Appetite for Deconstruction

Top 5 Holiday Movies & Specials

Mike Sergott — Fri, 09 Dec 2011 18:20:51 +0000

Originally posted December 9, 2009.

Well, I hope you all had a fantastic, beltline-busting, Thanksgiving… and that you are prepared for the Countdown to Christmas. I’m sure some of your neighbors jumped the gun and got their lights up before November 26 (and if you are included in that group, shame on you. No lights, no tree, and no fucking Christmas music until the day after. There’s no discussion about this… the cavemen made a pact about this and we’ve all agreed to uphold it for eternity. So stop cheating, for little Christ child’s sake!).

That said, since this won’t get posted until post-Thanksgiving, I’m going to try and get in the spirit somewhat and list my five favorite holiday movies of all time.

Before we get to the feature-length fare, let me first list my top 5 best children’s specials. I know you watched these as a kid and I know you’re trying to convince your own kids why Charlie Brown is cooler than Shrek (speaking of which, have you seen that Shrek special? It’s even more annoying than those movies, which is saying a lot).

Top 5 Chistmas Specials

With apologies to The Star Wars Holiday Special. Mr. Magoo’s Christmas Carol and The Year Without a Santa Claus (which, let’s face it, is Heat Miser and Snow Miser and 20 minutes of bookended crap), here’s my five:

5. Santa Claus is Comin’ to Town (1970):

4. How the Grinch Stole Christmas (1966): Maybe this one got a little tarnished because it now shares a name and mental space with that abomination that Jim Carrey shat out. But that aside, it’s brilliant, led by the fantastic narration of Boris Karloff.

3. Frosty the Snowman (1969): Hap-py Birthday! Another standout narration performance, with Jimmy Durante taking the honors this time (I’m convinced to make another Christmas classic, you’d have to hire Morgan Freeman. “I’d like to think that the last thing to go through Professor Hinkle’s head – other than that carrot – was knowing that Frosty had gotten the best of him…” How cool would that be?)

2. Rudolph The Red-Nosed Reindeer (1964): My kids’ favorite, hands down. The island of misfit toys, Hermey the dentist-wannabe, Yukon Cornelius, the Abominable Snowman, a cranky Santa, Rudolph’s mentally abusive parents (way to give the kid a complex his whole young life, Donner… I’m sure being perpetually forced to cover up his nose won’t scar him for life or anything), and the great Burl Ives. Does it get any better than this?

Well, actually…

1. A Charlie Brown Christmas (1965): The Godfather of Christmas specials, likely never to be topped. Seriously, when Linus does his speech on what Christmas is really about, don’t you still get the chills? It almost makes me remember that this Christmas thing is all about god n’ stuff.

Almost.

Couple that with the coolest dancing scenes in movie history and you’ve got gold, Jerry, gold!

Top 5 Holiday Movies

Okay, on to the movies…

First the honorable mentions: Gremlins (1984), Bad Santa (2003), Die Hard (1988), The Nightmare Before Christmas (1993) and March of the Wooden Soliders (1934).

5. Trading Places (1984):

4. Scrooged (1988):

3. Miracle on 34th Street (1947):

Sinterklaas Kapoentje

Gooi wat in mijn schoentje

Breng wat in mijn laarsje

Dank U Sinterklaasje

Man, I love that song

Okay, so back to the old school traditional stuff for a minute. First, don’t get this confused with either one of the lame remakes (’73 or ’94). Those are terrible. The ’47 version is superb, with a performance by Edmund Gwenn that makes you really believe he is Santa Claus, and a child acting job that is actually good (a young Natalie Wood).

2. A Christmas Story (1983): This is like crack for a movie quote-addict like me.

Oooh fuuudge! …Only I didn’t say “Fudge.” I said THE word, the big one, the queen-mother of dirty words, the “F-dash-dash-dash” word!

Fra-gee-lay. That must be Italian.

Over the years I got to be quite a connoisseur of soap. My personal preference was for Lux, but I found Palmolive had a nice, piquant after-dinner flavor – heady, but with just a touch of mellow smoothness. Life Buoy, on the other hand…

Deck the harrs with boughs of horry… fa ra ra ra ra, ra ra ra ra!

Try not to love this movie. I TRIPLE-dog-dare ya…

1. It’s a Wonderful Life (1946): Yeah, yeah… I know… you think I should’ve put A Christmas Story #1. But I’m sorry… there is only ONE movie that makes me get all teary-eyed every time I see it, and here it is. Who hasn’t thought they’ve done nothing with their lives at some point, or have been so frustrated as to wish they hadn’t been born (um… it’s not just me, right? Anyone? Um… perhaps I’ve said too much).

All right, but you know you’d want to see the impact you’ve made on people’s lives if you could. You watch George Bailey go through hell and back, only to realize (as his brother toasts him at the end of the movie) that he’s the “richest man in town.”

Damn. I just started tearing up again… every freaking time.

Anyway, happy viewing.

The Top 5 Christmas Songs of All Time

Mike Sergott — Fri, 09 Dec 2011 17:14:45 +0000

Originally publlished December 13, 2009.

