Search

Search only in certain items:

40x40

Justin Young recommended track Who Are You? by Void in Side B by Void in Music (curated)

 
Side B by Void
Side B by Void
1980 | Punk
(0 Ratings)
Album Favorite

Who Are You? by Void

(0 Ratings)

Track

"When I was about thirteen an older friend of mine made me a tape of DC hardcore. Making tapes is a lost art and I still do it, but you can get USB’s now that look like tapes. He made me a tape because I only knew Minor Threat and they were like a gateway drug for me. “This was the first song on there, it’s from the split record Void did on Dischord Records with The Faith in 1983. It’s funny, when Freddie was talking about what he liked and didn’t like, when you’re that age you’re constantly navigating through the sea of songs you actually really connect with and the ones you think you should like, because they make sense with the identity you’re trying to cultivate for yourself and I was floored by ‘Who Are You?’ “It’s everything that’s great about Punk Rock and everything that’s great about music when you’re a kid, that rage and that anger and also feeling completely misunderstood by everyone in your house, your family, your school or your hometown. I read that Kurt Cobain put this in his top 50 songs of all time and of course that makes sense, it’s a song about being misunderstood and that’s what Nirvana came to represent for another generation. “It’s Punk Rock at its best and like The Stooges song for Freddie, this really taught me that it’s not what you play it’s how you play it, as long as you’re being authentic, and Punk Rock is just authentic rock isn’t it? I was in a punk band and my first shows were in Southampton above a pub for this DIY collective called ‘STE’ - which stood for ‘Southampton, Totton and Eastleigh punk collective.’ Students got in for a quid and under 16’s got in free. It was great, there weren’t many women, but other than that it was a great way to ply your trade. “I’ll play it to you and when you hear the opening you’ll see what I mean. It’s this intro, this riff, it still excites me now, it’s just so brutal and the song’s a minute long. It’s so direct and to me it’s weirdly poppy as well, maybe I’m alone in thinking that, but it was a song that was really easy to connect with. It’s filled with rage and it’s one of those songs that you want to turn up so your parents can hear who you are and see where you are in your life."

Source
  
40x40

Duff McKagan recommended Clash by The Clash in Music (curated)

 
Clash by The Clash
Clash by The Clash
1977 | Rock
8.6 (5 Ratings)
Album Favorite

"I got that record from my brother-in-law for Christmas - we have this huge family and so we were picking names from a hat and whoever you got the name of you bought a present for. My brother-in-law was this cool fucking dude who listened to college radio and he got me that first Clash record and I got to see them later that year so I guess it was Christmas 1978. We had the US version, it was just called The Clash with the green cover – you knew that if you were American, 'cos we were like, ""we cant get the real fucking English version"" - I mean they had it on import, but it was so expensive. I don’t know what my musical life would have been like if I didn’t get to see that gig. It was really exotic for that band to come and play Seattle. The whole Seattle community was there and it was probably only 200 people but it felt like everybody in the world was there. I remember there was this wooden barrier and this security guy in front of the pit who didn’t know how to deal with a punk rock audience, and he just decked this kid and broke his nose and The Clash just stopped the gig. And Paul Simonon or someone grabbed an axe and broke down the barrier! And I remember Joe Strummer saying, ""there’s no difference between us and you guys, these barriers and shit are separating us"", and it suddenly dawned on me. They were totally against the whole rock star thing, like there’s not us and there’s you, it was like we were all in this together. I guess I’d be lying if I said in the nineties I didn’t have… not ‘punk rock guilt’ exactly, but there would be a lot of bands that came up, like Soundgarden and Pearl Jam, there were guys who were in the punk rock scene and this was what was next, and as a young dude you feel a little guilty when you’re suddenly selling millions of records. But no-one sold their soul or changed their fucking tune, this was what evolved out of punk rock. Looking back it was a natural progression. Guns was a mix of a lot of different input, punk rock, seventies rock, and it was about doing something different and maybe that’s what punk rock sounded like at that point, I don’t know (laughs). I mean Guns was as DIY as it got, we would hitchhike 1,200 miles to get to a gig but we just went to the next level in getting a major label deal, that was the big change. But I took that ethic with me that Strummer had said. I don’t know any different, I’m honoured to be playing gigs and I’ve always paid tribute to that way of thinking."

