Thursday, April 10, 2003
Book Review
Paperback Raita
By William Rhodes
Readers of Alex Garland’s The Beach take note. Paperback Raita is an essential travel fiction for dreamers in search of that elusive dream of a backpackers heaven. Not that it is about finding that perfect beach or getaway. In fact, Paperback Raita is more about striking it rich the quick way.
Using India as a backdrop, William’s protagonist is Joshua King, kid born with silverspoon, dependent on family, who will inherit his pop’s 5 million dollars if. .. yes, the catch is if he writes a bestseller and the old man is giving him 5 years to do that.
After he tries to get a job with Reuters as a journalist (but fails because he was pissed off and couldn’t stomach the fact he got the job through nepotism, links his step mom has; and hence subsequently walked away from the interview), he deflected to India and lead the bohemian life of a hippie; writing for Hindu week and promising them an investigative piece on the underworld of drug dealing. But first, he has to infiltrate the network and his only hope is chum, wannabe actor, Sanjay, whom he knows could arrange.
And as you can guess, Joshua stumbles on clumsily with the leads he has and finds himself getting deeper into the hole he has dug for himself. When his possession was raided by the police over possession of grass, he has no choice but to hatch a sinister plot and work with Jasmine, a beautiful Dutch girl whom he fell in love with, and who was also in a similar predicament. She has to save her boyfriend, James, who has been locked up in prison and in Joshua words, “fucked in the arse” day in day out.
William Rhodes writing is quirky, not totally serious, easy to read and identify, something you can call yuppie literature perhaps, The story about a yuppie for yuppies desiring adventure involving death, drugs, sex, money in a supposedly exotic country, India where lost yuppies become, well, hippies, trapped, unable to go home and chasing the dragons for the rest of their lives.
In a way, it is like The Beach because its about in search of something we think we lack in our lives.
Paperback Raita
By William Rhodes
Readers of Alex Garland’s The Beach take note. Paperback Raita is an essential travel fiction for dreamers in search of that elusive dream of a backpackers heaven. Not that it is about finding that perfect beach or getaway. In fact, Paperback Raita is more about striking it rich the quick way.
Using India as a backdrop, William’s protagonist is Joshua King, kid born with silverspoon, dependent on family, who will inherit his pop’s 5 million dollars if. .. yes, the catch is if he writes a bestseller and the old man is giving him 5 years to do that.
After he tries to get a job with Reuters as a journalist (but fails because he was pissed off and couldn’t stomach the fact he got the job through nepotism, links his step mom has; and hence subsequently walked away from the interview), he deflected to India and lead the bohemian life of a hippie; writing for Hindu week and promising them an investigative piece on the underworld of drug dealing. But first, he has to infiltrate the network and his only hope is chum, wannabe actor, Sanjay, whom he knows could arrange.
And as you can guess, Joshua stumbles on clumsily with the leads he has and finds himself getting deeper into the hole he has dug for himself. When his possession was raided by the police over possession of grass, he has no choice but to hatch a sinister plot and work with Jasmine, a beautiful Dutch girl whom he fell in love with, and who was also in a similar predicament. She has to save her boyfriend, James, who has been locked up in prison and in Joshua words, “fucked in the arse” day in day out.
William Rhodes writing is quirky, not totally serious, easy to read and identify, something you can call yuppie literature perhaps, The story about a yuppie for yuppies desiring adventure involving death, drugs, sex, money in a supposedly exotic country, India where lost yuppies become, well, hippies, trapped, unable to go home and chasing the dragons for the rest of their lives.
In a way, it is like The Beach because its about in search of something we think we lack in our lives.
DVD Review
Blank Generation/ Dancing Barefoot
Directed by Ivan Kral and Amos Poe (I)
Blank Generation compiles black and white footage from bands performing in CGBG alongside to their songs taken from rough and murky cassette demos which, for the non-fan becomes boring soon. More for the serious collector as these are rare recordings though sound quality could have been improved. Yet, it is more likely that it is the compiler’s intention to mimicry the low quality - hisses and scratches to complement the visuals to depict an era long gone. Very rock and roll perhaps.
