Adventures in TO Part 3: The Return of The Return

"Bleating Hearts" (2012, label unknown)

2012-02-13T18:47:00.002-05:00

Apparently these guys are not to be confused with an 80s band with a very similar name.

I like the aesthetic despite the utter lack of originality (I am a sucker for horns) and can't help thinking that with repeated listens I would really, really like this, even though the everything is really too obvious and easy to be considered outstanding or remarkable. 7/0

"Wings of Desire" by Wim Wenders (1987)

2012-02-13T18:39:00.002-05:00

I think that Wenders is perhaps the poor man's Fassbinder. He clearly has many similar abilities: this film has some absolutely spectacular (and ballsy) shots in it, and has a pretty great sound design, both things Fassbinder was also extremely adept at. But where Fassbinder grabbed you with his very human dramas (despite his characters sometimes being so eccentric as to be unlikeable) Wenders' films seem to almost always lack the kind of compelling - and often difficult - stories that Fassbinder liked to tell. And this is as true of this film, where Wenders gives us a story about...angels.
Now, I don't know if it's just because of my complete lack of interest in a supposed alternate reality or what, but frankly I just can't relate to immortals. I can't relate to transvesties and transsexuals either, but at least they are human beings. Wenders gives us angels that are vaguely human but obviously not human in important ways. Leaving aside the question of whether beings from a reality greater than our own would resemble human beings, we are still left with pretty boring angels who merely yearn to be human. Being human myself, I have problems empathizing with such characters, despite the beauty of the shots. Without these characters, the story - such as it is - lacks any kind of pull.
The second major issue is his pacing: it takes a very long time for the story to start and though I get the idea of that (he is trying to set up the monotony of the angels' existence, no doubt), it seems like it could be a little more compelling, a little better paced. The bigger pacing issue comes with the climax. I love the Bad Seeds, but I don't really see how hearing them perform two songs is necessary to the film (already very deliberately paced).
I must say I generally enjoyed the Peter Falk angle, tehehe...until I found out his true nature, and then I sighed and resigned myself to admiring aspects of this movie but generally not liking it very much.

Results of the first ever beer tasting

2012-02-13T08:46:00.002-05:00

On Saturday, the Malty Tasker hosted a beer tasting for his birthday. We tried 16 (well, actually 17) beers. Here are the results (all out of 50):

#1 St. Ambroise Russian Imperial Stout 43.3
#2 Dieu du Ciel Peche Mortel 42.6
#3 Samuel Smith's Oatmeal Stout 42.5
#4 St. Bernardus Abt 12 41.8
#5 Rochefort 10 41.75
#6T Rochefort 8 39.8
#6T Central City Red Racer IPA 39.8
#8T Young's Double Chocolate Stout 39.3
#8T Fuller's London Porter 39.3
#10T Henry's Irish Red Ale 38.5
#10T Chimay White 38.5
#12T Hobgoblin 37.7
#12T Muskoka Dark 37.7
#12T Black Oak Pale Ale 37.7
#15 Hockley Stout 35
#16 Wells IPA 32.8

"Silver Skies" by Lake Forest (2012)

2012-02-12T16:04:00.001-05:00

So incredibly meh. 5/10

"A Sleep and a Forgetting" by Islands (2012, Anti)

2012-02-11T10:08:00.000-05:00

This guy says this is his soul album. I know nothing about him but I know a little bit about soul and, well, this lacks it. Middle of the road indie pop that doesn't in anyway offend, challenge or inspire. Blah.

L'amour de loin by the Canadian Opera Company

2012-02-11T09:54:00.000-05:00

I'm pretty sure I forgot to tell you that we went to a performance of Tosca a few weeks ago. For me it was a real experience to see a Puccini even one I didn't know. I know reviewers felt like the leads were a little wooden but having only seen a couple operas in my life, I couldn't tell. I don't know the difference between great singing and bad acting and great singing and good acting, especially when I'm in the last row of whatever that theatre is called in the Four Seasons Centre (if you have been in there you know what I'm talking about). I quite enjoyed Tosca.

Last night we went to see Kaija Saariaho's L'amour de loin (yes, a French opera by a Finnish composer). From the outset I was pretty sure I was going to like it. I knew it was recent and I knew there was an electronic component of the score, so that was exciting. On the other hand, I had never heard of Saariaho and I had no idea whether I was about to see some kind of revivalist shit.

But I shouldn't have been worried. The music was wonderful. It combined seemingly numerous devices of twentieth century "classical" music into something that slowly seeped into your mind. By the end I was almost humming along, despite how un-hummable the whole thing was. There was a huge influence of the pre-serialist modernists and impressionists, me thinks, as there was a heavy dose of xylophones and other percussion. There were atonal moments (but very slight and subtle ones), there was a harp duo (!) in the orchestra that regularly played some of the major motifs and themes. The electronic component grew and grew as the opera went on, to the final act where at times the orchestra didn't appear to be playing at all, and we just listened to loops. Even though the singing didn't seem to quite fit at first, I began to get quite impressed. The vocalists were able to show off aspects of their voices that don't always come through in the older operas (at one point the lead female gets downright guttural) The whole thing was very impressive.

I can't say the same positive things about the libretto or the staging. Nothing happens in this opera. There is very little plot and there is very little in the way of anything beyond the singers telling us what they feel. Yes, there are a couple of good lines that should have elicited laughs from the crowd (I'm guessing the music was telling them it was "serious") but on the whole the libretto is shockingly sparse and it sort of made me wonder what captivated the creators about this story. Nothing about the story captivated me. Now, I don't normally care about the libretto: opera plots are generally stupid. But when you watch something for 2 1/2 hours the plot should at least grab you at some level. So I'm pretty sure that though I want to buy a recording (they weren't selling it unfortunately) I have no interest in sitting through it again in a theatre, unless of course someone comes up with a better staging.

That was my other issue. Most of the people who actually stayed for the full five acts (I would say less than 2/3 of the original crowd) were talking in rapture about the staging. I must admit it was innovative: it combined ballet, acrobatics, film, some tricks you might see in a theatre and some tricks you might see in the circus (fitting due to the director's circus background) together. Sure, that sounds interesting. But it reeked of the director throwing up his hands and saying "I don't know what to do with this plot because nothing happens!" It was very busy. There were three of the two leads (one singer each, two dancers each) and two of the third lead (only really three characters in the opera) and there lots of other people on stage doing whatever it was they were doing, all seeming attempts to distract us from the fact that nothing happens. I would have been happier to watch a symphony perform this with three singers and a choir and, say, some kind of video thing in the background (like a moving painting). I think that would have been more effective.

As a result, though I loved the music and am adding it to my list of works to acquire, I can't really say it is a great opera because I think operas should have at least some kind of plot that allows an effective staging. Still worth seeing though if you like your music modern, or if you like your staging on the quirky side of quirky.

"Barchords" by Bahamas (2012)

2012-02-09T18:50:00.002-05:00

He certainly has a knack for melody and when he wants to he can play. But this is very middle of the road. 6/10

"Downtown" by Erin Passmore (2012)

2012-02-07T20:02:00.001-05:00

She is clearly very talented, as the varied approach to the arrangements shows. But often she sounds too much like Joni Mitchell. 6/10

Crazy Italians: On the Cultural Disconnect Between Myself and Italian Cinema

2012-02-06T12:38:00.002-05:00

Nearly a decade ago, when I was living in Australia, I went for a couple of organized tours of parts of the country I had never been too. One such tour occurred in the southwestern corner of Western Australia, an area that is one of the most beautiful I have ever been to in my limited travels. On this tour were, say, 11-12 people.

Four of them were Italian.

They were some of the loudest, most obnoxious people I have ever met: they fought with each other, the guide, and us, and alternatively praised each other and us out of proportion; they interrupted everyone; they constantly switched languages so that you would be listening to what one was saying and then you couldn't here the aside to the friend; they ignored most of the guide's and tour company's rules and guidelines whenever they felt like it (but also chastised others for the same); during a canoe race, after they had been given admittedly limited instruction on how to canoe (which they talked through), they all paddled on one side, causing their canoe to turn immediately into the next canoe, tipping that one over and causing the loss of the latter canoe's belongings (this group has also ignored the instructions as they had not secured their belongings in the watertight, buoyant containers), including three digital cameras; etc. We got to calling them 'Crazy Italians' (pronounced with a heavy Italian accent) behind their back and then eventually to their faces; they reveled in that.

It seems a little funny to me that I would have so many issues with so many Italian films as Italian movies (mind you, Italian movies in English) were among the first foreign films I discovered and loved. I am speaking of course of Sergio Leone's spaghetti westerns. Now, admittedly, just because one loves one genre doesn't guarantee that one will love all films from a certain country (I went through a samurai movie phase, but can't say that I love Japanese cinema unconditionally, and regularly have a similar cultural disconnect issue with the Japanese), but I still feel like something went wrong.

I don't dislike all Italian cinema, obviously. I find the films of Antonioni, Bertolucci, Leone and Rosselini to be anywhere from interesting failures to among the greatest films of the 20th century. More recently, I have seen at least one exceptional film from Italy (Marco Tullio Giordano's Best of Youth). But, on the whole, I have a huge problem with most Italian movies I see.

I came to this realization while watching Asia Argento's ridonculously self-indulgent mess of a debut film, The Scarlet Diva. I have seen few of her father's movies, but the ones I have seen are rumoured to be among his best. I can't say that I have been particularly impressed with Dario Argento's abilities, or his concept of horror (my limited experience with him suggests that we find different things scary) but I can see his utter disregard for internal coherence (and much of Italian cinema's disregard of it, what we might call the "fantastical element" in Italian cinema) in his daughter's debut, even if there are no glaring plot wholes (in the shreds of a plot) in it. Though there are moments in the film that are quite funny (the entire Gus Van Sant gag, for example), and others that do create pathos well, there are so many more moments where she fails to effectively convey what she is trying to say, even though it is fairly obvious that she is trying to make a point about how the film industry treats women. The film is full of unnecessary jump cuts, drug/alcohol trips and all sorts of other things you might expect from a first time director. In fact, the film has two giant signs hanging around its neck: "This film was made by a first time director" and "This film was made by an Italian."

I think the reason I can tolerate (and in some cases venerate) Antonioni et al. is because they don't generally have that fantastical element in their work. They often operate within (or more particularly, without) the genre cliches of English language cinema and, more often than not, set their films in a world where the supernatural is not present or at least barely present.

But the majority of Italian films that I have seen do operate in a world where the supernatural plays some kind of influence (or have characters who believe such things, or at least have a filmmaking style influenced by films about the supernatural, as is the case with The Scarlet Diva) and I can't abide that if the characters aren't interesting. And that is the other problem: Italian films tend to be populated with Italians of the kind I met on my trip, the kind of people I don't need to see again, even on screen.

"Guns, Sex & Glory" by Rococode (2012, label unknown)

2012-02-04T09:22:00.000-05:00

Listening to and liking interesting music doesn't always entail making interesting music. Case in point: Rococode. There are tons of ideas going on under the surface: the time signatures are often extraordinarily whacky (for pop rock), there are both obvious and not so obvious breakdowns that violate pop rock rules/conventions, and little vamps that go on too long. Someone in this band likes interesting music. Maybe the whole band. The problem is that their desire to write hooks and/or their desire to have people sing along with them (and really, I have no idea where this desire comes from: "all I want to do when I grow up is write catchy music!") overwhelms the clear interest in Interesting Music. So, while this should be miles beyond everyday pop rock, it isn't. It's stuck pandering to people who would be alienated by what's under the service through hooks and lyrics that don't make you think. 6/10

"Blues Funeral" by Mark Lanegan Band (2012, 4AD)

2012-02-02T21:35:00.002-05:00

Very meh. Has nothing on par with his best songs and contains unwelcome stylistic diversions that just don't work. When you name something "blues funeral" you sort of expect...you know, blues.

"Wisdom" by Branches (2012)

2012-02-01T21:03:00.003-05:00

I'm trying to figure out why I or anyone else would listen to this over anything else. 5/10.

"Resolution" by Lamb of God (2012, Epic)

2012-01-30T20:24:00.002-05:00

Well, unlike some metal bands they actually try the odd different thing...within limits. It's hot to hear something so lauded and realize that...well, it's a relative thing as it always is with metalheads. If all you do is listen to metal, I guess this sounds pretty amazing. Outside of that context it sounds more like an okay metal band, who at least change their sound up from song to song (most of the time) but who are hardly going to convert me with something so conventional.

"In the Rock Hall" by Bidiniband (2012, maybe released on Pheremone)

2012-01-30T20:21:00.003-05:00

I can't deny this guy's knack for hooks. They seem to come super easy. And he has a sense of how to arrange a song, too. But his lyrics are often pretty bad (or for reasons I cannot figure out, he merely lifts them from famous songs...no doubt as tribute, but still) and well, I can't say that I've ever liked easy pop rock. It just sounds like they're not trying that hard. Knowing nothing about the Rheostatics, I can't say how this compares, but it is certainly merely above average out of that context. 6/10.

"Over the Bluffs" by the Holiday Crowd

2012-01-30T20:17:00.001-05:00

I tried to listen to this but I could not give it my customary three listens for any conceivable reason. It sounds like Morrissey having taken complete control of Joy Division (with a different guitarist). It is plagiarism. Yuck.

