Pink Floyd - Rare Singles

So today Pink Floyd releases newly remastered versions of their 14 major studio albums, along with some other treats, like a six-disc version of Dark Side of the Moon, a new best of album to come shortly, and more. This is exciting for new Pink Floyd fans, who have yet to discover the band, and dedicated Pink Floyd fans, who have lots of money to shell out on fresher, cleaner, fancier versions of what they already have. Pink Floyd was my top favorite band in high school, and they remain one of my favorites to this day. But I guess I fall under that group who already has all this material (albeit in less shiny forms), but doesn't have the money to go out and buy new copies every time they release a new version (you know how many times they've re-released Dark Side of the Moon? And to this day, I've only bought it once).

However, this is a perfect opportunity for me to introduce you to a Pink Floyd compilation I put together myself a number of years ago. I call it Rare Singles, and it puts together a lot of the non-album material from the Floyd's early days. In 1971, the band itself released a compilation titled Relics, which consisted of a few early singles, some standout tracks from their first few albums, and one or two unreleased tracks. I eventually discovered that there were other early singles not appearing on this disc, or any other easily acquired disc (that is, without shelling out a fortune for one of the box sets). So, I decided to "upgrade" Relics by creating a new compilation that would dispense of all the album tracks, and replace them with more of the hard-to-find stuff.

I think it's a fantastic compilation, and it sounds really great. It brings out more of Syd Barrett's genius through those early singles that are mostly forgotten today, and it also has a nice balance of stuff that showcases the rest of the band. I also threw in the great track Embryo which appears only on Works, an otherwise unremarkable Pink Floyd compilation released in 1983, as well as a live version of the song which stretches it out and gives it more life. You know record companies are in that game to scam fans out of their money, so they'll release compilations with mostly stuff they already have, plus one or two rarities they can't get anywhere else. I think it's dishonest, and so that's the point of Rare Singles - to put all (or at least a lot of) that rare stuff together on one disc. You'll never see it on store shelves, but I think it would be very popular if such a disc were ever released.

Here's the track list:

1. Arnold Layne
2. Candy And A Currant Bun
3. See Emily Play
4. Apples And Oranges
5. Paintbox
6. Scream Thy Last Scream
7. Vegetable Man
8. It Would Be So Nice
9. Julia Dream
10. Point Me At The Sky
11. Careful With That Axe, Eugene
12. Biding My Time
13. Embryo
14. Embryo (Live at BBC 1970)

And for the cover, I made a point to search out a rare picture of the band that includes both Syd Barrett and David Gilmour, which bridges the gap between the two main and early lineups, and represents the spirit of the compilation.

Notes on The Goblet of Fire (book version)

Warning: There be Harry Potter spoilers in this post.

* I love that Moody's "Mad-Eye" can see through things - even Invisibility Cloaks!

* I love how Hermione is NOT crushing on Viktor Krum in this version. (He's definitely not her type - not that Krum's any worse than Ron, though :-\).

* I loved the entire house elf liberation subplot. It was a great allegory for slavery. Even down to the fact that the slaves feared their freedom, and most people justified the convenience of having slaves by believing that the slaves enjoyed their slavery - even perfectly reasonable, caring people believed this. There is no force as strong, or as corrupt, as conservativism.

* I am continually impressed by how much of an inspiration and a role model Dumbledore is. He has such wisdom and integrity. The way he treats people with respect who deserve it - whether human or giant or youth or former Death Eater - is so admirable; yet he is a force to be reckoned with against the agents of evil and hypocrisy and cowardice.

* I like how scathing this book is toward both the media (Rita Skeeter), and politics.

* I immensely enjoyed the confrontation between Dumbledore and Cornelius Fudge, the Minister of Magic, at the end of the book. It really shows how inadequate politics are, and how fear and laziness can contribute to evil and corruption. And it also sets up the Ministry as an enemy (even independent of Voldemort's influence), and what is to happen to Hogwarts at the hands of Dolores Umbridge in the next book. Like many things, this is explained much more clearly in the books than it was in the movies.

* On that note, I also liked the explanation for what happened between Harry and Voldemort during their duel (Priori Incantatem). It makes a lot more sense than, "oh, guess what, these ghosts are gonna show up, but we're not gonna tell you why".

