#the movie came out in 2008 so if you haven't seen it yet then that's on u for being a slowpoke

[ctrl-alt-vibeshift]

in defense of the brat album art

my feed stopped when charli xcx dropped the album art for her upcoming sixth studio album "brat" a few weeks ago. like many angels, i was confused at first, as the image staggered out of the code on her merch site unannounced through a vinyl preorder link that originally had no image to go with it (and yes i ordered one before seeing any visuals...). even after she tweeted it, and the creative team posted about their contributions to it, questions were left unanswered. was it real? was it just a placeholder? was it an alternative cover for the brat_360 exclusive vinyl? this is not the album cover right? one angel dared ask our god in her twitter replies.

even before i got official confirmation that this was indeed the official cover, which i think came from charli's interview with vogue after the release of lead single von dutch, i was obsessed. the green: neon, but not tacky like the overdone highlighter trend already claimed by k-pop boy group nct, rather a muted, dull lime, catching your eye but not blinding you. the font: a simple sans serif, slightly condensed and elongated, nothing over-the-top or borderline illegible like the custom fonts artists usually commission. and the blur, the pixelization, the resolution, the quality (or lack thereof)—this is what really does it for me.

they're barely there, the rough, blurred edges of each letter, but once you see them you can't unsee them. the design evokes the feeling of waiting for an image to load in full quality on instagram, a youtube video playing in less than 1080p while buffering, a hi-res photo downloading from the cloud, a show or movie lagging its way into clarity on streaming services. or as oomf (@_alienmelissa) using a fan edit of von dutch lyrics put it:

(trans: lyric videos around 2008 all had fonts and backgrounds like this..........)

while thinking about the many implications of the low quality text on the cover, i read the essay "in defense of the poor image" written by hito steyerl in e-flux journal back in 2009, which perfectly put into words what i had been ruminating on:

[The poor image] mocks the promises of digital technology. Not only is it often degraded to the point of being just a hurried blur, one even doubts whether it could be called an image at all. Only digital technology could produce such a dilapidated image in the first place.

"one even doubts whether it could be called an image album cover at all," as many have due to the "poorness" of the brat art. better yet, steyerl goes on to proclaim "resolution was fetishized as if its lack amounted to castration of the author," also predicting the mass ridicule of charli for choosing and releasing such a "hurried blur" of an album art design.

regardless of what you compare it to, the low-res, early internet digital aesthetic it speaks to is something i haven't seen spoken much about. many twitter gays are up in arms about the lack of an image of charli on it, breaking her faceful cover streak (although she does hide it a bit on pop 2), and not giving them a new image to set their profile pictures to. charli has acknowledged this in the vogue interview: “I mean, as a female pop artist, what’s more bratty than not being on your album cover? Especially when there is so much pressure for women within the pop sphere to do exactly that," as well as in a tweet posted right before i started writing this:

which grimes replied to while i was writing this:

grimes scratches at what i'm getting at, but is more focused on the shock value that comes with its loud simplicity. this sentiment of breaking the feed, cutting through the visual muck and endless faces with a bold monotone color and by refusing to show face, is something i also admire. yet i think why i feel so passionately about the aesthetic value of this cover is that it offers me a respite from the overflow of high-res images mediated through the internet and onto my phone screen.

i'm so sick of the flood of iphone/digital photography, its quality increasing with each new device release. these images try too hard to replicate what they're representing, and create a false reality that many (myself included) get trapped in. we've sunken into the uncanny valley, and it's about time we claw ourselves out. i don't want to experience the physical through the digital anymore. i'd rather see all your pores when you're inches from my face than through the insane number of pixels resting in my palm. i want the images on the internet to be so obviously contained within it that there's no mistaking them for something material. i think this is why i'm such a fan of camcorder style photography and videos: like the chunky pixels surrounding "brat," they whisper i'm not real, i'm flawed technology, i will never replace the resolution of your retinas.

lucky for me, brat isn't the first artwork to do so, as there seems to be a shift back towards the materiality of the offline and the rougher edges of early internet interfaces within the broader art and design world as well. kat kitay describes this as "technoromanticism" in her essay "what's after post-internet art?" for spike magazine:

Exposed circuitry departs from the post-internet gloss typified by DIS Magazine, which shined up or hid away the ugly parts of technology. Hardware is made visible, laying bare the flow of power and information, at the same time transfiguring electronics into sacred objects. 

replace DIS magazine with PC music (its audio equivalent imo) and you'll get an analogy more relevant to charli's own aesthetic journey here. the super slick black lamborghini on the cover of the vroom vroom ep has driven off, her impossibly iridescent skin on the cover of pop 2 has shed its shine, and the skyscraper she's perched on for the cover of xcx world (RIP) has long been toppled, leaving nicki minaj's gag city in its ashes. the brat cover is the antithesis to these eras.

while ecco2k croons all i wanna see is 1080p / but reality keep me on 240 on "hold me down like gravity," maybe it's time to embody the "240" of reality again. with charli teasing this record as her clubbiest to date, tapping back into her party girl roots attending uk raves in her tweens, brat offers us a chance, both visually and sonically, to embrace the blur, the sweat, the adrenaline, the tears, and of course, the poppers fumes, of a low-res life.

