Album Review: Manic Street Preachers - Postcards from a Young Man (2010)

Manic Street Preachers - Postcards from a Young Man (2010)

For a band that once claimed that it would make one incredible album and then disband, ten albums and almost two decades later seems like they sort of failed on that promise. But that's a good thing, because the Manic Street Preachers have not only survived, but they continue to get better with age, as is evident on Postcards from a Young Man (2010), their most joyous musical statement yet.

While there's no denying that Postcards is a far cry from their punkish beginnings as heard on their incendiary debut Generation Terrorists (1992), it truly feels like the band is now where it should be. They've been on a bit of a roller coaster throughout their career, what with their chief lyricist Richey Edwards disappearing off the face of the Earth three albums in and all (only for the band to score big the following year with a mellower sound). This alone was enough of an identity crisis, but when the band hit a ten year bump with the surprisingly mediocre Know Your Enemy (2001), an album that tried and failed at capturing the band's early fire, it seemed that the Manics were on the way out. Fortunately, after a break, the band had a fifteen year renaissance that continues with this latest offering.

Postcards represents the pinnacle of the band latter day rejuvenation, something that began with 2007's excellent Send Away the Tigers. Tigers was both equal parts energy and elegance, something that the band had been in a bipolar conflict with since the 1996 breakthrough Everything Must Go. Yet, from Tigers onward, this was not a problem, and the band finally found and embraced their signature sound. This even applies to the dark but excellent Journal for Plague Lovers (2009), where edginess was reinforced by stark elegance. And just a year later, however, Postcards fully embraces the power of the elegance in a way that both reinforces and progresses the band's recent surge.

For once the band acts its age, and they do so by holding nothing back. The first three tracks, and singles ("(It's Not War) Just the End of Love", the title track, and "Some Kind of Nothingness") make up the most jubilant opening to any Manics album. Each song soars on big guitars, bigger strings, and monumental choral arrangements, yet never does it feel overblown or self-indulgent. Songs like the cascading "Golden Platitudes" or the relentless "A Billion Balconies Facing the Sun" feel more statements of celebratory hope rather than rants of hyperbolic political prose (like on Enemy). Grandiosity doesn't even begin to explain what occurs on Postcards, but it all feels like this is the final communique, so all must be said in big bold stanzas. If this is their last offering, they are going out with a hero's bang! The Manics are preaching to masses one more time, and it's well worth the listen.

McS

Album Review: Kamelot - Poetry for the Poisoned (2010)

Kamelot - Poetry for the Poisoned (2010)

Having climbed the mast of the symphonic metal scene to finally fly their flag with 2005's The Black Halo, Kamelot have spent the past five years capitalizing on their recent ascendancy for better or for worse. Whereas 2007's Ghost Opera was more or less a holding pattern for the band, Poetry for the Poisoned (2010) is a welcome progression, even if the results are, at times, inconsistent and awkward.

First and foremost, Poetry is heavier and darker than anything prior, and that alone makes it far more interesting than Ghost Opera (which felt almost lazy by the album's second half). In addition, Poetry boast some of band's best songs to date, especially the sinister opener "The Great Pandemonium." Other standouts include the moving "Hunter's Season" and "House on a Hill," the latter being arguably the band's best duet power ballad (featuring a excellent performance by returning siren Simone Simons). Unfortunately, much of Poetry's middle suffers from overly ambitious production with lackluster songwriting; it's not that the songs aren't interesting, they just don't achieve the musical impact that the best of Kamelot songs achieve (but at least it's not due to laziness). Despite this drawback, you have to hand it to the band for trying new things, and fortunately, things pick up toward the end. The title suite is absolutely fantastic and the closer "Once upon a Time" is the most rousing moment on Poetry (even if this track feels more vintage Kamelot than anything else on the album).

In the end, Kamelot make good on their promise to change things up a bit. And while Poetry is certainly not their best work, it's their most engaging work. The darker direction is something they can work toward perfecting on their next album; however, with vocalist Roy Kahn's recent departure, it will be interesting to see whatever comes next.

- McS

Album Review: Pete Yorn - Pete Yorn (2010)

Pete Yorn - Pete Yorn (2010)

Say what you will about Pete Yorn, but he's been putting out dependable folk-rock for the last decade. And even if some albums were better than others, at least he's amassed a handsome discography to go along with his rugged good Jesus-like looks. In 2009 alone he had twin releases (Back and Fourth and Break Up, the latter of which was with Scarlett Johansson), and barely a year later he has another! It would be easy to assume that this prolific period means a diluted pallet for Petey, but this is far from the case, as his eponymous self-titled fifth release is as vibrant a record as when he debuted ten years ago.

