Sunday, October 28, 2018

Mini Reviews for October 22 - 28, 2018

Rev yous.

Movies

Halloween (2018)
It's about as fan-servicey as the trailers promised, which is to say: very. At times, the film tries to say something about the fundamental magnetism of Michael Myers (a nice dovetail with the fan service, admittedly), which would be interesting if the movie didn't keep getting distracted by weird comic cul-de-sacs and some fairly ridiculous gore. David Gordon Green directs handsomely, and the cinematography is generally very good—if a bit ruined by the overzealous editing à la last year's It, and some of the directorial flourishes feel more like obligatory "cool" than anything truly inspired (one long take in particular feels very much like someone saw that episode of True Detective and was like, "Bro, that's sick"). Still, it looks nice, and that niceness is complemented by a solid finale. I'll cop to having seen this in a bad mood, so perhaps I should recuse myself. But I thought this was aggressively mediocre. I guess when you get right down to it, I shouldn't have been expecting anything more than I usually expect from slasher sequels (even ones forty years delayed/retconned), but at least a lot of those had the good sense to be completely loony in their mediocrity. Grade: B-

Don't Worry, He Won't Get Far on Foot (2018)
Gus Van Sant adapts John Callahan's memoir into something of a Gus Van Sant's greatest hits collage—mostly, a fusion of the counter-culture, drug-addled meandering of Drugstore Cowboy with the therapeutic schmaltz of Good Will Hunting. And it works really well on a moment-by-moment basis (both of Jack Black's appearances are among Black's best cinema in years), even if the whole package doesn't exactly hang together as something special. Which is I guess how it usually goes with greatest hits collections. Grade: B





Southside with You (2016)
"Before Sunrise, but it's Barrack Obama and Michelle Robinson's first date" is a supremely kooky premise that this film plays entirely straight. It's a profoundly weird experience to try to engage sincerely with the emotional arc of this movie knowing that one of them will eventually become the leader of the free world, and the chasm between the very light, very sweet text of the film and the overwhelmingly weight of its historical context creates a cognitive dissonance that's like a significantly more intense version of the way The End of the Tour exploited the collision of the popularly imagined David Foster Wallace with acted simulacra of that image. Here, there's the obviously pandering liberal vision of Obama as the great man who, according to the film, can on a whim rouse community organizers with an impromptu speech or make old white people comfortable with the ending of Do the Right Thing crashing into a youthful, horny, and honestly kind of douchey Young Barrack not that far removed from the pretentious navel-gazer of Ethan Hawke's Jesse in Before Sunrise, just with a bit more political soulfulness thrown in. The movie makes it utterly impossible to set aside your own opinions of Obama the Political Figure while also seeming (somewhat perversely) to tease you with the prospect that this is "just" the story of two young activists falling in love. It's an interesting experiment (one—despite all this rambling—I'm not entirely convinced is intentional, but oh well) that's probably more interesting as the subject of a graduate student essay than as a viewing experience, largely due to the somewhat flatly written and only passably acted central relationship. It's not exactly uncommon knowledge, but perhaps it's taken for granted that the reason the Before movies work so well is the extreme synergy between its screenplay and its actors—it's not that Southside with You is poorly written and acted, exactly, but that crucial chemistry isn't there. Combined with the political semiotics loop-de-loops, it's hard to really get that invested but just as hard to dismiss entirely. Grade: C+


Big Eyes (2014)
I don't know how much I buy that Burton is positioning this film as a metaphor for his career, but if it is, it amusingly positions Amy Adams as '80s/'90s Burton and Christoph Waltz as 2000s-onward Burton, which feels just about right. Anyway, Big Eyes is nothing really to write home about, but it's solidly constructed (which is practically a miracle for modern-day Burton) and it's really, really nicely shot and lit—and not in that normal, post-millennium Burton way, either. Grade: B






Dark Water (仄暗い水の底から) (2002)
The opaque milkiness that water gets as it seeps from a regular drinking-water pipe through the ceiling of your home and back into your living space is particularly off-putting, as if there is something irremovably contaminated about the drywall and insulation and other structures that literally make up your home. Somehow, it is worse than lake or river water, which on a scientific level is (I imagine) significantly filthier. But to see such filth come from your own house—it makes me feel ill. Dark Water makes this essential repulsion its premise, and it's frequently horrifying. It also takes the idea of contaminated water leaking through a home to its metaphorical extreme, using that imagery to explore generational trauma (the true structural contamination of a home) and the knots that form between parent and child, knots that twist and ache and wind until it's hard to trace the linkages that separate one generation from the next. It's scary, sure, but more than anything, it's heartbreaking. Grade: B+

A Nightmare on Elm Street 4: The Dream Master (1988)
A huge step down from Dream Warriors and every Nightmare film before it, The Dream Master is when the inherent silliness of this franchise collapsed in on itself and smothered its inventive spirit. There are a few inventive moments—it's apparently going to be a franchise staple for Freddy to seduce some horny dude in a grotesque way, and there's a scene involving a waterbed here that is a decent iteration on that—but for the most part, the film is pretty tedious and rote, lacking the audacious special effects/gross-out gags or the demented sense of humor of its predecessors. It almost succeeds in becoming a sort of unintentional comedy (the film's idea of literary academic debate is, "Kafka and Goethe have never been irreconcilable to me," which is surely a Mad Libs creation), but ultimately, the funniest thing in the movie is its recycling of Annie Hall's penis envy joke, which probably speaks more to the creative drought here than anything. Grade: C

Television

Party Down, Season 1 (2009)
Though it was the American version of The Office that was at its popular height in 2009 when this short-lived but cultishly beloved comedy about a team of caterers debuted, it's the UK iteration of the show that Party Down draws most from, using that original series's borderline-cruel well of darkly observed human microdrama and the cosmic irony inherent in being stuck in a job that was nobody's first choice—there's a real sense of tragedy to these characters that is so sharply and agonizingly realized that it's impossible not to think of Gervais and Merchant's early-millennium masterpiece. Even if you're only familiar with the American Office, though, you'll recognize the DNA, from the socially clueless boss who overcompensates for his flaws to the point of dysfunction to the sardonic/wistful will-they-won't-they couple to the insufferable and rude coworkers. That isn't to say that Party Down isn't its own thing; the catering conceit allows for some pretty great "job of the week" features (catering a rich kid's yacht birthday! catering a libertarian rally!), and Ken Marino's Ron is a fresh, utterly sad spin on the "awkward/offensive boss" trope. The cast as a whole is excellent, in fact, starring all sorts of late-2000s comedy luminaries such as Lizzy Caplan (of course—can we have her in every TV series from now on? Please and thank you!), Jane Lynch (whom the show loses to Glee near the end of this first season, which... *shakes fist*), and Adam Scott. The whole package probably isn't going to blow your mind—due to the aforementioned similarities with The Office as well as its unfortunate propensity for making homosexuality the butt of its jokes (it's, like, self-aware, but it's still operating on that late-2000s assumption that if something is "gay" it's inherently funnier, which is blegh)—but it's a solid and sometimes hilarious little half-hour tragicomedy. Grade: B+

