Viking Restaurant

Superman Returns-Deleted Scenes

The following article from supermanhomepage.com gives a helpful breakdown on the scenes that Bryan Singer cut from Superman Returns. Once again, this has turned out to be my most profound disappointment concerning the film, because in my mind I just cant shake the idea that the film really needed these scenes. They just seem crucial to me and I cant figure out why Singer would have cut them. I just think all of the complaints about lack of character and story development in the film would have been satisfied had these scenes remained in the film. I am hoping hard for an extended edition DVD. But then again, Singer is no Peter Jackson. He hates doing extended editions. So we will see.

Superman Returns-Second Impression

OK, make fun of me. I have already seen Superman Returns a second time. And my thoughts about the film have changed significantly, almost all for the better.

Almost without fail, the second viewing of a good film is always the best for me. This is the viewing where I get to take a film on its own terms, without misguided expectations, and without constantly wondering how and when I am going to be surprised. Because I know where the film is going, and I can grasp the whole picture from start to finish, I can begin to pay more attention to the details of the film. I can take the film's pulse so to speak. I become more aware of the pace, the flow, and the different beats in each scene. I can also let go more and just allow myself to enjoy the film and to take it in for what it is.

In this particular case, it also helped that I got to see the film from farther back the second time. I saw it on opening night from the third row, and so the big action scenes became a little irritating because I couldnt fully absorb them. But on my second viewing, this was not a problem at all.

So what is my second impression? In short, I think my only substantial criticism of the film that still remains is that it is too short. I think that Bryan Singer made an unwarranted decision to cut out several key scenes from the beginning of the film, including a 5 minute sequence that shows his return to Krypton and several scenes from his time in Smallville. I think we crucially needed these scenes to A) understand more about Krypton and its crystal technology, thus gaining a deeper appreciation for the rebirth of New Krypton later in the film and B) give the audience more time to identify emotionally with Superman's return in Smallville before he moves back into the bustle of big city Metropolis. I am desperately hoping that Singer will decide to reincorporate these scenes into the film, even though he has suggested that they will only be offered as deleted scenes.

But other than that very frustrating criticism, I have learned after my second viewing that this movie surpasses every other film in its genre besides its original predecessor, that I have no qualms about calling this film a gorgeously executed masterpiece, and that this film deserves a second chance from anybody who didnt get it the first time, because there is a lot more to this film than meets the eye! There are obvious reasons and then not so obvious reasons for making such a bold declaration. One obvious reason for this, that nobody seems to be challenging, is that the film is simply stunning visually and delivers more epic spectacle than we have ever seen in this kind of film. This film is image upon image upon image of cinematic delight to a moviegoer. I challenge anyone who disagrees to go back and dissect this film frame by frame. Singer did not drop the ball here. In fact, he knocked it out of the park.

But films are more than just visuals. The characters and the story have to hold up as well. On my first viewing, I was skeptical about how well Singer developed his characters and told his story. But on the second viewing, most of my doubts about this disappeared. The fact is, the story that Singer and his screenwriters Dougherty and Harris tell is incredibly bold and brave. Its the kind of story that I feel ridiculously lucky to have gotten because it never should have happened. The demands of a major studio and of populist appetites should have made it so that Singer would have never been able to shoot this script. I mean think about it! Rather than reinvent an exciting new franchise like Batman Begins or Spiderman, Singer wanted to bank hundreds of millions of dollars on reinventing a franchise from 1978 and give the public a story in which Superman is an illegitimate father and cant even have a relationship with Lois Lane because shes taken, not by a jerk mind you, but by a pretty great guy. Im sorry, but on paper, this must have looked like a terrible idea for a 2006 blockbuster movie. But Singer pulled it off. And even though his unorthodox choices have angered many fans, I have to put myself solidly in the camp of those who think Singer delivered one of the greatest developments to Superman's character to ever carve a way into his variegated mythology. And he did this not in a cheap and corny and poorly executed way. No, upon my second viewing, I am convinced that he did it in a nearly perfect way. It all boils down to those final scenes of the film, in the hospital and in the boy's bedroom. Those scenes were MUCH more emotional for me the second time around. Maybe its because I identify so strongly with fatherless characters, but watching this orphaned man whisper to his estranged son while he sleeps, and regaining that long lost father/son connection, just moved me in huge ways. And to have the father be Superman just made it all the more compelling. Perhaps I feel in my own life that restoring the father/son relationship is the great conflict of my life, and so I am fascinated that Singer chose to make it Superman's greatest conflict, even though he is a character who was once known to the American public as a man without flaws.

