Songs for your iPod

Glass, Concrete & Stone - David Byrne

This is one of many tracks that impressed me on the soundtrack for In good company (2004). A half-decent movie, but the soundtrack is what left a lasting impact on me)



...

Sunshine - Peter Salett

(Again, in my opinion the songs on the soundtrack were far better than the movie Down in the valley. Here's his myspace)



...

This Must Be The Place (Naive Melody) - Talking Heads

(Ok, you've probably seen Wallstreet (1987), but do you remember this beautiful song from the credits?)

Film review: Rabbits (2002)

Rabbits is directed by David Lynch, and may be the best Lynch movie you have never heard of. A must-see for fans of Lynch. Rabbits is comprised of 9 instalments totalling about 50 minutes, and is a companion piece to his latest underrated movie Inland Empire (2006), as some of the scenes are similar, but it can easily be watched independently of that film. It feels like he was experimenting with this type of filmmaking before using it in that full-length movie.

A word of warning, it could be difficult to obtain a copy of this film from regular shops like amazon. It was released as part of an expensive lime green box set in 2008, but was originally a series shown exclusively on DavidLynch.com. You might be able to find it on YouTube if you’re lucky.
The story is about a group of three talking rabbits in a room. Very mysterious and ambiguous, we never see what’s outside the room, so it’s difficult to make any clear-cut interpretations. Is it all a dream, and if so who’s dream? Is one of the rabbits humming the music from the red room scene in Twin Peaks?, and is this a clue to solving the mystery? The male rabbit says we should remember what he says, why?
What about the demon, who appears twice, the words are spoken in a foreign language, maybe a language not even known to man? Is the demon a representation of evil, an evil we cannot understand?
Is it an alternative or fictional reality? The male rabbit several times leaves the room and when he reappears we hear canned laughter. Only a few seconds have passed for us the viewers, but how long has he been away in the rabbit world?


Is Lynch mocking the TV-sitcoms and its phony laughing like Oliver Stone did in Natural born killers? The laughter seems inappropriate, as if this audience is laughing at the wrong time and have misunderstood the dialogue.

The bunnies talk in riddles, they don’t seem to be communicating with each other, is this Lynch’s failure to write a decent script, or more likely, an example of character’s not listening to each other but selfishly rambling on without paying attention to the others answers?

If you want to further discuss or understand the abstractness of this piece, I suggest you visit the IMDB message board for this title.

A fascinating, abstract, frustrating, creepy and unforgettable experience, but at the same time there’s no denying a typical David Lynch atmosphere. The music, costumes, shadows and lighting all add up to a unique world. It’s amazing that an almost plotless story can be so intriguing, but it really is! This is a piece of film not easily categorized other than saying it’s made by an auteur.

What makes it even more interesting is how it refers to Lynch’s other work like Mulholland Dr. and like I said Inland Empire. I guess you can draw certain comparisons to non-Lynch films Harvey (1950) and Donnie Darko (2001) as well.

IMDB

Book review: Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? / Philip K. Dick (1968)

I usually prefer sci-fi on film, but I was impressed by this novel, full of ideas, and it still holds up well today despite being written in the 1960s. Love the title of this book. I’d be interested to know of other novels where the title is a question? "What was she thinking? : notes on a scandal" is one book. Here are more.

The film Blade runner is loosely based on this novel. The book is more thoughtful and the film more visually atmospheric, so they compliment each other very well. The stories differ quite a lot, the book includes scenes with Deckard’s wife Iran and their pets. The ending to the film I think is more exhilarating. In the book, I am not sure I was entirely convinced that people in the future would want goats and sheep as pets, I can understand why they left this out of the film. The only motivation being real animals are sought after due to them being status symbols. The electric animals are lower down on the prestige chart. A weakness in both film and book: why does Deckard hunt the replicants, if they are going to die within a few years anyway?

