Speaking Of Careers in Music… Recording Engineer, What’s That About?

Known as Recording Engineers, Sound Engineers or Audio Engineers… this is your desired title, and the “who’s you” of professions. Your on your way to becoming partly responsible for possibly some of the most explosive music in existence! Actually, you could be partly responsible for some of the most interesting commercials and/or movies also. (depending on what directions and opportunities you pursue)

So how does it work? Well before any recording is done, the producer, artists and YOU will discuss the “desired sound” of the recordings. This may be done to some extent before the project is started or may be specific to certain tracks after the project has begun.

Here’s what you’ll most likely be in for. (this is just an example of many) It’s 6:00… PM! You arrive at the studio and start setting up the equipment and instruments needed for the upcoming… 12 HOUR session! You’re 1 to 2 hours earlier then everyone else. It’s your job to have the studio ready for recording before the music artists and producer arrives.

Finally, the recording party arrives and recording begins. The engineer is responsible for working the track board, computers and other technologies to achieve the “desired sound” earlier discussed by the recording party. That’s basically what goes on during sessions.

In addition the engineer is responsible for mastering the recordings usually after the session is over. This is often overseen by the producer. Basically the engineer will “balance” the recordings to sound consistent to listening. To elaborate… often when recording, the artists may not sound exactly as you would hear when listening to a finished album. Sometimes the vocals may be a little louder then the music or visa versa. It’s the engineer’s job to smooth the recordings out. An engineer may also add certain sound effects to a project to reach the “desired sound”, sometimes an echo here or synthesized vocals there, etc. It’s the engineer’s job to polish the recordings to what ever extent. Finally, the engineer will break down the equipment and instruments when the session is over.

So how do you find yourself in the studio recording some of the biggest names in showbiz?

Nowadays it starts with schooling. You will need vast knowledge of computers and recording equipment. From there expect to be an intern or assistant engineer. Through time and experience you will be trusted to engineer on you own and obtain some of the most valuable connections in entertainment. Have Fun!

Now getting back to your computer, right now your cursor is blinking at the end of the words: careers in music recording engineer…

Hit Enter!

Dave Weston is a music industry entrepreneur, song writer and music artist affiliate. He is also the author of the Insider Music Careers Guide. You can learn more about music industry careers at http://www.music-career-guide.com

An Introduction to 8-string guitar

8-String guitar comes with eight strings. There are many variants of this musical instrument guitar, one maybe invented from Russia along with the 7-string guitar alternative in the 19th century. The musical instrument 8-string guitar has started gaining popularity very recently, notably among jazz artists such as Charlie Hunter, The Special Purpose, Richard Scott, and Terje Rypdal and other metal artists like Meshuggah, Korn guitarist James “Munky” Shaffer also had also been appeared with 8 string guitar during occasional live shows.

There are constantly increasing the number of online musical instrument store and musical instrument store offering 8 string guitars, and a production eight stings is been released during 2007 by Ibanez. Some of the other main manufacturing companies of 8 and also 9 strings guitars are Novax Guitars launched by Ralph Novak and Conklin Guitars.

Advantages of 8 string guitars:

• Full range of bass notes appears from A an octave lowers than the 5th guitar string, and up to the drop-D string.
• Latest 19-century model smaller scale and thin neck facilitates access to all 8 strings, for even Barres.
• It has the ability to play 10-string range of Mertz, and 7-string Coste range.
• It has the ability to play Baroque transcriptions at actual pitch.
• It plays Baroque 8-course lute pieces from originals.
• Play drop-D pieces with contact to the usual 6-string and drop-D fingerings.
• Low D and A quiver understandingly with 2 open strings.

This period balanced 8-string guitar shaped by Reis in about 1840 is a hard surviving example of the multi-bass guitars. It is designed after the well-known Viennese builder Anton Stauffer, as many Viennese builders copied the same Stauffer's design. Note that the additional 2 strings are not fretted and they are only the open string could be played. The headstock is a usual figure 8 shape, where the gathering for the 7th and 8th strings is interlocked.

The musical instrument 8 string variations can also be found in classical nylon strung instruments. They are usually tuned with two additional basses, which differ in pitch depending on the piece being played. Another general variation is to add an additional bass and treble string. The additional treble is almost forever tuned to A, while the added bass string generally falls on A, B, or C.

Different types of Guitar Amps

Once you have selected your guitar, you require finding an amp to go with it. Today there are various options available depending on size, sound, amplifier technology and configuration. We are here to give you some useful and necessary information that would steer you through the maze.

Various types of Amplifiers

There are basically four types of guitar amplifiers: Solid-state (analog), Tube, Modeling (digital), and Hybrids.

Solid-state Amps - These guitar amps are recognized solid-state as they use transistors for their preamp and for power sections as an alternative of tubes. They are extremely trustworthy and hardly ever require repairs. They normally have a very fresh tone, even though many come with "distortion" channels also. These amps are all the rage with players looking for a strong, dependable touring amp.

Tube Amps - Tube amps are favored by many guitarists for their tepid, fat tone and as well for the "organic" distortion. Tube amps are generally sound louder than solid-state amps of the same wattage and have an exact "feel", which you do not acquire from solid-state amps. Most tube amps have different channels, which could be switched from clean to distorted tones instantly. Tube performance could also be deteriorating over time, so tubes require changing occasionally.

Modeling Amps (Digital Amps) - Modeling amp uses digital processors to reproduce the sound of traditional and contemporary tube technology. Using software that "models" the sound of tube amplifiers (and cabinets); these amps put the sound of various amps in one box. Modeling amps are programmable, and frequently have fitted digital effects like delay, chorus, etc. Some as well comprise of digital or even for analog outputs with orator simulation for going direct in to a recording border or P A system.

Hybrid Amps - Combining the best of each kind of guitar amp into one package, these amps use a real tube in combination with the solid state power part of their amps. Marshall Valve state amps use tubes in the preamp part and solid state circuitry in the power section to make a tube tone with no necessity the use of power tubes.

Rocky is a Copywriter of www.gigasonic.com

He has written many articles in various topics.For more information visit:For more information visit:
www.gigasonic.com/alesis-hd24-recorder.html

Prophetic Music & The Arts

I believe that music and art is the language of God's heart and when we abide in Him, He communicates with our heart through music and song, revealing Himself to us and giving us revelations of His love and identity. In turn, we communicate to His heart our adoration and awe of who He is and all that is in Him. This is my definition of prophetic worship. As words connect with our minds, music connects with our heart. Music is able to convey a message which only our heart can understand. If our heart could speak, it would come out music. You can "feel" music and it provokes an emotional response. Through prophetic music and the arts, we are able to relate to His emotions, His pain and His love.
Prophetic music and art can capture the very heartbeat of God in a song, a tone, or a brush stroke, or even a splash of paint. We can experience prophetic revelations through many different styles of music and art as well. After all, God is the Master Creator. He creates through us and speaks to us through His vast and beautiful creation. God loves to communicate with us through prophetic music and art... Of course there are so many other ways in which the Lord will speak to us, but there is something about prophetic music and art that can communicate His love and carry us into the very heart of God Himself... the Oracle Flame.
The "Oracle" was the innermost sanctuary of the temple in the Old Testament where the glory of God resided. It is the inner nucleus of all that is Him and is now accessible through the conduit of His blood. This is the place in which we encounter the energy of God, which is His love. An "oracle" is also a revelation or a place of revelation. A place in which we experience the immensity and fervor of this love in it's many facets and expressions. Only here may we know Him. Only here may we be transformed into His likeness and reflect the light of His glory. Only here may we know true love. Only from this place may we truly love. Here we fall in love with Him again and become His Bride. Here we receive His authority, His power, His energy, the all-encompassing, eternal force of God... love.
In the Oracle there is a Flame. A massive, raging, roaring, violent, searing, all-consuming pillar of fire. This fire is His love. It is the source of all that is good. It is life, it is the very energy that sustains us. It was the creative force that caused the universe to be. It is His life-giving and death-crushing power, which heals and destroys. It is a balm and it is a weapon. It is the nucleus of life itself. The Lord wants to fan these flames of love upon us until we are completely consumed in it. Here we must abide. Here we must remain, never to leave. He is calling us to abide in the Flame, to live in the Flame and to become the Flame. To be flames of love in this dark age.
When we engage the Flame and immerse ourselves in His love, we will take on His nature, we will become like Him. We will become His intermediaries on the earth, just as a bride represents her husband. We will be His emissaries of love, directly channeling this life-giving energy into the hearts of those with whom we connect. This is the power which transforms entire communities, it is the power which heals our land, it is the power which can disarm the greatest of foes. It is not our knowledge or words or actions or faith alone which can do this, but love. Through His love, we receive His vast knowledge. His words will be on our tongue. We will act out of love and have the faith of a child. Our very existence will be love. Everything we do will be motivated by love. Love will be the source and root of all that we are, all that we say and all that we do.
We are called into the heart of God. He is inviting, enticing and drawing us into the realm of His holy presence. He has been softly whispering and gently persuading, and now He is persistently beckoning, adamantly warning, intently shouting and fiercely roaring. He is desperately crying out to us to come away with Him to the intimate love chamber of His heart. Will His Bride respond?
My heart is to see the Church return to the source, return to the Flame of their first love to become once again His true Bride on the earth. My vision is to see His Bride arise to her rightful place of authority beside her Lover in a perfect and death-defying union which will cause even the greatest of Hell's beasts to tremble in sheer terror. It will cause the entire world to stand in awe. It will cause angels to salute in respect. We have not known this kind of power because we have not known this kind of love. In His love we will have greater vision because we will see through His eyes. In His love we will have the courage to follow our dreams because we will be motivated by love. In His love, we will abandon all fear, we will know His truth, we will feel His emotions, we will speak His words. Our hearts will beat with His love. We will absorb His nature. We will be one with Him. We must abide in His love continually and let His flame consume us. We must get back to the Oracle Flame and here we must remain.
My purpose is to allow the heart of the Lord to communicate with His Bride through the spiritual conduit of music and art and to allow our hearts to communicate back to Him in worship. When this exchange takes place and we truly have a revelation of who He is, we will then have the authority to prophesy to the nations the mysteries of God and the wonders of His love. This prophetic worship is the key.
My vision is to facilitate a journey into the heart of God through prophetic worship, to express and declare His heart, passion, emotions and message to His Bride and to the nations of the world through a revelation of His love in the Oracle Flame.
The purpose of http://www.oracleflame.com is to encourage you in experiencing this revelation through the prophetic arts.
So sample the music, browse the art, explore the revelation vault or go connect with others of like mind in the blog or chat... and let the Master Creator speak to your heart and drench you in the flames of His love.