So why does this film truly rise above all of the others in its genre (except perhaps the original)? The emotional story is far bolder and more compelling for me than anything in the Spiderman, X-Men, or Batman universe. I mean this movie sends Superman from the very farthest reachest of outer space to the lowest depths of the ocean and even into the core of the earth itself, and yet the film ends in a small boy's bedroom. That to me is how this movie, for all its epic grandeur, captures the rare emotional intimacy needed for any truly great film.

(UPDATED) Superman Returns-Initial Thoughts

WARNING: I WILL WRITE WHAT IS CALLED "SPOILERS" IN THIS POST THAT WILL "SPOIL" THE MOVIE IF YOU HAVENT SEEN IT. DONT READ UNTIL YOUVE SEEN IT!

I have a BILLION thoughts about Superman Returns, which I saw last night. I really dont trust myself to write an accurate review until Ive seen the film again, but I thought I would fire out my initial thoughts in a more rapid-fire fashion.

First off, for anybody reading this who went with me last night, I have to say it was so much fun having so many people show up to see the movie with me. It was just a lot of fun for me so thanks!!

So let me just give my thoughts by talking quickly about each of the main elements of the film:

CLARK KENT: Loved him! One of my friends had a negative reaction to the way Brandon Routh came off in this film, and while Im not so bias as to be impervious to all criticism against this movie (this film was by no means perfect) I would pretty much have to wholeheartedly disagree with any substantial attacks against Routh's performance. The verdict is not in yet on Routh, on whether or not he is truly a good actor or just a great imitator of Christopher Reeve. I do think Routh showed some real promise in the fact that some of his more emotional scenes were entirely believable to me. But even if Routh may never win an Academy Award, he pulled off Clark Kent beautifully. I couldnt have asked for a better portrayal of that character. Every facial expression and line was pulled off with grace and precision, with all of the nervous, shy, and bumbling characteristics of a well-played Clark. It will probably be debated whether or not Routh truly channeled the character of Clark Kent or whether he just channeled Christopher Reeve's 1978 performance. I believe the former. Brandon was Clark Kent. A striking example of this to me was when Clark found out that Lex Luthor was released from prison because Superman missed a court date. Jimmy says something to Clark to the effect of "I bet that really p@#@es Superman off" and Clark responds by nodding and saying "Yeah, A Lot." I cant express it in writing, but Brandon just captured oodles and oodles of Clark Kent in the way that he delivered that line and thats just one of many examples from the movie where Brandon just delivered the line and the look in just the right way. He managed to look just like Clark to Jimmy while revealing a strong hint of Superman to the audience, and I just love that kind of stuff.

