Joined: Aug 2009 Gender: Male Posts: 666 Location: Southern California
Deep Purple - Now What?! (2013) « Result #1 on May 12, 2013, 8:56am »
When Ritchie Blackmore left Deep Purple for the second time in 1995 (the first time being twenty years earlier) many fans thought that the band's time had run out. The revolving door of band members couldn't possibly sustain the band beyond the loss of such a key figure in the band, right?
With the release of the next year's, Purpendicular release - the first with new Purple guitar player Steve Morse - the band proved otherwise.
Purpendicular was a spectacular album, a true return to form in terms of songwriting and performing quality. Morse brought both more Hard Rock and more Jazz to the band's sound. Where Blackmore was influenced by Classical music, Morse came from a Jazzier background, but also had some solid Hard Rock chops that helped him fit into Purple perfectly. The album ranged from hard edged Rockers to mellower Jazz Rock songs to styles in between. Both the fans and the critics loved the album.
The three follow up albums in the Steve Morse era? Not as much. None of them (Abandon, Bananas, Rapture of the Deep) were bad, but none of them were as great from start to finish as Purpendicular was. They all had highlights that were as good as most of the songs on Purpendicular, but the inconsistencies of those albums took them down a notch. The loss of Jon Lord (who left the band in 2002, and, sadly, passed away in 2012) didn't hurt the band live (his replacement, veteran Don Airey did a great job in concert), but his songwriting skills were missed.
With the last Purple album, Rapture of the Deep, being released in 2005 it seemed like the band had no interest in writing and recording another. In fact, at one point Ian Gillan was quoted as saying that there wouldn't be another Purple album.
But Deep Purple, being the musician's musicians that they are, clearly felt the need to create again, and this time they enlisted famed producer Bob Ezrin (Alice Cooper, Pink Floyd, KISS) to take charge of the project.
The result? Seriously, now what?
The result was the best Deep Purple album since Purpendicular, and an album that holds up very well against even their best releases from their heyday back in the 1970's. Now What?! is a great Deep Purple album - one worth the 8 year wait.
The first thing you notice as a listener is just how much this album sounds like a cross between Purpendicular and Purple's comeback/reunion album from 1984, Perfect Strangers - both sonically and stylistically. The main difference in the sonics being the lack of the big, overproduced 1980's drum sound, but otherwise the sounds are somewhat similar.
You could be forgiven for thinking that, "A Simple Song," was something off a new Iron Maiden album from the intro. Mellow chords on Roger Glover's bass start the song, and Steve Morse's tasteful, restrained lead opens the song, and Ian Gillan's passionate, melodic vocals lead the way into an explosion of Purple Power. It is at this point that the song no longer sounds like Maiden, but something taking equal bits from early (pre-Gillan/Glover) Purple, the MK II line-up era, and the Purpendicular era. Don Airey clearly channels his inner Jon Lord and it's as if time has come to a standstill.
"Weirdistan," sounds like a lost track from Perfect Strangers as if interpreted in 1996 by a reinvigorated, revitalized Purple with a slightly (very slightly) Jazzy feel. Actually, this sounds a bit like Abacab era Genesis on steroids, and maybe just a bit like some recent James Bond music. It's a great song.
The Perfect Strangers vibe doesn't end there. "Out Of Hand," again sounds a lot like something from that 1984 album through the filter of the Purpendicular sessions. Melodic, somewhat heavy, and moody, this mid-tempo song is nothing short of great. And by this point in the album it has become clear - the Purple/Ezrin pairing has resulted in a new classic.
Ezrin has worked wonders with Ian Gillan, whose vocal range has noticeably diminished over the years. Gillan sounds better on Now What?! than he has on any Purple album since Purpendicular. In fact, just about everyone involved with this album has stepped up their game to a higher level - including Ezrin. Drummer Ian Paice, bass player Roger Glover, guitarist Steve Morse, and keyboard player Don Airey all give fantastic performances that are among the best in each of their respective careers, and that's saying a lot.
"Hell To Pay," is probably the closest that the band comes on the album to their most famous style from the 1970's. The longer (non-radio edit) version of the song on the album features an extended Hammond organ solo from Airey that just screams Jon Lord while showing some of Airey's own style (he did play for Rainbow, Ozzy Osbourne, Gary Moore, Jethro Tull, and Whitesnake, among others). This is yet another great track.
The slightly looser, Jazzier feel is front and center on, "Bodyline," a song that could have very easily been included on Purpendicular. The song bounces with a vibrance that belies the years behind the band and it's members. There is energy and vitality here in spades as Deep Purple proves that they still have a lot left in the tank. Ezrin manages to coax a bouncy, Jazzy performance out of the band without sacrificing the hard edge that made the band famous. This is one of the album's highlights, although, to be honest there are a lot of highlights on this album.