New Year's Eve: Is it the single biggest letdown of the year?

It’s the last week of the year and suddenly everybody you know is on this crazed mission to find a rocking party for New Year’s Eve. The big question you ask everybody you bump into is “What are you doing on New Year’s Eve”? and some of them has a perfectly planned out response – so as to not look like a loser – and some people just haven’t given the idea a second thought.

What is it about New Year’s Eve that gets everybody so worked up? No matter where in the world you are on the 31st of December, if you’re not “doing anything” you’re automatically classified as a loser. You spend all your energy chasing this surreal dream of a magical night. But what for?

A great party, gorgeous people and an international DJ..
A perfect way to spend New Year’s Eve entails a great party with gorgeous people and an international DJ playing the most amazing set. Sounds almost perfect on paper, just as long as it’s not superficial. Obviously there are people who are into those types of parties otherwise it wouldn’t be such a huge success, year after year after year. But if you’re not into that type of thing and you’re spending you’re week’s pay on a VIP all areas access pass just to show everybody that you were there, then who are you actually fooling?

Let’s face it, if you’re not into trance, dance and house beats there really is nothing for you to do on the most important night of the year. Or is there?

Here’s the deal..
The solution is simple. Instead of having that frantic, panicked grin on your face every time someone asks you what you are going to do on New Years Eve, throw the question right back at them. The only reason why they’re asking you is probably because they don’t know what they are going to be doing themselves. So why not invite him/her with you and your buddies, the more people the more interesting the party. And it doesn’t have to be a raucous, call-the-cops-to-put-the-music-off kind of party. The possibilities are endless and the sky’s the limit.

Make your own night to remember
Different people means different personalities and there is guaranteed at least one interesting person in the room, one person you have failed to get to know properly, one joker, one hot chic/guy who came with your friend from work, one person that knows how to work the grill and one person who knows someone that knows someone whose cousin has an empty house that night. Isn’t it also weird that you bump into all the people that you haven’t seen in like decades, just before New Year’s? So make the most of it. Invite them round too.

And even if you don’t have an empty house, go out to an arb place where all of you can just chill out and have fun (whatever that’s supposed to mean).

If you are going to be at one of those infamous parties that gets people talking about it for the next year, remember that it’s the people you spend it with that actually count. You don’t NEED to be at the trendiest hotspots or the most elite nightclubs to have a great time. It's the people you're with and the mindset you have that all form part of the makings of a great night.

About The Author:
MyMusicSearch.co.za is the South African music portal for music and music lifestyle in South Africa. Find everything you'll ever need to get fuelled on local talent, this one's for the fans.

Police Tickets Keep Fans Wrapped Around Their Finger

Legendary rock band, The Police are set to bring their crowd-pleasing performance to both Toronto and Montreal with two shows apiece in late July, before returning to the Air Canada Centre for a final Canadian date in November. There are plenty of ticket deals to be found, as amateur ticket speculators and professional ticket brokers from all over North America have flooded the secondary ticket market with various quantities of inventory, which they had purchased in hopes of turning a quick profit in the volatile and sometimes lucrative secondary market.

The Police Tour is arguably the most sought after ticket of the year with over 1,770,000 tickets sold to date, according to ThePolice.com. The 80抯 rock-trio kicked off their highly anticipated reunion tour last month with a three-night run in Vancouver, BC, initiating the start of a world tour with more than 70 performances currently scheduled.

With face value prices originally as high as $240 per ticket and two to three times that amount in the secondary market, it came as a pleasant surprise to fans in Vancouver, that come opening night, prices had dropped 200% from where they were when the tour was first announced. For their first official concert in 23 years, prices bottomed out to the point where tickets were sold for half of the face value, ($49-$89 each), as listed on ShowTimeTickets.com.

The world tour is scheduled to end early next year, following two North American legs, a European tour, and dates throughout Latin America, Japan, Australia and New Zealand. The last date of the European tour, October 19th at Cardiff抯 Millennium Stadium, sold out within an hour of going on sale, setting a record for the venue previously held at three hours by Oasis and the Foo Fighters in 2005, as reported by BBC News.

Remaining Canadian Dates:

Air Canada Centre - Toronto - July 22, 2007 - Tickets starting at $165

Air Canada Centre - Toronto - July 23, 2007 - Tickets starting at $165

Bell Centre - Montreal - July 25, 2007 - Tickets starting at $150

Bell Centre - Montreal - July 26, 2007 - Tickets starting at $75

Air Canada Centre - Toronto - Nov 8, 2007 - Tickets starting at $315

*All prices as of June 21st, 2007 on ShowTimeTickets.com

Alison Moyet The Turn CD Review (W14)

With so much fine music available today, do we really need a new album from 80's songstress Alison Moyet? Well, yes, actually we do - a new Alison Moyet album is always welcome to this reviewer's ears.

Alison's career went commercially south with the release of the Hoodoo album back in 1991, and she hasn't been able to recapture her former commercial success since. However, while Alison was hemorrhaging fans at an alarming rate, those who stuck by her were rewarded with some of the best music of her career; the aforementioned "Hoodoo", the brilliant "Essex" (1994) and the career-defining "Hometime" (2002). Quality control took a sharp decline with the release of her utterly forgettable album of covers, "Voice", in 2004.

Alison is back with her first album of original material in 5 years, "The Turn", which has been described by her label, W14, as being the album that "Alison Moyet was born to write and record." Fantastic for her - but is it any good?

Well, yes and no.

The album kicks off strongly with the cracking lead single 'One More Time', which acts as a brilliant warm up for the album's standout track 'Anytime at All' - a song of soaring beauty which showcases Alison's voice superbly. 'Can't Say It Like I mean It', 'The Sharpest Corner (Hollow), 'It's Not The Thing Henry' and 'A Guy Like You' are each trademark Alison Moyet, and are delivered with the passion that you would expect from one of the best female artists that England has ever produced.

The inclusion of the three songs from the play "Smaller", in which Alison starred alongside comic genius Dawn French, seems odd and unnecessary considering that these songs were heard more than 12 months ago; their placement on an album of new material smacks of filler rather than killer. 'Fire' is one of the weakest songs on the album and Alison seems to have forgotten to write a chorus for it.

Overall it's a strong collection of songs, and is a marked improvement over Voice, but you can't help feeling that it's all been done and heard before. Perhaps it's time for Alison to bring something new to the table to keep her remaining fans happy.

3 out of 5.

To learn more about Alison Moyet or The Turn, visit the Alison Moyet Forum.

This review may be republished in unedited form.

The Most Powerful Tool in The World - The Goal and the Plan

Ok, once the hair on the back of your neck has gone down we can get started with the planning process. I don't know what it is about "planning" that gets so many of us creative types squirming in our seats. I've had monumental arguments with fellow bandmates over planning and I've even had bands break up because of it. Musicians seem to think that goals and plans are anti-creative or anti-artistic. That couldn't be further from the truth. Goals and plans serve to focus our energy and focus our creativity. They actually help us produce more and better art. If you only absorb one concept from this set of 21 let it be this: "Set Goals, Make Plans to Achieve Them, and Work on Your Plans Everyday." Nothing else can mobilize you and move you forward faster than a good plan and a little discipline. Now let's talk about how to make a plan.

