7/11? More like 911

Beyonce has done it again. I am sorry to bring another fangirl post to the blogosphere about, in my opinion, one of the most inspiring and unattainable talents of R&B music, but it has to be done.

The singer released two new bonus records to her latest album Beyonce, entitled “7/11” and “Ring Off.” The songs were meant to be released at a later date, but somehow they got out before their planned release. Thank the heavens they did.

“Ring Off” is a song that seems to be about the singer’s mother and the drama experienced between her father. It’s empowering. She sings to her mother in a loving voice telling her to finally put her “love on top” (a reference to a track from her studio album “4”). The theme coincides with her album’s mission of women empowerment. Going through the ups and downs of her marriage, the singer is consoling her mother and letting her know that it is finally time for her to be happy with this “ring off” of her finger. She can finally be herself and learn from the mistakes that happened in her past. Great song, check it out here!

“7/11” is just what the doctor ordered. The beat follows suit to some of the hits from the current album like “Partition” and “Drunk in Love”. There’s a place to dance, a place to sing, and a place to…rap? Yes, the singer seems to have fallen into her own genre with the Beyonce album in general. Mixing her vocal abilities of singing with the crispness of her speaking voice, she stands in her own lane with this upbeat hit.

The possibly biggest fangirl part of this record is the D.I.Y video she did for it. Check it out below, and then we’ll talk.

Yes, she’s in her underwear 98% of the video. Yes, she’s still amazing. The video showcases her dancing around with, what seems to be her real backup dancers, having fun with the some of the moves they’ve been working on for the track. There’s butt-shaking, there’s a pyramid of bodies, and there’s Blue Ivy for .2 seconds on a bed. I mean, can it get any better than that?

The release of these two records and the music video reminded me of how exciting it can be hearing a great song for the first time or seeing a great video for the first time. Music, especially the mainstream kind, can get old really fast, and it’s always great to have that “wow” moment when something first enters your ears and takes you over. Whatever music you enjoy, I encourage you to try and absorb the moment when you first hear a favorite track or view a favorite video. It’s great for memories because we all know how overexposure is the theme of this generation.

Finding Brandon Graham part 2 + Interstellar

Uncanny combination.

http://royalboiler.wordpress.com/

Here is the link to Brandon Graham’s blog the “royal boiler”.

It is basically like an online scrapbook of various things that he finds interesting or scans of work he has done recently.

Also, here is an image of the cover of “Walrus” his published sketchbook.

I must say that my interest in comics came at an unfortunate time because nearing the end of the semester, this newfound medium is only acting as a distraction, preventing me from working diligently on the work at hand. But at the same time, it is always nice to find new interests.

~

On to Interstellar. I didn’t like it that much. Not that it was a bad film by any means. But it wasn’t anything exceptional. I won’t write this with a summary, so as not to have any spoilers.

For the most part it felt as if Christopher Nolan was just way too ambitious with this film. The film was way too long and I felt as if it could have ended at one point but it just kept going. Having a run time of almost three hours, it feels as if Nolan has studio execs by their balls at this point, given the fact that they allowed him to release such a long cut of his film.

Also, does Christopher Nolan have to try and blow people’s minds in every single film he makes? More importantly, I can’t help but feel that people say their minds are blown after watching a Nolan film because they ‘should’ say so. I was always fascinated by the visuals but probably the most mind blowing film I have seen from his filmography is “Memento”, and not “Inception” or “Interstellar” –maybe the “Prestige”. But even then, I find it hard to really jump on the Nolan hype train. There is something about his movies that feel almost too clean for me (I have no other way of describing it as of yet).

I mean I still enjoyed the Dark Knight trilogy and his other films that I listed, but they are by no means my favorite films of all time.

Also, please, why do people have to talk so much during this movie, perhaps I was with the most obnoxious audience, but throughout the movie, there were constant oohs and aahs and questions being whispered. So annoying.

I think Nolan needs to dial back on his stories and bring it back to smaller budget films and focus heavily on story.
Interstellar was fine, but it is no “2001: A Space Odyssey”. Nolan tries so hard to tie up the ending in a nice knot and provide an easy answer to the questions brought up in his movie. But what made 2001 such an amazing film is that Kubrick did not provide an answer. I still don’t know what the ending of that movie means. That is why it is amazing, because it never fails to challenge me and get me thinking.

Veins of Rain

Have you ever looked at the sidewalk during an intense storm? An amazing thing happens to those sheets pf droplets as they plummet to the ground; they start to group together into vein-like formations from the disparity of concentration of those droplets. It’s almost as if the storm is helping to show us the natural blood-network of the Earth. This is how we are all connected, through the Earth and its ordinarily invisible network. This is the beauty of the Earth and nature and the everyday.

