The only funny/entertaining thing to come from this movie

Have you seen the trailer for “The Vow”? If you haven’t, go watch it. But, be warned, you may vomit.

In the film, a loving couple’s lives are destroyed after a car accident gives the wife amnesia therefore the husband must make her fall back in love with him. “The Vow” has all the ingredients for the perfect, cringe-inducing romance movie: a stunning couple, their flawless relationship, and a tragic incident that tears them apart. The only thing it seems to be missing is that it isn’t based off of a book by Nicholas Sparks.

Romance movies are, to put it lightly, just not my thing (full disclosure: I do have a soft spot for “When Harry Met Sally” but really, who doesn’t?) I hate how generally unrealistic they are, how they portray people as goon-eyed love freaks, how sappy they are, and how there is such an element of drama.

I am not against the fantasy of films. I think that movies are a great escape from reality and that they all create idealistic worlds. But romance movies take that idea too far. They create an entirely new universe, one that I don’t wish to be a part of.

I do not want to be written a letter every day. I do not want somebody to show up at my door confessing their secret desire for me. I do not want to be woken up at 3am with a boombox playing a stupid song. And I most definitely do not want to kiss in the rain. I prefer to stay dry, thank you very much.

So please, Hollywood, can we make a deal and stop making these horribly cheesy, unrealistic romance movies? Let’s start showing the funnier aspects of love and life, the most reasonable things that happen that people can relate to. Let’s erase this genre of movies that seem to always require a box of tissues and chocolate. I surely will not miss them.

Seeker Lover Keeper

There an awful lot of acoustic bands that come around these days. Oftentimes it’s hard to differentiate between them (largely because there’s a factory somewhere that makes most of them). But don’t lose faith! Sometimes good ones come along. They have brilliant lyrics and are incredibly heartfelt. Speaking of good acoustic bands, how bout that Seeker Lover Keeper!

There’s a very bizarre phenomena that happens in the American music scene where a lot of times, bands that have enormous success in other countries fail to even get mentioned in any conversations. That’s why you haven’t heard of Seeker Lover Keeper despite their debut album going gold over in Australia (and Australia’s developed a great music scene! Angus & Julia Stone, The Temper Trap, Cut Copy just to name a few).

Wikipedia describes them as a super-group, which is true in the actual definition of the word, each of the three ladies in the group have careers outside the group, but it doesn’t seem right to call a group that makes sentimental, smart acoustic songs a super-group. Semantics aside, the band is composed of Sarah Blasko, Sally Seltman, Hally Throsby. Between the three of them, they have toured with Lykke Li, Broken Social Scene, and have done lyrical work for some of Feist’s material. I guess you could probably get away with the term “super” with a resume like that. Not to mention the album was produced by Victor Van Vugt who also produced some PJ Harvey tracks and Nick Cave stuff.

They’ve received positive press reviews from places like The Couch Sessions, Spinner, and Folk Radio (because they’re good). So check them out!

Even Though I’m A Woman

We Will Know What It Is

Seeker Lover Keeper on iTunes:

Meryl Streep and Margaret Thatcher

Being the avid history nerd that I am, I was basically counting down the minutes until the opening of Iron Lady, the new film chronicling Margaret Thatcher’s life, starring Meryl Streep. I mean, what could be better than Meryl Streep (who is awesomeness in human form) taking on a complex, fascinating character like Prime Minister Thatcher, right? Regardless of your politics, Margaret Thatcher’s story is an exciting one.

I was expecting a few things from the film. First, I was expecting a kick-butt performance from Ms. Streep. Second, I was expecting to learn more about Margaret Thatcher’s political and personal story, since I don’t know that much about her. Third, I was expecting to be thoroughly entertained.

Unfortunately, only one of my three expectations was really fulfilled. Meryl Streep’s performance was above and beyond what I had hoped for. She did an incredible job conveying subtle aspects of Margaret Thatcher’s character, and portraying her throughout at different ages. I also just have to give props to Meryl Streep for taking on this role and helping to bring to light the story of a political trailblazer.

Sadly, I feel the film didn’t give Meryl Streep much of a chance to delve into certain aspects of Thatcher’s character. The film touched on events that occurred during Thatcher’s time as Prime Minister, but glossed over many.