Books

The Vile Village by Lemony Snicket (2001)
The seventh book of the Series of Unfortunate Events series represents something of a turning point in these books in a number of ways—not the least of which is that Count Olaf no longer needs a disguise, and (in the typical cynical fashion of this series) not because of any particularly uplifting victory by the Baudelaire siblings but because a typo in the newspaper leads all the other characters to belief that the villain is "Count Omar." It's also the book in which the Baudelaires begin to have more autonomy, since they get to pick where Mr. Poe sends them (the titular village), as they think the village's name—abbreviated V.F.D. on a map—will help them solve some of the series's ongoing mysteries and find the Quagmires. This is also the book in which the cruel cosmic joke of "V.F.D." comes to the fore, and the sheer accumulation of things that V.F.D. could stand for becomes something of a sick, postmodern joke—V.F.D. on the map, it turns out, stands for "Village of Fowl Devotees." The essential absurdity of the Baudelaires' universe becomes more and more apparent at the same time that their agency increases, and the series begins to modify its thesis from "the world is a cruel and absurd place that is incompatible with ideas of justice or equity" to "the world is a cruel and absurd place made even more so by the individual actions of autonomous individuals," an idea reflected not just by the Baudelaires' frustrated attempts to own their own destiny but also by the byzantine proliferation of rules that the Village of Fowl Devotees has put into place—laws and rules being perhaps the most acute way that a free people make the world a maze of absurdity. It's all very darkly funny, but it's also, more so than any other of the Series of Unfortunate Events thus far, crushingly sad—not just in the formulaic "foiled attempt at victory" that all the books have leaned into but also in the minutiae recorded of these frustrations. In what is without a doubt the saddest moment of the series so far, Klaus realizes, when he and his siblings are at their most despairing, that it is his birthday, and the book takes a few pages to mull over the chasm between what Klaus's previous expectations for this birthday and the reality of it. It's uncharacteristic for the series to languish over little character moments like this, and when it does, it's a punch to the stomach. Grade: A-

The Hostile Hospital by Lemony Snicket (2001)
The Hostile Hospital continues the series's subversion of its own tropes that The Vile Village began—this time, forcing the Baudelaires to disguise themselves instead of Count Olaf (although Olaf also disguises himself, too). It also extends the previous book's exploration of individual autonomy to pose ethical questions about what it is that truly makes a person's decisions "evil"—do the ends justify the means? should a pure motivation be a factor? does the way that the universe's absurdity limits one's viable options change the way actions must be evaluated on a moral level? This is only accentuated by the increased visibility of Lemony Snicket as not just the book's author but also a character (a character who has perhaps committed questionable actions himself). It's always been clear that these books were postmodern metafiction, but as the series gears up for its back half, the precise nature of its postmodernism and its metafiction is snapping into focus. The Hostile Hospital is not nearly as biting or clever as The Ersatz Elevator, nor is it as sad as its immediate predecessor, but it's still no slouch. I can't believe I never read these books when I was in middle school. I would have dug them so much. Grade: B+

The Carnivorous Carnival by Lemony Snicket (2002)
Like The Hostile Hospital, The Carnivorous Carnival is more of an extension of the ideas and plots of the previous few books than it is anything new of its own. Back again are the plot subversions of having the Baudelaires, not Olaf, in disguise; returning is the ouroboros of "V.F.D."; here are the same questions of freedom and one's own responsibility for one's actions (there's a particularly violent and horrifying iteration of this question at the book's finale, rivaling the infamous Aunt Josephine death by leeches in The Wide Window as the series's most grisly moment). But, as formulaic as this series can get, these ideas still feel fresh, if not quite as exciting as when they showed up in The Ersatz Elevator and The Vile Village. Plus, the book ends on an especially nasty and unfortunate riff on the "suddenly tragic ending" thing that this series loves, which is, even in a book (and series) full of mean shocks, still pretty shocking. Grade: B+

Music

Let's Eat Grandma - I'm All Ears (2018)
Let's Eat Grandma are, in most respects, yet another piece of the current wave of female-led, emotionally forthright, retro-curious, future-focused indie rock that's been dominating the game for a few years now. What sets this band apart from Snail Mail and Mitski and their other peers in this wave, though, is a deeply atmospheric and even goth spaciousness to their music; listening to I'm All Ears feels a lot like listening to classic The Cure or Echo & the Bunnymen filtered through a distinctly millennial sensibility, and that's probably intentional—surely it's no accident that the excellent 11-minute closing track is called "Donnie Darko," name-dropping that ur-text in post-millennium appropriation of '80s goth rock. These folks aren't copycats, though, and as much as the album evokes its 30-years-prior ancestors, the music itself is as fresh and inventive as you would want a 2018 indie rock release to be, not just in the spaced-out, epic closer but throughout the album with the likes of the high melodrama of "Snakes & Ladders" and the strutting synth-pop of "Hot Pink." I've not listened to the band's 2016 debut, but that one would have to be quite an album for I'm All Ears to come anywhere near to being a sophomore slump. It's one of the strongest releases of the year. Grade: A-

Sunday, October 21, 2018

Mini Reviews for October 15 - 21, 2018

Harrah movies.

Movies

Three Identical Strangers (2018)
The film wields one particular event (involving the death of an individual central to this documentary) as such a cudgel that raises a lot of the ethical questions that the film uses to critique the twin study at the crux of this doc—as does the very premise of turning the lives of real people who have been so exploited into a rip-roaring docu-thriller. It helps that the "identical strangers" have given their consent, but honestly, would we gobble up this story any less readily if it had been told without their consent? I'm doubtful, and in general, I wish that, for all its Errol Morris-aping aesthetics, the movie had a bit more of a Morris-like streak and used interview as tool for philosophical treatise as much as narrative delivery. But it is a thrilling story, and I was admittedly gripped, aesthetic and ethical nags be damned. So in the end, what can I really say? Grade: B

Trapped (2016)
Trapped is centered around the struggles of several women's health clinics as anti-abortion legislation hamstrings their ability to function. It's not a particularly elegant documentary; it kind of meets halfway between a Wiseman observational style and a more traditional talking-heads issue doc, and it serves neither style as well as a more dedicated commitment to either would have (I'm left wanting both more rigorously informative work on the specifics of the issue and more anecdotally patient footage of the minutiae of the clincs' day-to-day operations). However, as a piece of ideology (a resolutely pro-choice one, it must be said), it presents the exact factors in the abortion debate that make me (while pro-life in philosophy) pro-choice in practice: the fact that anti-abortion laws don't really curb abortions, just the safety of them, the empty capriciousness of anti-abortion laws, the callous disregard for the realities of healthcare by anti-abortion politicians, the collateral damage of anti-abortion laws on other health services. To put it another way: the only Planned Parenthood in Knoxville is down the street from my house, and it is the only healthcare provider that is not a dialysis clinic for miles; every morning, there are people protesting abortions on the sidewalk in front, and honestly, if they truly wanted to decrease the number of abortions, they should be petitioning the city, state, and federal governments to incentivize outpatient facilities and reliable pharmacies and primary care physicians and, I dunno, a hospital to come to East Knoxville. But no. Apparently the best thing to do is the yell at the women who come to the sole women's health clinic in the area. Grade: B-

