Stuck In My Head 6.16.2014 - I've Had Enough

I've Had Enough
by The Who

You were under the impression
That when you were walking forward
You'd end up further onward
But things ain't quite that simple.

You got altered information
You were told to not take chances
You missed out on new dances
Now you're losing all your dimples.

My jacket's gonna be cut and slim and checked,
Maybe a touch of seersucker, with an open neck.
I ride a G.S. scooter with my hair cut neat,
Wear my wartime coat in the wind and sleet.

Love Reign O'er Me.
Love Reign O'er Me.
Love.

I've had enough of living
I've had enough of dying
I've had enough of smiling
I've had enough of crying
I've taken all the high roads
I've squandered and I've saved
I've had enough of childhood
I've had enough of graves...

Get a job and fight to keep it,
Strike out to reach a mountain.
Be so nice on the outside
But inside keep ambition

Don't cry because you hunt them
Hurt them first they'll love you
There's a millionaire above you
And you're under his suspicion.

My jacket's gonna be cut and slim and checked,
Maybe a touch of seersucker, with an open neck.
I ride a G.S. scooter with my hair cut neat,
Wear my wartime coat in the wind and sleet.

Love Reign O'er Me.
Love Reign O'er Me.
Love.

I've had enough of living
I've had enough of dying
I've had enough of smiling
I've had enough of crying
I've taken all the high roads
I've squandered and I've saved
I've had enough of childhood
I've had enough of graves...

I've had enough of dancehalls
I've had enough of pills
I've had enough of streetfights
I've seen my share of kills
I'm finished with the fashions
And acting like I'm tough
I'm bored with hate and passion
I've had enough of trying to love.

Stuck In My Head 6.9.2014 - I've Known No War

I've Known No War 
by The Who

I've known no war
And if I ever do I won't know for sure
Who'll be fighting whom
For the soldiers lonely tomb
Now opens as soon as the referee's gun starts to roar
I'll know no war

Galbraith took his pen
To break down the men
Of the German army defeated
On the nineteenth day
Of a spring day in May
Albert Speer was deleted
And as soon as the battle was over
I was born in victorious clover
And I've never been shot at or gassed
Never tortured or stabbed
And I'm sure - I'll never know war

I know I'll never know war
And if I ever do
The glimpse will be short
Fireball in the sky
No front line battle cries
Can be heard as the button is pushed
By a soul that's been bought
I'll know no war

In an out of reach loft
The medals are lost
They belong to a lone broken sailor
His provinces now
Are the bars of the town
His songs and his poems of failure
For his grandchildren can't see the glory
And his own kids are bored with the story
But for him they'd have burned behind netting
From the brink they were grabbed
And I'm sure
I'll never know war

I've known no war
And if I ever do I won't know for sure
Who'll be fighting whom
For the soldier's lonely tomb
Now opens as soon as the referee's gun starts to roar
I'll know no war

War - I've known no war
I'll never know war
And if I ever know it
The glimpse will be short
Fireball in the sky
No front line battles cries
Can be heard as the button is pushed by a soul that's been bought
And the armies remaining will judge without people or courts
And there's no point pretending that knowing will help us abort
I'll know no war

The Amazing Spider-Man 2

Spoilers ahead.

There's been a lot of consternation about this film on line. It seems people are very upset about it.

Now, I hardly find these Marc Webb/Andrew Garfield-led Spider-Man films to be without flaw, you can find my review of the original film here. That being said, my initial reaction upon leaving the theatre after seeing The Amazing Spider-Man 2 was that it was my personal favorite of all the Spider-Man films that have been made.

Strong words? Possibly, and perhaps repeat viewing may change my mind. However, this film FELT like the Spider-Man I have enjoyed in the comics, and the changes made from the comic all made sense and felt OK, to me.

Now, am I overjoyed that the Sinister Six are all, apparently, Oscorp-based, and tied directly to
Richard Parker's research, and therefore, Peter Parker directly? No, not really, but it also wasn't such an egregious breach of storytelling that it made me upset.  As I have always said about "cannon" and "retcons," if they open storytelling doors, I am fundamentally in favor of them.

And, here's the deal, I am interested in what they will do with this Sinister Six movie, and what will happen with the team that Harry Osborne is building. Do I think it's the best idea in the world? A film (apparently) totally about villains? Maybe not, but I'm willing to concede that it could result in an interesting film. Also that where The Amazing Spider-Man 2 leaves that storyline makes me more interested.

