I'm in Sevilla, Spain. I just came across this place. It's closed down now, of course, but I bet it was really cool.
I don't really care how much the latest superhero film took at the box office, although I'd probably know if you asked me. When I watch a film the main thing I am looking for is a good story. I like it when I look up at the big screen and can see a part of me staring back at me. More than anything, I am still looking for Jimmy Stewart and Jack Lemmon and Billy Wilder in every film I see.
Friday, 30 March 2012
Thursday, 29 March 2012
The Lump of Meat
The human brain is amazing.
Look at a picture of a young Charlie Chaplin, he really was that young once. That young boy grew up to invent 'The Tramp', create lasting comedic masterpieces, and change the history of cinema.
He was like the rest of us --- a body walking around with a lump of meat encased in his skull.
We romanticize greatness. Even that TED talk by Elizabeth Gilbert is enticing, where she talks about catching an idea from the ether as it passes you by. She thought the problem with creatives and depression/suicide is that they place too much emphasis on genius being personal.
I agree, partially. We all start out thinking we'll be exceptional and discovered immediately for our brilliance. It doesn't work like that and it takes years to understand it.
I'm happy to get rid of the concept of genius and also the idea of catching ideas from the ether -- at least in any spiritual sense.
The ideas ARE out there. When you meet new people and see new places, your brain fires up, you create new neural pathways. Creativity occurs in all humans but it happens differently in artists. Or at least, the end result is different.
The more you create, the better you get. Especially when you make mistakes. We only really learn when we humiliate ourselves by trying projects a little too complex for our current skills.
Those skills improve. You become hardwired for creativity and output. Every project you complete makes it more likely you'll complete the next one. We're habitual creatures.
But the fact remains: It's just a lump of meat in our heads. When we're dead, it does nothing, it's just like anything else. Can we be as great as Chaplin, or Lionel Messi, or Einstein? Probably not. But let's not think of them as geniuses. Let's think of them as talented people who concentrated on their work. Work they had an aptitude for.
There are so many variables to creativity. Most perplexing is the social aspect. Society asks not "were you creative?", but "did you make money?" -- that mindbender is enough to give most artists a breakdown every time a well meaning friend or family member asks "how is it going?"
To realize the brain is just a grey lump of flesh is freeing. It does what you instruct it to do. It does what you focus on. It creates based on what you're thinking and feeling and experiencing.
You want to do your best creative work? Then make sure you're creating with every chance you get, and tempering it with enough time for rest, socialising and being spontaneous.
You are as capable as anyone else. You're nothing special, just a lump of grey matter encased in a skull.
Actually, that IS pretty special-- you're a piece of meat in a skull and the neurons are firing, but a hundred years from now, they won't be. Let's get creative and leave our imprint while we can.
Tea With Milk: The Difficulty of Being English and Abroad
In England you get tea with milk. In America you get tea but if you want the milk they look at you funny.
In Spain you get tea with a glass of milk. In Germany you get a pint of water with a tea bag on the side and they refuse to bring you milk. In Sweden you get tea with milk but nobody ever goes to Sweden.
In the Netherlands they give you tea but if you ask for milk they think you're high. In France they don't give you tea and they don't give you milk. In Ireland they give you tea with milk but only after a few pints of Guiness.
In Sicily you ask for tea with milk and they give you coffee. You explain the error and they give you tea, but still with no milk. You explain again and they give you milk, but take away the tea. You go to complain but see the mafia sitting outside and instantly buy everyone an espresso.
Sunday, 25 March 2012
Twenty Seconds Of Insane Courage
An Enormous Anger Grows in Brooklyn: Discovering THE RECORD SUMMER
Who are 'The Record Summer'? Where have they been? Where are they heading? To be honest, I don't have a clue, I just discovered them. But this is one of the purest songs I've ever heard.
At the time of writing, 'An Enormous Anger Grows in Brooklyn' has 758 views on YouTube. Their Facebook Fan Page has 196 followers. How exciting! The journey is beginning.
