The beginning and the end: A random rant about albums.

I don't know how most people judge a music album when they first plug it in. I know that there are many variables to consider, such as how much do you liked the previous album, if this is their debut, who recommended it, etc... I think what makes people's musical taste differ is expectations. Those expectations are usually drawn from either what you know already or what you have been told. For example, if I were to recommend to a Brian Eno fan the new Sunn O))) album simply because it is "ambient like Eno," someone is going to be surprised (By the way, any Eno fans...check out the new Sunn O))) album). Meaning that, what I told the Eno fan wasn't a lie, it just wasn't the whole truth.

I, on the other hand, do take people's word for it a lot of times because I trust their music tastes, or rather I trust their knowledge of my own tastes. But, when I'm searching alone, and by alone I mean flying blindly into an album because it was on some internet Top Ten list, I always feel a little anxious but I think I've discovered my criteria in whether or not I like an album. It's either the first track or the last track.

Now, this standard applies with most albums that I consider to be my all-time favorite. From Pink Floyd to Earth. From Neurosis to Blackalicious. Usually my favorite of those favorite are the albums that connect the beginning from the end (Pink Floyd - Animals, Earth - Pentastar: in the style of demons, Leftover Crack - Fuck World Trade or any Frank Zappa album to name a few). But I wonder if my philosophy is flawed. How many albums have I discarded because the first song didn't do it for me? Note: I'm not including the 30 second intro track that a lot of good albums have.

Not to say that albums with solid beginnings and endings are the only good songs on the album. But I find when I'm new to a band or an album, I typically judge it by the first and last tracks. Harvey Milk, The Arcade Fire and Sonic Youth are good indicators of that.

Music is really the only medium that allows for these kind of lazy techniques. Movies and books can sure be tainted be a shitty beginning or end, but I'm still willing to take the journey with a little more vigor if they don't open strong than with a music album.


Now what so important about the beginning of an album to me is not necessarily to "wow" me. But to set me up for whats to come. Either buckle up or chill. The problem some albums run into is that the albums are too front heavy. I can get half-way through Choking Victims - No Gods, No Managers, and not be bothered with the rest of the album.

The point I want to make is the construction of an album is a delicate art that I don't understand. All I know is if I like the beginning I'm sold. If I don't, you better knock me out with that last track.

Command Image: Pushing command!

Killing of Mailmen

So what I wanted to do is write about sitcoms or the new Shrinebuilder track. But instead I'm going vomit this at you, dear public. I simply can't help it.

Take a look at this video.




Your politics towards health care is not really relevant to me, but what this video shows is that the people who say inspiring words such as: "Abolish all health care" or "expand medicare rather than Obamacare," it makes it difficult for me to take you guys seriously. I wonder, where are you getting all of this? Where in the world is this coming from?

Notice how this name keeps popping up. Glenn Beck.

Okay. You know the guy. Unfortunately if you are a quasi-rational person, you would absolutely know that this guy is a journalist in the same way that I'm a journalist. A guy who reads whatever crazy shit he finds on the internet and present it as fact.

No, he's far worse than your average lazy blogger. He delivers it as more than fact but as warnings. He brings an apocalyptic doom in his rants and demands that people do something about it. He often compares himself as a modern day Howard Beale (our unofficial and *cough* unlicensed mascot here at Lack of Command). He makes this comparison due to his "mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore" attitude towards the news Glenn Beck has clearly never seen the whole movie nor clearly has he ever read the full monologue. Beale says things need to change, where as Beck seems to only say things need to stop.

What I don't think he realizes is that a call for things to stop, for some people means a call to go backwards. So he uses the same tactics as McCarthy, getting Czars fired, protests started, and people's fears (whether legitimate or not) to shift to blind anger.

AP posted today that a man in Kentucky was lynched. He was a census worker and according to the report: the word "Fed" was sketched on his body.

So we're back to this are we? I understand the anger, I can even understand the hatred. Lord knows, I called for the head of George W. Bush and Ronald Reagan. With some degree of seriousness as well. Not in the sense where I really wanted to see them in the gallows, but I definitely wanted justice. Now, just because I felt anger and hatred, I didn't kill the fucking mail man!