Ain't Them Bodies Saints (2013)
I'm much more a fan of David Lowery when he's in Ghost Story mode than when he's in Malick-lite mode, as he is here. The camerawork and acting are beautiful, but it lacks tangibility in the editing and story structure that made '70s Malick (which is definitely the Malick this wants to be) so perfectly celestial and Americanan. Nor is its writing specific or grounded enough to get the soulful tragedy of something like Sugarland Express, which Ain't Them Bodies Saints also really wants to be. I guess what I'm saying is: GIMME S'MORE OF THAT COSMIC WISTFULNESS, LOWERY. Grade: B-



A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors (1987)
The characters are paper-thin, I don't know what this movie's trying to do thematically, and all the franchise-connectivity stuff feels like an afterthought—good on the film for finally taking advantage of the "lucid dream superpowers" thing, but bad on the film for not going anywhere with it. But who cares about those things when you have these magnificent dream sequences? Tricycles spontaneously melt; solid objects like walls and chairs become diffuse and dangerous; there's an honest-to-goodness stop-motion sequence. It's all kind of amazing and nightmarish in a way that feels almost like a proto-Michel Gondry without all the twee. I can't say the movie really hangs together, but I could have spent a long time with this movie's sensibilities. Grade: B

Zombie (Zombi 2) (1979)
Ostensibly a sequel (thanks to dodgy Italian copyright law) to George Romero's Dawn of the Dead, but that doesn't really make any sense, especially given where the movie begins and ends. There are moments of sublimity here: a zombie wrestling a shark underwater, a notorious eye-gouging scene, the non-sequitur editing, the admirably gross zombie makeup (immortalized in the film's iconic poster), the score—that's all great. But the movie surrounding those moments is pretty rough, which yeah, I know, Italian low-budget, etc. But still. It would have been nice to have something to appreciate when the movie wasn't going pedal-to-the-metal sensory/gag-reflex overload. Also, I guess this just kind of comes with the territory, but surely women don't scuba dive naked, right? Anyway, even if they did, I haven't seen a camera so nakedly lecherous in a long while. Also, I wasn't really expecting this movie to lean so hard into the traditional voodoo zombie lore, given that one of Romero's big contributions to the genre was excising that stuff. Anyway, like a lot of voodoo zombie stories, this one has the whiff of racism, and while I guess there's a reading that positions this movie as anti-colonialist (there are lots of references to conquistadors [apparently pronounced "concweestadores"] and slavery in a way that's often linked to the undead), the movie certainly doesn't put a lot of effort into advancing it. Anyway, the good parts are good enough that I'll probably remember this movie pretty vividly, but golly, that's a lot of caveating I'm doing here. Grade: C

Night of the Demon (1957)
As far as the Jacques Tourneur canon goes, Night of the Demon is no Cat People, lacking that movie's ink-black nights and engaging characters. I also think the movie softballs its narrative by allowing Mr. Square-Jawed American Rationalist to triumph in the end; when we're dealing with the conflict between ancient paganism and modern reason, it's a bit too safe for a horror movie to massage our contemporary belief in reason over the supernatural. Gimme those incomprehensible forces that confound the modern scientific mind! But nonetheless, it's supremely atmospheric in that oh-so-Tourneur way, and the final fifteen minutes or so are terrifically tense, as is a mid-film séance. A good time, if not a flat-out great one. (P.S. This movie's shorter, American cut goes by Curse of the Demon, which raises the question of why American localizers thought "Curse" sounded cooler than "Night," but whatever; the main thing is that I couldn't find any posters for Night, which is why I have a Curse poster instead. Just wanted to settle that for all you pedants out there.) Grade: B+

Sunday, October 14, 2018

Mini Reviews for October 8 - 14, 2018

RIP Fall Break.

Movies


First Man (2018)
Damien Chazelle's last two features have been, to one degree or another, about the cost of success—what must a person give up to realize a great dream? First Man inflates this theme to a national scale, bludgeoning us with just what the United States had to sacrifice to put a man on the moon. We're treated to endless conversations of nervous NASA eggheads fearing government suits cutting the costly space program and sweating congressmen blustering about the billions of dollars the space race is costing the taxpayers and protesters (including Kurt Vonnegut!) shouting all the more pressing needs the Apollo program's funding could pay for—and not anything slight either, but things like a social safety net and food for the hungry. We're even shown human beings dying in the process of getting a man to the moon. And as such, for about 90% of its runtime, First Man is profoundly ambivalent on whether or not this national ambition is justified. This ambivalence is mirrored by Ryan Gosling's inscrutable, stoic (some might say empty) performance as Mr. "One Giant Leap For Mankind" himself, Neil Armstrong—who, it must be noted, has his own personal "cost of greatness" plot in the way his distance (both emotional and spatial) takes a toll on his wife, played by an excellent Claire Foy breathing way more life into this thankless "wife of a famous historical figure" role than the archetype usually receives. First Man is, to my knowledge, the only movie about the United States space program that really grapples with the ethical quandaries, to say nothing of the urgency of its interrogation, and the movie is worth seeing on those grounds alone. But then we get the moon landing itself, a sequence whose breathtaking beauty and bold silence and stark lighting and unshakable ethereality so firmly puts to bed the idea that it somehow wasn't worth it all in the end to get here that it's impossible not to feel deep in your gut that Chazelle's ambivalence was just theatrics and that he knew the answer all along—a decidedly less interesting ethical debate than originally presented. But there's no denying that the moon landing is magical, both as a real-life historical achievement and presented here as a cinematic showstopper, and Chazelle's direction captures really well that heady feeling of being so overwhelmed by the sheer magnitude of something that all other concerns, however urgent in theory, fall away. And maybe I'm not giving the film enough credit for its ethical wrestling; in the afterglow of the moon landing, it's easy to forget that the movie's final scene is a profoundly irresolute one, as Foy's Janet Shearon welcomes her husband back to Earth not with a smile but with tense silence, a wall of glass separating one from the other—greatness from the human cost. Grade: B+