1 Decide Exactly What You Want. Pick a goal. If you're new at this, start small. You don't have to reinvent jazz with you first goal. Pick something that you know you can achieve. Something challenging but doable. If you don't believe that you can achieve it, you will not. Make sure that it is measurable, that you will be able tell when you have completed it. Make it detailed and specific. For instance, don't say "I want to become better at playing in all twelve keys." Instead, decide to memorize the melody to the song "I Got Rhythm" in all twelve keys and be able to perform it at 160 BPM in any key from memory.

2 Write It Down in Vivid Detail. Write it down on paper. With as much detail as possible. What exactly will you be able to do when your goal is accomplished? How will you know when you've accomplished your goal? How will you measure it? The more clearly defined your goal is, the greater the likelihood of achieving it. Physically writing it down on paper can not be over-emphasized. Write and re-write your goals daily. This will keep your mind focused and your "eyes on the target."

3 Give Your Goal a Deadline Without a deadline a goal is simply a wish. Decide when you will achieve your goal. On what date will you be able to perform "I Got Rhythm" in all twelve keys from memory? If you find that you are not going to hit your deadline, simply create a new one. Not to say that deadlines should be changed on a whim. You should always strive to hit your goals on time, but there will be occasions when you will have to modify your plan. As you practice this method you will get better and better at estimating how long a goal will take to complete.

4 Make a List Write down everything you can think of that you will have to do to achieve this goal. List every single step. Break your goal down into tiny bite-size pieces that you can complete in one practice session. As you think of more steps, add them to your list. This is how you accomplish a big goal. You have to break it down into the actual steps that you will complete in your daily practice sessions.

5 Put Your List in Order Now turn your list into an actual plan. Put every step in order. What will you have to do first? Second? And so on. This will now serve as your blueprint. This blueprint will move you forward fast. With out a blueprint you are at the mercy of luck and chance. You are simply meandering around aimlessly. It's kind of like firing a bow and arrow with a blindfold on. It's worse actually. It's like firing a bow and arrow with a blindfold on and no target. You could hit anything, but chances are you will hit nothing. With a plan, it's as if you have a target in front of you, there's plenty of light and your blindfold is gone. You can work until you hit the target, and then move on to the next one.

6 Take Action Go practice. Get busy. Work on your plan. Action is the key to success. Without action you cannot accomplish anything. With action you will accomplish great things. Even if your plan is flawed you can accomplish a lot, simply by taking action. Action, Action and more Action.

7 Practice and Work on Your Plan Everyday Develop the habit and discipline of practicing and working on your plan every single day. Even if you only have twenty minutes to practice, do it. Learn something or take a tiny, tiny step forward. You will be amazed by how much you can learn and how fast your music can progress by utilizing this formula. This is the most powerful tool to help you progress on your musical journey and become a monster jazz musician.

Free Guitar Lessons Online: The Most Critical Fact

You're learning guitar because you want to play on your guitar your favorite music, and you want to enjoy the feeling of drawing out of your guitar those enticing sounds.

And you want to learn to play your guitar in an optimum way, so you'll awaken the admiration of everybody listening to you.

And you can achieve your goals, when you take into account a few and very important concepts, specially when you are self-teaching.

I won't tell you that they are easy. I抣l tell you that you can definitively do them, just putting will and work. Like everything deserved in life.

Let抯 go through them.

Attitude: It is the main thing you must have in mind. I'm talking here about a strong and decided state of mind and body that puts you on the track of all the effort needed to meet your goals. Without hard work you won't get anything great in life. You won't even be a fair guitar player.

Listen in a different way: Until now most likely you listened just to enjoy it. From now on, you' listen music to enjoy it and learn from it. You'll listen trying to find out how the player is playing every specific part of the piece; what is the player intending to give; what difficulties is the player encountering, and how is he/she going through them; how would you like to have that part played.

Practice daily: Yes! Practice daily! Not less than two hours a day (one in the morning, and one in the afternoon, evening or night). I told you that it would be hard.

Practice efficiently: During the time segments you assigned to practicing, do just that.

Practice. Practice the lessons, exercises, scales, chords, pieces you must practice. Be clearly sincere with yourself. Don抰 fool yourself, thinking that you are doing your practice when you're only playing something you like to play and not what you must play.

Play with others: Whenever possible, specially when you have reached a playing knowledge and skills (and it isn't required very much), play sometimes with other guitar players.

You'll be surprised about how much you can learn.

Look for a teacher: Yes. Look for a teacher. If you are learning to play guitar on your own, there抣l be a time when you'll need the guidance and advices of a guitar teacher.

There are many things than cannot be written and read. They must be shown and explained over the guitar itself. And I guarantee you that you'll be amazed about what you will learn.

Remember. Attitude, change your listening habits, practice daily and efficiently, play with others whenever possible, and have a teacher to make your knowledge perfect.

There's no mystery in learning to play the guitar, but though rewarding it's a way of hard work.

Take it like that, and you'll become a very good guitar player.

You will find more very useful tips and advices visiting the resources in the Author's Signature paragraph below.

Learn How To Sing High Notes

Amongst the vast range of vocal works, you will find high notes sung in most of the glorious, heroic, influential, lofty and passionate musical performances. It抯 the real greatness bought by the high notes. Such notes often appear in the climaxes of musical works and inspire the emotions of all who hear them.

Audiences love to listen to high notes and singers like to produce them, so this ideal quirk makes singing high notes hugely desirable all round!

Singing high notes could be described as almost instinctive and is indeed within the human nature. Throughout the world, there will be people of all backgrounds, including native minorities from various countries, who sing high notes in the most passionate manners when their emotions are excited. Letting out feelings via high-note vocals is a universal form of expression.

Whatever the reasons may be, it抯 true to say that people who enjoy learning to sing are usually in favor of high-note singing. This phenomenon not only occurs in singers who are already of the high voice range but also exists for those in the low voice group as well. However, desperately shouting high notes is extremely dangerous. People are often misled by the thought that the higher the notes they抳e reached by forced straining, the more success they have achieved. Without basic foundation and mastering of the correct singing skills of how to sing high notes, however, this shouting method does much more harm than good!

The singing of high notes actually belongs in the advanced stage of vocal training. There is a lot of confusion surrounding this area of singing and too many people tend to rely on their own methods, or blindly imitate their singing idols to produce high notes with uncontrolled, indiscriminate shouting, causing a lot of negative consequences.

Many have developed severe vocal deficiency.

Although I have rich knowledge and experience in the area of singing high notes, I do not actually advocate that people go ahead and sing notes that exceed their ability, nor do I advocate that people sing high notes frequently without the foundation of knowing how to sing them correctly. Besides, high notes are not all there is to the average vocal composition. The performance of a piece of vocal work is determined by many factors; it should be comprehensive and all-rounded in nature, delivering various aspects of sound to the audience抯 ear.

Nevertheless, singing beautiful and enchanting high notes is still a most stirring idea and is one to be encouraged. But being able to sing them well requires training in order to understand the right method for how to sing high notes.

Crash

Rarely do I find myself equally liking and disliking a movie but that is exactly where I find myself with Crash, Paul Haggis’ first film following the critically acclaimed Million Dollar Baby. Crash follows a group of people in L.A. as their lives collide unexpectedly and violently over a forty-eight hour period.

Crash works because it takes an honest and serious look at racial, ethnic and class relations in Los Angeles a city that is the epicenter of such tensions. Instead of just offering the same overused and overdone stereotypes, Crash forces you to look at what we think we know about these issues and forces you to look at them from a point of view that may not have previously considered.

The movie is helped in part by the amazing performances of the cast. As star studded as the cast is that doesn’t necessarily guarantee great acting but in Crash the actors more then deliver and there is more then one Oscar worthy performance in the film.

Don Cheadle is outstanding as usual as a hardworking detective whose mother loves his thug younger brother then she does him. Matt Dillon is more then convincing as a bigoted cop who is caring for his ailing father and Sandra Bullock’s performance as the wasp wife of the district attorney who is very honest about her contempt and fear of anyone who doesn’t look like her is arguably the best of her career. It’s easy to forget that Bullock is a pretty good actress considering her recent choices in films (think Miss Congeniality 1 and 2 come to mind) and rarely have we seen her in a dramatic role, but she does an excellent job here that is more than worthy of a little gold man.

Crash doesn’t work because in order to tell its tale it relies too heavily on coincidence. The movie wants you to believe that all of these lives intersect in a two day span in a way that irrevocably changes everyone’s life and for many their view of the world. I realize that L.A. is a small town in that everybody knows somebody but give me a break. I don’t think Matt Dillon’s character is the only cop in the city or Michael Pena as the only locksmith. I don’t believe Terrance Howard’s was the only other person driving a black navigator or one of the young thugs just happens to have a cop for a brother. The movie tries hard to make you believe that all the coincidences are possible but it just doesn’t work.

I can accept that the lives of these characters intersect here and there but the movies insistence that they all connect in some way takes away the level of reality that the movie strives so hard to achieve. Everyone fitting in this nice little circle rings false and is actually completely unnecessary to the telling of the story.

Crash also suffers because it offers little to no analysis of these issues. It more or less says, “Here it is do with it what you may.” I didn’t expect answers and would have been very disappointed had the film tried to offer any but if offers very little in the way of hope and when you lay such heavy material on an audience you should at least offer some hope that things can and will be better.