A message to Republicans: to whoever wants to be the leading canidate in the 2012 presidential election needs to stand up now and demonize this kind of behavior. Honestly too. But you won't will you? After all, when George Tiller was killed this summer (in CHURCH of all places), what did you do? You all pretty much said: murder is wrong, but there's a special place in hell for him anyway. Or how about Joe Wilson? Shouting at a joint session of Congress at the President and than touting that line as a battle cry. You allowed it.

This is what happens when hatred meets stupid.

What happened? Where are the smart people on the right? The problem is the religious right has taken over. The only problem is we didn't see this coming but we should have. They've bullied and muscled there way on to the school boards, on to the library boards and community chairs. They did it quietly in some places. So they get to advance and give suction to those who were beneath them and agree with them on "moral standpoints." And used a media system and a "scorched earth" political tactic. Filling people with the idea of: it's us or them.

That mentality has carried over into the nut house.

This is may just be an isolated incident. I hope so. But this one incident to me is one too many. I desperately want there to be "have you decency, sir?" within the Republican party to oust these guys away from the megaphone, like in the McCarthy era. Here's the thing, I don't want it to get to that point. I don't want there to be another McCarthy era. Or another blacklist. Nor another Civil War.

Is it racism? Probably. Is it an irrational fear and anger towards the federal government? Probably. Is it people being poor and not having anyone to blame for that fact? Probably.

I don't know how to fix this. I wish I did. I thought that if someone could only show them that they are incorrect in their conclusions but welcome to the process, we would be done with all of this. All I know is that we as a society have to move past this. We have to grow beyond these all too familiar cycles. We have to be able to trust ourselves and each other. After something like this happens, it damages that trust I have for people and almost destroys any sort of hope I have for a better country or a better human race.

Only time time will tell how this will play out but we've seen this happen before. We need to change it before it gets that bad again. The killing of mailmen just because they are mailmen is the type of hatred that lacks all logic.

Anyway. We now return to our regulary scheduled program. Just pay attention. And remember, keeping your moral high ground is the most important when the stupid and the crazy lose theirs.




Command image: Mailman Command

Doom and Drone, Sludge and Stone Part 4: Stone

The Stone

Josh Homme, guitarist for Queens of the Stone Age and stoner icon band Kyuss, once said that he hates the term Stoner Rock. Admittedly, I’m not a huge fan of the term because I feel it very much pigeon holes the music into only singing about wizards and harsh pipe hits. However, I think the term “Stoner Rock” should stick because the term was created by the bands and the fans. You see, once a “music scene” begins to turn into some sort of fucking fashion function, or ends up being exploited by greedy artists and even greedier record companies: the control is no longer honest. It’s either you got to stay hip or, for lack of a better term, staying the course on what made you money. Music scenes, especially music scenes that start regionally, are always ripe for the taking. From punk to hip-hop to grunge to indie. They are then usually marketed in the corporate friendly, non-judgemental and non-exclusive term of “alternative.” Alternative. Remember Alternative Rock? College friendly love songs or misguided teenage angst that usually just led to keg-stands and one-night-date-rape-parties. Now, alternative has found another feast for the platter. It’s called “indie.” Indie rock is the new Alternative. And so the cycle continues.

Which is why I find it necessary to maintain the term “Stoner Metal.” It really has nothing to do with the actual act of smoking weed. I mean, it’s part of it I guess, but the idea that you need to do drugs to listen to and enjoy music is absurd. It has more of the fact that this is a style of music that its roots are born from 1990’s (going further back than that I know, relax music historians, but go with me.) In the 1990’s we saw the destruction of crappy hair/opera/cock/butt metal by the hands of grunge sound coming out of Seattle. Meanwhile, a few hundred miles south in various parts of California we had the likes of Kyuss and Sleep. The two bands that many would dispute are the ones that re-defined (due to lack of a better term) Stoner Rock. Or at the very least introduced a new way to play rock and roll. The new way was simple: try the old way again.

Riffs. Cymbals. Low bass. High distortion. Sing (or scream) like you mean it.