I remember seeing Jason Mraz in the basement at the Betsey Trotwood in Farringdon, London. There were only 40 of us, and we all knew we were discovering something special. We got to request songs, we got to talk to him, we got to know him. And then a few years later he was selling out Wembley Arena and "I'm Yours" was all over the radio. That's how it goes.
We're over-saturated with bands these days. How do you stand out? You just get good, that's all there is. Get good at whatever it is you do. What do 'The Record Summer' do? That's open to interpretation. For me, they reach for something pure, that's the only way I can describe it. They sound truthful, they sound like they mean it.
I guess 'Put You Out' is the hit, it has 4,667 views on YouTube.
That's what it's about these days. You don't reach everyone, you just gotta reach someone. Really reach them. I've had 'An Enormous Anger Grows in Brooklyn' on repeat for days. You might hate it, you might not see why I'm making a fuss --- but that's what it's about in the modern era. You make music and films that sound and feel and smell like YOU, and then if people relate, they'll love you and spread the word. I've got no reason to care about this band, yet here I am demanding you at least give them a listen.
This is how it starts. You don't need the record labels and the big film studios, you just need people who want to repeatedly watch and listen to your art. I can't stop watching the Cameron Crowe film 'We Bought A Zoo'. It's a friggin' family drama with zoo animals! I didn't expect to love it as much as I did, but it's Cameron Crowe. And I dig his stuff. Who he is and what he says matters, to me.
Friday, 23 March 2012
21 Blog Street
None of us know what any of the great wisdom means, we just like to pretend we do.
Thursday, 22 March 2012
12 ANGRY MEN (1957 Vs 1997)
It's 12 people in a room, talking. That's ALL it is. Yet it's riveting! A perfect film.
For those of you who haven't seen it: the film is about a jury who has to reach a unanimous verdict on a murder case. 11 of them are certain he's guilty, yet one of them is not sure. Juror no #8 is played by Henry Fonda. You can't take your eyes off him in this film, you sit there spellbound for 90 minutes.
They remade it in 1997, and Fonda's role was played by Jack Lemmon. I understand the casting. Juror No #8 was an everyman. He's who we like to think we are. And if that isn't an exact description of Jack Lemmon then I don't know what is.
But guess what? It doesn't work with Jack Lemmon! In fact, the remake hardly works at all.
It looks simple, right? 12 men in a room talking, easy! Just follow the script, get the shots, and be done with it.
But the original was directed by Sidney Lumet, one of the all time great directors. When someone nails subtlety and simplicity, they make it seem like anyone can do it, but it's not true, it takes skill, talent and awareness. Lumet made a masterpiece in 1957. The remake in 1997 is flat, you don't believe the characters. It crosses your mind that you're just watching 12 people sitting in a room talking.
We tell stories to each other verbally, or we read them in print. It's enough, when the story is great and handled well. That's why the original movie is so good. Henry Fonda grabs your attention and you're in awe of him standing up to 11 men who disagree with him.
With the Jack Lemmon version, he's not brave, he's just disagreeing with people, he's just unsure. It's just as valid, but it's not as compelling. But Fonda is magnetic, he pulls you in and holds onto you for the entire film.
The first film does an incredible job of putting you in the room. You feel like you're in the jury. Each member of the group is distinct and different. Some are reasonable, some are apathetic, some are angry and hostile. Thing is, you relate to all of them! That's why Fonda's character is so powerful, because you know how hard it is for people's minds to get changed. You feel it yourself when you're certain about something.
The craziest thing about '12 Angry Men' is that we don't know the full case, only what we hear in the jurors room afterwards. Our interest in the story isn't even based on the merits of the case, we don't even know them!
The 1957 version is genius, a masterclass in simplicity, story, and character. The 1997 version has everything in place, but it doesn't feel as natural. It's worth a watch, but the original is the masterpiece.






