#dec102018

[tanaka-s]

Newspaper holiday

DEC,10.2018 https://twitter.com/tanakasoushi/status/1072140142817624065

[our2ndstreet-blog]

zodiacs as McDonald’s food

Zodiacs: What McDonald Food You Are? (Disclaimer: I do not want salt with my fries) Aries: Bacon, Egg, n’ Cheese McGriddle Taurus: A caramel Frappe with fries being dipped in Gemini: Hot Fudge Sundae (((without peanuts))) Cancer: Hash Browns Leo: Dr. Pepper Virgo: Chicken McNuggets Libra: McChicken with fries in b e t w e e n Scorpio: Sprite but in a water cup Sagittarius: Pico Guacamole With Artisan Grilled Chicken Capricorn: Hotcake Platter Aquarius: Oreo Mcflurry Pisces: Apple Pie

[hiroshimatsumoto]

dec102018 by Hiroshi Matsumoto Via Flickr: Dec. 10, 2018 9 cm x 9 cm (app. 4" x 4") oil on canvas © 2018 Hiroshi Matsumoto www.hiroshimatsumoto.com

[our2ndstreet-blog]

Bohemian Rhapsody: You’re Bad, Not Problematic

Bohemian Rhapsody: You’re Bad, Not Problematic If there's one thing that can be agreed on about Queen, it’s that their frontman, Freddie Mercury, is an icon of his era and his life and legacy are a story most certainly worthy of being told. So when I sat down to watch Bohemian Rhapsody a couple of weeks ago, I was ready to enjoy a movie mainly focused on just that, despite some negative press I had heard a while back about the state of this movie's production. Unfortunately, I left the theater with the negative press confirmed rather than debunked. Not only did I spend 134 minutes watching a frustratingly inaccurate retelling of Queen and Freddie Mercury's history, I watched a movie that was clearly robbed of its potential by obvious sanitization of the band’s past (perhaps accentuated by the surviving, active members of Queen having a hand in the production of the film). If you went into Bohemian Rhapsody hoping for a heart-wrenching tale of a fascinating musician taken too soon, you were probably as disappointed as I was, if not more. That is not to say the movie didn't have its moments, nor that it wasn’t completely unenjoyable. Rami Malek's performance as Mercury was fantastic and easily the most admirable aspect about the movie at all times other than the soundtrack. However, Malek's embodiment of the legendary singer could not save this movie in its entirety. These two aspects of the film, while undeniably important, are not the only ones. Aside from a few moments of humor, the nice things about this movie end here. Unraveling this fun trip of singing along to Queen in the theater, you get just about nothing of substance. The movie suffers from a lack of dramatic impact, with the only moments where you are supposed to feel tension being fabricated for the purpose of this film’s story, which is, of course, not appropriate if one is trying to create a biopic. Bohemian Rhapsody centers around Queen's formation in 1970, their rise to prominence, and the “struggles” of the band, culminating with their astounding performance at the Live Aid benefit concert in 1985. This means that the film must also cover these years of Freddie Mercury’s life, from his meeting Roger Taylor and Brian May when they were part of the band Smile, to his romantic relationship with Mary Austin, the end of their physical relationship due to his series of male lovers (and not his AIDS diagnosis, as the film would have you believe). Mercury and Mary Austin remained friends for the remainder of his life, often referring to her as his “common law wife” and his “only friend.” Bohemian Rhapsody shows promise of solidly developing Austin and Mercury’s relationship (perhaps even to the point wanting to see a movie dedicated solely to the premise of how the pair's relationship evolved over time), but throws this away as soon as the film starts to dwell on Freddie's sexuality. When he comes out as bisexual to Mary Austin, she automatically concludes that Mercury is gay and the question is never highlighted again in the movie, aside from passing moments where Mercury is visibly hurt that Austin has moved on after they split up. Their continuing relationship after he came out to her, and giving more weight to the idea that Mercury likely was bisexual is pushed away in exchange for focusing more on the band’s story, which in itself would have been fair enough if they had not been so lackluster in telling both stories, because the exchange made is not worthwhile. However, before covering the relationship to the band in terms of just Mercury, I feel it necessary to first discover the point where all three major flaws of the film converge: Paul Prenter, the film’s de facto antagonist, a former manager/lover of Mercury, who, to be fair, is cited as the influence on Freddie that caused most of the internal conflict over the sound of Hot Space. In reality, that is where Prenter's purview of the era covered by the film would end. However, in the film, Prenter is responsible for far more than he can really be held accountable for in the real world, and the way he is portrayed gives way for the most heinously inept parts of the movie. Prenter is the culmination of “taking liberties” with the history of the band and mischaracterization. Bohemian Rhapsody does a lot with Prenter, and being professionally and romantically involved with Mercury as he was, it’s somewhat believable that he could have done certain things mentioned in the film as things he did (with a certain event being a distorted version of something he actually did). However, he is simply everywhere in the film. He is simultaneously Mercury's lover, manager, and so obsessed with