So, stoner metal fans should feel fortunate that it has a term that wasn’t “given” to us. It was term that we all created and continue to perpetuate. Because if we can keep our name, we won’ t be fooled again. Until they at least de-criminalize marijuana, there is no really long term way to market stoner metal. So if you can’t market it, you leave it alone. Our name is the last defense. They should have just called punk rock, shit rock; or maybe called hip-hop fuck-hop. Keep it dirty. Keep it off the grid. This way we can stay our own community and we can control our own destiny.

Now, onto the lesson….




Remember these guys from our first lesson? Sleep. No stoner fan is complete without hear every track from "Sleep's Holy Mountain" at least ten times. The album was called the album Black Sabbath never made. Sure the lyrics are goofy, but what Sleep demonstrates is the absolute touchstone of the Stoner Metal Genre, the riff. Stoner, Sludge, Doom and Drone all have that in common. The celebration of the riff. While most metal bands are trying to cram a thousand riffs into a 5 minute song , this genre will take 7 minutes to play 2 or 3.

Or in the case of their hallmark stoner masterpiece, "Dopesmoker," where Sleep took an hour to play 3-4 riffs. It's a head rattling journey into heavy. It was later renamed "Jerusalem" and split into tracks, causing the eventual demise of the band. The members of the band have become stoner metal icons, Al Cisneros, Chris Haikus and the mighty Matt Pike. Like I said with Wino, Matt Pike is one of the most overlooked guitarists in all of metal. See: High on Fire.



It's like Elmore James learned how to play metal.

Now we can't talk about stoner metal without talking about their California counterparts, Kyuss.



If "Sleep's Holy Mountain" was the album that Black Sabbath never made, Kyuss is like Alice Cooper's pissed off, pot smoking little brother. The emphasis is still on simple, fuzzy riffs, but this is not dragon slaying music. This is for getting in your car and driving down miles and miles of desolate desert road. The quartet of guitarist Josh Homme, drummer Brant Bjork, vocalist John Garcia and bassist Nick Oliveri only made two albums, but it was more than enough to make an impact.

To me, what stands out about Kyuss is it's cymbal heavy drumming which would eventually become another characteristic of the genre. Most metal bands are about the pounding double bass, but the emphasis on the cymbal adds to the characteristic fuzz of stoner metal.



Doors-esque tripped out guitar solos, Black Sabbathy riffs, and rough unpolished vocals. This my friends is why we so proudly listen to this style of metal. It's funky. It's bluesy. It's evil. It's trippy. It provides some serious rocking in bulk supply. And for stoner metal, you don't have to wander too far from the these California powerhouses. Enjoy!



Today's Command Image: Commander Riker (you knew it was coming)

Battlestar Galatica or the week of death

So here in moving, things are finally settling down and I would greatly like to apologize to my partner and brother for taking so long to post something here in our refuge called Lack of Command.

In settling here in NY, I've learned to harness the word swear words with eloquence in my daily speech. And while I'm not as comfortable enough to stretch my legs anywhere on the east coast yet, I hold on to the hope that I'll get there some day. But in any case, that's how I would describe my travels halfway around the world: cramped. My time, my energy, my mind and body are cramped.

So, on to Europe. Europe was pleasant enough I suppose. I spent most of the trip drinking or stabbing my notebook wildly with my pen writing out whatever came to my head. But seeing ancient civilizations fascinate me. The more I learn about history, the more I can see around the corner. Also, the heat and the little coffee's get on my nerves.

Back in Pueblo. The less said about the good and the bad there, the more sacred I feel that it will remain.

And back again to New York. Back to work with Richard.

So what a crazy week it has been ladies and gentlemen. The stars are certainly falling. Iran was in upheaval. A governor with a lot of, shall we say, frequent flyer miles. But celebrity deaths seem to hit people the hardest. The biggest of course is Michael Jackson. I won't say much on the subject, but what I will say is that when one is born into fame, one can feel trapped for the rest of his life. That dude could dance though. My jaw still drops when I see him moonwalk.