Bringing back a holiday goodie from last year…

Mike’s Top 5 Christmas Songs of All Time

A quick nod to the honorable mentions:

White Christmas (Bing Crosby)
Frosty the Snowman (Jimmy Durante)
God Rest Ye Merry Gentlemen (Barenaked Ladies & Sarah McLachlan)
Adestes Fideles (Luciano Pavarotti)
You’re a Mean One, Mr. Grinch (?)
Heat Miser and Snow Miser (Heat Miser and Snow Miser)
Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer (Burl Ives)
Christmas in Hollis (Run DMC)
Winter Wonderland (Ray Charles)
Happy Christmas (John Lennon)

And now, the big winners:

5. Santa Claus is Comin’ to Town (Bruce Springsteen): Love him or hate him, you have to admit that this is a darn catchy version. The only problem is that all of the radio stations think so, too… so I’ll hear this song 900 times before the weekend is over and be inclined to change my mind. Better post this to the site before it’s too late.

5. Have Yourself a Merry Little Christmas (The Pretenders):

4. Christmas Time (Vince Guaraldi Trio):

3. Feliz Navidad (Jose Feliciano):

Flea’s Nobby Dog

Hmmph…

2. The Christmas Song (Nat King Cole):

1. Little Drummer Boy (David Bowie & Bing Crosby): First of all, it’s freakin’ David Bowie and Bing Crosby!! The most unlikely successful pairing since Tom Hanks and Hooch. You really need to listen to the extended version from the old Bing Crosby Christmas Special, with the inane banter between the two of them. Cheesy… but in a delicious, Christmassy kinda way.

Super 8 (C+)

Mike Sergott — Sat, 02 Jul 2011 16:08:14 +0000

Starring: Amanda Michalka, Elle Fanning, Kyle Chandler

Directed by: JJ Abrams

112 minutes

In Super 8, J.J. Abrams has made a homage to Steven Spielberg. Despite being set in the 1970s, this is a full-on, modern-day E.T. (there’s a decent amount of guns, explosions and crashes throughout… perhaps Abrams expressing displeasure with his mentor after Spielberg went back and digitally deleted all of those government agents’ hand guns and replaced them with bananas or hand sanitizer or whatever hell those were).

The only problem? I never liked E.T. As a kid, I barely tolerated it. As an adult, I can’t stomach it. Too sugar-coated in that way only Spielberg can (ie, only through a child eyes can we capture the ‘wonder’ of things and appreciate people different from ourselves and outsmart government agencies… y’know, bullshit like that).

Super 8 follows that blueprint exactly, with a liberal sprinkling of Goonies thrown in to amp up the “kids on an adventure” factor. Now, I’m under personal strict orders never to criticize Goonies in any way, under penalty of divorce. But to be honest, this particular gang o’ kooky kids is what makes the movie somewhat appealing. Instead of trying to save their parents’ house from foreclosure, they’re just some bored kids in the ‘70s trying to make a zombie movie on their Super 8 camera (and yes, they had me at zombie movie).

Along the way, while sneaking down to the train station late at night to capture some realistic background shots for a pivotal scene, they are witness to (and almost victims of) a horrible train wreck. When the train’s mysterious cargo escapes, enter the military to (a) immediately go into cover-up mode and (b) destroy the “cargo” at all costs.

Stereotypelab

Let me say this: I know several people in the military and not one of them is anything close to evil (well, maybe one). I also know one government agent and, while he’s a little slow on the uptake sometimes (we don’t call him Mr. Potato Head for nothing), he’s as nice a human being as you’ll ever come across. So it always starts my eyes rolling when the government descends upon small town folks with nothing but evil in their hearts and destruction in their agenda.

Of course, the small town adults are not much better – this being a JJ Abrams production, we are bound to have daddy issues up the hoo-ha. With almost no women to be found, the single dads include a guilt-ridden alcoholic and the still-grieving-after-his-late-wife’s-death, no-nonsense deputy sheriff. Since we already have an alkie, the sheriff has to express his grief by simply looking sullen and getting mad when his son plays with his friends (all of whom seem to be pretty good eggs).

No, it is only the wide-eyed, well-adjusted (despite the warped environments they grow up in) young boys and girl who have the open mind to understand what’s going on, act on it and, ultimately, connect with the aforementioned “cargo” in order to save the day for cargo and humans alike.

Plot holes you could drivce a spaceship made of spoons and old TV parts through

To go into much more than that would give too much of the plot away. Suffice to say that on the one side, the children and their zombie production have enough charm and humor to make things enjoyable almost throughout… however, on the other hand, the stereotypes , plot holes (the kids simply escape the military outpost by… getting in a car with a stoned guy and driving away? Really?), and cheesy life lessons (much like Lost, the key lies in letting go) can leave you gagging on your popcorn as you exit.

Oh, and one last thing: despite my comparisons between this and E.T., be advised this is not a kids movie. My 5 and 6 year-olds would’ve been terrified by the train crash as well as the violence exhibited by human and non-human alike. Adults only, please.

The verdict

Plenty of people loved E.T. And given the current crop of shitty summer fare being forced on us this season, you could do worse. So I’m giving this a B-, although I have a feeling by the end of the year I’ll be course-correcting this down to a C+.

Rated PG-13 for “intense sequences of sci-fi action and violence, language and some nudity.”

Hangover II (D-)

Mike Sergott — Sat, 02 Jul 2011 16:08:03 +0000

Starring: Bradley Cooper, Ed Helms, Zach Galfianakis

Directed by: Todd Phillips

Let me start off by saying that while I thought it was okay, I wasn’t as rabid a fan of the original Hangover as most. Some elements of that first movie that were downright horrible, including the flamboyant Mr. Chow (Ken Jeong) and the grating Zach Galifianiakis. None of the cast members were very funny characters, really – it was the original premise that made it work, and how you were just as lost and susceptible to the curve balls being thrown along the way.

