December 29, 2005
Top 10 Rock Albums of All Time
I love music. I especially love Rock and Roll. That's why doing a list like this is both extremely difficult and enormously rewarding. It forces me to make tough decisions between beloved songs and albums, but also elicits so many memories and positive feelings, and simply reminds me of so much good music that I can't help but smile and feel all warm and fuzzy as I write this.
But enough of that crap. You want to know what I think are the 10 best rock albums of all-time? For better or worse, here's what I came up with:
OK, as always, I put a couple rules in place. Obviously these must be rock albums, which is admittedly a broad category, as it technically could include many kinds of rock, such as Oldies, Classic, Hard, Pop, Punk, and Soft. But the album must be an actual album, as in studio release, not including singles/EPs/compilations. Also, this is a list of favorites, not meant to be a list of the most important or most technically sound. Just the top 10 rock albums I'd want on a desert island. Without further ado, here we go...
I. The First Cut (great albums, but not legendary)
As I did with similar Top 10 lists, the easiest way for me to come up with this list was to just start putting albums down on paper, and then cut them into sections. I came up with 20 without having to go dig, so I figured that was where to start: after all, great albums should stick with you, and you shouldn't have to go searching for them. They leave a lasting impression on you that you don't soon forget. However, here are the 10 that didn't make the cut:
Dookie (Green Day, 1994)
Mellon Collie and the Infinite Sadness (The Smashing Pumpkins, 1995)
Pinkerton (Weezer, 1996)
II (Led Zeppelin, 1969)
Tommy (The Who, 1969)
American Idiot (Green Day, 2004)
Throwing Copper (Live, 1994)
Ten (Pearl Jam, 1991)
Rubber Soul (The Beatles, 1965)
The Joshua Tree (U2, 1987)
II. Must Have Albums
OK, we're getting into rarified air here. These are career-best performances by some of the best bands of all-time, reaching musical pinnacles that most bands will never experience...
10. Superunknown (Soundgarden, 1994)
The best offering from the most overlooked band of the 90's grunge explosion. So many hits here: Fell On Black Days, Black Hole Sun, Spoonman, and My Wave. Not to mention The Day I Tried To Live, a song that never was a single or received much notoriety, but which I believe is Soundgarden's finest effort. The album is chocked full of heavy yet catchy guitar hooks, thunderous drums, and of course, Chris Cornell's amazing voice. It is so heavy, yet so musically talented and fun. If I had to throw a single album into a time capsule to explain to futuristic humans how good grunge was, this would be it.
9. Are You Experienced? (Jimi Hendrix, 1967)
Jimi Hendrix wasn't around for long, but this was his finest hour. This isn't a greatest hits compilation, but it sure feels like it, since Purple Haze, Fire, Hey Joe, The Wind Cries Mary, Foxey Lady, Highway Chile, and Manic Depression are all found on this blockbuster album. I put in this disc and get to marvel at Jimi's genius for over an hour, getting lost in his insurmountable guitar talents and soulful lyrics.
8. Metallica (Metallica, 1991)
This entry is likely to draw ire from any hardcore Metallica fans, who might argue that this album (also known as The Black Album) is when the band deviated from their true roots and began to sell out. Whether or not there is any validity to this claim, the fact remains that this album is tremendous, and is possibly the defining hard rock album of our generation. It certainly opened the doors for hard rock to become accessible to a more mainstream audience, and in that sense, its importance cannot be diminshed. Like most of the albums on this list, the number of hits here are just staggering: Enter Sandman, Sad But True, Holier Than Thou, The Unforgiven, Wherever I May Roam, Don't Tread On Me, and Nothing Else Matters... and that's only through the first 8 tracks on the album! This is one of my all-time favorite driving albums, because it is so musically sound, absolutely ferocious, and just so darn good.
7. Rage Against the Machine (Rage Against the Machine, 1992)
Speaking of driving albums... this is the mother of them all. Rage's self-titled debut is an utter tour-de-force. I'm not sure any band has burst on the scene with more passion, more vitriol, or more skill than RATM. Yet again, a solid album from start to end: Bombtrack, Killing In The Name, Take The Power Back, Know Your Enemy, and Wake Up light up this album like firecrackers. It's the most emotionally charged CD in my collection, always a good choice when I need to get the adrenaline flowing. Despite the off-kilter political ramblings of lead singer Zack de la Rocha, he is completely overshadowed by the guitar prowess of Tom Morello, the best guitarest of the modern era.
