10 of '10: Best Albums of 2010

This may have been my hardest year for selecting the ten best albums of the year. Plenty of albums had great singles (Kelis and Hurts) or were surprisingly amazing (Kanye West) or were exactly what you wanted/expected (Nina Nastasia and The National). But, to really pick the greatest albums... those I would return to repeatedly throughout the year. Those I imagine returning to in years to come...

1. Five Ghosts, Stars
2. Have One On Me, Joanna Newsom
3. The Courage of Others, Midlake
4. Crystal Castles II, Crystal Castles
5. New Amerykah Pt. 2, Erykah Badu
6. The Suburbs, Arcade Fire
7. Body Talk, Robyn
8. Stridulum, Zola Jesus
9. Dagger Paths, Forest Swords
10. Love Remains, How To Dress Well

Joan Rivers: A Piece of Work

I have been anticipating the viewing experience of this film for quite some time. All the reviews were so positive. The movie was being plugged everywhere. It was a constant attack of Joan Rivers, left and right. After watching the film, it all makes sense. This woman is an industry. Joan Rivers is a product. And, she is very much aware of this. Joan Rivers understands the importance of lasting and the amount of work one must put into lasting.

A Piece of Work is very much a mediocre documentary. We are given glimpses of Joan Rivers' life. There are things I didn't know: a Joan Rivers' talk show?, a made-for-TV film about the suicide of her husband?, and the real reason for the fall out between Rivers and Carson. While the film gives us all these details, it doesn't quite give us enough details. There must be a lot of juicy back story to the life of Joan Rivers, right? Or, is this really her life?

At one point, Melissa Rivers reveals how shy her mother truly is. At another point, it is mentioned how comics lack confidence. Is Joan Rivers shy and uncomfortable with herself? Is Ms. Rivers really just an angry, depressive, aging woman? I think this might be what we are expected to believe. Kind of. We're supposed to be aware of how hard working Joan Rivers is. We're meant to see she is a tough cookie. But, there is a soft side revealed. A dark side. A personal side. This isn't easy for everyone to reveal.

Is this a real documentary? Or, is it slightly staged? Joan Rivers claims she is an actress. Is this her greatest performance? A portrait of an artist in need of a career boost? She is honest about how much she needs constant income. She reveals how much money she spends on employees, family, her house. Everything is out in the open. But, we might not be seeing her entire personality.

We are never once shown a Joan Rivers meltdown. Never once shown Joan Rivers have a full diva fit. She says they exist. But, why don't we see them? We are only shown a woman afraid of fading from the lime light and fading from life. A woman so afraid of death that she is constantly on the move. Steps ahead of death.

I am not sure we are ever given a full portrait of Joan Rivers. But, this is a very fun and interesting film.

B

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hollows

Within the first few minutes of the film, I remembered how much I dislike big budget blockbuster films. I don't get off on explosions. I don't enjoy chase scenes. I am not wrapped up in shallow shocks and suspense. When it comes to magic, I'm even less involved. How come sometimes these teens are able to transport to another location? While other times we're left watching them wiggle their way out of a boring encounter for fifteen minutes? Wiggle your noses or something, kids. Just keep moving.

Something went terribly wrong with the Harry Potter films after the fourth film. What went wrong? I'm not terribly sure. But, the fifth and sixth film were horrible. After seeing the sixth film, I told myself 'no more Harry Potter.' I lied. I didn't have to pay for the ticket. And, I have sat through six other films. Why not sit through one more? Oh, wait... two more!

If you were to count the amount of times we had to look at Harry Potter shirtless... you'd have all your fingers up on one hand. Is this wizard porn? Am I watching Twilight? When did Harry Potter turn into a franchise for making tweens wet? I wasn't expecting this forced sexuality. Or, maybe, I'm too sensitive. But, I really doubt that. And, speaking of a "maturity" factor... there is a scene where Harry takes Hermione to dance along to a song on the radio. This is supposed to be a friendly moment, maybe. It comes off as some complicated untold love story. The type of scene one expects to see with a bunch of on the brink of divorce 30 year olds trying to seduce the one that got away. It just felt awkward. Incredibly out of place.

My father described the film as "teenagers on a camping trip." I might call it "teenagers on a campy trip." The lines are bad. Half the acting is lame. The film is meant to rely on action and story. But, being as this is a lead in to the final battle... there isn't much action. So, we're left with story. And, even that is wearing thin at this point.