So what does the sequel do? Take all originality out of the movie by providing almost a carbon copy of the plot (only this time in Bangkok instead of Vegas), and even specific scenes (going from an innocent “cheers” to emerging from a blackout, checking pockets for clues, making “the call” to Tracy, etc). There’s even more of Mr. Chow and Galifianakis in this one, making it almost unwatchable. And to make things even worse, director Todd Phillips inexplicably adds an element that has sounded the death knell for any movie not starring Clint Eastwood: the repeated use of a monkey.

A monkey.

“When a monkey nibbles on a penis, it’s funny in any language,’’ says Alan (Galifianakis) in the movie.

No. No it’s not.

And then what happens is… eh, it’s not even worth it.

To go into any further description would be to give more attention to a terrible movie than its due. Suffice to say that, this being a sequel, the movie tried to up the ante with regards to how nasty and edgy it can be (severed fingers, more male full frontal nudity, sodomy), but it only comes across as desperate and… sadly, predictable.

The verdict

Stay away from this movie unless you’re deeply stoned on some good Thai weed one Friday night after this comes out on DVD.

Maybe.

Mike’s verdict: D-

[Rated R for "pervasive language, strong sexual content including graphic nudity, drug use and brief violent images, and a smoking monkey.]

Bridesmaids: It’s Not Me. It’s You.

Mike Sergott — Fri, 10 Jun 2011 23:29:14 +0000

The Inexplicable Love of Bridemaids and Why the Women of America Need a Course Correction

About once a year, I agree to let my wife pick a movie we should go see. Now, please save your sexism rants… my wife decides 98% of what transpires in our universe. She just sucks at picking movies, that’s all.

Case in point: Bridesmaids.

I’m not a fan of the genre as it is, but this was atrocious even by “chick flick” standards. Terrible characters. Not a single funny moment. Daring you to exit the theater by the mid-point.

And yet, despite the fact that my three companions (including the aforementioned Mrs. Movie Picker) hated this film with equal passion, the rebuttals came in fast and furious:

OMG…I saw it Saturday night and thought it was hilarious.

I’m shocked to hear… I’ve only heard the opposite so far.

OMG I loved it! I was cracking up the whole time!!

LOVED it! I think it’s you Mike!

Now, other than the fact that you people use OMG far too much, I have to say I’m disappointed. While I’m often chided for being too tough on movies, this one was terrible no matter how you slice it.

I’m not going to bother reviewing the movie at great length. After all, I’m hardly the ideal candidate to critique a chick flick comedy. Suffice to say that Kristen Wiig, one of the more popular Saturday Night Live performers in recent memory, co-wrote the script and stars in the film as a failed bakery owner who is, basically, a borderline sociopath. This is the kind of character you’d never befriend, let alone choose as your maid of honor – she’s intrusive, moody, and oblivious to the feelings and needs of anyone around her. As a result, she’s almost impossible to root for and invest in.

The movie simply takes the Hangover/Judd Apatow formula (he produced) and slides women into the male roles: the neurotic, ne’er do well lead who, despite constantly screwing people over, finds love and ends up saving the day (Wiig in place of Seth Rogen); the straight man who gets screwed over (Rudolph in place of you name it… Michael Cera, Justin Bartha, et al); the fat character who gets to spurt out the movie’s most vile commentary (Melissa McCarthy in place of Zach Galifianakis)… well, you get the point.

Like most SNL performers who enter the movie arena, this plays out as a series of small skits rather than a consistent story with plot points that tie together and characters that develop. Here, you get such beauties as:

Dueling Bridesmaids Speeches
The Mexican Feast from Hell
Psychotics 101: How to get a cop’s attention

In between, Wiig tries to hold these skits together with dramatic attempts to show her character’s continued downward spiral (when it’s impossible to feel sorry for her, since she simply throws all the good elements of her life away – her job, her newfound relationship, etc – for no other reason than she has to for the sake of the story. Also, I get the fact that she lost her bakery, but does that mean she can’t get a job working for someone else’s bakery?? Instead, she quits cooking altogether, as apparently it is evil).

I remember first watching Wiig in Knocked Up (she had a small part as part of the E! staff) and thinking how good she was with her dry delivery. But much like Aldous Snow’s character in Forgetting Sarah Marshall, it was easy to see that a little of that was more than enough. And much like Get Him to the Greek (which revolved around Snow and attempted to make him a dramatic figure at times, too), you start hating the main character right away. And once you hate the main character, you don’t find their misadventures very funny… just sad and annoying.

So the question becomes: why did YOU like it?

I won’t pretend that I didn’t hear gaggles of women in the audience cackling throughout the movie. So is it me? Was this movie simply out of my realm?

No. It’s not me, it’s you.

To paraphrase Lewis Rothschild in The American President:

People want intelligent female characters, and in the absence of genuine female characters, they’ll listen to anyone on screen. They want female characters. They’re so thirsty for them they’ll crawl through the desert toward a mirage, and when they discover there’s no water, they’ll drink the sand.

You, Women of America, are drunk on sand. You’re so desperate for strong and smart portrayals of women (and justifiably so) that you’ll gleefully eat up anything even remotely resembling it. It’s why people adore Tina Fey (who, while somewhat talented, gets 10x the credit she deserves).