6. IV (Led Zeppelin, 1971)
This album contains Black Dog, Rock and Roll, Misty Mountain Hop, When the Levee Breaks, and the Grandaddy of Them All, Stairway to Heaven. Need I say more? I thought not.
III. The Pantheon of Rock
This is as good as it gets. I wouldn't sell or get rid of these albums for anything. These are all albums that:
- Are solid from start to finish
- I listen to frequently, and sometimes, multiple times in a row
- Blew me away by their greatness the first time I heard them, and continued to do so on repeated listenings
Here is the gravy:
5. The Bends (Radiohead, 1995)
OK Computer is Radiohead's critical darling of an album, but I will argue to the death that The Bends is their best album, not to mention the best the 90's have to offer. Unlike the previous 5 entries in this list, there are few popular singles here: only Just got serious radioplay, while High and Dry and Fake Plastic Trees were moderate successes. But Radiohead has never been popular with the common radio-listening masses: they are a refined sound for a more discriminating audience. Despite this, The Bends is a pure, unadulterated, great rock album. There are no weak tracks here, and it is lyrically and musically transcendant. It is an inspired album that really defies definition - just go listen and enjoy it.
4. Aqualung (Jethro Tull, 1971)
The most amazing thing about this one is that I just discovered this album about a month ago, yet I'm already convinced that it is one of the best albums ever made. It all started when I heard Locomotive Breath on the radio, and I thought it was fantastic, which led me to find out more about the song and its album. What I discovered was a complex, mysterious, and exciting album called Aqualung, a concept album criticizing those who abuse God and religion for selfish reasons. The album is an enigma, because for each hard rocking jam, there is a smooth and bluesy folk song. To top it all off, Jethro Tull is best known for their lead singer, who is a flutist, and he blends the flute into the hard rocking songs so perfectly that it's a wonder no one else has tried doing it since. This album absolutely knocked me off my feet.
3. Physical Graffiti (Led Zeppelin, 1975)
Despite the popularity of other albums such as II and IV, I believe the sprawling double-disc Physical Graffiti is Led Zeppelin at their most creative and talented. They display a range of musical ability which is just stunning, covering so many genres in a way that lesser bands (read: all other bands that ever existed) could only dream of. Hard rock, blues, folk, reggae, country, and surf rock are all represented here, and all are done well. All the hits are on the first disc, including The Rover, Trampled Under Foot, and of course, Kashmir. But the second disc really displays their prowess, including beautiful ballads like Ten Years Gone, mystical rockers like In the Light, and fun folky experiments like Black Country Woman. Not the best album for a new Led Zeppelin initiate, but for the veterans, listen and admire.
2. Boston (Boston, 1976)
Holy crap. This album is insane. Pound for pound, probably the most fun album ever made. And it is so strong from start to finish. Look at the evidence: 8 songs here. The first four tracks are classic rock radio staples (More Than a Feeling, Peace of Mind, Foreplay / Long Time, and Rock and Roll Band). 3 others get pretty serious airplay (Smokin', Something About You, and Let Me Take You Home Tonight), and even the final song, Hitch a Ride, can be heard on the radio occasionally, and is a fantastic song in its own right. Boston's trademark vocals and unique guitar riffs are so engrossing, so infectious, that if you don't get fired up by listening to this album, you might be dead. It misses out on the #1 spot by the smallest of margins, supplanted instead by...
1. Who's Next (The Who, 1971)
This isn't even fair. Similar to Boston, this album lives on through radio: of the 9 tracks, five (Baba O'Riley, Bargain, Going Mobile, Behind Blue Eyes, and Won't Get Fooled Again) are radio staples. But the rest are just as solid. This album gets the edge over Boston for several reasons. First off, the mentioned songs aren't just radio staples, they are bonafide rock classics. Baba O'Riley and Won't Get Fooled Again in particular are transcendant hits, among the best rock songs ever made. But a close look at the album shows the great range that The Who has on display here: there are monstrous rock jams, softer, excellent ballads, and even a hilarious ode to significant others (My Wife) which might be the funniest rock song ever written. Not only is every track strong, I would argue that each track is a classic, whether it got radio airplay or not. Plus, it helps that I consider Won't Get Fooled Again to be the best rock song ever written. To me, this album is the best example of pure genius in action, one of the rare times in history when four people got together, all world-famous for their musical abilities and at the top of their game, and made an album better than anyone could have imagined possible. It simply does not get better than this.
