EPIC Cover of the Week

Sarah Winters makes Top 40 sound like Pitchfork-worthy alternative pop folk greatness. You just want to hug and console her voice. Here’s her Bandcamp.

We all eat that shit up, admit it.

TRACKS W/ CLASS | Macklemore – The End

Could be a follow up to the former Aurally Audacious Endeavours, could be an accompaniment, could be its own thing.

Tracks W/ Class points out tracks that you should be listening to, and would benefit your musical experience and hopefully bring you into another territory of music that you wouldn’t have journeyed into otherwise. If you have, then good job.

If not, then let’s start with Macklemore.

THE ARTIST

The Seattle rapper has been traversing the mid-fame rap scene and especially around hip-hop blogospheres. While he’s a star in his hometown, he only recently did some concerts north of the border, and I hope his fanbase grows because he offers something that most other rappers don’t offer: meaning.

Mainstream hip-hop has depressingly become easy to decipher into three categories of subject matter: drugs, money, and getting women. That’s not even a stereotype, probably any producer will tell an artist that to reach Top 40 charts, you’d have to manufacture a bubble-gum beat and throw two or three lines of lyrics about any of the above, and repeat until squeaky clean.

What does Macklemore do? He tells stories about drug addiction; succumbing to it, overcoming it, suffering because of it, losing loved ones due to it. And that’s just one song. Pride for his heritage, the dangers of consumerism, tributes to his favourite role models—things that can’t be described in one word, dominate his collaboration work with The Vs. EP with producer Ryan Lewis, who offers some incredible instrumental backing to support Mack’s rhymes.

THE TRACK

This EP ends with “The End”, a slow and sombre finisher for a diverse and emotionally wearing experience with Mack’s subject matter changing between golden highs (“Irish Celebration”) and disturbing lows (“Otherside”).

“The End” presents a simple story: it’s prom night and there’s The Girl. The quintessential teenage story—fight or flight to get that dream of having her.

But Mack’s lines prove an astounding depth to this story—it’s so unabashedly introspective, it’s like looking into the innermost feelings for a young boy and laying them out on the table while overwhelming love and longing comes over him.

I got chills by the third line. When I closed my eyes and listened to this track, Mack laid out the imagery, the setting, and the characters in a few seconds to give me a full picture. Most rappers can’t do that.

And it really is telling a story—Mack raps through the two characters. The girl says this, and the boy responds with that. Some of my favourite lines show a surreal and dreamy feel to an all-to-relatable experience:

“You whispered, ‘Don’t you love music / It’s such a gift, and I’ll give it to ya’"

It’s a back and forth between doubt and bliss (“My God, seconds away from God, Yes"), consuming hope and crippling loss. Going through this song is like having a little movie move through your mind and leave you wanting more. Mack pieces together his storytelling so deliberately because he knows this subject matter attaches to it’s listeners. It’s all about universal feeling.

Not to mention Ryan Lewis’ choice of instrumentals. Crying violins and defeated, softly blown horns surround the ‘dance floor’ of this prom night. They express the emotions our characters are feeling. A sombre piano backing track binds it all together to create a slow, steady descent into the thoughts and feelings of what might very well be our past selves.

It’s a study on the state of love, having to grow up and lose what you thought was your entire world. You don’t know if the devastation is physical or emotional:

“Not letting go, but I can’t hold on / Fading through my fingertips, watching us fall / I try to catch you with my arms”

This song comes full circle—it forces thought, and it questions your most significant questions you could be posed with, if only for a moment.

TAKEAWAY:

I’ve had this track on repeat for like three days. It can become addicting, but it’s good to begin actually feeling things from music again. Macklemore is an expert lyricist and musical storyteller, and Ryan Lewis knows his rhymes so intimately he matches them with his instrumentals like a puzzle piece. There’s plenty of tracks off of The Vs. EP that are evidence of that, but “The End” is a great way to finish it.

It’s poignant, it’s honest, and it plays with your emotions. All the best songs do.

Want more Macklemore? One of his newer tracks, “Wings” is complex as ever.

ReV13UZ! (of Movies) | Chronicle (2012)

Directed by: Josh Trank
Written by: Max Landis
Starring: Dane DeHaan, Alex Russell, and Michael B. Jordan

Boy, did this flick come out of nowhere (at least to me, the average movie-goer). Three high-schoolers find a mysterious object in a field and discover it gave them superpowers. Sounds simple right?

Incredibly, it’s superhero film that’s been released in the past two years comes off quite complex of a piece. Chronicle is really, I think, a result of Max Landis’ being able to produce the scripts he wants produced. And maybe that’s because his dad is John Landis (the famous one), or maybe it’s because studios really want to produce his shit, but the point is, I’m glad this got out there.

