "no news is bad news." I'd seen Kingdom of Heaven twice before, the theatrical cut uncomfortably in 10th grade World History class, and the director's cut once a few years ago.

It's important to note that Kingdom of Heaven is one of the more famous recent cases of a film being butchered for the theater, and only really appreciable in the extended cut (funnily enough Scott had the same problem with Blade Runner, what's up with that Ridley?). The DC extends the running time from 144 minutes to 190 minutes and inserts entire plots that were cut out from the theatrical. I'm not going to do an in-depth compare and contrast, but I think I can fairly say not to waste your time with the theatrical.

Kingdom of Heaven takes on a segment of history that could be considered controversial even today, the crusades. Specifically, the fall of Jerusalem and its capture by the Muslims. It's a complex subject, and Scott does really well not to glorify or vilify either side of the project. Various characters deliver different outlooks on the conflict and religion itself - you'll find most are reasonable, subtle, and respectful portrayals, with the exception of the Bishop who was a little too goofy for the otherwise stone-serious film ("Let's convert to Islam... repent later!" was when he crossed the line for me).

On a related note, the writing is definitely mixed. Mostly good, but there are some enormous clunkers - especially a few bizarre, out of place, cheesy as all-get-out voiceovers by Bloom during one scene where he reminisces about his dead wife ("How can you be in hell...if you're in my heart?"). Missteps here and there aside, it gets the job done. The acting is also somewhat mixed - it's unfortunate that the only characters that get consistent screentime throughout the film are Orlando Bloom as Balian (a respectable performance, but he can be wooden), and Eva Green as Princess Sibylla (who does well when called upon for performing, but who is mostly relegated to staring forlornly at proceedings).

The rest of the impressive-on-paper cast is largely a series of glorified cameos which are nonetheless some of the best moments of the film - Brendan Gleeson is spectacularly unrecognizable as Raynald de Châtillon: this was my third watch of the film (and I'm a Brendan Gleeson fan) and I still didn't know it was him until the credits rolled. Edward Norton plays a king without ever showing his face, an admirable and thankless task, and Liam Neeson does well as a wise, if short-lived, father figure.

The production is spectacular and the battles epic, as one would expect. The director avoids the pithole of depicting battle after battle - some are classily bypassed without depiction, and those which are shown (especially the stand outside Kerak and the siege of Jerusalem) are tremendously impressive in scope and presentation. Scott does however tend to overwhelm the audience with constant epic music and melodrama, which leads to a sort of jadedness. And there are several other annoying cinematic habits on Scott's part - that tacky as hell "choppy slow motion" he abuses, the cheap "character about to be executed, sword falls CUT AWAY oh no they're dead!! CUT BACK oh no they put the sword NEXT to their head!" fakeout which is used MULTIPLE times, and so on. Despite the greatly increased runtime of the director's cut, the film still feels rushed until it reaches Jerusalem, with many scenes feeling overly curt and abbrieviated, not allowing the film the time it needs to breathe.

Flaws aside, the movie lives up to its epic billing and at the end you're feeling about as weary and defeated as the Christian occupants of Jerusalem. I can't comment on Kingdom of Heaven's historical accuracy, but I'm not a stickler for that kind of thing as long as the broad strokes are correct, and they were here. It's no Lawrence of Arabia (though it seems to subtly homage its predecessor at times), but it's a successful historical epic that leaves you feeling emptied and bitter at the idea of religious conflict. And if you didn't make the connection yourself, Scott helpfully points out that TO THIS DAY PEACE IN THE MIDDLE EAST REMAINS ELUSIVE!!!!

4/5 (previously 5/5)

Fast & Furious (2009)

Don't see it.

Modest Mouse Live at Stubb's BBQ 3/4/09

After I was accepted to UT, I began hearing all sorts of neat things about how Austin is the "live music capital of the world," how it's THE place to be if you like live music. Sounded great to me. But, tragically, through all of fall semester, the only live music I saw was one measly day of ACL. Admittedly an awesome day, but that's a pretty pathetic accomplishment for a music lover living in the self-proclaimed capital of live music. Fortunately, soon after spring semester started, show after show was announced and I soon found myself broke after buying tickets to several shows, the first of which was Modest Mouse.

It was my first show at Stubb's BBQ, which is apparently a quite prominent small venue, and I liked the place. I didn't have a lot of time to look around because I arrived as the opening bands were finishing up, but it functioned perfectly well.