So, any comments from the peanut gallery?
December 28, 2005
Deck The Halls With Boughs of Frustration
So, I'm sitting here in Jacksonville, on a dial-up connection, going stir-crazy and about to rip my hair out. I've been stuck in town for 12 days (3 days past when I wanted to leave town), and I haven't had access to a car my entire time here. Why, you ask? Well, that's a complicated question. The short answer is: I had a car accident on the 17th and I haven't gotten my car back yet. I came in town a week before Christmas, because I bought my mother tickets to see the Nutcracker for her birthday last month. The rain was torrential: I was hydroplaning all the way into town, and visibility was extremely poor. I got into town OK - but I had one of those feelings like something was going to go wrong. I had been feeling it all day. Ever have that happen? It's the weirdest and most frustrating thing. Anyways, I got here just in time to pick up mom and head out to the theatre. The Nutcracker was wonderful; neither of us had seen it before and we really enjoyed ourselves.
However, on the way back home, I found myself in a right-turn only lane when I wanted to go straight. There was a car next to me preventing me from going over, so I started to slow down and waited for them to pass. However, due to the low visibility, what I didn't see approaching was a small concrete median at the end of the turn-only lane, apparently put there to enforce drivers to turn rather than go straight. Well, I turned the wheel sharp but didn't fully miss it, clipping it with the right side of my car. Unfortunately, I was going fast enough to cause some serious damage: both of the tires and wheels were shot, the oil pan was knocked off, and there was some damage to the undercarriage. But this is only the beginning of the story...
The long answer to why I don't have a car is: complete incompetence on the part of the car dealership. Due to the flat tires the car was completely undrivable, so I had to have it towed. I assumed that the safe bet was to tow it to the dealer where I bought the car several years ago. Bad, bad idea. They have been screwing around with it ever since. Despite the fact that there were several things that needed to be fixed, all of the parts were in stock the same day I brought it to them, so it should have been a one or two day job (they said that themselves). But things started going downhill very quickly. Here's a sampling of some of the stupidity I've been dealing with:
- First, it took two days to convince them that my front tire was covered under Road Hazard Warranty and needed to be replaced for free. When I purhcased the tire three weeks ago (after busting the previous one on a pothole), I was told that VW now provides free Road Hazard coverage on all its tires. The dealer absolutely denied any knowledge of this. After repeatedly telling me I was incorrect, they finally had to call VW national headquarters to find out their mistake.
- I originally assumed that the only damage was to the tires/wheels and the oil pan. After a further look they noticed the underbody damage, at which point I knew things were getting expensive and that I would have to claim it on insurance. I told them not to replace anything until I filed the claim and the insurance adjuster saw the car as-is in order to get an accurate estimate. Well, they completely ignored my command and started working on the car anyways first thing in the morning. This put me in a tough position, because the insurance company refused to give them permission to finish, because doing so might jeopardize my ability to get covered. Yet the dealer kept calling me saying "we have to finish this car now because it is taking up room in the shop and preventing other cars from being serviced". Essentially they tried to pressure me into granting them premission to finish by making me feel it was my fault, despite the fact that I told them not to start.
- After the insurance company provided an estimate, they determined that the wheels could be found elsewhere for a cheaper price. Well, the car then sat for three days with nothing happening, because no-one claimed responsibility for ordering the parts from the other retailer. I literally sat on the phone with the insurance company, who assured me that the dealer was being stupid and that the insurance company never orders parts. Then I would sit on the phone with the dealer, who assured me that the insurance company was being stupid and that the dealer never orders parts from other retailers. Both sides were practically screaming at me, trying to convince me that they were right, and I'm sitting there ready to explode, just thinking: "I don't care who's right, someone order the damn parts or I'm going to destroy you all". Finally, the dealer broke down and ordered the freaking rims.
- After ordering the rims, the dealer told me it would take one day for them to get there. This was right before Christmas, which ensured I would not have my car until post-holidays, which was a huge hassle. So I call yesterday, only to find out that, all of a sudden, it will now take a week to get the rims. Completely unacceptable. So I tell them that I will pay the difference on the damn rims that they already have in stock: just get my car fixed so I can get it away from these morons.