SUPERMAN (UPDATED!!!): I cant believe it! I actually posted this whole review and I forgot to put anything in about Superman. What an idiot! Well, now I am updating the post so I hope nobody missed out on my thoughts here. I dont even have much to say except "BEST SUPERMAN EVER!!!" Now dont misinterpret that statement. This is not necessarily the best overall performance ever for Superman/Clark Kent/Kal-El as a whole. But as far as Superman is concerned, and soley Superman, he has never shined brighter than in this movie. If this truly was a Jesus movie, then what we get in this movie is a focus on the "divinity" aspects of his character. Clark, the human, has a relatively small role. Superman has a huge role! We see him in some of the most spectacular, awe-inspiring sequences we have ever seen him in! We actually see Superman on screen longer than Clark. Thats pretty much the opposite of every other superhero movie out there. Usually we see lots of the "secret identity" and then we see just glimpses of the hero during key sequences. In Batman Begins, we see mostly Christian Bale as Bruce Wayne. In Spiderman, the focus is on Toby Maguire as Peter Parker. But in this movie, the focus is Superman, and thats who Brandon Routh spends most of his time portraying. And I really liked that about the movie. I thought it was unique and I thought Superman really needed his due. This was one of the stronger aspects of the film. And Brandon Routh played him beautifully in every scene. There was not one scene in the whole movie where Brandon Routh did not perfectly capture the essence of the character in every look and every line.

LEX LUTHOR: I mean, come on. No matter what one might say about Spacey's performance (Was it evil enough? Was it too campy? Was he threatening enough?), could any other actor have pulled this role off as well? Spacey was the natural choice for the part. I thought this even before he was cast in the role. I had no qualms about his peformance really. It was just the Lex Luthor I hoped to see on the big screen. Granted, more could have happened with his character. And I think some people will be surprised to learn that this IS NOT a Superman vs. Lex Luthor movie. I was even a bit surprised. I really thought the conflict with Lex would be greater and more central to the movie. But Lex is actually a bit of a sideplot compared to some of the more emotional stuff going on in the film. That was an unorthodox choice on Singer's part, and Im not sure how I feel about it. Lex could have been a more central threat in the film. But instead, he kind of swoops in from the side and then disappears to a deserted island. Nevertheless, Spacey was the perfect choice and lit up every one of his scenes. One of the highlights for me was the scene where Lex and Lois confront each other for the first time. I expected this huge, almost frightening moment where Lex captures Lois unawares. But instead, in a brilliant move on the writers part, Lois captures Lex unawares while Lex is brushing his teeth. It was a truly great moment, where I was really happy Kevin Spacey was in the scene and not somebody else.

LOIS LANE: Ok, this is a more controversial one. I cant say I really loved Lois Lane in this movie or the way Kate Bosworth played her. But I UNDERSTOOD her completely. What people want from Lois Lane is a fast-talking, wise-cracking, confident but nervous, stubborn but easily swept away, psychological mess of a woman. And Kate just plays this really restrained, almost completely un-animated Lois that is bound to disappoint some hardcore Lois fans. On the other hand, I really did have to take a step back and think about where Lois was in this movie. Superman impregnates her and then just leaves for five years. She is now a mother and balancing a relationship with a man she deeply cares for with a hidden love she has for a man she deeply misses. I totally understand why she would have lost some spunk, why she would be missing some fire. It makes total sense. In fact, if Lois had been too animated, and too spunky, it would have probably made me angry because it wouldnt have made sense character wise. Lois in this movie was not a lot of fun, but she made a lot of sense. My main worry is for the sequels. Kate plays an excellent restrained Lois. But can she play an unrestrained Lois for future movies. I sure hope so because we are stuck with her.

RICHARD WHITE: Loved him, loved him, loved him! There were so many ways for this new character to go wrong. For those of you who dont know, Richard White is a brand new addition to the Superman universe. There was great potential for him to go horrendously wrong. But the exact opposite happened. The writers really enobled this character. They didnt just write him as the "boyfriend in the way" of Superman that the audience just despises. The writers could have made him cocky, arrogant, and stupid. (Think of Superman's rival to Lana Lang in Superman III) I am so glad that the writers made this character likeable and made him somebody that you WANT to see in the sequels. You understand why Lois would fall in love with this guy. Hes a hero in his own right. Hes a little bit like the totally human version of Superman. He flies (but he has to use a plane), he's a great writer, and hes just an honest-to-goodness decent guy. This movie has a ton of Biblical parallels (one might say too many for one film) and I think there was definitely an idea here to make Richard a parallel to the Biblical Joseph, the man now responsible for raising a "super-kid" not his own.