The NBA still needs to adopt the CFL crossover rule in order to be fair

2012-01-29T08:56:00.000-05:00

A quarter of the way through the season, it is already apparent, as it seems to be every season, that some decent western conference teams will be left out of the playoffs for yet another year. Here are the standings of the top 20 teams by record:

1. OKC: 0.842
2. Chicago: .810 (1st in the east)
3. Denver: 07.37 (2nd in the west)
3. Miami: .737 (2nd in the east)
5. Philly: 0.7 (3rd in the east)
5. Atlanta: 0.7 (3rd in the east)
7. Indiana: 0.667 (5th in the east)
8. Orlando: 0.632 (6th in the east)
9. LAC: 0.625 (3rd in the west)
10. Utah: 0.611 (technically 5th in the west, because of division leaders)
11. Dallas: 0.6 (6th in the west)
11. Houston: 0.6 (4th in the west)
11. Portland: 0.6 (6th in the west)
11. San Antonio: 0.6 (6th in the west)
15. LAL: 0.550 (9th in the west)
16. Memphis: 0.526 (10th in the west)
17. Boston: 0.500 (7th in the east)
18. Minnesota: 0.474 (11th in the west)
19. Milwaukee: 0.421 (8th in the east)
20. Cleveland: 0.389 (9th in the east)

Something is seriously wrong here. Aside from the fact that the Jazz wouldn't get home court despite deserving it (Houston gets it because of geography), we have two teams in the east that should - by any good measure - not make the playoffs, in the Celtics and Bucks. But because of the current standings not only would the Lakers and Grizzlies (two above 0.500 teams) not make it, but the Timberwolves, who are at this point clearly superior to the Bucks, would also not make it. Yes, for once more of the better teams are in the east this year, but the east still isn't strong enough to furnish 8 playoff teams. Until it is, there should be a crossover, and the preference should be to have all +0.500 teams in the playoffs. I think that would make for better basketball, personally.

On a complete other note: how the fuck is Cleveland winning over 1/3 of their games?

"Old Ideas" by Leonard Cohen (2012, Columbia)

2012-01-28T12:16:00.000-05:00

Cohen is one of the few major songwriters from the 60s that I have somehow managed to avoid (not on purpose) so I am hardly the guy to put this in its proper place. I don't really know where it sits in his catalogue. That being said,
The songs are pretty strong and the arrangements are usually tasteful and restrained enough not to interfere. I know Cohen's voice and don't have issues with it (occasionally he reminds me of a lower Dylan during a particular phrase). The one general issue I have with some of his songs is the over-use of biblical cliches, but they are at least over-used better than most other songwriters would over-use them.

"No. 1 Remixes" by Christina Vantzou (2012, don't know the label)

2012-01-27T11:53:00.002-05:00

Fine, but who hasn't heard this a million times since Eno invented it in the mid 70s?

What's the last cartoon you watched?

2012-01-22T11:08:00.003-05:00

I can't remember but it was just the other day. I can't really say.

Ask me anything

What made you smile today?

2012-01-22T11:08:00.001-05:00

Not formspring.

Ask me anything

formspring.me

2012-01-22T11:07:00.001-05:00

Ask me anything http://www.formspring.me/superchicken46

Accuracy in the media

2012-01-22T10:58:00.002-05:00

During the hullabaloo about the SOPA boycott various members of the US Congress and Senate were quoted saying utterly ridiculous things about how wikipedia - a free site - was punishing its consumers (and other such idiotic things: apparently Congressmen and Senators only approve of grandstanding when they do it themselves). But the worst comments I saw came from a former US Senator who is now the head of the MPAA. Because he is a former US Senator, the articles I read inclusively treated him as if he were a spokesperson for the government. But the MPAA is not a government agency; rather it is an organization funded by major studios whose duty it is is to use supposed "moral standards" (which have never been made clear) to harm independent film. We are supposed to take this man's comments about anything related to SOPA seriously? We are supposed to take anything anyone related to the MPAA takes seriously? Most people don't know the full details of the MPAA. Isn't it responsible journalism for the reporter to explain what the MPAA is and what it really does (as opposed to what it claims to do through press releases)?

The Campaign to Fire Brian Burke: Fabian Brunnstrom

2012-01-12T18:02:00.003-05:00

Leafs got: Fabian Brunnstrom, LW, Stars got Mikhail Stefanovich, C

The infamous Brunnstrom, who was signed to the NHL based on a YouTube video, finally came to Toronto. Burke had previously pursued him and fortunately lost out. Brunnstrom's NHL totals to date: 41 points in 104 games. Sure, he hasn't been given a full season, but his AHL numbers are not exactly mind-blowing either. If the Leafs were going to acquire this incredibly overhyped player, at least they gave up nothing, literally. Stefanovitch has been playing in the KHL since midway through last year and the Leafs merely gave up his rights. Presumably Burke knew he wasn't coming here and let the Stars believe what most NHL teams want to believe about Russian snipers in the KHL: that they want to come over to the NHL, surround themselves with players (and fans) who speak another language, and pay taxes on their lower salaries.

As much as I want to criticize Burke for going after Brunnstrom in the first place, I can't really since they got him for nothing. Brunnstrom is now playing for the Wings' AHL team (he signed with them this offseason) and is producing at around 0.5ppg, which is astoundingly mundane.

NHL 1/2 Season Awards

2012-01-08T11:57:00.001-05:00

Automatic Awards:

The Rocket Richard: Steven Stamkos: 28G in 40GP

The Gretzky/Oates (my award for most assists): Henrik Sedin: 38A in 42GP

The Art Ross: Sedin again: 49P in 42GP

The Orr (my award for most goals by a D): Jason Garrison (who?): 11G in 41GP

The Bourque? (My award for most assists by a D): Erik Karlsson: 34A in 42GP

The Coffey (my award for the most points by a D): Karlsson again: 39P in 42GP

The Jennings: Tim Thomas and Tukka Rask: 1.75GAA

The Crozier: Brian Elliot: .940 Save Percentage

Voted on Awards:
The Hart (basing it on the best player on the best team):
Dan Girardi (which demonstrates the flaw with this approach): 3G, 12A for 15P in 39GP, +7, 27:19ATOI OR
Ryan Callaghan: 14G, 17A for 31P in 39GP, +6, 20:55 ATOI, 58% face-off percentage

The Norris:
Shea Weber: 26:19 ATOI, +12, 30P, 70 hits, 54 blocked shots
OR
Zdano Chara: 24:28 ATOI, +27, 25P, 69 hits, 39 blocked shots

The Selke: A toss up between:
Ryan O'Reilly: +42 takeaways/giveaways, , 30 hits, 21 blocked shots, 54% face-offs, 18:47ATOI
Pavel Datsyuk: +37 takeaways/giveaways, , 45 hits, 15 blocked shots, 56% face-offs, 18:56ATOI
Jonathan Toews: +36 Takeaways/Giveaways, +14, 21 hits, 13 blocked shots, 60% face-offs, 21:04ATOI

The Harvey (my award for the best defensive D): Dan Girardi?
The Vezina: Henrik Lundqvist: 18W, 1.89GAA, .939 SV percentage
The Calder: Ryan Nugent-Hopkins: 13G, 22A for 45P i 38GP

The Hits Just Keep on Coming when you Publish with iUniverse

2012-01-04T19:55:00.002-05:00

So today I finally called to pay iUniverse for my "free" copies (I am paying the shipping). I called with my project number in hand but that wasn't good enough to them. The lady immediately tried to pass me off to my consultant's voicemail (as my consultant has gone home for the day) because I didn't have my "order number" (the system is so unsophisticated as one department cannot look up things another department can look up). Fortunately I found my order number in time. Then, I asked the all important question of whether my 21 (!!!) copies would be delivered "no signature required" (if they are not, carless Riley has to go to the Purolator depot at Kipling and Norseman to pick them up...how is that happening) and the lady's response was that iUniverse would be providing me with a tracking number which should satisfy me. This company is fucking useless.

The Best (New) Albums I Heard in 2011

2011-12-31T15:02:00.002-05:00

I have heard a lot of new music (that wasn't released this year) this year; more than normal in fact. That's courtesy the Hamilton Public Library. As a result, though I managed to listen to as much (or perhaps more) new music this, I haven't had time to revisit any of it. As a result, the majority of these comments were made when I last listened to the albums, not any time recently. It's entirely possible I will change my mind about many of these the next time I listen to them. I have added notes where appropriate.

1. Tom Waits: Bad as Me (8/10)
I can't really think of anything negative to say about this. It certainly lacks the unity or cohesiveness and/or adventurousness of his very best stuff but the songs are pretty strong and the arrangements are outstanding as always.

2. Man Man: Life Fantastic (8/10)
Not nearly as zany as the last time out, but I like it. I like it more with alcohol (what does that mean?) but I still like it.
Dec 31 2011: I absolutely loved their last album, so this is actually fairly high praise.

3. Braids: Native Speaker (7/10)
There is a lot here that reminds me of Animal Collective, even though there is a chick singing, they are making much of the noise with guitars instead of keyboards, and there is a live drummer. At times the singer sounds a little too much like Bjork (on the title track particularly). But on the whole I think I like this. I may change my mind. Who knows?
Dec 31 2011: Though I never imagined it at the time, this was the best Canadian album I heard all year (many of the albums below are Canadian).

4. TV on the Radio: Nine Types of Light (7/10)
So I think I like it more than Dear Science,. I'm pretty sure I like it more than DS. But it isn't making me want to listen to it more. So I think we'll have to stick with this for the moment. I was worried it would be too mellow. It's not. But it certainly lacks many of the elements that drew me to the band. That being said, I think it's fine music. It just isn't doing anything exceptional for me on this day.

5. Badbadnotgood: BBNGLive1 (7/10)
Before I get into it, I will say first off that I like this music. I generally like fusion (the idea that this is "instrumental hip hop" is more than a little hilarious; if this isn't jazz then I don't know what it is) that stays away from "cool jazz" cliches, as this does. But (and it's a big but):
I think one of the main reasons I cannot get into hip hop is the hyping/bragging that is a central part of it. I don't even like that stuff in rock and roll (but I can handle it if the band has chops...when Danko Jones comes along and are like: "we're so awesome," it is very hard to take) but with hip hop the guys are almost always bragging about how they are good at rhyming. So the fuck what?
I am not for a moment trying to deny there is something musical about rap (or even other spoken word music), or that there are similarities between jazz and rap, a major component of hip hop, as there are (one could argue that the most authentic rap is created the same way as the most authentic jazz: by improvisation) but I still cannot for the life of me buy in to a genre where huge amounts of time and energy are spent at discussing how great they are at rhyming (or how great their DJ is at "dropping" beats). Frankly, if you're going to brag, you should have chops.
And so that is the biggest problem I have with BBNG, despite the fact that I like what they are doing. Clearly inspired by hip hop (with their use of samples, with the occasional raps that appear, etc), they have inherited the braggadocio of hip hop, which is silly. Why is it silly? Because the idea that this is the first time people have made music like this (as they imply in their comments to the crowd) is beyond preposterous.
Fusion has existed for over 40 years now, folks. People have been attempting to mix hip hop and/or rap with jazz for at least twenty years (at the VERY least). Uncharacterizable fusions between alternative rock genres and jazz have been going on for around that long as well, and funnily enough this supposedly hip hop-derived jazz sounds an awful lot like what the Bad Plus or Acoustic Ladyland have been up to in the last decade or so (mixing alternative rock with jazz).
So stop bragging. This is nice music, but it's hardly original. Cut the bragging out of the act and it might be better.

6. J Mascis: Several Shades of Why (7/10)
It's very enjoyable but I think it would be improved if he took some of the extraneous instruments and replaced them with electric guitars which sort of sound like those but sort of don't.

7. Radiohead: the King of Limbs (7/10)
This is mellow, shockingly mellow. I don't know what has happened except that they have gotten older. As others have observed, it's like the mellow parts of Kid A/Amnesiac, only it's less weird this time because we've had a decade to get used to Kid A and Amnesiac. My big question is where is the energy of Hail to the Thief, In Rainbows and the other pieces of Kid A and Amnesiac? There was earnestness and urgency there for a long time, a big part of their sound, and suddenly it's gone. This is like a relaxing, background noise-ish type of record, which I never thought Radiohead would make. I'm not saying it's bad; it's quite pleasant. But Hail to the Thief, for example, is hardly pleasant. I don't want pleasant, personally. I can get pleasant from lots of other bands. I would rather have something with a little more spark to it. By mellowing out this much they are definitely headed off in a different (though not entirely new) artistic direction, but it is not one that I particularly like. I can't really bash it since, as I said, it's not bad. I like a number of the songs. But I'm let down, definitely. I was so excited when I found out they were finally releasing another record. And instead it's their shortest and calmest album to date. Boo.

8. Anna Atkinson: Mooniture (7/10)
Atkinson is like a less-quirky, far more accessible, Canadian Joanna Newsom, at least the early Joanna Newsom. Her voice is a lot more traditional, but there is a similar sense of humour and ear for unconventional melody on sometimes untraditional folk instruments. Her songs are decent and the instrumentation makes them far more interesting. The only problem really is the length: this is almost an EP.