But what I really want to talk to you folks about is a little show that I've been trying to plow through called Battlestar Galatica. I've just made it to the third season, but I feel I've garnered enough of it to get a real feel for the show. But, before I begin, I was recommended this show by people who I trust and immdiately compared to the Wire.

That is not the case.

Battlestar Galatica is good. But only Sci-fi good. And while it does delve into issues that are more real than we might want to admit (politics, war, religion, etc), one still feels to be stifiled by it's own limitations. It's concept is absolutely addicting. It's execution is commendable (handheld space battles, Russell like). Edward James Olmos excels in his performance.

I have three complaints: The Frak. The Fuck. The Feel.

The Frak needs no explination. I hate it. So many great scenes are completely ruined by this nonsense replacement swearing. I understand it's a throwback to the old show, but out of all the things to old to from the old show, why that? It's so daycare of them. Russell's philosophy on swearing: do it or don't.

The Fuck. There is a lot of sex in this show. Like a whole lot. Now I understand that those who watch Battlestar Galatica (particularly males) could use the jerking material, but I think we should leave that to Star Trek: Deep Space Nine.

The Feel. Now what do I mean by that? I mean that I don't feel for any of the characters. I'm intrigued to what's going to happen, but none of the characters really grab you. They talk a lot about the struggle of humanity, but I don't get the sense that these characters get a chance to show theirs. I'm not saying it's missing entirely, but because of the complexity of the story, they rush the plot over the characters. Plot only enhances characters. Not the other way around, so when we find out that someone's a robot (in some cases with characters who we just met), I can really care less because I have to throw out anything I knew about them. All I'm saying is that they got it backwards. They flung us into this world and no one to really guide us through the process. It's a major problem. Even the most formulaic sitcoms force you to like the characters. But this show never gets there.

So bottom line. Good. Not great. But interesting enough. I might keep watching, but I might just wait for season 3 of Mad Men.

Okay. Finally got that out of my system.


Command Image: Mac Command (in celebration of Richards new computer)

An Open Letter to Chuck Norris

I’m not going to apologize for this; this is going to be political. Russell and I are pretty politically liberal, by pretty I mean very. While we tend to be more radical than most in our beliefs, we always welcome opposing viewpoints, as long as they’re intelligent and respectful. I’ve become very good friends with folks who vehemently disagree with me, albeit the disagreement is usually followed by a healthy intake of alcohol. The point is, while we here at Lack of Command don’t want this to become a purely political blog, we certainly welcome the element.

That being said, I hate Chuck Norris. This has nothing to do with politics; it has everything to do with taste. He’s awful and I detest his work, whether it’s hawking exercise machines, flying a jet pack wearing cowboy boots, or getting his ass kicked by Bruce Lee, I’ve never liked the guy. I also never understood the worship of the guy. Even books like “Why Chuck Norris is Better Than You and Your Mom,” which are written with a slight tongue in cheek tone, piss me off. Chuck Norris sucks guys, sorry.

The other thing I can’t stand is political hack punditry. If your job is being a pundit for either side of the political aisle, you are not to be taken seriously. People who peddle opinion as fact, telling half-truths and over exaggerations in order to sell books/radio shows/TV shows/image are WAY too powerful for their own good.

So how does my hatred of Chuck Norris and political hacks intertwine? Easily, Chuck Norris is a political hack. He and notorious motivational list maker Lou Pritchett have written an Open Letter (Read: Everybody Else Will Read This BUT You) to President Obama, saying that he scares them. For all the “bad ass” that Chuck Norris is associated with, to be scared by a guy like Obama is pretty sad. I mean I was never scared of Bush (Cheney on the other hand,) and I’m a guy who scared of his own belly button.

So I will provide commentary on Mr. Norris’s letter, which is written in the Pritchett-style of “Writing Lists is Easier.”

President Obama:
You scare me because so many amazing corporate and American leaders, such as Lou Pritchett, are saying you scare them.

You scare me because this guy is telling me I should be scared? Look I love the Wu Tang Clan, but I am not going to be scared of something because Ghostface Killah tells me I should be.