* The Goblet of Fire is the turning point in the series, and I think that's why it's one of my favorite parts of the story. The tension, and the despair when Voldemort finally returns. It's like the ending of The Empire Strikes Back, when the bad guy wins, and everything looks so grim, and you're dying to find out what the heroes will do to fight back. I'm looking forward to reading on!

Horror Realm Con (Saturday)

I got the autograph I wanted on Friday, but I decided to come back for another day of fun at the Horror Realm Con. Being a late riser, I skipped all the programming in the first half of the day and arrived in the afternoon to roam the Dealer's Room a bit more before catching some panels. I was considering picking up some cheap smut, since, you know, where else can you find that sort of stuff (offline)? And there was plenty of it to choose from. But you know how porn is - all the content is pretty similar, and finding something with a model you like can be a crapshoot.

It occurred to me that I could try to find something with Misty Mundae in it. She's a model I like, and she's done both softcore porn and horror. In fact, I think she's even been described as a scream queen; although, the Ladies of Horror lamented yesterday that the label "scream queen" has sort of lost its prestige these days, being diluted by the countless amateurs who grasp onto it hoping to make a name for themselves. Considering what I had seen in the Dealer's Room on Friday, I knew I wouldn't have much trouble finding a title featuring Misty Mundae, but I wasn't expecting to find a booth right outside of the Dealer's Room advertising various erotic features, including some of Misty Mundae's work! I suppose I should have taken it as a sign, but I ended up not buying anything, because I really didn't want to spend any more money. :-(

So what's the deal with all this porn at a horror convention? Well, it's no big secret that the 'sleaze sector' kind of runs through both the 'b' horror and porno genres. Actually, the Ladies of Horror mentioned yesterday the stereotype they have to deal with, where people will assume that if you're a female actress who does horror movies (careful you don't pronounce it "whore movies" ;D), then you also do porn. Which is not necessarily the case. Nevertheless, the naked fact is that there is indeed some overlap between the genres. Like how the exploitation genre covers both gratuitous sex and violence. Which brings me to the first panel I attended on Saturday.

It was a talk with 42nd Street Pete, who grew up around the grindhouse theaters on 42nd street in New York City, during their heyday. He had plenty of sleazy stories to tell about that scene, with all the drugs, sex, and bootleggin' you can imagine. The one thing I took away from it was that as cool as the exploitation genre can be, the grindhouse lifestyle was not very glamorous. The movies were good; but the lifestyle of the movies' patrons - not so great. Of course, there's a sort of cult of sensationalism around this kind of seedy lifestyle, and these guys are idolized for their participation in the history of this genre. But as the panel room just across the hall started drawing a crowd for the Pin Up Contest I had also wanted to see, it became obvious to me that hanging out with a group of guys bragging about their experiences with hookers isn't half as interesting as actually spending time with attractive women, admiring their impressive, and sometimes sexy, costumes.

Speaking of which, I tracked down one girl who had, hands down, the greatest outfit of the entire convention. I don't think it was even horror-related, but it didn't matter, because it was amazing. It was sort of a gold vinyl outfit, that didn't leave much to the imagination, with a huge peacock tail on the back. It was fantastic. I talked to the girl briefly, and I discovered that not only was she the fire-breather from the night before, but she was also going to be the DJ later that night! When I approached her, I was afraid that she'd be weary of the sort of attention she must have been getting a lot of, but she turned out to be incredibly friendly, in a way that very few people are. I guess that, if you're going to wear something like that, you have to be able to appreciate that kind of attention. Which, in my eyes, is a truly admirable quality. ;p (It didn't surprise me when I later learned that she's done some modeling).

So then I skipped off for some dinner at the food court across the street, then I got back just after dark to catch the first half of the Horror High Homecoming Party, which consisted of two bands (one after another) playing outdoors right next to the hotel pool (which was closed - it was rather chilly, anyway). The first band was Devilz in the Detailz, which was not as metal as I was expecting these bands to be, and the second band was River Runs Scarlet, which was very metal and just the sort of band I'd expect to hear at a horror convention.

The second part of the homecoming party was indoors in the restaurant attached to the hotel, with tunes provided by DJ Cy-Fi, the same girl with the fantastic outfit I was just talking about. Except she had changed, into another fantastic outfit.

There was also a costume contest, but the theme seemed to be skewed towards an '80s motif (since, you know, that was a great decade for horror movies), which I felt took some of the attention away from the great horror-themed costumes that were around. Like the chefs carting around a zombie wok, filled with disembodied limbs, and lots of brains! There were a lot more people in costumes today than there was on Friday. Several zombies - some of them really good. Lots of violent makeup effects - both on zombies and non-zombies. Spooky contacts were very popular - and I admit, they can have a very disconcerting effect. Have you ever tried talking to someone with fogged-over eyes? It's unnerving.