I was hyped up at the beginning solely because of a small viral campaign to get awareness about this movie—apart from the whole “oh, not another one” reaction, there was a decent enough reason to get hyped. It didn’t seem to be dictated by big budget studio overheads and it seemed like a different take on something that’s been repeatedly done in recent cinematic history.

The problem with superhero flicks is that they’ve become so concentrated in numbers and so relentless in releases that audiences, globally, are becoming tired of them. Sure you have some gems like X-Men: First Class and to an extent Captain America: First Avenger, but Marvel’s been pushing their ‘cinema-verse’ initiative with probably billions of marketing and advertising dollars, and there’s a fear in my head that it’s gonna get stale before it even gets tasty.

So what adds flavour to a threatened genre? Interesting movies. And I’m also glad this isn’t affiliated with a set publisher or property, because that automatically turns people off, especially when someone utters the word ‘DC’ and it doesn’t involve anything dark, knight-like or with bats. It’s an original concept—and my God, that is so rare these days.

Okay, well not completely original, this is a strikingly similar film to the Japanese animated Akira from 1988—which was and still is an amazing science fiction film, anime or otherwise. Max Landis, I’m guessing, loves that movie, and probably Josh Trank too. These guys look young, so I’m gonna say that they’re not tainted by the life-sucking powers of Hollywood industry yet. So be lucky for that.

But enough with presumptions, apart from uniqueness or difference, this film offers a lot more in terms of cinematic quality.

I found it to be two big things that really drove the core of this movie: the aesthetic, and the characters. I’m pretty sure that without one or the other working together so closely, this film would have fallen short on its intentions and not been as good as it was.

Andrew, Matt, and Steve are the central characters, and their the ones who get the superpowers, and they’re the ones that form the close friendship because of it. There’s a deliberate pacing to how they grow to know each other and discover the extent of their abilities, and with that comes the second element of the naturalistic cinematography and the ‘found-footage’ style that this movie pushes. And pushes it well.

That pacing plays off the distinct look of the movie—it’s unconventional because this movie wants to set itself up as an unrecognizable plot progression; in other words, something not constructed. This heavy investment in crafting a naturalistic look was key in making an enjoyable experience.

The way I see it, to pull off ‘found-footage’ successfully, it either has to imitate reality as closely as possibly (like with The Blair Witch Project) did, or tie it very closely to the actual narrative. Chronicle did the latter, it did it very cleverly.

This is an interesting movie because firstly, it’s different, and secondly—at least for me—we’re completely in the dark regarding what it’s really about during the opening credits. That helps it a lot. We’re thrown into the life of Andrew, the real core of the movie, as a deeply troubled teen and is literally seeing the world through his lens.

I love the constant thematic value of cameras and video taping that Chronicle presents—again, engraining the aesthetic into a deeper meaning helps audiences get past the gimmick of ‘found-footage’ and present it with purpose.

So back to character—these three guys have obvious chemistry. From interviews about the film, they said they were to live together for three weeks prior to filming to know each other inside and out. Jordan boasts with charisma, Russell puts forth a layered, nuanced performance where his character is visibly struggling and teetering between emotional states, and DeHaan plays the obvious troubled teen, and does it convincingly.

It’s actually pretty terrifying when things go that certain way. More than anything, this movie gets down to the core question that we all have when we’re talking about superpowers: What would you do with them?

Chronicle plays with that question with some progressive answers—it shows that it’s not what you would do with your powers, it’s how you would use them. What makes a villain and a hero? How does one deal with power? Where does responsibility lie when you’re in such deep shit as these three guys end up?

Who’s fault is it when someone snaps?

Those were the questions running through my mind during the movie, and after the movie especially. That’s when you know it made you think, and you can tell its a good movie from that.

It’s an honest, unpretentious presentation of a genre that’s been raped by big budgets and extreme corporate measures. It’s a step back to say “Wait a minute, there’s another way to go about this” and I’m glad Max Landis and Josh Trank hooked up for this idea and made it mostly independent. It wouldn’t have had the depth it does without it.

A thinking man’s superhero flick, who would have thought?

Look for it in your local show listings—if you’re a fan of sci-fi, superheroes, or something that’s not like what’s usually out there in cinemas today, this is your money’s worth.

The Dangers of Teleportation.

Remember kids, having teleportation without an accompanying super-sense of complete spatial awareness—well, it brings bad news.

Also, boy what a wonderful school!