You scare me because after you initiate more government borrowing and bailouts than all presidents combined, you then require Congress to follow a system that is "pay-as-you-go."

And the Iraq War was paid for with what? Stickers? BOTH parties have done the borrowing and bailouts for decades, but when Obama does it, that’s when it becomes frightening? The “pay as you go” system was repealed right before Bush took office, as a result the deficit increased over 400 billion dollars, but you probably missed that part too.

You scare me because you really do believe that going into massive amounts of debt can remedy our economy in the long run.

Right, and cutting spending during in the 30s made the depression disappear right? Oh wait, it got worse. I agree that massive unchecked spending can be a problem, note the key word, unchecked.

You scare me because your actions don't reflect the federal governmental constraints and fiscally prudent principles of our Founding Fathers and Constitution.

Really? Which Founding Father? Jefferson or Adams? Or Washington? Sure Madison and Jefferson were all for constraining the federal government, almost to a psychotic degree, but what about Adams (either of them?)

A little side rant here, this is the exact kind of political hack job I can’t stand, these self important talk show hosts and out of work actors don’t or won’t actually READ history. The Founding Fathers weren’t the Brady Bunch; they got into some real heated debates about over things like the constraints of the federal government. So to say that Obama is not reflecting the “Holy Principles” of the Founding Fathers is a silly over simplification of the Founding Fathers, and it turns what should be a real useful history lesson into just another brainless slogan from people who read backs of books and call it a day. Anyway, back to it.

You scare me because you repeatedly still play the blame game with the Bush administration but never blame the Clinton administration, even though it was responsible for the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac sub prime fiasco via the proliferation of loans to unqualified borrowers.

This I do agree with. As I’ve said, this orgy of deregulation didn’t start with Bush, hell it didn’t even start with “The Great Deregulator” Reagan. But again, this scares you why? That a politician is playing the loyalty card with his party? Does it scare you all the time or only when Democrats do it? We can’t all be mavericks.

You scare me because you buy and run the banking, automobile and (soon) health industries with taxpayers' money but refuse to call it socialism.

Probably because it isn’t socialism, the banks aren’t nationalized and Obama doesn’t seem to be in any hurry to do so. Would it stop scaring you if he did call it socialism? Fine, then stop calling people who kill doctors “pro life” and torture “enhanced interrogation techniques.”

You scare me because you claim to be a fighter for minorities and the promises of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness yet do not defend the unborn. What greater minority is there than those in the womb, against whom you already have enacted more pro-abortion laws than anyone since the Roe v. Wade decision?

Did I fall asleep? Are abortions free now? Are they mandatory? Last I checked, abortion is legal, no more/no less. I know abortion is a touchy subject for a lot of people, but the fact of the matter is that Obama hasn’t been president for six months, hardly long enough to make schools teach abortion.

You scare me because you promise to defend the U.S. against all potential enemies yet pacify those harboring terrorists, fight for the rights of combative detainees, and enable the enemies of Israel.

Is Obama funneling money to the PLO? Please. Pacifying harboring terrorists, like hanging out with Musharraf right? Wait that was Bush. Like arming and training combatants to fight the Soviets? Oh wait, that was Reagan. Obama makes a speech in Cairo and you start running for the hills? How are transferring prisoners from some Podunk holding facility to one of the most heavily fortified prisons in the world fighting for their rights?

You scare me because you deny America's Judeo-Christian heritage before other countries of the world, espousing "the promise of a secular nation" during an age in which religious revisionism is on the rise. (Thank God for Rep. Randy Forbes, R-Va., and others like him, who even now are trying to preserve America's religious history by proposing the passage of a bill that would create "America's Spiritual Heritage Week." Call or write your representative today to support it.)

Whether or not “The Founding Fathers” were religious doesn’t matter, what does matter is that they were all indeed secularists. Just because the population of the country is primarily Judeo-Christian does not change the fact that we are a secular nation. That’s not a bad thing.

You scare me because your media team (including the mainstream media) seeks to label as radical, quarantine socially or in some way penalize any opposing conservative voices (such as conservative talk show hosts, news agencies, columnists and actors, such as Jon Voight).