It’s why The Hunger Games is the new mega-popular book series, when in actuality, it’s horribly written (it makes JK Rowling look like Kurt Vonnegut) and after about 2/3 of the way through the first book (there are three of them), it falls off the tracks and never recovers (and yes, I read them all just to make this single point). But here we have an ass-kicking, beautiful young woman who takes care of her family… and while surrounded by men (some who keep throwing their affections at her endlessly despite her constant rejection/standoffish behavior), she never lets them dictate what she does. So while that chick in Twilight represents the inner lust of every 30- and 40-something women who reads those books, Hunger Games represents what those women want their daughters to become (well, maybe not thrown into a winner-take-all death arena, but someone who survives and thrives in a dog-eat-dog world while keeping her head, and…of course… never having sex until she’s married). Sigh.

And it’s why we perpetuate this goofy myth that Sarah Palin has the slightest chance to become president (you might not think so, but according to recent recent polling, she’s right up there in the mix after Mitt Romney and Tim Pawlenty). People want to know that we are making progress… that women have a shot to lead us.

I know how much you need it and want it. But by throwing your support toward movies with no vision or ambition, or poorly written books, or poorly prepared, close minded presidential candidates, you’re not raising the bar. You’re not asking anyone to step up and make real entertainment or present real role models that are worthy of the mantle.

I get it – you don’t have much hope, so you take what you can get. But you deserve better.

I realize that’s quite the tangent to go off on, but I need to get it off my chest. Carry on, my wayward sisters.

The verdicts:

Bridesmaids: F

The Hunger Games trilogy: D+

Sarah Palin: F

The general taste of Women of America: C-

A Long Overdue Criticism of the Cop-Out Ending

Pete — Fri, 10 Jun 2011 23:29:03 +0000

I recently watched the movie Inception for the first time, and thoroughly enjoyed it… until the final minute of the film. That one final minute, for me, spolied the entire experience. Why? Because of the cop-out ending.

Please note: If, like me, you’re a year behind everyone else and haven’t seen Inception yet, don’t read any further.

In the final moments of the film, the top that promises to reveal whether Leonardo DiCaprio’s character is still stuck in dream-space is spinning — if it continues to spin, it’s a dream, and if it doesn’t, then he’s made it back to reality. But just as we’re about to discover the final fate of this person we’ve watched for two hours, the screen goes black. The end. Sorry. Make up your own ending.

“Wait, Pete, you’re missing something. It’s supposed to end this way.”

It is? That may be how writer/director Christopher Nolan planned it, but in terms of telling a story, you can’t convince me that’s how it’s supposed to be. A friend of mine once observed, quite perceptively, that the problem with horror movies is that there’s all of this great, grand buildup throughout the movie, and then at the end the only way to wrap it all up is to have a giant black hole appear and suck all of the evil into it. He’s right, but I’d still prefer a bad ending instead of a movie that aches for profundity and cheats the audience by not giving us an ending. To me, it’s just laziness, or worse, a cowardly unwillingness to take a stand one way or the other. Is he dreaming or isn’t he? Uncertainty doesn’t cut it here; this is a movie, not quantum physics. Nor is it a Choose Your Own Adventure book (though I always liked the Zork series, myself). If there’s one way the story begins, and one way the story proceeds apace, then there’s only one way it ends, and I expect to be shown what it is, or at least be given the tools to figure it out.

On that matter, I should draw a distinction between Inception and the final episode of The Sopranos, which some of you may have in mind while reading this. To me, The Sopranos ended definitively—maybe you had to work a little to figure it out, remembering or re-watching comments made in earlier episodes to appreciate the “cut to black.” But it was an ending. Even the ending of Lost, sucky as it was and try as it did to bundle up and explain away many seasons’ worth of throwing shit to the script wall and seeing what stuck, was an ending.

That’s all I ask.

The cop-out ending tries to be all things to all people. It attempts to inoculate itself from criticism, because of course, there is no one right answer. It’s ambiguous. Any answer can be right, as long as we put in the work to make it right.

I believe putting in the work is the writer’s job. If someone misinterprets, so be it, but the cop-out ending smacks of a writer who doesn’t respect his audience, just likes to screw around with them a bit before pushing a microphone in their faces, saying, “But enough about me… what do you think?”

Maybe I’m reading too much into this, but I feel like Inception is just the latest in an increasing trend of movies with cop-out endings (I’ll rely on the Deconstructionists and the readers for other examples). And it’s even worse in literature.

To my knowledge, the cop-out ending hasn’t been done much in journalism, as it’s sort of antithetical to the whole idea of actually informing an audience. But since I’m having a little trouble coming up with a witty, memorable, buzz-worthy close… why don’t you just go ahead and come up with one yourself?

I’m sure it’ll be great.

“X-Men: First Class” (B-)

Mike Sergott — Fri, 10 Jun 2011 23:28:53 +0000

Starring James McAvoy, Jennifer Lawrence, Michael Fassbender, Kevin Bacon

Directed by Matthew Vaughn

X-Men: First Class is a fun, mindless little comic book story, despite its limitations. Of course, when it comes to movies like these, you can’t beat a good origin story – and anyone with a working knowledge of the X-Men will find this story, and the birth of some of its central characters, interesting.

