Kazhes pierakstu burtnīca

Jean-Luc Godard once again. This time it`s a crime movie about a man who kills a cop and wants to flee with his girlfriend from Parice to Rome. Most of the time he does very little for succeeding in his task though. The girl is a young American who works selling `New York Harald Tribune` on the streets of Paris and doesn`t really know if she loves Michael. Neither does she know who her boyfriend really is. Not that she cares when she finds out. The film may seem a bit odd and it`s just what it should be like. At least it`s much more entertaining than `My life to live` and a bit tighter structured. Although I don`t know yet why Godard is so obsessed with that Tribune newspaper which seems to appearing in most films of his. Yeah, Jean Paul Belmondo is the star of the film though I must admit that I don`t really like his fat lips. I know that it`s good for an Italian mafia person but does this look unpretty indeed.

Until the day I found this book on a library shelf I didn`t even know that there existed other works by Spoerl than `Die Feuerzangenbowle` which I had read in Latvian. It turned out that Mr. Spoerl was not only an author of comedies but also wrote something that could be described as essays but should be described as boring. Also there was a novel called `If all of us were angels` which is about some man who finds himself in trouble after he unexpectedly spent a night with a prostitute in Cologne. What stands out in the whole book is another novel I was unfamiliar with before - `The muzzle` is its title and it`s about an attorney who has to find the villain who put a muzzle on the emperors statue. What`s good about it - it`s that the attorney himself is the commiter of the crime but because of being completely drunk at the time he doesn`t recall nothing like that. Another novel `The gasman` tells about a Eastgerman dude who suddenly becomes rich after selling his suit to a stranger on a train. A last but not least there`s a honeymoon which actually is opposite to its title. Not a great book but not a disaster as well.

A few questions on the film remain unanswered, for example - why did I get an Italian of the film if it`s supposed to be in English? On the content of the film itself - it shows a few days in the lives of several people among whom is a revolutionalist named Mark and a secretary of a big company who runs away for no apparent reason named Daria. The plot is more than loose and pretty much nothing goes on most of the time, not even dialogue. Highlights include the scene where Mark gets arrested for talking too much and after being asked of his name replies "Carl Marx" and the police officer asks him about the way his name should be spelled; and the last few minutes of the film. I also liked the psychedelic plane. But overall `Zabriskie point` (btw. Zabriskie point is an existing location which I would love to visit at some time in my life) is not the most entertaining piece of filmmaking I`ve ever encountered.

I read it because of Donnie Darko. Nothing special to my humble oppinion. I found it rahter dull - except for the quote which certainly goes well with the movie:

Can a teen comedy be really silly? Sillier than simply silly? For example, is it possible that a film of more than 90 minutes which is supposed to be a comedy won`t make you laugh even once, and if a grin appears on your face it`s only to showcase how lame the film is? I guess it`s most certainly possible. And it`s even a thing likely to happen if the words "National Lampoon" appear somewhere near the title. The plot is of course really twisted - there are two girls named Dominique, one of them a French exchange student, another one a hooker, who get mixed up. There`s an undercover I don`t know who who`s mixed up with a girl from the dorm. There`s this black guy whos girlfriend comes to think that he`s cheating on her. To be frank - there is nothing but misunderstandings. And there are no funny jokes. At least there`s not even a single mutual joke - and that shows something. What else? The actors suck, and it`s no wonder since they aren`t particulary famous. The music? Was there any? I`m not really sure, but it wasn`t good at all. I don`t usually rate films like this particulary high, but in the high seas of lameness this film deserves being called an ocean. Even Jim Jarmush would make me laugh louder than this.

They say that Hot Hot Heat aren`t at their best in this record. I can`t really know for I`ve never listened to any album by this band before. And I`m not so sure that I ever will. Ok, this record ain`t bad so I probably could be thinking like this: "If a not-so-good record by this band is pretty decent, their best could be a freaking masterpiece. I probably should spend some money to learn more about this band." But I won`t do that? And why is that? First, I`m not a big fan of paying for anything. Second, how can I know that I will find a record that some people call to be better than this one to be really that good? As for this album it has 13 songs and after something like 3 or 4 listens only one of them has managed to capture myattention. It`s called "Goodnight, Goodnight" and it sounds somewhat similar to "Dogs die in hot cars", only it`s not very consistent - the verses are good but the refrain isn`t. From the rest of the album there`s "Pickin` it Up" - a college rock song, "Elevator" which probably could have been done by the "Goo Goo Dolls" and "Shame on you" which reminds of "This Love" by Maroon 5. Altogether it`s not bad but it ain`t very good as well.