OK, so why did I love this film so much? Because for a specific reason that a lot of people have chosen to criticize it. This being Gwen Stacy's death and how Peter, and the film chooses to deal with it. I've heard a lot of criticism that the film "let's Peter off the hook" for Gwen's death.

Well, yes, but I'd argue that's the whole point.

See, as opposed to the Sam Raimi-directed Spider-Man trilogy, Webb and his team have embraced "with great power comes great responsibility." Whereas Raimi (with star Toby Maguire) presented a Peter Parker who was CONSTANTLY wallowing in, and almost solely motivated by guilt, Webb and Garfield have crafted a Parker that, even in the face of his greatest losses, embraces a responsibility to something other than himself and his martyr complex. The film is about moving past fear and pain.

When Peter returns to the suit and faces down The Rhino in the closing minutes, it is a statement about heroism that Raimi simply never made. The added bonus of the small child who tries to be the replacement for the missing Spider-Man only reinforces the point. Spider-Man is a hero because he does what he can, what only he can to do, because it is right. That sacrifices will be made, and forced on him, but that is HIS choice. Just as it was Gwen's choice to put herself in harm's way. And those sacrifices, they're part of living life to the fullest. Standing by a doing nothing? Not trying? THAT is true failure.

On top of all that, even in the comics, Gwen's death was NEVER Peter's fault. He may have failed to save her, but The Green Goblin killed her, period.

Not to mention that this film, more than any other Spider-Man film, FEELS like Spider-Man. The character is spot-on. The situations are solid superhero fare (is the Electro storyline somewhat reminiscent of The Riddler in Batman Forever? Sure. There are no new stories). The direction is flat-out stunning, and the action set pieces are pure, unfiltered Spider-Man.

It's just a fucking fun movie to watch, and it got me truly emotional at least twice. You really can't expect much more than that.

So, yes, I really enjoyed The Amazing Spider-Man 2. I'm sure I'll take heat for that opinion among my friends whom I think were more interested in stoking a personal rage over a Alex Kurtzman and Robert Orci scripted film than anything else. For me, it's about how I felt watching the film, and this certainly did not have the third-act trainwreck of Star Trek Into Darkness, for example.

I'm recommending it. I had a great time.

Cold Sweat: Stuck in My Head 5.14.14

Cold Sweat
By Thin Lizzy

I put my money in the suitcase
And headed for the big race
I felt a chill on my backbone
As I hung up the telephone

Stone cold sober and stone cold sweat
Running down the back of my neck
To lose means trouble, to win pays double
And I got me a heavy bet

Cold, cold sweat

They say chances on the outside
Are looking pretty slim
I've been so lucky on the inside
I feel I'm going to win

Stone cold sober and stone cold sweat
Running down the back of my neck
Take a little money, there's nothing left to lose
And I got me a heavy bet

Cold, cold sweat

I've got me a whole month's wages
I haven't seen that much in ages
I might spend it in stages
And move out to Las Vegas

Stone cold sober and stone cold sweat
Running down the back of my neck
To lose means trouble, to win means double
And I got me a heavy bet

Cold, cold sweat

I put my money in a suitcase
They say chances on the outside
I got a whole months wages

Stone cold sober and stone cold sweat
Stone cold crazy
Place another bet

The Sad Tale of Bill Finger Continues

Check out this article at Bleeding Cool. 

 The relevant section, a statement from Athena Finger, Bill Finger's Granddaughter:

75 years of Batman! No one could have predicted the longevity and the continued relevance of this comic book hero that has become a cultural icon when my grandfather, Bill Finger, collaborated with Bob Kane back in 1939. My grandfather has never been properly credited as the co-creator of Batman although was an open secret in the comic book industry and is widely known now. It is now my time to come out of the shadows and speak up and end 75 years of exploitation of my grandfather, whose biggest flaw was his inability to defend his extraordinary talent. Due to what I feel is continued mistreatment of a true artist, I am currently exploring our rights and considering how best to establish the recognition that my grandfather deserves.

I'm sure this will lead to another round of "oh, look at how evil DC Comics is!" With our kneejerk vilification of any corporate entity.

This issue isn't about DC - it's about Bob Kane and his estate.