[ratcready]

10 fav movies

thanks for the tag @ainulindaelynn :3

oh this is tough!! in no particular order we have (also i haven't seen any new movies in a while so pls withhold judgement AHAHA)

the secret life of walter mitty (2013) - its just. so good. like the way daydreaming is represented and the cinematography and just seeing life on film makes me !!!!!! also the soundtrack is brilliant

the devil wears prada (2006) - idk its just iconic

yesterday (2019) - the music is nice, the story is weird but funny, the beatles are gone, what more could you want

rogue one (2016) - yes I'm a star wars fan (newly divorced but still!) and rogue one is def the best one by far. behind it would be tesb

ip man (2008) - i loved watching ip man as a kid. still do

6. ant-man and the wasp (2018?) - I wont say its my fave fave but I do rmb enjoying it a lot when it first came out! funny + lighthearted is all i need really & my standards r like. underground

7. planes, trains & automobiles (1987) - SO funny and emotional

8. ferris bueller's day off (1986) - i just really like this one

9. the matrix (1999) - I SAID WHAT I SAID

10. i dont think ive found it yet! we'll see

open tags! i dont really know anyone yet so if you're seeing this feel free :)

[uboat53]

I had a revelation today about why I'm suddenly disconnected from the Marvel movies and shows that are coming out.

You see, I've been reading lot about how they've just become CGI spectacles and how it's terrible for movies, but that never bothered me. So why haven't I felt as much interest in the latest series of Marvel content, otherwise referred to as Phase 4?

I came to realize it's because they spent 22 movies building up a consistent narrative which was interesting and interconnected… and then they abandoned it.

Let me explain.

For reference, I'm an older Millennial. I grew up on Marvel stuff, X-men and Spider Man, and I was just finishing college when Iron Man (2008) came out, so I'm pretty much the prime audience for this.

Now, everything in Phases 1 through 3 of the MCU built toward Endgame, I think we can all agree that that's the case. Every solo movie, every Avengers movie, everything built one or more pieces toward what happened when Thanos snapped and then the Avengers snapped back.

Not only mechanical stuff, but there was also a build-up of trauma and experience. We saw the progression of Tony Stark's PTSD and his determination to do ANYTHING to stop what he thought was coming. We saw Steve Rogers slowly lose faith in the institutions he had once believed in. It wasn't even all trauma, though, we got to see Natasha Romanov learn to trust and James Barnes start to rebuild himself after being brainwashed.

And the snap, once it happened, was devastating. Half the population of the universe disappeared, including many of the heroes we'd been following in the various movies. Beyond the personal trauma of loss, jobs were left with no one skilled enough to do them, houses were left empty, and property was abandoned. It was clear that there was not a single person or place in the universe that wasn't dramatically affected.

Then, five years later, after everything had sort of adjusted, the Avengers snapped everyone back.

What happened then? What happened when the population suddenly doubled? When people thought lost forever, who had been grieved, came back? When people returned to find their friends and relatives had changed over the 5 years? What happened to the homes that had been left abandoned or had been taken over by other people? How did the universe suddenly feed twice as many people as had existed the day before?

Don't get me wrong, some Marvel cinema touched on some of this. We see people suddenly reappearing out of nowhere in Wandavision and the entire premise of The Falcon and the Winter Soldier revolves around a group that's angry at having what they feel is theirs taken away from them by people who have returned, but it's not the focus. Instead, we see everything jumping straight into the multiverse saga without much of a pause taken to explore the immense consequences of what the Avengers did in Endgame.

So yeah, it feels like they dropped the plot. Everything built up to Endgame and Endgame delivered a massive gut punch of a plot point, the kind that could reverberate through dozens of films, and then… nothing.

I should note that I'm not completely disconnected from the MCU, I'm still excited about Loki Season 2 and I've seen Wakanda Forever, but I'm not looking forward to the new movies or TV shows the way I did in the decade leading up to Endgame. It just doesn't feel like it's part of the same story arc anymore.

Maybe I'll get there. Maybe I'll find the new arc just as interesting as the old one, but I've figured out why I'm not there yet.