Source
  
40x40

Kristy H (1252 KP) rated Blueprints in Books

Feb 13, 2018  
B
Blueprints
6
6.0 (1 Ratings)
Book Rating
Caroline MacAfee is a divorced carpenter; one who has kept her last name because she is still part of the well-known MacAfee family, which owns MacAfee Homes, a popular business in their town. Caroline is also host of the popular TV show "Gut It" (think something on DIY or HGTV) - that is until she's told she's too old to host the show the day after her 56th birthday. The network wants a new host: Caroline's 29-year-old daughter, Jamie MacAfee, an architect with the family company. Pushing for the change is Caroline's ex-husband, Roy, and her ex-father-in-law, Theo. The news rattles Caroline and upsets the foundation of her happy mother/daughter relationship with Jamie.

But everyone's life is further upended when Roy and his new wife die suddenly on a stormy night, leaving MacAfee Homes without its charismatic marketing lead and Jamie to deal with sudden guardianship of her toddler half-brother, Tad. Quickly, she must navigate life as a new mom; deal with the impact of motherhood on her relationship with her fiance; juggle the impact on her work, especially with her father no longer with the company; and try to heal her fractured relationship with Caroline.

If it sounds like there is a lot going on in this novel, there is. Yet, it seemed like it got off to a slow start. I almost put the book aside for some others on my "to-read" list until I got to the accident and things picked up. After that, even if parts of the plot and the characters' actions irked me, the book itself breezed by, and I found myself wanting to finish it quickly.

One of my biggest pet peeves with this novel was all of the talk of sex. I am no prude and have no issues with sex being in a novel, when appropriate. In this book, it seemed like it was inserted just because. Delinsky made several veiled references to "50 Shades of Grey" (the characters were reading it, for instance) and it almost seemed as if, because of that, it felt necessary to insert dialogue about sex, sex scenes, and more. Caroline and Jamie's discussions of sex, Caroline's discussions of sex with her friend, Annie - they were all painful and came across as extremely stilted. In fact, several times, it seemed like the characters were having various conversations to make sure we really, really knew how they felt about certain things, when, truly, if Delinksy would have just let the plot unfold naturally, it would have all come out on its own. It was a little unnatural and forced.

Speaking of said plot, it is a Delinsky novel, so be prepared that it will all seem a little fantastical at times. I would have liked to have been reading this novel on the beach - it's the perfect beach read where you can just suspend real life for a little while and get caught up in a slightly unrealistic plot.

That being said, Caroline and Jamie are fairly likable characters. They grow on you. I found myself empathizing with Jamie and her struggles with working motherhood, for instance. If you go in expecting a fun, silly book, you won't be disappointed.

(Note: I received an ARC of this book via the Goodreads First Reads program in return for an unbiased review.)
  
Next Door
Next Door
Matt Shaw | 2021 | Horror
8
8.0 (1 Ratings)
Book Rating
82 of 250
Kindle
Next Door
Compiled by Matt Shaw

Once read a review will be written via Smashbomb and link posted in comments

From the mind behind "MASTERS OF HORROR" comes a new horror anthology to keep you up at night!

Whilst Matt Shaw is busy producing, writing and directing the feature film NEXT DOOR he decided to put together a horror anthology of the same name, and with the same theme as the motion picture. None of the stories in this collection feature in the film; the two products are completely separate other than the central concept of exploring who does live NEXT DOOR to us?

Given the fact these are some of the biggest names in horror, you can bet that whomever is living next door probably won't be the friendliest of characters...

The year is 2019 and technology has come so far that we spend more time staring at our mobile devices, and screens in general, than getting to know our next door neighbour. Gone are the days of knowing everyone who lives on the same street, or in the same village. Instead we leave our houses, avoid eye-contact or give the bare minimum of grunts to those we see and go about our daily lives without a care for anyone else. No more street parties, no more kindly neighbours checking in on you, no more Christmas cards from the little old lady who lives across the street. There's only "us" and our technology.

