K.I.S.S. - The Singing Edition

I'm a fan of simplicity. In pretty much anything I attempt, I live by the mantra of "KISS."

Keep. It. Simple. Stupid.

Now, I'm sure that this is why I like many things that operate on very simple levels. I liked Avatar, for example, as a basic, direct allegory about environmental responsibility. Yes, you could make a much more "realistic" and "educational" film on that subject, but, from experience, that leads you directly into a quagmire trying to impart knowledge, rather than impart emotion. Cameron has a rather direct, and, shall we say, "unencumbered" writing style. He gives you the info you need, and moves on to the next bit that info suggests.

Keep. It. Simple. Stupid.

F.Y.I. - This should not be construed as me making a case for Avatar as a work of unadulterated genius. It ain't perfect, but, man...You have to take it for what it is. It's direct, and you can tell Cameron has his heart very much in it.

Anyway, point is, I find directness, clarity of intent and execution, to be the true way to transcendent work. Take your material, believe in it, and express it in a direct, emotional way. Even the most "complicated" successful works of art or craft hew to that guide.

So, yeah...how does this relate to singing? Well, I read Sal Nunziato's Burning Wood blog on a regular basis, and his entry today led me to this piece by John Eskow at The Huffington Post. I cannot tell you how much I agree with these guys, I can't tell you how man times CByrd and I will listen to somebody screech 234 notes into a 12 note melody like, and turn to each other with a "please, stop singing" look.

I liken it to being an actor. When you approach a role, you'll find so, so very often that, the less you do, the more effective it is. (Johnny Depp is the exception that proves the rule...sometimes.) There is something to Mamet's "speak the words, brave and true" in True and False.

What does your character want? How do you use the lines to get it? Once you understand how to answer those questions, and can mean it, you can play the role. The rest is paint and window treatments. It's frippery to prove to ourselves and others that we're "good." It's showing off. Sure, sometimes you can connect it, and make it real. However, those moments are most effective if you use them precisely and sparingly.

So, an actor has dialogue and intent. In a similar manner a singer has lyrics and melody. What's really annoying, as both Sal and Eskow point out, is that the standard practice now is to see how much you can "add" to the melody. Every line has become an opportunity to express the singer's range, and if that's not your thing, you're overshadowed.

Case in point, caught a bit of American Idol last night, saw a cute little gal named Emily Anne Reed. a Kewpie doll voice, plays guitar, and her apartment just burned to the ground. When she sang "You're Getting to be a Habit With Me," I really loved it, kind of a squeaky Billie Holiday vibe, but she just sang the song. No futzing around, no pointless runs around the melody line, just sang the song. Of course, the judges had to almost not send her on, with Steven Tyler "iffy" about it. Eventually they did, but CByrd and I looked at each other and said, "out in the first round."

And that is abysmally sad.



This girl had a solid voice, a unique style (for this crowd), and a direct delivery. I could see, with the right material, becoming a fan, but surrounded by these Mousekateer wannabes, with their all over the place sense of melody, SHE'S the one that seems "weak." Uniqueness is not valued, nope...just give us another 12 almost-off-key runs on the word "hope."

Of course, it's American Idol, what do I expect? Yet, it does reflect the sorry state of what our culture has come to see as "good" singing. If you try to critique, you'll get that "it's soulful."

Ray Charles is soulful. Stevie Wonder is soulful. Gregg Allman is soulful. Dug Pinnick is soulful. You aren't going to see any of these people turning a 2 note word into a 45 note phrase. Exclamations? Howls? Tangents between lyric lines? Sure! They're also singing these lines like they've lived them, like they're the single, most important words that could come out of their mouths. The commit to the song, they aren't committed to impressing people with how they can throw their voice around.

I've said before I'm a pretty poor vocalist. I stand by that, but I also know a good singer when I hear one. I know because I respond to the performance on an emotional level. God knows, I've got emotional over people who were clearly over-singing, too, but, more often than not, it's a good song, performed well that really hits me.

Of course, I'm into rock and roll, singer-songwriters, not this pop-diva-thing. I'm not the audience for American Idol, or Christina Aguilera, or any of that stuff. That said, I'd like to see a little more variety in what we're told is "great singing."

Monday Randomness

Didn't watch the Golden Globes last night. I tend to view the Globes as a scam. Awards that seem to go to whatever studio gives the Hollywood Foreign Press the best party, but you can't deny that they influence the Oscars, for good or ill.

So, so happy that Jeff Bridges won. The film, as I've said, is nothing new, but the performances is vintage Jeff Bridges, and, frankly, he should've been showered with awards years ago.

So, so disappointed that Robert Downey Jr. beat Matt Damon in the Musical/Comedy category. It's the award version of star fucking...Downey is "hotter" than Damon, and his move made more bank. Never mind that Damon just killed in The Informant!

And Avatar took it home over The Hurt Locker. Netflix shipped us The Hurt Locker over the weekend, so I expect to be watching it very soon (finally), so I can't really compare, but, that said, I don't think this is a horrible choice. Avatar did provide a visual experience the likes of which I've rarely experienced, and lest we forget...film is a visual medium. I read a snarky tweet that said, "Avatar can be watched on mute to the same effect."

Well, so what?

I'd lay money, based on Kathryn Bigelow's past films, you could say the same about The Hurt Locker, or many of Martin Scorsese's films, or Steven Speilberg's. The fact you could tell a story using mainly visual information is a really illogical way to criticize a movie, or it's maker.

Avatar isn't the greatest movie ever, or even of this year, in my opinion, but it's top-flight ginormo-scale Hollywood filmmaking, and it actually has a compelling message. It will trigger a huge change in, at the very least, how films are presented. This is why I don't entirely balk at it winning awards, and certainly don't think Cameron is undeserving of beating out his ex-wife Bigelow for a Best Director win. Avatar is a director's film, just like The Hurt Locker, the kind that takes every skill a director has to pull off.