9. Fucked Up: David Comes to Life (6/10)
The punk rock opera thing has become a bit of a trend, now, I guess. That's pretty fucking hilarious. Punks used to hate that stuff. Oh well, times have changed.
It is hard to approach this band without bias as they are a little overhyped (did I say a little?). What is most surprising is the utter lack of diversity in the songs (and the repetition of themes that occurs in the beginning - which one would expect in a rock opera - dies out pretty quickly despite this). And many other bands have done the "aggressive music" mixed with melody thing a lot better.
Just sort of meh. Still better than what's on the radio. But really, music critics, this is what you consider a great album? I am not impressed.
Dec 31: The idea that this is the best album of the year, or right up amongst them just goes to show the laughably low standards the independent music press embrace in order to declare a masterpiece (or two) each and every week. Stand this up against the great rock operas of all time and convince me this belongs amongst them. It's not possible.

10. Ox: Tuco (6/10)
Well this is okay I guess. It reminds me of Granfaloon Bus without their sense of melody, or of Virgil Shaw's solo stuff without the quirkiness and world music. I hear many other things in it: Nick Cave and Pearl Jam intros are almost - but not quite - copied for two songs. The Young cover does nothing for me. If you are going to cover something, add something to it. Does this add anything? No. There is almost something to this. And because I am overly fond of alt-country I don't mind it.

11. Sandro Perri: Impossible Spaces (6/10)
Like so many people labeled "indy," Perri is full of ideas. And like so many people labeled "indy" Perri could use a producer to get him to keep the right ideas and cut the less good ones. But that isn't the main problem with this album, as it is with so many albums. Rather the problem is another common one besetting the "post-rock" community: if you don't like the hodgepodge influences, you probably won't like the album. Perri borrows from the less interesting, more commercial half of jazz fusion (the part that is more fusion than jazz) like Weather Report or the wussy side of Return to Forever. Sometimes the keyboards sound like Jan Hammer when he was in Mahavishnu Orchestra, only dialed back a ton.
There are little bits and pieces that work only they do not make an album. They seem to be assembled almost scattershot, as if completely by whim.
It is very creative music, but it just doesn't do it for me given my general dislike of his references.

12. Portugal. The Man: In the Mountain in the Crowd (6/10)
The first song sounds like indy rock Elton John. No, that is not a compliment. It does get better from there. But there're a whole lot of wussy "soul" approximations underneath the indy veneer.

13. Library Voices: Summer of Lust (5/10)
I gave this my customary three listens and honestly it made very little impression on me. I have heard a lot of bands like this. The one distinguinshing thing about them appears to be their song titles.

14. The Horrible Crowes: Elsie (5/10)
I don't like the bands these guys like and so I think it's safe to say I don't like them. Springsteen was often hard to take himself, and so it's a shame that we have loads of people who have decided that they are Springsteen's heirs (in much the same way as way too many people decided they could be Dylan's heirs decades ago). Now we get some really bizarre "I wish I was the Boss" lyrics matched with music that is... well, boring. I love how there are all these kids who are mining the 80s but they are mining the pop rock of the 80s, rather than the interesting music of the 80s. The more I know about the extensive interest in Springsteen and U2, the more I despair for humankind.

15. Thursday: No Devolucion (4/10)
At the Drive-in without the passion, intensity, grit or sense of dynamics. That slander doesn't describe everything here, as there are moments when the band goes all screamo and/or metal and briefly sounds like they might actually know what "rock" means. But most of the time they sound pretty radio friendly and pretty safe. And some of these lyrics (like the counting ones) are brutal. This band is the perfect example of how "post-hardcore" is becoming what post-grunge was. Yuck.

There was one other album I heard this year that was super over-hyped but I couldn't find the review and have no idea what the band was. So let's just say it was probably in the last five somewhere (rankings-wise). Everyone else loved it, as usual. I am such a snob.

The Best Movies I saw in 2011

2011-12-27T10:12:00.004-05:00

N/A: Incendies (10/10)
This is cheating, I know. Technically Incendies came out last year on the festival circuit. However, I did not see it before I did my 2010 roundup and so it got left off my list of the best movies of last year (it was the best one). So I mention it here, if only to do it some justice. Incendies is the best movie I saw in 2011 (that was new enough to be considered a new release) despite the fact it premiered in 2010. It is the best Canadian film I think I have ever seen. It is handled about as well as any film on such subject matter. I have little to say about it in complaint.

1. Shame (9/10)
Shame isn't quite the mind-blower that Hunger was, though it is substantially easier to watch (a relative thing). Though I have many issues with the concept of "sex addiction," Fassbinder and McQueen treat the character very much like an addict, and that is at first harder to understand but eventually much easier to understand than Fassbinder's last role in a McQueen movie (I could never starve myself, nor remain so silent).
One of the things I love about McQueen is his usage of so many techniques. There are directors who love long takes and there are directors who love quick-cutting, but McQueen uses both (with a great emphasis on the form), as just one example of how he stands out. He has an astounding visual sense, which was also very noticeable in Hunger, and he also (mostly) has a great way with sound. He's one of those guys whose films you see and you say to yourself: this guy can direct innately.
The one quibble I have with this film is the score (not the soundtrack on the whole) is often used too conventionally for such an interesting filmmaker. There are emotional cues we don't need, that belong in a lesser film. But that is a minor quibble.
The ending is perfect.

2. Fatherland (9/10)
Remember those TVO Canadian history docs where they had c-list Canadian actors dressed in costume and reading the letters of dead Canadians and Americans to recreate history? Well, that's what Fatherland is, only it is much, much, much better. Beginning with the Argentinian national anthem over film0stock of protesters and rebels being beaten and killed, this film attacks what must be passing for established history in Argentina. It is mostly a series of readings from letters and books by famous Argentinians performed from atop or next to their graves in Buenos Aires' beautiful necropolis. The concept would seem obvious if it had actually ever been done before: passages that horribly incriminate Argentina's heroes (in their own words) in deeds of genocide are read next to and atop statues of themselves. It works wonderfully and is at times horribly ironic (and sometimes funny in a very dark way). The only issue with the film is it's length: this is something that doesn't move forward at all and so it should be shorter. Actually, one other issue: I don't quite get the last shot, though it is beautiful.

3. Into the Abyss (8/10)
Unlike most films about murder and capital punishment, Herzog's latest doesn't try to convince you the killers are innocent. He accepts at face values both the story of the police (which is supported by confessions and some pretty damning physical evidence) and the claims of both murderers that they are innocent. I think he does this because the point is that capital punishment is wrong regardless of what happened (and to that point, we can never know exactly what happened in any murder that isn't caught on tape, even if there is a ton of evidence suggesting what happened). It's an interesting approach that I must say through me at first. As usual, Herzog has found fascinating human beings who cannot fit into the normal world (in this case because of bad childhoods, drugs, alcohol, etc) and there are some real moments of emotional power, pathos and humour. Herzog also lets the faith of all the different interviewees sit there as they all (well, most of them) try to excuse their actions/consequences in the name of destiny. My only real quibble is with the chapter headings (a real nitpick of mine this year it seems) as they kind of add a pseudo-philosophical pomposity to the film that isn't necessary.

4. The Hunter (8/10)
This is the second year in a row I have seen a film called the Hunter and the second time I have rated such a film 8/10. I guess it's a title that grabs me. They are very different films just so you know. Though this is a storyline that has been seen time and again it is done very well: the acting is great, the story keeps you guessing enough even though the theme is so familiar, there are multiple moments of genuine tension and the cinematography is spectacularly beautiful. The only objection I had to the film as a whole was the score, which I found heavy-handed and overdone. This is funny because during the Q&A a guy asked a question to the effect of "how did you get a such a great score?" Trust me, it sucked. It was pounding drums in the tense moments (never heard that before...) and soaring string quartets at emotionally poignant moments (again, that's new...). The other quibble, which I am slowly getting over, is the ending. I don't like it. But I'm asking myself the Ebert question, 'how else could it have ended?' and I am having a hard time coming up with one that is as apt (there are other possibilities but they don't work with the story, they would just satisfy my need for unnecessary ambiguity). Which was the better Hunter? Probably this one. This one was at least more quickly paced as the other was (deliberately) slow.

5. Crazy Horse (7/10)
I knew nothing about this place going in, so I was a little bit surprised by the content.
The problem with fly on the wall documentaries is they cannot usually stand long running times and the biggest knock against this film is that it is far too long for its subject matter. Without giving us much in the way of characters (though far more than in the other Wiesman film I've seen) it is tough to sustain interest through over two hours just of footage of a high end nude dancing establishment (yes, I just said that). Fortunately, he shoots people interviewing some of the people and he shoots production meetings, so we do get to know some of the major players at least a little. This results in most of the films best moments. It is certainly an interesting film, I now never need to go to Crazy Horse, and I discovered at least one subject for a future documentary all his own, but this is way, way too long.
PS: This film may contain the single greatest cover of a Britney Spears song ever, if it is even possible to have something like a "single greatest cover of a Britney Spears song ever."

6. The Last Gladiators (7/10)
A pretty clunky style and a complete lack of big picture focus is saved by Chris Nilan. Now I didn't pay attention to hockey in his prime. And I only cared about the Leafs in the early 90s, so I had no idea who he was. But he is a hell of a documentary subject (as the producers stressed in the Q&A). I may disagree with much of what he says, but he is a great interview; unflinchingly honest, which is rare. He is the centre of the film (they decided they should do that in the editing room it seems) and it's the way it should be. Unfortunately the film is marred by two big issues. The first is stylistic: it is unbelievably episodic, especially for a film that is only about 1 hr 40. There are numerous chapters (15? more?). I have no idea why. All it adds it runtime. Nothing else. Some of these chapters are five minutes long. I have no idea why they are there. It's a bizarre decision, unless without them the film is so short that it is not a feature (I highly doubt that). The second problem is that the filmmakers are either fans of hockey fighting or got to know the enforcers so much that they felt they couldn't in any way commit to some kind of condemnation of this. I have a huge problem with this, especially given what we are learning about the relationship between concussions, drugs and suicide/accidental death. Now Chris Nilan, Terry O'Reilly, Tony Twist etc can argue until they are blue in the fact that they never sustained concussions but the fact is that concussions were rarely diagnosed (if ever) when they played. The head trauma, in addition to the other physical trauma, and the drastic career change in the 30s must have a huge impact on most goons, whether they could play a little or barely skate. The filmmakers don't really take a position on this (well they do, seeing it as entertainment), and as a result I am hugely disappointed. Those two criticisms aside, this is worth watching especially for Nilan.

7. Horrible Bosses (7/10)
I liked this movie more than a lot of people, I think. It made me laugh all the way through, which is fairly rare for such a mainstream comedy. I haven't seen it again to see if I was just in the right mood but I definitely enjoyed myself. And unlike the movies that come after it on this list, I wasn't constantly nitpicking about things that were going on.

8. Juan of the Dead (6/10)
This is basically a Cuban remake of Shaun of the Dead with enough differences (and enough crasser humour) to at least make it unique. This isn't like an American remake of a British film, where they merely iron out anything foreign. This is actually a pretty distinct little movie, with plenty of gore (though much of it is off screen because of the budget), plenty of laughs and some truly terrible CGI. The biggest problem is consistency of tone, as the film careens between really funny and not at all funny and sometimes serious way too often. Some of the jokes just didn't work (though subtitles can hurt timing) and there was at least two too many montages. But it was extremely entertaining in fits and starts, and it certainly was the most fun I had this year, even if it was far from the best film I watched.

9. Grinders (6/10)
A TVO documentary with an interesting subject and some pretty meh construction. It was a TVO documentary after all.

10. Where do We Go Now? (5/10)
Ah the TIFF crowd pleaser.
This is a mildy funny movie (I laughed a few times, Monique is not sure if she even laughed) that had most of the audience roaring: very safe jokes mostly along the lines of 'tehehe, Christianity and Islam are different but the same, tehehe.' In that sense it is like the Lebanese version of Bon Cop, Bad Cop, only with songs. That's right: it's a musical. Only it's not. There are three (?) songs in the entire movie. Which leads me to it's biggest problem (beyond the overly safe humour for the subject matter): the tone. There are long stretches where it is a comedy, there are moments when it is a not particularly funny musical, and there are stretches when it is very much a serious drama (at one point the director - yes, she cast herself - is screaming at all the men in her life for causing all this suffering). I get that as men we are expected to take at least some reverse sexism as atonement for he 1000s of years of sexism, but the idea that women want religious and ethnic conflict to stop but cannot stop it because of the hot-headed men is as simplistic as it gets. It adds nothing to any conversation about how to move forward from these seemingly intractible conflicts (and honeslty, if every mother felt the way these mothers do, why would there be war in the world?). This would be excusable if the film were funny, but despite the audience roaring and clapping throughout, I did not find it so.

Those are all the new movies I saw this year. As usual, I saw far more older films.