Crash is a must see movie. I think in a country that has managed to convince itself that race issues no longer exist this film is a stark reminder that that is far from reality and that there is still a lot that needs to be done and that should be done. Often we don’t have the opportunity or we simply don’t want to look at the world outside of the little box we have created for ourselves. Crash forces you to look outside of that box and in the end I believe you will be better for it.

Tamika Johnson is a freelance writer and owner of PrologueReviews.com. To read more reviews by Tamika or to have your book, music or film reviewed visit http://www.prologuereviews.com

Sith Connects the Dots

Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith does exactly what it has to do, no more and no less. It brings each of the characters into place for the real Star Wars to begin by connecting the dots between the two ponderous prequels that preceded it and the magical movies from the late 70’s and early 80’s that started this phenomenon. It does so competently, but doesn’t really add anything new, in my opinion, to the overall saga. Having seen all of the prequels now, I’m not sure that Darth Vader’s backstory was even worth telling.

It’s possible that the problem is larger that the flaws built into George Lucas’ movies. It’s hard to take Vader all that seriously as an icon of evil when he spends so much time on TV these days chopping mop handles with his light saber and ‘force’ choking talking M%26Ms. How seriously could we take Hannibal Lector if he was on TV every commercial break telling us how he likes to eat his Whopper with some fava beans and a nice Chianti? Of course, Star Wars was the movie that created modern movie marketing and merchandizing, so maybe its poetic justice that it gets all the life sucked out of it by being oversold. It hasn’t seemed to hurt the bottom line, but for me it takes all the magic out of the movie.

As for the movie itself, it manages to tell the story of Anakin Skywalker’s descent into darkness competently. Even Hayden Christensen manages to be somewhat convincing as the future dark lord. You certainly sense that the character is more confident and at ease once he has embraced the darkness. But it’s no great performance, not even as marginally chilling as the performance Anthony Hopkins has given in the above mentioned role. I don’t know if Christensen lacks the chops to play truly dark or Lucas lacks the talent to direct truly dark, but for all of the darkness promised in this movie, I just didn’t see it. Even the Emperor seemed like a lightweight compared to what I remembered from Return of the Jedi. Physically both Anakin and Palpatine manage to wreak a lot of havoc, killing one lifeless character after another, but because we don’t really care about these characters it has almost no impact. Much is made of Anakin killing the Jedi Younglings, but every time they talk about it it’s “Anakin killed the younglings.” Nobody says the word “children,” which is the key to the horror of the moment. Lucas, knowing how many children would be in the audience, probably wanted to avoid talking about dead children, but by using a word like ‘youngling’ he detaches his audience from the tragedy and Vader from his darkness.

Anakin’s fall into darkness is convincing enough, if somewhat contrived. The loyalty conflict between serving the Jedi and the legitimate authority of the Chancellor would have been a more interesting story than the nonsense about Padme. Anakin’s visions of her death in childbirth lead him to seek the power over life and death one can gain from the dark side. Apparently in the vast technocracy of Coruscant pre-natal care is unheard of, since Padme didn’t know she was having twins, but it’s hard to imagine that many women die from childbirth in such an advanced society. Lucas gives us this as an excuse to have sympathy for Vader, a reasonable explanation for his fall into darkness. It would have been more interesting to have him choose to defend the Chancellor not because of some dark power the man had over life and death, but because he saw him as the legitimate leader of the government threatened by a Jedi coup. Anakin could’ve fallen on the wrong path thinking he was doing the right thing, which is the way many good people come to be evil. Rather we are given a character that chooses darkness as a means to an end, but a character Lucas still wants us to have sympathy for.

As for Padme, one has to wonder what happened to this character. She went from feisty fighter to pregnant lump. The only reason she’s in this movie is to give Anakin a reason to go dark and to give birth to Luke and Leia in time for them to be in place for Episode IV. After all the things she fought so hard for in the previous movies, you think she would want to stay alive and fight for her children, rather than just give up and die. Yet that is what she does. Other characters are also just part of Lucas’ giant game of connect the dots. One gets the impression that Jimmy Smits’ Bail Organa could’ve been a really interesting character in the prequel trilogy, providing some of the sorely missed Han Solo type charm to the series, but all he’s good for is saving Obi Wan and Yoda and providing a home for the future Princess Leia. Samuel L. Jackson is wasted as Mace Windu, his brief light saber duel with Palpatine is mostly forgettable, and his death was almost laughable. Obi Wan, Yoda and Palpatine are treated better by Lucas’ story, but then they are a vital part of the next three episodes and are not as easily dismissed as poor Padme was.

In terms of action and visuals this movie certainly delivers everything a Star War fan could want. It does a better job of being a Star Wars movie than Attack of the Clones, but still falls shorts, in my opinion, of capturing the magic of the original trilogy. Some critics have said that Episode III is a tragedy of Shakespearean proportions, and it certainly has all of the elements of one, but it’s executed more like a Saturday morning cartoon than one of Shakespeare’s plays. But maybe that’s all that it is, or all Star Wars ever was, a big flashy Saturday morning cartoon.

Kingdom of Heaven

Kingdom of Heaven is Ridley Scott抯 way of trying to recapture the success of Gladiator and to turn Orlando Bloom into the international sensation and instant leading man that Crowe became after is Oscar winning performance in that Gladiator. I don抰 fault Bloom for trying. I know he had to be thinking how could he lose? Sure it抯 an epic drama and none of the other recently released historical epics (including his Troy) have come anywhere near the success of Gladiator, but Dreams has Ridley Scott, Gladiator抯 mastermind at the helm, he couldn抰 go wrong卹ight? Well, that抯 not exactly what happened. See someone forgot to tell Orlando that he抯 not Russell Crowe. And while he looked damn good in those elf ears, it takes much more then a pretty face to pull off an epic drama the likes of Kingdom of Heaven and unfortunately for us all Bloom just doesn抰 have it.

I hate to criticize Orlando. I do. I think he抯 gorgeous and love to watch him on the big screen and he抯 not a bad actor he just doesn抰 have the acting chops or the screen presence to be convincing as the salvation of a nation. Heaven tells the story of Balian (Bloom) a lowly blacksmith who has lost his child and then his wife to suicide. He soon learns he has a nobleman for a father who has returned to recruit him on his journey to go and fight the holy Crusades and save Jerusalem from falling back into the hands of the Muslims led by the historic military leader Saladin. Agreeing to go in hopes of being able to atone for his wife抯 suicide, he soon learn that knowing one抯 enemy isn抰 as clear as knowing where your religious beliefs lie.

Outside of Bloom not having what it takes to carry the roll of Balian, Heaven doesn抰 work because the story is choppy and unclear. Scott decides to tell several stories: the jockeying for power amongst the Christians, the tenuous treaty between King Leopold and Saladin, Saladin and his relationship with his people, and an unnecessary love story that only seems to be there so there can be an excuse to see a semi-nude Orlando and instead of seeming interesting and entertaining it all just came across as one big convoluted mess.

Instead of all of these mini tales the movie would have been much more interesting had it just focused on Saladin抯 and Balian抯 grudging but shared respect for one another and the battle over Jerusalem. Instead we are left with a lot of unnecessary screen time filled by boring sub-plots and a badly used Edward Norton who is stuck behind a tin mask mumbling for a good portion of the movie. Talk about bad use of an actor, Norton would have made a much better Balianl then Bloom and might have been able to stir up some emotions and excitement where Orlando could not.

Despites these gaffes, Kingdom of Heaven does offer some notable performances namely Jeffrey Irons who plays Tiberius a battle weary Sheriff of Jerusalem and commander of his own troops who is vehemently opposed to breaking the treaty they have with Saladin and David Thewalis the Hospitaler and Balian\'s father抯 friend and subsequently the one who helps Balian become the man his father wanted him to be.

While relatively entertaining, Kingdom of Heaven is ultimately a disappointment. I expected more out of Bloom but I really expected a great deal more out of Scott, after all he is the guy who brought us Gladiator and help turn Russell Crowe into a house hold name. Unfortunately, for everyone Kingdom of Heaven is no Gladiator.

Tamika Johnson is a freelance writer and owner of PrologueReviews.com. To read more reviews by Tamika or to have your book, movie or film reviewed visit http://www.prologuereviews.com

Monster in Law

Monster in Law marks Jane Fonda’s return to the big screen after a fifteen year absence and Jennifer Lopez’s return to film after the Bennifer debacle. Monster in Law tells the story of Viola (Fonda) a Barbara Walters-esque reporter who loses her job to a young, blonde skinny Minnie who she thought was there to fetch her coffee. Upon learning this news she has an on air breakdown and after some time in a psyche hospital she leaves only to learn that her only child Kevin (Michael Vartan) is going to marry some girl (Lopez) that she has never met. At this point hijinks ensue (think Meet the Parents with the women at each other’s throats instead of the men) and an all out war erupts between Fonda and Lopez with Vartan’s character remaining completely clueless. I was under the impression this was supposed to be a comedy, except someone forgot to tell Anya Kochoff that when writing a comedy script the jokes should occur throughout the entire movie not just the last half hour or instead of a comedy you end up with a bumbling mess that makes you cringe instead of laugh and leaves you wondering how Klute’s Bree Daniel and yes, how even the Wedding Planner chose this as their comeback film.