This anthology takes a look at who lives NEXT DOOR and what secrets they may be keeping. And who knows, maybe it will serve as warning to you that, really, you should be paying attention to those living close-by. After all, Fred West was someone's neighbour once...

Featuring stories by:
Tim Lebbon
Shaun Hutson
Ryan C. Thomas
Jeremy Bates
David Moody
Guy N. Smith
Matthew Stokoe
Justin Woodward
Gary McMahon
Rich Hawkins
Jim Goforth
Matt Shaw


1. A Family-Friendly Neighbourhood by Ryan C Thomas
This was actually quite funny and sweet in a gruesome clever way. All the toys turning into little knife wielding creepy thing only to find out they are their kids souls! They just want to be together 😂

2. Final Feast by Guy N. Smith

Quick little story of the cannibal next door! I loved it!

3. Insurgents by Rich Hawkins

A story of a war ruined mind, a soldier dealing with his demons. Well written just not my normal read.

4. Mirror Image by David Moody

A couple move into a new house with an extra handy neighbour. I enjoyed this one funny how my husband is so crap at DIY too 😂😂

5. Neighbour Hood by Tim Lebbon

Omg this has to be the creepiest one so far and the whole reason I never use my attics’!!!

6. Dinner Date by Jeremy Bates

A bit slower than the others think I just got a little bored. Never accept dinner invitations before getting to know the guy no matter how hot he is! Silly girl!

7. Why Does Randolph Draw by Matthew Stokeoe

Got to be honest I didn’t finish it I just got so bored after page 5! Just wasn’t catching me.

8. Saturday Night Whiskey by Justin M.Woodward

This was really god and well put together a kids last cry for help from his dodgy uncle!

9. Sixteen by Jim Goforth

This felt so rushed even for a short story! Although it’s a good lesson of don’t get involved with swinging neighbours 😂

10. Pornography by Matt Saw

Haha she didn’t see that coming

11. Somewhere in Here by Gary McMahon

This was one creepy ass story and for one so short I’m throughly creeped out!!

12 By Darkness Hidden by Shaun Hutson

This was pretty good a urban legend type story. Villages can be super strange places.

I really enjoyed this compilation got some great new authors added to my list too.
  
Mother! (2017)
Mother! (2017)
2017 | Drama, Horror, Mystery
Welcome to the Crystal Maze.
Darren Aronosfsky’s mother! is like no other film you’ll see this year: guaranteed. As a film lover, an Aronosfsky film is a bit like root canal at the dentist: you know you really need to go ahead and do it, but you know you’re not going to be very comfortable in the process.
Jennifer Lawrence (“Passengers“, “Joy“) plays “mother!” doing up a dilapidated old house in the middle of nowhere with her much older husband “Him” (Javier Bardem, “Skyfall”). he (sorry…. He) is a world-famous poet struggling to overcome a massive writing block. The situation is making things tense between the couple, and things get worse when He inexplicably invites a homeless couple “man” (Ed Harris, “Westworld”, “The Truman Show”) and “woman” (Michelle Pfeiffer, “Stardust”) to stay at the house. As things go progressively downhill, is mother losing her mind or is all the crazy stuff going on actually happening?

Jennifer Lawrence can do no wrong at the moment, and her complexion in the film is flawless: it needs to be, since she has the camera constantly about 3 inches from her face for large chunks of the movie: I sat in the very back row, and I still wasn’t far enough away! Her portrayal of a house-proud woman getting progressively more and more irritated by her guests’ inconsiderate acts – a glass? without a table mat??! – is a joy to watch. As her DIY ‘paradise’ is progressively sullied my ‘man’ and ‘woman’, so her distress grows exponentially.

Some of the supporting acting is also superb, with Ed Harris and particularly Michelle Pfeiffer enjoying themselves immensely. Also worthy of note are the brothers played by real-life brothers Brian Gleeson and Domhnall Gleeson: the latter must never sleep since he must be *constantly* on set at the moment. One of these guys in particular is very abel! (sic).