DC has been sending, admittedly modest in relation to the value of Batman as a property, checks to the Finger heirs for years. There's even an interesting story of how a lover of Finger's now-deceased son was receiving checks from DC, instead of Kane's granddaughter, the rightful heir. When Finger biographer Marc Tyler Nobleman brought this to DC's attention, they rectified the situation quickly. At his San Diego Comic-Con presentation in 2012, Nobleman specifically pointed out that DC were not the bad guys in this story.

Finger is denied his rightful credit because of the contracts that Bob Kane, and his estate, have with DC Comics. Aside from the quote in his "autobiography" (Kane didn't really even draw 90%, and that's being generous, of what's credited to him, I doubt he wrote a book), Kane NEVER admitted Finger's central role (likely greater than Kane's) in the creation of the Batman mythos. During the 60's he even wrote personal responses, lashing out at anyone who suggested Finger's contribution.

I am almost certain that if the powers that be at DC could legally name Bill Finger Batman's co-creator, even just to set the record straight, leaving aside the money (which again, is really about Kane's contract - not DC welching), I honestly believe they would. Every creator, editor, etc, etc, I've ever heard speak on this issue knows EXACTLY what happened and how Kane, via his contact with National/DC, secured for himself sole credit, and the financial benefits thereof, for perpetuity. That doesn't mean they can speak openly about it, as legal matters often go.

Kane clearly benefited from coming after Siegel and Schuster, and seeing the vast monies that Superman was bringing in. He, or his father, was smart enough to secure a legally binding agreement with National/DC that paid off for him handsomely. Would that Siegel and Schuster had gotten such advice.

This also allowed Bob to keep Finger, and the multiple other "ghost" writers and artists he employed, from sharing that windfall. It may seem Machiavellian to our modern eyes, but that was the way cartooning worked in those days. Comic strips were often written and drawn by underlings in the paid employ of the person who's name actually graced the newsprint page. All the greats, Will Eisner, Jack Kirby, Joe Simon, had "studios" to accomplish the massive amounts of work they would undertake in order to make actual money. The difference, really, is that Bob Kane, reportedly, rarely drew or wrote anything himself.

In 2006, at the San Diego Comic-Con, I had the good fortune to witness a "Golden Age Batman" panel that brought a lot of these creators together. Their differing responses to working for Kane were illuminating, Shelly Moldoff, for instance, was very upfront about who Kane was, what he did, or didn't, actually do, but also felt that Bob had lived up to the agreements they had. This seemed to upset Jerry Robinson, who had long felt Kane had kept him from proper recognition as, at least, the co-creator of characters like Robin and The Joker. It was a lovely panel to attend, but it did leave me with one overriding impression...

Bob Kane was mainly interested in Bob Kane, and making sure that Bob Kane got as much money, attention and fame as he could. Bob Kane made a great deal for himself, and he enjoyed the fruits of his legal foresight. He also guarded his position jealously. You really can't deny it, and I see fewer and fewer Kane apologists as time goes on.

Let's take another look at Kane's quote about Finger from Batman and Me:

Now that my long-time friend and collaborator is gone, I must admit that Bill never received the fame and recognition he deserved. He was an unsung hero…. I often tell my wife, if I could go back fifteen years, before he died, I’d like to say, ‘I’ll put your name on it now. You deserve it.

Yes, he does, and perhaps Kane's widow, Elizabeth Sanders, might remember those times (if they actually happened, frankly) and extend this courtesy to the memory and heirs of Bill Finger. She's the one who can do it, not DC Comics. So, while we can celebrate the legacy that Bill Finger left us, and bemoan the injustice of his lack of credit, let us not forget that DC Comics has already gone beyond the compensation they were legally required to provide (which was nothing). What they cannot legally give, and it's probably the most important, the most meaningful, gesture, is credit. Only Bob Kane's estate can do that...

...And they don't seem to want to.

 

*I would've provided more pictures of Bill Finger, but very few actually seem to exist.

The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame Vs. Kiss

Let's start with a couple of things I believe...

One:

I believe the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame is absolutely justified and correct in reaching beyond the narrow confines that many vocal fans (and artists) have about what "Rock and Roll" is. It's important to include outlying genres, because they strengthen and influence the direction that the form moves in. Make no mistake, the reason we're still taking about Rock and Roll is because it, as a from, evolves. Rhythm and Blues is a stone in the foundation of Rock, which begat Elvis Pressley's Hound Dog, and Cuck Berry's Johnny B. Goode, but also begat Chic's Le Freak, and Snoop Dogg's Gin & Juice.

