The Carrier

Clocking in at just short of 35 minutes, “Accelerate,” R.E.M.’s 14th studio album and their first in nearly four years, also happens to be their shortest album in their 25- year career. 

Originally based out of Athens, Ga., the band helped to popularize college rock in the ‘80s and pioneered the emerging sound of alternative rock in the early ‘90s. After their original drummer left in 1997, R.E.M released a string of poorly received albums,and many began to wonder if the band was still relevant. 

With lead singer Michael Stipe suggesting the band would split up if they were to release another bad album, the band spent only three weeks in the studio preparing “Accelerate.” The quick recording schedule reflects the album’s fast and fresh feel, something they’ve lacked on their albums for quite some time. 

Compared to their previous albums, “Accelerate” contains a loud production quality, mirroring their guitar-based 1994 album, “Monster” (“What’s the Frequency, Kenneth?”); except for the haunting track, “Houston,” which echoes some of the experimentation on their landmark album, “Automatic for the People.” 

Despite its short length, “Accelerate” is not a throwback to their work in the ‘80s, but it is something fresh.

The first three songs provide an energetic push to get you into the album, starting out at breakneck speed and reaching the high point with the third track, the catchy single “Supernatural Superserious,” serving as a nice radio-friendly update to R.E.M.’s peachy sound. 

The fourth track, “Hollow Man,” starts off slowly with just a piano and Stipe’s vocals, quickly building into another flowing and rocking R.E.M. track, the song contains some possibly introspective lyrics into the personal dilemma of R.E.M. and their fall out with their critics and fans: “I’m overwhelmed, I’m on repeat, I’m emptied out, I’m incomplete.” The next track, “Houston,” is full of a weird and almost hypnotic rhythm, with even more ambiguous lyrics from either the perspective of a Katrina survivor, or, as the last few lines suggest, a perspective on R.E.M.’s once faltering career: “And some things they fall to the wayside, their memories yet to be stilled, belief has not failed me, and so I am put to the test.”

R.E.M. may have passed the test, but “Accelerate” still has the feeling of a band in transition. Within every track, you can sense that the band is having a good time for a change, trying to feel out what it was that got them together in the first place. The lyrics are layered with political undertones, but most of it can be left up to the listener. 

While a song like “Until the Day is Done” is obviously about the current state of the union, the song “Mr. Richards” could either be a politically motivated song on troubled times, or a humorous evaluation of Michael Richards (Kramer from Seinfeld) and the racial comments he made during a standup act two years ago. But it is with the title track that the band clearly displays their motivation behind the album: “No time to question the choices I make, I’ve got to fall in another direction.”

“Accelerate” stylistically is R.E.M. in the fast lane, both with the album’s length and the composition of the songs. However, their destination is unknown even to them. With the quality behind “Accelerate,” it could go either way for R.E.M. But just like the opening track, “Living Well is the Best Revenge,” the band seems to be happy living well with their newfound sound.

Imagine a television show whose main characters include the mayor of a major American city, a homeless drug addict and a shotgun wielding street bandit who is also a homosexual, among many others. This is HBO’s The Wire, which has been on the air since the summer of 2002, and is now in its fifth and final season with its last episode airing on March 9.
The show’s creator, Ed Burns, is a retired crime reporter for the Baltimore Sun. Throughout the series, Burns has gone to great lengths to present the show with authenticity, featuring a number of Baltimore policemen in minor roles in front of and behind the camera. While the show is set in Baltimore, Burns has claimed that the show is about the decay of the American city, and with each season, Burns focuses on a new issue to discuss these themes of urban digression, all centered on the drug trade.
The first season introduces us to a handful of cops assigned on a special detail to take down the Barksdale family drug organization that controls the western streets of Baltimore. Throughout this season, and for the majority of the series, we follow these cops and criminals as Burns explores the absurdity of the “war on drugs,” with one detective declaring it a false slogan, because, “wars end.” In later seasons, the show explores the decline of the working class in the urban environment, prison reform, politics, corruption, public education and, most recently, the media.
Even though the show goes on to explore various other scenarios of urban decay, the show truly examines the struggle of individualism in a state of institution, whether it be the institution of the police department, a ghetto drug empire or the public school system. It cleverly observes many of characters and skillfully develops them in a subtle novelistic approach through the course of the entire series. Forget individual episodes with one specific plot, i.e. Law & Order or C.S.I.; The Wire develops its stories throughout an entire season and beyond.
The characters are wide ranging and are all given equal treatment. Even a brief scene with a teenage drug dealer’s mother is full of drama and realism, compared to the scenes with the Baltimore mayor and his inner circle. As a police procedural drama, the show delivers in its realistic approach with an equal balance of humor.
Some scenes, like the ones featuring a number of urban drug dealers in a conference at a hotel discussing new territory, feel like a modern day adaptation of The Godfather. But it transcends its genre limitations and clichés in its depiction of modern day life through real people in real situations.
Despite its overwhelming critical praise, throughout its six-year run the show has received very low ratings, and has developed a sort of cult following through its syndication on the BET network. This show works as an incredible sociological depiction of the current state of American cities. Its approach varies from laughter, suspense and some downright Shakespearian moments.
The show is a masterpiece in weaving together many storylines and characters while still being gripping and moving. The Wire is currently the best television program still airing, and does not receive the wide audience that a show of this caliber deserves to get.