- I call back today, expecting my car to be fixed. Now I find out that, surprise!, the car needs an alignment, and that can't be done until tomorrow, delaying me by at least another day, despite the fact that she told me it would be ready today.
So, as you can probably tell, I'm about ready to kill someone. While it is possible that this is a joint screwjob by both the insurance company (Progressive) and the dealer (Tom Bush VW in Jacksonville, FL), my personal assessment is that the incompetence is almost solely on the dealer. So, my advice for all of you would be to never, ever deal with Tom Bush BMW/Volkswagen if you happen to need service in Jacksonville. I will be filing a complaint with VW national, because this is honestly the worst service experience I've ever had.
Unfortunately this whole ordeal overshadowed the holidays, because I actually had a nice Christmas. As I already said the Nutcracker was a great experience, and it was nice seeing the whole family on Christmas Eve, and I got everything I wanted from Santa Claus. My dad even showed up at the family get-together - I hadn't seen him for any significant amount of time in over 2 years. There have been no serious arguments or crises. I certainly got some heavy reading done, evidenced by the fact that I just posted 4 book reviews. I even got to have lunch today with an old high school friend that I don't get to see very often. For the most part, despite being trapped in a small condo for 12 days, it's been a relaxing holiday. Now, if I could only get my car back from these blundering idiots...
OK, that's enough ranting for the evening. I hope you all had a wonderful Christmas and, for those I won't see soon, have a great New Year...
Book Review: American Psycho (1991)
|
|
For all of its gore, the novel is primarily a blisteringly satirical look at a material society in which individuals care only for themselves. Take a look at Batemen's daily, public life: he continually interacts with friends (and I use that term very loosely) who are preoccupied with image and status. The novel is narrated purely from Bateman's point-of-view, and when he describes people he meets, he does not tell us about their physical features or his emotional reactions to them: he describes their wardrobe, in excruciating detail, making sure to point out the particularly sharp and tacky. The dialogue is completely vacuous: debates about the finer points of various brands of bottled water, discussions about how to properly wear and coordinate cummerbunds and suspenders, and arguments over what high-profile dinner reservations they can secure. Nobody remembers anyone else, and characters continually refer to one another using the wrong name. In their world, it is more important to look good than to actually care about someone else.
With this world of false image as the backdrop, Bateman amuses himself by doing the one thing that seems to bring him real pleasure: killing and torturing others. He is certainly not a respecter of persons; throughout the course of the novel, we see him commit heinous acts of violence against friends, co-workers, bums, prostitutes, animals, and random people. His acts escalate as the book progresses, beginning with simple murder, and eventually becoming so graphic and unfathomable that it is hard to stomach. It seems that Bateman's destructive acts continue to further desensitize him, forcing him to try new things just to derive any sort of satisfaction from the deeds. Predictibly, with each victim he becomes further detached from reality, and begins to lose grip on his finely balanced life, to the point where, at the end of the novel, nothing can satiate him.
Yet the real shock of the novel, and the source of its genius, is the fact that Bateman never seems to suffer consequences from his actions. And this is where the satire takes full effect: for all of society's emptiness and obsession with image, the fact that Bateman can kill a young child on the sidewalk in broad daylight, and get away with it, is the most frightening thing imaginable. It is a scathing attack on a society so isolated from the real world that it does not value life, even that of a child or the helpless. In several ironic (and darkly humorous) scenes, Bateman even tries to give himself up: he confides his secrets to his friends, he attends a Halloween party as a serial killer (drenched in real blood and gore), and leaves body parts around his own apartment for his maids to find - and no one seems to mind.
As if all of this weren't enough, there is another interesting possibility to consider: could Bateman be imagining all of this? Maybe all of his sickening deeds are part of a sadistic fantasy world, created as a mental escape from the numbing void through which he sleepwalks each day? There is some evidence to support this, but certainly not enough to prove or disprove it. It is up to the reader to decide - but either way, it does not lessen the criticism heaped upon this 1980's New York society.
For the careful reader, be warned that the novel is full of unrelenting imagery and description, including graphic details of murder and torture, as well as love scenes that are essentially graphic pornography. If you have a strong stomach and can endure the harrowing passages, American Psycho is definitely worth a read. It is as satirically funny as it is horrific, and it will certainly make you think twice the next time you vainly check your hair in the mirror or consider buying that designer suit...