It's absolutely silly to dismiss music that's designed for dancing. When Little Richard blasted into Tutti Frutti, his goal was to git those teenagers in 1956 on the dance floor. Likewise, you cannot dismiss the clear influence of folk artists like Pete Seeger and Woody Guthrie on undeniable Rock artists like Bob Dylan and Bruce Springsteen. I, personally, see "Rock" as a rainbow of styles and genres with Robert Johnson sitting at the end like the proverbial pot o' gold.

What the critics miss, and it's kind of unforgivable, is that the Hall of Fame is not just about honoring artists for record sales or fame, but providing education about the history of the form. One of my favorite exhibits in the museum (which is separated from the Hall of Fame, proper), are kiosks where you can search for your favorite artists, and explore a graphic diagram of their influences, and then explore their influence's influences. Using this display, you can see how interconnected the tapestry of Rock is. This sort of education is something these vocal opponents might benefit from.

Two:

I believe Kiss deserves induction into the Hall of Fame. They fulfill the requirements I would personally have for such an honor. They were influential, they inspired other musicians, they have a legacy that deserves respect.

But, really, is their legacy about music?

I mean ABSOLUTELY no disrespect with that statement. There are plenty of truly amazing Rock artists who are important, and it has nothing to do with musical skill, originality, or creativity The Punk movement, honestly, was important because they didn't have any of those qualities, as an example. Kiss wasn't doing anything revolutionary, on a musical level. They wrote good, catchy songs that were aimed to be just that, not compositional achievements. I think any members, current or former, of that band would agree.

That should not be taken as me saying the music is bad. I quite like a lot of the early Kiss material, and it is "classic" for a reason. The wrote songs that people liked, and a big reason was because they weren't overly challenging. A lot of artists did the same thing.

The Original Kiss

What Kiss had that was different was, frankly, image. The reason the band became a phenomenon was because of their make-up, the stage show, the tricks and stagecraft. They brilliantly came up with the make-up, costumes and personas that made it possible to immediately "get" what each guy in the band was about - regardless of music. Paul "Starchild" Stanley was the preening frontman. Gene "Demon" Simmons was the dark creature holding down the bass. "Space" Ace Frehley was the lead guitarist, with out of this world leads. Peter "Catman" Criss was the drummer, away and above it all.

When I was in elementary school, EVERYBODY loved Kiss, but I'd actually lay money that the vast majority of the kids I knew had never heard a single song. The music was, in the end, irrelevant to the image and marketing. They had built a marketing machine that led kids into the fold with four-color superhero imagery, toys, games, model kits, and kept them as they reached their teen years with suggestive lyrics and a general naughty vibe. Kiss owned the world from 1976-1978, and I would, again, with respect, say that had very little to do with music.

This is why I totally understand why the Hall of Fame, firstly, seemed to drag their feet on inducting the band, and, now that they will be inducted, are only inducting the original four members. While Eric Carr (who replaced Criss, officially, in 1980), Vinnie Vincent (replacing Frehley, officially, in 1982), Mark St. John (who had a brief tenure as lead guitarist in 1984 - cut short by illness), Bruce Kulick (lead guitar 1984 - 1996), and Eric Singer (Replaced Carr after he succumbed to Cancer in 1991) are all talented and did good work for the band, they existed in a time when Kiss didn't feel like a truly distinctive group. They, speaking bluntly, felt like a lot of other 80's hair metal bands inspired by Kiss. Especially after they removed their make-up in 1983. They were in a good band, but not a Hall of Fame band.

Then, of course, there's the issue of the return to make-up. Which began when the original lineup reunited in 1996, and toured until their "Farewell Tour" of 2001. Criss left the group again, during this "Farewell Tour," and Frehley departed afterward. After that, money was still there to be made, and Eric Singer returned as drummer, with Tommy Thayer taking the lead guitar spot. The difficult choice the band made was that Singer and Thayer are now touring with the group as "The Catman" and "The Spaceman," and wearing the make-up and costumes that Criss and Frehley made famous.

(For the record, Eric Carr performed with the band in make-up, but with his own persona, "The Fox," as did Vinnie Vincent as the Egyptian-themed "The Wiz." Since you're probably never heard of these characters, or know what they looked like, you can probably guess that it wasn't the most successful idea.)