Despite its flaws, Blank Generation serves to testify the vibrancy and strength of the scene. The pre MTV era music videos (if we can call them music videos – more like amateur efforts – think Blair Witch, shaking camera and focuses on guitar, faces e.t.c. with most of them, recordings in CGBG club) documents and highlights the difference in the types of music being played. From Blondie’s brand of punk / pop (although it is debatable among critics if Blondie can be considered punk) to Talking Head’s droning Art Rock to Ramones’ silly punk makes one wonder again, how unique CGBG is; and more specifically, what unites these musicians together.
The interviews and artists commentary comes from Dancing Barefoot, the second documentary, made for Czech TV, which explains the thread of this story running through Czech exile, Ivan Kral, who plays with CGBG bands including Blondie and Patti Smith.
Though Dancing Barefoot’s uneven standard of footage does not provide a full picture of CGBG (and you pat my back and I pat your’s interviews with musicians involved in CGBG then), there are still hilarious moments such as Iggy Pop derison of Ivan whom he considers as a John Lennon wannabe. Patti’s reference to Ivan as his Mick Jagger highlights the closeness of Patti Smith Group. Much of this documentary also runs around Patti Smith’s history with Patti Smith playing almost equal or second fiddle to Ivan. Tina Weymouth of Talking Head claims that she thinks no one can ever surpassed Patti on stage. This can be seen through the highly charged Patti Smith’s reading for Amnesty International with Ivan speaking in the background. It provides a glimpse of how provocative Patti Smith can be when indulging in performance poetry and cements her legendary status as the high priest of rock. In her concert performances, Patti gives herself totally. She shakes and rattles her body as if in a trance and her prowess can only matched by Iggy (also included in the documentary) who jumps down stage, only to be raised by the frentic crowds below. In another occasion, he throws his mike into the air, only to face his back to the audience as his jeans slip and reveal a bare bum.
Sure, Dancing Barefoot contains some of the most amazing concert recordings captured on stage but one cannot help if they are undecided if it is a documentary about CGBG. Ivan Kral or Patti Smith Group. If it acts to tell us more about Ivan, there is definitely no insight on Ivan’s musical abilities. If it is about CGBG, the lack of interviews or historic accounts with musicians involved in the scene, only makes the audience more confused. The lack of opinions by critics and fans also makes the story one-sided. If it serves to add to Patti Smith’s myth, it runs thin on what is the real reason/s leading to the break up of Patti Smith Group. Patti’s marriage to MC5’s Fred Sonic Smith is not mentioned.
In short, Blank Generation/ Dancing Barefoot contains some of the best recordings but it isn’t enough to whet the appetite of fans or arouse the curiosity for those who wants to know more about CGBG. Like cliched rock journalism, it seems more like a half-hearted attempt to worship the gods of rock and roll but fails to give justice to the subject.
We deserve better.
Blank Generation/ Dancing Barefoot
Directed by Ivan Kral and Amos Poe (I)
Blank Generation compiles black and white footage from bands performing in CGBG alongside to their songs taken from rough and murky cassette demos which, for the non-fan becomes boring soon. More for the serious collector as these are rare recordings though sound quality could have been improved. Yet, it is more likely that it is the compiler’s intention to mimicry the low quality - hisses and scratches to complement the visuals to depict an era long gone. Very rock and roll perhaps.
Despite its flaws, Blank Generation serves to testify the vibrancy and strength of the scene. The pre MTV era music videos (if we can call them music videos – more like amateur efforts – think Blair Witch, shaking camera and focuses on guitar, faces e.t.c. with most of them, recordings in CGBG club) documents and highlights the difference in the types of music being played. From Blondie’s brand of punk / pop (although it is debatable among critics if Blondie can be considered punk) to Talking Head’s droning Art Rock to Ramones’ silly punk makes one wonder again, how unique CGBG is; and more specifically, what unites these musicians together.
The interviews and artists commentary comes from Dancing Barefoot, the second documentary, made for Czech TV, which explains the thread of this story running through Czech exile, Ivan Kral, who plays with CGBG bands including Blondie and Patti Smith.