Here, we go back to Nazi Germany, where a young concentration camp prisoner named Erik is discovered for his supernatural ability to psychically manipulate metal. Of course, those Nazis being the sick puppies they are (they tried to steal the Ark of the Covenant, for Christ’s sake!), they decide the best way to foster this “gift” is through pain and torture, starting with the murder of Erik’s mother by the evil Dr. Schmidt (Kevin Bacon).

Flash forward to 1962, where Charles Xavier has become a professor at Oxford, specializing in the study of mutants. His area of expertise attracts the CIA, who enlist his help in studying and dealing with the very, very evil Sebastian Shaw (who was once – you guessed it – the evil Dr. Schmidt). Worlds collide when Xavier crosses paths with the aforementioned Erik (Michael Fassbender), now all grown up and hell bent on seeking revenge on his former Nazi captor. Erik agrees to join forces with Xavier and they begin to recruit more mutants for the cause (the montage scene where they find and pitch the mutants disappointingly falls flat – mostly, I think, because they find just about the lamest mutants possible).

It doesn’t exactly “kick ass,” but it ain’t half bad.

On the plus side, director Matthew Vaughn keeps the pace moving and adds a lot of light-hearted moments, much like he did in his previous film, Kick-Ass. Another huge plus is Michael Fassbender, so good in Quentin Tarantino’s Inglorious Basterds. Here, he delivers a performance seldom seen in comic book movies. You can actually feel him struggling with his light and dark sides throughout the film – so even though you know he’s destined to transform into the bad guy by the end, you still kinda root for him to reconsider.

In fact, the movie’s cast is fairly strong throughout, including James McAvoy’s solid turn as Professor X and Kevin Bacon as the uber-bad guy (note: I liked Bacon’s performance, but hated his character. A flaw of the comic book system, I always hate the near-unstoppable bad guy with powers greater than anyone else’s. Bacon does the best he can with it, which is admirable… but ultimately, you wish he was more of a brilliant mind than a… well, you can watch for yourself to find out).

Unfortunately, the movie’s plot sputters and groans almost the entire way – whether it’s the mutants being responsible for the Cuban Missile Crisis to the parallel to the civil rights movement. And of course, the primary mission of the bad guys is right out of the James Bond Villain Handbook (destroy the world, of course!). I think the mutants forget that in wiping out those pesky humans, the resulting melted goop of a planet left over wouldn’t be the coolest place to set up the New World.

The Verdict

But all that hardly matters. This is a comic book movie, after all… and not a bad one at that. If you’re a fan of the genre, you’ll most likely exit smiling. If all things inked don’t appeal to you, this movie won’t exactly convert you. It’s as simple as that.

Mike’s verdict: B-

[Rated PG-13 for “brief strong language, some sexuality, and a violent image.”]

Under Deconstruction: Sarah Palin & Paul Revere

Mike Sergott — Fri, 10 Jun 2011 23:28:35 +0000

“He who warned uh, the British that they weren’t gonna be takin’ away our arms, uh by ringing those bells, and um, makin’ sure as he’s riding his horse through town to send those warning shots and bells that we were going to be sure and we were going to be free, and we were going to be armed.” (Sarah Palin)

So Sarah Palin set off a firestorm this week, proving two things: (1) she has no chance of becoming president… ever. (2) Not only does she not know her American history, but most of the people criticizing her don’t, either.

I’ve seen people absolutely crush her for not knowing what “a third-grader with a basic social studies curriculum” knows. And in return, I’ve seen others vehemently defend her and lambast the public at large for their own lack of knowledge (and basing their own knowledge of history on a poem and not actual events).

Anyway, let’s set the record straight.

So what actually happened?

On April 18, 1775, Paul Revere and several others were sent to warn John Adams and John Hancock that British (and yes, I know… everyone back then was technically British… very clever. But I think you know who I’m referring to) spies were attempting to capture them. Both Revere and William Dawes made it to Adams and Hancock successfully – though Revere would be captured soon after (that whole “one if by land, two if by sea” thing was poppycock… while the Minutemen were indeed trying to find out how the British would approach, Revere and his lantern had nothing to do with it. He simply had indicated that he would try to hang his lamp in the Old North Church should he be captured. Not sure how he was supposed to accomplish this… would he ask the soldiers to give him a minute before they hauled him away? But I digress…).

According to some reports, while captured, Revere would regale the British with tales of how well armed the Minutemen were and how they were ready to repel an attack (although even this seems suspect, since he would later be accused of cowardice and face a military court martial trial, of which he would be acquitted. Maybe instead of boasting, Revere squaled like a stuck Irish pig?).

So what actually happened? Part II

ANYWAY, my guess is that someone on Palin’s staff gave her a quick rundown on Revere, and may have added a throwaway line: “…in fact, Ms. Palin, did you know that during his ride, Revere would get captured and tell the British of the Minutemen and how well fortified they were?”

Best guess: Palin, who clearly seemed flustered in recounting the Revere takeaway, mixed up what her prep team told her, the famous Longfellow poem (“Listen my children and you will hear…”), and her own special augmentation (Revere rang bells? He fired warning shots? On a secret mission? Really?). The result: a moment reminiscent of when Katie Couric asked Palin to name what magazines she read.