So, you have six other musicians who have played on Kiss albums (seven if you could Anton Fig, who ghosted for Criss), and are technically eligible for induction. Yet the Hall of Fame has decided they will not be inducted. I think this is the correct choice. I think Rock and Roll Hall of Fame Foundation CEO Joel Peresman does a good job of addressing the issue over at Billboard. 

The heyday of Kiss, the point where they were truly a band who's accomplishments made them worthy of induction, really ended when the four original members simultaneously released solo albums on September 18th, 1978. When the TV-Movie Kiss Meets the Phantom of the Park aired on October 28th, 1978, the cracks had begun to show. Kiss began to become a caricature of itself, which is deadly for a band that was conceived as a bit of a caricature. Then the make-up came off, and they just became fairly generic.

Again, not BAD, but they just seemed to become interchangeable with acts like Ratt. Los Angeles sleaze-rock, and with the whimsical quality of the make-up gone, the sleaze could be overwhelming.

Current Kiss lineup

Then after Criss and Frehley left again, and different musicians were asked to  wear their costumes and make-up, he whole thing just felt like it was edging toward a sham. The shows may still be impressive, technically better than with Frehley and Criss, but I think Gene Simmons and Paul Stanley know EXACTLY what they created in the 70's. The personas are the band members to anyone who's not a hard core fan, and the general audience just wants to see a Kiss show, and it doesn't particularly matter if Frehley or Thayer is under the Spaceman make-up. Gene, especially, has even hinted at a point where the band could continue without ANY of the original members, with paid stand-ins doing the work while "the organization" (controlled by Simmons and Stanley) takes it's cut.

The fallout has been that when Kiss is inducted to the Hall of Fame on April 10th, apparently no version of the band will perform. The HOF was pushing for a reunion of the original members, Frehley and Criss appeared to be open to it, but it was apparently nixed by Simmons and Stanley. Simmons and Stanley have also been pounding this idea that's it unfair that the other members are not being inducted.

I call bullshit, and I'll tell you why.

Aside from what I said above, most of these guys didn't play in a Kiss that was a Hall of Fame-worthy band, this comes down to what Kiss has always been about - marketing. This is about the Kiss marketing machine. The machine that has moved more and more strongly toward a model where the band members are personas, not people. Who's the lead guitarist of Kiss? The Spaceman. Not "Ace Frehley," not "Tommy Thayer," but "The Spaceman." Then the band can put anybody up there who can play the tunes, and no one need know the difference.

Long gone are the days when Bruce Kulick could stand on stage as "Bruce Kulick," a member of the band Kiss. Long gone are the days when Eric Carr would be tasked to attempt to figure out a new costumed persona for the band. This is gone in favor of a Kiss "concert" that resembles a play with music. New performers portraying your favorite characters.

By singling out Ace Frehley, Peter Criss, Gene Simmons and Paul Stanley the Hall of fame has made a distinction between the people who created those characters, who defined and lived them, and any replacements the Kiss organization may hire to tour in the future. When the day comes, and it will, that "Kiss" is made up of four guys who have no connection to the original four members, other than the signature on their paychecks...is that really Kiss? To Gene Simmons it is, because he'll be getting paid.

As Mr. Peresman said, and I think it's fair:

"Sometimes there's an entire body of work up until (the artists) are inducted, other times it's a specific period of time that established the band as who they are. With Kiss there wasn't one person here who didn't agree that the reason Kiss was nominated and is being inducted was because of what was established in the 70s with Ace (Frehley), with Peter (Criss), with Paul and Gene (Simmons). That's what put them on that map...(Kiss) is a unique situation where you have artists who wear makeup as part of what the band's about...(later members) are fine musicians who...basically have the same makeup and are the same characters that Ace and Peter started. It's not like they created these other characters with different makeup and playing different songs. They took the persona of characters that were created by Ace and Peter."

Beatlemania, or Rain, are fine, entertaining shows, but no one's trying to sell you on the idea that you're ACTUALLY seeing the Beatles. Likewise, the fan-based Kiss Tribute Bands, aren't saying they ARE Kiss. It's just damn creepy, to me, that the Kiss Organization continues in this direction.

Something That Just Occured to Me

I was doing do flittering around the britannica.com website, and came upon a picture of John Ford in his later years....

And made a connection to The Young Indiana Jones Chronicles, as they were broadcast:

And, man....George, I love it. That was sneaky, and awesome. Especially since Indy met John Ford during the show.