The Dixie Chicks and Bill Maher send their best. Look I get it, for more than 8 years conservatives hacks have been able to get away with saying any stupid stuff they vomited up the night before without anybody calling you out, but that’s changed. America has changed, and after 8 years of Bush, the public is starting to not buy a lot of the crap that ya’ll have been feeding you, with out comes the mainstream media. There really is no such thing as a liberal media, or a conservative media in the mainstream it is only what makes money. Obama’s hot now, damn hot, so he’s what sells. That’s that..oh whatchamacallems…oh yeah free market thingys that you conservatives are so hot and bothered about.

Sincerely, Chuck Norris


Chuck, seriously, legitimate disagreement is one thing, but fear? Be serious, it’s this sort of idiotic pandering to people’s base emotions that prevents people from engaging in any sort of serious political discussion. You and your ilk are obviously not interested in any sort of serious political discussion, just rehashed talking points. You’d rather find the next slogan to put on a t-shirt than actually provide any sort of coherent argument. Is it really any wonder the whole world is laughing at you?

As I’ve said time and time again, I welcome debate and discussion, what pisses me off is that these idiots on the right (I’m not saying the left is as pure as the driven snow) take what could be a great opportunity to have an actual discussion, but instead would rather be the next “guy” in the party. It’s any wonder why so many people view politics as a no touch subject for conversation, because once people run out of slogans and bumper sticker quotes they are left with a shell that could have been a solid argument.

So be afraid of Obama because he flew to Cairo or is might just actually put some working regulations on things that have long run rampant. One of Lou Pritchett’s biggest gripes was that Obama wants more government control than private control. What the hell have they had for decades, and look what happened, the bottom fell out. The solution may not be rubber banding all the way to the left (like I’d like) but doing nothing is not a solution.

Free market doesn’t mean zero regulations; a small government doesn’t mean ZERO government. Look at that, middle grounds, grey areas, maybe if we stopped trying to think of the next clever way for the powers that be to ignore us and actually started talking to one another, we’d at least know where we’re both coming from, maybe find some common ground.

Right, I promise the politcal rants will be scarce and we can go back to what I KNOW is your favorite topic, Electric Wizard. Coming Soon


Command Image: Novel Command

Doom and Drone, Sludge and Stone Part 3: Wino (and a side tribute to a legend)

Howdy folks, Russell already apologized for the lapse in posts, but it's not like anyone was really aching for them other than he and I, so with that, back the to the lesson.

Wino

Scott "Wino" Weinrich. Very few names are synonymous with a style of music. Aretha Franklin to Soul, Kurt Cobain to Grunge. People who did not invent their style, but they embody it so much that they might as well have. This is no more evident than in the case of Wino. Not even the Ozzman is spoken with such reverence among fans of this style. He's probably one of the few individuals that deserve to be listed as their own chapter in this tome of metal.

What inspired me to write about him now was the fact that while I'm in France, dicking around on the internet while the wife does real work, I've found myself listening to a lot of Wino. I posted this fact on Facebook like any good interwebaphile, and everyone assumed that I was getting drunk on wine.

Granted, I am in France and I have been known to hit the wine in foreign countries, but Wino ought to mean more than a term for an alcoholic.

Why you ask? Well in the year 1987, Wino became the vocalist for the band Saint Vitus. Think about the year 1987 if you can. Fine, wikipedia it if you must. Metal was moving away from the Broadway productions known as hair metal into a much more real, much harder realm headed by thrash masters Metallica, meanwhile Death and Napalm Death dropped the atomic bomb known as death metal on the scene. However, creeping underneath the fast drums and ripping solos was a tune called "Born Too Late."



Think about the title, Born Too Late, these guys were Sabbath boys in an Anthrax world. I can only imagine how these guys would've been received if they came around when Black Sabbath landed on American shores. This is almost a battle cry from the 60s and 70s, it's slow, it's evil and it's heavy. Nothing like this was being played at the time, but listening to this, it's a wonder why people were surprised when grunge destroyed the glam bands.