Let's talk about originality. Is Harry Potter just the Chronicles of Narnia meets Lord of the Rings meets the 21st century? I know these complaints have been made before. And, I've read all but the last book in the series... but, these films just come off as complete remakes of other films and novels. The scene of the ball of light in the woods... I half expected it to turn into Cate Blanchett. And, hell, who didn't want Tilda Swinton to show up as the White Witch? Give us something to cheer about.

C-

10 of '10: Favorite Books of 2010

The following is a list of my favorite books published this year. All are newly published in 2010, except one is a new translation released this year.

1. Point Omega, Don DeLillo
2. By Nightfall, Michael Cunningham
3. Molly Fox's Birthday, Deirdre Madden
4. Antwerp, Roberto Bolano
5. Madame Bovary, Flaubert (trans. Lydia Davis)
6. Just Kids, Patti Smith
7. Freedom, Jonathan Franzen
8. The Infinities, John Banville
9. Secret Historian, Justin Spring
10. Beatrice & Virgil, Yann Martel

Secret Historian, Justin Spring

BEST OF 2010

I have never been a fan of non-fiction. I've said this before when reviewing Patti Smith's Just Kids. But, Secret Historian marks my second experience with non-fiction this year. And, both experiences have been incredible. When I first started reading Secret Historian, I assumed I would never complete the biography. At 400 pages, I figured I would have enough by time I got through 200 pages and skimmed through the handful of photographs at the center of the book. I was wrong. There is so much of interest in the life of Samuel Steward that I can't imagine having put this book down before it ended.

Samuel Steward was born in a small town in Ohio. Later moved, with his two aunts, to Columbus, Ohio where he attended the Ohio State University. He received his PhD in Literature. Became a professor. Published a couple of novels. Wrote articles for magazines. Became friends with literary types (Thomas Mann, Gertrude Stein, Thornton Wilder, etc). Was a focus of one of Kinsey's studies. Moved to San Francisco to become a tattoo artist. Became a tattoo artist for the Hells Angels. Published pulp fiction gay porn. Steward lived the life of a great biography.

Stewart was in the habit of recording his sexual escapades. He kept track of the names, dates, places, and sexual encounters of his partners. At times, he would tape pubic hair of his sexual partners to the back of the index cards containing all of this information. Basically, a card catalog of his tricks. All of this information came in handy when Kinsey started to meet with Stewart. Eventually, Kinsey would film Stewart in the middle of an S&M encounter with another of Kinsey's case studies.

Stewart tattooed a ruler on his forearm. He did this so as to always know the length of the cock of the man he was about to spend his evening with. To sum up the sexual life of Stewart: "a grand total of 197 releases in 1951, and a grand total of 184 contacts for that year: an orgasm every forty hours" (p.129). At first, one is almost turned off by this sexual appetite. But, by time the biography reaches the middle, I felt happy for Stewart. He was seeking. He was exploring. He was happy. And, almost always safe (except for a few encounters that left him with a brief and mild STD).

The sex documents aren't too revealing or over the top. The reviews of the biography made me think I might be shocked by the content within the pages. But, either I am very aware and comfortable with sex, or the biography was careful enough to keep things on very even ground. For a wider audience of readers.

There are moments of great sadness to Stewart's life. He was anti-relationships. He lived his life alone. Only look for quick, physical encounters. Stewart was obsessed with S&M. Always looking for someone to really make him feel the sexual experience. At times, the encounters went too far and scared Stewart into a few months of celibacy. These are the most telling moments of Stewart's life.

Also, Stewart's desire to achieve greatness. To produce a piece of art that made him feel complete. He used to teach his students about the knowledgeable man seeking a meaningful life. Stewart was such a man. He tried teaching, writing, tattooing, etc.

The biography is beautifully written and often reads as fiction. An incredibly quick and interesting 400 pages on the life of a man who needs to be read about.

A

The Baby of Macon (Peter Greenaway) - 1993

I couldn't be happier that I saved The Baby of Macon as the last of the Greenaway films to watch. The reason it was the last, it is near impossible to get your hands on a Region 1 copy. The Baby of Macon was never released on DVD in the states. Also, the film is only, on rare occasions, screened in theaters for festivals and special events.

The Baby of Macon was created, in part, as Greenaway's response to cultural outrage to a British billboard of a new born baby, covered in blood with umbilical cord attached. The billboard was quickly removed due to public outcry. This caused Greenaway to question why society is so sensitive to images of a newborn baby, but willing to sit through films where rape and violence is made to look glamorous, or at least presentable. Greenaway set out to create a film to attack the senses.