[via The Daily What]

ReV13WZ! (of Comics) | Batman #6

Written by: Scott Snyder
Pencils: Greg Capullo
Inks: Jonathan Glapion
Colorist: FCO

THE BASICS:

- New villains, old presence. And Owls. 

- Trapped underneath Gotham City.

- Delusion + reality, which one’s which?

- Batman faces death…again.

- Plus: this cover is terrifyingly amazing.  

RUNDOWN:

Wow, what a comic this has been so far. If there’s a proper way to write Batman, Scott Snyder’s probably nailed the formula—hell, he probably invented a new one. At the rate he’s going with the character, he could redefine a lot of things about what Batman really means as a book and as a superhero.

If you haven’t read the first five issues of the current Batman series, you are missing out on some grand and disturbing storytelling. Snyder and his team have definitely moved away from the traditional way Batman is portrayed into some psychopathic reality-bending horror fest that pits Bruce against his own sanity. And it’s lovely.

No spoilers allowed, because I want you to read it but: the new set of villains that Snyder’s introduced into the Batverse are a doozy. I don’t read a lot of Batbooks and I’m not his biggest fan, but nothing like this has been done for a while to this scale. Organized crime syndicates sure, but the balls on these guys now three issues in—and by the fifth, as the previous issue, it’s balls-to-the-wall fucked up.

These bad guys will tickle your fancy, and Snyder following up last issue’s unmatchable story, matches it with this one. The entire set-up has been for this issue, and the constant disadvantage that Bats has been set with loses ground, and the pacing of this issue is literally him crawling up from the deepest of dark places and fighting back with all his might.

And I think Snyder’s direction with Bats’ character is to bring an emotional core back to him rather than just a representation of strict morals and due justice. That’s all blah-blah and constantly gets dished out with countless Batbooks—this is different.

A major theme so far in the first six issues has been the identity and soul of Gotham City, rather than just a place, it has its own atmosphere, its moods and its defining emotional qualities, and Bruce is intensely tied to the city he protects. So the Court of Owls—these new guys, come up as a secret society that’s been hidden from everyone, including Bruce, and he’s not gonna be happy.

It’s played with wonderfully in the previous issues, and again, it all bubbles and festers to the top with some jam-packed action, slick fight scenes, and some of the grittiest artwork you could have for a Batbook, and that’s saying a lot, thanks to Greg Capullo and Jonathan Glapion.

BRASS TACKS:

Technically, Capullo brings that distinct drawing style that automatically adds some personality to a book. By issue six, I’ve grown accustomed to those harsh edges and angles that permeate through soft backgrounds and locations. Faces are lively, but rooted in a sense of grit that matches Gotham’s architecture and its atmosphere. It’s a lovely look if you dig stylized characters, which I do.

Plus, violence is done so beautifully here, and especially the past few issues. You can feel the pacing of the fights, it’s like a visual crescendo with each panel punching into the next. It’s a hell of a ride. And Capullo I’m guessing is loving the fact that he gets to detach from realism for this book and really delve into Bruce’s psyche (which takes a beating in this storyline, read those other issues) with consistently nasty, brooding, and grimy takes on what it’s like to be in Bruce’s perspective. There’s a full-page that really brings it home for me, it’s great.

FCO’s colours—I’m liking the visual theme he’s got going here. If you read it, you’ll notice a consistency of black and whites, dully greys peeking through, and an emphasis on lighting, or lack thereof. Shadows and darkness are key. The thematic implications are full to the brim, it’s a great compliment to Snyder’s story. This time, the Batman is not the one lurking in the shadows. Awesome.

TAKEAWAYS:

Read this fucking comic. It’s going to be award-winning. Batman’s never—and I mean NEVER been done this way with such conviction and efficiency. If you think you know Batman, you’ll change your opinion for the better with this one. If you don’t know Batman, you’ll be meeting the best version yet. If you’re like me and really need a reason to like Batman, then this is definitely it.

That’s something for everyone, inside one comic book. That’s skill.

That’s Batman #6. GET IT.

ReV13WZ!! (of Comics) | Batwoman #6

Expect a lot more of this in the future.

Weekly recaps of favourite comics alongside movie reviews of new and classic sci-fi, fantasy, or the geeky-related, in-depth television schpeels, and roundups of any new content floating around in the ether that catches the eye of this blog will be featured, just for you.

 

My hopes are, the more content I put up, the more you’ll care about this blog, and the more people you’ll send this too. Also, for me to get better and talking about things I like. That’s always good.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BATWOMAN #6
Written by: W. Haden Blackman & J.H. Williams III
Pencils: Amy Reeder | Inks: Richard Friend & Rob Hunter

The sixth month of DC’s “New 52” publishing initiative is calling for some lineup changes to keep things fresh. One of the bigger stories was with Batwoman, mainly because William’s artwork for the series is up there at "challenges fine art” level and we get to see how Amy Reeder, a cult favourite especially among female readers, fares in comparison.

