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 Wed, 9 Aug 2006 19:20:42 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/2006/08/09/192042.php vjackI have been a fan of Slayer since the groundbreaking 1986 release of Reign in Blood. They are one of the only thrash bands from this era that has remained true to the style of music they helped to create. I have every album they've released from Show No Mercy to the brand new Christ Illusion; I listen to them all regularly.Many of the songs on Christ Illusion would have been right at home on their last album, God Hates Us All. Examples include "Catalyst," "Skeleton Christ," "Cult," and "Supremist." The tone is angry, the subject matter is often anti-Christian, and the tempo is fast. Other tracks remind me of Divine Intervention ("Black Serenade"), South of Heaven ("Catatonic"), and Seasons in the Abyss ("Eyes of the Insane"). Fans of the more overtly Satanic imagery from Slayer's early albums will not find much of that here, other than "Black Serenade". However, Slayer continues their attack on religion from God Hates Us All into Christ Illusion.To make sense of Slayer's lyrics, one must remember that Slayer was one of the first influential bands to blend punk and metal in a unique style of thrash metal. Some would call them a thrash band, others would call them a death metal band, and both would be right. Their dark lyrics (especially on the earlier albums) are filled with typical death metal imagery inspired by a love of horror films and military history. Slayer writes from the point of view of the killer, and many people mistake this for an endorsement of what the killer is doing. They were wrongly criticized for being Nazis after Reign in Blood's "Angel of Death." Songs like "Jihad" will be misinterpreted as suggesting that Slayer is pro-terrorist, but this only reflects the ignorance of the listener.So, how does this album compare to the rest? If I had to rate Slayer's full-length studio albums from favorite to least favorite, my list would look something like this:1. Reign in Blood2. Seasons in the Abyss3. South of Heaven4. God Hates Us All5. Christ Illusion6. Live Undead7. Hell Awaits8. Show No Mercy9. Diabolus in Musica10. Divine Intervention11. Undisputed AttitudePutting these in order is quite difficult, but at least you can see where I believe Christ Illusion fits relative to other albums. This is a good one that will not disappoint Slayer fans. Music51390@blogcritics.org Wed, 9 Aug 2006 19:20:42 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2006/08/09/144517.php vjackI finally got around to seeing The God Who Wasn't There, and I thought I'd share my impressions in case others hadn't heard of it or were trying to decide whether it was worthwhile. In case you haven't heard of this film, here is a reasonably accurate synopsis from Netflix:Borrowing the lively approach of documentaries such as Fahrenheit 9/11 and Super-Size Me, ex-Christian fundamentalist Brian Flemming's expose shines an unflinching spotlight on Christianity and the existence of Christ. Flemming interviews religious experts and Christians of varying backgrounds, ultimately asserting that Jesus Christ is more than likely a fictional character based on legend and that Christian doctrine is rife with contradiction.I was really looking forward to this one even though I was surprised to discover that the film's running time was only a little over an hour. My initial impressions were not particularly positive, as the first ten to fifteen minutes of the film were little more than a collage of obscure movie clips relating the Jesus myth. I was reminded more of Schoolhouse Rocks than Fahrenheit 9/11. The poor production quality, awful music, and odd narration made me feel like I was watching a bad student film.To say that things improved from this point would be an understatement. Once it got going, I was pleasantly surprised by the turnaround. The interviews with Richard Carrier, Sam Harris, and others were outstanding. It was almost as if the director thought that viewers would be bored by these interviews and felt a need to add bad music, B-movie clips, and even cartoons to entertain. This was a bad decision, as the interviews were the highlight of the film and really made it worthwhile.Where the director deserves the most praise is his structuring of the argument presented in the second half of the film -- that Jesus was likely a fictional character and there are many compelling historical reasons to doubt the veracity of the Bible. The data presented here are not widely known and difficult to refute.The bonus features on the DVD include extended interviews with most of the scholars interviewed in the film. The interviews with Harris and Carrier were reason enough to buy or rent the DVD. The director asks the very questions I would like to ask and received outstanding answers. I become more impressed with these guys with every interview I see.In summary, this is a film that should be seen by all atheists and agnostics. Despite its flaws, it is likely that you will enjoy it. Of course, I think it would be great if most Christians would see this film, too. More than any film I have seen in the past few years, this is one I am dying to loan out to anyone who I can get to watch it. Video51371@blogcritics.org Wed, 9 Aug 2006 14:45:17 EDT