I wanted to see more explanation of how Thatcher came to believe in her conservative politics, whether she ever questioned them, and how she became interested in politics in the first place.The film alludes to Thatcher’s early ambitions with a scene where she dreamily watches her politically active father deliver a speech, but skips over Thatcher’s time at Oxford, showing us her run for Parliament before we know why or when she became interested in politics.

Instead the film focuses mainly on Thatcher’s life as an old woman, after her husband has died, as she is beginning to lose her mind. In most of the movie, Thatcher is coping with the loss of her husband. She hallucinates that he is with her when he is, in fact, dead, and for most of the film refuses to throw out his belongings.

At the end of the film, she finally lets her hallucinations go, as she imagines her husband walking out the door. However, this is done with much crying and saying that she is scared to be alone. I thought the film’s choice to include these hallucinations was especially interesting, as it highlighted Thatcher’s dependency on her male counterpart, rather than focusing on her independent strength.

One positive aspect of this portrayal is that it debunks the idea that Margaret Thatcher was, well, an Iron Lady. Showing Thatcher as vulnerable and reliant on her husband humanizes her to some extent. However, it frustrates me that it is necessary to portray a female leader as dependent on her husband to humanize her or make her seem likeable.

I found myself wishing that the film had focused on a stronger, more independent Thatcher, rather than trying to make her hard exterior soft on the edges.

Maybe it’s because I can be a bit of an iron lady myself sometimes, but I think Thatcher would have been even more likeable and relatable, had more of her firmness and independence been portrayed. I was expecting a lot from this film, and frankly, I left somewhat disappointed. While I commend Streep and the others who worked on this film for highlighting the life of such an interesting woman, I hope that someday filmmakers will not feel the need to soften such a powerful character simply because of her gender.

Ani DiFranco

After 20 years in the music biz, self-described “Little Folksinger” Ani DiFranco is still technically little, although her influence on fellow musicians, activists, and indie-minded people the world over has been huge. She still proudly identifies as a folksinger, too, but her understanding of that term has always been far more expansive than a bin at the record store or a category on iTunes, with ample room for soul, funk, jazz, electronic music, spoken word, and a marching band or two. Over the course of more than 20 albums, including the live double CD Living in Clip (1997) and the two-disc career retrospective Canon (2007), as well as the latest one, ¿Which Side are You On? (2012), Ani has never stopped evolving, experimenting, testing the limits of what can be said and sung. Her lifelong tribe of co-conspirators includes everyone from Pete Seeger and the late Utah Phillips to a new generation of twentysomething singer-songwriters who grew up with her songs and shows — and then there’s the motley crew of folks like Prince, Maceo Parker, Andrew Bird, Dr. John, Arto Lindsay, Bruce Springsteen, Chuck D, the Buffalo Philharmonic, Gillian Welch, Cyndi Lauper, and even Burmese activist and Nobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi, with whom she has crossed paths in a myriad of ways.

Born in Buffalo, New York in 1970, Ani spent part of her twenties in New York City, then returned to her hometown where she established first a business office and then a performance venue called Babeville as the twentieth century ground to a halt and the twenty-first one revved up. For much of the last decade she’s been based in New Orleans — but at her core she’s always seen herself as “a traveler,” covering pretty much the four corners of the earth by now, both solo and with her band. (There’s less corner-covering these days, now that she’s consciously slowing down a bit and raising a daughter with partner and co-producer Mike Napolitano, but she still gets around just fine, playing venues like Madison Square Garden for Pete Seeger’s ninetieth birthday bash and another star-studded lineup at the Beacon Theater in Manhattan for Wavy Gravy’s seventy-fifth.)

Early in her career, Ani made a choice that is now so obvious to so many people that it’s hard to remember it was once considered brazen: to say no to every record label deal that came her way, and yes to being her own boss. That decision has earned her plenty of attention over the years, but it has never been what brought sold-out crowds to her shows around the world, fans debating every nuance of her lyrics, and fellow performers clamoring to work with her. No, all that has more to do with another choice she made early in life: To use her voice and her guitar as honestly and unflinchingly as she could, writing and playing songs that came straight from her own experience, her boundless imagination, her sharp wit, and her ever-more-nuanced understanding of how the world works. She did it in noisy bars with nothing but a shaved head and a lone guitar in 1990, and she’s doing it with renewed intensity today.

via Righteous Babe

¿Which Side Are You On?