December is usually associated with spending time with the family. Whether it is relatives coming from long distances to visit loved ones, or a college student returning home for the holidays after enjoying a semester full of independence.
Families will be coming together during the holidays this year just as they always have and will for years to come.
The holidays are also an important time for Hollywood, in which they release some of their most prestigious films in hope of winning an Academy Award. Studios can always count on families coming together during this time of year, so they can make more of a profit, releasing more serious films in comparison to the slew of action and comedy films released every summer, in hopes that the adults will go for the more “challenging” material.
If a person were to look at the statistics of films with many Academy Award nominations and the times of their releases, they would discover the release of these films usually fall in the final three months of each year.
Unfortunately, not all of these films are as prestigious or fulfilling as the studios thought when they set out to release them, but here is a spotlight on two particular films playing this month in limited release that will be expanded into more theaters as the year draws to a close.
Instead of going for the targeted family-oriented audiences and Oscar-bait shamelessness that make up the holiday season, these two films achieve something on a more artistic level.
The films will most likely be remembered for years to come as being innovative to the medium of celluloid, despite being ignored by the general public during the time of their release.

“I’m Not There”
Directed by Todd Haynes

Bob Dylan will be most likely remembered for his song “Like a Rolling Stone,” with lyrics that defied the general ways of song writing and revolutionized the way songs have been written ever since.
Many people do not know of the constant changes his public image has gone through since he broke out onto the folk scene in the early ‘60s, ranging from the young prophet of the folk movement, to growing his hair out and going electric, to even releasing a string of Christian albums after being born again through the word of God. The idea of putting his life in a straightforward narrative would seem challenging, considering all of the transformations of his various personas.
It is with this concept of the mystery that Dylan has created about himself through his song lyrics on which that director Todd Haynes based his film. “I’m Not There,” is not a biography about Bob Dylan, at least not in the sense of “Walk the Line” being one of Johnny Cash. Instead, he plays with the various images Dylan has created for himself over the years and portrays a number of different characters who are all inspired, one way or another, by aspects of Bob Dylan’s life and career. In fact, the name ‘Bob Dylan’ is never even mentioned once in the film.
Are you still following me? For the long haired, electric Dylan of the mid ‘60s, we have Cate Blanchett playing a character named Jude Quinn who is stranded on tour in England, tuning out the questions of the press and getting booed on stage. We also have Heath Ledger portraying a movie star who struggles to maintain a balance between his private family life with the world around him, based upon Dylan’s own struggles to do the same. Oh yeah, and the actor playing Dylan as a teenager is an African-American.
Haynes’ interpretation of Dylan’s life and music is extremely unconventional, to say the least, but it is also enchanting, surreal and moving. Five different actors (including Heath Ledger, Christian Bale, Richard Gere) and one actress portray aspects of Dylan’s life through various different segments, each standing alone in its style, but each adding up to the entire whole of the film.
Plus, Haynes provides us with a Dylan-filled soundtrack, half of the songs being covers, and sets them to some unforgettable images and sequences. With the casting alone, Haynes is asking a lot of his audience, but in all honesty, there is not another film like this. He has crafted something with this film that is as complex as Dylan’s own lyrics, and, most importantly, he understands that Dylan’s career was anything but straightforward, so why bother making a generic picture of a complex man?
Many people will be split when they see the movie based upon their current knowledge of Dylan and whether or not they even like his music. The only advice that should be given to people going in is that this is a portrait of one artist through the various extremes of his career. The concept and final outcome of the film will probably leave many viewers lost and unsatisfied, but they should at least walk away with the understanding of how different and ground-breaking something like this truly is. Bob Dylan is one of a kind, and so is this film.