"Above and Beyond," has a bit of an Emerson Lake and Palmer feel to it with Airey's brassy keyboard part at the beginning of the song sounding particularly ELP-ish. As the song settles in to the first verse the band takes it down a notch as Gillan gives another restrained vocal with a ton of feeling. Dynamics seems to be the key word for this song, and while it isn't quite as good as the best songs on the album it is more ambitious. And it's still a very, very good song. When the weakest songs on your new album are merely very good you've come up with something remarkable.
For the next track, "Blood From A Stone," the band reaches back to the 70's for inspiration. The thing is, it's not the band's own past from the 1970's, but the influences of a lot of 1970's artists, ranging in style from R&B to Jazz to Rock. Airey plays an electric piano on this one (an underused musical weapon that has been largely neglected over the last two or three decades) as well as the requisite Hammond organ. The song has a mellow-ish groove most of the way (with a somewhat heavy chorus), and the groove is just spectacular. In a word - WOW. Ezrin said he wanted to not only capture the band's signature style, but he wanted to push the boundaries of what that style could include, and this song is a great example of the results.
More ELP-isms abound in the majestic, "Uncommon Man," which is particularly inspired by Aaron Copland's, "Fanfare For The Common Man." Again, Don Airey gets a chance to shine here as he puts his spin on the proceedings. It's yet another dynamic track - and another that falls in the, "Very good," category.
"Apres Vous," finds the band venturing a little closer to their early to mid 1970's style while still showing bits of Perfect Strangers and Purpendicular. It's a Hard Rocker that just screams, "DEEP PURPLE!!" And, oh, by the way - it's a great song, too. The band plays this mid-tempo song with a confidence and a maturity that is equalled by the energy and power involved.
The lead single from the album, "All The Time In The World," is a laid back, almost early to mid 70's California Rock type of song (through a Purple filter, of course). There is a slight Country feel with some slide guitar present (tastefully mellow and kept to a supporting role). This song is loaded with nuance and detail. Ezrin's influence has brought out elements that were new to the band on Purpendicular and expanded on them.
The standard edition of the song closes out with the darker, moodier, "Vincent Price," which opens with the same keyboard sound that Airey used on, "Mr. Crowley," for Ozzy Osbourne. The main song itself is dark (for Purple) and heavy in a moody, atmospheric way. For a song this dark and moody it's got an infectious groove, a significant achievement. And, yes, this is a very good song, aiming for greatness, but just barely missing.
The collaboration between Deep Purple and Bob Ezrin can be called nothing short of a rousing success. Now What?! is a great album. The songs are all very good to great and the sonics of the thing are fantastic.
Re: Roller Coasters... « Result #2 on May 5, 2013, 9:41pm »
My son loves Silver Bullet, it's a great ride. Ghost Rider is another really good one at Knott's. But for roller coasters Magic Mountain just destroys the place. Why Knott's wasted all thae space and money building the stupid Windseeker and never having the damn thing running I don't know. The new Boardwalk area they're building is a total rip off of Disney's California Adventure, hopefully it'll be decent. I like Knott's but it's getting tired.
Joined: Aug 2009 Gender: Male Posts: 666 Location: Southern California
Iron Man 3 - Theatrical Release « Result #4 on May 5, 2013, 9:02pm »
Some people have called Iron Man 3 a welcomed return to form. Iron Man 2 was harshly criticized by many, even though it retained the sense of fun - hell, the near whimsy - of the first Iron Man movie. Iron Man 3 has more than it's share of humor, but is it really a better movie than it's predecessor?
I don't think so.
It's not bad. It's actually pretty good, but it's not the return to Iron Man 1 form that the hype would have led us to believe it was.
Why? Too busy. There are too many different plot threads going on and as a result the movie isn't very cohesive. Secondarily, they recycle the, "Tony's having physical/psychological/health problems," angle from Iron Man 2 (where, to be honest, it was done better). That bit is completely unnecessary and actually becomes a distraction.
Iron Man 1 turned out so well because it was simple, direct, and to the point. Iron Man 2 wasn't as good because there were more characters and more plotlines as they set up The Avengers (but it was better than most critics would admit). Now Iron Man 3 seems to forget all the lessons learned from Iron Man 2, even though IM2 director Jon Favreau is in the IM3 cast. Apparently, new director Shane Black didn't bother to ask Favreau for his take on the script or the approach to the movie overall, because if he had Favreau might have warned him of the pitfalls of throwing too much into the mix.