Whereas the trailer depicts this as a kind of normal haunted house spookfest, it is actually nothing of the sort: much of the action (although far-fetched) has a reasonably rational explanation (a continuation of my theme of the “physics of horror” from my last two reviews). The film is largely seen through mother!’s eyes, and the skillful cinematographer Matthew Libatique – an Aronosfsky-regular – oppressively and relentlessly delivers a uniquely tense cinematic experience. For me, for the first two thirds of the film at least, it succeeds brilliantly.

Aronosfsky is no shirker of film controversy: having Natalie Portman perform oral sex on Natalie Portman in “Black Swan” was enough to teach you that. But in the final reels of this film, Aronosfsky doesn’t just wind the dial past 10 to the Spinal Tap 11…. he keeps going right on up to 20. There are a few scenes in movies over the years that I wish I could go back and “unsee”, and this film has one of those: a truly upsetting slice of horror, playing to your worst nightmares of loss and despair. While the religious allegory in these scenes is splatted on as heavily as the splodges of mother!’s decorative plaster, they are nonetheless extremely disturbing and bound to massively divide the cinema audience. I think it’s fair to say that this DVD is not going to have “The Perfect Gift for Mother’s Day” as its marketing strapline.

Which all leaves me… where exactly? For the first time in a long time I actually have no idea! This is a film that I was willing to give an “FF” to while I was watching it, but as time has passed and I have thought more on the environmental and religious allegories, and the portrayal of the cult worship prevalent in popular X-factor celebrity, I am warming to it despite my best instincts not to. I’m not religious, but I would love to compare notes on this one with someone with strongly Christian views.
So, I’m actually going to break all the rules (a snake told me to) and not provide any rating below at this time. I might revisit it again at Christmas* to see if I can resolve it in my mind as either a movie masterpiece or over-indulgent codswallop.
* I have, and have decided to give it 4 Fads… its a film I’ve thought about a lot over the last few months.
  
The Hitman's Bodyguard (2017)
The Hitman's Bodyguard (2017)
2017 | Action, Comedy
A plethora of clichés.
2017’s summer blockbusters fizzle to a halt with this formulaic action comedy. Ryan Reynolds (“Deadpool“) plays Michael Bryce: a cocksure “Triple A rated” bodyguard, always planning three steps ahead so that he can protect his clients without killing anyone in the process. With such arrogance, a fall is inevitable. On the other side of the legal scales is Darius Kincaid (Samuel L Jackson, “The Hateful Eight“), a contract killer who always gets his man. But the incarcerated Kincaid is offered a deal to release his equally incarcerated wife Sonia (Selma Hayek) in return for testifying against the fearsome Belarus president Vladislav Dukhovich (Gary Oldman, “Dawn of the Planet of the Apes”), on trial for war crimes at The Hague. An Interpol team led by Bryce’s’s ex-squeeze Amelia Roussel (the striking Elodie Yung) now have to get Kincaid to Belgium unscathed with Dukhovich’s well-trained and well-armed thugs stopping at nothing to ensure he won’t be there to testify. Fate transpires that Bryce and Kincaid become an unlikely team in trying to bring Dukhovich to justice.


After losing your no claims bonus, hysterical laughter is the only way forwards. Ryan Reynolds and Samuel L Jackson.

This is a movie whose script seems to have been glued together from a patchwork of other movie scenes:


– the bad guy / bad guy partner relationship of “The Nice Guys“. Check.
– the street ambush of “Clear and Present Danger”. Check.
– the Amsterdam boat chase of “Puppet on a Chain”. Check.
– the comedic bar-room brawl from “Airplane”. Check.

Many of the action scenes are done with panache and some great stunt work. But it’s all stuff we’ve seen countless times before, so what is needed for differentiation is the relationships between Bryce and Kincaid: this needs to be the cornerstone of the film. But it just doesn’t quite work. Jackson’s contribution is never in doubt, even though we’ve seen this motherf-ing shtick countless times before: he’s still magnetic, charismatic and a joy to watch. But unfortunately Reynolds just doesn’t deliver the acting goods to make the banter believable: there is a reason “Deadpool” is his best film – he wears a mask for most of it! His ‘puppy-dog look’ gets rolled out multiple times, but it’s unconvincing in the extreme. Together they are no match for Gosling/Crowe in “The Nice Guys“.


Nun but the brave. Jackson (if not Reynolds) get happy clappy.