In Jane’s defense she did the best she could with the script she had. It is hard to make Lemonade with rotten lemons, and that is just what this script is…rotten. The jokes were played out and unfunny and even the usually funny Wanda Sykes couldn’t save this stinker. Also, Fonda just isn’t suited to physical comedy. She tried: there were all the requisite falls, slaps and over exaggerated reactions but none of it played well. When I was supposed to be laughing I shuddered thinking, “Wow, could this possible get any worse?” Fonda’s role would have been more suited to a Streisand, a Midler or a Streep, they would have that aging, vindictive diva role down and might have been able to save the film, I stress the might.

Fonda wasn’t the only one cast badly. Jennifer Lopez as the sweet, innocent, underachieving, slightly dimwitted and very naive Charlie was about as believable as Ben Affleck saying “I do.” The scene where she was gushing about the importance of marriage and how her marriage to Greg was going to be the most important day of her life was one of the few funny moments in the movie, even though it wasn’t scripted to be so. You just can’t sell Lopez as the gushing, sweet, anti-diva Charlie. It’s just not possible. Let’s face it, we’ve seen too many marriages, too many divorces, heck too many engagement rings and this is the same woman who purportedly had an all white clause in her rider and if it wasn’t fulfilled all hell broke loose…sweet and innocent, I think not.

And poor Michael Vartan. I guess he was just happy to have a starring role in a movie so it didn’t matter to him that he was little more then a glorified prop, a well dressed extra, a poor excuse to propel this sorry excuse for a plot along for the 102 minutes it bumbled across the screen. Vartan had very few lines, those he had were just plain bad and he then was unceremoniously dismissed for two-thirds of the movie just so Fonda and Lopez could go at each other without him being present. The movie could have really gone on without him. As it was it was quite easy to forget that he existed or that he was even the reason why of all the shenanigans in the movie were happening to begin with.

Believe it or not Monster in Law wasn’t all bad. About two thirds in something amazing happened: thanks to a doctor who was really a waiter, a bowl of gravy and a really bad allergic reaction to nuts I had my first real laugh of the movie. Also, watching Fonda squirm as her mother in law played by Elaine Stritch, shows up was priceless. Those scenes were the best acted and best scripted scenes of the entire film. They almost made the movie worth watching.

All in all stay away. Monster in Law isn’t worth your time or money. Seeing Jane Fonda back on the big screen was nice but I really wish she would have chosen a better vehicle to make her long awaited comeback.

Tamika Johnson is a freelance writer and owner of PrologueReviews.com. To read more reviews by Tamika or to have your book, movie or film reviewed visit http://www.prologuereviews.com

Monster in Law

Monster in Law marks Jane Fonda’s return to the big screen after a fifteen year absence and Jennifer Lopez’s return to film after the Bennifer debacle. Monster in Law tells the story of Viola (Fonda) a Barbara Walters-esque reporter who loses her job to a young, blonde skinny Minnie who she thought was there to fetch her coffee. Upon learning this news she has an on air breakdown and after some time in a psyche hospital she leaves only to learn that her only child Kevin (Michael Vartan) is going to marry some girl (Lopez) that she has never met. At this point hijinks ensue (think Meet the Parents with the women at each other’s throats instead of the men) and an all out war erupts between Fonda and Lopez with Vartan’s character remaining completely clueless. I was under the impression this was supposed to be a comedy, except someone forgot to tell Anya Kochoff that when writing a comedy script the jokes should occur throughout the entire movie not just the last half hour or instead of a comedy you end up with a bumbling mess that makes you cringe instead of laugh and leaves you wondering how Klute’s Bree Daniel and yes, how even the Wedding Planner chose this as their comeback film.

In Jane’s defense she did the best she could with the script she had. It is hard to make Lemonade with rotten lemons, and that is just what this script is…rotten. The jokes were played out and unfunny and even the usually funny Wanda Sykes couldn’t save this stinker. Also, Fonda just isn’t suited to physical comedy. She tried: there were all the requisite falls, slaps and over exaggerated reactions but none of it played well. When I was supposed to be laughing I shuddered thinking, “Wow, could this possible get any worse?” Fonda’s role would have been more suited to a Streisand, a Midler or a Streep, they would have that aging, vindictive diva role down and might have been able to save the film, I stress the might.

Fonda wasn’t the only one cast badly. Jennifer Lopez as the sweet, innocent, underachieving, slightly dimwitted and very naïve Charlie was about as believable as Ben Affleck saying “I do.” The scene where she was gushing about the importance of marriage and how her marriage to Greg was going to be the most important day of her life was one of the few funny moments in the movie, even though it wasn’t scripted to be so. You just can’t sell Lopez as the gushing, sweet, anti-diva Charlie. It’s just not possible. Let’s face it, we’ve seen too many marriages, too many divorces, heck too many engagement rings and this is the same woman who purportedly had an all white clause in her rider and if it wasn’t fulfilled all hell broke loose…sweet and innocent, I think not.

And poor Michael Vartan. I guess he was just happy to have a starring role in a movie so it didn’t matter to him that he was little more then a glorified prop, a well dressed extra, a poor excuse to propel this sorry excuse for a plot along for the 102 minutes it bumbled across the screen. Vartan had very few lines, those he had were just plain bad and he then was unceremoniously dismissed for two-thirds of the movie just so Fonda and Lopez could go at each other without him being present. The movie could have really gone on without him. As it was it was quite easy to forget that he existed or that he was even the reason why of all the shenanigans in the movie were happening to begin with.

Believe it or not Monster in Law wasn’t all bad. About two thirds in something amazing happened: thanks to a doctor who was really a waiter, a bowl of gravy and a really bad allergic reaction to nuts I had my first real laugh of the movie. Also, watching Fonda squirm as her mother in law played by Elaine Stritch, shows up was priceless. Those scenes were the best acted and best scripted scenes of the entire film. They almost made the movie worth watching.

All in all stay away. Monster in Law isn’t worth your time or money. Seeing Jane Fonda back on the big screen was nice but I really wish she would have chosen a better vehicle to make her long awaited comeback.

Tamika Johnson is a freelance writer and owner of PrologueReviews.com. To read more reviews by Tamika or to have your book, movie or film reviewed visit http://www.prologuereviews.com

Kingdom of Heaven

Kingdom of Heaven
Kingdom of Heaven is Ridley Scott抯 way of trying to recapture the success of Gladiator and to turn Orlando Bloom into the international sensation and instant leading man that Crowe became after is Oscar winning performance in that Gladiator. I don抰 fault Bloom for trying. I know he had to be thinking how could he lose? Sure it抯 an epic drama and none of the other recently released historical epics (including his Troy) have come anywhere near the success of Gladiator, but Dreams has Ridley Scott, Gladiator抯 mastermind at the helm, he couldn抰 go wrong卹ight? Well, that抯 not exactly what happened. See someone forgot to tell Orlando that he抯 not Russell Crowe. And while he looked damn good in those elf ears, it takes much more then a pretty face to pull off an epic drama the likes of Kingdom of Heaven and unfortunately for us all Bloom just doesn抰 have it.

I hate to criticize Orlando. I do. I think he抯 gorgeous and love to watch him on the big screen and he抯 not a bad actor he just doesn抰 have the acting chops or the screen presence to be convincing as the salvation of a nation. Heaven tells the story of Balian (Bloom) a lowly blacksmith who has lost his child and then his wife to suicide. He soon learns he has a nobleman for a father who has returned to recruit him on his journey to go and fight the holy Crusades and save Jerusalem from falling back into the hands of the Muslims led by the historic military leader Saladin. Agreeing to go in hopes of being able to atone for his wife抯 suicide, he soon learn that knowing one抯 enemy isn抰 as clear as knowing where your religious beliefs lie.

Outside of Bloom not having what it takes to carry the roll of Balian, Heaven doesn抰 work because the story is choppy and unclear. Scott decides to tell several stories: the jockeying for power amongst the Christians, the tenuous treaty between King Leopold and Saladin, Saladin and his relationship with his people, and an unnecessary love story that only seems to be there so there can be an excuse to see a semi-nude Orlando and instead of seeming interesting and entertaining it all just came across as one big convoluted mess.

Instead of all of these mini tales the movie would have been much more interesting had it just focused on Saladin抯 and Balian抯 grudging but shared respect for one another and the battle over Jerusalem. Instead we are left with a lot of unnecessary screen time filled by boring sub-plots and a badly used Edward Norton who is stuck behind a tin mask mumbling for a good portion of the movie. Talk about bad use of an actor, Norton would have made a much better Balianl then Bloom and might have been able to stir up some emotions and excitement where Orlando could not.