With Iron Man 3, even though it is a fun, entertaining movie, it's all a bit too much. Maybe Shane Black and the producers thought they had to keep up with the specacle and over the top size of The Avengers, but that was extremely flawed thinking. What made Iron Man 1 work was Robert Downey Jr and a smaller scale story. A more personal story. A fairly simple story - one that gave Downey and Gwyneth Paltrow a chance to carry the movie on their charm (something that worked brilliantly).
Downey and Paltrow don't have as much of a chance to do their thing in Iron Man 3 (not even as much as they did in IM2), and that's a shame. Sure, they're both great when the movie takes a breath and gives them a chance to carry things for a little while - but that's the problem, it only lasts a little while and then it's on to the next crisis or action sequence.
There's also a plot twist that kind of sucks the air out of the movie, making the first half seem like a cheat. And the villain seems to have a never ending supply of soldiers, which actually hurts in the action finale as we don't really know how many of them there are, and if they've all really been disposed of or not.
Still, the action sequences are exciting and the banter between Downey and Paltrow (and between Downey and Don Cheadle) is still quite good. The ingredients are all there, the problem is that too many ingredients have been thrown in and it gives this particular cinematic cake an odd taste - too many flavors all at once, and not enough of the flavors that we enjoy the most.
And as a result by the hour and a half mark the movie already feels long, and it's stil got a significant amount of time to go at that point. They could have trimmed out a lot of stuff and excised the plot twist and made a better movie.
Iron Man 3 is good. It's just not as good as it should have been (and easily could have been). At least this wasn't a Batman and Robin or Superman 3 type disaster. The bar was just set really high by Iron Man 1, and then kept high by The Avengers. Even though Iron Man 3 didn't hit that mark it still does a decent job of getting off the ground.
Common elements in web design layout « Result #5 on Apr 15, 2013, 11:21pm »
Creating a website design is not a simple process. You have to know many details related to web designing to give your websites the most perfect look. Web design layouts vary with respect to the requirements and preferences. Here are a few common elements in web design layout. Header of the webpage is the first thing that one sees in a website. Most of the websites have images in the header section. These images cover the topmost width of the webpage and give an idea about the website. The header size is usually 700-800 pixels, as this the most preferred width. The header part should contain an image that defines the website in the simplest way. The intention of your website should be thus delivered in a simple and appealing way. The header should also include the title of the websites. If your website contains multiple pages, you can install navigation menus to facilitate easy access. The navigation menu styles are different for different websites. Big websites usually have separate menus that guide the users from one page to another. Your website should have an optimized content. Give quality content that’s user as well as search engine friendly. After giving the necessary width area for the navigation menu, the rest of the space can be allotted for the content. You can go through the blogs written by web designers from website designing company India to know more about important elements in web design layout.
Joined: Aug 2009 Gender: Male Posts: 666 Location: Southern California
Dust - Hard Attack & Dust (1972/71) « Result #6 on Apr 9, 2013, 2:07pm »
What's that? You've never heard of Dust before?
If that's the case, then you're not alone.
If, however, you are familiar with this Hard Rock power trio from the early 70's you are in an exclusive group.
Dust consisted of Richie Wise on guitar and vocals, Kenny Aaronson on bass, and Marc Bell on drums. Some of you may be familiar with Aaronson due to the album he did with Sammy Hagar and Neal Schon (HSAS, Through The Fire), or from his tenure playing for artists such as Rick Derringer, Joan Jett, Billy Idol, Billy Squier, and Brian Setzer. Many of you will be familiar with Marc Bell under the name Marky Ramone (yep, he was the longtime Ramones drummer). And some of you will be familiar with Richie Wise as part of a studio production due with Kenny Kerner, particularly as the guys who produced the first two KISS studio albums.
And speaking of Kerner, he and Wise co-produced both of the albums contained on this CD reissue as well. Kerner and Wise went on to a very successful career as album producers after their time working with KISS.
So there is no doubt that the albums re-released here are historically significant. All four of the people who contributed to the album (and Kerner got involved in the songwriting, too) went on to noteworthy careers in Rock and Roll. But are these albums (the self titled debut album and it's follow up, Hard Attack) as good as the talent involved would lead you to expect?
Yes and no.
Hard Attack gets an emphatic yes, while the debut album gets a, "Not quite, but really close."
Not surprisingly, then, when Sony Legacy put this package together they placed the Hard Attack album first in the running order. And, what do you know? Dust (the album) sounds a little better in context when following it's follow up. (Do you follow?)
Hard Attack opens up with a song firmly rooted in 1972, but like the best songs of that era it still sounds good today. VERY good. "Pull Away/So Many Times," features prominent use of acoustic guitars, but make no mistake - this song rocks hard. It's got a ton of energy. It's just also got a lot of dynamics and musical texture. And it's a very, very good song, and a great album opener (both for the original Hard Attack album, and for this re-release with both Dust albums).