Like most acts that still mine the folk-rock scene, Yorn's musical style hasn't varied too much throughout his career; however, each release does bring its own twist to the table. With Pete Yorn (2010), the twist is a raw edge to the music previously unheard on any previous albums, and that makes for a relatively surprising listen considering his last two albums were more along the lines of acoustic pop. It's not to say that Yorn is now embracing punk, far from it, but he does rock a little harder this time. The guitars fuzz, the drums rollick, and the vocals don't always stay in tune, but that's fine because the music as a whole embraces a pleasurable amount of grit (thanks in part to the raw production of the Pixies' Frank Black/Black Francis). Such is the case with the excellent rockers "Precious Stone" and "Paradise Cove 1." But that doesn't mean that Yorn has lost his sensitive side, "Stronger Than" is one of his better tender moments, with it's earnestness only amplified by the raw production.

All in all, Pete Yorn just sort of works and is a rocking addition to Yorn's fairly sizable catalog. And while it's difficult to beat his seminal musicforthemorningafter (2001), Yorn has certainly left his first decade on a high note.

McS

Album Reviews

Warning: there were a few key albums from last year that I just didn't get to in time, but I'm going to get to them now, so sorry if they're a year late...

McS

Winnie the Pooh Review

Winnie the Pooh (2011)

Last year’s Tangled (2010) proved that Disney Animation Studios’ triumphant return was not limited to the seminal The
Princess and the Frog (2009). Not only that, but it also proved that DAS could also hold its own within this Disney-in-the-age-of-Pixar period (as Tangled was far superior to Toy Story 3 (2010), despite what the Academy would have you believe). Of course, the cherry for Tangled was that it was the studio’s golden 50^th feature offering, and it certainly celebrated it with a commercial and critical bang. Now, with 50 features under its belt, it’s all butter for Disney Animation Studios, or in this case, it’s all honey! That’s correct! 51 is Winnie the Pooh (2011)!

At first it might seem strange for Disney to push forward by reaching back (even though various divisions of the company do it all the time), but a second glace reveals a company making good on its mission to continue to not only entertain but enchant. Needless to say, the characters of A.A. Milne are nearly as prolific in the Disney canon as Mickey Mouse, with countless in-house movies and successful TV series’ following the original 1977 feature. It would have been one thing to make another high profile sequel that embraced current tendencies, but Disney would not be so crass to do this in its classic feature division. This offering could have either been a step in the wrong direction or just a mere retread. What we get though is a lovely modern retelling and so much more, yet it refuses to let the 21^st Century family marketplace dictate its aesthetics. Instead of retelling the story in the CG domain of Pixar (or even to just follow up their own Tangled), Pooh is presented in all of its classic glory in a classic hand drawn animation style filtered through the modern enhancements that only seek to enrich the medium. The result is a breathtaking wonder that pulls at the very heart of the Disney melt, without being overblown. The art is incredible and retains more life than most of its CG peers, yet it never feels old or outdated thanks to digital plating techniques that propel the analog to create a truly timeless feel. This is basically what The Princess and the Frog used to great effect, and the animation truly sings! While the story and characters are still frozen in amber (that’s a good thing), the audio-visual component is truly fresh and spectacular, yet wrapped in a gentle presentation. Even the live action introduction (a clear ode to Walt era Disney, and a time capsule heterotopia for those who know where to look) is a beautiful HD update that manages to retain the warm organic ambiance of classic Disney. It’s difficult to say anything else, because we all know the characters and the story so well and there is nothing new in that department, but that really really really REALLY is a good thing.

In the end, Disney has scored a hat trick in its latest renaissance. If Winnie the Pooh tells us anything it’s that hand drawn animation is just as important today as ever, even with Pixar taking all the money. This is a new life for Disney and for the medium. Maybe the most gracious aspect of this film is how humble it is, because Pooh is not trying to fight Cars 2 (2011), it doesn’t have to! This is classic Disney making magic on its own terms, coming full circle in a surprisingly subtle fashion. Few Disney Animation Studio features are as unassuming as this, but few are this honest. This is Disney at its base sum best!

McS

This is my happy place.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4VXQSs1Qfcc&feature=player_embedded#!