Book Review: The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time (2003)
|
|
Like most autistic children, Christopher has many peculiarities. He hates to be touched. He does not understand how to "chat". He harbors completely illogical behaviors, such as not talking to anyone all day if he sees four consecutive yellow cars on the way to school. However, he is stellar at math and science, has an impeccable memory, and loves animals. So when he sneaks outside late one night and finds his neighbor's dog Wellington lying dead with a garden fork sticking out of it, it throws his world for a loop. Christopher's favorite literary character is the great detective Sherlock Holmes, so he decides he's going to do some "detecting" himself and figure out who killed Wellington.
The most fascinating thing about this novel, as you might expect, is that it is told exclusively from Christopher's point of view, providing a very moving and thought-provoking look at the inner workings of an autistic mind. Now, I'm in no position to say whether or not Haddon's portrayal of autism is accurate, but given the fact that he has a history of working with autistic individuals, and based on reviews I have read about the novel, I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. Throughout the novel, Christopher goes to great lengths to help us see what he sees. He expounds upon his odd behaviors, things that he doesn't understand (like emotions and metaphors), things that annoy him, and other idle thoughts which occupy his brain.
What is amazing about it all is how much sense he makes - for all the mystery that the world makes autism out to be, when we see things from his perspective, even his most bizarre habits make some sort of sense in his world. What's more, the people around him that he interacts with are the ones who seem bizarre and out-of-step with the "normal" world, due to their obsessions with emotions and relationships. There is a deep sadness hanging like a cloud over the people in his life, and it effects us more than it does Christopher, due to his inability to process such information - in fact, I wasn't sure whether to envy or pity Christopher for his emotional detachment. It makes for a poignant yet highly ironic story. The author truly succeeds at getting the reader to completely identify with the one character who otherwise they might have trouble understanding.
The novel is written very stylishly, full of diagrams, pictures, and numbers, true to Christopher's style. Rather than thinking in terms of many words and complicated emotions, he tends to express himself through images, and Haddon makes us privy to those images, further illustrating a vivid picture of Christopher's mind. He is extremely frank and brutally honest, and while he is prone to getting side-tracked from the main story to discuss some sort of tangent on his mind, never once does it become a dull read. I was enthralled from the beginning to the end, and you probably will be, too.
One word of warning, however: due to Christopher's enjoyment of Sherlock Holmes, he discusses his favorite detective novel, The Hound of the Baskervilles, at great length - so much so that he essentially gives away most of the major plot points of the story. If you are concerned about this, you might want to read Baskervilles first. But don't let that be enough to keep you away from this novel, because you would surely be missing out.
December 27, 2005
Book Review: Light In August (1932)
|
|
Light in August is usually considered one of Faulkner's most accessible works for the uninitiated, since it lacks the complex stream-of-consciousness style which he employs in other works, such as The Sound and the Fury and As I Lay Dying. The story is mainly told via an independent narrator, and despite the fact that the story is not always told linearly, it is usually pretty straightforward. However, all should be forewarned that, due to the time when this novel was written, as well as the subject matter, the language which is used might be found offensive to some.
Faulkner begins his tale with Lena Grove, a young pregnant woman who is walking from Alabama to Mississippi to find the father of her child so that they may be married. To those who help her along the way, she relates the story of how her man, Lucas Burch, had to leave months ago to find work, and since she has not heard from him, she's going to find him. She received a tip that he was in Mississippi, so she simply began walking. Her naivete is tragic: everyone else can see that she has been deserted by a womanizing lowlife, but no-one has the heart to tell her. Her resoluteness is staggering: she is absolutely firm in her convictions that she will find Lucas and settle down to be a family. With Lena, Faulkner succeeded in eliciting a reaction from me which has never happened before: he demanded my sympathy for her from the very first page of the book.
Eventually Lena arrives in Jefferson where she eventually crosses paths with the other characters: Joe Christmas, a man of mixed-race background who has been a drifter his whole life; Gail Hightower, a former reverend with a mysterious past; and Byron Bunch, a plain man who falls in love with Lena. Christmas' story dominates the novel in terms of sheer size - orphaned by his white family due to his part-black heritage, he is sent to an orphanage and eventually raised by a domineering, God-fearing abusive man and a woman who attempts to compensate by doting on him excessively. It is in this household that his self-destructive behavior takes hold, beginning a downward spiral of bad decisions which eventually lead him to Jefferson and a tragic end.