On firmer ground is the quirky relationship between Mr and Mrs Kincaid. Although sharing limited screen time together, Hayek and Jackson spark off each other wonderfully. Seeing Selma Hayek in uncharacteristically sweary and belligerent mode was highly entertaining (although it’s worth commenting that my wife took great offence to the ‘comic’ bullying of an overweight cellmate).


“I had to ask the guy next to me to pinch me to make sure I wasn’t dreaming” – the future Mr and Mrs Kincaid meet in a rough place… the seediest dive on the wharf.


Elsewhere in the acting roll call, Elodie Yung delivers just the right measure of cuteness, toughness and passion as Roussel, but Oldman delivers a full-on retread of his Ivan “Get off my plane” Korshunov from “Air Force One”. There is also a change to Oldman’s character’s face at the end of the film in the form of a rampant skin complaint which is ‘explained’ by a clumsily inserted news item about an “attempted poisoning”: it’s such a clunky and bizarre addition to the script that it made me wonder whether the actor has some unexpected ailment (like shingles) during filming…. but I can see nothing related to this online.


The striking Elodie Yung as the Interpol agent Roussel.


The screenplay by relative newcomer Tom O’Connor bumps along from implausible action scene to implausible action scene, with more that its fair share of ‘WTF’ moments. For example, after a random chase through multiple Amsterdam alleys and shops, Jackson pulls up outside the very DIY shop Reynolds ends up in to pick him up! The script is also tonally uneven throughout: given this is supposed to be an “action comedy” the action is often brutal and unpleasant and the comedy – in the main – just not funny enough. (About the funniest thing in the film are the most ineffective sub machine guns known to man, most notably in the mildly ludicrous, if well staged, boat chase scene!)


An entertaining cameo from Richard E Grant as a businessman in danger.


The film also manages to offend, in more ways than the 15-rated violence and language used: I’m not sure WHEN this movie was actually filmed, but the use of an articulated lorry as a terrorist weapon towards the end of the film is certainly in very poor taste after the events of Nice, London and Barcelona. Not appreciated.
Directed by Patrick Hughes (“The Expendables 3″…. say no more) this hodge-podge of a flick is sporadically entertaining, but is one I will struggle to remember in a couple of months time.
  
40x40

Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Joker (2019) in Movies

Nov 10, 2019  
Joker (2019)
Joker (2019)
2019 | Crime, Drama
Joachim Phoenix - Oscar winning performance? (1 more)
Look and feel of the film - technically brilliant
Use of "that song" (0 more)
A loser's tale.
“Joker” has managed to stir up a whirlwind of controversy, centring partly around the level of violence included but also on the use of “that song” on the soundtrack. But putting aside that flurry of commentary, what of the film itself?

Man, this is a dark film! It’s as much of an anti-superhero film as this year’s “Brightburn“. The Batman legacy has addressed the mental state of the protagonists before (both that of the hero and the villains). Here we have a real study of how a mentally unstable no-hoper can be pushed over the edge by bigotry, carelessness and government cut-backs.

Indeed, there is something alarmingly prescient about the movie’s plot line, watching this as we (in the UK) are in the month of possible (or as Boris Johnson would say, definite) Brexit madness! “Is it me, or is it getting crazier out there?” Arthur Fleck muses to his social worker (Sharon Washington). And a rant by Arthur late on goes “Everybody just yells and screams at each other. Nobody’s civil anymore. Nobody thinks what it’s like to be the other guy. You think men like Thomas Wayne ever think what it’s like to be someone like me? To be somebody but themselves? They don’t. They think that we’ll just sit there and take it, like good little boys! That we won’t werewolf and go wild!” Chilling words as we possibly face a very bumpy October and November in the UK.

After reviewing “Judy” I wouldn’t be the least surprised if I’d just seen the Best Actress award bagged (by Renée Zellweger). Now, with “Joker”, surely Joachim Phoenix might bag his first (and well overdue in my book) Oscar. Although nominated before (for “Gladiator”, “Walk the Line” and “The Master”) he’s never won. Here Phoenix’s physical transformation into Arthur Fleck is SIMPLY EXTRAORDINARY. And the way he captures the (medically) induced fits of helpless laughter, ending in a sort of choking fit, is brilliant and replicated to a ‘T’ on multiple occasions.

