June 23, 2004
Just Like California
Posted by nerdling | June 23, 2004 12:51 PM
Beat Takeshi Kitano in a period samurai picture directed by Takashi Miike? My ears just perked up, though no significant details have yet become available.
Whoa! I usually don't go in for sequels, but apparently I was asleep at the wheel when Battle Royale II: Requiem was released.
Universal UK announced plans this week to revive the dead CD single. Such singles became defunct because the small size was not compatible with many CD players, rendering the discs useless. Universal's foray into necromancy relies upon some nifty cross-marketing: each disc will contain three songs and be enhanced, allowing the owner to download ringtones corresponding to the songs.
Because what the world really needs now is more annoying ringtones.
This seems to be the decade for intellectual property disputes. First came the RIAA and multiple lawsuits over copyright violations, then SCO Group's lawsuits over Linux, and now Fender is claiming that it owns the rights to the signature shape of the Stratocaster—which means that Fender is claiming common law trademark ownership for every guitar that has borrowed that shape, and is currently seeking legal ownership of those rights.
For other guitar makers like Gibson or ESP, this is a serious problem. The Stratocaster is such an icon—and one that has been repeatedly copied for 50 years—that the shape of virtually every electric guitar is descended from the Strat.
The Harvard Business School journal Working Knowledge followed up on the March paper by two researchers at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, which contends that file sharing does not in fact damage record sales. An interview with study author Felix Oberholzer-Gee investigates the present and future of file sharing and its implications. {Via Blogcritics}
Reasons I hate Pitchfork, part 274: Corey & Corey.
From the website: "'Corey & Corey' is a staged, fictitious documentary detailing the exploits of two wannabe writers, Brent DiCrescenzo and Ken Shipley, as they strive to create and sell a fictional television show about the hypothetical lives of two washed-up teen stars, Corey Haim and Corey Feldman. The two couldn't be more different. Brent holds a degree in film production, but currently works in a chain bookstore. He is the pragmatic, rational superego of the duo, fastidiously keeping the television show on track. Ken thinks big, talks big, acts big, and rubs people the wrong way. He's constantly three or eight steps ahead, if not completely off the course. While Brent fact checks space-time theories for an episode where C+C dream of making a time travel sequel to License to Drive, Ken practices on a putt putt course, honing his career safety net - a membership on the Miniature Golf Association tour."
I hate to be the one to break the news, but mischieviously ironic representations of the '80s have been done so many times that there is no humor left to be had. Besides, aren't the Coreys already enough of a well-worn joke? Further—and more annoying yet—the fact that Brent is playing a dissatisfied, overeducated college-graduate-cum-struggling-writer strikes me as more fact that "fictitious." We are, after all, referring to the guy whose antics and falsified reporting forced Pitchfork to issue a retraction just two days ago.
To paraphrase The Ramones, gimme gimme shock treatment (with electrodes attached to Brent DiCrescenzo and Ken Shipley).
oh, what a sweet wonderful dream to have that much free time. were those idiots at the party the other night, or were those just their fat, pathetic dopplegangers?
i'm not trying to put you down--i'm just a better writer than you,
dan
Posted by: dan at June 23, 2004 04:52 PM
Hats Off to Pitchfork, Part 275:
Their presentation of Another Fucking List of the Top 100 Albums of the 1970s.
Just what the world needed.
Posted by: Kierin. at June 23, 2004 05:06 PM
I can only imagine what the top 50 albums on that list are, since they managed to get Big Star—Third/Sister Lovers, Pink Floyd—Dark Side of the Moon, King Crimson—Starless and Bible Black, Van Halen—Van Halen, Led Zepplin—Houses of the Holy, Iggy & the Stooges—Raw Power, and David Bowie—Aladdin Sane, Hunky Dory and Ziggy Stardust out of the way in the bottom half of the list.
I suppose the enlightened minds at Pitchfork had to get all that populist drivel out of the way before they got down to the business of being seriously ridiculous and elitist in their listmaking efforts. If Rush doesn't make an appearance, I'm going to start a circle pit in my office.
Pitchfork must be stopped.
Posted by: Marleigh at June 23, 2004 06:32 PM
no:
germs, yes, blue oyster cult, boston, judas priest, thin lizzy, black sabbath, gram parsons,
queen, parliament, frank zappa, tom fucking waits, elo, cheap trick, tom petty, bob dylan, bruce springsteen, lynrd skynrd, warren zevon, jackson browne, the eagles, john prine, new york dolls, alice cooper, rolling stones, and the almighty three man army rush.
but! they do have brian eno's entire discography and every crap ass miles davis album from his "china white mainlining" period. bravo--another gold star for purposefully obscure, yet very hip, taste.
i am the champions,
dan
Posted by: dan at June 24, 2004 09:00 AM
How the fuck do you make a list of the top 100 albums of the '70s and neglect the best Goddamned rock band of all time while including one of the worst, most overrated punk bands of all time?
What fucking douchebags. I don't even know why I read Pitchfork. It offends my sensibilities and makes me really, really mad.
Posted by: Marleigh at June 24, 2004 12:44 PM
Would love to hear your impressions of Battle Royale II -- I'm still undecided about it. Certainly not as good as the first, and it has some dodgy politics that I haven't sorted out.
An extended director's cut was meant to open in Japan this month, but it was cancelled as a result of the Battle Royale-influenced killing that took place a week or so ago. (An 11 year old girl, obsessed with the movie and the novel, killed a fellow classmate.)
Posted by: Filmbrain at June 24, 2004 09:10 PM
In reference to the Pitchfork retraction on behalf of Brent's writing: w/the keen logic you possess, do you think Brent intentially wrote lies OR is it more likely the site's founder got cold feet about TRUTHS written and their repercussions? Even you stated he wrote too many facts about himself which contradicts your statement rather than supports?!??! I will also suggest that Corey+Corey has a meaningful plot based on,as stated, many undeniable facts about each writer's persona. I think they get that it's all a bad joke, but thanks making it clear!
Posted by: nicole herbert at June 29, 2004 03:01 AM
I think he intentionally wrote lies. It would be neither the first nor the last time a journalist posted something that could not be substantiated with fact—which, in journalism, means it is not true. Further, I fail to see how writing a review for a Beastie Boys album filled with anecdotes about their PR firm and a long-ago Radiohead concert has any relevance at all.
Call me crazy, but I read reviews to gather information and opinions about new releases. It's an old-fashioned idea, but one that is not completely without merit.
And what on this Earth is meaningful about the lives of two frustrated college graduates dressed up with trite (and easy) jokes about two washed up '80s icons? It's the fact that they know it is a joke that makes it loathesome.
I'm terribly happy for you if you find the drivel Pitchfork publishes satisfactory. I don't happen to find snotty, ironic, pretentious exercises in creative writing disguised as music journalism interesting. I exorcised my interest in pretentious literature years ago by reading Joyce.
Posted by: Marleigh at June 29, 2004 03:27 PM