Cineplex doesn't want me seeing movies, that's for sure

2011-12-27T09:42:00.002-05:00

So yesterday the GF and I went to our first movie in a theatre since TIFF, and our first non-festival movie (together anyway) since last spring or thereabouts. We went to see "Shame," a film we were both interested in seeing.
We were confronted by the usual "pre-show" barrage, which at this point is expected. But then, when the movie was supposed to start (1:15), we were treated to "Timeplay" (which they warned us was coming by telling us things like "get ready for timplay, which is so interactive" during the pre-show). Timeplay is a gimmick which supposedly lets the audience choose their own adventure...during ads. In order to participate, audience members must download an app, and then must follow the instructions on the screen. That is to say, in the moments before everyone should turn off their phones, Cineplex would like everyone to be using their phones.
The point of timeplay for the audience alludes me. The point for cineplex and the advertiser is obvious: by signing up for the app they are are registering current and potential customers, respectively, without appearing to do so. But for those of us who just want to watch a movie, I really don't see the point. We were treated to extra ads; the ads of timeplay.
Following timeplay, we were treated to the usual pre-coming attractions ad campaigns, only they seemed longer than in the past; let us say between 5 and 10 minutes (I did not time it, but it felt like that). Then, when I had just about decided that they stopped showing previews and just showed ads (I thought the advantage of going to a theatre was to avoid ads?) they then showed three coming attractions. So we were treated to at least 20 minutes of stuff between the "pre-show" and the feature, most of which made no impact on my life (I can't tell you what the ads were for one day later; one of them may have been for Ford or some other car company). The previews I remember (or at least I remember one of them) because they spoke to me as a movie goer. The ads did not.
So I am left wondering why I should go to the theatre, when I can watch ads-free movies through Zip and through Netflix. We still have a few passes left we want to use, but after that: why should I go? Can anyone tell me? Cineplex is clearly trying to survive and I get that. But there has to be a better way than barraging the viewer with ad after ad (whether interactive or not) after they have paid a fair chunk of change to see what used to be an ad-free feature.
Really, aside from the "big screen" aspect of it, I have no desire to go through that again. So I think once we are done these passes, it will be revue theatres for me from now on (as it should have been) because at least they treat their customers as paying moviegoers, rather than potential buyers of cars and the like

What do you do to relax?

2011-12-24T08:36:00.001-05:00

Well I can't relax when formspring is pretending I had actual questions to answer. Fuckers.

Ask me anything

How often do you use a computer?

2011-12-23T08:44:00.003-05:00

Constantly

Ask me anything

Why are you so good to me?

2011-12-23T08:44:00.001-05:00

I'm so good to you I ignore your formspring questions for two months. Love you. (Someone somewhere is gagging)

Ask me anything

"Southern Comfort" (2001, Kate Davis)

2011-12-14T17:51:00.001-05:00

I can't for a moment understand what it is like to feel like I am living in the wrong body. From a very early age I have always been comfortable with what I have and don't have. There are times I have found my physical self upsetting or disappointing, but never have I felt uncomfortable. So I have always been hugely confused by trans-gendereds. And though I now accept where I grew up as my home, I have never found such a profound attachment to it that, were I subject of hate, I wouldn't be able to move away.
This movie, and Robert Eads in no small part, helps put a more human face on people who are so different from their surroundings and yet refuse to leave. Eads is a charismatic (wo)man and his relationship with someone who went the opposite way he did is exactly the kind of thing that bigots need to see. There isn't much to say to anyone who sees these people together and still thinks that it is somehow "wrong."

Existential Liberalism and the Republic of Canada by R. Nelson Haas

2011-12-14T10:10:00.001-05:00

It can be bought from Amazon.ca here:
http://www.amazon.ca/Existential-Liberalism-Republic-Canada-Moderation/dp/1462056628/ref=tmm_pap_title_0?ie=UTF8&qid=1323633432&sr=1-1

If you would prefer to purchase the e-book, it can be found here:
http://www.amazon.com/Existential-Liberalism-Republic-Canada-ebook/dp/B006BVE0RQ/ref=sr_1_1_title_1_kin?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1323633501&sr=1-1

I don't live in Hamilton any more

2011-12-14T09:58:00.002-05:00

So I realize that I have been posting here for two and a half months after I moved back to Toronto. This says either a) I'm really lazy b) I totally forgot the name of my blog or c) I have been very busy this autumn. I'm going for a combination of all three.
The last time I changed blogs I had a difficult time convincing everyone to switch over and I worry that this is will happen again. Another reason why I worry is that I have a supposedly more serious blog for my book (did I forget to mention I published a book? Oh right...let's add a) into this) which I am doing a piss-poor job of maintaining (and notifying people about) so really, do I switch yet again?
I will let all you faithful readers know (that is a joke, laugh).

"Red Road" (2006, Andrea Arnold)

2011-12-13T08:30:00.000-05:00

There is certainly a lot here that is worthwhile. I can't say too much against the acting or the sense of realism (of the circumstances if not of the lead's behaviour). I also can say that this film makes me not want to live in Glasgow. But anyway: the problem with this film is that the director decided she would play it tricky. The reason's for our leads behaviour are saved to a big reveal. The problem with that is that we lose sympathy for the lead (or at least those of us who think framing something for someone they didn't do is just as bad as committing that something lose sympathy) well before we find out why she is like this. Can we then forgive her for what she did for closure? I have a very hard time. That being said, the closure scene with the in-laws is very well done and touching. But if this film had been structured differently, it might have worked a lot better and wouldn't have left a bitter taste in my mouth.

The Shield (2002, Shawn Ryan)

2011-12-11T10:35:00.002-05:00

Only the first four seasons:

Approximately 8 years ago or thereabouts, I found the Shield, as well as Six Feet Under, the Wire, Deadwood and some other of what we might call "the new TV." I was as enraptured by the Shield as any of these programs and I saw in them all a chance for TV to actually eclipse many movies not just in terms of production values but in terms of cultural value. Serial drams can tell continuing stories that can become even more central (or meaningful) to our lives than great films. (As an aside: I still think there is great potential here to adapt some of the great classics of literature into the serial drama form.) Having just watched the first four seasons of the shield in less than four weeks I must say that I have drastically changed my position.
I am a great believer that, on the whole, people who make good things will usually make good things and people who make bad things will usually make bad things. I have tested this theory many times and continually test it with filmmakers I don't know. With ones we do: we are always shocked if someone like Joel Schumacher pulls something even remotely decent out of his ass. Whereas, when Scorsese makes a good or great film it is expected. But if Schumacher makes yet another piece of shit, we are not shocked whereas if Scorsese does, we are disappointed. Shawn Ryan made the Unit. I didn't know this before but now it explains a lot. One thing it explains is why a show like the Shield was always riddled with problems. Problems I couldn't see when I was like "swearing and violence on TV?!?! Sweet."
In retrospect, the Shield just pales in comparison to its contemporaries. From the very start, Mackey is more corrupt than possibly any police officer in North America. That is a serious problem for suspension of disbelief. The fact that their actions get more and more unbelievable throughout the first three seasons (and then again to some extent in the second half of the fourth season) doesn't help the attempt at suspending the disbelief. The origins episode halfway through the first season is almost laughable as it has the strike team basically sit down and decide to become corrupt. That happens? Really?
Further, almost all behaviour in the show appears rooted completely in character. Unlike The Wire or Deadwood, there is relatively no acknowledgement of the role of circumstances in these people's jobs (there is far greater acknowledgement of it on the Shield than other TV, but it is sporadic and only used when it furthers the plot).
The acting and direction are far superior to your average show or cop drama. The problem is inherently in the script: the anti-heroes are too corrupt and get away with too much, everyone is too tense too much of the time (when do these people rest?), the few redeemable characters are hated by virtually the entire rest of the station, etc.
Ryan has nailed a number of authenticities about police but he has missed so many more about people that it makes the show far less successful than it could have been.

Dream Home (2010, Ho-Cheung Pang)

2011-12-11T10:32:00.003-05:00

There is nothing redeeming about this film. A lady doesn't get her dream home and goes on a killing spree. Except we know she goes on the spree from the very first and there is utterly no suspense to anything. The only thing positive to say is that the gore standard is up to Japanese horror films. And that's hardly a positive thing when you are trying to make a point about real estate bubbles...

It Might Get Loud (2008, Davis Guggenheim)

2011-12-11T10:26:00.001-05:00

I can't say that I find the idea all that fascinating: three guitarists from three generations of rock music. There are so many guitarists out there, selecting three seems arbitrary. The further arbitrariness is that two of these are blues based guitarists and one isn't. The Edge genuinely seems out of place, and not just because of his technical limitations. Individually, the stories are interesting, but they could all be part of separate movies. I can't say I didn't like it. I like much of it, but it still seems odd that it even exists and the "summit" never lives up to its potential - as these things rarely do (except for briefly during "In My Time of Dying").

The Campaign to Fire Brian Burke: Phillippe Paradis

2011-12-04T08:35:00.002-05:00

Yes, in this day and age, it is extraordinarily unpopular to suggest that Burke's plan hasn't worked, as the Leafs find themselves floating between 2nd and 7th on a daily basis and since Kessel (somewhat shocking) and Lupul (unbelievably shocking) are leading the league. I am a believer in looking at things longterm and think there is no way in hell either player keeps it up (Kessel has already dropped well of his pace of earlier this season, as he is now on pace for 100 points instead of over 200). So I continue looking at deals that both made sense and didn't.

Leafs got: Phillippe Paradis, LW, drafted 27th overal in 2009
Canes got: Jiri Tlusty, LW, drafted 13th overall in 2006

Tlusty is the perfect example of the Leafs inability to develop in-house talent. He was advertised as a sniper when he was drafted (by JFJ). As usual, they couldn't make up their minds with him: he played for both a junior team and the Marlies in his first pro year, and played for both the Marlies and the Leafs in his second. When he played for the Leafs he played on the third or fourth line, as if this Russian sniper (I emphasize Russian because we all know that, save a few players like Fedorov, very few Russian hockey players come over an learn new tricks in the NHL) was going to miraculously turn into a checker because Maurice thought he would. Of course he didn't and he became a pretty significant draft bust (he was the highest pick of the Leafs since Antroshit). But he was never given the chance: he had one decent partial year in the AHL (66 points in 66 games) after they had given up on him the second time but he never had clear expectations, like virtually every other Leafs draft pick, and he never had a clearly defined role or a role suited to his skills.
For the record, the right thing to do would have been a) if you're going to send him to junior, keep him there all year b) give him time in the AHL until he starts playing like the player you drafted, i.e. until he starts putting up point-per-game numbers and you do this before you bring him up to the NHL, c) once he is a top 3 forward in the AHL, give him an extended (i.e. season-long) shot at top 6 in the NHL. The same thing has been seen with Kadri: now that he has a place he can learn the pro game, he is excelling and maybe he isn't a bust like he looked earlier but the Leafs took ages to figure it out.
So obviously it didn't work and he needed to be traded but for what? As usual, Burke traded him for a player whose skill set he preferred, not necessarily a better player. Paradis was drafted lower (which doesn't always mean a lot) and one look at his junior numbers indicates that he was never much of a scorer. So first Burke has traded a guy with offensive upside for a guy who probably doesn't have it (Paradis has, to date, an illustrious 6 points in 25 AHL games). But second, Tlusty had at least managed some mediocre output in the NHL (slightly below 0.3ppg, which is like a third liner) and actually nearly a point-per-game in the AHL, Paradis has evidently played a couple games for the Blackhawks (his new home) but that is it. So again Burke traded a player whose game he didn't like for a less good player whose game he did like.
It's not the first time and it's not the last but my question is, since when did Burke have the monopoly on understanding what wins? He hasn't exactly lit it up in Toronto, and we all know how he failed to take a very talented Vancouver team where they needed to get to. Why is it acceptable to Toronto hockey fans to routinely trade more talent for less? Talent isn't everything. Talent without work is not much, but work without talent is usually even less.
Tlusty is currently doing not much for Carolina, which is expected and fine. He is a bust and I am not for a second denying he should have been traded. Paradis was part of the first Versteeg deal, a deal that I did not like at the time (and I have been proven to be wrong: Versteeg was nowhere near as bad in Toronto as people claim, Stalberg has been not much in Chicago (though he having his best season to date) and DiDomenico has never recovered from his injury to be the top 6 me and a lot of other people thought he could be...in fact he was in the ECHL last I checked), but which, had it not been replaced by a worse deal later, rendered the Leafs better, so we can't say the Tlusty/Paradis deal was bad. We can just say it is indicative of Burke's often bizarre assessment of value, and how he is willing, more often than not, to give up talent for workers, something that, if practices frequently and consistently, will render the Leafs fairly impotent come "big game" time (now, I must admit that I thought this team would have a lot of trouble scoring this year and so far I am very wrong).

BBNGLive 1 (2011 [no label?])