Look, I work in communications, and spent many years in PR. It’s the Republicans job to spin such an embarrassing moment into a potential “What? Oh no, no, we got YOU” moment. And for fervent Republican followers, it seemed to work.*

[Editor's note: Actually, the biggst thing Palin had going for her this week was Anthony Weiner, who pretty much blew Palin off the front pages. I have no real comments about Weiner, other than to say that if you’re a private figure, this shit is going to come back to you. It always does. If you’re a public figure, how the hell do you think tweets, voicemails and DISTRIBUTED PHOTOS OF YOUR PENIS TO PORN STARS won’t eventually find their way out in the open? C'mon, man... that's up there on the list of things NOT to do in life. And this comes right after going up against a Sicilian when death is on the line.]

C’mon, people… there’s absolutely no way to defend Palin for her consistent lack of preparedness. Sure, you can ferret out a nugget of truth from that thoughtless spew she produced. But that’s only because she fell ass-backward into it.

I think my friend Dave Holmes summed it up best on his blog:

Listen: like who you like. You want to worship Sarah Palin? Knock yourself out. This is a free country, obviously due in large part to Paul Revere warning the Redcoats. But don’t pretend she didn’t fuck up her answer to the brutal question “What have you seen so far today, and what are you going to take away from your visit?”

Harrumph!

Music Review: Prince in Concert

Mike Sergott — Tue, 26 Apr 2011 00:18:42 +0000

A review of Prince live at the Los Angeles Forum, April 23, 2011

It’s been 48 hours since I visited “PrinceWorld“… and I still haven’t decided whether it was a good experience or not.

On Saturday night, a group of friends and I attended a Prince roller coaster of a concert at the Great Western Forum – the fourth show in Prince’s 21-night planned run in Los Angeles. Before we get to the verdict, forgive me if I go off on a bit of a tangent…

The dude is just… Delirious.

Before I can talk about the show, I have to comment on the man himself. Prince is just a weird guy. In fact, I am convinced that the Prince from the movie Purple Rain behaves exactly the way the real Prince does… in other words, I picture him running around the halls backstage near-crying between encores, or talking to his band mates only through a pop-up puppet.

Case in point: For as much as I think he makes dog-shit movies, I get a kick out of the stories that director Kevin Smith tells when he’s on the lecture circuit. He tells a particularly lengthy one about how Prince called him to make a documentary of a new album release, during which he recounts a conversation with one of Prince’s handlers:

Kevin Smith: I told her, “I can’t make a documentary.” And she was like, “okay, but he [Prince] really wants you to do it.”

“Ok, but I’m not really cut out for this thing…” and she said, “Kevin, let me explain something to you about Prince… I’ve been working with Prince for many years now, and I can’t go in there and tell him you can’t work on this documentary.”

And I was like, “Why?”

“Because Prince doesn’t comprehend things the way you and I do.”

And I was like, “What do you mean?”

And she was just, like, “Well, Prince has been living in ‘Prince-World’ for quite some time now… so, Prince will come to us periodically and say things like, ‘It’s three in the morning in Minnesota. I really need a camel. Go get it.’ And then we try to explain to Prince things like, ‘Prince, it’s three o’clock in the morning in Minnesota. It’s January. And you want a camel. That is not physically – or psychologically – possible.’ And Prince says, ‘Why?’”

Money Don’t Matter 2 Night

That seems about right to me. And after this Saturday night’s concert, even moreso.

So when Prince woke up one morning and told his people he was ready to do a new tour, I imagine it went something like this:

Prince: (clapping, and then talking through his pop-up hand puppet) Attention, people. Prince is ready to go on tour.

Prince’s manager (PM): What? That’s amazing, Prince! Let’s do it.

Prince: Yeah, but Prince doesn’t want to play his music.

PM: I’ll get on the phone with Ticketmaster, and we’ll… um, say what now, puppet?

Prince: You heard me. That’s the old Prince. The Prince who sinned. The Prince who had not yet purified himself in the waters of Lake Minnetonka.

PM: Um, so what do you (Prince leers at his manager and directs attention to the puppet)… I mean what does he want to play?

Prince: Prince wants to revisit his R&B funk roots… teach this generation about the true masters. That reminds me. Call Larry Graham and see if he’s free.

PM: Um… who?

Prince: (sigh) Larry Graham, from Sly and the Family Stone.

PM: (silent and mouth agape)

Prince: Um, he’s only the greatest bass guitarist of all time.

PM: Really? Better than Geddy Lee or Phil Lesh?

Prince: Who?

PM: Nevermind. I’ll call.

Prince: Prince figures he’ll do some Sly… maybe some Kool & the Gang… some Michael Jackson… Joe Simon… Wild Cherry… Chaka Khan… he may even throw in some Bob Dylan. ‘Make You Feel My Love,’ I think.

PM: (thinking, but daring not to say it alound: who the fuck is Joe Simon??) Um… okay. But Prince puppet, the people will want to hear actual PRINCE songs.

Prince: (Sigh) Are we going to get into this again? You make him upset when you say those things. Fine, maybe he’ll play Mountains, Insatiable, Adore… hmmm… maybe Sometimes It Snows in April. Oh, and while we’re on the subject, Prince wants to do 21 shows in Los Angeles.

PM: Holy shit.

Prince: Please no dot curse in his presence. That is the talk of the devil… nothing more.

PM: (again, thinking… this is the same guy who used to go around calling himself a Sexy Mutherfucker, right? Ok, just checking.) Sorry, puppet. Sorry, Prince.

Prince: And he wants them all to be at the L.A. Forum.