“No Country for Old Men”
Directed by Joel and Ethan Coen

The opening of “No Country for Old Men,” the twelfth film by the Coen brothers, features a sort of world weary narration by Sheriff Ed Tom Bell (played by Tommy Lee Jones), reinforced by various images of the desert lands of west Texas.
In his narration, Bell discusses a general viewpoint of an aging sheriff in a changing time. His tone is nostalgic, yet exhausting. We are then introduced to a psychotic killer named Anton Chigurh (played by Spanish actor Javier Bardem, who will win an Oscar for his performance), who has been hired to retrieve stolen money from a drug deal gone wrong just north of the border. The thief of the drug money is a local blue collar man named Llewellyn (Josh Brolin) who stumbles across the cash while hunting near the Rio Grande, encountering a pile of casualties and a bag full of money in the middle of nowhere.
The film then proceeds to follow Llewellyn’s storyline, as he travels on the lam through west Texas with the stolen money, followed closely Anton, who manages to leave his mark wherever he goes. Meanwhile, Sheriff Bell serves the audience somewhat like a Greek Chorus, reiterating the events we have seen on the screen as the investigation unfolds. The Coen brothers, who have brought us such diverse films as “Fargo,” “The Big Lebowski” and “O Brother Where Art Thou?,” are always able to explore an equal balance of humor, certain and specific regional dialects and customs. With “No Country for Old Men,” the Coen brothers continue this trend in their style, providing an interesting view of the crimes presented in the film through the eyes of the down home folk of west Texas. One part in particular that provides both humor and unease in these observations is a scene in which Anton goes to Llewellyn’s trailer park in search of the money, only to come across an elderly Texas woman who happens to be the landlord. It is this balance of comedy and terror that presents the Coen brothers at their best.
For most of the way through the film the Coen brothers give us a taut cat-and-mouse game between Llewellyn and Anton, as the action increases and the suspense builds. It is Tommy Lee Jones’ character, however, who remains the center of the story and the overall focus of the film. Without spoiling anything, the Coen brothers manage to trick the preconceived notions of the audience and the genre conventions that usually define films like these and bring us a film about a man lost in a changing world and unable to come to terms with the hardships of his time. The Coen brothers adapted their screenplay from the Cormac McCarthy novel, and manage to stick closely to the source material while crafting a genius work of their own. It is the final act of the film that will probably leave many viewers disappointed, as the film begins exploring the themes of McCarthy’s work through Tommy Lee Jones’ storyline.
The Coen brothers have not disappointed with their new film. It has already received widespread acclaim from many critics and will likely go on to receive many Oscar nominations pending an expansion of its release. However, it is the final scene that sets it apart from many of the other films released around this time of year. Mirroring the opening narration, the scene is very subtle and some could even call it abrupt, when in actuality, it might be the most poetic ending to a film in many years.

The opening scene of director Ridley Scott’s “American Gangster” is the perfect introduction to how the story of Frank Lucas, a notorious drug dealer in Harlem during the late ‘60s to the early ‘70s, is going to be presented to us.
I would not even call it a scene because it goes by too fast, much like the depiction of the main character, played by Denzel Washington, and the film itself. “American Gangster” has a lot of good things going for it, especially on the entertainment level, but if it’s reaching for everlasting acclaim (and I think it is), then it just barely misses out.
Right away, we are presented with Frank Lucas, a caretaker to an aging criminal in Harlem, during the Thanksgiving of 1968. Working with his boss for 15 years and observing local Italian mobsters, Lucas has developed a code of ethics involved with being a gangster. When his employer passes on, Lucas begins applying these ethics to the street.
With the Vietnam War playing constantly in the background on televisions (a motif used throughout the film), Lucas uses a family connection in the military, and soon enough, is importing 100 percent pure heroin straight from the jungles and into the ghettos of New York City. With an instant rise in wealth and power, Lucas begins employing his family members from North Carolina into his business and even sets his mother up with a nice estate.
Meanwhile, in New Jersey, Richie Roberts (played by Russell Crowe), a straight-laced detective during a time of extreme corruption, is having a hard time getting by. Because of his honesty and hatred of corruption, he has alienated himself from nearly everyone he works with.
Not only that, but his wife is leaving him and wants full custody of their son. And if that weren’t enough, he is also going through law school but has an extreme fear of public speaking. Before too long, he is recruited to lead a team of investigators in bringing down drug operations and their ties with corruption.
Their efforts are often foiled by a group of corrupt New York cops, but soon they discover Lucas and his operation and begin their own operation of taking them down.
That is the setup, and it’s a good one, but director Scott and screenwriter Steven Zaillian (he also wrote “Schindler’s List”) do not really know where they want to go with the story or the portrayal of their lead character. There is no doubt Washington is an extraordinary actor, as well as  a reliable one.
In “American Gangster,” he is merely a reliable actor filling the role of a shallow, one-dimensional character. There are a few snippets of dialogue thrown in toward the end that try to expand Lucas’s existence, but while on the screen, he rarely shows emotion, and we never really know what makes him tick. Scott’s direction is good, making references during the final bust to gritty cop films from the ‘70s, such as “The French Connection” or “Serpico,” but misses out on all the class of the crime epics that it strives to be. There is great montage, however, of the drugs being smuggled from Southeast Asia, through American military bases, to New York City and its ghettos.
Despite its ambitions, “American Gangster” misses out on being the highly acclaimed epic film it should have been (it’s still pretty long, though), and just ends up joining the list with films like “Blow” and “Lord of War” as being the yearly formula films that are extremely enjoyable, yet cannot escape the realms of being just ‘good.’
In spite of everything, there is a moment of greatness in the final image with Lucas, years later, standing on a street corner with Public Enemy playing in the background, observing the long term effects of the urban decadence  he was responsible for.
It’s a great ending that makes you wonder where the great film was that should have come with it.