It breaks my heart to hear people make stark distinctions between science and art. There is no distinction, one blends into the other in a perfect gradient. No art exists without some orderly science behind it and there no science without some beautiful art to observe. Creativity and fact exist in all things. Look at the branches of trees, they grow in orderly fractals, but there is also beautiful randomness that dictates their growth. Nature is the existence of art and science in harmony. Humanity is the only force trying to separate the two.

I don’t understand why we try to categorize life like this. The brain thrives on both the chaos of creativity and the regularity of fact. Chaos allows us to relax and emote, regularity allows us to predict and react. Both are necessary and both complement one another. Humans can live with this notion of gradience, but we refuse to accept it. We love contrasts and categories because it often allows us to function more easily, but this should be the one thing that isn’t categorized. We should witness the beauty of the everyday and also see the stunning order. Life isn’t lived in categories and nature won’t exist that way either.

We should learn to appreciate Nature and its creations. The veins of rain and its connections show us this interaction of art and science. We could perhaps form some sort of explanation for this occurrence, but we could never truly predict its artistry. Let’s all take a moment to appreciate the wonders of the world. It is perfectly ordered with rules, but also incomprehensibly chaotic. Look at the ordinary and marvel at its extraordinary existence.

“Birdman” at the Michigan Theater

birdman

In Alejandro Gonzalez Iñárritu’s new movie “Birdman,” Michael Keaton plays Riggan Thomson, a washed up actor who had played the flying superhero ‘Birdman’ three times and refused another sequel, only to watch his career fade and disintegrate over the years. Although Iñárritu insists that the story is intended as a reflection on his own insecurities, the casting is seems far too referential to be coincidental –  Keaton, of course, played Batman twice and, largely disappeared from movies after turning down a third installment.

We find Thomson backstage, scrambling to prepare for the premiere of his first Broadway play, which he has written (adapted from Raymond Chandler’s “What We Talk About When We Talk About Love,”) and is directing and starring in. For Thompson, this is a last ditch attempt at legitimacy and relevance, an effort to salvage his sadly diminished reputation (“I’m a trivial pursuit card,” he moans) by establishing himself on the stage.

The deep mess of Thompson’s personal life is quickly revealed through interactions with his cast and crew as they clamber to prepare for the three opening previews: his girlfriend Laura (Andrea Riseborough) reveals that she is pregnant, his ex-wife visits and makes tragicomic, regretful allusions to their chaotic shared history, his daughter Sam (Emma Stone) has recently emerged from rehab and works as his sulky assistant, her presence serving as a frustrated living rejoinder to her father’s self-centered career obsession.

Meanwhile, a falling light fixture immediately knocks out Thompson’s bumbling lead actor, and he must replace him with the conceited but talented Broadway star and method actor Mike Shiner (a brilliantly overbearing Edward Norton), whose histrionics threaten to derail both the show and his relationship with the lead actress (Naomi Watts).

 

While the camera weaves through the labyrinthine backstage (a set artificially crafted on a soundstage to make the halls appear narrower and more claustrophobic), catching glimpses of the increasingly entangled cast arguing, flirting, smoking and rehearsing, the frazzled Thomson retreats to his sparse dressing room, where he monologues to himself in the disembodied voice of Birdman, levitates, and moves objects with his mind (generally to smash them). “Birdman” never decides whether Thompson’s powers are ‘real,’ even as our hero eventually flies through the city streets and conjures up blockbuster style explosions with crazed despair/delight. The surreal conceit works largely because Keaton’s intense, personal performance anchors us to the fantastic: Keaton’s Thompson is by turns brokenly self-reflective and fiercely manic, both burned out and crazily sustained by the mission to perform.

Much like the occasional fantastic departures from reality in Louis C.K.’s Louis, whether or not we think the fantastical moments in Birdman are taking place in Thompson’s psyche or actually happening, we follow because we understand how the preoccupied mind can inadvertently project itself outwards, how weirdly personal the world can get when we accidentally experience it through the lenses of our own consuming inner messes. At one point, as Thompson stumbles drunkenly down the city street, the homeless man who has been ranting about God in the background turns to Thompson as he passes and makes the plea of an auditioning actor – did that sound good? Should I try it differently?

Though “Birdman” explores deeply personal themes (aging, relevance, legitimacy of different art forms, parenthood), it does so with a flashy stylistic melding of the theatrical and cinematic: in constant motion, the camera follows the cast through the theater hallways in a series of lengthy, carefully staged and choreographed takes, which Iñárritu has spliced together through a mix of clever editing and CGI to create the illusion of a single, long take. The style isn’t just an impressive gimmick –  the perpetual motion of camera and actors creates a rattled, exhilarating energy, while quietly evoking the foreboding feeling that Thompson has lost control of his personal life and his art. Antonio Sanchez’s excellent, sharp percussive score keeps the feverish energy up as the show’s previews go comically wrong, conflicts between characters come to a head only to get weirder, and the narrative practically spirals towards opening night.