keeping him to himself that he does comically “evil” things. He is the one to notify Freddie of the possibility of a solo record deal, double-crossing Mercury's former manager (leading to the former manager's firing), he's also the one that keeps Mercury away from the band once they “break up,” staying with him in Germany throwing extravagant parties filled with promiscuity, drugs, and alcohol, he also keeps Mary Austin away from Freddie by intercepting phone calls and lying to Freddie, as well as intercepting a phone call about the Live Aid concert, effectively trying to keep Queen from getting back together for the concert. This mountain of tasks, I remind you, all fall on Prenter as he is represented in the film, despite there being little proof that any of these things were Prenter's responsibility. It is after all of these cartoonishly ridiculous acts of villainy that Mary Austin flies to Germany to bring Freddie home, with him then catching wind of Prenter's duplicitous behavior, deciding to fire him there, leaving him in Germany in 1985, leading a fuming Prenter to out Mercury on national television. The problem, as with most of Prenter’s representation (and most of this part of the film) is that in the real world, the events mentioned did not happen as they are portrayed. Mercury actually fired Prenter in 1986, after Live Aid. Prenter would then out Mercury to the tabloids the following year, in 1987, also disclosing Mercury’s relationship with Jim Hutton. While it is clear that the real Paul Prenter was by no means a “good guy,” the film chose to portray him as a villain for all the wrong reasons, again conveniently dodging further discussion of Mercury’s sexuality by pinning all sorts of other deeds to the antagonist, rather than highlighting the more than suspicious things he actually did (including blackmailing Mercury with the threat of outing him). However, while Prenter crystallizes many of the problems of Bohemian Rhapsody, he isn’t all of them. The rest of the major problems come in with the bulk of the interactions of the band, specifically Freddie’s interactions with the rest of the band, or, seemingly, against them. In covering the majority of Queen’s history, the film has a lot to go through, including but not limited to, 11 albums, 12 tours, and key moments in the band's road to fame, such as their first television appearance, the massive success of the titular song, and their internal conflicts relating to the 1982 album Hot Space. Obviously, the film cannot do all of this in its runtime, so it understandably covers at length the key moments with tours and album publishings serving more as intermediate segments to blast music in and sing along to. This decision in the film is not the problem, the problem is the decision to move certain events in the band's history around in attempts to kind of magic plot points out of nowhere. Much of the band's early history is also glossed over, aside from their first success in Killer Queen and the making of Night at the Opera and consequently, the making of Bohemian Rhapsody. In terms of the band's relationship with Mercury (which constitutes most of the movie), many missteps are made in both the characterization of Mercury relative to the band, as well the bulk of the “liberties” taken with the band timeline coming into play here. In the scenes leading up to and including the band’s (non-existent) break-up over Hot Space and Mercury’s solo deal, Mercury is increasingly portrayed as the only diva of the group, consistently making snide remarks at his bandmates while they are supposedly calm and level-headed, completely inoffensive. Am I expected to believe that for a second, especially in a movie that Brian May and Roger Taylor took part in producing? The idea that Freddie Mercury is the only divisive member of the band at this point in time is a thinly-veiled attempt at sanitizing and deifying the rest of Queen, perhaps in a failed effort at amping up the embattled state of Freddie Mercury, or perhaps in a genuine effort to make the rest of the band look good. This becomes even more unbelievable when taking into account the next big slip-up in terms of continuity: Freddie’s solo deal. The way Bohemian Rhapsody makes things seem, you would be well within your right to believe that Queen’s frontman was being a self-centered snob when he threw an outburst over being confronted about the lackluster sound of Hot Space and decided to sign his own solo album deal without telling the other members, and that the rest of the band was taken aback by the blatantly underhand move, leading to differences that in that moment could not be settled, ending in a “break-up” of Queen for the next 2-3 years. However, as per the pattern of Bohemian Rhapsody, this is not at all what happened. Yes, the band was conflicted about the awkward-sounding album they were working on, but there was no split over it, and certainly not over Mercury going to work on his first solo album, Mr. Bad Guy. In fact, both Brian May and Roger Taylor had begun successful solo careers by the time of the film’s “break-up,” with no issue from the band, as was the case when Mercury went to work on his solo debut. Unfortunately, this is not where the diverging timeline created by Bohemian Rhapsody converges back into the main timeline. After the film’s Queen break-up, the series of events in Germany happens, and we are brought to a meeting in manager Jim Beach’s office (Beach became the band’s manager in 1978), where Mercury apologizes for his actions towards the