Along with Oasis, Blur and Pulp this group of people with different sexual orientations know as "Suede" or "London Suede" (not to be mixed up with an obscure country musician named Suede and the legendary glam rock band "Slade") was at the frontiers of the emerging Britpop in early 90s. Actually "Suede" don`t seem to be playing the same brand of Britpop that their competitors were - they are much more lyrical than any other famours Britpop band. While "Blur" were more daring and willing to experiment, "Pulp" had a much stronger emphasis on synthesizers while "Oasis" was just a "Beatles" tribute band, "Suede" specialized in bitter-sweet rather slow songs sung in cat-like voice. I somehow can`t really connect myself with this band - I`ve listened to this album some four or five times and not a single song still seems to stand out among the rest for me. All of them aren`t bad, yet I don`t feel any signs of brilliance or genius in these songs. "Lazy", "Thrash", "The chemistry between us" and "Beautiful ones" are all okay, but who`s interested in being ok after all? One has interest in either those who suck badly or in those who suck perfect.

Actually I read this book as the last of the "Thanatonauts" trilogy, but it somehow has happened that I write about it first in my factoid, which seems to be very logical. Michen Penson is a young man who works as a doctor and who has experienced coma when he was a child. His friend Raul Razobraque is a young man who works as a biologist and who`s father was writing a book about death until he commited suicide. Together Michel and Raul try to find out what`s death really all about (so in some ways this is similar to "The meaning of life"). What they find out is that after death (or in case of falling into a special kind of coma) soul of a person leaves the body and starts a journey to heaven. So they want to learn more about this journey. When the French president nearly dies and experiences such a state he hires Raul to become the explorer of the unknown continent of the dead that happens to be if not 100% material than at least reachable before returing back. In order to pass the seven heavens Michel and Raul (but mostly people working for them, for they themselves don`t go into death before the last pages of the book) have to join forces with all religions for monks can also go to heaven and come back, fight a war in the land of the dead and rescue Michel`s dying wife. This all is "enriched" by adding some facts about what different religions have been saying about death. In short, the book was quite exciting to read, yet it wasn`t a great book. I believe that Werber achieved his best with the second book of the series - "The Empire of the Angels" while here he aims too much for action scenes. His characters are okay, yet they don`t get too much development and even the central character isn`t really consistent. The storytelling also has a few lapses - having too much repetition of moments like "thautonautics was on the rise" and "thautonautics wasn`t too popular then" (such sentences appear periodically and way too often). I also don`t like Werber messing too much around with all religions. Still the book ain`t bad it could be better.

Despite the fact that this band didn`t last particulary long it`s considered one of the best the 80-90`s Britain ever produced. Probably there are some reasons for that, since at least on this album the songwriting is really good, some of the songs are very close to being brilliant, etc., etc. Yet there is one thing that bugs me about the Stone Roses - they are praised too much, and nobody can live up to the expectations of this level. Probably the Roses were the Beatles of their era, at least on some songs they do sound as a newer version of the fab four, particulary on "Shoot you down", with the 60s feel to their music. Not having listened enough to this record I`m not sure that I can judge it the way it deserves, but who cares. If I`ll give it another spin on my PC, the rating will probably change. Or it won`t. Who knows.

This is the same Jack Bruce who sang "In a white room with black curtains" a little earlier than he recorded this album of his own. In 1969 Cream was long dead (or short dead to be more precise, for Cream broke up in November 1968 and this album came out in September 1969) and Jack Bruce had no other options to survive in this harsh world than record music on his own. On "Song for a tailor" he didn`t choose a particulary unexpected approach, mostly sticking to blues rock he had already played in the Graham Bond Organisation and staying away from guitar rock, for not a single Eric Clapton is present on this record. His singing is pretty good though and the music has a decent groove going on. As it`s typically the case with bluesrock, this album isn`t about gigantic hits, memorable riffs or catchy choruses, it`s about feeling the groove, and the groove is there. Probably I`d find something else in this record, but it`s so darn hot in Riga today that I have no other option but to say that there`s nothing close to "Disraeli Gears" on this record but that doesn`t mean that it`s that bad, it`s just not THAT good.