Zidane

Tonight i went to see Zidane: A 21st Century Portrait.
I've been waiting a long time to see this movie as i've had the soundtrack for almost a year (scored by Mogwai). It never seemed to have gained US distribution.
I was able to see it as a part of the still ongoing T:BA Festival here in Portland.
It was very special, though cumbersome at times do to its intense focus on Zinedine Zidane's every movement, which, of course, weren't always completely compelling, as the 17 35mm cameras captured his waiting, walking, talking, sweating, looking around, spitting. Every detail.
The idea and aspect here is unique, beautiful, and was at times quite moving. Mogwai's score helped.
I went to the movie thinking it would be a study on movement, on Zidane's motions as a profoundly chiseled, trained, and talented athlete. I was surprised to find that most of the movie utilized sound- the sounds around him in the crowd, the warm, startling thump of the soccer ball being kicked, and also Zidane's own voice. His inner voice played a big part too, as it was juxtaposed via text from interview material ontop of Mogwai's minor key compositions. You felt as if you were hearing his thoughts on the field from deep within his consciousness.

All in all, a film i won't forget.

bedside table goals

This is the first personal post i'll have made in a great long while. I considered starting a new blog but maybe that's too easy, maybe i should finish something i've started anyway. But this post won't be about music at all. A lot has changed in my life since Jesse's review of Portishead's 3rd, my moving back to Portland being one of the biggest.
So, for myself mainly, here are some goals i wrote down at my bedside table for while in pdx this time:

1) meet people. go to ilan's, asher's, etc.
2) watch better movies (miranda july, wholphin)
3) read before bed
4) go running (3x a week minimum)
5) bike to work
6) work
7) eat less and better (no artificial foods, no food after 8pm)
8) be picky
9) write a new album (electronic, strings, drums)
10) put tv away, no more halo except on mike's
11) get patio built
12) seek out installations and film screenings

Portishead- Third (2008)

When I heard they were reuniting, I did everything I could to implement upon myself a ninja-style media blackout pertaining to all-things Portishead. I avoided every mere mention of the band, every piece of news, and every live cut orbiting the blogosphere for the last 6 months. In fact, in the two weeks following the release of Third, I must have made three trips to purchase this record, only to leave empty-handed every time. I just couldn’t do it. I couldn’t risk the potential for a band so intrinsically linked to my musical upbringing (not to mention a band I absolutely adore) to somehow fail artistically upon their reunion. It turns out that my hesitation was unjustified.

While Beth Gibbons’ vocal oeuvre has been noted to stand as a bit one-dimensional at times, Third sees her exploring new melodic and lyrical territory, all the while maintaining her ability to dig her nails into the ventricles of your heart. The album opens with “Silence,” a jungle meets break-beat offering that quells any expectations for what one thought the Third should/would sound like. This track, along with “Plastic” and “Hunter,“ inhabits a more jigsaw-like territory than any songs contributing to the velvety-flow of their first two albums; its elements cobbled-together in a jaggedly abrupt, but never distracting manner.

To contrast against the rip and paste aesthetic of the previously mentioned tracks, most of the remainder of the record’s songs are unbending and repetitive (but not at all in a negative way). Songs like “Nylon Smile” become intoxicating and hypnotic, nesting themselves into the dusty and unused corner of your conscious; a part you weren’t quite sure was there but are happy to discover, much in the same manner as Syd Barrett’s solo work (though, by a very different approach). “We Carry On,” with its proto-industrial rhythm fits this mold (it’s like Stereolab with teeth), as does “Machine Gun,” which is more creepy and paranoid (and adventurous) than anything the band has ever released. The song’s conclusion melts away into the territory of a lost Vangelis track, and would feel at home among Blade Runner’s end-credits. It should be noted, however, that the song-title and staccato-snare framework of “Machine Gun” were used on Hendrix’s Band of Gypsys 28 years prior to the release of Third (Portishead should’ve done their homework and named it something different, I guess).

Third’s standout tracks are “Small,” a gothic chamber-opera bookended by a synth-driven darkwave meltdown, and “The Rip,” which is perhaps the best song the band has ever written (unique and fragile, the song inches towards its conclusion of a claustrophobic heartbeat’s pulse and the whir of a lover’s blood coursing just beyond the boundary of their breast). It is undeniably beautiful, expectedly melancholy, and wholly addictive, which leaves the question: if Portishead had this kind of material in them all along, why have they been hiding?

Rating: 8.5
by Jesse Robert W.