FREE DOWNLOAD OF ¿Which Side Are You On? FOR FBOMB READERS

Ani DiFranco on iTunes:

Joy Askew

“When writing about myself I would always start by saying that I was ‘originally from the North of England’… in fact that’s not true but I grew up there from age 5 in Newcastle, famous for its coals and shipbuilding. The place was grimy, cold and hard but full of character and culture, with many theaters and concert venues and legendary clubs. Newcastle was frequented by the likes of Bob Dylan (Don’t Look Back) and Jimi Hendrix (his manager Chas Chandler, bassist for the famed Newcastle Band The Animals was a true Geordie and my father was his headmaster!) I love the English movie Get Carter set in Newcastle and starring a young Michael Caine, it really reflects well a lot of what this once Roman Northern garrison town was about.

There was so much legendary live music when I was a teenager and by the time I was 14 years old I was playing and singing around town in a blues band with my brother Roger.

So I went to jazz college and took up the tenor saxophone along with playing the piano and singing. After a few years playing in London and listening to Sly Stone, Parliament Funkadelic and Quincy Jones, I knew I just wanted to be in America….so I came – because I got the chance! My chance was to tour the East Coast with Warner Bros. band Eye to Eye as their keyboard player/backing vocalist and after that tour fell apart I joined fellow Brit. Joe Jackson on a world tour for his Night and Day Record. That tour lasted a year and was a real high. We got to play with the Rolling Stones, the Who and the Grateful Dead and visit Australia and Japan. I was truly devoted to being in New York after that experience!

In 1984 I met and toured with performance artist Laurie Anderson playing keyboards and singing…In the following years I appeared on some Joe Jackson records (Big World, Blaze of Glory, Laughter & Lust, Live) and started writing my own songs…I settled into my own career as an artist and even though I had written songs for many years previously, this is where I feel I really began to find myself and explore my own expression. Tender City was released on BMG in 1996. This record has performances by Peter Gabriel, Larry Klein, Jerry Marrotta and Shane Fontayne, among others.

Three more self released solo albums followed, then I formed a duo with electronic jazz musician Takuya Nakamura named ECHO and our CD of the same name was released on the New Line Records label in 2002…In 2008 I released “The Pirate Of Eel Pie”.

I have been an activist on behalf of farm animals since 2004. I volunteer to help bring awareness of farm animals in dire factory farms across America and to promote Veganism for ourselves, the animals and the planet. My song Poor Man’s greed appears in the film “Peaceable Kingdom – The Journey Home” and several songs on “Drunk On You” reflect this volunteer work.”

via JoyAskew.com
Drunk On You

I Broke The Law

Joy Askew on iTunes:

Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer

With the holiday season just behind us, we’re all probably a little tired of Christmas movies. Many, it seems, are tired of one specific movie: Rankin/Bass’ “Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer”. As a young child, I had my mother record this on VHS and I would watch it on loop until well into January.

It wasn’t until I got this movie on DVD a few years ago that I began to notice that the movie isn’t really that good. The animation is crude, even when compared to other stop motion animation of the time. The sound quality is a notch below what you hear in those singing Hallmark cards. The plot barely holds together under even the loosest scrutiny. Also, the messages in the movie are rather objectionable.

A few articles have appeared this holiday season attacking the movie for it’s supposed support of bullying (which only makes sense if you don’t watch the whole movie) and for it’s sheer creepiness (which I can understand). But if parents should be worried about their children watching this film, it has nothing to do with its creepiness or its supposed support of bullying. What I find most objectionable about this movie is its overt sexism.

Somehow I never noticed it until recently, but the sexism is pretty  blatant. For instance, why are all of Santa’s Reindeer male? It’s not merely a coincidence: the film is pretty clear that the boys join in the reindeer games while the girls stay off in the corner…swooning? Admiring? Life isn’t all that different for the female elves either.

Maybe you look at those two examples and find that they’re a little too subtle to be considered sexism. Then let me present exhibit A: when Rudolph and Hermey get fed up with the senseless bullying and run away, Rudolph’s parents and girlfriend all want to go out looking for them. But Donner (Rudolph’s dad) puts the kibosh on that by saying, “No, this is man’s work.” Looking for someone is mans work? Are women bad at looking for things? Do they need to be protected? This movie assumes so.

A little later in the film we encounter Exhibit B: when Yukon Cornelius flips over the edge of a cliff during a brutal tickle fight with the Bumble. It is then that Sam, the narrator, says, “They were all very sad at the loss of their friend, but they realized that the best thing to do was to get the women back to Christmas town.” What does that even mean? Why do the women need to get back home? They can’t handle their grief for some guy they just met?