2011-11-27T10:19:00.002-05:00

Before I get into it, I will say first off that I like this music. I generally like fusion (the idea that this is "instrumental hip hop" is more than a little hilarious, if this isn't jazz then I don't know what it is) that stays away from "cool jazz" cliches, as this does. But (and it's a big but):
I think one of the main reasons I cannot get into hip hop is the hyping/bragging that is a central part of it. I don't even like that stuff in rock and roll (but I can handle it if the band has chops...when Danko Jones comes along and are like: "we're so awesome," it is very hard to take) but with hip hop the guys are almost always bragging about how they are good at rhyming. So the fuck what?
I am not for a moment trying to deny there is something musical about rap (or even other spoken word), or that there are similarities between jazz and rap, a major component of hip hop, as there are (one could argue that the most authentic rap is created the same way as the most authentic jazz: by improvisation) but I still cannot for the life of me buy in to a genre where huge amounts of time and energy are spent at discussing how great they are at rhyming (or how great their DJ is at "dropping" beats). Frankly, if you're going to brag, you should have chops.
And so that is the biggest problem I have with BBNG, despite the fact that I like what they are doing. Clearly inspired by hip hop (with their use of samples, with the occasional raps that appear, etc), they have inherited the braggadocio of hip hop, which is silly. Why is it silly? Because the idea that this is the first time people have made music like this (as they imply in their comments to the crowd) is beyond preposterous.
Fusion has existed for over 40 years now, folks. People have been attempting to mix hip hop and/or rap with jazz for at least twenty years. Uncharacterizable fusions between alternative rock genres and jazz have been going on for around that long as well, and funnily enough this supposedly hip hop-derived jazz sounds an awful lot like what the Bad Plus or Acoustic Ladyland have been up to in the last decade or so.
So stop bragging. This is nice music, but it's hardly original. Cut the bragging out of the act and it might be better.
As a side note: the reaction to BBNG in the Canadian indy music scene has been hilariously over the top (as it often is, in most indy music scenes when they think they've found something new) and it just goes to show you how little jazz any of these people have ever heard before. Frankly, I think On the Corner should be required listening for everyone.

Puccini Gold by Various Artists (Decca 2007)

2011-11-26T16:26:00.002-05:00

This embodies everything that is wrong with opera compilations. The only theme here is Puccini "hits," not performers or anything else. So, first we get a very arbitrary selection of bits and pieces of Puccini operas. Then we get a very arbitrary selection of interpretations of those bits and pieces as there are numerous contributors. Who exactly is this for? For people who don't want to sit and listen to a whole opera, or even a compilation of a composer's famous arias (or what have you) by one singer (where you might get the odd idiosyncrasy, heaven forbid). This is is pop as opera gets. It's not just popera it's pop popera. The Three Tenors performance of "Nessun Dorma" at the end of the album (even though it begins the album as well, with just Pavarotti that time) is the best example of what is wrong with this stuff: it features three guys totally over-singing everything and the audience cheering wildly (repeatedly, and seemingly at random, because we cannot see what is going on on stage) because they are thinking "wow I recognize that melody!"
Yuck

"Dummy" by Portishead (1994, Go!)

2011-11-19T15:54:00.001-05:00

I can't claim to be a huge trip hop fan but I have long been aware of it and I generally have had respect for it (I can handle it a lot more than hip hop). I guess this is sort of trip hop balladry (balladry in the modern not the traditional sense). As such it is very effective and well done, though I think to really get it under your skin, you have to be in a given mood or state of mind. I can't say much beyond that in terms of criticism: it is well made and likable, though I guess if I can say one other thing it is a little one-note in the mood, if not in the arrangements.

"The Pianist Original Motion Picture Soundtrack" (2002)

2011-11-19T12:10:00.001-05:00

A fair collection of romantic music pieces.

The NHL 1/4 Season Awards

2011-11-19T08:41:00.002-05:00

Automatic Awards:

The Rocket Richard: Phil Kessel: 13G in 19GP
Now, obviously I'm more shocked about this than practically anyone. All I can say in my defense (and eternal carping about how Kessel sucks) is that he was on pace for something 100 goals earlier in the season and now he is on pace for about 50 or 60, It's called regression towards the mean and its happening with him and the Leafs. Soon he will be on pace for 40. He will score 35 this year (give or take) and not win the Richard.

The Gretzky/Oates (my award for most assists): Daniel Sedin: 17A in 19GP

The Art Ross: Kessel: 25P in 19GP
Note how he's no longer a 2PPG player like he was the first 10 games. I predict another 60-something point season. When Kessel slumps, does he ever slump (and remember folks, what happened to Stamkos last year, who was on a ridiculous pace and then proceeded to score 6 goals over something like 3 months, it happens more than we think)

The Orr (my award for most goals by a D): Jason Garrison (who?): 7G in 18GP

The Bourque? (My award for most assists by a D): Erik Karlsson: 17A in 20GP

The Coffey (my award for the most points by a D): Erik Karlsson: 18P in 20GP
His dominance will not last long.

The Jennings: Niklas Backstrom and Josh Harding: 1.95 GAA

The Crozier: Brian Elliot: .947 Save Percentage

Voted on Awards:

The Hart (basing it on the best player on the best team): Marian Hossa: 9G, 12A for 22P in 19GP, +13, 20:02ATOI

The Norris: Shea Weber: 26:38 ATOI, +18, 12P, 32 Hits, 25 blocked shots

The Selke: Jonathan Toews: +16 Takeaways/Giveaways, +7, 10 hits, 6 blocked shots, 2015 ATOI

The Harvey (my award for the best defensive D): Douglas Murray? 3P, +8

The Vezina: Pekka Rinne

The Calder: Matt Read: 6G, 5A for 11P, +6

"The Man with Flowering Hands" by Dixie's Death Pool (2011)

2011-11-18T22:13:00.003-05:00

Yet another "I have heard this before" indie rock/post rock fusion thing. With fewer actual songs this time around. I can't get into this stuff and frankly aren't we inundated with it? Do we need more and more? Why can't I listen to something trend-busting on Exclaim! for once?!

The Union (2007, Brett Harvey)

2011-11-15T18:03:00.000-05:00

It generally exposes the real reasons why marijuana (and hemp in the US) is criminalized. The problem is they can't decide whether they are focusing on BC or the US.

"The Voice of the Sparrow" by Edith Piaf (1988 Capitol)

2011-11-14T18:07:00.002-05:00

Not living in France at the time Piaf came on the scene, I have a hard time getting her voice as anything more than what it sounds like to me (something that is relatively unique, and obviously full of emotion). She certainly feels the songs but I cannot say one way or the other whether what impact she had, as I'm simply not familiar with French vocal music beyond Gainsbourg.

The River (1951, Jean Renoir)

2011-11-14T17:59:00.000-05:00

This is a beautifully shot film and it is certainly the earliest example I know of a Western film being entirely shot on location in a non-Western country. It also is probably the first Western film to have a soundtrack nearly completely made up of non-Western music. As such it is a landmark and a valuable piece of history. But as a film, there is a lot to be desired. The child actors are mostly horrible. The lead male has evidently never seen a person with a limp (and one must assume Renoir hadn't either). I guess the story would be appealing to a young woman who grew up mid century in another country but two near-middle-aged male like myself who has been brought up to be oversensitive to depictions of other cultures, it doesn't do anything for me (and made me cringe a little too often).

The Mendacity of Hope by Roger D. Hodge

2011-11-11T17:46:00.001-05:00

I was extremely sceptical of this book when I was lent it by my father. I don't particularly like polemics and I figured, despite the claims on the back cover, that I would react the usual way to such things: which is that I would dismiss outright after 25-50 pages.
Sure enough that was my first reaction. I can't help but say to Hodge that, like anyone else, Obama is only one man, and any man who is subject to all the favour-promising of the American presidential cycle is hardly someone to count upon. And I can't help but think Hodge was one of the ones who fell for him (at least at some point in the distant past) otherwise why is he so mad? (unless of course he is just tired, like so many of us, of the St. Obama stuff) But despite these things something happened: I began to agree with him.
I think my initial scepticism had a lot to do with the fact that I haven't paid attention to US politics with any seriousness in years, simply because every American TV news source except for PBS makes me absolutely insane (and I don't get PBS). I frankly stopped paying attention. So when I have defended Obama to some (on both sides) as "well-meaning" and "just a man" it turns out I was doing so without anything to justify it.
The scary thing about this book (okay one of the scary things) is that Obama is essentially Bush with different interests, only Bush was at least somewhat incompetent, had to rely on others (often as incompetent) and who really wasn't good at hiding what he was up to. Obama is very good at convincing a sizable portion of reasonable Americans (I do not consider the "solid 25%" to be reasonable Americans, so the comparison with Bush doesn't fit) that he is trying very hard to change things and to be a major improvement over Bush, when he is anything but. If Hodge is to be believed (and he has reputable sources for most of his claims, except for the odd, often hilarious, opinion), Obama is in many ways worse than Bush because Obama acts like he isn't Bush whereas Bush was transparent in that sense (if in no other).
I am not for a second attempting to justify any of the far right criticisms that come from the Tea Party types. And, to clarify, that's not what this book is about. Hodge doesn't believe Obama is a socialist (I suspect he would like him if he was); rather Hodge sees Obama as more of the same Reagan/Bush/Clinton/ Bush Jr. that has put the US where it is now. They really haven't differed all that much on policy in real terms (except for how much the debt has skyrocketed under two of them) and the fact that Obama is just more of the same is infuriating if only because he has always claimed he is not (and the others really haven't made much of that).
If you read this and agree with him, at the very least you will be greatly disappointed and quite possibly more likely you will be enraged at the farce that is Obama Inc.

Still Life (2007, Zhang Ke Jia)

2011-11-11T17:43:00.002-05:00

I genuinely like films that are nice to look at. I am less enthusiastic about films that think they can use that as an excuse for some other flaw, for example to revel in obscurity. This film would be a lot less easier to admire and think about if there weren't brief snippets of aliens. Can anyone justify this for me? I don't get it. And frankly it is so casually handled that it makes me unwilling to put the thought into appreciating the rest of the movie. At least it's nice to look at (and makes you feel for the people of the gorges).

Invisible Man by Ralph Ellison

2011-11-04T12:59:00.003-04:00

As a white Canadian born in the last quarter of the 20th century, I do not know in any way shape or form what it means to be a Black American (or any other oppressed minority in a European-derived country) but I think perhaps this is the closest I will ever get to understanding it. It is a powerful story and though I want to sometimes challenge its realism I cannot because I know stuff like this happened even if I want to react to it as contrived. I have a few issues with it: I find he is unnecessarily obscure about things (whether it be the purposes and words of the communists he takes up with or with is own feelings) and I think occasionally the symbolism is as obvious as it gets (when he literally burns up his past in the sewer) but I still couldn't put it down (which is saying something for a message book), I still needed to know what happened, and I was still moved in some vague and indefinite way. I can't give it full marks because of the occasional clunkiness, but it's a near-classic.

Rolling Stone's 100 Greatest Guitarist of All Time

2011-11-04T12:55:00.003-04:00

Eight years after the fact I stumbled upon this list and I am shocked at how terrible it is. It's not just that it is biased to Americans (is it ever biased towards Americans) - and specifically to blues-based guitar players - but it makes no sense. There are one or two jazz guitarists on it but it is clearly not a list of jazz guitarists (as there would have to be more). Maybe it's a list of those who had something to do with rock. But then it would certainly have to include Charlie Christian. But it's not just those left off (and some of those included, like the guy from...Alice Cooper?) but the order and the write-ups. You have Neil Young in the 80s or 90s and then you have John Frusciante in the top 20. Bizarre! And sometimes they just say this or that guy was in a good band or something like that, and don't even explain why they think he's good. If I wasn't doing Nanoriwmo and trying to finish my book I might have to debunk it further.

Punishment Park (1971 Peter Watkins)

2011-11-02T12:48:00.000-04:00

This is yet another excellent fake documentary from Watkins. As someone who has observed police-protestor confrontations (albeit ones far less violent than this film) I can tell you that the hysterics are exactly accurate, that is what it sounds like. The concept is a little far-fetched (but I think the idea is that it is only a little far-fetched) but on the whole I think it is pretty effective. My only quibbles are that the "criminals" are a bit too literate and that there is no way any administration would allow a film crew to film this...unless of course it were South Vietnamese...

tUCo by Ox ([forgot to check the label] 2011)

2011-11-01T14:32:00.000-04:00

Well this is okay I guess. It reminds me of Granfaloon Bus without their sense of melody, or of Virgil Shaw's solo stuff without the quirkiness and world music. I hear many other things in it: Nick Cave and Pearl Jam intros are almost - but not quite - copied for two songs. The Young cover does nothing for me. If you are going to cover something, add something to it. Does this add anything? No. There is almost something to this. And because I am overly fond of alt-country I don't mind it.

Conquest of the Useless by Werner Herzog

2011-10-31T13:52:00.002-04:00

This was given to me by accident but sometimes that is the best way of discovering interesting things. I am a massive Herzog fan but I was skeptical about reading something by him, if only because I have a couple of pretty firmly held beliefs about artists that would lead me to be wary of such an enterprise: a) good and great artists are assholes more often than not b) just because someone is good at one or more artforms, doesn't make that person good at many. But to my surprise this "diary" is a fascinating, illuminating and surprisingly funny read. Certainly more entertaining than any diary I have ever written. It is very much like a novel, in that it is episodic, and Herzog mixes in dreams and random snippets of past news with the daily reality. As such it overcomes its own origins and stands as something special; worth reading even if you have never seen Fitzcarraldo or don't even know what it is.

The Visitor (2007, Thomas McCarthy)

2011-10-31T13:45:00.001-04:00

This is the kind of movie that a hell of a lot of people should watch but won't. It humanizes something terrible that is happening that most accept without worrying about. While doing so it avoids cliches that most American movies about this subject would resort to. We expect certain stories and moments to emerge in a movie like this and they don't, which is a very welcome surprise.