Though Dancing Barefoot’s uneven standard of footage does not provide a full picture of CGBG (and you pat my back and I pat your’s interviews with musicians involved in CGBG then), there are still hilarious moments such as Iggy Pop derison of Ivan whom he considers as a John Lennon wannabe. Patti’s reference to Ivan as his Mick Jagger highlights the closeness of Patti Smith Group. Much of this documentary also runs around Patti Smith’s history with Patti Smith playing almost equal or second fiddle to Ivan. Tina Weymouth of Talking Head claims that she thinks no one can ever surpassed Patti on stage. This can be seen through the highly charged Patti Smith’s reading for Amnesty International with Ivan speaking in the background. It provides a glimpse of how provocative Patti Smith can be when indulging in performance poetry and cements her legendary status as the high priest of rock. In her concert performances, Patti gives herself totally. She shakes and rattles her body as if in a trance and her prowess can only matched by Iggy (also included in the documentary) who jumps down stage, only to be raised by the frentic crowds below. In another occasion, he throws his mike into the air, only to face his back to the audience as his jeans slip and reveal a bare bum.
Sure, Dancing Barefoot contains some of the most amazing concert recordings captured on stage but one cannot help if they are undecided if it is a documentary about CGBG. Ivan Kral or Patti Smith Group. If it acts to tell us more about Ivan, there is definitely no insight on Ivan’s musical abilities. If it is about CGBG, the lack of interviews or historic accounts with musicians involved in the scene, only makes the audience more confused. The lack of opinions by critics and fans also makes the story one-sided. If it serves to add to Patti Smith’s myth, it runs thin on what is the real reason/s leading to the break up of Patti Smith Group. Patti’s marriage to MC5’s Fred Sonic Smith is not mentioned.
In short, Blank Generation/ Dancing Barefoot contains some of the best recordings but it isn’t enough to whet the appetite of fans or arouse the curiosity for those who wants to know more about CGBG. Like cliched rock journalism, it seems more like a half-hearted attempt to worship the gods of rock and roll but fails to give justice to the subject.
We deserve better.
Monday, April 07, 2003
La Strada
Directed by Federico Fellini
La Strada (1954) is claimed by critics to be Fellini’s first film with his distinctive signature style; and in Roger Ebert’s opinion, I quote, “bridge between the postwar Italian neorealism which shaped Fellini, and the fanciful autobiographical extravaganzas which followed”
John Nesbitt’s review of the same movie included Robert T. Eberwien’s A Viewer's Guide to Film Theory and Criticism quote:
Neorealist films are characterized by a pronounced social consciousness on the part of their makers, a concern for the lower classes and their despair and squalor, and a stark realism of technique relying heavily on long takes and depth of field.
Without going too much into an analysis, (Pauline Kael considered the three main characters as mind – The Fool as played by Richard Basehart, body - Zampano and soul - Gelsomina), La Strada feels more a fairytale.
It is the story of slow-witted Gelsomina (Giulietta Masina) sold to Zampano (Anthony Quinn) a busker who travels around the country in a caravan pulled by a motorcycle, and his only trick is to break chains around his chest.
They were to tour with a circus where The Fool (Richard Basehart) falls in love with Gelsomina. Unfortunately, there was already an enmity between The Fool and Zampano, which lead to tragedies.
La Strada’s most striking characteristic (and possibly adherent in most Fellini’s later movies) is the juxtaposition of drama with fable like characters. Gelsomina’s simpleton look is innocent and tragic at the same time. The Fool, while maintaining a cheerful disposition, reveals an emotional side of him for Gelsomina. Even Zampano, the tough and coarse looking trickster who ill-treats Gelsomina, looks like the bad guy that comes straight out of a fable. Yet, towards the end, when we see him break down and cry, it is hard to believe that this is the man who has difficulties in acknowledging his feelings.
If we were to take Robert T. Eberwien ‘s definition of neorealism, La Strada will not fit into its strict categorization. While it shows the living conditions of the poor and lower social classes in Italy, it is also encoded into a fairy tale like plot, that alienates itself away from what neorealist films are.
Directed by Federico Fellini
La Strada (1954) is claimed by critics to be Fellini’s first film with his distinctive signature style; and in Roger Ebert’s opinion, I quote, “bridge between the postwar Italian neorealism which shaped Fellini, and the fanciful autobiographical extravaganzas which followed”
John Nesbitt’s review of the same movie included Robert T. Eberwien’s A Viewer's Guide to Film Theory and Criticism quote:
Neorealist films are characterized by a pronounced social consciousness on the part of their makers, a concern for the lower classes and their despair and squalor, and a stark realism of technique relying heavily on long takes and depth of field.
Without going too much into an analysis, (Pauline Kael considered the three main characters as mind – The Fool as played by Richard Basehart, body - Zampano and soul - Gelsomina), La Strada feels more a fairytale.