There were also quite a few goth fashions, though many of those were attached to the lovely Black Hearts girls. I discovered that DJ Cy-Fi is also the owner of Black Hearts Clothing, which had a booth set up in the Dealer's Room. Their clothing is awesome - they have vinyl corsets, and miniskirts, and all the sorts of things I wish I could wear, if only I had the right figure. You know, a girl wears these things, and she's just plain hot. A guy wears them, and it's some kind of bizarre fetish. Then again, maybe I'm just not hanging around with the right crowds.

I caught another well-dressed group who were advertising a stage adaptation (by the Rage of the Stage Players) of the film The Hamiltons, which you'll remember was one of the After Dark Horrorfest films a few years ago. Isn't that crazy? The one girl in the group, who I believe won first place in the Pin Up Contest, had a brilliantly themed "gothic lolita" costume. She was Little Miss Muffet, wearing an elegant dress, but covered in spiders - they were even in her bowl of curds and whey! Ick!

I'll admit that after the party was over, I was reluctant to go home. There was still activity in the halls, and I think there was a midnight show about to go on in the film room, but they looked to be running a little bit late, and I didn't really feel like waiting til after 2am to walk home. So with a heavy heart, I left. I wasn't expecting to have as much fun as I did at this horror convention, but it turned out really well. The only thing that would have made it better is if I had some friends of my own to go with (friends who live in my city and enjoy sharing my interests), and if I had had time to prepare a costume. I actually had one I could have worn, one that I've been looking for an excuse to wear, but the convention was a totally last-minute thing, so I didn't have time to plan it out. Plus, I don't know how comfortable I'd feel wearing that costume out in public all on my own...

Maybe I should stop by Black Hearts' store sometime and get myself outfitted. ;)

Horror Realm Con (Friday)

Horror has a history here in the zombie capital of the world, the City of the Living Dead, where the modern zombie first rose from the grave in George Romero's Night of the Living Dead, the movie that breathed new life into the zombie genre and awakened a new generation of horror fans. In spite of this, and my horror fandom, until today I had never attended a horror convention. But yesterday (and not a moment too soon) I found out about the Horror Realm Con, being held this weekend close enough (and cheap enough) for me to attend.

But the thing that clinched it, that gave me the motivation to get my butt out there, was seeing Kyra Schon's name on the guest list: Kyra Schon, the ghoul next door herself, who played Karen Cooper in the original Night of the Living Dead, the little girl zombie whose face is on the poster - a visual icon of zombie horror. I don't know if I've ever said this before, but I've always wanted to hang one of those NotLD posters on my wall. So I figured this would be the perfect opportunity to get an autographed copy!

When I got to the con, the first thing I did was head for the Dealer's Room, to look for a NotLD poster, or t-shirt, or anything with the iconic image of the zombie girl on it that I could get signed the moment I ran into Kyra Schon. It turns out she was in there, with a booth set up, all ready to sell autographed prints (and posters, and t-shirts). So I ended up getting an iconic print, with a personalized autograph from Kyra herself, who was very sweet and friendly. I was so excited (and also afraid of the print getting bent in my backpack), that I immediately walked over to the arts & crafts store nearby to put it in a frame. :3

But since I had made it out to the con, I was determined to stick around and see what other creepy fun it had to offer me. If I had the money to spare, I could have spent tons on the DVDs available in the Dealer's Room - all kinds of horror and exploitation flicks, including many hard-to-find cult classics. Also lots of posters and prints (signed and not), and plenty of homemade crafts like the stuff you find in the Artist's Alley of the anime cons I'm more familiar with. But, of course, with a horror theme, and a particular emphasis on zombies!

I stopped by the panel room to sit in on the Ladies of Horror Panel, featuring a discussion with four scream queens - Linnea Quigley (the girl who danced naked on a tombstone in Return of the Living Dead!), Tiffany Shepis, Amy Lynn Best, and Sarah French. One thing I discovered is that in spite of my enthusiasm for the genre, my fandom is not so developed, or obsessed, to recognize all the important names and titles that come up. Nevertheless, it was very interesting to hear these ladies talk about their experiences being in horror films, and what's it like being a woman in the industry. (Apparently, it's not as hard as the feminists would have you believe. But then, horror has always been unusually appreciative of its female icons. If you can get beyond the whole "sex and violence is degrading!" mindset.)