band, and expresses interest in performing at Live Aid with them. In actuality, the band got right to work on their 11th album, The Works, right after Hot Space, and was touring for the former when they were contacted about Live Aid. The lead up to Live Aid produces the most egregious inaccuracy created, and left me frustrated through much of the otherwise enjoyable recreation of the iconic concert. ​Freddie Mercury’s AIDS diagnosis being moved up to 1985 for the sole purpose of giving extra weight to his performance at Live Aid is an appalling, enraging decision that should have been shot down immediately, but alas, it made it into the final, theatrical cut of Bohemian Rhapsody. There was much negative press around the film when it was revealed that the era covered would (in an accurate representation) not extend to Mercury’s battle with AIDS. What was the production team’s answer to this, you ask? Instead of deciding to cover the 6 years of Mercury’s career they cut off, or simply emphasizing other, related struggles of the singer (such as his SEXUALITY) in the set time to still construct an accurate story, they decided to lazily throw in two scenes in sequence where Freddie gets diagnosed and reveals it to the band, with the band then giving condolences and deciding to throw their full support behind him and help him keep it under wraps, and add a few slides at the end of the film saying Freddie Mercury died due to complications from AIDS in 1991, and don’t forget to donate to Jim Beach’s AIDS charity! It is apparent that the team behind Bohemian Rhapsody added the AIDS scenes as an afterthought to save face with the public, and the way it is incorporated into the rest of the film is transparently without effort or skill. The story of Farrokh Bulsara ceases to be gripping or emotional (if any other inaccuracies didn’t do this already). In trying to fit within the time frame the makers of the film set for themselves, they completely miss any of the thematic depth of Mercury’s legacy and diverge off a much more compelling and believable storyline. Of course, the famous Live Aid concert closes out the movie and we end on the dreaded aforementioned end cards, but the concert does close the story rather excitingly, again leaving me to wonder what potential was lost when they decided to mix facts with fiction in Bohemian Rhapsody, and leaving me both, craving a movie focused on Freddie Mercury’s relationship with Mary Austin, and more Queen music (and judging by the film’s soundtrack bringing Queen back to the charts, it seems more clear that the movie’s financial success was all that was in mind when creating it). In conclusion, Bohemian Rhapsody is a failure as a biopic retrospective of one of the greatest bands in rock history, but if you just want to sing along to Queen songs for 134 minutes, this movie is absolutely the one for you. Watch this with friends who will be just as frustrated as you are about the lapses in storytelling, but will also sing with you at the top of their lungs, and you’ll have a good time. ----END---- P.S.: This next part is a bunch of things that don’t totally fit in with the big blocks of criticism, but still observations I had about the film. ​Freddie’s identity and family life are minor subplots of the film, with half-hearted emphasis during early Queen days and Live Aid (with just about nothing in the middle). It’s cute that Freddie and his father reconcile after many years of conflict and disagreement over Freddie “rejecting his heritage,” and much like the relationship with Freddie and Mary, it’s things like this that should have been more prominent in Mercury’s story. Also, a truly comedic emphasis is put on Freddie Mercury’s passion for cats, to the point where I questioned whether they focused on the cats more than they did Freddie himself. This problem brings to light the other relationship that Freddie was in, you know, the gay one. Jim Hutton does appear in Bohemian Rhapsody, and his relationship with Mercury is present, but for a rather small amount of time, as Hutton becomes involved with Freddie in 1985, at the tail end of the movie. Also, songs in the film come about a little too conveniently. Brian May has everyone and their wives in the studio, and in an effort to create a song “that the audience can participate in” (this part is somewhat true, an oddity for this movie), gets everyone together to do the iconic stomp-stomp-clap of “We Will Rock You,” and Freddie walks in late to the recording session (cue canned cheering), listens to the beat, and asks if May has written the lyrics. Boom, “We Will Rock You” exists.There’s another scene where the band is in a heated argument, and John Deacon hushes everyone from the corner as he strums the bassline to “Another One Bites the Dust.” Classic made. While these scenes of serendipitous song creation fit with the film’s general tone, they only help in making the film feel more disconnected from reality, and it’s a shame that the songwriting process for some of the more thought provoking Queen songs is glossed over in exchange for moments of musical magic in writing the immediately recognizable hits.

[our2ndstreet-blog]

zodiac signs as ice cream flavors

Zodiac Signs - Ice Cream Flavors (Disclaimer: Take this with a grain of salt) Aries: Cookie Dough Taurus: Pistachio Gemini: Chocolate Fudge Cancer: Strawberry Leo: Cookies and Cream Virgo: Rum and Raisins Libra: Butter Pecan Scorpio: Butter Brickle Sagittarius: Chocolate Capricorn: Mint Chocolate Chip Aquarius: Rocky Road Pisces: Vanilla