Little Women (2018)
So my wife and I were going to see Crazy Rich Asians, but circumstances conspired against us, and we found ourselves in a screening of this movie instead: a movie that neither I nor my wife knew anything about. It's extremely rare for us to go into a movie as blindly as we did this one, which is its own kind of thrill, I'll admit; I wasn't even sure it was an adaptation of Louisa May Alcott's novel. It turns out that it is, in fact, an adaptation (though one set in the modern day), and it's, uh, not a good movie in any conventional sense: the cinematography is flat and overlit, the editing is dysfunctional, the screenplay is trite, and the acting is generally pretty wooden—to say nothing of the usual pitfalls of adapting Little Women (if even Gillian Armstrong's 1994 classic couldn't find anything constructive to do with Beth and Professor Bhaer, then certainly it's unfair to expect anything more of this version, but nonetheless, Beth and Bhaer are still drips). But anyway, it was still pretty novel to watch an opening credits roll and to have zero idea of what I was about to see; I recommend that experience. And even setting aside our viewing context, to this specific movie's credit, it stumbles upon two minor strokes of genius. Firstly, making the March girls homeschooled is perfect, and as someone who was homeschooled for a number of years, I am pleased to report that the movie gets exactly right the kind of free-range, unself-conscious creative energy that often animates large homeschooled families—there's an organic warmth to the way the family scenes unfold that feels unforced in a way that's super rare in movies and even rarer in movies that depict homeschooling, and I dug that. Secondly, there's Sarah Davenport's prickly and antagonistic performance as Jo March, which is an incredibly effective counterpoint to the often-saccharine mechanisms of Alcott's plot. Having Jo be a selfish dick who just prattles on about her various high fantasy writing projects is a fantastic modernization of Alcott's character and, moreover, an even more specific depiction of a certain corner of the homeschooled world (not that yours truly was ever such as nerd as to prattle on about high fantasy writing projects, oh no, I would *never* do such a thing, definitely not, nope). Now, to be clear, neither of these pieces salvage the movie as a whole, which remains incompetent on both cinematic and writing metrics. But among the mediocrity, there's a curious spark of life that a lot of other movies lack. If a movie's going to be bad, it can at least be this kind of bad: an honest and personal kind. Grade: C


Did You Wonder Who Fired the Gun? (2017)
Creative nonfiction is only just now, in the past decade or so, gaining real traction as a distinct literary form, so it's only fitting that film would still be finding its footing regarding the genre. Did You Wonder Who Fired the Gun? definitely skews along those lines, as much Southern Gothic literature and personal essay as it is a traditional documentary (reminiscent of last year's I Am Not Your Negro, which is actually based on an essay); documentarian Travis Wilkerson apparently envisioned this first as a performance, not a film, and it shows—I'm not sure if his self-serious, Batman narration would have worked on a stage either, but it sure isn't helped by the necessary filmic adaptation into voiceover. Yet for as much forced weight as the narration brings, there are also moments of absolutely arresting lyricism. In the film's best moments, wordless and starkly black-and-white footage of rural Alabama is set to garbled, wax-cylinder blues loops, and Wilkerson's investigation of the legacy of his great-grandfather (who killed a black man in cold blood and never faced legal consequences) becomes a ghost story. It's terrifying, and in the darkest corners of of the footage you can the specters of the past—the erasure of a black man, the unrepentant id of a white man; what persist are perverse, horrific inverses of each other: the void of the black man's legacy and the unmistakable, crowding largeness of the white man's. Those are just moments in a 90-minute film, but it makes the whole thing worth watching. Elsewhere, the movie isn't nearly so successful, especially as it increasingly relies on narration over pretty simple double exposures. Near the beginning of the movie, Wilkerson states that this movie is "radical," which is sort of pretentious anyway (how radical is it if you have to tell us it is?) but also set me up for a more formally adventurous movie—I could have done with something a bit more disruptive, or else just the pure horror of the B&W footage. Surely there's a great movie to be made out of this film's conception of creative nonfiction, but unfortunately, this movie isn't it—though it's certainly earnestly trying to be. Grade: B-


Into the Abyss (2011)
I keep accidentally watching these documentaries that double as horror movies, which I guess is appropriate, given the month and all. But jeepers creepers, this was rough. For some reason, the stories that resonate most against capital punishment with me are the ones that should argue least for mercy; In Cold Blood's account of Hickock and Smith—brutal murderers, both—thrashing for nearly twenty minutes in their nooses before finally dying shook me to the core when I read it in high school, and now, here's Werner Herzog's own In Cold Blood, which chronicles the crime and execution of a man who has committed similarly brutal murders. As in Capote's work, the first half of the film is dedicated to outlining all the grisly details of the murders committed, and make no mistake, they are horrifying. But there's something also deeply horrifying about watching the man guilty of these murders talk on camera just days before his execution—to see his eyes glisten, to hear his voice intone, to see his body move so full of life. Later in the film, we're shown a transcript and timeline of the man's lethal injection, and it's as frightening as the account of the murders—not that the injustice of an unprovoked murder and a state execution are the same, but just that the mere premise of the cessation of a human life (even one that has committed such vile actions) has an inherent terror. Herzog has said that this isn't a movie intended to take a stance on the issue of capital punishment, and in a way, he's right; it is, as Herzog himself says, "a gaze into the abyss of the human soul," not a polemic. But to gaze into a human soul, knowing that it will be (and already has been, by the time we see this documentary) annihilated—that's a horror that transcends the law. Each human life we encounter: that's the most terrifying of ghost stories. Grade: A-


Jennifer's Body (2009)
I think I may be the only person left on the planet who still really digs Diablo Cody's intensely affected faux-hip dialogue, but God help me, I love it. Honest to blog, I'm ready for her to make a full-on screwball comedy. Anyway, that's neither here nor there, because Jennifer's Body is not really the best showcase for that Cody touch—I mean, the dialogue is still enjoyable (sample: "They went all Benihana on my ass with that knife"), if not perhaps as laugh-out-loud funny as Cody can sometimes be, though I did get a hearty chuckle out of Adam Brody's speech about how the late-2000s indie-rock boom left the market so over-saturated that "Satan is our only hope"; however, the surrounding movie has some pretty severe structural and thematic issues. The film's treatment of the indie-emo music circuit as home to some heinous sexual predation is eerily prescient of all the Warped-Tour/Brand New/Pinegrove stuff that's come out in recent years ("prescient" or just "paying attention to women's experiences"?), and I was excited to see that explored in the rest of the movie. But the film kind of loses the centrality of that thread by positioning Megan Fox's Jennifer as the primary threat. It's like a vampire story in which the main threat isn't Dracula but the women he attacks, and unlike, say, Teeth, this movie doesn't really seem to be trying to say anything about how the whole "female danger" archetype is a direct response to male oppression; it's just a spooky story about a demonic woman, and not even that spooky either. Also, Amanda Seyfried is at a mental institution or something. I dunno. This is all on top of some rather tepid cinematic style. I had a good time with this movie, but it was not the uproarious good time that "Diablo Cody wrote a horror-comedy" promised. Grade: B-