After that panel, I stuck around to hear author Jack Ketchum answer questions about his life's work. You might (as I did) recognize him as the man who wrote The Girl Next Door, inspired by a horrific true story, which was adapted twice to film, one of those based on Jack Ketchum's novel (the other one an independent retelling of the true story, and, incidentally, starring Ellen Page). It's tempting to view horror writers as sick, depraved people, but that's a far too easy stereotype to fall into. Hearing Jack Ketchum talk about his work was very illuminating. Apparently, his 'hook' was to translate the sensationalistic violence he was seeing in the cinema back into literature, where it wasn't being represented; instead, authors were in the habit of utilizing too much restraint. I know a lot of people outside the horror fandom would recoil in disgust at that notion, but hey, that's what horror's about. It's not about fluffy bunnies hopping through dewy sunlit meadows. It's about blood and guts and terror.

After nightfall, and coming towards the end of the night, some girls were advertising "half-naked fire-breathing" out in the parking lot. Can you guess which direction I headed? I overheard some talk of the girls dancing on top of a zombified van parked nearby, but unfortunately that did not come to pass (that would have been fun to watch). However, the half-naked fire-breathing did go on as advertised, and that in itself was exciting. I think it's just fantastic that I can say I went to a horror convention and got to see half-naked girls breathing fire. What have I been waiting for all these years?

On a related note, I didn't see a whole lot of full-on costumes at the con, especially compared to what I see at the anime convention I regularly go to. (But there is an '80s horror costume contest planned for tomorrow night). Then again, I did see a lot of people dressed in some pretty groovy gothic fashions. The people overall were very friendly, which to me is not surprising, but might shock you if you believe the stereotype that horror fans are violent, antisocial folk. The fan community may have been skewed toward a male audience, but there was actually a pretty good proportion of females in attendance - especially taking all the actresses into account. There were even a few kids there (more girls than boys!), and though they appeared to be in tow of the celebrities or other con-goers they were related to, they seemed enthusiastic about the atmosphere. (When I picked up my badge at the registration desk, two girls came running up bragging about the candy they were carrying, and we all had a friendly laugh about them "taking candy from strangers").

Friday's programming culminated with the Horror Cabaret, that ran until just before midnight. Four acts performed, starting with Evenings in Quarantine: The Zombie Opera, adapted for the convention. It was, as billed, a zombie opera, featuring music and [some very impressive] vocal performances (plus some really cool on-the-fly arm-severing fx). I don't know if the fact that you can hear the zombie apocalypse story told in opera form reflects the ubiquitousness of zombies in popular culture, or if it speaks to the obsessive quirkiness of zombie fans. Either way, it's a shame the story has become so cliched, because it truly is a good one. But I suppose that even if you beat the story to death, it will just keep coming back again and again, because people love it.

Also performing at the cabaret was the ElectroBelly & Friends Dance Troupe. I have mixed feelings about belly dancing. On the one hand, belly dancers are known for their curves, and I tend to be be attracted to thinner body types. But on the other hand, it's a very sensual dance form. I am impressed that these dancers can get up in front of a crowd and dance so sensually, seemingly without self-consciousness. I could have just been imagining it, but I sensed that some of the guys in the audience were embarrassed to be seen watching too closely (I wasn't - I figured they weren't dancing just to be ignored). Meanwhile, the few people I noticed who were staring intently were female! I also love that, in spite of how sensual it is, belly dancing is considered a legitimate dance form that can be performed in festivals and conventions, and not restricted to seedy bars and back alleys, like "adult" performances are.

The other two cabaret acts were less in tune with my interests, and so they inspired less enthusiasm from me. One of them was mentalist & magician Chris Handa. I'm a skeptic, and I'm not really into "audience interaction" performances, but he wasn't bad. He certainly did a convincing job of "magically" selecting the hottest girl in the audience to come up front for a demonstration. We all know "magic" is just a series of tricks, but a performance like this is all about showmanship, and this guy put on a pretty entertaining show. The other act was a comedian/musician named Weird Paul, who sang a bunch of silly songs with funny lyrics. Amusing, certainly, but not really my preferred style of entertainment.

Stay tuned for Saturday at the con!