La Vie en Rose (2007, Olivier Dahan)

2011-10-31T13:41:00.001-04:00

So this is a pretty interesting and compelling biopic except for one thing. It is well-shot (there are some really great shots) and well-acted (the lead is fantastic) but it jumps around in time for no apparent reason. Now, if I'm not mistaken, Piaf's life unfolded linearly like any other, so if we are getting her story in non-linear fashion, there must be some reason, no? But I don't know what it is, and that's the movie's detriment.

The Prowler (1981, Joseph Zito)

2011-10-30T11:51:00.000-04:00

This is one nonsensical film. Yes, most if not all slashers have at least the odd implausible moment (like the scene in seemingly half of them where the girl runs further into the house instead of out the front door) but this one has moment after moment after moment of flat out ridiculousness. Take, for example, the lighting in the Major's house (which they enter TWICE for no apparent reason). First a light is on in the room in which they are in, and no lights are on in the next room, and then when they are leaving that room, the lights are now on where they were off and off where they were on, just so it looks creepy. What person searching a house for a prowler is worried about electricity? We spent the entire film ripping into these little inconsistencies as if we were the cast of MST3000. The only really good part was when the drunk guy asked Pam while she was walking backwards. If the rest of this implausible film had been played for laughs like that scene, there might have been something to this.

The Big Money by John Dos Passos

2011-10-28T12:16:00.002-04:00

Whereas I found Nineteen Nineteen to be a significant improvement on the first book, this one feels like he has lapsed back into his bad habits, and he gets confused between the form and the storytelling. He is still writing reasonably compelling stories but he can't decide whether he wants to tell one person's story or the country's. So we get tons of two people in this book, and the others are glimpsed only a little, as they somehow manage to meet each other at dinners and parties and such (reading the USA trilogy, one becomes convinced that the United States has as few people in it as Canada). And he just isn't consistent with his form. "The Camera Eye" almost disappears for whole sections. And we get a chapter about one guy and, just like the first novel, we don't here from him again for hundreds of pages. I'm not taking notes. I need to be reminded that some of these people exist more often than every 150-200 pages.
I sort of thought he had worked things out in part 2, which is why I read part 2. But I have found that really this has to be one of the most overrated works of the 20th century. Yes, he did do something new and different, but he didn't do it well, and certainly that is as important as doing it first.

Oh Steven, you've done it again

2011-10-27T18:12:00.002-04:00

Today it was announced that there would be a significant number of extra seats added to parliament, in BC, Alberta, Ontario and Quebec. It is estimated that these seats will add $11 million to the cost of a single election, not to mention that added cost of MP and staff salaries, which will probably considerably more. Now I don't object to increasing the number of seats in general, as I think it is an important part of any rep by pop system (though in a reformed system, I would like to see a cap on seats, so that parliament doesn't become as unwieldingly large as the US H of R) but what I do get annoyed about is Harper being the one doing the increase after he has incessantly told me and everyone else in this country that we don't want elections when he doesn't want them (*cough* Prorogue *cough*) because of their cost. But he has just upped the cost. Does that mean "Canadians" now want fewer elections?

Sometimes the internet is great

2011-10-27T16:36:00.002-04:00

Check this out:
http://rateyourmusic.com/prediction?album_id=1601
RYM actually predicts what I might like based on other's opinions. Yes, other sites do this too but this one guess was pretty close. I think I could well use it to see what else I should delve into. Hmmm. That's a time waster if I ever saw one.

Mer de noms by a Perfect Circle (Virgin 2000)

2011-10-27T16:31:00.000-04:00

Well this is tough. There are elements here that work really well. The odd riff here, the odd kalimba there. And I like the [i]idea[/i] of it. I like the attempt to combine late 90s alt-metal/alt-rock with non-rock sounds in order to come to something better (hell, one of my favourite 00s bands spent half their career doing that very thing). But something about it doesn't work. I don't know if it's the songs (I suspect it's the songs) or perhaps it is just a lack of a clear musicality on par with Tool (in Tool, for example, all three musicians have distinctive styles on their instruments which are not to be confused with other) but something is missing. That being said, I will try listening to it again in the future to see if it grabs me more. I am doing because it saddens me to hear something that I think I should like but don't.

Troubled Water (2008, Erik Poppe)

2011-10-27T14:46:00.001-04:00

Though this is well-acted and well put together I found the plot more and more contrived as it went on. I don't know that I buy Agnes' actions at all, which is a major problem for me (and the film).

Lovable (2007, Alan Zweig)

2011-10-27T14:40:00.001-04:00

Though it threatens to be way too self-involved throughout its course, this is actually quite an interesting documentary on singledom. Though the director spends too much time on himself (as he know doubt would, given his problem), I found many of his insights and comments to be universalizable, despite our differences. When single, I have had similar thoughts. Moreover, it was interesting to see so many women with so many theories on the subject, as I sort of figured that was only the domain of lonely, over-educated men.

Find the Others by Find the Others ([label unknown] 2011)

2011-10-27T14:32:00.002-04:00

Though, like many soundtracks and pseudo-soundtracks, it is tough to judge this without the accompanying pictures/film, I will do so anyway. Without the pictures to distract us, we are left with the music. And the music isn't particularly compelling. It is like so much independent music these days, which seeks to combine post-rocky "soundscapes" and songcraft, giving the album an extremely uneven feel. Some of this sounds like it is the post-rock equivalent to My Life in the Bush of Ghosts, and some of it sounds like a folk singer (or two) with way too many musical toys in his basement. Now, if I had pictures to look at maybe I wouldn't be so picky, but I am evaluating this as a aural recording, not as a mixed-media performance. And as such, it lacks any kind of immediacy and the melodies just aren't that compelling. Sheppard might well be up to something interesting, but it is very hard to tell without the visuals.

Le Petit lieutenant (2005, Xavier Beauvois)

2011-10-26T13:23:00.001-04:00

This is a very well done cop film. There is a great balance between the personal and the professional. Everything is handled matter-of-factly and the lack of a soundtrack really enhances the sense of realism. I really don't have any thing to say in criticism of it.

Veronika Voss (1982, Rainer Werner Fassbinder)

2011-10-24T21:47:00.002-04:00

This seems to me to be Fassbinder's Sunset Blvd., though I'm not sure if that conveys everything about this movie (certainly it doesn't convey the third act). As usual, some of his camera moves are just bonkers (though more subtle than Lola) and the lighting is often beyond bizarre. I was spellbound and I think it might actually be the strongest of the three (though I would have to watch them all together to make that decision). A very strong final film.

Vexille (2007, Fumihiko Sori)

2011-10-24T21:44:00.001-04:00

Just because it's animated, doesn't mean it's not an incoherent action flick
This is a big nonsense Hollywood blockbuster with too much CGI posing as an anime flick. I really don't understand why people think they are allowed to throw common sense and physics out the window just because they are using animation. The viewer still has to be able to suspend their disbelief at least a little so the world has to be made real on some level. And it isn't here. There are plot lines left untied (what is Leon, anyway?) but the worst aspect is that this is trying to sell itself as reasonably hard science fiction and then we have these metal tornado things that make no sense whatsoever. Yuck.

What's your favorite late-night snack?

2011-10-24T21:40:00.001-04:00

Peanut butter and lettuce

Ask me anything

Live on Two Legs by Pearl Jam (Epic 1998)

2011-10-20T11:35:00.001-04:00

This has its issues compared to their later slew of live albums, as it is a tour album. It is a little too hit focused, though it has a fair amount of material from No Code and Yield and some covers, which is cool. It's definitely not the best live document out there, but it's alright.

Official Live: 101 Proof by Pantera (Eastwest 1997)

2011-10-18T17:08:00.000-04:00

The only fucking thing I fucking learned from fucking listening to this is that fucking Phil Anselmo is an idiot.
All joking aside, not knowing their studio output I can't really compare the versions. I can say that it is a live comp, and so it suffers from that. Worse, it has new studio tracks tacked on, presumably in an effort to sell more copies (which is unintentionally hilarious). The performances are pretty good. Can't say I like the Ballads as they all sort of sound like Metallica.

Don't plan the parade just yet

2011-10-18T16:51:00.002-04:00

For those of you who have watched Kessel's early season magic and think that he is born-again (and, therefore, that the Leafs are a much better team) should note something. Currently Kessel is scoring 1.5 goals per game. Additionally he is potting 0.75 assists per game giving him a ridiculous league leading 2.25PPG (pardon the poor sample size but this is of course the problem with getting excited about early season success). So how does this compare with his career to date? His career GPG is 0.35. His career APG is 0.31. Making his PPG 0.66 (less than a third of what it is this season). At some point there will be regression towards the mean. Sorry.

Lola (1981, Rainer Werner Fassbinder)

2011-10-18T11:34:00.000-04:00

I didn't like the Blue Angel much but that doesn't seem to matter. Fassbinder's take is so much more interesting. Aside from telling a compelling and humourous story, featuring fine acting, he does his usual thing where he finds interesting techniques to tell the story. Three things are particularly notable: first, there are the cuts from scene to scene, taken from noir or early German cinema and featuring dissolves paired with music...but the music cuts out before you can really figure out what it is. Then there is the lighting of the eyes, straight from noir and Hollywood melodrama. Finally, the crazy camera movements during the bureaucrat meetings have to be seen to be believed. Only Fassbinder would have dared.

Bad as Me by Tom Waits (Anti 2011)

2011-10-17T18:38:00.000-04:00

I can't really think of anything negative to say about this. It certainly lacks the unity or cohesiveness and/or adventurousness of his very best stuff but the songs are pretty strong and the arrangements are outstanding as always.

The Great Opera Hits by the Czech Symphony Orchestra, Prague Philharmonic Choir conducted by Julian Bigg (Great , unknown year)

2011-10-17T14:58:00.003-04:00

The good thing about this compilation is, unlike so many others, its actually the same orchestra playing all the tunes. But like so many "classical" compilations, this is music for people who like opera as a bunch of catchy songs, as opposed to what opera actually is. It's catchy, but one is hardly going to get a sense of any of these composers listening to this.

Doomsday (2008, Neil Marshall)

2011-10-17T12:46:00.000-04:00

So there are loads of ideas in this movie, a few of which would probably stand along as separate films. But the movie is too short (and too frenetic) to really explore all or even most of them properly. There is WAY too much going on in this movie, as there are subplots galore (few of which are really adequately resolved or even explored) and a huge number of questions. For example, if Kane's clan really are content at returning to the middle ages, where exactly did they get the clothes? A museum? The castle they took over? Why wouldn't they just wear newer clothes? There must have been enough in the various stores of Glasgow to last a few decades. Certainly more new clothes than medieval clothes. And that's just about one aspect of one small part of the movie. The reason these questions are never explained in anyway seems to be either laziness or a desire to provide a fairly relentless action movie, rather than worry about...you know...sense. It's too bad, because many of the ideas are pretty neat.

Scott Walker: 30th Century Man (2006, Stephen Kijak)

2011-10-17T12:38:00.002-04:00

I am not familiar with Walker's early work but I think the Drift if one of the great and essential recordings of our young century so this was a treat for me. Unfortunately, it is a pretty oddly made film, jumping back and forth between interviews and parts of Walker's career. Worse, there are multiple 'music videos' (for lack of a better term), which have apparently been included to get you into what is not very immediate or accessible music. I don't really get that decision, I don't find it necessary for the film, and I frankly think it detracts from it (in addition, it suggests that the filmmakers didn't have enough material, which seems really odd given the sheer number of interviewees and Walker's own thoughtful comments). I really would like to like this movie more, and I would advise anyone with an interest in Walker to check it out anyway, but it is not a great documentary.

The Tripper (2006, David Arquette)

2011-10-17T12:36:00.001-04:00

This isn't scary - and I'm not sure its really supposed to be - but the problem is that it isn't funny either. I laughed maybe twice. The political commentary is obvious and heavy handed and not in any way insightful. The best part about it is the spot-the-famous-people aspect, and that's not all that much fun either (thanks to the internet). This is a mess of a movie but it makes sense since I certainly never thought David Arquette had directing in him.

Smash by the Offspring (Epitaph 1994)

2011-10-13T12:12:00.000-04:00

Two things about this make it better than most other 90s pop punk: the louder, hard rock guitars and the "social comment." The Offspring were certainly more literate than Greenday (at least at the time). On the other hand, Dexter is a pretty terrible singer (which would be more acceptable if the music was faster) and the band lacks for hooks outside of the singles (and hooks are pretty important in pop punk). Still, I prefer this (slightly) to early Greenday and I can't help but finding the Offspring more interesting than most of their contemporaries, even if they never really lived up to the promise I occasionally detect.
PS I hated this when it first came out because I didn't listen to distorted guitars.
PPS "Come Out and Play" is a near classic song but it lacks a great performance here. For me, it is still awaiting a definitive performance,

The Greatest Songs Ever Written (by Us) by NOFX (Epitaph 2004)

2011-10-12T16:23:00.000-04:00

When I was a little more musically naive I used to believe that NOFX were preserving something, let's call it the essence of punk or something silly like that. I didn't believe this because I listened to them, but rather because the guys I knew who were into punk (I wasn't really at the time, except for the Clash) all liked them and seemed to think they were one of the few real punk bounds around.
Ten years or so later, I certainly think the idea of an essence to punk (or any other genre) is relatively silly, or at least way too difficult to define. But if there is something like that I can't really find it here. NOFX are relatively raw, energetic, catchy and political (though it is often hard to tell when the tongue is in cheek and when it isn't) and so in that sense I guess they are preserving the original punk movement.
But I am a big believer in evolution, or at least in the revising - and revitalizing - of traditions and NOFX clearly don't agree. This comp - which suffers from the usual comp faults which I have detailed elsewhere - gives us a really good summary of why NOFX might have been a pretty cool band in the late 70s but in the 90s and 00s it's hard to make a big deal out of them.
I'm sure it's better under the influence, but listening to it sober I can't help but wonder why these guys don't just grow up already (I will say though that they at least can play a little more than Greenday, so good for them).