Lars Lindstrom keeps to himself. He lives in the garage behind his brother and sister-in-law’s house, attends church regularly and completely ignores the advances made toward him by his co-worker Margo.
Lars always looks like he is on the edge of either laughing or crying, always wanting to be left alone. His sister-in-law, Karin, worries about him while his older brother, Gus, just ignores his social ineptitude.
And then one night, Lars actually comes to dinner, but asks if his friend “Bianca,” who speaks very little English and is confined to a wheelchair, may join Gus and Karin. Thrilled at the news that Lars has met someone, they begin to prepare for dinner. They are soon shocked, however, to discover that Bianca is a life-sized doll that Lars bought over the Internet, who he is convinced is real.
Director Craig Gillespie and writer Nancy Oliver’s film sounds like the set up for a raunchy comedy, something along the lines of “The 40 Year-Old Virgin.” But in all honesty, it is anything but. They tell the story in a very subtle way and at a very slow pace, making all of the humor the initial shock value of seeing this man interact with this doll as if it were real. Lars is played by Ryan Gosling, who continues to take on challenging roles and has proven himself to be one of the best young actors in the film industry today. Gosling plays Lars perfectly, without going over the top, despite the character’s actions. He makes Lars believable and extremely likeable.
At first, Gus and Karin are mortified by Lars’ delusion, so much so that they take him to their small town doctor (Patricia Clarkson) who soon starts giving weekly “treatments” to Bianca, while in actuality, she psychoanalyzes Lars. The doctor encourages everyone to play along with his delusion, in hopes that he emerges from his shell.
Before too long, Bianca is embraced by the small community, becomes a regular volunteer with the help of Lars’ fellow church-goers and is employed as a mannequin at the local mall. It is at this point where the film begins to show its true colors, taking a serious look at loneliness and the positive effect human contact has on people. A scene between Lars and his brother Gus later on in the film on what makes a person a man is a very touching scene that reveals a lot about its characters.
“Lars and the Real Girl” is an interesting and enjoyable fable about growing up and embracing adulthood, told with an unlikely but successful approach. It is nice, for once, to see a film feature Christians as open and accepting people. The humor is down played and, as a result, comes at a very relaxed rate.
The supporting cast is excellent, and director Gillespie does a remarkable job at setting the mood, having the story take place during the winter and using the cold barren landscapes to establish the loneliness and isolation felt by Lars. This is a ‘feel good movie’ without the silly genre conventions and plot formulas. This is a ‘feel good movie’ done correctly.

From the opening moments of “The Nanny Diaries,” directed by Shari Springer Berman and Robert Pulcini, the audience gets a sense that this might be more than a chick-flick, “feel good” type of film. The directors introduce the story with narration from the star, Scarlett Johansson and set the whole thing up as a type of anthropological study. This framing device, while hard to convey in a review, will probably end up annoying most people who go and see it. But the truth is, it really is the only thing the film has going for it.

(more…)

“Superbad” has achieved notoriety for the McLovin character because “I am McLovin,” has been repeatedly quoted, mainly by teenagers who technically are not even old enough to purchase a ticket for the R-rated film.

No one is talking enough about how well this film combines teen sex comedy with pop culture references, while still saying something intelligent about male friendship.

(more…)