I would be lying if I said I'd always been a big Modest Mouse fan. To tell the truth, I only knew two of their albums well (The Moon and Antarctica, Good News For People Who Love Bad News). But I really do enjoy those two albums, and I'd always seen a lot of acclaim for the group, so I purchased a ticket to see the (unfortunately Johnny Marr-less) band. Thanks to my natural sense of impeccable timing and my lanky maneuverability, I arrived as the opening band was wrapping up, but managed to sneak into a quite respectable spot.

Speaking of getting good spots, this might be an opportune time to mention a few of my concert peeves. One: people who shove past you to get to the front. Fuck those people. If you can get through people without physically pushing them out of the way, if you don't touch them or only slightly brush them when passing through, that's okay with me. But when you're pushing your way through and forcing people to step to the side to let you through, that is fucked up shit, and really annoying. Two: people who stick their cameras into the air and take pictures during songs. Keep them down, or do it in between songs if you must. It is really annoying when half the bloody audience has cameras in the air.

But, Modest Mouse. How to put it...they rocked the fuck out. They played at least one song off every album of theirs, with the most represented album being Good News. I would've liked to hear some more of The Moon and Antarctica, especially Tiny Cities Made of Ashes, but you can't always get what you want, I suppose. Fortunately we were spared Dance Hall, possibly my least favorite song by them, which has been rearing its unfortunate head at the occasional show on this tour. We did get one of my current favorites, Paper Thin Walls, which was notable because the band randomly stopped midway through the song, had a smoke and a drink, and then suddenly jumped back in where they left off. It was a bit of a "WTF" moment, but in the best sense possible. They also graced us with two brand spankin' new songs, The Whale Song, and Satellite Skin.

The most memorable highlights were two epic centerpieces, the unreleased Whale Song, and Doin' the Cockroach. Whale Song absolutely blew me away; it started with a bass riff and a tight beat, and turned into a monstrous several-minute instrumental jam, with a short part with vocals in the middle, and an instrumental outro. I know Modest Mouse may not be the first band that leaps to mind when you think "epic instrumental jams," but the song absolutely blew me away. Hopefully the studio version will do it justice. Doin' the Cockroach was also fantastic, and it was easily lead singer Isaac Brock's most spirited performance (though he was consistently energetic and lively): his antics included throwing his mic stand and mic into the audience, thrashing around on the floor, and yelling into his guitar pickups at the top of his lungs. It was absolutely captivating.

Another interesting note was that the band was performing with two drummers; I felt that their music really shone live because of the much more prominent and powerful drumming and percussion that accompanies performances. While the dual drumming seemed a bit gimmicky, it was still neat to watch. Isaac Brock was quite charismatic throughout, and between songs he kept things interesting by wishing crew happy birthday, singing what appeared to be a Wells Fargo jingle, and, most memorably, holding an extended conversation with a pair of fans who were apparently following the band on tour. He was mostly wondering how the fuck they managed to pull that off. While he berated them, it was all in good fun, and it really helped keep the mood light and fun. The only major disappointment of the show was them apparently having to stop playing a song or two early, because of a noise curfew. Very weak.

Watching the band play was great fun and gave me a new appreciation for them; rest assured that Modest Mouse will top my last.fm charts for the next week or two. Highly recommended if you get the chance to see them.

Setlist (my favorites asterisked):

1. 3rd Planet*
2. We've Got Everything
3. Black Cadillacs
4. Here It Comes
5. The View
6. Fire It Up
7. Alone Down There
8. King Rat*
9. Baby Blue Sedan
10. Whale Song*
11. Paper Thin Walls*
12. Blame It On the Tetons
13. Ohio
14. Float On*
15. Doin' the Cockroach*
16. The Good Times Are Killing Me

Encore:
17. Satellite Skin
18. Parting of the Sensory

Sigur Rós - Von (1997)

If you know me, you probably know that I adore the difficult-to-pronounce band out of Iceland called Sigur Rós ("victory rose"). They are in the running for one of my favorite bands ever, and for good reason; I would consider three of their albums perfect or borderline so, and they have made what I find to be some of the most emotional and moving music ever. Though they are known for their sprawling, epic masterpieces, the band started out quite differently; in exchange for painting a studio, they were allowed to record their debut album, Von. It is a very unusual album, with lengthy ambient passages (actually ambience, not just chill music). Recently I made a track-by-track review of the album and figured it'd be appropriate to post it here.