PM: Why???

Prince: Because Prince saw Earth, Wind and Fire play there.

PM: (speechless)

Prince: Oh, and make most of the tickets $25.

PM: Okay, but Prince… if you want to draw fans, you need to play your hits. Purple Rain… or Let’s Go Crazy… or…

Prince: (finally speaking on his own) I get it. Fine. I’ll play them… but I’ll let the fans do most of the singing.

PM: One last thing… if you plan to play your hits… and some of your lesser-known stuff… AND a tribute to all of those funk pioneers, um… well, that’s going to be one long show.

Prince: It’s fine. Some nights I’ll keep playing until they throw us out. Some nights I’ll just quit early. Whatever.

PM: Okay, but if the fans are clamoring for the hits, will you change the show as time goes on?

Prince: The who?

PM: The fans, Prince.

Prince: Pssh… this isn’t about them. It’s about the music.

Let’s Go Crazy

And that’s the best way I can describe the marathon concert that was adrenaline-packed peaks and confounding valleys. I think Prince essentially got tired of conducting jam sessions in his paisley Minnesota mansion and wanted to be closer to some Inglewood soul food options (the only reason I can think of for opting to play in the seriously acoustically-challenged Forum).

I remain convinced that Prince simply does not like the music he created in the ‘80s and ‘90s because it represents his pre-Jehovah’s Witness self: a foul-mouthed, oversexed sinner. I think he would rather not play any of that at all in order to demonstrate his own personal maturation. I also think he simply doesn’t like that style anymore and prefers the ’70s sound. To prove my point, he opened the concert by reaching into his old school bag o’ tricks for the aforementioned lengthy collaboration with Larry Graham (see end of this article for a full set list from the show) – an odd choice, since it kept the crowd idling and the overall energy from truly ratcheting up. Don’t get me wrong – Prince is as powerful behind the guitar as ever, and Graham is indeed a legend on bass. But people were dying for old school Prince, and the dribs and drabs he provided only served to frustrate more than appease. I think Prince believed he was being the crafty showman, leaving the people always wanting more at every interval in the show. But all too often, people sat in their seats, content to be “educated’ while they checked their phones or held conversations with their neighbor.

Of course, then a familiar lick would play, and the crowd would get whipped into a frenzy instantly. It took over an hour, but Prince finally delivered with a consecutive string that included Let’s Go Crazy, Delirious, 1999, Little Red Corvette, and Purple Rain. But for such a master showman, Prince demonstrated a lack of ability to read his audience, and after each fierce burst, he’d sap the room of its momentum by playing something obscure, or turning the stage over to his backup singers for 10 minutes, or playing a string of ballads.

To go back to the religious angle again, I think Prince played the music because he felt it was a necessary evil to keep the crowd in their seats while he played what he wanted. The hits were rushed, and the majority were never played through to their entirety (especially frustrating was the first encore, which featured a medley: When Doves Cry / Nasty Girl / Sign ‘O The Times / The Most Beautiful Girl In The World / Darling Nikki / Single Ladies / Hot Thing / I Would Die 4 U). Songs like Darling Nikki and Nasty Girl would get knowing smirks after the first few notes, a disapproving shake of Prince’s reformed head, and an immediate cut to the next track. Even the songs he did play – like Little Red Corvette – featured lyric changes and ballad intros that seemed out of place. Or, even more frustrating, Prince would dissociate himself from his hits by singing very little of them… leaving that task to both his backup singers and the audience. If I had wanted to hear myself sing Prince, I could’ve just stayed home (since I do that a lot anyway).

Arrogance

In addition to his musical choices, Prince teased the audience mercilessly in other ways – including lowering the house lights three times before coming on stage, just to get everyone to cheer. At the end of our concert, the house lights came up after the second encore – during which half the arena left. Not sure why, since reviews of previous shows had alerted folks that Prince has a tendency to make people wait and come back out – which is exactly what happened. After the 5-10 minute delay, Prince came back out for about 30 more minutes. Although, once again, it was to deliver non Prince music… an odd reward for the hangers-on.

Not everyone was that fortunate. The night before, I’d read that instead of coming out for additional encores, Prince simply rode around the stage for a few minutes on a girl’s bicycle… only to disappear again for the rest of the night.

All that, and yet he’s still an Irresistable Bitch

As a diehard Prince fan, I guess my own lofty expectations let me down more than Prince himself did. After all, he delivered a concert that ran over three hours (when was the last time an artist played that long?). And it was indeed “real music by real musicians” as Prince had promised, and not canned, synthetic, pre-recorded crap (and his band is exceptionally good).

And despite his liberal dancing, there was no signs of lip-synching or an out of breath Prince.

And he did play a lot of his hits among the 30 or so he delivered – and that includes some of the old school songs that may not have registered for some, including Controversy and Sometimes it Snows in April (a personal favorite).

And simply put: Prince still has got it, musically speaking. Whereas we’ve seen some “past their prime” artists wheeze through sets or skip the old stand-by’s that require greater range or fizzle at the end due to lack of stamina (yeah, I’m looking your way on all three of those, Dave Gahan), Prince looks better than he did 20 years ago. He looked like he could’ve played 2 more hours without breaking a sweat, and demonstrated the same range as ever.