I think it's really great that two genre, "action" directors are apparently the frontrunners going into the Oscars. Look at Bigelow's filmography, she and Cameron are from the same school. It's just easy to be snobbish, and think that, because Bigelow made a film about Iraq, and not blue aliens, hers is "more important."

Anyway, I fell down yesterday morning. I am stiff, sore, and my right elbow is tender to the touch. I thank those who've showed concern, but also want to reassure everyone...If I REALLY hurt myself, the LAST thing I'm going to do is run to the phone to tweet about it. Lots of asprin, taking it easy, and I'll be fine.

But it did make me think of something, along with some complaints leveled at me by a friend on Saturday night....

I post a lot of crap via twitter/facebook. I tend to use these status updates as a stream-of-conciousness way to document my own, frankly, worthless musings. Likewise, I use this blog to pontificate on various topics that interest me, and get out various emotional states. I ALWAYS strive to be honest in my blogs or status updates, I am an artist, a performer, and I am my material. There's no point to this blog if I hide my emotional state! Facts, details, names, these are details that made be changed/hidden to protect the innocent, but what I write here is true, and comes from as honest a place as possible.

However....

I am rarely as depressed as I appear, or as excited. Things bother me, things make me happy, and I post them. I consider life changes, and I make mention of them. It's part of my process and sharing myself with the world. If I didn't want to share myself, then, frankly folks, acting is just about the LAST thing I ought to be doing.

What I find interesting is how much importance seems to be attached to a lot of what I say. I mean, half of my status messages are stupid jokes, a good portion quoting lyrics (which may, or may not, be tired to my emotional state...sometimes I just have a song stuck in my head), and the rest is...snippets of me. True, yes, but hardly anything to get upset about.

"I read it on the internet." How often I hear that. Where? Who said Obama wasn't a US Citizen? Who said Jeff Goldblum fell off a cliff in New Zealand? Or that Jackie Earl Haley is playing Sinestro? I mean, these are all false. Obama's birth certificate plainly says he was born in Hawaii, Jeff Goldblum is alive and well, and, according to the Director of Green Lantern, Haley's never even been mentioned. How does this start? Somebody makes a joke, or says "wouldn't this be cool..." and somebody reads it, and adds in their own interpretaion. And it bulids and builds...

Most of what I post is, like most of the internet, far from the full story. Jumping to conclutions is, apparently, now part and parcel of surfing the web.

I fear for us. I really do.

Christmas Week.

Actually a busy day at work. A bit stressful.

I am really dying for this week to be over, and I usually don't get too wrapped up in the "Christmas thing." I just need to decompress, and it hasn't been happening lately. I'm hoping that it'll happen over the next couple of weekends.

after some false starts, it looks like my theatre company will be having a New Years Eve shindig, so that's cool. we rarely have anyplace to go for NYE.

I did see both Avatar and Up in the Air over the weekend. You can see my reviews here and here, respectively.

I'm really shot today, so I have very little to report.

Set for Pandora

So, tonight I'm seeing James Cameron's Avatar, catching a 3-D (but not IMAX) screening at 10:00.

I am excited, but also hesitant to allow myself to get too wrapped up in the whole deal. Critics I respect have raved, and others have really trashed it.

(spoiler warning BIG TIME for that second link)

Then there's this.

We shall see.

And people said I was crazy....

Yup, Avatar hate is in full swing.



Oh, folks, I am so sorry for you who's ideas of "badass" are so narrow as to be dissapointed that the space marines are actually the bad guys this time.

I am still hopeful, and ready for the journey Cameron wants to take me on, instead of some fanboy's fevered dream of what it ought to be.

For my Facebook friends, find the video here.

Of course I'd also like to point out this little bit of ridiculousness.

Oh, of course, a video that takes some shots at Cameron doesn't reflect the opinion anybody at Ain't It Cool News. God, why do I still read that site? It's ridiculous.

I'm all for some positivity from fandom. We need it, we're all too busy hating everything now. (as this reaction to Avatar shows) That said, AICN is just a nest of star-f*ckers, at this point.

A*V*A*T*A*R

So, the teaser trailer for Jim Cameron's latest opus, his first since Titanic, just hit.

Find it: HERE

So, I've watched it twice.

I'm convinced of one thing here, this will be the biggest fanboy letdown since The Phantom Menace. I mean, since late last year, the fanboy call has gone out "F*cking your eyeballs in December, 2009." The general vibe is, basically, how can Jim "badass" Cameron make a movie in IMAX digital 3-D that is anything less than mind-blowing?

Once again, the fanboy community gets hung up on the visual.

That's where Cameron will fall down. He's asking us to accept CGI creations as, essentially, our main characters. The same fanboys that are chafing their neither regions in anticipation of this film are also the ones bitching and moaning about the over-use of CGI in every other film that comes out. The fanboy assumption, once again, is that somehow they will be able to ignore that these are CG creations.

They never do, they never will.

Now, me, personally? I'm jazzed. I think it's a little amusing to use all this tech to essentially re-make Dances With Wolves set on another planet. I'm confident in Cameron's ability to make me care about his story, even if I'm keenly aware that the images aren't "real." Hell, Pixar makes me weep with almost every film, and that's not even attempting to be "realistic."

The problem with fanboy anticipation is that they're obsessed with being dazzled, visually. Me, I want a fun story. While they're staring at the tech, trying desperately to be f*cked in the eyeballs, I'll be trying to get involved with the characters. Boys and girls, please re-think how you're looking at this movie...

Because the trailer...looks, tech-wise, like any number of other movies you've seen.

But the story...may be amazing.