It is the story of slow-witted Gelsomina (Giulietta Masina) sold to Zampano (Anthony Quinn) a busker who travels around the country in a caravan pulled by a motorcycle, and his only trick is to break chains around his chest.
They were to tour with a circus where The Fool (Richard Basehart) falls in love with Gelsomina. Unfortunately, there was already an enmity between The Fool and Zampano, which lead to tragedies.
La Strada’s most striking characteristic (and possibly adherent in most Fellini’s later movies) is the juxtaposition of drama with fable like characters. Gelsomina’s simpleton look is innocent and tragic at the same time. The Fool, while maintaining a cheerful disposition, reveals an emotional side of him for Gelsomina. Even Zampano, the tough and coarse looking trickster who ill-treats Gelsomina, looks like the bad guy that comes straight out of a fable. Yet, towards the end, when we see him break down and cry, it is hard to believe that this is the man who has difficulties in acknowledging his feelings.
If we were to take Robert T. Eberwien ‘s definition of neorealism, La Strada will not fit into its strict categorization. While it shows the living conditions of the poor and lower social classes in Italy, it is also encoded into a fairy tale like plot, that alienates itself away from what neorealist films are.
Sunday, April 06, 2003
Rope
Directed by Alfred Hitchcock
If it’s anyone, it’s only Hitchcock that can pull this one over us and makes Rope, the movie more binding than the murder itself for we are to see Brandon Shaw ( John Dall) and Phillip Morgan (Farley Granger) strangle David Kentley (Dick Hogan) within the first few starting minutes. Immediately, the dead man is carried into the chest, ironically, to be the dining table, that a party was to be held later. The people invited includes David, his father and aunt, girlfriend and girlfriend’s ex – more irony?
Besides the homosexual sublime references(between Brandon and Phillip) that involved much academic studies, film students then were also interested in Rope’s filming techniques which used only ten or nine cuts. To smoothen most transitions, the camera zooms into someone’s jacket and out again. Otherwise, the story flows fluidly as long shots.
The captivation with Rope are however the hidden subtext conversations. For example, when Brendan uses the rope they murdered David with to tie the books together for David’s father or the argument between Brendan and David’s father about murder: the Nietzschean philosophy as surmised by Brandon, “Murder is an art for the superior few. The few are mean of such intellectual and cultural superiority that they’re above the traditional moral concepts.” James Stewart who plays Rupert Cadell, also invited to the party, is their teacher who grows suspicious of foul play as the night progresses. He, coincidentally, is the man who taught Brendan the theory about murder. He also suggested having a strangle day or murder week during the party which offends David’s father.
As I have mentioned earlier, only Hitchcock can tell us everything about a murder, the murderer and his intent at the start and makes it captivating right to the end. The suspense, of course, lies with what goes on in the party with a dead man in a chest and whether anyone will find out.
The particularly disturbing yet serenely peaceful provocative ending is stunting. With Brendan sipping his champagne comfortably while Phillip plays atmospheric music with his piano, one thinks of how far theory can go in real life and what happens when it is executed. Whether if teacher preach what he means and if Brendan was right all along when he says they are the superior few.
Battleship Potemkin
Directed by Sergei Eisenstein
One of the greatest films of all time. Much written, debated, banned in many countries, Battleship Potemkin relates the mythical legendary Russian Rebellion in 1905.
Eisenstein adopts a “general mood of a people in an oppressive time” as an approach rather than a personal account to tell the story. It starts off with the men in the battleship refusing to eat the rotten meat with maggots in their ship. When the officers decided to shoot the noncompliant sailors, one of them, Vakulinchu, rose up and lead a mutiny, which soon led to his death.
Critics have claimed Odessa Staircase, the fourth section in the movie, composed the most dramatic culmination of any film. Odessa Steps juxtaposes faces of horror with soldiers shooting from above steps like mechanical robots. Bodies starts to litter the steps that sees more people running away while another long shot shows more killings. The individualization of the citizen caught in this tragedy, is shown when a woman who finds her son being shot and trampled by the crowd. Enraged, she runs back to carry her son and confront the soldiers, nearing her, only to be...
I have to agree with Roger Ebert when says in a review about the film that it is “so famous for so long that it is almost impossible to come to it with a fresh eye” . To review Battleship Potemkin is almost as difficult to explain why film students have to watch it to understand film history.