The Singles: 1992-2003 by No Doubt (Interscope 2003)

2011-10-12T12:46:00.002-04:00

Yes, No Doubt are a singles band. I must assume that since the only studio album I have heard by them, Tragic Kindgom, is one of the best examples of a 90s album where the singles are uniformly better than anything else.
This is a good compilation in that sense, but personally I can't say more than it is above average because honestly I find No Doubt to have gotten less and less musically interesting as their career progressed (or at least less appealing to me). Tragic Kingdom has always been a borderline guilty pleasure for me (some days I like it alright, some days I'm really embarrassed that I have listened to it so many times) but I don't really like their extremely poppy dalliances with rock steady and dancehall (and I don't like those styles anyway). And frankly I've never liked their lyrics much.
But this is what it says it is and if you like No Doubt that's a good thing.

Impossible Spaces by Sandro Perri (Constellation, 2011)

2011-10-11T14:27:00.000-04:00

Like so many people labeled "indy," Perri is full of ideas. And like so many people labeled "indy" Perri could use a producer to get him to keep the right ideas and cut the less good ones. But that isn't the main problem with this album, as it is with so many albums. Rather the problem is another common one besetting the "post-rock" community: if you don't like the hodgepodge influences, you probably won't like the album. Perri borrows from the less interesting, more commercial half of jazz fusion (the part that is more fusion than jazz) like Weather Report or the wussy side of Return to Forever. Sometimes the keyboards sound like Jan Hammer when he was in Mahavishnu Orchestra, only dialed back a ton.
There are little bits and pieces that work only they do not make an album. They seem to be assembled almost scattershot, as if completely by whim.
It is very creative music, but it just doesn't do it for me given my general dislike of his references.

Valhalla Rising (2009, Nicolas Winding Refn)

2011-10-11T11:01:00.001-04:00

Well this is quite the artsy attempt at an "action" film (for lack of a better term, though there is little action). One suspects that a lack of budget somewhat contributed to this, as its certainly easier to film in "mist" than worry about backgrounds and such. Unfortunately, too much is left out of the picture to really get enough of what is supposedly of import (I really have no idea). I have some major issues with the geography of the film (though Scotland does a good job of standing in for Canada, how the hell did they get to Canada?) and some problems with its excessive moodiness. On the other hand, it certainly prompts more questions than just about every other viking movie I've seen.

This Gun for Hire (1942, Frank Tuttle)

2011-10-11T10:56:00.001-04:00

This is a pretty by-the-numbers 40s noir with many of the conventions more obvious than normal (Ladd is tough, but sensitive, etc). The best part is probably the variety of great locations. The overly patriotic nature is a little annoying and so is much of the acting from the supporting players (particularly the talent agent near the beginning, who is terrible). I suspect that the book is much better (and British).

I was wrong about Kessel

2011-10-09T14:39:00.001-04:00

He is on pace to score 123 goals this season. Shows you what I know.

"Empire of Illusion" by Chris Hedges

2011-10-09T14:38:00.000-04:00

2.5/5
I agree with much of what Hedges has to say (excepting his chapter on Porn, see below) but I don't agree with the way he says it or many of his claims about the "what" that he has identified as destroying the US. Yes, the US is clearly headed for worse times, and this is definitely in part a result of celebrity culture, imperial pretensions, massive discrepancies in wealth and other things he points out. But between American Fascists and this Hedges has gone from reasonable to near-hysterical (here he is not quite the absolutely hysterical columnist of Truthdig just yet). Passages of well-researched or well-backed, astute claims and observations are interwoven with "Oh my god the corporations!!!!" and other such nonsense befitting of far worse authors.
A selection of problems:
The chapter on porn completely ignores a huge section of the porn industry that is not about degrading women. Moreover, by focusing on the slim minority of people who actually attend porn conventions, Hedges is hardly looking at a typical cross section of the populace.
Systems are not people and do not require things or want things or what have you. Yes, that impression is often given but it is intellectually dishonest to claim that the economic system itself is attempting to do anything.
Hedges claims that there was a better time in America (alternatively indicated as pre-Vietnam and pre-Reagan) and yet one of his main bases for his claims of a corporate elite is C. Wright Mills' work of the 1950s, when Hedges doesn't seem to believe such elites really existed. So is Mills' right or not? (Incidentally, Mills' work is not widely accepted within the political science community because Mills' work is, like Hedges, almost entirely polemical).
I could go on but that should suffice.
Much of what Hedges says is alarming and disturbing and Hedges passion is admirable but he is preaching to the converted. In order to affect change, surely Hedges needs to come off as more reasoned, so those who don't already agree with him, or who are inclined to think of him as a "socialist, " "communist" or other American dirty word, might actually consider what he is saying and attempt to act on it.

Stuck (2007, Stuart Gordon)

2011-10-09T13:46:00.000-04:00

This is, essentially, the American Black Comedy version of the Death of Mr. Lazarescu. It has some of the same social comment themes, though they disappear as the comedy heightens, and it is far less poignant, because it's a comedy. On the whole it is entertaining if less effective than its foreign inspiration.

Vanishing Point (1971, Richard C. Sarafian)

2011-10-09T13:45:00.000-04:00

This has a reputation as being the greatest car chase movie of all time and it probably is (this statement excepts movies like Bullit or the French Connection where a truly great car chase is merely part of the film). That statement doesn't say much however, as most car chase movies aren't much of anything else. It's about as artsy and, conversely, as bare bones, as something like this could be, and that's to its credit. But in the end it is just a car chase movie that certainly will resonate far more with anyone who was a white teen or 20-something in late 60s/early 70s than with anyone else.

Ten Canoes (2006, Rolf de Heer, Peter Djigirr)

2011-10-09T13:44:00.000-04:00

Well this is an interesting little piece of history. It certainly is important, since it's probably the first true film documentation of this particular story. As film it is a little too meta for what it is doing, but then that appears to be the nature of this story (and perhaps many Abo stories). I can't say it was all that captivating but I recognize it's necessary and certainly a good first step. It pales in comparison to the Fast Runner, though.

"Vernon, Florida" (1981, Errol Morris)

2011-10-09T13:43:00.000-04:00

This is sort of indescribable (in a less interesting way than Fast, Cheap and Out of Control). It's a portrait of a town I don't particularly have any urge to go to now. It lacks narrative of any kind and so is a precursor to many fly on the wall documentaries (though here they talk to the camera). Unlike most of these types of documentaries, it is not too long. It doesn't really tell the story of Vernon but apparently there is a very good reason for that.

"Talk to Her" (2002, Pedro Almodovar)

2011-10-09T13:41:00.000-04:00

This is an interesting and dare I say touching film that manages to go somewhere I wouldn't have expected even though in retrospect it's somewhat obvious. The acting is good all around and the story turns out to be pretty compelling despite my initial reservations. There is a good mix of a little bit of a light humour with the more...well, serious, for lack of a better word, subject matter.

The Campaign to Fire Brian Burke: the '11-'12 Leafs Preview

2011-10-05T22:52:00.000-04:00

Cast your mind back a few years to when Burke was rumoured to be the first choice as Leafs' GM, despite already having a job. There was a lot of hype by his supporters - and Leaf fans in general - about how he would change things, how he would be different than JFJ specifically.
Well all I see is the same old same old only the team is worse. Both men tried to save their jobs by constantly making deals instead of going for the full rebuild. But at least JFJ had a team to work with, what Burke has hasn't amounted to much.
And if you really disagree with me so much just ask yourself this: if, on the day of Burke's hiring, you were told that as a condition of his hiring you would have to accept a first line of Phil Kessel, Tim Connolly and Joffrey Lupul would you really have said yes? Of course not. Because you would have believed, like many of us did, that John Tavares was the future of the Maple Leafs, and that somehow Burke was going to get him (and that Tavares was going to develop a little faster than he has).
And here we are a couple years later, nearly half way through the supposed rebuild and what to we have to build on? Not much. I present, as yet more evidence of Burke's bungling of his job, the Leafs' prospective roster for the coming season:

As it stands right now here is the Leafs' depth chart (subject to some minor alterations through training camp and injuries of course):
Lupul Connolly Kessell
MacArthur Grabovski Kulemin
Kadri/Frattin Bozak Armstrong
Any of: Brown, Crabb, Dupuis, Lombardi, Orr, Rosehill, Steckel

Phaneuf Schenn
Liles Komisarek
Gunnarsson Gardiner
Franson

Reimer
Gustavsson

The top line:
Joffrey Lupul, LW/C:
Best season: 28G, 25A for 53P, -13 in 81 games with Anaheim in 05'-'06
Career 82 game average: 23G, 24A for 47P, -10.
Lupul, like Kessel, is a winger who couldn't make it at centre in the NHL for the fairly obvious reasons that he doesn't set guys up and doesn't appear to play much defense. The Leafs brass (Wilson specifically) would like us to think that playing the most minutes of his career with Kessell and Connolly will give him a career year at 28 (a full six years after his previous career high). They might be right but I really think they won't be. Kadri should be in this spot or not make the team (see below). Will playing the defensively inept Lupul with the defensively inept Kessel work?
Tim Connolly, C:
Best season: 17G, 48A for 65P, +10 in 73 games with Buffalo in '09-'10
Career 82 game average: 16G, 36A for 52P, -5
Connolly at least had his best season recently. Like Lupul, he has been beset by injuries playing 600 games in 10 seasons. If he is healthy, he looks like a good second line centre (though his peak numbers suggest first line, who knows if at 30 he is past or in his peak). He needs to be healthy to make this group offensively effective as I think Lupul's scoring sort of rests on him.
Phil Kessel, RW/C:
Best season: 32G, 32A for 64P, -20 in 82 games with Toronto last season
Career 82 game average: 28G, 25A for 54P, -5
We know why Kessel can't play centre (he doesn't set up guys enough, even though he can, he can't play defense more than one game at a time) but we also know that you can pretty much count on him for 30 goals every season. The problem is that last year, during his best offensive season ever, he was on the ice for 71 goals against. Kessel needs defensively inclined linemates to help him out and I really doubt these two fit the bill. They will need to score a lot. Will Kessel ever be more than a 30 goal, 60 point player? I certainly hope so given the investment.

The second line:
Clarke MacArthur, LW/C:
Best season: 21G, 42A for 63P, - 3 in 82 games with Toronto last season
Career 82 game average: 18G, 24A for 43P, -5
MacArthur had a career year last year and it's hard to see him repeating it this year. This line was the real first line for much of last year and MacArthur was the playmaker on the team. We don't want to break up the chemistry of this line but I have half a mind to play him with Kessel. The problem is nobody knows if last year was something that can be expected for the future or whether it was to secure a contract.
Mikhail Grabovski, C:
Beast season: 29G, 29A for 58P, +14 in 81 games with Toronto last season
Career 82 game average: 21G, 30A for 50P, +1
Grabovski showed us a lot last year, that he really is a 2nd line centre in the league and that he is actually a pretty decent two-way player when he can be motivated to do that. He doesn't pass enough to be a #1 but I think the Leafs have to be pretty happy. The problem is his age: the idea that Grabovski has a higher ceiling than 60 points seems a preposterous since he will turn 28 in January. He will probably be this good for a few years more and then there will be a decline.

Nikolai Kulemin, RW/LW:
Best season: 30G, 27A for 57P, +7 with Toronto last season
Career 82 game average: 21G, 22A for 44P, +/- of 0
Kulemin on the other hand showed some real potential (being a few years younger than Grabo) and showed that he can play both ways. He is one of true bright spots for the team. Since he and Grabo are pretty much the best thing the team has defensively amongst the forwards it stands to reason that they will be playing the tough defensive matchups which means their point totals may suffer (unless they both become so good that they both shutdown opponents and score at the same time) but I don't know that the line should be broken up if they are scoring less. The team needs someone to play D up front.

The third line:
Nazem Kadri, LW/C:
Last year in the NHL: 3G, 9A for 12P in 29G, -3. Last year in the AHL: 17G, 24A for 41P in 44 games, +2.
Career 82 game average in the OHL: 31G, 56A for 87P, +20
Kadri may not get this spot but a the moment it seems to be his and I think that's terrible (see below). Lupul should be here despite his iffy defense. Or a prospect who isn't attempting to become an offensive player in the league. With the lack of defense on this line, one can only hope for power play time for Kadri and for enough minutes to show what he could possibly do. He needs an actual chance, not a 29 game taste. Good decision making him a winger though.
Update: His injury means that Frattin will start in his place. I think this is probably good for Kadri because if Frattin can do a good job of being a 3rd liner then maybe Kadri can get top six minutes in the minors (or, if Lupul is about as good as I expect him to be, in the majors) and we can finally see what he is.
Frattin's career 82 game average in NCAA: 46G, 39A for 86P

Tyler Bozak, C:
Last year in the NHL: 15G, 17A for 32P in 82 games, -29
Career 82 game average in the NCAA: 36G, 42A for 78P, no +/- info available
Bozak was put in a terrible position by the team last year and failed miserably. As a result they have decided he should be put in another difficult position. What about being a team worst -29 says this guy plays defense? I admit I've seen potential from him too but it can't be consistent: either Kessel is so bad defensively that he dragged Bozak down with him or Bozak isn't good defensively even though he looks it at times. This line is going to struggle to stop people.
Update: Bozak will once again centre the "first" line while Connolly is hurt. Oh dear.