Despites these gaffes, Kingdom of Heaven does offer some notable performances namely Jeffrey Irons who plays Tiberius a battle weary Sheriff of Jerusalem and commander of his own troops who is vehemently opposed to breaking the treaty they have with Saladin and David Thewalis the Hospitaler and Balian's father抯 friend and subsequently the one who helps Balian become the man his father wanted him to be.

While relatively entertaining, Kingdom of Heaven is ultimately a disappointment. I expected more out of Bloom but I really expected a great deal more out of Scott, after all he is the guy who brought us Gladiator and help turn Russell Crowe into a house hold name. Unfortunately, for everyone Kingdom of Heaven is no Gladiator.

Tamika Johnson is a freelance writer and owner of PrologueReviews.com. To read more reviews by Tamika or to have your book, movie or film reviewed visit http://www.prologuereviews.com

Sith Connects the Dots

Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith does exactly what it has to do, no more and no less. It brings each of the characters into place for the real Star Wars to begin by connecting the dots between the two ponderous prequels that preceded it and the magical movies from the late 70’s and early 80’s that started this phenomenon. It does so competently, but doesn’t really add anything new, in my opinion, to the overall saga. Having seen all of the prequels now, I’m not sure that Darth Vader’s backstory was even worth telling.

It’s possible that the problem is larger that the flaws built into George Lucas’ movies. It’s hard to take Vader all that seriously as an icon of evil when he spends so much time on TV these days chopping mop handles with his light saber and ‘force’ choking talking M%26Ms. How seriously could we take Hannibal Lector if he was on TV every commercial break telling us how he likes to eat his Whopper with some fava beans and a nice Chianti? Of course, Star Wars was the movie that created modern movie marketing and merchandizing, so maybe its poetic justice that it gets all the life sucked out of it by being oversold. It hasn’t seemed to hurt the bottom line, but for me it takes all the magic out of the movie.

As for the movie itself, it manages to tell the story of Anakin Skywalker’s descent into darkness competently. Even Hayden Christensen manages to be somewhat convincing as the future dark lord. You certainly sense that the character is more confident and at ease once he has embraced the darkness. But it’s no great performance, not even as marginally chilling as the performance Anthony Hopkins has given in the above mentioned role. I don’t know if Christensen lacks the chops to play truly dark or Lucas lacks the talent to direct truly dark, but for all of the darkness promised in this movie, I just didn’t see it. Even the Emperor seemed like a lightweight compared to what I remembered from Return of the Jedi. Physically both Anakin and Palpatine manage to wreak a lot of havoc, killing one lifeless character after another, but because we don’t really care about these characters it has almost no impact. Much is made of Anakin killing the Jedi Younglings, but every time they talk about it it’s “Anakin killed the younglings.” Nobody says the word “children,” which is the key to the horror of the moment. Lucas, knowing how many children would be in the audience, probably wanted to avoid talking about dead children, but by using a word like ‘youngling’ he detaches his audience from the tragedy and Vader from his darkness.

Anakin’s fall into darkness is convincing enough, if somewhat contrived. The loyalty conflict between serving the Jedi and the legitimate authority of the Chancellor would have been a more interesting story than the nonsense about Padme. Anakin’s visions of her death in childbirth lead him to seek the power over life and death one can gain from the dark side. Apparently in the vast technocracy of Coruscant pre-natal care is unheard of, since Padme didn’t know she was having twins, but it’s hard to imagine that many women die from childbirth in such an advanced society. Lucas gives us this as an excuse to have sympathy for Vader, a reasonable explanation for his fall into darkness. It would have been more interesting to have him choose to defend the Chancellor not because of some dark power the man had over life and death, but because he saw him as the legitimate leader of the government threatened by a Jedi coup. Anakin could’ve fallen on the wrong path thinking he was doing the right thing, which is the way many good people come to be evil. Rather we are given a character that chooses darkness as a means to an end, but a character Lucas still wants us to have sympathy for.

As for Padme, one has to wonder what happened to this character. She went from feisty fighter to pregnant lump. The only reason she’s in this movie is to give Anakin a reason to go dark and to give birth to Luke and Leia in time for them to be in place for Episode IV. After all the things she fought so hard for in the previous movies, you think she would want to stay alive and fight for her children, rather than just give up and die. Yet that is what she does. Other characters are also just part of Lucas’ giant game of connect the dots. One gets the impression that Jimmy Smits’ Bail Organa could’ve been a really interesting character in the prequel trilogy, providing some of the sorely missed Han Solo type charm to the series, but all he’s good for is saving Obi Wan and Yoda and providing a home for the future Princess Leia. Samuel L. Jackson is wasted as Mace Windu, his brief light saber duel with Palpatine is mostly forgettable, and his death was almost laughable. Obi Wan, Yoda and Palpatine are treated better by Lucas’ story, but then they are a vital part of the next three episodes and are not as easily dismissed as poor Padme was.

In terms of action and visuals this movie certainly delivers everything a Star War fan could want. It does a better job of being a Star Wars movie than Attack of the Clones, but still falls shorts, in my opinion, of capturing the magic of the original trilogy. Some critics have said that Episode III is a tragedy of Shakespearean proportions, and it certainly has all of the elements of one, but it’s executed more like a Saturday morning cartoon than one of Shakespeare’s plays. But maybe that’s all that it is, or all Star Wars ever was, a big flashy Saturday morning cartoon.

Man on Fire: How Sound Tells the Story

Man on Fire: How Sound Tells the Story

“I’m the sheep that got lost, Madre.” And so goes the description John W. Greasy offers of himself in Tony Scott’s Man on Fire (2003). John Greasy (Denzel Washington) is a lost soul trying to find his way back to the light, back to living. He is a man seeking redemption for the atrocities he committed in the past as a black ops agent for the government. His light comes in the form of Lupita Ramos (Dakota Fanning) the young charge he is set to protect. As he slowly finds his way again, finds a reason for living, it is suddenly and violently lost to him as a heinous kidnapping plot goes array and the young girl is ripped away from him. Scott’s use of sound acts as a way to document Greasy’s evolution through the film and highlights major turning points in the movie.

Scott’s use of auditory flashbacks as Creasy tries to commit suicide early in the movie, shows how isolated and desperate he is and the level of guilt he has regarding his former occupation. As the scene beings we see shots of Creasy drinking and crying for seemingly no reason at all. We see him praying and reading his bible but toying with his gun as well. Soon we begin to hear pieces of past conversations that Creasy has had with other characters in the movie: “I’m the sheep that got lost,” and “Do you think God will forgive us,” and “I couldn’t guard a corpse.” Each of these phrases plays over and over again as the scene escalates and Creasy becomes more and more drunk and isolated from his surroundings.

Hearing these thoughts play again and again allow us to know what is going on inside Creasy’s head. We understand that the man is fighting his demons and that he has extensive guilt for the atrocities he has committed in the past, ones he does not believe he can be forgiven for. These sound flashbacks are just as effective as images of his past deeds would have been because they allow us to understand what could bring him to kill himself. As the scene ends and he puts the gun to his head and pulls the trigger it isn’t a surprise.

As the film continues Creasy’s friendship with Pita gives him a new lease on life. Where he was looking to kill himself before and did not think he was able to guard anyone, he had managed to form a loving relationship with the young girl he was protecting. Nothing illustrated that relationship more then the sound bridge used as a transition from Pita’s music lessons to her kidnapping. Pita wanted to get out of her music lessons and Creasy told her all she had to do was burp periodically throughout the lesson and her instructor would be offended and never agree to see her again.

As Pita begins her lessons Creasy waits outside for her to finish. As he’s waiting the kidnappers converge on their location and soon a firefight ensues. Throughout this sequence what we hear is Pita taking her lessons and burping in regular intervals as her instructor continuously admonishes her.

Hearing Pita follow Creasy’s advice shows how far he had come since the beginning of the movie. Before he couldn’t find a reason to live and didn’t think himself capable of the job he had of protecting Pita; now the relationship between the two of them is so strong that she trusts his advice to get her out of an unwanted situation.

Hearing the lessons playing over the kidnapping attempt underscores how devastating losing her was to Creasy because his ability to live again was wrapped up in his relationship with Pita.

Scott continues to use sound as a way to document Creasy’s evolution throughout the film when he uses the song Pita was playing when she was kidnapped as the music for the scene when Creasy finds out she has been killed. From the moment he he’s told Pita is dead through to his decision to stay in Mexico and hunt down her kidnappers we here that song.

Using the song is significant becomes it serves as foreshadowing for Creasy’s decision to exact revenge for Pita’s murder. It is as if the song is a representation of his thought process, so when we learn of his intentions to go after the kidnappers it isn’t a surprise. It also serves as the final turning point for Greasy in the film: first he was alone and desperate, then he’s found his way again with his relationship with Pita, and now he’s back to being the man he’s tried to forget, except this time he was killing to right a wrong instead of it being his job.

Once Creasy was told that Pita’s missing, Scott uses the sound of Pita screaming his name as she was being kidnapped as a way to mark Creasy’s progress on his revenge mission. Using her screaming repeatedly throughout the film served as a reminder as to why he was after her kidnappers.

