http://blogcritics.org/ A sinister cabal of superior bloggers on music, books, film, popular culture, politics, and technology - updated continuously. en Copyright 2005-2007 by the authors Fri, 9 Jul 2004 19:33:03 EDT http://backend.userland.com/rss Blogcritics.org custom software http://blogcritics.org/ Phillip WinnSunday, August 26, 2007, marks the switch of all Blogcritics.org article feeds from full-content to short-content. This is the result of several converging factors, and is unfortunately a permanent decision (as permanent as any decision can be on the web, that is). We are aware of all of the reasons that this is a Bad Idea, and we are aware that some of you will be quite upset about having to click on something to read the free content, and we're sorry. Unfortunately, despite great effort, full-content feeds are not currently economically viable. Two other factors are involved: full-content feeds have resulted in an unprecedented level of content theft, with BC content appearing on many websites, usually spam sites, without attribution or permission. This duplicate content causes a cascading set of problems, not the least of which is that search engines generally aren't favorable to duplicate content, and don't always guess correctly. Finally, our RSS advertising partner is strongly in favor of short-content feeds. We hope that you'll continue to subscribe to BC via RSS, and when an article grabs your eye, it's only a click away, still free on the BC website. Thank you for your understanding. Administration0@blogcritics.org Sun, 26 Aug 2007 12:00:00 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/07/09/193303.php Brian DearThe floor is sticky in spots. The seats you wanted are taken, but the second best are available, so you take them and sit down. The smell of other people's popcorn is strong and unpleasant. The auditorium is still lit as more people come in and sit down. The screen is showing advertisements, still images from a slide projector. Now it's an ad for refreshing Coca-Cola. Now it's an ad for Lenscrafters. Now it's an ad for some greasy bar-b-q restaurant. You haven't been paying attention to the music coming over the speakers --- it's that typical AMC Movie Tunes dreck. Songs that appear to be beautiful but lack any beauty or genuine feeling. Songs with a squeaky model's voice, a voice that does not do the songs justice, if the songs had any redeeming value to begin with, juxtaposed to Lenscrafters and Coca-Cola.This is supposed to be a review of Katie Melua's new CD Call off the Search, but I'm finding it difficult to write anything positive. I did not like this CD. In a nutshell, Kate Melua has chosen material that she has no credibility singing. These are not the tunes she's looking for. These are not the tunes people are going to find her with. Her voice is thin and weak, all style but no substance. There's no energy, no experience, no emotion that sounds real or heartfelt. And there's the problem of her age (19): singing songs that older people can relate to, but when sung by her, sound like some slightly creepy appearance of a teenage kid on American Idol or Star Search singing the blues or some kind of subject matter that only makes sense when the singer's swung a few more times around the sun.For instance, one song, called The Closest Thing to Crazy, she sings, "how can you treat me like a child?" Well, I can imagine a few reasons. She sings, "feeling 22, acting 17..." How about we split the difference: 19. I sound like an old coot but hell, go listen if you have to. Close your eyes. Lenscrafters.The music is well-produced, well-recorded, don't get me wrong. It's just that the songs are tedious. The voice is completely phony, rendering the listening experience an ordeal, not a moment of joy.But all is not lost. I have the perfect antidote to Call Off the Search: it's listening to K.D. Lang stunning performance of Crying off of her LIVE BY REQUEST album. Now there is a woman with a voice, and passion, and dramatic delivery. That is a performance that inspires awe. A performance that is so incredibly powerful, by the end you'll have to immediately play the song over again for a closer listen. You'll be wondering, did you really hear what you thought you heard? And are those tears in your eyes?Try it. Run, go find a copy of Lang's performance. Listen closely. Turn the volume WAY UP. I guarantee you'll have completely forgotten about Melua's CD like I have. Music17289@blogcritics.org Fri, 9 Jul 2004 19:33:03 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/11/15/134833.php Brian DearApple's got this QuickTime movie preview running for a new movie by called 21 Grams from Focus Features. Sean Penn's in it. Benicio Del Toro's in it. Naomi Watts is in it. It's directed by Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu. The movie's supposed to be pretty good.I really really hope so, because the preview's been driving me up the frickin' wall more each time I'm forced to sit through it. It's been showing in theatres around town seemingly before every bloody film I choose to go see."They say we all lose twenty-one grams at the exact