Don't Be Afraid of the Dark (1973)

A movie came out last weekend by the title of Don't Be Afraid of the Dark, and it is a remake of a horror film from the seventies that seems to have a lot of respect among cult audiences. I hadn't seen it before, but with the release of the remake, I thought it was a prime time to go back and watch this cult favorite. Having just done so, my impression of the classic film is that it is a quality horror film, though it hasn't aged terribly well. I didn't find it to be super scary, looking back from the perspective of a 21st century horror fan, but there were a lot of elements to it that were genuinely terrifying, and I can believe that this film frightened a lot of people back in the seventies - especially if they watched it as a child.

The premise of the film is that a young married couple have just inherited an old house, but it is hiding a terrible secret. There are apparently some kind of devilish gremlins living in a bricked-up fireplace, and they want out. And you can bet that once they get out (and you know they will), they won't be up to any good. The concept of the creatures is pretty scary, and the film does a very good job of building atmosphere, and not showing you too much. But, inevitably, as weird as the creatures look, seeing them detracts a little bit from their fearfulness (at least interpreting it with my adult mind). However, their whispering is very frightening, and the concept of small gremlin-like creatures emerging from a pit in a fireplace, who thrive in the dark, and don't like the light, is a strong one.

I'm actually curious to see the remake at this point. Of course, one must approach remakes with a healthy skepticism these days, but as much as the original film has gained a loyal cult following, I think the film could stand to gain from a little modernization. Of course, that could just as easily be a kiss of death for a cult classic, but I think it's worth a look. I did notice from the trailer that the remake has recast the protagonist as a child, and I wonder if that somehow reflects on our modern paranoia about the vulnerability of children, as if to capitalize on that fear to enhance the effect of the horror. Frankly, I think a creature that has the power to terrorize full-grown adults (and doesn't have to rely on targeting the weakest link) is much scarier. But at this point, I'm only speculating. It remains to be seen whether I'll get a chance to go out and see the remake in the near future. At any rate, this has been a rather early introduction to horror season, which is coming up in another month!

P.S. Oh yes! This is a total spoiler, so you shouldn't read this if you haven't seen the movie, but I have to commend this film for the direction it took in the ending. Far too often the good guys win out in the end, foiling the plot of the evil ones that hound them. But not this time. I know it's nice to come out of a movie thinking, "boy that was scary, but at least we got 'em in the end", but realistically speaking (well, realistic in a suspending-disbelief sort of way), if an evil supernatural force was after you, I'd wager that your chances for survival would be very slim. ;-)

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2 (2011)

Warning: this review contains SPOILERS from the second part of the seventh Harry Potter movie (the final part of the series).

That's it, it's all over. This movie is kind of complicated to review because you can either look at it a) independently, b) as the second half of the full Deathly Hallows experience, or c) as the conclusion to the entire Harry Potter series. As a standalone movie (though having seen the rest of the series), it was very exciting and entertaining. As the continuation of The Deathly Hallows, it was a fitting second half, where all the plotting and running around gives way to the final hefty showdown at Hogwarts. And as the conclusion to the Harry Potter series, well, it's mostly satisfying (more on that in a bit), and certainly you get what you were expecting - the final duel between Harry and the Dark Lord - and everything gets wrapped up neatly in the end.

The final battle was exciting. I really liked that the final showdown ended up being the siege of Hogwarts. Voldemort was somewhat less intimidating in the very end than I anticipated, but I suspect that's due to the fact that he fragmented himself into those horcruxes, and that by destroying them, Harry and friends were able to weaken him considerably even before the final fight. Originally I had viewed those horcruxes as if they were extra lives, but I guess I should have taken the "splinter your soul" (or however it was described) phrase more seriously. Now, I wonder if that was really the best idea. Would Voldemort have been more powerful if he had kept all of his strength within himself? And while we're speaking of the horcruxes, I would have liked to have learned more about their individual significances, though I suspect this may be elaborated on more in the books. They mainly seem to be valuable treasures, which is really cool, and I thought that deserved some more focus.

I stated all the way back in my review of the first HP movie that I like the concept of the wands (and my feelings haven't changed). There's a question, though, of how much power the wands themselves have, and how much of that power is the wizard's own. I like to think of the wands as being conduits for magical power, and that different ones - designed differently and with different materials - will magnify or manifest a wizard's power differently. But then there's also the issue of the wand's will, which is brought up in this film, and turns out to be of critical importance. I expected a more traditional power struggle (like Goku vs. Vegeta) between Harry and Voldemort, with Harry ultimately overpowering Voldemort with the power of his love and friendship, rather than Voldemort failing on a wand-related technicality. But the whole horcrux sidequest seems to suggest that it was always more a battle of strategy than brute strength even from the beginning.