As he uncovered more and more about the kidnapping plot the flashback of Pita screaming was used more frequently as a way of escalating the action that was taking place. As the movie came to an end we hear that same scream, except this time Pita is being released by her rescuers and running to Creasy. Hearing the same scream used to mark her missing and then used as a way of harking her return offers closure for Creasy.

He has completed what he set out to do and his road to redemption is complete. So, as we watch Creasy die at the end of the movie, there isn’t a sense of regret but that the troubled man we meat early in the film is finally at peace.

Scott’s use of Sound in Man on Fire offers insight into the mind of its lead character, John Creasy and helps to represent his evolution throughout the film as well as major plot twists.

Tamika Johnson is a freelance writer and owner of PrologueReviews.com. To read more reviews by Tamika or to have your book, music or film reviewed visit http://prologuereviews.com

A Look at the Heart of American Beauty

A Look at the Heart of American Beauty

Sam Mendes’ darkly comic portrayal of suburbia in his first movie, American Beauty (1999) takes a hard look at what happens when you’ve accomplished the American Dream only to realize that it isn’t enough. Lester, the film’s anti-hero wakes up one morning deep in a mid life crisis and decides that he wants something more then the life he has carved out for himself and proceeds to search for that something and in the process, disrupts the lives of those around him, particularly his wife Caroline. Through his use of color and surrealist elements Mendes shows how passionless and unhappy Caroline and Lester are in their seemingly perfect world and how true happiness lies not in doing what’s expected or in material goods but in finding the beauty in being true to yourself.

The color red and roses are a symbol of passion and desire and Mendes uses the combination to symbolize the lack of passion and in turn the misplaced desires in the character’s lives. Caroline, Lester’s wife is a woman who on the outside seems to have it all: a family, a big house, and a great career. But we soon find out that nothing in Caroline’s world is perfect except for the red roses she takes great pride and care in growing.

These roses can be found everywhere: lining the yard, on end tables, the center piece on the dining room table and even in the home she’s trying to sell. The roses represent the passion that Caroline has lost for life but can’t admit she no longer has. She is a deeply unhappy woman who tries to mask that unhappiness by projecting forth an image of perfection. She believes that if she thinks positive then everything will be okay. She listens to and recites daily affirmations to herself to keep up her positive mental state. The truth of the matter is that she is in a loveless marriage, is estranged form her child and is in a career she hates.

She envies and later desires the success (and attention) of her rival, the “Real Estate King” whose image is portrayed by big red signs placed in the yards of the homes he is selling. She learns form him that “In order to be successful one must project the image of success at all times.” Caroline’s roses are the embodiment of that idea since they are the only thing in her life that she is succeeding at and are as perfect as she pretends the rest of her life to be.

Lester realizes that his wife’s roses are representative of the lack of desire she has for him and their life together. So, it isn’t a surprise that his own misplaced desires are represented by the very flowers that he loathes because they get all the affection and attention he does not. As Lester begins to find his way first by standing up to his wife and then by quitting his job he begins an unhealthy fantasy for his daughter’s teenage friend, Angela.

These fantasies are very surrealist in nature and are some of the most beautiful and disturbing scenes in the movie. Each of these breaks in reality feature Angela intimately involved with the roses: they are coming out of her blouse or she is only covered in roses or she is immersed in bath that is filled with rose petals. Lester uses this fantasy as the only hope he has in his otherwise miserable life. His desire for Angela spurs him to make life changes that he believes will allow her to desire him and ultimately make him happy. Lester eventually learns that this fantasy isn’t they way to his happiness, yet using Caroline’s roses as a part of the lust he has for someone else turns the flower that’s representative of his misery to one of power and hope for Lester.

Mendes continues to play with the theme of color in Caroline’s life as a means of showing her unhappiness in the way that she dresses. She is the only one of the main characters that is brightly dressed. Most everyone else in the film can be found in muted colors: earth tones, grays and blacks but Caroline can always be found in color. Under her earth tone suit she has on a bright red slip. Her nightgown that she wears to bed is a light blue.

Later in the film in a very comic moment at a drive thru at a fast food restaurant she can be found in a red suit. Her desire to convince the world and herself that she is happy isn’t just saying or telling people she is happy but dressing happy as well. This obsession for projecting perfection even through her dress makes for poignant moments in the movie as reality breaks through a happy veneer.

Caroline cries as she isn’t able to sell the house though she has on her red slip and her roses on the table. She loses out on a moment of closeness with her husband because of her attachment to material goods as she looks perfect in her blue dress and high heels. Her attempt at finding happiness is abruptly lost as she’s caught in a compromising situation in her sexy red suit.

Throughout the movie Caroline misses the fact that she isn’t going to find happiness in all of her stuff or on how pretty the image she projects seems to be but only taking an honest look at herself and her life will bring her the happiness she finds so elusive. Her brightly colored garb makes her stand out in the movie but also makes her unhappiness more obvious.

Lester also tries to find happiness in colorful material objects. He turns in his boring Camry for a fire red 1970 Pontiac firebird a car he’s desired since he was a kid. He purchases and plays with a red remote control car, yet unlike his wife his use of material goods is a stepping-stone in trying to figure out what will make him happy, not as a way to cover up his unhappiness. As the movie progresses Lester finds searching for happiness out side of himself is pointless, that it starts from within. In the end it isn’t a brightly colored car or fantasies of a young girl that make him happy but black and white memories of his childhood, of his daughter of the early years with his wife that give him peace and happiness.

Mendes makes us question how we define happiness and success as he explores the inner-lives of a marriage that on the outside seem like they have it all, that they are living the American Dream.

Tamika Johnson is a freelance writer and owner of PrologueReviews.com. To read more reviews by Tamika or to have your book, music or film reviewed visit http://www.prologuereviews.com

Heart of Platinum

Heart of Platinum

I always imagined that the Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, that book within the book that offered all kinds of useful information to those thumbing their way across the Milky Way, was a rather fluid thing, in a constant state of being rewritten and reedited as new information was gathered by writers such as Ford Prefect. So it didn’t really bother me that they made changes to the story in bringing “The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy” to the big screen. Having seen the results of a completely faithful screen translation recently (Sin City), I was more than happy to see “Hitchhiker’s” be less than faithful. Unfortunately, being Hollywood, they changed all the wrong things.

The basic story (and it’s always been the most basic of stories) of an English everyman named Arthur Dent who gets saved from the demolition of Earth by his good friend (and undercover alien) Ford Prefect to go on an incredible journey through the galaxy remains mostly unchanged. They still have to listen to Vogon poetry, conveniently translated by a Babblefish, before they are thrown out an airlock into space. They are still improbably saved from death by the Heart of Gold, the only starship in the universe with an improbability drive. That starship is still commanded by two-headed Galactic President Zaphod Beeblebrox, (nothing like the name Zaphod Beeblebrox to make your spell checker more depressed than Marvin the Paranoid Android) and crewed by the aforementioned android and a girl named Tricia MacMillan (Trillian for short) that Arthur once tried to pick up at a party. And they all end up on the planet Magrathea, home of an ancient race of world builders who had originally built Earth itself as a huge computer designed to calculate the question to life, the universe and everything (the answer, already computed over 7.5 million years by another supercomputer named Deep Thought, is 42). They just take a few different detours than those familiar to readers of the books. The problem is that those detours result in a kind of philosophical shift away from what was always at the heart of the “Hitchhiker’s” story.

“The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy” is a book about the absolute absurdity of existence. The answer the question of life, the universe and everything is 42, and nobody is ever sure of the question (how many roads must a man walk down?). And that absurdity, first and foremost, is what the book was about, with characters and plot merely added on for context. Arthur Dent was a man to whom life happened. He was a victim of the absurd whims of a universe that would seek to destroy his home planet on the same morning that it destroyed his home. Surviving that absurdity, without actually learning anything valuable from it, is what made Arthur Dent who he was. The problem for Hollywood is that that is not the kind of hero they want for one of their movies. No, Hollywood heroes need to learn, or redeem, or defeat, or triumph over something.

So Dent, whose entire sad little life was annihilated in the first moments of the movie, when given the opportunity to return to that life in the end makes the uncharacteristic decision to continue to travel the galaxy with Trillian, Prefect and George W. er, Beeblebrox. It was not a decision that the Arthur Dent I remember would’ve made, but of course in the book it wasn’t an option. The world building Magratheans never finished Earth Mark II, and if they had it probably would have been minus the trappings of civilization that Arthur remembered. So by recreating the world entirely as it was in the moments before its destruction, this film takes all the wind out of the earth shattering opening. Although if absurd things like the Earth being destroyed to make a hyperspace expressway can happen, I suppose equally absurd things like a whole new Earth being created can also, but it shifts Arthur from a victim of circumstance to a being wholly in control of his situation. He now has that choice, return to a place identical to home or continue his adventures in the galaxy. Whatever he chooses, he is no longer a victim of the absurdity of life, a fact that defeats the point of the story.