Christmas is a man obsessed by the conflict caused by being part white and black. Originally he felt his blackness to be a disease, as he was constantly ridiculed by other children who could sense his secret without actually seeing it. Then, as he reached maturity, he was compelled to shun whiteness and join his "true" people. He deserts his home and goes to live among negroes. Later he feels that his black blood is what drives him to do horrible things. He is a nomad, rejected by both peoples, having no home and no hope for a future. His obsession with finding his identity eventually leads him to a confrontation with Reverend Hightower, and a grisly death.
Faulkner's tale is powerful, exploring race and the consequences of action more deeply than I've seen in any of his other works. Each character's ultimate end is profoundly affected by their own choices throughout the novel. And you get a real feel for how important a part that race played in the lives of these people. But the ultimate downfall of this novel, what separates it from the rest of Faulkner's classic works, is its slow pace and tendency to get lost in its own storylines. Particularly while relating Joe Christmas' tale, Faulkner embarks upon flashback on top of flashback, expounding upon each in such rich detail that we forget that there is a story unfolding in the present. Even within his long sections of prose, some of his sentences are so weighty, so impossibly complex, that it took me sheer effort of will to stay focused at times and not gloss over entire passages. Despite the frustration that sometimes accompanies Faulkner's stream-of-consciousness style, I found his long, detached, and hopelessly abstract volumes of prose in Light in August to be much harder to follow.
Despite this, the novel often feels like an importantly ominous warning, encapsulating a lesson about sin and redemption. If this sounds interesting to you, then take a chance on this novel. Faulkner enthusiasts should definitely have a read, if only because of the critical acclaim of the book. But I feel that most casual readers will find themselves suffering through many of the same dense passages that I did, ultimately leaving a bad taste in their mouths.
Book Review: Dune (1965)
|
|
The story begins in the midst of a tenuous time for the Atreides family, the Royal House of planet Caladan. They have been ordered by the Emperor to move to planet Arrakis, known commonly as Dune due to its brutal desert landscape. We soon learn, however, that there are more sinister forces in play. Baron Harkonnen, arch-enemy of the Atreides family, seems to be involved somehow, and a trap seems likely. But the Atreides have little choice in the matter, so the Duke Leto, his concubine Jessica, and son Paul prepare for the long and likely dangerous journey.
It does not take long to see that there is something special about Jessica and her son Paul. She is regal and elegant, possessing special mental and physical faculties provided by her training at the hands of a mysterious order known as the Bene Gesserit. Paul has inherited much of her skill, and has refined these gifts under her personal training. But she suspects that there might be something else: and there is, for it soon becomes apparent that Paul is the Kwisatz Haderach, a powerful figure who is destined to fulfill a legendary prophecy by leading his chosen people to freedom. But it is not until he arrives on Dune, surrounded by an environment that could kill him and dangerous enemies who are actively trying to do the same, that the prophecy begins to take shape.
After finishing Dune, I was reminded of a quote that Peter Jackson (director of The Lord of the Rings trilogy) said regarding the novels which he adapted: "it is as if Tolkien found some secret scroll about the real history of earth". This is how I feel about Frank Herbert's creation - it only takes reading a few pages of this novel to understand what a marvelously complex and rich world he has created. It feels so massive and well-constructed that it is hard to believe that it is not a real story in some distant land or future universe. Herbert only hints at the depth of character and history in this novel, all of which is expanded upon in later novels.
But a novel must stand on its own, and for that purpose, I review Dune here as an independent work, not as the first offering in a large and successful series. The novel is a rich blend of political intrigue, apocalyptic battles, environmental science and ethics, and spiritual mythos. However, I found that the novel's depth was often its undoing - I had a hard time following some of Herbert's storylines, particularly the political and spiritual overtones that are prevalent throughout Paul's rise to prominence. There are many things which are hinted at, or briefly discussed, which only serve to broaden the scope of the novel without adequate explanation. Certainly these side-topics are explored in other novels in the series, but they serve to make Dune a confusing storyline at times. It is almost as if the author had so many different things he wanted to cover, that he did not have adequate time or enough pages to do so.
But make no mistake, Dune is a fun and important read, an absolute must for sci-fi enthusiasts, or for anyone else who enjoys a good story. There are enough disparate things about this novel to make a fan out of anyone. Paul is an honest, inspiring, and wonderfully confident protagonist, and his story is sure to keep you intrigued. Despite the fact that some parts of the book kind of lost me, and that I'm unlikely to read any of his subsequent offerings in the series, I am glad that I took the time to step into Herbert's fascinating futuristic universe, even if only for a short while.