I loved “You Were Never Really Here“, primarily due to Phoenix’s pitch-perfect performance. And “Joker” reminded me very much of Lynne Ramsey‘s film: a disturbed loner, looking after his elderly mother; with violence meted out to wrong-doers. Joe is almost the yin to Arthur Fleck’s yang: Joe is an invisible man who is very much present; Arthur is a very visible man who thinks he is invisible. There’s even comment by Fleck towards the end of the film that sometimes he thinks he’s ‘not really there at all’! (A deliberate ‘in’ joke in reference to that film?)

After some pretty piss-poor “pension grabs” in recent years, culminating in the appalling career- nadir of “Dirty Grandpa” in 2016, Robert De Niro comes good with a fine performance as the idolised but thoughtless and cruel talk-show host Murray Franklin. It’s very much a supporting role, but delivered with great aplomb.

Also great again is “Deadpool 2“‘s Zazie Beetz (a great trivia answer for an actor with three ‘z’s’ in the name). This angle of the story is deviously clever, and Zazie handles the various twists and turns brilliantly.

Movie violence needs to be taken in context to both the film’s story and to the movie’s certificate. For those expecting a light and fluffy “Avengers” style of movie, they might be shocked by what they see. True that the film definitely pushes the boundaries of what I think is acceptable in a UK15-certificate film. … I suspect there were HEATED discussions at the BBFC after this screening! The violence though seems comparable to some other 15’s I’ve seen: a DIY-store drill scene in “The Equalizer” comes to mind.

A particularly brutal scene is reminiscent of a climactic scene in “Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood“, such that Quentin Tarantino might have just cause to appeal his ‘UK18’ certificate.

You might argue about the level of violence that SHOULD be shown in a 15 certificate film. But I think the violence portrayed – given this is in the known context an origin story for a psychopathic killer – is appropriate. I personally found the Heath Ledger‘s Joker’s “pencil trick” scene in “The Dark Knight” more disturbing, given it was a 12 certificate.

I have less sympathy for the inclusion of “Rock and Roll Part 2” on the soundtrack. The fact that a convicted paedophile (I refuse to say his name) is profiting from the ticket sales is galling. This is almost deliberately courting controversy. There has been some view that this is a “traditional” chant song at US football matches (as “The Hey Song”). But most (all?) teams have now recognized the connection and stopped its use. At least here the director and producers should have more of a ‘world view’ on this.

Where “Hangover” director Todd Phillips does recover some of this respect is in the quality of the script (co-written with Scott Silver) and the direction. It’s misdirection without mis-direction! Some of the twists in the plot (no spoilers here!) I did not see coming, and certain aspects of the story (again no spoilers!) are left brilliantly (and chillingly) vague.

Sure, it borrows heavily in story-line and mood from Martin Scorsese‘s “Taxi Driver”. And I was also reminded of 1993’s Joel Schumacher flick “Falling Down” where Michael Douglas is an ordinary man pushed to the edge and beyond by a series of life’s trials. But if you want to criticise a film for “not being 100% original” then let’s start at the top of the 2019 IMDB listings and keep going! I’ve also seen comment from some that criticises the somewhat clunky overlay of the Batman back-story into the script. I also understand that view but I didn’t personally share it.

Elsewhere I would not be surprised if the movie gets garlanded with technical Oscar nominations aplenty come January. The cinematography, by Phillips-regular Lawrence Sher, is exquisite in setting the grimy 70’s tone. (I loved the retro Warner Brothers logo too). And both video and sound editing is top-notch. Not forgetting a sonorous cello-heavy soundtrack that perfectly suits the mood. Want to put a bet on which film might top the “number of Oscar nominations” list? This might not be a bad choice.

Dark and brooding, with a slow-burn start, this is a proper drama that might make action superhero fans fidgety. But I simply loved it, and would love to carve out the time to give it a re-watch. The Phoenix performance is extraordinary. Will this make my Top 10 of the year? Fingers to head, and pull the trigger…. it’s a no-brainer.