[elindae-writes]

on the subject of chihuahuas

the first installment of the beverley hills chihuhuas franchise astounded me whereas the second terrorized me

in the first movie the chihaha's mouths DO NOT MOVE, they still talk (a bit too fucking much if you ask me) but their voices are just sorta disembodied and kinda implied to be coming from their bodies

BUT THE SECOND MOVIE (the one where the chihahuas are competing for 50k) is the one in which their mouths have been animated via cgi to make it look as if they're really articulating their words and it's just awful okay

why am i posting about this

[frankiefellinlove]

I almost cried because I couldn’t attend this event 😔

Report of Archives shown in Asbury Park today

By Stan Goldstein

What a shame this wasn't recorded or filmed or even photos exist yet. The Asbury Park Music and Film Festival photographer was allowed to take pictures of the talk and hopefully they will appear soon.

This was one for the ages. It was spectacular!! Bruce was there. He did a Q&A at the end. Ten videos shown.

Then they had the talk. Thom Zimny and Chris Phillips came out, there was a third chair. Before they started Thom waved to the side of the stage and said "Come out now" and Bruce walked out to a standing ovation.. What followed was an incredible Q & A. It's a shame this wasn't recorded, but I took a lot of notes.

Some breaking news from it.

Bruce said that a DVD/video will be coming out of the full New Orleans Jazzfest show from 2006.

Bruce said that show was "One of his Top-5 live performing experiences."

Bruce also said he would love to see a full Tunnel of Love show come out.

Bruce said a lot of this footage he had never seen before. He said he never saw the clip with Clarence from Buffalo in 2009 before.

Bruce says he's amazed what he can find on Youtube and suggest fans should go there to find some things.

He was very relaxed. Wore a black sweat shirt (sweater? ladies need your help here) with a "5" on it.

Some quotes from Bruce:

"I have lived many lives, many I haven't seen myself," after seeing this footage.

Bruce said they were "superstitious about being filmed in the early days. That's why we never did any TV. We felt that a magician should not look too close at his magic trick."

Bruce then gave a shout out to Barry Rebo who was in the audience. Barry is the one who shot much of the early footage.

Bruce said he was surprised to find out what they have (in the vaults). "I feel glad that Thom was able to dig up this stuff."

Bruce said when they did the filming for "Live in New York City" in 2000 that he felt "he was finally getting over the wall" of not liking to be filmed.

This was after Chris asked him about the Blood Brothers documentary from 1995 being one of the first things being filmed officially.

Bruce had a funny line about being recorded/filmed: "You always think you are more handsome than you actually are and you always think you sound better than you actually do."

Bruce said the 1975 Bottom Line shows "Really changed the life of the band. We were officially contenders. We no longer had to be good, we had to be GREAT! every night." to which many in the ground yelled out "You are!"

Chris asked about doing 10 Bottom Line shows in five days in 1975 (early and late show) and Bruce said they were only an hour-and-a-half each, so it wasn't too bad.

Chris Phillips tried to ask him about the new album but Bruce said he didn't really want to talk about it.

The 10 songs:

1. When You Walk In The Room - Bottom Line, August 16?,1975

One-camera color. Not great quality but who's going to complain seeing Bruce from this era

2. Apollo Medley - Apollo Theater, NYC, March 9, 2012

Chris Phillips asked Bruce about this. It's the clip where Bruce goes up in the balcony and sings from the front, really dangerous.

Bruce: "I don't know what I was thinking when I did that. It wasn't planned, no one was following me. I just said fuck it and I then fucked up the whole arrangement with the band. I was just glad to find some pipes to hold on to. We do perform some death-defying acts."

Bruce also said it was incredible to play there with all the history of the place and it was a great way to break the band in to start the Wrecking Ball tour. Said it was Jake's first show and "there was no pressure."

Bruce also said to Thom that they should put this out someday too. It was all professionally filmed with multiple cameras. This footage was awesome. The look on Patti's face when Bruce was in the balcony was priceless.

3. New York City Serenade, Dec. 15, 1973, Nassau Community College, black and white, two cameras: Rough footagae but incredible.

Chris Phillips asked about David Sancious playing on this. This was the original E Street Band: Bruce, Garry, David, Danny and Vini Lopez. This clip was shown at the Monmouth U. archives event in 2014. A magical clip. David on the piano is spectacular.

"David is one of the most musically talented people I have met and on the planet. His ability to cover everything, he's a master. I loved to have him in the band."

Chris then said "Well there's the elephant in the room. We have some new music and David plays on it and Bruce said "Yea, he plays on some of it. But we don't have to talk about that."

4. My City Of Ruins - Seeger Sessions, Jazzfest, 2006

Pro-shot, multiple camera footage. Great shots of the crowd singing along "Rise Up!" According to Bruce, this whole show will be out at some point.