So Wino has a pretty solid voice right? Far cry from the show tunes-esque wailing of the hair bands, or from the growls and shouts of the emerging thrash and death metal. His voice is without pretension. A blue collar, whiskey coated, almost bluesy metal voice. Another Ozzy? Hardly. Wino is actually a musician. (That's right I said it.)

After Vitus, came The Obsessed, which actually came before Vitus, but now they had a record deal, and Wino dusted off his guitar and showed the world his might on the strings, he did it again with The Hidden Hand and Spirit Caravan.

The Obsessed:


Hidden Hand:


Spirit Caravan:


Metal heads might say they prefer their metal faster with more ripping solos, as if in order to be a good guitarist you must be able to play a million notes a minute. A guitarist like Wino doesn't play a million notes, he plays the correct notes. If I ever hear that there's no good "guitaring" in this sub-genre I simply point to two examples, Wino and Matt Pike (Sleep, High on Fire).

I highly recommend you check out Stoner Rock's Guide to Wino if you're interested in a good introduction to a versatile and hard to pin down guy. To this day, the guy continues to work his ass off, he has his own band now, simply named Wino. He took more time than Ozzy and Dio combined to do that. On top of that, Shrinebuilder. Oh, you haven't heard? Shrine fucking Builder?!? A super group of monumental proportions, Scott Kelly from Neurosis, Wino, Al Cisneros from Om and Sleep, and Dale Crover from the Melvins. The earth will die screaming.

So before I wrap this unusually long post up, I did want to write a bit about someone who passed away.

Koko Taylor, one of the last Chicago blues legends passed away at the age of 80. She had a voice that kill armies, and one of my favorite vocalists of all time. A lot of people don't know, but the blues was more influenced by its' women than any other genre. Guys like Son House and Muddy Waters learned from hearing Ma Rainy and Bessie Smith on the radio and Koko carried their torch for a generation. While Muddy and Wolf battled over who was the King of Chicago Blues, there can be little doubt that Koko Taylor was the queen. Thank you Ms. Taylor, you won't have a movie starring Beyonce about you, but you broke my heart on countless occasions, and you will be sorely missed. I'll send you out with Koko singing her hit "Wang Dang Doodle," with the immortal mouth harpist Little Walter backing her up. Until I next get a free moment.


Command Image: French Command

Short Reflections and Reactions to the movie "Up".

To the regular follows (all four of you), sorry for the long Hiatus from Richard and I. It's been a crazy week of moving, working, and not writing in this blog.

More into what I would like to talk about:

Up.

Pixar rarely disappoints. Each film that they release is not only visually amazing, but also their films are remarkably character based. Characters that are outrageous and fantastical but whole-hearted human and universal. The characters relate to any viewer. Pixar is unique as a company because it isn't a coincidence that all of their movies are like this. They have built a company that's quality over quantity. They'd rather release one great movie a year, than 20 mediocre films in one year. It's a motto that should be applauded and rewarded. They contribute to the young and the old stories that make you laugh, grip with suspense, and look around to make sure no one saw you drop a tear or two.

Up is no exception.

There were several points while watching this movie I wrenched and fought back tears. A friend of my described the plot; About Schmidt meets Indiana Jones.

The theme of the film is adventure. We as kids longed to seek out unexplored territory. We find as we get older that the territory is not only already been explored, but thousands have already been through it. That craving to do new things gets lost on us as we have to go to school and eventually work.

The message of the film is that life is an adventure. Carl (the main character) has never learned to have an adventure. When he finally realizes what a life he has lived and how happy he was is the most touching scene to be animated. I get choked up just thinking about.

It's about a man who desperately needed an adventure on his own. A man who learns it's not the things you had, it's about the memories and the feelings that you share with people that matter. It's about a man who can't cope with a heartbreaking loss.

The story of a man who needs to get back Up.

We all have some element to relate to that. I think half of what makes the human heart, are people we've grown to love. The other half is still 6 years old.

So I'll make this short. Up is a masterful film on all fronts. But when it comes to Pixar, it's almost redundant to say that. It takes more than great graphics, it takes an understanding of an audience and map of the heart. Cheers.


Command Images: Back Up From under water.