December 5, 2005
Movie Review: Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (2005)
|
|
"Goblet of Fire" is a complicated book, in that it deftly intertwines awkward relationship drama with palpable evil and an ever-increasing sense of danger. One thing that must be considered is that the book is quite long, and though the film times in at 2.5 hours, there was no possible way to cram all of the book's action into the movie. Naturally, there had to be some cuts, and I must admit that they took some great liberties with the script. But I must commend the decision-makers in that what was cut seemed to be acceptable, while still keeping the core spirit of the novel alive. Book "purists" who feel the movie must follow the novel exactly might be disappointed, but those who are open-minded, as well as those who haven't read the books, are all likely in for a great time.
The film is fast-paced right out of the gate, as we begin by watching Harry, Ron and Family as they attend the Quidditch World Cup. But there's not much time to focus on quidditch, as sinister events soon take center stage. Before you're even settled in your seat, a group of Voldemort's followers, known affectionately as the "Death Eaters", terrorizes the attendees, voraciously declaring the return of the Dark Lord. Luckily our favorite family escapes unscathed, but for Harry, it is a case of being out of the frying pan and into the fire.
The trio soon head off to Hogwarts, only to find that the Triwizard Tournament has been resurrected from the grave and will be hosted this year at the school. The tournament is a multi-school wizarding competition in which a single champion from three different schools is selected to participate in three highly-intensive and extremely dangerous feats. Besides Hogwarts, the other competitors include the ravishing ladies of Beauxbatons Academy from France, and the intimidating men of the Durmstrang Institute from Northern Europe. The three schools could not be more different in their student population and in their core teachings, which is sure to guarantee a thrilling competition.
Luckily for Harry, participation in the tournament requires such a level of wizarding prowess that an age limit for entry was enforced - and Potter missed the cut. Potential champions are required to submit their name into a Goblet of Fire, and once all applicants have been accepted, the Goblet will spit out a champion from each school. Unfortunately for Harry, the Goblet has a surprise in store for him, and he finds himself in the midst of a competition involving, among other things, dragons and a maze full of dangerous creatures. As if that weren't enough, he finds himself struggling for the first time with "real-world" problems, like learning to dance and being in the awkward position of having to invite a girl to a ball.
As it turns out, Newell's varied directorial background suited him perfectly to film both ends of the spectrum quite well. Harry's stress in choosing a date to the Yule Ball is filmed equally as tense as his battle with the fearsome Hungarian Horntail dragon. The sets are wonderful, the costumes are top-notch, and the cinematography is oftentimes breathtaking. But perhaps his greatest achievement is squeezing every bit of talent out of his young cast of heroes. You can debate their acting prowess in the earlier films, but there is little question that Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint and Emma Watson all turn out fantastic performances in this film. Watson, in particular, is amazing - she has a difficult role, balancing the parts of friend and romantic interest as she begins to grow into womanhood, and she finds just the right notes of insecurity and frustration to play the part perfectly.
The two main adult roles somewhat offset one another. I was not crazy about Richard Gambon as Dumbledore in "Prisoner of Azkaban", and I was less enthusiastic about him in this film. Perhaps it is unfair to compare him to the late Richard Harris (who played Dumbledore in the first two films), but Gambon lacks the twinkle in the eye and austere warmth which permeates through the chacter of the great wizard. However, Ralph Fiennes' portrayal of Voldemort is stellar - he is downright chilling and just plain terrifying. Miranda Richardson as the nosy and exaggerating reporter Rita Skeeter also does a wonderful job with her role.
If anyone in the Harry Potter film world deserves top credit, it has to be Steven Kloves and David Heyman, who have penned the screenplay and produced (respectively) each of the four movies. In my opinion, all of them have been fantastic films, all quite close to one another in quality. There has yet to be a bad Potter movie, and with any luck, there won't be. The fact that three very different directors have created these films, all of which have been box office and critical successes, is a testament to the hard work of those involved at the top. I think "Goblet of Fire" gets the slight nod over all the others, in that it is just a touch better across the board: the acting is better, the technical aspects are flawless, and the mood is more complex and fluid, which makes things more difficult to film well, and that much more commendable for such talented execution.