New Iceberg Writers

I'm happy to welcome a couple of new review writers on board our little floating glacier here. I figured getting some friends in on the reviews would be a lot more fun than dancing around on my own pedestal forever. This way the range of genres, bands, and tastes covered will expand and everyone benefits! So see above to check out Amy Mika's first review for Destroyer's Trouble In Dreams.
More updates by more fabulous mystery writers on the way.

Rating System!

I've decided to enter the world of the ultra elite by implementing a rating system for the records i'll be talking about on this site. I want to clarify that by no means am i a professional music critic. But as a person who's watched his own bands' albums get criticized, rated, sometimes praised, sometimes degraded, i've decided to have some fun of my own.
And you'll probably be getting reviews more from an artist's perspective (more sympathetic, but less objective, obviously), rather than those you'd read in your average "website that shall not be named" -style review blog.
You can check out the meanings behind the number scores to the left, and i'll be amending older posts with corresponding ratings, so you can get a feel for them already.
Really, ratings are completely arbitrary, but i think people secretly love them. One thing you won't get here ever is me bashing a band just because i have a personal vendetta against them. I think all art made in earnest is worth respect, and i've saved the 5.4 and belows just for fun, or maybe for a day when i'm just in a really bad mood.
Should be an interesting experiment. Who knows? Maybe someday this blog will even have a little good influence...

Reasons That Music Fans Listen

A couple of days ago, i found myself engaged in a conversation with someone i was sitting next to in a doctor's office. He was a music fan and we naturally fell onto the topic. We discussed Bob Dylan, local music, the lack of venue space or support for kentucky artists, and the conversation was all going pretty good- until i made a comment about how much i hate the Rolling Stones (which was partly tongue in cheek, though mostly true).
This opened up a bag of theories on why "old stand bys"- proven bands who have stood the test of time (like the Rolling Stones, maybe, or the Beach Boys, Beatles, Fleetwood Mac, U2, etc.) might or might not be a person's preferred listening over slews of newer, sometimes more "experimental" bands (unproven ones with maybe not enough albums to yet justify their often trend-fueled popularity).
This guy explained to me that as much as he wanted to, he couldn't listen to "new" bands like Modest Mouse or the Shins as much as his friends were, and his theory was this:
There are so many thousands of bands now and such easy access to music with the internet that you can fill a harddrive with 100s of GBs of stuff that will take you months and even years even listen to, let alone let sink in. But in 10 years, will you still care about half those bands? Since people's tastes tend to change, he was saying its a better bet to just enjoy the music you know is good, and not waste too much effort on a band that will just come and go.

I thought this was a pretty good point in a way, and also agreed that for a lot of people, being a music fan is a lot like being a collector- it becomes obsessive to the point that people download 20 albums a day, but the listening is only half as important as the "owning". A lot of the stuff probably doesn't get listened to ( or at least listened to WELL).

I thought for a minute and then tried to explain why i find myself constantly chasing after new music. My explanation was this: I listen to a lot of music, and most of it is new (especially lately). A lot of it is experimental or "out there" to a person who doesn't often go beyond Aerosmith or The Red Hot Chili Peppers. And a lot of it is crap.
There is a ton of new crap out there. There is also a ton of wonderful new stuff. The extra effort here is concentrated on having to constantly filter through the crap to get to the good stuff. But what i find, for me, is that all the extra work involved in "discovering" new music: that is filtering through the bad, discerning quality vs mediocrity for yourself, and swimming through an ever growing digital sea of totally "unproven" internet releases or challenging musical ideas- is that every few years i will find a gem, a real one- something that will completely change my view on what music is. Something that makes you say, "I never knew music could even BE like this". And it changes your musical perspective, as well as your LIFE from that point on. And this, to me is worth the trouble.

So, there's where i stand on listening to "modern" music. Of course, not everybody has the time or even finances (though i'd say the internet cancels this excuse nowadays) to wade through thousands of releases a year, and that's really understandable. I think you have to be a pretty big music geek to think like this.
On the other hand, there are artists out there who take years to create, refine, and execute their craft, hoping it will bring something new and wonderful to the world. Is it not too wrong to expect that a person takes five minutes to listen to a song outside of their usual, safe, circles and give some attention to those who might not have the funds or influence to get supermodels to dance on cars in their videos? Where would progression be without people trying out new things?
When Stravinsky debuted his "Rite of Spring", there were riots breaking out in the audience, who opposed it almost entirely. We now consider this work a timeless classic. It's easy to see how great it is in retrospect. My point is that if we aren't paying attention, we might be missing some great things going on in our own lifetime. Without being open minded, we might miss something that will ultimately enrich us (somehow the Pharisees and Jesus come to mind).

Like Nietzsche said, "Without music life would be a mistake."