So it turns out I was right in my suspicions about Snape, regarding Dumbledore's death. They were indeed co-conspirators. Though I hadn't imagined Snape's connection to Lily, but it explains a lot. I had wondered how Snape could have been a Death Eater, and yet had later gained Dumbledore's trust. I imagine there's probably more exposition in the books (which I am about to read), as there is a lot in the movies that is sort of glossed over, without going into much detail. I can imagine Snape would have been driven to the dark side due to his experience of unrequited love, yet I wonder how sincere his allegiance to Voldemort ever was, considering that he was able to renounce it, and climb so high as to become a trusted friend of Dumbledore. Was Snape a spy all the way back then, too? Or was it Voldemort's murder of Lily that ultimately turned Snape around? I can see it happening that way.

I talked a bit about Draco in my review of the first part of The Deathly Hallows. I was really hoping that he would come out and do something significant, to redeem his character (either as a reluctant hero or a respectable villain, either way). I guess he's just a weak person. And it's no wonder, his father's a spineless coward. It's too bad, though, because I could really see so much more coming from Draco. If he had been a stronger person, he could've become the next Dark Lord after Voldemort's demise. A true thorn in Harry's side. But I guess that's a story that wasn't meant to be.

I was really moved when it was revealed that Harry's fate was to sacrifice himself to be killed by Voldemort. Maybe it's because I have a bit of a martyr complex. Can you imagine how hard that would be? Coming to terms with the fact that you have to give up your life for the greater good? How could you find the resolve to march willingly to your own slaughter? It's a really heavy development, but I liked it. Though things sort of turned out differently in the end. Maybe the book is better on the details, but I felt a little gypped that Harry came back, after establishing that he was going to have to die. I know, it makes for a good narrative - force the audience to mourn Harry's death, and then give them a happy ending anyway. Plus, seeing Harry come back for the final bout is exciting.

But still, when you make super big decisions like that, you should commit to them. Can you imagine how much different the end of the series would have been if Harry had had to die (and stay dead)? It would have been much darker, yes, but they still could have prevailed over the Dark Lord in the end. It would be a bittersweet victory, for sure, but it would be more emotionally heavy, and perhaps more true to life. Sure, some significant characters did die, but the only one that truly leaves a gap is perhaps Dumbledore, and he was old, anyway. There's no constant memory - "oh, that's right, Harry's not around" - like a memento, of the great battle and just how much was sacrificed.

In fact, that's just the thing. The ending is too convenient. Too concise, too wrapped-up. Nothing has really changed. You get to the epilogue, and 19 years later, you're right back where you started. Almost as if nothing even happened. No real lasting scars or memories. And if nothing else, I was pissed that Harry wasn't the Headmaster of Hogwarts, or at the very least, the Defense Against The Dark Arts teacher. Think about it, not only is Harry Potter the one who defeated the Dark Lord Voldemort, but he's the only guy who was killed, twice, by Voldemort, and lived. That's pretty bad-ass. I mean, what better Defense Against The Dark Arts teacher could you ask for than someone who is immune to the killing curse? And what's more, Harry could have been a Master of Death if he so chose, since all three of the Deathly Hallows passed into his hands (two of which he let slip through his fingers).

Regarding the ultimate pairings, I couldn't help but notice the trend of extraordinary people marrying mediocre people. (And ironically, both of those mediocre people are Weasleys). You got Harry, the boy who lived (and then defeated Voldemort), marrying a damsel in distress, and you have Hermione, the brightest witch of her age, marrying a talentless doofus. When it was first revealed that Harry was going to have to die, I thought that was the reason the author had put Ron and Hermione together - so that they could have some measure of happiness in the long run. Even though Hermione deserves to be with Harry. If there's any good to come from this, it's the reassurance for all the mediocre people out there that you may actually have a chance pairing up with somebody extraordinary. Keep the dream alive!