She did a damn fine job. I’ll get to story in a minute, but the big pull with this issue other than being the guest artist is that readers want to know how her art’s going to play out for the book—the visual style may be completely different, but reading it evoked the same grit and grime on one page, and fullness and lush expressions on the next. William’s proved that he can be diverse, and Amy’s followed up with her own signature take on that.

What stayed consistent, I think, was Guy Major’s flat colours that dominate most of the pages, transferred from Williams’ work on the previous five issues. The distinctive look of Batwoman’s costume, chalk-white skin, and burning red hair (you can tell from the cover) haven’t been tampered with. Reeder’s art team respects Williams’ take with convincing devotion.

What enticed me was an entire change in pacing, structure, and especially panelling. Right here I should mention that this is a a whole new story arc, so a great jumping-on point if you want to get into a great character, and a great Batbook. It’s a mulit-plotted read, with Kate (Batwoman’s secret identity) at the center of it, and like a puzzle, it unravels for us with each panel. There’s a mix of static, nuanced character moments for each of these plots, against some beautifully rendered action to balance it out. Motion is a big part of this issue, Williams and Blackman gave Amy an opportunity to flex her anatomical muscles—the movement here is great.

Content-wise, I’m pretty hooked. This new plot comes straight off the last one with the new Weeping Woman villian, a self-contained story—but like the ghostly, mystically fluid powers Batwoman had to battle with, it sends ripples outwards to the beginning of this plot. And, above all, what anyone would like about any good Batbook is that there’s some investigating involved, albeit in a non-linear fashion this time around. And that’s not a bad thing at all. 

So, amidst DC’s shuffling of creative teams dominating the scene right now, Reeder’s addition to Batwoman met, and probably exceeded everyone’s expectations (a very tall order). And if you didn’t have any beforehand, then great, this is a book with great art, great story, and most of all, amazing character. There is no other superhero like Kate Kane out there, at least not of her calibre. Guarantee that. 

Lots of people work looking forward to this team-up, and Amy Reeder’s proven in twenty minutes she knows the book like the back her hand. She better stick. Williams is showing his capabilities as a artist-turned-writer (along with Torontonian superstar Francis Manapul on Flash) and the whole creator line-up is just poised never to fail.

It’s one of the best superhero comics out there right now, and it shows no signs, even when new guys are put into the mix, of stopping anytime soon. Pick this issue up.

EPIC Everything About This of the Week

If there is anything good in humanity, this animation is the embodiment of it.

Oh my God, how I would watch the FUCK out of this series.

Somebody buy this animation team, somebody fund this project. Please God, anybody.

Do it for the children. For the Saturday cartoon slot. For our future.

This is amazing. It is the epitome of awesome. There is nothing better.

Holy shit, I love everything about what I just watched.

‘Lazy Writing’ is a pretty lazy complaint

I hear this term thrown around a lot, particularly in circles where audiences can easily scrutinize the workings of the writers that present them with material. It always irks me when I hear it from fans, and what some of them think constitutes written content of being ‘lazy’. My guess is that lazy writing, from a audience’s perspective, just means that they can easily determine the conventions that the writer employed and figure out the mystique, if you will, behind whatever they were writing—whether it be characterization, plot structure, backstory…the list can go on for ages.

A lot of the time these fans throw around that term to classify a certain writer as being bad, whether it be for that show, that film or that comic (screenwriters less so since they get relatively the least amount of attention). Now, my assumption is that being fans they have had a lot of material that they’ve gone through, so obviously they’d be able to pick up on the conventions common to that genre or even broader, that medium, given that they are a devoted fanbase. Now, I’m not going to particularly bash those fans in question, but I will take the side of the hypothetical ‘lazy writer’.

There’s a connotation with that term that makes it extremely loaded. Now, my bias may stem from the fact that most of those fans that complain about lazy writing are the same fans that fester and boil with rage at the slightest inconsistences that they perceive violate the sanctity of their favourite characters, or key components of their favourite fictional universe. So to address those complaints, in itself, may be not the most pressing issue, but I’ll tackle it because somewhere down the line someone is undoubtedly accuse me of committing to said ‘lazy’ writing.

Fans are fans because the consume the material, not because they partake in it. They read, watch, and participate to a capacity, yes, but they aren’t involved in the creative process for good reason. They don’t know what it entails. Especially the writing process. It’s gruelling. I’ve been lucky enough to not experience it in its full horror. I hope to though, but that’s another story.