1. Sigur Rós: Ten minutes of ambient noises. Fuck yeah. Some of the earlier noises are neat sounding but about 6-7 minutes in there are screams and voices in the background that are creepy as fuck. There is nothing musical at all in this song, I'm afraid. Bizarre opener to an album...I would say its strongest merit is that because of it I can mention Sigur Rós when someone talks about bands with self-titled songs. Which is a bit sad. 3/10

2. Dögun: Huzzah, some semblance of musicality! This is the kind of ambient music that I prefer. Not random noises, but just extremely relaxed stuff. The singing is beautiful. Unfortunately about halfway through the music disappears in favor of the sounds of rain, indistinct voices, and a weird sound in the background that I can't describe....maybe a strangely distorted guitar with some sorta of wah. It's eerie, at any rate. Great start, but again with the ambient noises... 6/10

3. Hún Jörð...: This is more fucking like it. I love the quiet harmonics that make the groundwork of the song, but the real impressive aspect of the song is the singing...incredibly beautiful, but it sounds nothing like Jonsi does on later albums. I don't even know if it's him singing. The melody, while pretty, is uneasy and foreshadows dark things. The drumming shines as it lends the song a powerful sense of urgency without dominating the singing in any way. The song is very repetitive...the singing pretty much repeats the same thing over and over again, with more intense instrumentation each time, but it works so well. I could listen to that vocal melody over and over and over. Anyway basically shit gets in tents. Nothing else to it. Maybe I only like it so much because it's such a stark contrast to the first two songs full of ambient noise, but I really think it's a great song, even if it sounds nothing like their later music that I like so much. I love the part towards the end where the song is rewound and skips, it's a really trippy effect that works eerily well (even if it is a bit gimmicky). The first time I heard it, I thought my computer was messing up. The distorted laughter is really creepy but really awesome. And the screaming at 6:50 gives me shivers. Good shit. 9.4/10

4. Leit að lífi: More random ambient thingies. Yay! Not really. For some reason I'm reminded of The Beatles and their brief experiment with things of the sort. As it's simply a short interlude, no rating.

5. Myrkur: Another real song! Kickass. Myrkur has always heavily reminded me of She Sells Sanctuary by The Cult, which is in no way a bad thing. Myrkur is very dream poppy and very different from their later albums, but I love it. Again the vocals are not characteristic of later Jonsi at all, and they sound pretty similar to the ones on Hún Jörð, albeit with a friendlier and less epic melody. The song is pretty unchanging throughout its six minute run, but it doesn't feel overlong to me. 9/10

6. 18 sekúndur fyrir sólarupprás: "18 seconds before sunrise"...aka 18 seconds of silence. No rating for obvious reasons. They named their website after this song (or whatever it is).

7. Hafssól: More ambient noises as an intro. They seamlessly transition into more musical ambiance with some more heavenly singing. Very well done in that regard. Only thing is, nothing ever really happens in the song. Just more musical ambiance. It beats the hell out of unmusical ambiance, true, but still, it would be nice if it were more engaging. That said, I think it's probably the best ambient track on the album. 7/10

8. Veröld ný óg óð: A very strange piece of work that is made up of various percussive sounds overlapping with one another. Reminds me of Convergence by Jonny Greenwood. Creepy and maybe more interesting than some of the other ambient noises on the album, but still ambient noises. 4/10

9. Von: The very beginning of this song really creeped me out the first time I heard it because it makes the exact sound that I hear in my head when there is a slight hum when I exhale through my nose. Hard to explain but it's weird. Anyway. Another regular song! I love the percussion, and the singing is more Jonsi-like than perhaps anything on the album. And, as such, it is beautiful. Simple but amazing, and featuring acoustic guitar, which came as a bit of a shocker given the album up to this point. 9.6/10

10. Mistur: Short ambient interlude #2. Or #3 if you count the 18 seconds of silence from before. No rating.

11. Syndir Guðs (Opinberun frelsarans): The beginning is similar to Olsen Olsen from their second album, but the similarities end at the bass riff. There is really some bizarre stuff going on here. Strange noises fly around, that almost sound like children's toys, or maybe a robot communicating in robot speak. I like what they do with the vocals, singing in one ear and whispering in the other. Really strange effect but I like it. This song manages to unite some of the creepy elements with some of the beautiful ones, and for that reason I think it is one of the most interesting tracks, if not one of the very best. 9.3/10

12. Rukrym: Six minutes of silence, and then a hidden track which consists of some of Myrkur played backwards. Vaguely novel but they already did the same thing once on the album and it just doesn't add anything. No rating, similar to the case with Avalon on Agaetis Byrjun.