"Walk In The Soft Rain," was clearly influenced by Led Zeppelin, but more than that, it echoes many of the same influences that impacted the unreleased pre-KISS album from Gene Simmons and Paul Stanley (Wicked Lester), which is interesting as they would work together a little more than a year later. More acoustic guitars, more dynamics, and less flat out Hard Rock are heard here than on the first song, and the song is a little more dated, but in the context of the album as a whole this is a solid track and very enjoyable to listen to.
A string quartet, a piano, an acoustic guitar, a Hammond organ, and some restrained drumming are all featured on the Beatle-esque, "Thusly Spoken." This one is flat out mellow and moody, showing that these guys really were interested in more than just letting it rip. It's a fairly good song, but it is extremely dated. That's not necessarily a bad thing, though.
"Learning To Die," lets it rip. This is a frantic, high energy, rip roaring proto-Punk song. It's more musically sophisticated than the Punk Rock that would follow a half decade later (there is a moody, mellower section in the middle, and has stronger musical and melodic points), but it has all the attitude and musical anger that was the cornerstone of Punk. Oh, yeah - it's a good song, too.
And then you've got, "All In All," another hard rocking song featuring some frantic drumming from Marc Bell. Listening to this track it's easy to understand how Dust made their reputation as a fierce live band that attacked their songs with a fury. More good stuff, to be sure.
From there the band takes it down (WAY down) to the mellow, acoustic, "I Been Thinkin," a song that even features a pedal steel guitar, giving it a bit of a Country feel(!). It's not a great track, but the big fat acoustic guitar (VERY well recorded) sounds really good and the vocal melody is fairly good. And they keep it short, making it more effective.
More effective because it makes the next song sound even heavier than it is by comparison to the mellow acoustic track that precedes it. "Ivory," opens with more frantic, hard hitting drumming from Bell, and it is an instrumental that just kicks all kinds of ass. It doesn't sound all that dissimilar some of the stuff on the first Iron Maiden album, just a little more dated (in this case, in a good way). "Ivory," is actually one of the highlights of the album.
Then the band goes full on Country with, "How Many Horses." Yeah, I'm sure that some people who bought the album back in '72 must have been a little confused, too. While, "I Been Thinkin," leaned Country a little, this one crosses way over that line and only keeps one big toe on the Rock side. It's a decent song, but it does sound a little out of place (not a lot, though, as Bell keeps a certain energy level present).
Not to worry, though, as the band gets back to their proto-Metal, proto-Punk sound on, "Suicide." This one may be the heaviest and angriest song on the album, and it's also one of the best. It's a tour-de-force for Bell, despite it's middling tempo. This was the final song on the original Hard Attack album, and the final song from the band. They certainly left their mark!
From there we go back in time to 1971's Dust.
And that album opened with something of a Spanish Guitar intro, simply called, "Entrance." It is brief, and leads into the rocking, "Stone Woman," which features some prominent slide guitar (much like the guitar work on the Rolling Stones albums of that era). This is a great track, and it actually benefits from having the Hard Attack album come before it on this reissue.
"Chasin Ladies," is obviously influenced by Mountain's, "Mississippi Queen," and no amount of echo on the vocals is going to hide that fact. Having said that, while it is inferior (and more dated) than Mountain's song it is still a good track, and it does go in some directions that the, "Mississippi Queen," never did.
"Goin' Easy," is another mellow-ish song featuring acoustic and slide guitars, this one a little bluesier than the others (not a lot, but a little bit). Not bad.
"Love Me Hard," is another of the hard rocking Dust songs featuring some very busy drumming from Marc Bell. It is another of the album's highlights and shows off Richie Wise's vocals well. Wise wasn't a great singer, but for this kind of material he was effective.
Then you get a song with the odd title, "From A Dry Camel." The song opens up sounding like Paranoid era Black Sabbath, before moving into debut album era Black Sabbath territory (like the song, "Black Sabbath," itself). This is a nine minute epic track that goes from the moody, slow, doomy Sabbath kind of thing to a frantic track without warning about three and a half minutes in. That part sounds a lot like Call Of The Wild era Ted Nugent (including liberal use of the wah wah pedal). Finally, about six and a half minutes in the song downshifts a couple times before returning to the Sabbathy part. Like I said, it's an epic track. And, yes, it is quite good.
"Often Shadows Felt," returns the band to the acoustic guitar driven material, with Bell's frantic drumming kicking in from time to time. It's a decent track. One that works fairly well in context of the album as a whole, but wouldn't work quite as well on it's own.