moment of our death," the preview narrator's voice (sounding an awful lot like Sean Penn) announces. "Everyone," he continues, "twenty-one grams. The weight of a stack of five nickels. The weight of a chocolate bar. The weight of a hummingbird."Let's see. "A stack of five nickels." Did you know that a nickel weighs exactly what two dimes weigh? That means a stack of five nickels weighs the same as a stack of ten dimes Now, according to the logic of the universe where Focus Features comes from, such a stack weighs twenty-one grams. They're close. A single nickel is 4.5 grams (whereas a dime is 2.25). So a stack of five very clean nickels would weigh 22.5 grams. Alright. So they're off by 1.5 grams. Here, let me stamp your dramatic license.But wait. "The weight of a chocolate bar." A very, very small chocolate bar. Did you know that there are 28.35 grams in one ounce? When was the last time you bought a chocolate bar that weighed less than an ounce? Read the full story here: http://www.brianstorms.com/archives/000215.html. Video10154@blogcritics.org Sat, 15 Nov 2003 13:48:33 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/11/05/202953.php Brian DearTech Billionaires Team Together to Buy Warner Brothers Film StudioGroup Plans to Hire New Scriptwriters, Director, and Re-Shoot The Matrix Revolutions Next WeekHollywood, CA /DenounceNewswire/ -- 5 November 2003 -- In the most dramatic and expensive takeover in film industry history, a group of high-tech billionaires, including Bill Gates, Paul Allen, Steve Ballmer, Steve Jobs, Pierre Omidyar, and Larry Ellison, announced today the acquisition of the Warner Brothers film studio and film catalogue, as well as three other companies, with one stated purpose: to remake The Matrix Revolutions. READ THE FULL DENOUNCE.COM STORY HERE Sci/Tech9863@blogcritics.org Wed, 5 Nov 2003 20:29:53 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/10/04/124022.php Brian DearIn Part Two of my continuing series Nettle vs ACLU, I describe the latest correspondence between me and the ACLU's officers. But first, I take on the Sierra Club's junk mail.Here's an excerpt from my article: While I know the ACLU doesn't believe the Sierra Club got my name and address from them, I am satisfied (based on the investigation I undertook, contacting a number of nonprofits who confirmed they got my info from ACLU) that indeed that's precisely what happened. But there's no point wasting time over that; we'll just have to agree to disagree. So how do deal with Sierra Club junk mail? There are number of ways. Here's one.One Way of Dealing With Sierra Club Junk Mail I was disappointed to see another envelope from the Sierra Club, complete with a typeface on the front of the envelope making it look like it was handwritten. I opened the envelope. Inside was a cover letter, a flyer about near-extinct species (which made me think, "Once you annoy a potential contributor, they're lost forever..."), an ad for some outdoor hiking gear, two stickers, a membership card, two petitions I was supposed to sign, and a bunch more items. I must confess I didn't read any of it. Imagine how much money Sierra Club would save if they didn't cut down so many trees to send out such huge volumes of unwanted junk mail to people who in good faith joined the ACLU not realizing doing so meant they'd be bombarded with solicitations from all these other nonprofits? Oops. Big mistake. They sent a Business Reply Mail letter with the postage already paid. Now, what should be done about that. Let's see. Huh? Who me? What evil grin? First, pile all the junk mail together. Ah, but notice they've made the return envelope slightly smaller than the junk that was sent. Not a problem. Scissors to the rescue! Trim off edges so all the stuff will fit in the return envelope. Jam it all in there. Loud organ music and mutters of "muu-ha-ha-ha" optional. Ah, now doesn't that feel better? Some day next week, some poor schlepper at the Sierra Club will be scratching their head. Note the simulated handwritten plea at the upper left. My reply: "If you stopped sending out unwanted junk mail you would save even more much-needed funds."For the full story, including the latest email from ACLU, and my latest reply to them, click here.Copyright © 2003 Brian L. Dear. All Rights Reserved. Culture8901@blogcritics.org Sat, 4 Oct 2003 12:40:22 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2002/10/04/002920.php Brian DearPart Six of an ongoing review of the Netflix service. Read the story on Nettle here. Video1067@blogcritics.org Fri, 4 Oct 2002 00:29:20 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2002/10/02/144929.php Brian DearThere's a growing trend in media websites: newspaper and magazine print ads are starting to appear online in their full print glory. I think this is just swell. Read the story at nettle.com. Culture1034@blogcritics.org Wed, 2 Oct 2002 14:49:29 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2002/09/27/141837.php Brian DearI've had Jaguar for about a week. This is one user's saga dealing with Jaguar and Apple's shenanigans. Culture954@blogcritics.org Fri, 27 Sep 2002 14:18:37 EDT