And, attack he did. The Baby of Macon is a constant visual of violence, hatred, and disgust. From the start, a nude overweight woman with her face covered gives birth to a child. The first child born in the village in a long time. This is viewed as a miracle. The townspeople decide to taste, wash their faces, and smell the afterbirth in hopes of receiving some of the good luck. The birth mother's daughter decides to trick people into believing the child is her own. A virgin birth in a city of infertile women.

The baby becomes Christ-like. The daughter starts to sell the child's urine, strands of hair, etc as good luck charms for women hoping to have children. The daughter has hidden her father and mother away so they do not reveal the truth of the baby. Soon the church begins to question the virgin birth. It is quite interesting how quickly Greenaway has the church up against the idea of the virgin birth, but then suddenly they are in favor once they have control over the child. The church exploits the child in a way the daughter never imagined.

The film includes a nude man gored to death by a bull, the eating of the after birth, the murder of a child, cannibalism, and a gang rape including 207 men. The film doesn't pretend to be viewer friendly. But, Greenaway never intended to be. And, is quite successful in his goals.

The story is presented as a play. We see the stage. We see the audience. We see behind the stage. We see the actors out of character for a bit. The film is a mix between Prospero's Books stage quality and The Cook, The Thief, His Wife, and Her Lover's disturbing plot.

There is so much to say about this film: costumes, acting, score, images, ideas, theories, beauty, etc. I fear giving too much away. In fact, already giving away more than I should. This is a film you will feel as you watch. I add it to my list of most painful/disturbing films (Salo, Dancer in the Dark, Irreversible).

A

Black Swan

BEST OF 2010

I have always been a fan of the films of Darren Aronofsky. But, for some reason I never think to list him as a "favorite director." I feel the same way about David Lynch... great films, but I'm not always so sure about the film making. So, I decided to think of my critiques of Aronofsky through my viewing of Black Swan.

Black Swan is a black and white film. Basically. Aronofsky may take his desire to prove color reveals personality too far. Throughout the film, those who are evil are dressed all in black (Hershey, Ryder, Kunis). Those who are good are dressed all in white (Portman). Then, there are those who are dressed in black and white or gray (Cassel). And, for Cassel's character we are never really certain how much he is driven by evil and good. His clothes, his apartment, his office... everything is black and white. Aronofsky refuses to give us the answer to this character. This may imply Cassel is much more important than I may have originally thought.

Black Swan is a film about the image of the self. The very examined life. There is rarely a scene in the film where a mirror is not present. The ballet studio has ceiling high mirrors, Portman's apartment has a huge mirror in the front room, the dance floor is up against a huge mirror. Some of these mirrors are typical mirrors. What you see is a reflection of the self. Other mirrors cause one to look shattered, or grotesque, or unusually shaped.

Is this weak film making? To push a point (good vs evil, the reflection of self) too far? And, does Aronofsky really push it too far? Hard to say. None of these things were very distracting. But, at the same time, why do these things stick out so much upon first viewing?

For me, Black Swan holds so much meaning because I have seen The Red Shoes. The parallels between these two films are overwhelming. Cassel, Ryder, and Portman are all mirrors of characters (playing very similar roles) from The Red Shoes. Both films deal with obsession and the desire for perfection in art and career. Not to say these themes aren't common in many films, but one would be hard pressed to deny how strongly similar the two films truly become.

These sound like complaints. But, I actually loved the film. Black Swan is the feminine to The Wrestler's masculine. Again, these two films are so similar. The obsessive, destructive drive for success in one's career. Although, The Wrestler is certainly the stronger of the two films. I believe The Wrestler is one of the five best films made in the past ten years.

With Black Swan, Aronofsky has finally come the closest to creating the horror film he has so long been in the process of creating. Looking back over Aronofsky filmography (Pi, Requiem for a Dream, The Fountain, The Wrestler), so many of his films have elements of horror. Their intense struggle with the self from destroying itself and others.

Aronofsky's Black Swan is one of the most intense movie experiences this year. The audience is left exhausted, silent. The constant waiting for the final reveal. The film is well worth viewing. Portman's performance is magnificent. And, Barbara Hershey couldn't have played her role better. This is certainly a career resurrection for her, I hope.

B+