The final song on the original Dust album (and the reissue) is the rocking, "Loose Goose," which almost sounds like a precursor to Stevie Ray Vaughan's, "Rude Mood." Like, "Rude Mood," this one is an instrumental, and kind of acts like Dust's own, "Wipe Out," the way Bell played the drums on it.
Musically, Dust could really be heard as a combination of early Grand Funk Railroad (up through E Pluribus Funk) and pre 1976 Budgie. It is a dated sound, but the songs are well written and still sound good today.
Sonically, the albums were obviously recorded quickly on low budgets, but aside from the drums being a little thin (and the guitars lacking enough distortion to be as effective as possible in the heavier songs), the albums both sound fairly good for the era.
If you enjoy bands like Budgie, Grand Funk Railroad, early Alice Cooper, etc, then chances are you'll enjoy Dust.
Joined: Aug 2009 Gender: Male Posts: 666 Location: Southern California
Saxon - Sacrifice (2013) « Result #8 on Apr 6, 2013, 8:26pm »
1990. Solid Ball Of Rock. The first Saxon album featuring then, "New," bass player Nibbs Carter.
From that point forward Saxon has released eleven studio albums without a clunker in the bunch. Not one.
Sure, prior to that they had some iffy albums (Innocence Is No Excuse, Rock The Nations, and Destiny). None of them were particularly bad, but none were particularly great, either.
But with the release of Sacrifice Saxon has made it eleven studio albums in a row with the weakest of the bunch being very good, and Sacrifice definitely isn't the weakest of this rather strong bunch.
Damn.
Most bands would love a four or five album run like that. Saxon's extended it to eleven. That says a lot about the dedication that these guys have to their craft. And make no mistake, with Saxon it is a craft. It is work - just work they love.
Sacrifice was produced by one Peter "Biff" Byford, and from the sound of things he's played a significant role in co-producing most of those eleven albums over the last twenty-three years. Sacrifice is merely a continuation of the early 90's Metal style that Saxon has nearly perfected.
After a brief introductory piece called, "Procession," with the sounds of a jungle, an Aztec type ritual, and some mood music, the band kicks it in to high gear with the title track. They go from zero to 90 in no time flat. "Sacrifice," is a burst of high octane power and energy from a band sounding 25 years younger than they have any right to sound. Blending power, energy, and melody, "Sacrifice," makes it's case as the best song on the album - and it's a strong case as it really is a great track (one of the band's best over the last 23 years).
"Made In Belfast," isn't quite so fast, and it starts out with some nice acoustic instruments, but it isn't really any less heavy - just more melodic and restrained when it comes to tempo. This is the kind of song that no one does as well as Saxon does. This is classy Heavy Metal.
And then Saxon pushes the pedal through the metal with, "Warriors Of The Road," another high tempo song loaded with power and melody. The main riff sounds vaguely reminiscent of their early 80's heyday, but the presentation is full-on modern era Saxon, and that's a good thing. Byford, as on the previous track, shows an adept ability to write strong vocal melodies that are truly melodic without being overpowered by the fast, heavy music (which itself shows a strong sense of melody). This song is definitely no letdown in quality as Saxon maintains that high level here.
"Guardians of the Tomb," finds the band settling in to a tempo that hits a happy middle ground between the previous two tracks. Biff and company (the band having settled on this line-up on 1997's Unleash the Beast - Paul Quinn on guitar, Nigel Glockler on drums, Doug Scarrat on guitar, along with Biff and Nibbs) up the ante when it comes to melody on, "Guardians," but (not surprisingly) they don't back off on the heaviness factor one bit. The result is another great, classy straightforward Heavy Metal song.
Yes, "Stand Up and Fight," is a total cliche. Yep, no question. 100% cliche. And you know what? It's a damned good song anyway. This is the kind of song that Saxon does so well, with so much honesty and enthusiasm that it's easy to forgive the cliche. They've lived it (it's a song about being in a band and sticking to your guns, more or less), and there is so much honesty and integrity here that the quality of the music and the vocal melodies combined with that honesty and enthusiasm makes the song work. And in context of the album as a whole the song sounds even better. It would sound good as a stand alone song, but as a part of Sacrifice, the album, it sounds exponentially better.
From there the band backs off the tempo a bit, again without backing off on the heavy side of things. "Walking the Steel," actually covers a topic that is anti-cliche as I can't recall anyone ever writing a Metal song about it. About what? The men who work construction building skyscrapers. It's a dangerous job, and the song alludes to that along with (subtle) allusions to 9/11 and the Twin Towers coming down. Fantastic stuff, both musically and lyrically.
The band finally breaks into the kind of dynamics that they've been known to use for their entire career on, "Night of the Wolf," a song that starts out with some crushingly heavy melodic riffs, before settling in to a slightly mellower, melodic verse, and then moving into a heavy chorus. An acoustic solo section is very nicely done, morphing into a heavier solo section. Another winner for sure. Maybe not one of the 3 or 4 best songs on the album, but it would have been above average on their previous album, Call To Arms (which was a very good album).