Speaking of Hermione, Emma was as good as ever in this movie, and actually very cute acting all sweet on Ron, even though I hated that it was Ron that was making her act that way. But as an added bonus, her polyjuice scheme in this part was infinitely more intriguing than the woman she impersonated in part 1 of The Deathly Hallows. Emma looked good dressed up in Bellatrix's goth fashions, and damn if I wasn't convinced at first that Helena Bonham Carter was acting in place of Hermione transformed. Their personalities are so wildly different that to see Helena acting more like an insecure Hermione than a wacked-out Bellatrix threw me for a loop. Well done.

So that's it. I think I've said enough. I'll defer you to some other more dedicated Potter fan to give you more celebration for the conclusion to the series. It's funny to think that I hadn't even been interested in the Harry Potter series until just December of last year - a mere seven months ago - as opposed to those who have been dedicated to it either from the beginning of the film series, or even longer, from the books' original releases. And that's where I'm headed now - to read up on the original story behind this epic film phenomenon.

Emma Rating: Sugary Sweet

The Runaways (2010)

Rock biopic The Runaways is a special film. It's my favorite Dakota Fanning movie, but I like it for different reasons, so it would probably still be one of my favorites even if it didn't star Dakota Fanning. But, I'm glad that it does. Not simply because she's my favorite actress, but also, casting her as Cherie Currie was truly an inspired choice (and the same can be said for Kristen Stewart as Joan Jett). I can't imagine anyone doing a better job in the role than she did. This film really is the trifecta - it stars Dakota Fanning, it's a good movie, and the subject matter is right up my alley!

But it's a funny thing: after watching over a dozen movies starring Dakota Fanning over the past few weeks, this is the one role where I was least conscious that it was Dakota I was watching throughout the movie. (Needless to say, I was, however, still drawn to her fantastic performance and amazing looks). There could be any number of reasons for that. You might say it indicates that her acting is better in this movie than all the rest. Or maybe it's because she's not playing the "precocious brat" (not my personal choice of words) type of role she's best known for. She does seem to have a lot more innocence in this role, in spite of the fact that, while still just fifteen, she gets mixed up in a world of typically adult vices - namely, all the sex and drugs that come with rock stardom.

But if you ask me, I think it might have to do with the vintage '70s look Dakota takes on in this movie - particularly her feathered hair (which is right for the role, but I like Dakota's normal hair better) and heavy makeup. Or, even the fact that Dakota is not playing a fictional character this time, but an actual person, for which there exists a context independent of Dakota's performance. Lastly, it might simply be the fact that Dakota is no longer the child we all remember her as being. Yep, it's remarkable the change that has occurred in the three short years (or so) since Dakota's other sexy music-related role - Hounddog, in which she discovered the blues. And in The Runaways, she gets to experience the rock 'n roll lifestyle.

"Listen. Rock and roll is a bloodsport, it is a sport of men. It is for the people in the dark. The death cats. The masturbators. The outcasts who have no voice, no way of saying, 'hey, I hate the fucking world! My father's a faggot! Fuck you, fuck authority, I want an orgasm!'"

So who were The Runaways? They were the band that launched Joan Jett's music career. If you ask eccentric record producer Kim Fowley (inspiringly performed by Michael Shannon in the film), they were a conceptual rock project. Joan's idea was to start an all-girl rock band amid a scene utterly dominated by men. Kim Fowley picked up on the ingenuity of that idea and ran with it. Joan wanted an outlet for her musical talent, and Kim seized the opportunity to essentially pimp the band on the novelty of it being an all-girl rock group. And the group thrived on that short-lived balance between the two forces of women's lib, and women's libido. But it wasn't a stable balance.

The women's lib aspect is what makes the band historically significant. The Runaways didn't last long, but they did prove that girls could rock. They weren't actually the first all-girl rock group, as Suzi Quatro, who was a large inspiration on Joan Jett, had a band with her sisters about a decade prior. But the Quatro sisters (in their band The Pleasure Seekers, later Cradle) didn't attain the recognition that The Runaways did - Suzi was better known for her following solo career, with a backing band that included guys. But the important thing is that there was substance to The Runaways' rock act - real, quality music performed with real rock 'n roll energy - and that made an impression.

"What the hell are you wearing?"
"I'm thinking with my cock."
"More like, boner."

"You're basically ready for the peep show circuit, all you need's a porn name."
(Uh, hello? She's the Cherry Bomb!)