While I don’t condone these statements in the movie, I can see how they ended up there. This movie came out in 1964. You don’t have to watch but five minutes of Mad Men to see exactly where the writers of this movie were coming from. The 1960s were a different time, one where men were considered providers and women were thought to be fragile. Never mind that in the Rudolph movie the only outright compassion comes from our three misfit heros and the women. The men just walk around like angry jerks waving their manhood about.

Okay, so this movie’s sexist. Should we keep our children from watching it? Are we inadvertently supporting the views in the movie by watching? I don’t think that’s necessarily the case. I still enjoy watching this movie. The overall message of bullying being bad is a good one. When I eventually show this movie to my children, I’ll make sure to point out the instances I mentioned. This way we can still enjoy the film while learning from its flaws.

Vera Chytilova

Vera Chytilová was born on February 2, 1929, in Ostrava, Czechoslovakia (now Czech Republic). She studied philosophy and architecture in Brno for two years, then worked as a technical draftsman, a designer, a fashion model, a photo re-toucher, then worked as a clapper girl for Barrandov Film Studios in Prague. There she continued as a writer, actress, and assistant director.

She was denied a scholarship, or even a recommendation from Barrandov, but she took the admissions tests at FAMU and was accepted. From 1957-1962 she studied film directing under Otakar Vávra, who also taught Jirí Menzel, Milos Forman, Jan Nemec, and Ivan Passer. In 1962 she graduated as director from Film Academy (FAMU) in Prague. Her graduation film ‘Strop’ (Ceiling 1962) and the following film ‘Pytel blech’ (A Bagful of Fleas 1963) were “staged” improvisations with non-actors. In 1966 Chytilova and her husband, ‘Jaroslav Kucera’, made a witty surrealist comedy Daisies (1966), which was immediately banned, but then was released in 1967, and won the Grand Prix at the Bergamo Film Festival. She remained in Czechoslovakia after the events of 1968, when her colleagues Milos Forman, Jan Nemec, and Ivan Passer emigrated. Her films were often “shelved” for reasons of political censorship. For six years Chytilova was banned from making films. In 1976 she wrote a letter of complaint to President Gustav Husak, describing her artistic position. After some behind-the-scenes influence by her supporters, Chytilova was allowed to make a low-budget Hra o jablko (1977), which won a Silver Hugo at Chicago Film Festival.

Chytilova belongs among the foremost directors of the 1960′s Czech New Wave, which was influenced by both the French New Wave and Italian Neo-Realism. Her films were acclaimed for visual experimentation and for bold unmasking of the moral problems of contemporary society. Her art belongs to what Sergei M. Eisenstein described as “intellectual cinema”, that embraces the mix of “avant-garde”, “cinema verite”, “formalism”, “feminism”, or “happening” and, with a good deal of humor, it spreads beyond definitions. Chytilova’s films often present a multi-layered plethora of visual associations that encourages the viewer to make active interpretations. She survived through the political turbulences in Czechoslovakia and has been a highly original and uncompromising filmmaker.

via IMDB

Trailer for Daisies

Interview with Vera Chytilova

the (evil) power of photoshopping

Retouching photographs of models in magazines and newspapers has been a point of controversy in the publishing industry ever since technology like Photoshop has become readily available. Most magazines, especially ones dedicated to fashion and/or celebrity stalking, have no qualms about retouching “imperfect” pictures. I think this practice is absolutely reprehensible.

There are instances when it’s appropriate to retouch photograph. For example, if a person in a photograph has red eye or some stray hairs, or the lighting isn’t good, or if there’s some other imperfection that doesn’t change the concept of the picture to a ridiculous degree, I don’t see a problem with that. I do take issue with pictures retouched to the point that the original subject is unrecognizable or completely changed, especially in the mass media.

Dozens of studies have proven that young women are very much influenced by how the media portrays women, whether on television or the Internet or in magazines. As a result, when models are depicted as super-skinny with heads wider than their hips (as was done in a Ralph Lauren ad), that sends girls a message that they need to be as thin as possible in order to be accepted, to be “normal.” This sort of thing is why anorexia and other eating disorders are so common in our society. If models and celebrities were shown in magazines looking the way they do without Photoshop enhancements, young women would be able to see what “normal” really is.