By the time I exited the theater I was wound up and mildly exhausted, but also soothed by the lingering, poignant catharsis that  comes from watching a truly great comedy. It’s a serious feeling, mostly because it’s one of the basic bummers of being human that we’re going to be periodically, upsettingly disrupted from the necessary assumption that we are Important by the basic suspicion that life might just be completely ridiculous. “Birdman,” centers around this deep, tragic need to be important, acknowledging that we are ridiculous but endearingly so, invoking serious empathy with the flailing ex-superhero, making us laugh.

Worth the Work

The sad truth is that people in my generation are growing increasingly apathetic to hard work. Obviously this is no news flash, but sometimes going through a lot of effort for one small thing can seem pointless. This has come through in my experience with cooking. Why would I want to spend an hour or more preparing something I’m just going to devour anyway only to be left with a stack of dishes the size of Mount Everest, a floor covered in crumbs, and ingredients strewn across the kitchen? With all of that to anticipate wouldn’t it just be easier to order a pizza? Well, not too long ago I met someone who made me rethink my apathy toward the cooking process. This friend argued that cooking is an amazing art, that he loves the hands on engagement of crushing garlic and chopping onions, and that nothing beats the feeling of a successful cooking experience. It took me a little while, to say the least, to get on board with this mentality. After burning my jambalaya, setting the stove on fire trying to make bacon, and even regressing in my ability to make pancakes, I was ready to go back to frozen dinners for life. It wasn’t until I really started to acknowledge that all art takes both hard work and a lot of practice that I was able to start enjoying cooking. It’s the same with music, painting, drawing, and even writing. Understanding this has refreshed me in my approach to all of my artistic interests – writing, photography, music, and now cooking. The more I push aside all of the reasons not to do something, the better I get at it. Now I’m making acorn squash and eggplant parm like nobody’s business. Once you can pull down the creative process from this idealized space, you can take the first (and hardest) steps and get practicing. Then, the dishes, the time, and the mess will all be worth it and you can finally throw away the stacks of takeout menus in your drawer.

The Blackbird

I don’t like writing about music. To be honest, I don’t really like music. I respect it as an art form–quite highly, especially as I hold no talent in it. But music is not central to my life. Most people—that I’ve met—claim they couldn’t live without music. Almost every piece of writing about music—that I’ve read—illustrates music as such a beautiful and magical thing. I guess I’m just blind to the magic. Deaf, rather.

Many pretentious listeners claim that popular or electronic (if there’s a difference) music is awful and they only listen to classical composition. There seems to be a strange attraction to classic rock, jazz, and other genres of song too, but classical orchestras and pianos pieces seem to be prime examples of good, “quality” music. To fill my auditory palette, I’ve tried listening to “Classical Radio” on Pandora. After subjecting myself to most of these pieces, which some scientific articles claim to improve mental ability and health, I’ve come to somewhat understand the appeal. The lack of lyrics and electronic intervention to iron out audio wrinkles makes them somewhat natural. They hold a bit of imperfection, or at least a chance of it. They seem to create more pure sounds. This being said, I still wasn’t convinced that the music was worthwhile or beautiful. It was still something I could live without.

I’ve recently discovered Olivier Messiaen. Like many composers, he’s some French guy who devoted himself to the study of sound. Most of his work, like that of other composers, can be emotionally engaging and all that jazz. Actually, not jazz—different genre. Anyway, most of his work, despite some quirks that may or may not be pleasing to the ear, did not interest me. But then I found his Le merle noir, “The Blackbird.” You can listen to it on YouTube if you’d like.

The Blackbird is a chamber work designed to mimic the birdsongs of blackbirds. Messiaen explores the various cries, of terror and beckoning of the blackbird. I enjoyed the shrill moments in the piece, the sudden jolts and lulls, that mirrored the natural world. Judging by the comments on YouTube, the piece has had positive reception. This kind of surprised me, considering I enjoyed listening to it. There wasn’t a consistent melody or “beat”—things that I’d normally miss and others would normally love. Rather it was true; well-representative of the natural entity it was imitating. The natural birdsong of the blackbird is not innately beautiful (or heard as such), but Messiaen’s work displays it in this light. It gives an honest illustration and enables us to enjoy it. This is something that makes music useful: the ability to make the mundane beautiful. For me, this was done in The Blackbird.