Although there are discrete references to e.g. George Orwell’s 1984, it’s still a very original book. Amazing that an author can create such a future world from scratch. Everyone is under suspicion for being an android. Rick Deckard is a bounty hunter assigned to kill several Nexus-6 model androids, who have murdered there masters on Mars. An empathy test — the Voight-Kampff — is used to distinguish humans from androids. Another reviewer raises an interesting question: Wouldn't it be so much easier to just make all androids so they have an easily distinguishable feature to show they aren't a normal human?


I think this book works on many different levels. A lot is going on between the lines. It’s a science fiction adventure, but it’s also a dystopian warning saying we should look after the environment. It’s about how the drug industry is dangerous and can control your feelings. Furthermore, it’s a cautionary tale about how we should go about cloning and act towards our creations. The story is also about what it does to the protagonist Deckard that he is assigned to kill androids. Philip K Dick has stated the story is about what makes us human. Having a friend who suffers from autism, I felt the androids are described in an almost autistic way having little or no empathy towards others, this is less visible in the film. But this could just be a prejudice attitude among Deckard and his colleagues, we can’t be sure. The author PKD on page 90 tries to defend this lack of empathy by stating Deckard’s wife sometimes has even less empathy than androids.

It can be very difficult to determine if someone is an android in Philip K. Dick’s world, likewise it can be difficult to know straightaway if someone is mentally disadvantaged. It is widely known that a number of mentally disadvantaged people see themselves as aliens, try and pass themselves off as normal individuals, and on occasion are not even aware of suffering from a mental condition. In the book, several comments are made that the androids are attempting to blend in to society and pretending to be ordinary people. I may be wrong, but this allegorical interpretation I think suggests Philip K Dick himself was autistic (many artists are), or had knowledge of people with this condition. The androids lack many human qualities, but that's in part because they are manufactured that way. Is it their fault that they lack empathy? The androids could represent any given oppressed group throughout human history.

To me, it’s difficult to know exactly what PKD was attempting to say, as the story is open-ended. I feel the novel has taken on a life of its own based on countless reviews and articles over the years which interpret the story in various ways.
I guess the message to me is we should treat androids with equal respect and give them the same rights as humans, and not treat them as slaves, if one day the technology should allow them to be created artificially. Androids in the book have feelings and desires too. The story depicts how humans are as ruthless as robots by their willingness to kill robots. I think the author probably asks more questions than he answers, which I see as a good thing. We the readers are left to ponder these ethical questions ourselves.

Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? is in “1001 books you must read before you die”

Also, check my recommendations of Blade Runner and Frankenstein, which are related.

Songs for your iPod

She Sells Sanctuary - The Cult

(love the use of drums at 0.28!)



...
We Used To Be Friends - Dandy Warhols

(Why don't more bands use electronic drum beats like this? I wish they would)


Dandy Warhols - We Used To Be Friends
Uploaded by Pink_Bmx. - Explore more music videos.
...

Lately I've Let Things Slide - Nick Lowe

(This slow acoustic track is very different to the other 2 songs above. The singer Feist recommended this 2001 album "The convincer" on amazon. Its a beautiful album you can hear again and again in my opinion)

Film review: Jeremy (1973)

Once in a while you come across a movie you’ve never heard of before, which has a heart and soul, the relationships feel genuine, and some good music, Jeremy is such a film about first love.

I would call Cameron Crowe’s 'Say anything' among the best teen romances on screen of the 80s. 'The sure thing', also with John Cusack, to me another highlight in that category.

If you are able to see beyond Jeremy’s somewhat ludicrous 70s hair cut, and thick-rimmed and geeky spectacles, Jeremy (1973) is in my opinion a gem, a ‘70s Say Anything’, if you will.

My favourite part of the film is the intro, which features the song Blue Balloon (The Hourglass song) - by Robby Benson. I like how the opening draws you into the main characters predicament:





You don’t have to be a teenager to appreciate it, I watched it like a nostalgic trip back to my youth, and what it felt like to be in these kind of situations.

I don’t think they did a very good job with the poster on IMDB at all, the two main characters come across as creepy ! So I went with an alternative poster in my review.

I thought the first half of the film was stronger than the last half. Jeremy is a warm-hearted coming-of-age film more people should discover, only 303 people have rated it on IMDB!

IMDB

Rottentomatoes

YouTube