Directed by Alfred Hitchcock
If it’s anyone, it’s only Hitchcock that can pull this one over us and makes Rope, the movie more binding than the murder itself for we are to see Brandon Shaw ( John Dall) and Phillip Morgan (Farley Granger) strangle David Kentley (Dick Hogan) within the first few starting minutes. Immediately, the dead man is carried into the chest, ironically, to be the dining table, that a party was to be held later. The people invited includes David, his father and aunt, girlfriend and girlfriend’s ex – more irony?
Besides the homosexual sublime references(between Brandon and Phillip) that involved much academic studies, film students then were also interested in Rope’s filming techniques which used only ten or nine cuts. To smoothen most transitions, the camera zooms into someone’s jacket and out again. Otherwise, the story flows fluidly as long shots.
The captivation with Rope are however the hidden subtext conversations. For example, when Brendan uses the rope they murdered David with to tie the books together for David’s father or the argument between Brendan and David’s father about murder: the Nietzschean philosophy as surmised by Brandon, “Murder is an art for the superior few. The few are mean of such intellectual and cultural superiority that they’re above the traditional moral concepts.” James Stewart who plays Rupert Cadell, also invited to the party, is their teacher who grows suspicious of foul play as the night progresses. He, coincidentally, is the man who taught Brendan the theory about murder. He also suggested having a strangle day or murder week during the party which offends David’s father.
As I have mentioned earlier, only Hitchcock can tell us everything about a murder, the murderer and his intent at the start and makes it captivating right to the end. The suspense, of course, lies with what goes on in the party with a dead man in a chest and whether anyone will find out.
The particularly disturbing yet serenely peaceful provocative ending is stunting. With Brendan sipping his champagne comfortably while Phillip plays atmospheric music with his piano, one thinks of how far theory can go in real life and what happens when it is executed. Whether if teacher preach what he means and if Brendan was right all along when he says they are the superior few.
Battleship Potemkin
Directed by Sergei Eisenstein
One of the greatest films of all time. Much written, debated, banned in many countries, Battleship Potemkin relates the mythical legendary Russian Rebellion in 1905.
Eisenstein adopts a “general mood of a people in an oppressive time” as an approach rather than a personal account to tell the story. It starts off with the men in the battleship refusing to eat the rotten meat with maggots in their ship. When the officers decided to shoot the noncompliant sailors, one of them, Vakulinchu, rose up and lead a mutiny, which soon led to his death.
Critics have claimed Odessa Staircase, the fourth section in the movie, composed the most dramatic culmination of any film. Odessa Steps juxtaposes faces of horror with soldiers shooting from above steps like mechanical robots. Bodies starts to litter the steps that sees more people running away while another long shot shows more killings. The individualization of the citizen caught in this tragedy, is shown when a woman who finds her son being shot and trampled by the crowd. Enraged, she runs back to carry her son and confront the soldiers, nearing her, only to be...
I have to agree with Roger Ebert when says in a review about the film that it is “so famous for so long that it is almost impossible to come to it with a fresh eye” . To review Battleship Potemkin is almost as difficult to explain why film students have to watch it to understand film history.
Yeats is Dead
Edited by Josephn O Connor
15 Irish writers each contribute one chapter about a murder case that progresses bizarrely and out of coppers hand resulting in more deaths and an almost unfathomable web of deceits, lies and mysteries.
There, you have it. A nutshell review of an book with an idiosyncratic plot that is funny and thanks to Connor’s editing, despite different writer’s style, the book reads coherently. How did they manage to pull this feat off with threads of the thriller/humour running in absolute different directions? Can someone tell me how?
Part of the proceeds of this book goes to Amnesty International, by which Singapore doesn’t have a branch as of yet. Yes. Even Malaysia has one. Talk about human rights.
Edited by Josephn O Connor
15 Irish writers each contribute one chapter about a murder case that progresses bizarrely and out of coppers hand resulting in more deaths and an almost unfathomable web of deceits, lies and mysteries.
There, you have it. A nutshell review of an book with an idiosyncratic plot that is funny and thanks to Connor’s editing, despite different writer’s style, the book reads coherently. How did they manage to pull this feat off with threads of the thriller/humour running in absolute different directions? Can someone tell me how?
Part of the proceeds of this book goes to Amnesty International, by which Singapore doesn’t have a branch as of yet. Yes. Even Malaysia has one. Talk about human rights.