Average Score: 7.15/10
My Rating: 7/10

Von is a very strange album to debut with. It has almost no hints of Sigur Rós's future sound. The actual songs range from good to amazing, but to be honest, I feel like they wasted far too much time dicking around with ambient noises. I mean sure it's good for a laugh, but should you start your debut album off with 15 minutes worth of ambiance before anything vaguely interesting happens? No, you shouldn't. In a way I admire them for having the balls to do so. But in another way I don't, because I don't think they accomplished anything artistically by doing so, and I always skip the first two tracks on the rare occasion that I even bother to listen to the album in the first place beyond throwing one of the random tracks I actually like on. I do, however, admire the cover. I think it is very representative of the album as a whole...it is both creepy and beautiful at the same time. But mostly creepy.

Do I recommend this album to you? Only if you either: a) have explored all Sigur Rós's other work and are curious, b) enjoy creepy ambient noises, or c) are very patient and willing to make it through a lot of potentially uninteresting stuff for some payoff that may not be that great. Otherwise, stay away and enjoy the band's later, more accessible and much superior work. But it is at the very least interesting to see how the band started. They only sold 313 copies in the first year. Small start, but hey, they must have done something right.

Sebastien Tellier writes Reckoner three years before Radiohead

Sebastien Tellier - La Ritournelle

Radiohead - Reckoner

Coincidence? YOU DECIDE.

The Pains of Being Pure at Heart - The Pains of Being Pure at Heart (2009)

Well, a few days after starting my so-called music blog, I've reviewed more movies than I have albums. Dat shit ain't right. So, after doing a little brainstorming with my homies at M:RE, I remembered an interesting album that I had recently acquired which seemed perfect. The Pains of Being Pure at Heart (henceforth "The Pains") are an inconveniently named band that carry on the delightful dream pop tradition of notable bands such as M83, The Jesus and Mary Chain, and of course the incomparable My Bloody Valentine.

The self-titled debut opens with pleasing feedback and quickly shoots into a fast-paced, percussionless opener entitled "Contender". The song features a really neat combination of guitar sounds that My Bloody Valentine used to great effect on tracks like Sometimes: a constant stream of fuzzy distortion laying underneath a strummed acoustic guitar. The acoustic guitar is ultimately drowned out, with the exception of the sound of the pick hitting the strings. Most of the songs on the album use some variation on this theme, but it's a really fun sound so it doesn't become repetitive unless you didn't enjoy it in the first place.

Immediately noticeable upon listening is that the album is consistently fast, and bright, a noticeable departure from most of The Pains' apparent shoegaze influences; The Jesus and Mary Chain and My Bloody Valentine were both rather plodding for the most part, and they had a tendency to be on the sad and wistful side. In this sense The Pains are akin to M83; however, I unfailingly get a headache when listening to M83 for more than a song or two, and I felt no such malady approaching even upon repeated listens of The Pains' album.

The Pains of Being Pure at Heart is a short album, clocking in at just under 35 minutes. The length works well because most of the songs are to the point as well as on the shorter side. I've always had a weakness for albums that hit the spot and then wrap things up before their welcome is worn out. The length also prevents their admittedly unvaried sound from becoming stale. Of course, whoever heard of a shoegaze album with significant variety in sound? A prerequisite to flowing well as a shoegaze album is keeping the thickly distorted guitar and faint, subdued vocals. Any track attempting to mix up the sound significantly would stick out like a sore thumb. Their closest attempt to do so would be A Teenager in Love, which sounds stripped down during the verses; really, it's the same sound with most of the guitars simply removed for a period.

I would go so far as to say there are no weak tracks on the album. But, as I said earlier, they don't stray far from their poppy formula, so the lack of risk-taking could be critiqued. Their sound is really quite derivative and unoriginal, but the strength of the songwriting is more than enough to excuse them sounding a bit too much like their influences. The beginning of Gentle Sons is almost directly ripped from The Jesus and Mary Chain's signature "doom...doom doom, CH" drumbeat. It seems more of an homage than a ripoff, however, and though I almost forget that I'm not listening to that Scottish band from the 80s, it's a positive deception, if anything.