Paranormal Activity (2007)
On paper, Paranormal Activity represents a lot of why I love horror movies: the grassroots advertising, the ingeniously shoestring productions, the way the relatively low-budget productions allow for completely unknown creators, actors, and intellectual properties to reach wide audiences to an extent that's practically unheard of in all other modern movie genres, how the tireless hunt for novelty in scares leads to some shockingly experimental filmmaking making its way to multiplexes and hundred-million-dollar box-office grosses. I mean, Paranormal Activity is practically a mumblecore movie when it isn't a straight-up slow-cinema exercise, letting shots of nothing but sleeping bodies linger for long periods with no payoff but a door slowly creaking from side to side or a shadow flickering across the wall—perhaps the film's real ghost is the specter of Andrei Tarkovsky?That a major studio release got people to raptly watch static footage of a dark bedroom for like two or three minutes at a time is charming and gives me hope for mainstream American cinema. So I love all that in theory, and there are some really great moments in here (a sequence involving powder on the floor is a standout, and some of the jump scares are exquisite, given how patient they are). But y'all, I gotta admit, the moments that aren't great are really kind of tedious—both scenes with with the psychic are dull exposition dumps, and while I know that empathy isn't the only metric by which we can measure a horror movie's effectiveness, I really did not care one bit about the central couple, neither on a traditionally empathetic level nor on the horror-movie, schadenfreude-ish level of being interested in watching annoying people being terrorized. Thank goodness the good parts are so good, because the rest is like 75% of the movie. Grade: B-


Jacob's Ladder (1990)
For a movie that's essentially a feature-length Twilight Zone episode, there's a lot going on. The Twilight Zone's biggest asset was its ability to hone in, to the exclusion of all other distractions, on one particular concept or idea (most successfully, over the span of a thirty-minute episode—let's not talk of that season of hour-long eps). Perversely, Jacob's Ladder takes the opposite approach; there are extended stylistic digressions, nested hallucinations, subplots, and all sorts of other inefficient stuff that The Twilight Zone would never have bothered with (or when it did, it usually resulted in a tedious mess). And yet, when at its end, Jacob's Ladder reveals that the movie really only has one thing on its mind, and that one thing is a central idea so simple that it could have been told (and essentially was told in at least one Twilight Zone episode I can think of) easily over one quarter of the film's runtime, it somehow miraculously feels less like a pulled thread unraveling a sweater than it does a single string drawing all the movie's divergent pieces into a coherent whole. It's not really a mind-blower or anything (familiarity with The Twilight Zone and one particularly famous American short story you might have read in high school makes it pretty easy to guess where this is going by the movie's halfway point), and the movie is, at times, a bit too cute in seeding its final reveal. But overall, it's a tightly executed bit of storytelling that, moreover, never loses the human element of its story to the thematic and structural games it's playing—both chilling and poignant in its depiction of the American military machine and its remorseless devouring of human life. Grade: B+


The Stepfather (1987)
There's a certain salt-of-the-earth earnestness about Terry O'Quinn that makes him perfect for those roles that allow him to tip wholesome archetypes over into the unhinged implications of following those archetypes to their most intense convictions. His survival-man/man-of-faith deconstruction as Lost's John Locke is an all-time-great example of this, but The Stepfather, the 1987 slasher by way of Night of the Hunter, rivals the perversity of that deconstruction (if not with the nuance). The Stepfather is strewn with the scenery of typical patriarchal fatherhood, from the lumber and tool-stocked basement to the entrepreneurial breadwinner spirit of O'Quinn's titular character to a very knowing "Father knows best" line delivery form O'Quinn himself—not to implicate any one of these signifiers specifically but merely to imply the dark current in taking patriarchal norms to their fullest conclusions. The movie, honestly, could stand to give its female characters a little more to do, and the film overall would be much-improved if it granted even a fraction of the thoughtfulness it devotes toward the development of O'Quinn's stepfather character. But as a confrontation of masculine archetypes, The Stepfather is as sharp as they come. Grade: A-

Television


Better Call Saul, Season 4 (2018)
With Chuck gone from the cast and Vince Gilligan mostly gone from the writers' room, it was unclear just what direction Better Call Saul was going to take this season. And to be fair, what we ended up getting isn't exactly a new direction. But it is an intensification of the thematic push that's been the show's centerpiece since episode one: that in the face of an intensely arbitrary and unfair universe, individuals sell off bits of their soul in exchange for success until, inevitably, there's nothing left. This is, of course, true of Jimmy, whose embrace of opportunistic hucksterism is taking him closer and closer to the hollow man hiding behind salesman masks that we know from Breaking Bad, but this also goes for Mike, too, whose increased complicity with Gus (this season goes hard on the Breaking Bad prequelness, sometimes in ways that are a little too cute, I'll admit) forces him to forego his principles in a slow-motion trainwreck that feels downright biblical—but when has anything in this whole Gilligan world felt anything but? And then there's Kim—dear Kim, whose Achilles's heel, it's becoming clearer and clearer, is her affection for Jimmy, culminating in the season's absolutely crushing final minutes. There's a slow, methodical intentionality about each piece of this season that makes the moments where it all snaps into place all the more tragic; whereas Breaking Bad got, with each successive season, more reckless and breakneck in its pacing, Better Call Saul has never been slower, relying increasingly on extremely lengthy takes of characters in abandoned spaces working out problems whose solutions we are not yet privy to, or lengthy conversations that end with subtle shifts whose effects aren't apparent for episodes at a time. It's all very meticulous and rewards patience—but more so than any previous season, it makes that patience a prerequisite to viewing the show. Moreover, it makes the season's inefficiencies stand out starkly; I love Nacho, but it's clear this season that the show doesn't really know what to do with him anymore. But on the whole, this is another very good season from one of television's best. Grade: B+


American Vandal, Season 2 (2018)
I was a little worried that, with this season's focus on poop-centric crimes perpetrated by a mysterious "Turd Burglar" (including a mass-pooping incident appropriately named "The Brownout"), American Vandal would be leaning a little too easily into scatological humor. And it's not as if the season doesn't revel in the hilarity of its own premise; "Poop is funny," one character remarks at one point, and like... it is. So while there's never anything quite as sublime as S1's investigation of "ball hairs" and dick-drawing technique (I honestly could have done with a bit more of that kind of straight-faced forensics with these poop crimes), S2 does manage to milk the humor of its premise without tipping it over into lazy jokes. More importantly, as with S1, this premise is really a Trojan Horse for a shockingly astute investigation of teen social dynamics, following through on last season's treatise on identity and social expectations by broadening its umbrella to cover class, race, and especially the ways in which people project identity over social media. It never quite obtains that deep soulfulness or bracing tragedy that undergirded S1's finale, nor is it nearly as self-interrogative about the series's methodology—Sam and Peter have traveled to a school out of state to cover this case, and as such, their biases are much less entangled in the filmmaking than they were last season, when they were documenting their own friends; this unfortunately has the effect of making them much less interesting as characters, and the show misses several opportunities to question their involvement with the case, especially in the game-changing finale. But even if it doesn't quite measure up to the first season, Season 2 is in no way a disappointment; this is still one of the smartest TV series out there, and its depiction of contemporary teen behavior is unparalleled. Grade: A-