Colby Armstrong, RW:
Best season: 16G, 24A for 40P, +15 in 47 games with Pittsburgh in '05-'06
Career 82 game average: 17G, 23A for 40P, +6
Putting aside what I think of Armstrong's salary, Armstrong has proven he can be an effective player (though I really don't get all those people who claim he affects the Leafs' winning percentage, because even if they do have more wins with him in the lineup, the guy played 16 minutes a game last season...that's out of 60 folks). I'm just not sure he's so effective he can counter the defensive problems of his two linemates over the course of a season. But this is where he belongs despite his salary.

The fourth line:
The Leafs have tons of options for the 4th line (at least 6 players once Lombardi is healthy) and it's not all that important provided they do their job properly (hit people, don't give up goals, score the occasional goal). Certainly a healthy Lombardi has a greater chance than the rest of them at playing further up the depth chart.

Forward summary:
I wouldn't have signed Connolly as you all know, and not just because he was a very distant second in terms of available free agent centres, but more because I thought the Leafs should tank for some elite talent this year. I know that wouldn't happen, but I tried to dream. The other reason was that so Kadri, if he makes the team, could play top 6 minutes. I get that he isn't an NHL centre, and I'm actually quite happy the team has recognized this and moved him to the wing. But if you want to find out if this guy can play, you need to give him a real opportunity, either at the AHL or the NHL. One of my biggest peeves with the Leafs since I have returned to the fold is that they almost never develop prospects properly (Kaberle and now Schenn being the rare exceptions). I believe that anyone in any role in any organization needs to understand the expectations set for them, but when a team says 'you're not good enough' and then 'we need you' repeatedly over a career it is probably hard to take. Kadri should have spent the whole year in the minors last year and if he didn't perform that well he should do it again this year. He certainly shouldn't be trying to learn a checking role when the team wants him to become a top 6 forward. Remember Tlusty? They did the same thing with him and look what happened. Interestingly, Cullen has the 2nd line ranked first and Kessel's second, which is certainly more accurate in terms of quality of the lines, but I think it won't be reflected in minutes. Basically, I think that Kadri (or Colborne or whichever "prospect" makes the team) should be on a top six at the sacrifice of an older player (Lupul anyone?). The concern is to develop a future, not to promote mediocrity now. Having their supposed best offensive prospect play third line minutes is retarded. This reminds me somewhat of Lindros centring Kilger and Domi way back.
The Leafs have acquired Steckel as I was writing this leaving me to wonder why, as they already have a million guys like him.

The top D pairing:
Dion Phaneuf, D:
Best season: 17G, 43A for 60P, +12 in 82 games with Calgary in '07-'08
Career 82 game average: 15G, 32A for 47P, +3
Phaneuf is quite far removed from his best seasons but there is no reason to think he can't return to this form given his age. It remains to be seen. Personally, I think the best bet is to pair him with Schenn (or possibly Aulie if Aulie becomes a dependable defensive D at the NHL level) allowing Phaneuf to play a more risky style.

Luke Schenn, D:
Best season: 5G, 17A for 22P, -7 in 82 games with Toronto last year
Career 82 game average: 4G, 15A for 19P, -6
Schenn appears to be to be getting better and better. His minus, as far as I'm concerned, stems from playing for a shitty shitty team the last three seasons. I am convinced that it will go away as soon as the Leafs are better than .500 (I mean a real .500, not a NHL .500). As far as I'm concerned, he is their best stay at home defenceman and a legitimate #2/#3 in the league depending on how the pairs are set up (i.e. a #2 when paired with a Phaneuf, a #3 when paired with another shutdown).

The second pairing?
John-Michael Liles, D:
Best season: 14G, 35A for 49P, +5 in 82 games with Colorado in '05-'06
Career 82 game average: 11G, 33A for 44P, -3
Liles is supposed to be the poor man's Kaberle. If he is better in the playoffs than Kaberle (which is not hard, but Liles' numbers don't bear that out) then he already is more. I thought he was a good pickup, if the Leafs weren't so inundated with D. I think he should be fine as a top 4 offensive D. I don't think he is part of the future but he certainly should be able to do this job reasonably well. If not, trade him! He isn't young enough and Franson is sitting around without a job.

Mike Komisarek, D:
Best season: 4G, 13A for 17P, +9 in 75 games with Montreal in '07-'08
Career 82 game average: 2G, 11A for 12P, -1
It must drive the old guys nuts that someone like this could make that much money. Alas, it is the way of the world. Komisarek looked to be a legitimate #2/#3 shutdown D in Montreal, but it seems as though this was the Markov effect instead. Without Markov he has been just abysmal in TO (-17 with 14 points) and last year was demoted to the 6th D. I have him this high only because I have heard that they are playing Gardiner protected minutes. Gunnarsson might be here instead, it's hard to know. I am trying to stick to Left/Right pairings as long as I can so I put Komisarek here in the hopes that if the Leafs do give him this much of a role, he doesn't play as bad as he has the last two years. Trade him ASAP. I mean, if he plays well, don't sit and think about it: trade him. This is a terrible, terrible contract.

Third pairing?
Carl Gunnarsson, D:
Best season: 4G, 16A for 20P, -2 in 68 games with Toronto last season
Career 82 game average in SEL: 5G, 10A for 15P, +8
I like Gunnarsson though I think he might find himself the odd man out. Frankly I do think this is too far down the chart for him but he is ostensibly the third best left shot on D. I predict that he will play like he deserves more time, probably won't get it and will eventually find himself traded because of his lack of a physical game and he will prove a useful piece on some other team.

Jake Gardiner, D:
Career 82 game average in NCAA: 13G, 38A for 51P
Gardiner impressed more than most thought he would and he has made the team ahead of both Aulie and Franson, who both have more experience. One writer (he works for the Sun so we can *cough* write him off) claims he will be a star. I will believe it when I see it. For the moment it doesn't make sense to me to play him in protected minutes in the NHL when you can play him in top 2 minutes in the AHL and when you have Franson to play here instead but who am I to judge?

7th D:
Cody Franson, D:
Best season: 8G, 21A for 29P, +10 in 82 games with Nashville last year
Career 82 game average in the AHL: 12G, 37A for 49P, -1 (barely)
Franson looked great in very limited minutes with Nashville the past two years. The point of getting someone like this and putting him on a rebuilding team (as opposed to having him play a depth role on a competitor like Nashville) is to see if he can play top 4 (or even top 2) minutes. Starting him in the press box does not accomplish this. The Leafs will not know what they have with this guy until they play him.

D summary:
There are eternally two options on D: either you pair your best offensive (think Kaberle and McCabe together) and defensive players (shutdown pairs on many teams, like Bieksa/Hamhuis on Vancouver this past playoff) together or you pair offense with defense (think Keith and Seabrook before Seabrook started scoring). I think the latter works for a team like the Leafs because of the talent involved (Komisarek and Aulie aren't good enough to play shutdown with Schenn and it leaves Phaneuf, Liles and whomever else exposed without those guys playing with them). It's tough to figure out this year with all the shakeups. Aulie didn't make the team as expected. Komisarek made it (which is a surprise only if we thought Wilson was being rational about this process) and Franson sort of made it. My pairings are guesses because honestly I can't watch preseason hockey, it is meaningless. But I really can't understand why Gardiner is playing in stead of Franson: put Gardiner in the minors for a year and see if he can play and let Franson play to see what he does. Jesus.

Summary:
It boggles my mind that this team is what results from the Leafs being as bad as they have been for so many years. Other teams acquire top end talent the Leafs...acquire talent which isn't thought to be top end. Maybe they will look out on someone like Colborne or Gardiner (one can only hope) but they haven't lucked out on Kadri (so it seems anyway) or Bozak or any number of others (they have only lucked out so far on Kulemin, Reimer - perhaps - and Schenn). It is a chancy thing, rebuilding, and the only way to ensure you have a good chance is to accumulate as much of these risks as possible (like the Jays are trying to). But the Leafs don't believe this; they believe they can buck trends and do things differently. The result is a top line of Lupul, Connolly and Kessel (which will probably be unseated by the real top line just like last year) and a whole bunch of 2nd, 3rd and 4th liners who may collectively be good enough to make the playoffs (with a hot goalie) but have nowhere near the talent needed (at either end) to advance. The only way this team wins anything is if it turns into some kind of crazy shutdown beat-the-shit-out-of-you-while-the-refs-pretend-it's-pre-lockout-hockey team (like the '07 Ducks, last year's Bruins) and do any of us believe that a Phil Kessel-led team is going to be that?

Please MLSE, fire your GM so you can hire a guy who believes that he isn't always right, who believes in consensus, who believes that just because he thinks something, doesn't mean it's true, who isn't his own brand of hockey and who understands how to create a successful organization. Otherwise the Leafs will be mediocre (at best) ad infinitum.

The Campaign to Fire Brian Burke: He trades yet another pick for yet another grinder

2011-10-05T14:21:00.001-04:00

Steckel for a 4th round pick? Exactly why? The Leafs have more of these types of guys than most teams so why trade the potential to draft something else (I know, it is just potential) when you have so many of these dime-a-dozen guys? I don't get it and I will never get it.
Steckel last year: 1G for 1P in 18 games. He is 29 so he is in his "prime." Wow that was worth it.

National Ransom by Elvis Costello (Hear 2010)

2011-09-29T08:11:00.002-04:00

Costello seems to be attempting a similar project to Dylan at this stage, but unlike Dylan Costello is writing his own songs instead of reinventing old ones and pretending their his own. It's not as raw as Dylan's stuff obviously, but it still involves sort of a genre cherry pick of traditional American music styles. Automatically this appeals to me more than Costello's career-making music. And I find his songs to be particularly effective this time out, even if they are less obviously acerbic than what he used to write (and that makes sense since he is no longer young and presumably no longer as angry). This is pretty much as good as it gets for roots influenced pop. Great.

Armed Forces by Elvis Costello (Columbia 1979)

2011-09-28T21:18:00.000-04:00

It's slightly overproduced but this actually sort of makes it fit in with what was going on in the world. Costello is more biting here (and more cohesive) which appeals to me. It lets me forgive some of the more bizarre flourishes. Like the past one, it feels like a step forward and a step back at the same time, which is okay I guess. It's solid again but I still can't see any of these as masterpieces.

This year's Model by Elvis Costello (Columbia 1978)

2011-09-28T21:16:00.001-04:00

Rawer than the debut, which is nice. Perhaps a little more cohesive as well. Though it is better sounding I'm not sure the songs are quite as song: it's a tradeoff, something got better and something got not quite as good. I guess that's where I'm leaving it.

My Aim is True by Elvis Costello (Columbia 1977)

2011-09-28T21:15:00.000-04:00

It's unfortunate I guess that early Costello is constantly connected with punk, if only because of his lyrics (which are rather more biting than most 70s pop rock lyrics). The music is decidedly not punk: it's pure pub rock; one of the most overrated underground movements in rock music history I say. But that's not really to slight Costello; he was probably the best thing to happen to pub rock. He moved on and so I guess the world forgets. I don't know.
Anyway, I generally like his songs but the aesthetic is not great: it's a little herky jerky but mostly just the same thing that was going on in the states at the same time: 50s revivalism (Springsteen - who he sounds like at times, Petty, Seger) only Costello is a better writer and has managed to capture at least a little of the modern sense that comes with punk. And whether he was a punk or not, he was certainly more literate / eloquent than any of them which helps me get over the power pop contained herein.

Axe to Fall (Epitaph/Deathwish 2009)

2011-09-28T20:25:00.001-04:00

Part of me wants to like this more than NH, but part of me doesn't. There are way more metal cliches (the guitar leads in particular) and that's both a good thing and a bad thing. It gives us a reference point, but not a great reference point. I must give them at least some recognition for actually having some passable singing on the one ballad this time (unlike on YFM, where it is terrible). Part of me thinks it's stronger, and part of me thinks it's more of the same (I still like that). I will stick with the latter.

No Heroes by Converge (Deathwish 2006)

2011-09-27T22:04:00.000-04:00

Metalcore appeals to me because it combines things I like about metal and punk together, and skips on the excesses of metal (for the most part). This is a pretty good example. The lyrics are shit (when you can decipher them), but the music grabs you and doesn't really let you go, even when they go for an epic. Besides, what heavy band has good lyrics? I find it a bit more successful - if less varied - than the previous release, YFM. Perhaps it's just more example.

You Fail Me by Converge (Deathwish 2004)

2011-09-27T22:03:00.000-04:00

So I like this a lot but I really don't know if I can rate it higher than this. For one thing, like so many bands of this ilk, when they play a slow song you discover NOBODY knows how to sing.