Other changes in the story are also counter-philosophical. Zaphod Beeblebrox is now searching for the question to the answer of life, the universe and everything. Although his reasons are as shallow as we might’ve expected, I don’t see the need to change from his original goal of finding the treasure of the wealthy Magratheans. It all still takes you to Magrathea. No mention is made of the fact that Earth was only minutes away from calculating that question, which takes all of the irony out of the timing of Earth’s destruction (but I suppose if the Magratheans could rebuild the planet exactly as it was in the moments before its destruction the mice wouldn’t have needed Arthur’s brain, they could’ve just waited a few more minutes for the answer). Also, the Arthur and Trillian love story feeds us the old love conquers all, will make a new man out of you cliché that seems completely at odds with the overall philosophy of the books. If love gives meaning to life, then life has meaning and absurd old 42 doesn’t mean a thing. We always knew that Dent was attracted to Trillian, but being the man he was we never expected him to take the risks required to win her. Tacked on detours to see a strange cult leader and to rescue Trillian from Vogosphere don’t really add much to the story, just more layers of confusion for those not familiar with it.

Of course it’s supremely tricky to adopt a book about an idea to the screen, especially a book about as absurd an idea as absurdity. The actors, director and screenwriters (including the late Doug Adams, author of the book) all manage to be fairly competent. And in its own way this film is a legitimate take on the “Hitchhiker’s” story, especially if you like happy endings. But at its heart, it’s more platinum than gold; it’s just not the “Hitchhiker’s” that we all know and love.

A Lot Like Love

A Look at the Heart of American Beauty
Sam Mendes’ darkly comic portrayal of suburbia in his first movie, American Beauty (1999) takes a hard look at what happens when you’ve accomplished the American Dream only to realize that it isn’t enough. Lester, the film’s anti-hero wakes up one morning deep in a mid life crisis and decides that he wants something more then the life he has carved out for himself and proceeds to search for that something and in the process, disrupts the lives of those around him, particularly his wife Caroline. Through his use of color and surrealist elements Mendes shows how passionless and unhappy Caroline and Lester are in their seemingly perfect world and how true happiness lies not in doing what’s expected or in material goods but in finding the beauty in being true to yourself.

The color red and roses are a symbol of passion and desire and Mendes uses the combination to symbolize the lack of passion and in turn the misplaced desires in the character’s lives. Caroline, Lester’s wife is a woman who on the outside seems to have it all: a family, a big house, and a great career. But we soon find out that nothing in Caroline’s world is perfect except for the red roses she takes great pride and care in growing.

These roses can be found everywhere: lining the yard, on end tables, the center piece on the dining room table and even in the home she’s trying to sell. The roses represent the passion that Caroline has lost for life but can’t admit she no longer has. She is a deeply unhappy woman who tries to mask that unhappiness by projecting forth an image of perfection. She believes that if she thinks positive then everything will be okay. She listens to and recites daily affirmations to herself to keep up her positive mental state. The truth of the matter is that she is in a loveless marriage, is estranged form her child and is in a career she hates.

She envies and later desires the success (and attention) of her rival, the “Real Estate King” whose image is portrayed by big red signs placed in the yards of the homes he is selling. She learns form him that “In order to be successful one must project the image of success at all times.” Caroline’s roses are the embodiment of that idea since they are the only thing in her life that she is succeeding at and are as perfect as she pretends the rest of her life to be.

Lester realizes that his wife’s roses are representative of the lack of desire she has for him and their life together. So, it isn’t a surprise that his own misplaced desires are represented by the very flowers that he loathes because they get all the affection and attention he does not. As Lester begins to find his way first by standing up to his wife and then by quitting his job he begins an unhealthy fantasy for his daughter’s teenage friend, Angela.

These fantasies are very surrealist in nature and are some of the most beautiful and disturbing scenes in the movie. Each of these breaks in reality feature Angela intimately involved with the roses: they are coming out of her blouse or she is only covered in roses or she is immersed in bath that is filled with rose petals. Lester uses this fantasy as the only hope he has in his otherwise miserable life. His desire for Angela spurs him to make life changes that he believes will allow her to desire him and ultimately make him happy. Lester eventually learns that this fantasy isn’t they way to his happiness, yet using Caroline’s roses as a part of the lust he has for someone else turns the flower that’s representative of his misery to one of power and hope for Lester.

Mendes continues to play with the theme of color in Caroline’s life as a means of showing her unhappiness in the way that she dresses. She is the only one of the main characters that is brightly dressed. Most everyone else in the film can be found in muted colors: earth tones, grays and blacks but Caroline can always be found in color. Under her earth tone suit she has on a bright red slip. Her nightgown that she wears to bed is a light blue.

Later in the film in a very comic moment at a drive thru at a fast food restaurant she can be found in a red suit. Her desire to convince the world and herself that she is happy isn’t just saying or telling people she is happy but dressing happy as well. This obsession for projecting perfection even through her dress makes for poignant moments in the movie as reality breaks through a happy veneer.

Caroline cries as she isn’t able to sell the house though she has on her red slip and her roses on the table. She loses out on a moment of closeness with her husband because of her attachment to material goods as she looks perfect in her blue dress and high heels. Her attempt at finding happiness is abruptly lost as she’s caught in a compromising situation in her sexy red suit.

Throughout the movie Caroline misses the fact that she isn’t going to find happiness in all of her stuff or on how pretty the image she projects seems to be but only taking an honest look at herself and her life will bring her the happiness she finds so elusive. Her brightly colored garb makes her stand out in the movie but also makes her unhappiness more obvious.

Lester also tries to find happiness in colorful material objects. He turns in his boring Camry for a fire red 1970 Pontiac firebird a car he’s desired since he was a kid. He purchases and plays with a red remote control car, yet unlike his wife his use of material goods is a stepping-stone in trying to figure out what will make him happy, not as a way to cover up his unhappiness. As the movie progresses Lester finds searching for happiness out side of himself is pointless, that it starts from within. In the end it isn’t a brightly colored car or fantasies of a young girl that make him happy but black and white memories of his childhood, of his daughter of the early years with his wife that give him peace and happiness.

Mendes makes us question how we define happiness and success as he explores the inner-lives of a marriage that on the outside seem like they have it all, that they are living the American Dream.

Tamika Johnson is a freelance writer and owner of PrologueReviews.com. To read more reviews by Tamika or to have your book, music or film reviewed visit http://www.prologuereviews.com

This Autumn's Footwear Fashion; Platforms and Booties!

Sarah Jessica Parker famously made Manolo Blahnik a household name in Sex and the City. However, long before the erstwhile Carrie Bradshaw and her girlfriends made the legendary shoe designer a figure of mass consumption, "Manolo's" were already an essential item in the celebrity world and amongst the fashion elite. But today, as more and more people demand their goods, how can the Manolos, Jimmy Choos and Vivienne Westwoods of the world still get away with charging women thousands of pounds for their shoes? The simple explanation - women love shoes - may seem an overused stereotype but it is, sadly or not, very true.

Take one of the leading shoe trends for Autumn 2006: the platform. Chunky heels are once again all the rage, but they owe more to 1980s decadence than to the Swinging Sixties. The recent return to the skinny jeans and leggings of the Bananarama age has prompted a comeback for the heavy platform and the stacked heel. But don抰 get carried away with images of Olivia Newton John trying desperately to extinguish her cigarette with her killer heel at the end of Grease - stacked platforms may also be worn with a bell-shaped dress or skirt, so there's hope yet.

Also on the footwear catwalk this Fall are ankle length "booties". Once again hailing back to the 1980s, booties vary slightly in length, from below the ankle to just above the ankle. Often available with side-zips and buttons, the bootie will also be worn with leggings this season, as well as skirts, jeans or slim trousers. Though many designs are available, the most popular has so far proved to be Steve Madden's black suede model with a brown wooden heel.

Animal print footwear has also been gracing the catwalks and fashion magazines with its presence this season. Bring out the Cruella De Vil in you (animal-friendly, of course) by donning stylish zebra, leopard or Dalmatian-print platforms, worn with black tights and a pencil skirt. Top fashion gurus have even okayed the right to mix animal patterns together by assembling them with plainer accessories, so fashion slaves may feel free to go completely wild.

The prevalence of patent leather once again harks back to that vampish, 1980s feel; worn with a belted sweater and a skirt, patent leather boots can bestow a classy day-to-evening appearance, and if layered with a polo neck, will provide a more mod-ish look. Last but not least, the Autumn season would amount to nothing if it did not include the high boot. Though booties may currently be stealing the limelight, high boots will always provide a sophisticated air that few other items of footwear are capable of; wear with a patterned coat, or a mini skirt and a cropped jacket to achieve maximum effect.

Clearly, this Autumn's fashionable footwear is both trendy and functional, whether worn with the season favourite (leggings) or not. But rest assured, you won't need Carrie's contacts or Charlotte's money to obtain them: most high street retailers, like Schuh, sell similar models for much lower prices, so that anyone can afford these essential Autumn fashion items.

About the author:
Andrew Regan is an online journalist who enjoys socialising at his local Edinburgh rugby club.