Orange Is the New Black, Season 6 (2018)
Orange Is the New Black has always been a messy show. If you've been following my review of the series, you'll know that I've had deep issues with each season. Offsetting that, though, has been that each season has also had great pieces, too, from the deeply complicated depiction of the prison riot last season to the moving treatment of faith in Season 3 to the generosity of the show's empathy throughout the series. But let it be known that Season 6, in the year of our Lord 2018, is when I finally ran out of patience with OITNB's flaws; let it also be known that this loss of patience is not without reason, for Season 6 is where the show also seems to have run completely out of ideas. The shakeup at the end of last season, sending some characters to max while having others leave the show completely, now seems less like a bold narrative decision than an act of desperation. The new characters are grating and boring repetitions of what the show has already given us much more effectively in the past: Badison's alpha-dog posturing, Barb and Carol's evil nemesis masterminding, etc. And the old cast we do stick with (the ones in max) are so aggressively Flanderized that little of the nuance or respect given to them in the show's finest hours remains: Luschek is in a love triangle with two prisoners; Alaida is working for a vitamin-supplement pyramid scheme; Morello is... still pregnant, I guess; Alex and Piper, where (even in the best seasons) good storylines go to die, are planning a prison wedding. Only Taystee is given anything interesting to do, as she has become the legal scapegoat for last season's riot, and even that spins its wheels from time to time. It's all so tedious and pointless, made even worse by the per-usual flabby episodic structure and runtimes that plagues most Netflix shows—geez, did we really need a 1.5-hour finale? Did the individual episodes really need to be an hour-plus apiece? Here's hoping the seventh season is the last, because I don't know how much more of this I can take. Grade: C-

Books


A Corner of White by Jaclyn Moriarty (2013)
Finally a YA novel without the tired first-person sardonic narration. Jaclyn Moriarty writes A Corner of White in a wonderfully removed third-person that's like a bath of cool water on a hot day. There's a lot more to enjoy than just a relief from my personal hangups with YA tropes, though. Set alternatingly in our "real" world and a parallel universe in which there are magic fairies and hostile colors attacking villages and realms with funny dialects and pumpkin pyramids, the novel's kitchen-sink invention hearkens back to an older era of YA fantasy less preoccupied with explaining every last detail of the fantasy mechanics or creating a flatly coherent universe, when writers like Diana Wynne Jones were interested in the unbridled embrace of fun ideas and the characters' sincere interactions with those ideas. I found myself connecting more with the real world protagonist here, Madeleine, whose interest in Isaac Newton and a parking meter that leaves her cryptic letters felt more immediate than the more heavily fantasized trappings of the alternate Kingdom of Cello, where a boy named Elliot searches for his missing father and a pair of cops try to solve mysteries in a cock-eyed, hilarious way that seems to indicate that they just jumped out of an episode of Twin Peaks. It's all enjoyable, though, and each of the characters feels both precise and interesting while at the same time managing emotional arcs that feel genuine and human, even if the resolutions of their various mysteries do seem a little tossed-off and haphazard at times. I'll definitely be seeking out the other two books in this trilogy. Grade: B+

Thursday, October 11, 2018

Prog Progress 1978: Emerson, Lake & Palmer - Love Beach

Hi, everyone! Welcome to Prog Progress, a blog series in which I journey through the history of progressive rock by reviewing one album from every year of the genre's existence. You can read more about the project here. You can learn about what I think are some of the roots of progressive rock here. You can see links for the whole series here.


Throughout this project, I've selected albums that I thought were significant to prog's development, but that's also happily coincided with albums that, for the most part, I enjoy (and often even love). But now we've arrived at 1978, which is, uh, putting it lightly, not a good year for progressive rock. Yes put out Tormato, an album whose cover alone is so bad that members of the band itself apparently threw tomatoes at it; Genesis, absent now Peter Gabriel and guitarist Steve Hackett, left prog behind entirely as Phil Collins took the reigns in ...And Then There Were Three..., and the same went for Gentle Giant (whom I didn't ever get a chance to cover in this project, but whose records in the early-to-mid '70s stand toe-to-toe with a lot of what I have covered), whose album Giant for a Day! turned the band's music sharply toward limp pop-rock and whose cover turned their already kind of hokey Giant mascot into what looks like one of those painted plywood standees at an amusement park telling kids how tall they must be to ride the roller coaster. I mean, outside of Rush's pretty good Hemispheres (whose cover you may remember for its bold juxtaposition of brain tissue with tightly clenched buttocks[1]) and Camel's very good Breathless (as well as Popol Vuh's soundtrack for Werner Herzog's Nosferatu remake, if we're counting that as prog), it's basically all bottom-tier stuff like that. I did consider covering Breathless for this year's entry, since it anticipates a lot of where prog would go in the '80s and is, you know, fun to listen to. But ultimately, I decided that would be disingenuous and unrepresentative of the trash fire that is Progressive Rock, 1978. So I reluctantly arrive at Emerson, Lake & Palmer's 1978 release, Love Beach. Ah, Love Beach—much more representative.

Love Beach is terrible, y'all. There's no other way to slice it. The songs are bad; the lyrics are bad; the instrumentation is bad. Heck, you don't even need to get that far—just look at the album cover[2]! Those plunging necklines! That necklace! That chest hair! Those tans! Is this a Jimmy Buffett album? A photo from a vacation taken by the cast of Saturday Night Fever? I wish, because either of those options would have been preferable to what it really is: the nadir of '70s progressive rock and by a considerable margin the worst CD in my home collection (the things I do for this project...).

It wasn't always this way. It didn't have to be this way. When Emerson, Lake & Palmer formed in 1970, their future was so promising. Keyboardist Keith Emerson was fresh off of a successful run as a full-time member of The Nice (who were sort of a Moody Blues-ish group with an affinity for making rock arrangements of classical music); singer and multi-instrumentalist Greg Lake was a founding member of King Crimson and had played a central role in the recording of that group's first two albums; drummer Carl Palmer had spent time in both the Crazy World of Arthur Brown and Atomic Rooster. If not prog's absolute best and brightest (I mean, if only Lake could have dragged over Robert Fripp...), the trio were certainly not without impressive CVs and, requisite of prog's ambitions, all instrumental virtuosos. It all paid off handsomely on their self-titled debut in 1970, a commercial smash, a front-to-back excellent piece of early prog, and whose song "Lucky Man" was a staple of rock (and later classic rock) radio for years. This album established all the major ELP calling cards: virtuosic instrumentation that jumped from jazz to folk to hard rock to classical on a whim, extended solos that highlighted the strengths of the individual band members, lots of Moog synthesizer, and an affinity for doing straight-up re-arrangements of classical pieces (a proclivity likely imported from Emerson's time with The Nice)—this time, it was Bartók's "The Barbarian," which opens the album.