Bruce: "The Sessions Band was a great band. I want to do that again. It was a great day. The day before we went driving down to the Ninth Ward. Rock and Roll is best when the stakes are on the table and go go against trouble and hard times. It was good to perform there and serve."

Bruce said to come back to Asbury Park now is so great to see how it is doing. He said he feels like the "Ghost of Christmas past" when he walks around

5. Quarter to Three, Bottom Line, August 16, 1975

Bruce asked Thom Zimny who shot this? And Thom told him Barry Rebo.

Great, color, one-camera footage. Bruce is all over the place. Dancing on the center table in front of the stage. Jumping on Danny's organ then going over to Roy's piano. At one point he drops his guitar pick and a fan hands it back to him. Young, classic Bruce at his best.

Bruce said the band was physically and literally half the size they are now back in those days compared to the Apollo footage now. .

6. Promised Land - Freehold, Nov. 8, 1996

A one-camera close up shot of Bruce in color. Not the greatest video but I'm not going to complain.

Bruce said "going back to St. Rose of Lima was tough enough. I did debut 'Freehold' that night.

7. Who Do You Love/She's the One - Tunnel of Love tour, Rotterdam, June 28,1988.

May have been the highlight clip of the afternoon. Hard rocking E Street Band with the spotlight on Clarence. He's at his peak physically and is all over. "The sight of the The Big Man and the maracas" Bruce said with a smile.

Some epic footage of Bruce and Clarence practically making love on stage. You have to see it to understand. The women in the audience particularly liked this clip.

This is when Bruce said "We should put out a Tunnel of Love show."

8. Patti Scialfa doing "Tell Him" from the Stone Pony 10th anniversary show, 1984 with Cats on a Smooth Surface. Nice color, one-camera shot.

"I almost had her here today," Bruce said. "That's the night I met my wife, 30 years ago at the Stone Pony. As I said in the Broadway show, it was the first time I heard her sing. She was playing with Bobby Bandiera, an Asbury Park hero."

Bruce asked where that footage came from and Thom Zimny said Kevin Buell knew someone who had it.

9. Sandy - Dec. 15, 1973, acoustic with Danny Federici, black and white. Nice version but a bit slow. But hey it's classic Danny and Bruce.

Bruce kidded that "I thought I was going to fall asleep at any moment. I went to the bathroom and came back I was still playing!"

Chris asked Bruce a little bit more about "Sandy" and the writing of it and Bruce said "Sandy was when things were just starting to happen for the band. It was a goodbye to Asbury Park. The last night Danny Federici played with us (Indianapolis, March 20, 2008) I asked him what he wanted to play and he said 'Sandy.' The song was appropriate because I wrote it It as the ending of something wonderful and the beginning of something new. We were leaving Asbury Park just as things were changing,"

10. Growing Up - Buffalo, Nov. 22, 2009. With the story of meeting Clarence.

Bruce said he had never seen this clip before. "The story is completely true, all those things. It actually happened. Looking at that, I really miss the Big Man" Bruce said as he and the crowd got a bit emotional.

Toward the end Bruce thanked Thom Zimny, saying "He has allowed us to use this great footage. He's like another member of the band."

Bruce said how he saw a Jean Claude van Damme movie and called Thom up and said "we should look like that for the Darkness taping right on this stage." Which was done in December of 2009, the filming of the band playing the entire album for the box set.

Bruce also commended Thom for his work on "Springsteen on Broadway" and said "Broadway was going well, let's not fuck this thing up!" Bruce kidded that the "magic begins with: 'Do I look great?'"

There was a little bit of talk about the "Night with the Jersey Devil" film and the short movie made from "Hunter of Invisible Game."

Chris Phillips also asked Bruce about the Upstage movie that is being shown tomorrow and what Bruce thought about the original version which he saw in 2017.

"Why am I not in this?" Bruce said. He then did do an interview for it which will be in the new version. He continued: "That last time I walked into the Upstage it looked exactly how it looked in 1968."

Some notes: Cameron Crowe was in the audience as were the Farrelly Brothers.

When I got to my seat, I was told I was being moved. I bought a single ticket the moment they were on sale and ended up in the first row. They told me my seat was going to be used by Bruce and his family. I got bumped up to a folding chair in the pit right in front of the stage. A little tough to watch the videos but right in front of Bruce for the Q&A so no complaints here. As it turned out, Bruce never sat in the seats anyway. He did watch from the side up against the wall of the lower right (facing the stage) orchestra for a bit

The locking up the cellphones thing worked well. In a way it was kind of nice not having a zillion phones up when Bruce was onstage but what a shame that it wasn't record for "the archives", then again, maybe it was. I don't know.

Great job by Chris Phillips. What I liked is he asked "fan-type"" questions, not like how a New York Times or Rolling Stone writer would try to talk about it.

And if you stayed this long, thank you for reading