With a title like, "Wheels of Terror," you could be forgiven for thinking that this is a Judas Priest song, and musically it isn't far removed from a heavy, mid-tempo song from the Priest. It's another song about war (something Saxon has written about many times before - not surprising from a British Metal band), and it is effective, just not as much as most of the other songs on the album.
The final track on Sacrifice is, "Standing in a Queue," another grinding mid-tempo track with some solid melodies. The chorus actually sounds like a heavier, more metallic version of AC/DC, while the rest of the song just grinds along with a nasty attitude. Good song. Very good.
Biff sounds slightly raspier than in the past, but his voice is as strong as ever and that subtle rasp actually works with the slightly heavier direction the band has taken with Sacrifice. The rest of the band, Nibbs Carter, Doug Scarrat, Paul Quinn, and Nigel Glockler, sounds like a group that has been playing together for the better part of a quarter century. They are tight and it's as if they instinctively know what the other guys in the band are going to play. They're tight without sounding mechanical.
As for the audio production, the current Metal mainman behind the mixing console, Andy Sneap, handles the mix here. He does a very good job (yet again). The album is crisp, loud, and powerful without being overly distorted. Does it sound better than an album like Killing Ground or Call to Arms? Not really, those albums breathed a little more sonically (there was a little more sonic space between the instruments), but Sneap's mix is more appropriate given the material here. (The one knock on Sneap could be that the all the mixes he does basically sound the same, but that's a relatively minor quibble as the sound he gets is fantastic.)
The bottom line when it comes to Sacrifice is this - it's a very, very, VERY good album. Is it great? Well, as a straightforward, old school Heavy Metal album, yes it is. Absolutely.
And if you've ever been a Saxon fan this album definitely should be in your collection. Even if you've never been a big Saxon album, but you like Heavy Metal this would be a great place to start with the, "Modern," era of Saxon.
Joined: Aug 2009 Gender: Male Posts: 666 Location: Southern California
Metallica - Load and Reload Revisited « Result #9 on Mar 23, 2013, 3:08pm »
In 1996 when Metallica finally released the long awaited follow up to the Black Album it was met with a collective groan from long time fans. A more Rock oriented style with some mild Alternative leanings definitely turned fans off, but maybe even more than that some of their fans found the band's new short(ish) haircuts to be unacceptable.
Had Metallica, "Sold out?"
Well, yes and no.
Yes, the band did make stylistic concessions to what had been going on musically over the previous 5 years, but they did so because they wanted to adopt new styles into their own. The band was ready for a change, and the Black Album was the earliest indication of their desire to push the boundaries of their sound.
Still, in retrospect, while Load, and later ReLoad, did have more of a Rock feel (and occasionally a very slight 90's Alternative Rock feel) than the Black Album, it certainly wasn't all that far removed from their mammoth 1991 hit. Load and ReLoad definitely have a looser feel with a little more groove, but the changes weren't quite as radical as they felt at the time. Hopes for another Master Of Puppets style album had been dashed, and that definitely played a role in some fans' discontent with the state of Metallica in 1996 and 1997. The Black Album had been a watering down (and slowing down) of the style that had built Metallica into the biggest of the Thrash Metal bands of the 80's, and to take the band a step farther from their base alienated some of their original fans.
But what on the album doesn't sound like Metallica? Certainly, "Ain't My Bitch," "King Nothing," and, "2 X 4," clearly sound like Metallica, granted a Metallica with a looser feel and groove, but those songs are still easily identifiable as Metallica. Easily.
The band had always been known for dynamics, so the opening to, "The House Jack Built," certainly wasn't shocking, neither was the rest of the song. Perhaps it was the lead single, "Until It Sleeps," that threw their fans the most. "Until It Sleeps," does have echoes of both Nirvana and Blue Oyster Cult (circa, "Don't Fear The Reaper"), so while the song rocks hard, it isn't full blown Metal, which is what their legion of fans wanted. And as good a song as it is, "Hero Of The Day," also failed to go near Metal territory.
Ultimately, Load and ReLoad were both mixed bags for their established fans from the 80's. While some of the songs were heavy enough to be, "Acceptable," to their fans, at least 3 of the songs on each album weren't. "Mama Said," was almost Alternative Country in style, and that one sure set their fans off.
But what about the quality of the songwriting? Forget the style, how good were the songs?
They were good. Some were near great. There was enough good material between the two Load albums to come up with one great Metallica album, even setting aside good songs that didin't fit in with the, "Acceptable," Metallica style (the aforementioned, "Mama Said," being one example of a good song that would be left off the Fan Friendly album).