All the Critics Love U in New York

So, what’s the verdict? Well, I guess more than anything, I miss the Prince I saw during the “O(+>” days, when he sang each song with manic sexual energy, gyrated all over the stage, and told everyone with an angry growl that – directly contrary to this concert – he did not “come to funk around.” I suppose I just miss that sexy motherfucker more than I thought I would.

It should be noted that the absolute highlight of the night was not Prince, but Sheila E (who has been playing with him a lot on the tour). Her ‘Glamorous Life‘ brought the house down. It was a mind-blowingly impressive performance, and a stark contrast to the “new” Prince’s still-smooth-as-ever-but-unfortunately-reserved persona. A little more of Sheila E’s fire would’ve been most welcome throughout the concert.

Sheila E: A+

The rest of the concert: I liked it, but in Prince’s own words, it just wasn’t enough for me to use that magical-mysterious-intoxicating-joy-fantastic-fascinating word called love. B-

The Setlist for April 23, 2011

D.M.S.R.
Pop Life
Musicology
Extraordinary
Mountains (with Sheila E.)
Everyday People (with Sheila E. and Larry Graham)
Thank You (with Sheila E. and Larry Graham)
Sweet Thing (with Chaka Khan)
The Glamorous Life (Sheila E. lead vocals)
Raspberry Beret
Cream
Cool / Don’t Stop ‘Til You Get Enough
Make You Feel My Love
Misty Blue (Shelby J. lead vocals)
Let’s Go Crazy
Delirious (with Let’s Go Crazy Reprise)
1999
Little Red Corvette
Purple Rain

Encore:

When Doves Cry / Nasty Girl / Sign ‘O The Times / The Most Beautiful Girl In The World / Darling Nikki / Single Ladies / Hot Thing / I Would Die 4 U (Sampler medley)
If I Was Your Girlfriend
Insatiable
Scandalous
Adore

Encore 2:

Kiss

Encore 3:

Sometimes It Snows In April
Dreamer (with Welcome 2 America interpolation)
Controversy (with Housequake interpolation)

Encore 4:

A Love Bizarre (with Sheila E.)
Play That Funky Music White Boy
Hollywood Swinging (changed to Inglewood Swinging)

“Scream 4″ (D)

Mike Sergott — Mon, 18 Apr 2011 19:19:11 +0000

Starring: Neve Campbell, Emma Roberts, Hayden Panettiere, Courteney Cox, David Arquette, Rory Culkin

Directed by Wes Craven

Running time: 1:46

I’ve seen a lot of really moronic horror films in my time, including ones with Killer Klowns, homicidal ventriloquist dummies, an evil severed hand that falls from space, and Halloween III. So, no, I won’t call Scream 4 (aka Scre4m) dumb, even though there are plot holes so big, the combined plot holes from Scream 2 and Scream 3 could drive through them.

And I’ve seen some lazy horror movies, including the unending Friday the 13th sequels. So, no, I won’t call Scream 2 the laziest movie I’ve ever seen… although it comes close.

What I will saddle Scream 4 with is the title of Most Boring Horror Movie I’ve ever seen. Seriously, what does it say when my wife – who gets scared watching Kenny die on South Park – breezes through this movie like a walk in a Woodsboro park?

Maybe it’s because we know almost every single moment before it happened – not because we were so savvy, per se, but because the new movie “borrows” so liberally from the initial installment of the series.

Scream 4 makes no bones about its source material. Upon the return of uber-survivor Sidney Prescott (Neve Campbell) to her hometown of Woodsboro, the new Ghostface has decided to recreate the killings/ chaos of so many years ago.

We get tons of admonishments re how you “don’t fuck with the original” from the characters, and endless movie-within-a-movie references that already grow old during the film’s lame opening sequence (oh, and by the way guys… we get it. It’s “meta.” You don’t have to keep using the word “meta” like you’re Charlie Kaufmann at a screenwriting symposium).

“What’s your favorite scary movie?” “Um… not Scream 4.”

And so it begins. We have Sidney once again tormented, bumbling sheriff Dewey (Arquette) still… well, bumbling… and nosy reporter Gale Weathers (Cox, whose face is stretched so tight by cosmetic surgery she now has a disturbingly-wide Joker grin) trying to make a buck off everyone else’s trauma. And of course, what would a horror movie be without an abundant crop of teens to slaughter? Since Campbell is now 38, we’re introduced to her younger cousin and pals. Of course, they say snarky things that are way too thoughtful for kids their age, and they’re way too defiant in the face of imminent danger (seriously, a confirmed killer is on the loose so you go to a friend’s house with no adult supervision, get drunk and watch the movie that’s based on the confirmed killer who is on the loose? Really?).

You just hope they all die as soon as possible so you can go home and watch something tasteful and well done. Like The Hills Have Eyes.

Director Craven and writer Kevin Williamson try to make this seem as if it isn’t a 1990 retread by throwing around references to modern media – the killer texts at times instead of calls, one student vlogs his whole school experience, apparently, and the murders are uploaded to the Internet (someone should explain the concept of traceable IP addresses to Williamson… but I digress).

The Verdict

The original was a game changing horror film because it poked fun at tired convention and created something new and different. It’s sad that this latest installment – which actually makes fun of sequels and horror movies for the same old plots being done to death – is as lazy and boring as any horror movie I’ve seen in a very long time. Mike’s rating: D

But don’t just take my word for it…

The average Metacritic score was 53 out of 100 (“Mixed or average reviews).”

[Rated R for “strong bloody violence, language and some teen drinking.”]