No bite. No balls. Fuck "Twilight".
Actually, I haven't seen (or plan to) "New Moon". I did, however, see the first one. And I tell you, no matter if I go out and find Doc Brown to borrow his goddamned blender-powered Delorean, that is time that I will never be able to get back. I like vampires (Well. Vampire stories, anyhow. Never met any vampires. So I don't if I like 'em.). Always have. So despite how bad this whole endeavor looked to me, I gave it a chance because how can you Shiny Hot Topic vamps who play baseball (!) when it rains?! I'm sorry, but I don't get it. So, it's basically Romeo & Juliet with fangs. Whatever. The shit is boring. Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that you have to be 100% original. That's just impossible. Especially when playing in a genre whose teets have already been creatively mined and explored (and sucked on) since Bram Stoker wrote Dracula in 1897 (1897 for fucks sake! And it is a great read. If you haven't read it, it's actually presented as mostly a series of journal entries and letters written by the various characters in the book.). Do what you gotta do. But just don't bore me. (It doesn't help that all these played out, uninteresting "hook ups" from all the "actors" [that you can't go a day, a minute even, without hearing about] turn the whole experience into a circus freak show.)
Maybe the novels are different. Maybe something is getting lost in the adaptation. Maybe they're something there buried deep within the pages of Stepanie Meyers' "literary epic". But... I doubt it. This might sound sexist of me (I'm not sexist. I love sex.) "Twilight" has become a cultural phenomenon due it's popularity among women, and not just teenage girls. It appeals to a lot of older ones as well. It makes sense. These stories seem like nothing more than your average, corny-ass five and dime news stand romance novels, but with vamps (and now werewolves) thrown into the mix (This also smells a lil' of "Underworld" to me.). It's this same demographic that has turned the films into such worldwide moneymakers.
Maybe I'll be proven wrong. Perhaps I will catch "New Moon" on dvd (What am I saying? I know my wife'll make me! Love ya, hon.), and my mind will be blown away. And I'll take back every bad thing I've ever said about "Twilight" and start my own fan site. But again... I doubt it.
So...
"Twilight" sucks.
But "Near Dark" definitely doesn't.
Released in 1987 Katheryn Bigelow's "Near Dark" is what a real "revisionist" vampire flick looks like. Combining, the vampire film with the all of the conventions of the classic Westerns of yore. It is a highly intense, sometimes claustrophobic experience. It's ranks up there with some of the best vampire films of all time. But vampire genre aside, it is also just a smart well-written, and one directed with much gusto by Bigelow (Also responsible for the action classic "Point Break", the underrated "Strange Days" & the more recent "The Hurt Locker", which I have heard nothing but good things about.).It stars Adrian Pasdar (More recently of "Heroes" fame & Misses "One-of-the-Dixie-Chicks) as the human Caleb who gets involved with vamp, Jenny Wright ("Young Guns II", the great horror gem "I, Madman") and the rest of her "family" (Including "Aliens" vets Lance Henriksen, Jeanette Goldstein & Bill Paxton, all turning in standout performances).
This isn't any pussy-ass vampire flick. These vampires are monsters. The kills are hard. The action, uncompromising. But with their dark sense of humor, there is also a lot of fun to be had with this clan of vampires.
The film is currently being re-released on dvd. And with what seems like a shameless attempt to capitalize on the "hotness" of vampires (Because of "Twilight" and shows like "True Blood" and "The Vampire Diaries", no doubt.), the box art has gotten a lil' bit of a familiar makeover. Check this shit out...
Sigh. Oh, well. If it can get some people to check it out, more power to it. But I like my ol' dvd just fine. (The one posted at the top of this particular rant.)Anyways. "Near Dark" Check it!
Now onto...
Tales From The Shuffle:
This is entry is from yesterday. Didn't make it into to work today (Aww. Shucks. I know.) so there won't be a "Tales" from today...
1. "Parting Gift" - Fiona Apple - I know. I know. But you know what? She is a pretty gifted song writer. She has a great voice. She isn't like all the other cookie cutter "singers" out there nowadays who are all flash and no substance (I don't wanna name names, but... fuck it. I do. Beyonce. ["One of the best videos of all time"? Really?! Fucking really?! Oh well, look who's fool mouth that was coming out of. ] Fergie. That girl that kissed another girl. Taylor Swi... Fuck it. There's just too much shit out there right now. And obviously, most of you are buying it.) Oh, well. I digress. 
2. "Queen Of The Minstrel" - Cornell Campbell - I'm not sure of the history of the track, but it shares the melody and pretty much all of the same lyrics as Campbell's "Girl Of My Dreams" (My favorite track of his.). The main difference is the chorus which (Duh!) the lyrics "Girl of my dreams" is replaced with "Queen of the minstrel". Bo! Bo! Bo!
4. "What Do You Want To Be" - Oingo Boingo - Future film composer Danny Elfman's 80's rock band. "Best Of Boingo" is cool lil' album. The band is best known for "Dead Man's Party" (Featured and performed by Oingo in the "Back To School") and of course the title track from John Hughes' "Weird Science", but the Boingo are also responsible for some other kick ass songs.
5. "Things Can Only Get Better" - Howard Jones - Two back to back jams from the 80's. I remember having a 45" (That's vinyl, baby!) of this track. This and "No One Is To Blame" were his best known hits. Good shit, Howard!
Art Gallery: Two "burgundy" pieces from the sketchbook, "Ironic Cross" (To go with the vampire theme) and "Intravenous". No meanin'. Just havin' fun experimenting with that colored brush pen.
Enjoy.
B
"Click" to make these dudes, but bigger...
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
No comments:
Post a Comment