The Pains of Being Pure at Heart's debut album is a concise, lighthearted effort that combines indie pop melodies and tight drumming with textured guitar and whispy vocals. It is ultimately far from innovative, but the weaknesses are easily overlooked for now, and here's to hoping that the band succeeds and manages to come into their own sound. Recommended.

Stream the entire album for free on its Last.fm page here.

The Fountain (2006)

Being a loser, I found myself trying to decide what movie to watch Saturday night rather than being out with friends. After a halfhearted attempt to watch The Wrestler and finish up my 2008 film roundup, I found myself looking at the director's Wikipedia page. In fact, given my utter lack of interest in all things wrestling-related, the only reason I was giving The Wrestler a shot was because it was directed by Darren Aronofsky, who also happened to direct Requiem for a Dream, which also happens to be a heartbreakingly depressing movie, among my favorites.

As I skimmed Aronofsky's page, I noticed that he directed The Fountain, a film whose name I had been seeing all over the place recently, but which I had never seen. I didn't know anything about it at all, really. But I'm always up for a blind watch, so I promptly acquired the movie in 1080p and pressed play.

I'm not sure what I was expecting, but whatever it was, The Fountain wasn't it. The basic premise of the movie is that it follows three stories in three time periods (all starring Hugh Jackman and Rachel Weisz): a conquistador searching for the Tree of Life, a modern day scientist searching for the cure to his wife's cancer, and a mystical spacefarer in the distant future journeying across the universe with a strange tree. The movie jumps around between the three stories, but aside from the very beginning, I never found myself too confused or disoriented. The stories are thematically and perhaps even directly interwoven, and it is a rather interesting way to present what was apparently marketed as a science fiction film. There is really hardly any science fiction aspect to the movie at all, so don't think of it in that way. I would argue it's much more of a "fantasy" film, but I wouldn't pin it down to a genre. At any rate, I'm not going to divulge any more details of the story, but I assure you that it is an interesting one.

What I found to be easily the most impressive aspect of the movie were the visuals. The movie was on a smaller budget than Aronofsky would've liked, so fancy big budget effects were out of the question. So Aronofsky, the ambitious bastard, decided he wanted to go for the sort of visuals that wouldn't look outdated days from now, as 2001: A Space Odyssey accomplished (and this isn't the last time in this review you'll hear of Kubrick's magnum opus). So he went to a very specialized photography and shot an astonishing amount of footage of bacteria and chemicals growing and reacting in petri dishes. This footage combined with a greenscreen made for some mindboggling effects. Honestly, I think this is one of my favorite movies ever, visually. The overriding color is gold, as you can tell from the poster, and the color becomes a beautiful motif throughout the film. I'm really glad I was able to watch it in HD, you should too if you have the opportunity.

The acting is solid all around, though it's not mindblowing, and frankly, it doesn't need to be. Hugh Jackman has the strongest performance, with Ellen Burstyn (who previously starred in Aronofsky's Requiem for a Dream) in a small role that she nevertheless manages to shine in. Rachel Weisz was quite suitable and I can't complain, but she didn't particularly impress me either. As I said, the acting isn't the best out there - not that it's bad by any stretch of imagination - but the acting really isn't the most important aspect of the film.

What really shined about the film, other than the visuals, was that it gave me a lot to think about. It has some really interesting themes relating to life, love, death, and immortality. And it's delightfully fun searching for and reflecting on the parallels between the three stories. The parallels aren't crammed down your throat (few things irk me more than when movies plainly state their themes and messages as if the viewer is incapable of figuring them out for themself), but they're quite clearly there. The climax, the culmination of all three stories, includes one particular short scene that absolutely blew my mind and gave me shivers. Absolutely fantastic.

There's one last thing I should mention, and that's the fact that The Fountain is an artsy film. There's no denying it. If you're the type of person who found 2001: A Space Odyssey, Apocalypse Now, or There Will Be Blood too artsy, long, plodding, pretentious, or pointless, then The Fountain is not for you. I could say that it'll be above your head, or that you're too unintelligent for it, or that it's a thinking man's movie, but I won't. I really can see how someone could consider the whole thing a load of overindulgent crap. So if you fall into the category mentioned, don't bother. Otherwise, I heartily recommend it as a film that will dazzle the eyes and intrigue the mind.