Alice in Wonderland Review

Alice in Wonderland (2010)

Better late than never, right? I’m talking both about this review and a modern big-budget live-ish action adaptation of Lewis Carroll’s Wonderland saga. And with the DVD fresh on store shelves, I figured it was as relevant a time as ever; in addition, this is pretty much my realm, so I should really really do this! Ladies and gentlemen: Tim Burton and Disney present: Alice in Wonderland (2010)

Disclaimer: this is not a re-make, this is a sequel. Alice (Mia Wasikowska) is now 19 and has returned to Wonderland because everything has gone to hell for everyone. For Alice, it’s the threat of being strongly encouraged to wed a young wealthy noble gentleman with a sensitive stomach and a rod up his own rabbit hole; for Wonderland, it’s the ascension of the Red Queen/Queen of Hearts (Helena Bonham Carter), who has turned the once magical realm into the aftermath of the Pemberton Festival. Upon reentering the rabbit hole, Alice rediscovers all the usual characters, especially the Mad Hatter (Johnny Depp). As it turns out, there is a resistance of sorts, led by the White Queen (Anne Hathaway), which Alice must champion in order to fulfill her destiny. Is that good enough an explanation? Good, because what ensues is a cinematic cluster-cuss of breathtaking visuals, note taking plot devices, time taking explanations, shifting accents, a who’s who of real British character actors, a who’s who of fake British character actors, airborne food, not enough salt, too much pepper, confusing looks, inevitable disappointment, and Professor Snape as the Caterpillar.

First of all: it looks great, but it looks very CG. Now this is fine, especially for a Wonderland, but the campy/twisted vibe that some people might associate with it is completely sucked out. It also gives a scale to Wonderland that is almost too big for its britches. The whole point of the books was for Alice to go from one isolated incident to the next, which was Carroll’s style; Alice is not a hobbit and Wonderland is not Middle Earth. Even if this is a sequel (and why did they choose to do that, so they could cushion the blow without offending the author´s ghost?), it’s messing with the base format for reasons that are clearly neither artistic nor amazing.

Second of all: Wasikowska’s Alice is a bit stale, which is a bit of a problem when basically everyone else is CG. Even Burton’s usual ace-up-the-sleeve Depp turns in a surprisingly inconsistent performance; he certainly should be allowed to shoot for the moon, but he needed to use the same cannon for each scene. Fortunately, Burton’s other usual ace-up-the-sleeve (and main squeeze) Bonham Carter is fantastic and fantastical as the Red Queen, and Hathaway gives a surprisingly enjoyably breezy performance as the White Queen. I could go through the previously motioned who’s who lists for the voices of the various CG Wonderland characters that we all know and love, but that would take far too long and none of them were really that memorable (except maybe for the effectively calculated performance of Matt Lucas as both Tweedledee and Tweedledum). Interestingly enough, the most memorable character happens to be the March Hare (Paul Whitehouse, who apparently is not on any who’s who list!), who’s manic behavior is of the kind of prime Burton substance that is mostly absent from the film (yes it’s a CG character and no I’m not contradicting myself; it’s really that funny, so shut up).

When Burton debuted in the mid 80s, he brought a twisted charm to a “bicycle thief” situation with Pee-wee’s Big Adventure (1985), which was followed by the gothic comic bonanza of Beetle Juice (1988). And then there was Batman (1989). This hat trick was impressive, but then to follow it with Edward Scissorhands (1990), Batman Returns (1992), and Ed Wood (1994)? That’s just too much too soon! And it seems to have turned out that way because the 2000s have seen his craft slip. From the faceless Planet of the Apes (2001) to the heartless Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (2005), most of the life has vanished from the director’s work, and that’s because Burton’s art has been truly tainted by the advent of CG. His specialty has always been analog claustrophobia, yet the vast majority of his output over the last decade has been on a more epic scale. The main exception to this was 2007’s gothic musical Sweeney Todd: The Daemon Barber of Fleet Street (2007), but that’s why it was his best film since Sleepy Hollow (1999); both good films with a more intimate focus. If Alice in Wonderland could have been treated more like these films (and I don’t mean include the hyperbolic violence), then we would have had a much richer and zanier experience. And this is all very unfortunate, because when you think about it, is there actually anyone more qualified to channel Carroll’s vision than he (and please don’t suggest David Lynch, because he goes down the rabbit hole in all of his work, and a self-serving rabbit hole at that)? That answer was and still is no. Burton is certainly the man for the job, but I think we needed a Burton from another decade.

In the end, there is so much to say and ask oneself about this film: Is it what I/we/anyone was hoping for? No. Is it a masterpiece? Not at all. Is this Disney’s fault? Actually… no. And the reason for this is simply that Disney already has the best Alice incarnation of any film format/medium. For the finest take on Carroll’s classic, look no further than the 1951 animated feature of the same name. But the very fact that Disney already possesses the best actually serves to improve the experience of Burton’s film, and there is still a lot of fun to be had, because the characters endure and nothing in Wonderland can truly die. Warts and all, this is still Alice in Wonderland and there is still some Burton/Disney magic that shines through, and that still should count for something.

3.5/5 (For the story, Burton gets a B-)

McS