On an artistic level, the band never topped their debut, and as the years passed, they became something of a critical punching bag, even as their commercial success remained steady—to this day, albums like Tarkus (their sophomore effort, featuring a 20-minute sci-fi suite about a gigantic mechanized armadillo or something, which the album proudly emblazoned on its album sleeve) and Brain Salad Surgery (their fourth LP, whose climactic, 30-minute composition "Karn Evil 9" provides the immortal line of unintentional prog self-critique: "Welcome back, my friends, to the show that never ends") are held up as examples of the bloated excesses and grandiose pretensions of progressive rock. However, while some of this stuff is undeniably silly (and every album after their debut has at least one shockingly bad song [ex: Brain Salad Surgery's "Benny the Bouncer"]), I think there is also quite a bit of good material in those first half dozen ELP records alongside some of the kind of dumb stuff. Golly, I'll even stick up for parts of "Karn Evil 9" and a good chunk of "Tarkus," and oftentimes, even the silly stuff is sort of endearingly goofy rather than gratingly zany—like, an armadillo tank? Come on, that's kind of amazing. Aside from the band name's flagrant disregard for the Oxford Comma, I have no real beef against Emerson, Lake & Palmer.

Until you get to Love Beach. Friggin' Love Beach.

Honestly, a huge part of the problem is precisely the lack of the silly stuff. There are no armored armadillo tanks or 30-minute suites built around a lame Carnival / Karn Evil pun; there's barely even a classical arrangement—"Canario," a four-minute instrumental rendition of the fourth movement of Joaquín Rodrigo's Fantasía para un gentilhombre, feels like a tossed-off afterthought of fill-in-the-blank ELP instrumentation. What we get instead are lyrics about [*shudders*] love. Not sweet love either; no, this is the '70s rock star version of love. A real lyric: "Help yourself to a taste of my love / Call up room service / Order peaches and cream / I like my dessert first / If you know what I mean." The song goes on to say, profoundly, "Yeah, taste it, taste it, taste it / Around the maze of pleasure," later beckoning the song's subject to "get on my stallion / and we'll ride." If I had more confidence in Greg Lake's wit, I would call this a parody of rock lechery; as it stands, though, I think it's sincere, and alongside gems like the title track's couplet, "I'll keep you satisfied / My love won't hide" (or, let's not forget: "I'm gonna make love to ya on Love Beach"), it sounds like the band was just making bad love songs. We've traded wizards and circuses and mech battles and whatever other fun, uncool stuff ELP was singing about in their previous albums for the stalest and grossest of rock clichés, and it's boring and terrible and makes me so very sad and tired. Even the obligatory side-long suite, "Memoirs of an Officer and a Gentleman" is dull; not a hint of science fiction or metaphysics or anything here; just a really impassively told romance between a WWI officer and the woman he pines for from the front ("Girls, oh there were girls," the speaker sings at one point, just so we haven't forgotten how bad ELP is at writing lust). It's a tired trope to evoke Spinal Tap when classic rock bands fall on creatively bankrupt ideas, but... I mean, this is exactly the sort of stuff Spinal Tap writes. Only ELP is serious.

Look, I don't mind love songs. But these love songs are just so embarrassing; it's like they were written by people who have never felt a sexual or romantic thought in their lives but who, having studied the canon of Led Zeppelin and Aerosmith and the Scorpions, taking copious notes and creating diagrams of the lyrical patterns and emotional cues, produced this uncanny simulacra of human sexuality that's somehow both naive and uncomfortably well-informed. I just want to reach back into 1978 and pat these dudes on the back and say, "It's okay, guys; thanks for trying, but you don't have to write about sex." Neither the critical nor the commercial rock canon leaves much room for asexuality, and while I kind of doubt that any of the members of Emerson, Lake & Palmer identity as asexual ("brain salad surgery" is apparently slang for fellatio, so...), that's definitely where their artistic comfort zone lies. People like to focus on the long compositions and fantasy lyrics when they talk about the hallmarks of prog, but I don't think it can be discounted as part of the genre's appeal just how little progressive rock cares about sex; it really is one of the few arenas of rock and roll where masculine virility isn't a key part of the ethos, and as such, it's something of a haven for people who find that kind of posturing oppressive or silly or just simply don't have an interest in the relentless service of the libido. The rare occasions where prog does acknowledge sex (like this album, or this Gentle Giant cover) are, in addition to being juvenile and off-putting, jarring intrusions into a largely asexual world.

This is a huge part of what's so dispiriting about the fall of progressive rock at the end of the 1970s. I dismissively alluded to Gentle Giant and Genesis creating "pop-rock" music early in this post, and I just want to make it clear: what's depressing about that isn't that there's something inherently bad about pop-rock; it's that it's a violation of an ethos, a rejection of those who might have found a niche within the singular world that progressive rock created in favor of an opportunistic spirit of mainstream embrace. And that's compounded by the simple fact that most prog bands simply weren't that good at the whole pop-rock thing. I'm wearing some pretty heavily rose-colored glasses, I know; the progressive rock scene was full of the same kind of toxicity that any commercially lucrative music attracts. But in the same way that a lot of people look at glam rock not for its realities (e.g. statutory rape, drugs, whatever) but for its ideals (gender-bending, queer inclusivity, emotional sincerity), I think there's a similar argument to be made for progressive rock's bookish, outsider ethos as a place for those looking for a respite from the normalized culture of rock's canonical mainstream, even if the specific musicians don't measure up to that ethos. Admittedly, genres evolve and close fandoms can be as toxic as the "normie" culture they reject. But in the case of prog rock, the push toward the mainstream feels, in most cases, so craven and barren of ideas that my sympathies definitely lie with the fans left behind on this one.

This is certainly the case with Love Beach, which, behind the scenes, was absolutely a grab for money by chasing the trends of a changing rock landscape. In the liner notes for the 2017 reissue of the album (which I own, because I'm committed to my research, dammit!), Greg Lake remembers the album's inception; what he says is revealing: "We went to Ahmet Ertegun, the president of Atlantic Records, and explained to him that we didn't really want to make another ELP album. He was very concerned. He said 'You owe us another record. If you don't do it, we won't support your solo stuff'.'" More revealing still is Keith Emerson's memory of the album's production: "Much to my reluctance, a commercial album was suggested, meaning we would have to compress all the simpler ideas and make them into neat little singles." It's not as if Love Beach is some passion project; it's pure music industry cynicism. "We didn't really have much belief in the project," Lake goes on to say. Atlantic flew the band out to the Caribbean to record, hoping to ease some of the musicians' weariness, but that apparently made things worse. Lake again: "We spent more time in the studio than on the beach. Every day we'd go in there at 11 am just as the beautiful sunshine was coming out, and we had to go in this darkened room and come up with music. When we came out it was dark already. We felt we had just missed another lovely day."

I'm not here to tell you that Emerson, Lake & Palmer are some tragic music-industry sacrifice à la Syd Barrett in Wish You Were Here; they went to a resort to record an album, for goodness sake. Nor am I here to paint them as misunderstood geniuses [3], because they are clearly not. They are simply progressive rock's consistent middlebrow. And just as you can also take the temperature of a society's health by looking at its middle class, I think the same can be done of a genre and its middlebrow—and boy howdy, when the industry is forcing the kind of work out of a genre's middlebrow as Atlantic did of ELP on Love Beach, you know you're on a sinking ship. As Greg Lake muses, "In retrospect, I should have stopped for a while and regained my equilibrium."

So say we all, Greg.

Until 1979...