Nevertheless, the band's image was saturated with the ooze of women's libido. This had something of a two-pronged effect - attracting the attention of men by tapping into their sexual fantasies, as I'm sure Kim Fowley anticipated, but at the same time giving people a chance to criticize the band as a novelty act - chicks who were worth looking at but not listening to. Clearly, this wasn't true, as they were a very competent band, but that didn't stop people from tossing around those complaints. Maybe they were just feeling insecure, seeing teenage girls performing what they considered to be a man's role, but you could expect that hearing comments like that would lead the band members to start resenting their sexualized image.

"Pretty soon you'll be opening for us."
"Opening your legs, maybe!"

I'm pretty sure this issue has been exaggerated to enhance the dramatic conflict in the climax to this film adaptation of The Runaways' story (which is based on lead singer Cherie Currie's memoir, Neon Angel - which I highly recommend). This is somewhat unfortunate, because from my perspective, I view women's libido as being part of women's lib, and an integral element of The Runaways' formula. In the film, tensions in the band come to a head based on a sexualized photoshoot engineered by Kim Fowley as a clever publicity stunt. Cherie, who is hardly to blame for falling into Kim's trap, as it were, is berated for publicizing her crotch instead of the band's music. Granted, there's also an element of jealousy between the rest of the band, who, to varying degrees, resent Cherie being the face of the band, despite not necessarily being the best musician in the group. But the intent is clear when Joan (via Kristen Stewart) bemoans the fact that those sexy pictures are all the band's going to be remembered for. (It's notable that the pictures from that photoshoot, taken for publication in a Japanese magazine, are a lot harder to find today than the band's albums).

"They just showed up at my house with cameras, what was I supposed to say?"
"You could say I'm the singer in a band, not Linda fucking Lovelace."

But it doesn't have to be one or the other: sex or the music. After all, the success of The Runaways was a combination of factors, including both sex and music. If they weren't so sexy, would they have been as successful? How many genuinely good bands fall by the wayside because they can't find an audience? It's true that a novelty act will grow stale, but a song without a hook doesn't get much airplay. You're allowed to have both - style and substance; in fact, it's the groups that have both that tend to go the farthest and be remembered the longest. And what's wrong with having a sexy image, anyway? Especially in the sleazy world of rock 'n roll. You're right, it would be selling the band short if a fan liked them only because they were hot - but the band would similarly be selling people short for assuming that if a fan likes their looks, then they're not sophisticated enough (or too distracted) to appreciate their musical talent.

Case in point: yours truly. I think the band is totally hot - both the real band, featuring Joan Jett and Cherie Currie and the others, and the movie band, starring Dakota Fanning and Kristen Stewart and the others. And I also think they're an amazing band, from a musical standpoint (by the way, Kristen and Dakota both did a great job singing their parts in the film). What more proof could there be than this: during the movie, I had to pause it and go pick up my guitar to check the fingerings I use to play some of The Runaways' songs after watching the way Kristen played them (I can't say how accurate her playing was supposed to be, but I do believe she was coached by Joan Jett on the set). So you see, my sexual interest in the band doesn't have to cloud or obstruct my interest in their music. In fact, it makes me that much bigger a fan, because I can enjoy both listening to them and fantasizing about them, too! And that's just my point, the sexual aspect is a bonus, not a liability. There is often a thin line between rock gods and sex gods. That goes without saying for male rock stars, so why should it be different for female ones? (That's where the inconsistency of anti-sex "feminism" comes into play - it's female empowerment only so long as you suppress your female sexuality, which is, after all, nothing but a tool the patriarchy uses to subjugate women. Bullshit.)

As good as this film is, it's not above criticism - though I would argue that its flaws are insignificant compared to its better qualities. The biggest complaint a Runaways fan might have is the inaccuracies in the story. But seeing as this is a motion picture dramatization, that really comes with the territory. You shouldn't watch The Runaways expecting to get the real story, you should watch it to have a good time. If you want the former, check out Edgeplay, which is sort of a documentary via interviews with the various members of the band (excluding Joan, unfortunately). Another complaint fans might have is that in spite of the movie's title, The Runaways focuses on Joan and Cherie to the exclusion of the rest of the band - and even Joan's later success is glossed over, so that it's less of a Joan Jett biopic than a Cherie Currie biopic. But that's because it was based on Cherie's memoir, after all (perhaps they should have used Cherie's title - Neon Angel - for the film, but you can't argue the strategic/publicity advantage of calling it The Runaways). But if you can get over these quibbling facts (they don't bother me), The Runaways is a whole lot of fun. And as you could expect from a rock biopic, it has an outstanding soundtrack!