Even the most cynical Metallica fan wouldn't have had trouble accepting this as the new Metallica album in 1996...
1. Ain't My Bitch 2. 2 X 4 3. King Nothing 4. Cure 5. Wasting My Hate 6. Thorn Within 7. Fuel 8. Devil's Dance 9. Better Than You 10. Slither 11. Prince Charming 12. Attitude
Had that been Load it would have a much different reputation with fans today. Even so, the songs left off that version of the album were all at least halfway decent (if not fairly good), even if not in the expected or accepted Metallica style.
It's easy to hear which songs don't quite fit in with the rest of the Metallica catalog in retrospect. At the time they fit in with what was happening musically, and it was understandable that James and Lars had become bored with the same old thing that they had already been doing for almost fifteen years at that point. They needed a change.
And while Metallica hasn't put out a truly great album since And Justice For All, they have put out a handful of good albums (and one awful one in the form of St. Anger - and as LuLu wasn't really a, "Metallica," album the less said about that disaster the better) since 1991.
Most band that are able to survive more than a decade will put out at least one album that divides their fanbase (turning about half of said fanbase off), Metallica has just been better at that than most bands.
Still, they did manage to put out a new album that was hailed as a true return to form stylistically in the form of Death Magnetic. Too bad the mastering job on that one was butchered...
Joined: Aug 2009 Gender: Male Posts: 666 Location: Southern California
Django Double Feature (DVD) - 1970 & 1971 « Result #10 on Mar 13, 2013, 4:31pm »
In the wake of Quentin Tarantino's recent movie, Django Unchained, it was inevitable that the late 60's and early 70's Spaghetti Westerns that inspired Django Unchained would be re-released on DVD. This particular double feature includes two movies with no real ties to the original 1966 Sergio Corbucci classic (indeed, there were no official sequels until 1987's Django Strikes Again, which again featured Franco Nero as Django as in the original).
The first movie up is actually pretty good. A Man Called Django (1971) featuers Anthony Steffen in the title role, and it is a fairly well written and competently directed movie. The story is solid, this time Django is out for revenge a year after the murder of his wife. He teams up with a convicted killer who was part of the outlaw gang that killed his wife, and one by one they hunt down the men responsible.
This isn't a classic movie of the caliber of a Leone Spaghetti Western, nor is it even of the caliber of Sergio Corbucci, but what this is is a good, solid, entertaining Spaghetti Western. The gunfights are fairly well staged and the movie moves along at a good pace. Steffen is passable as Django, but he's no Franco Nero. He's fairly stoic and unemotive, but that works for this movie as Django is supposed to be both hurt and angry - and totally focused on his objective.
A Man Called Django is pretty good. Definitely worth watching if you're a Spaghetti Western fan.
The 2nd feature in this set isn't so lucky.
Django And Sartana's Showdown In The West not only has a misleading title (the original title of Django and Sartana Are Coming... It's the End would have been much more appropriate), but it's also not nearly as good as the first movie in this set.
It's never a good sign when more than one person is credited for directing a movie, and even though the American credits show only a, 'Dick Spitfire,' as director, it was actually directed by Demofilo Fidani (who co-wrote the movie) and Diego Spataro. The fact that two men directed this movie (whether they took turns or did it together is not reported) makes it all the more disappointing.
This is a truly amateurish movie. The script is bad (with a lot of scenes that do little to push the movie forward, and two lead characters that don't even meet until the very end of the movie). The dialogue is bad, the story is disjointed at best, and the plot is so simplistic that because the execution of the script was so poor the movie seems to take about an hour longer than it's 83 minute running time.
To add insult to injury the editing is amateurish, too. The whole thing seems like the first project a group of UCLA film students might have done.
The acting is bad as well. Franco Borelli doesn't look the part as a clean shaven Django. The producers & directors apparently thought he'd have to be clean shaven to stand apart from the scruffy Sartana, played by Jack Betts (under the name Hunt Powers). Neither Borelli or Betts/Powers are particularly bad, but they're given nothing to work with and no direction worth a damn.
Even the action scenes (gunfights & fistfights) look amateurish and fake, and that's the death knell for any Western if you don't have a top notch script. A mediocre Western can still be entertaining if you've got good action scenes, but this one doesn't.
This isn't a movie that goes well with either, "Franchise," (Sartana or Django), and is a movie that probably would have been better left to the dustbin of history.
Timeless Media Group's presentation of these two movies, however, is pretty good. Anamorphic widescreen prints, solid color, fairly sharp picture - the movies look better than they have any right to. (OK, the first one deserves to look this good, but not Django and Sartana...) At least the quality of the DVD presentation is good (although one gripe would be an inability to see the running time or where you are on the disc during said running time).