I’m thinking on my feet here, but I’d say such accusations stem from two main categorires when someone cries wolf with this sort of thing:

Awareness of Convention & Transparency of Content

Fancy capitalized words for some pseudo-academic setting, but bare with me, I’ll try not to bullshit you to death.

The first, awareness of the convention, is essential on both creator and consumer end when it comes to creative/narrative media. What most writing professors will teach us is that we have to respect the audience. It’s a key element—you disrespect the audience, your show or film or comic will be complete shit, the audience will pick up on it and they will tear it to pieces. It happens every week, most likely.

*cough* Green Lantern *cough*

Audiences, being bombarded by the entertainment industry every second of the day, is saturated with narrative. We already find story in everything, but its constantly shoved down our throats anyways. We swallow genre like a daily diet pill—we ingest convention and our minds piece together, with enough exposure, what these genres do to present story a certain way.

We all know in crime thrillers, the authority usually captures the criminals—in capers, the masterminds outsmart the ‘Man’. Horrors: black guy dies first. Fantasies: an otherworldly/supernatural threat jeopardizes the peaceful escapism that is shoved in our faces. My understanding of genre may be rough at this point, I’m sure I’m broadening it somewhat, but you get that genre conventions compose the meat and tendon of story.

The role of the writer is to hide that obviousness behind good narrative composition—audiences will be forgiving if they’re presented with a strong enough story. But ‘lazy’ writing comes into play here, if audiences aren’t respected, to a certain extent, their suspension of disbelief will dissolve away.

All the normal conventions that you employ, without consequence, will suddenly become bare naked in the sunlight. The flaws within the script scream out of the screen, or the page. Everything’s wrong. Fans are in a ruckus. It sucks.

Which brings it to transparency of content—writing any kind of fiction is essentially one thing: telling a series of lies to expose a universal truth. Call it theme, controlling idea, moral of the story, or what have you. Characters are fake, scenarios are fake, emotions are fabricated by some people cooped up in a room with gallons of Starbucks and potato chips. And I’ll assume safely that not may fans who say ‘lazy writing’ are all to knowledgeable to that fact.

I guess when fans catch a whiff of that coffee or those potato chips behind that major plot development or this character’s death, they feel betrayed above anything else. The words ‘it’s not real’ dominate their thought process. At that point it may become an unbearable read or a laughable experience, knowing that everything you invested in the story and its characters are for naught. Transparency kills the narrative. The content stays the same, and it can be completely competent writing, but those ‘superfans’ and dedicatedly intense audiences can sever their ties with a particular story and its writer, swiftly and absolutely. It’s their superpower.

But, lazy writing implies there would be something called diligent, or hard-working writing. Like the act of writing can be a humanistic quality in itself. Lazy people can be good writers—take me for example. This very well could be a useless argument regarding the semantics of a 4chan comment that I was somewhat bothered by, however it’s still important to discuss (if that means one long blog post) this issue.

But no, there’s no such thing as hard-working writing, or lazy writing. There’s just writing. Not to mention that fiction writing is by definition an artform (don’t even deny that), the notion of ‘lazy writing’ is already subjective, there’s no right or wrong. God forbid, there’s someone out there who loves The Phantom Menace, or thinks the new Catwoman ongoing series is the best thing ever to happen to the character.

Sure, convention may be misconstrued for cliché, or rightly so accused of being formulaic and overdone, to the writer’s extent. But there is no lazy convention. Just convention. Good writing incorporates convention invisibly, cleverly, to serve the story. Bad writing misuses convention and causes all those complaints by whiny fans of lazy writing. But again, subjective. The only objective way to take this is that lazy writing may as well be somewhat-energetic-but-still-full-of-spunk writing.

Hint: that’s called a voice. Writers can have more than one. It’s kind of their thing.

Condescendence aside, I earnestly hope fans minimize their usage of ‘lazy writing’ against works of fiction they don’t like or don’t agree with. Not to say it’s not the writer’s fault that it didn’t hit with them, but for God’s sake be more specific and aware of your criticisms.

Lazy vocabulary, for example, would be legitimate—the writer should verse themselves in a dictionary more closely to express their ideas better (I am so guilty of this it’s unbelievable). Don’t put a giant clamp around the complexity that is the act of WRITING to bash a work.

But hey, when was criticism ever constructive on the Internet?

So fans, you can stay fans, but don’t talk about things you most likely have no idea about. And writers, always strive for better writing—and playing with convention, not just using it, it’s a key part of that. And bitchy-ass whining neckbeard elitists?

Yeah, go fuck yourself. Only thing ‘lazy’ is you.