1] If there's one thing worse than prog's 1978 music, it's prog's 1978 album covers. Woof.

2] 1978 strikes again!

3] Unlike the reissue liner notes, in which this is a real sentence that exists: "ELP were no longer fashionable, and 'prog rock groups' were deemed extinct dinosaurs, when actually they were sleeping tigers still ready to do battle, with their claws drawn."

Sunday, October 7, 2018

Mini Reviews for October 1 - 7, 2018

FALL BREEEEAAAAAK. Also, it's HORROR SEASON!

Movies

Damsel (2018)
I like the film's deconstruction of, uh, damsel tropes quite a bit, and the acting is pretty solid across the board—you'll of course hear no complaints from me about Mia Wasikowska being in more films. But the screenplay—a pileup of forced absurdity and wittily florid banter—is the definition of "trying too hard," and it's frequently grating. I get it; we all love the Coen brothers' True Grit. But you know who isn't making Coen brothers movies? Everyone who isn't Joel or Ethan, and that includes you, David and Nathan Zellner, I'm afraid. Grade: B-




Teeth (2007)
The vagina dentata, as a folk myth, usually comes with the implication (or sometimes the explicit moral) that female sexuality is dangerous, particularly for men. Teeth, a movie about a teenager with a vagina dentata, doesn't exactly shy away from that subtext—it in fact revels in it, delighting in chomping sound effects and gooshy gore as male members succumb to the teeth. Where Teeth diverges from the folk tales, though, is in its depiction of the men who lose their penises—these are no tragic victims of predatory feminine sexuality; they are rapists and creeps and, in general, just terrible people—high school boys, in other words (one of the things the movie does best, actually, is portraying the spectrum of of teen sexuality—everything from abstinence culture to hedonistic male libido, with a lot of nuance in between), whose encounters with the teeth are entirely the consequences of their own toxic, predatory masculinity. In fact, the movie conjures a world (a fictional one, I hope... please?) in which every man seems stricken with this toxicity, and in doing so, the movie argues that, in a world without male allies, dangerous female sexuality is a necessity. It's an interesting twist, if a bit bludgeoned by its own propensity for smirking at its own violence and the plot's lopsidedness (everything to do with the protagonist's family is undercooked to the max, for example). But overall, it's an engaging parable; one could say that there's a lot here to chew on, and it's a better man than I who could resist ending this review on that note. Grade: B+

The Lost Boys (1987)
So this is what Joel Schumacher was doing before making bad Batman sequels. Certainly a cut above Batman Forever and Batman & Robin, though it's animated by the same lovably square visual sensibilities and nonsensical editing. Nothing in the film does much to argue for it being a particular good movie, but it's the sort of movie where the specific beats—the cantankerous grandfather (who gets the film's final line, the film's best line), the Corey Feldman and Jamison Newlander as the Frog brothers (sort of like if the "raw animal magnetism" kid from Gentlemen Prefer Blondes discovered The Cure at the same time he hit puberty, only two of him), Keifer Sutherland's aggressively unglamorous performance—are this precise mix of strange and inoffensive that it's hard to really call it a bad movie either. It just sort of is, and while I suspect that a large part of this movie's staying power with particular Gen-Xers has more to do with when it came out and how old they were when they saw it, I can sort of get it as the kind of movie you watch in bits in pieces on cable throughout the '90s until you know every line. Grade: C+

Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer (1986)
The film's juxtaposition of mundanity with horrific serial killer/rapist stuff (they don't tell you how much rape is in this movie—there's a lot) is, I'll warrant, not as fresh now as it surely was thirty years ago in the '80s, and the movie probably prioritizes shock in a way that, out of the culture war context in which it was created, doesn't feel super helpful or constructive. But it is a tremendously stylish movie in construction, from the way it frames its killer in relation to media and mirrors to how the bodies of the murdered women literally cry out with the tales of their deaths. I mentioned that this movie's blows don't land as sharply as they probably once did, but that doesn't mean that they don't still pack a punch. And the sheer lack of sentimentality or even reason given its titular monster—this dude just is, and there's no apology or rationalization of it beyond just the fact of the humanity's intense drive for destruction—is laudable. Grade: B+

Leave Her to Heaven (1945)
This movie belongs to Gene Tierney, who gives a nuanced and riveting performance as sort of a cross between a femme fatale and a domesticity-oppressed housewife—a straddling of categories which itself is a good microcosm for the way that the movie lives both in the worlds of film noir and classic melodrama. So it's no surprise that the film falls off considerably when (not to spoil too much) Tierney's character has little involvement with the movie's final twenty-ish minutes—though as a consolation prize, she's replaced by a delightfully intense (and young!) Vincent Price. Regardless, the film's a good time, landing-sticking or not. Film noir and melodrama are two classical Hollywood genres that were particularly adept at manipulating their respective tropes to develop rich subtexts that compliment the genre thrills without completely disrupting them; Leave Her to Heaven in general and Tierney in particular form a nice exhibition of this thematic flexibility. Grade: A-

It (1927)
I guess I just prefer my silent comedies to come in the package of grown men tumbling around narrowly escaping certain injury, but It—basically a romantic comedy and utterly devoid of tumbling men—is entirely too reliant on title cards for its laughs. Some of the title cards definitely are very funny, though, especially in the ways that they take advantage of how they can only basically give one line of dialogue at a time, making a humor out of the necessary terseness of a title card. "She's positively top-heavy with IT" one reads, and there's really not a lot of context to that—beyond the knowledge that "it" refers basically to "sex appeal" (the movie has, in an almost proto-Seinfeldian turn, invented a term and then resolutely refuses to allow its characters to use any other terms but the invented one), we as the audience are just left to stew in the discomfort and stiltedness of that particular diction. It's fun, if not an all-time classic, and the movie even works its way to some visual comedy toward the end, which is even more fun. Grade: B

Music

Tracy Chapman - Tracy Chapman (1988)
People talk about Nevermind setting the sound for the '90s, and I suppose that's true. But I think that's at least true of Tracy Chapman's debut, which predates the '90s by a couple years but absolutely sets the tone for soft rock in that next decade. I'm not the biggest fan of '90s soft rock, but I'll grant that Tracy Chapman is a particularly good iteration of it—especially the lead single, "Fast Car," which is justly deserving of its iconic status. Also, as is also the case with Nevermind and Nirvana in general, Tracy Chapman's status as the prototypical work of a new wave of mainstream pablum belies just how striking and political a record it is—I mean, the opening song is called "Talkin' 'bout a Revolution," and it's literally that: a call for class warfare. With the exceptions of the Born to Run-isms of "Fast Car" and the love songs "Baby Can I Hold You" and "For You," this is an album of political unrest and protest, a stark contrast to the softly plucked guitars of the instrumentation and the gentle timbre of Chapman's voice. I guess this isn't anything new in pop music, to use instrumentation as a counterpoint to the lyrics, but given all I knew about Chapman before listening to this album was "Fast Car" and "Give Me One Reason," color me surprised. Grade: B