Still, given the price and the quality of the first movie this doesn't make for a bad purchase for die hard Spaghetti Western fans.
![[Home]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/home.gif "[Home]")
![[New Topics]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/topics.png "[New Topics]")
![[Help]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/help.gif "[Help]")
![[Search]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/search.gif "[Search]")
![[Login]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/login.gif "[Login]")
![[Register]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/register.gif "[Register]")
![[Search This Thread]](http://images.proboards.com/search2.gif "[Search This Thread]")
![[Share Topic]](http://images.proboards.com/new/buttons/share.png "[Share Topic]")
![[Print]](http://images.proboards.com/buttons/print.gif "[Print]")
Author
![[avatar]](http://i933.photobucket.com/albums/ad172/B5Erik/ErinslastMorrisonawards023-1.jpg "[avatar]")
![[image]](http://i933.photobucket.com/albums/ad172/B5Erik/DeepPurple-NowWhat400_zps693652e7.jpg "[image]")
![[image]](http://i933.photobucket.com/albums/ad172/B5Erik/DeepPurple-NowWhatangle_zpsec965f33.jpg "[image]")
![[image]](http://i933.photobucket.com/albums/ad172/B5Erik/DeepPurple-NowWhatpromopic_zpsba6480ae.jpg "[image]")
Logged![[Reply]](http://images.proboards.com/buttons/reply.gif "[Reply]")
![[avatar]](http://i1125.photobucket.com/albums/l594/Mark_Lavallee/rsz_1f3gk5d.jpg "[avatar]")
![[Quote]](http://images.proboards.com/buttons/quote.gif "[Quote]")
![[image]](http://i933.photobucket.com/albums/ad172/B5Erik/IronMan3-Starkrev_zps71720deb.jpg "[image]")
![[image]](http://i933.photobucket.com/albums/ad172/B5Erik/IronMan3-Fallingrev_zpsc790dd06.jpg "[image]")
![[image]](http://i933.photobucket.com/albums/ad172/B5Erik/IronMan3-Grouprev_zpsf782b909.jpg "[image]")
![[image]](http://i933.photobucket.com/albums/ad172/B5Erik/IronMan3-Starkwaterrev_zpscbabf254.jpg "[image]")
![[image]](http://i933.photobucket.com/albums/ad172/B5Erik/IronMan3-Mandarinrev_zps93c17a10.jpg "[image]")
![[image]](http://i933.photobucket.com/albums/ad172/B5Erik/IronMan3-Pepperrev_zpsbaaba9b1.jpg "[image]")
![[image]](http://i933.photobucket.com/albums/ad172/B5Erik/IronMan3-GuyPearcerev_zpsa5378101.jpg "[image]")
![[image]](http://i933.photobucket.com/albums/ad172/B5Erik/dustreissueREVIEW_zpsdba5fa21.jpg "[image]")
![[image]](http://i933.photobucket.com/albums/ad172/B5Erik/DustHardAttackfrontREVIEW_zps9e48b62a.jpg "[image]")
![[image]](http://i933.photobucket.com/albums/ad172/B5Erik/9b5bd785-667a-47d9-8e9b-7e23eae7cd38_zps9d5a7bcf.jpg "[image]")
![[image]](http://i933.photobucket.com/albums/ad172/B5Erik/saxon-sacrifice_biffreview_zps0928ab2a.jpg "[image]")
![[image]](http://i933.photobucket.com/albums/ad172/B5Erik/88131c91-42ae-401f-8df1-41d6a4cac941_zps8dcc5fe1.jpg "[image]")
![[image]](http://i933.photobucket.com/albums/ad172/B5Erik/saxon-sacrifice_nigelreview_zps1799f3d8.jpg "[image]")
![[image]](http://i933.photobucket.com/albums/ad172/B5Erik/saxon-sacrifice_dougreview_zpsb6819f6a.jpg "[image]")
![[image]](http://i933.photobucket.com/albums/ad172/B5Erik/saxon-sacrifice_paulreview_zps7c5419d4.jpg "[image]")
![[image]](http://i933.photobucket.com/albums/ad172/B5Erik/Saxon-Sacrificereview_zpsf7f5712e.jpg "[image]")
![[image]](http://i933.photobucket.com/albums/ad172/B5Erik/saxon-sacrifice_band_review_zps6e041434.jpg "[image]")
![[image]](http://i933.photobucket.com/albums/ad172/B5Erik/Metallica-1996-Load-Backarticle_zpse5d06794.jpg "[image]")
![[image]](http://i933.photobucket.com/albums/ad172/B5Erik/DjangoDoubleFeature1_zps030c4e40.jpg "[image]")