THE KID (Jason White): OK, I dont know who will agree with me here, but I honestly think that the addition of Jason White to the Superman mythos was this film's most redeeming factor. I think (well, actually I know) that a lot of Superman fans are really angry that Singer decided to give Superman a kid, especially an illegitimate one. But personally, I think it was a great idea. In fact, I think it was a brilliant idea, perhaps the most brilliant addition to the Superman legend weve seen in decades. Superman has always been a story about some of the grandest themes in human history. He is a Christ-figure, a Moses-figure, the ultimate immigrant, the ultimate orphan, a weighty representation of both divine and human characteristics, a man of early twentieth century modern optimism (The Man of Tomorrow), but also a nostalgic throwback to the pre-modern, mythological man/god of Ancient Greece. So Superman manages to speak to a lot of things about humanity's past, its present, and its future. And yet, up until this point, Superman has never been a father, and a father to a broken family to boot. Superman's biggest weakness in the eyes of comic book fans has alway been that he is too perfect, too strong, too idealistic. Well, Singer has really turned that upside down in my mind. He has given Superman a truly legitimate human flaw. He is an imperfect father to an imperfect child. He now stands for the broken family, and not just the nuclear family of his 1940's and 1950's heyday. His child is not just some fun "super-kid" (although thats what Roger Ebert wanted him to be). No, his son has asthma, and his son is a bit insecure and feels guilty and confused when he throws a piano on top of his mother's attacker (his only super-feat in the film). I absolutely loved this element of the story. The movie itself, which actually lost a lot of steam for me toward the end, was "saved" by a very touching scene at the end where Superman visits his son at his bedside. At that moment, I believed in the film whole-heartedly again and I believed in Singer's vision.

JIMMY OLSEN: Perfect! This guy is the best Jimmy Olsen since Jack Larson (of the 1950's TV show) hands down. For me, nobody will ever beat Jack Larson. But Sam Huntington of the new film is definitely the runner up. He was funny, a great deliverer of his lines, and the only thing wrong with his character is that we didnt see enough of him. I definitely want more Jimmy! I think it was especially great that Huntington got to do one of his scenes with Jack Larson (as the bartender). It was great to see one great Jimmy Olsen pass the torch to another. The highlight scene for Jimmy in this movie might be his scene at the dinner table when he bites into a burrito trying to avoid rising tensions in the room between Richard and Lois. Priceless look on his face.

PERRY WHITE: The new movie brings us a pretty massive reinterpretation of Perry White's character if you ask me. Perry up until now has always been a little bit manic. Hes had a hot temper, gets easily frustrated with Jimmy, and is always pushing Lois. Over the years, it has seemed that Perry's hot temper has been on a continual decline. The 1950's Perry was always hot-tempered. He pretty much yelled all of his lines and a good portion of those lines were "GREAT CEASAR"S GHOST!" The 1970's Perry was fairly on par with the 1950's Perry. He was also very hot-tempered. But the 1990's Perry on "Lois and Clark" was a lot more reserved. He was transformed into a more genial, southern gentlemen who no longer said "Great Ceasar's Ghost" but preferred to say "Great Shades of Elvis!" The hot temper was definitely still there, but it was the more refined, calculated Southern temper that Ive personally come to experience here in the South. And now we have this new Perry White played by Frank Langella. He hardly has a temper at all. He is very calculated, very restrained, and you actually BELIEVE this man knows how to run a major city newspaper. Thats what I actually really liked about this Perry. He was so utterly believable. He seemed like he really could be the editor of the Daily Planet without getting his butt fired for shouting off at the wrong person. I walked away from the movie a fan of this Perry White. And I should note that he does say "Great Ceasar's Ghost" and its a beautifully delivered, well-timed line. I loved it.

KITTY KOSLOWSKI: This is Parker Posey's character in the movie. Now I really like Parker Posey and I loved her in this movie. She just has this quirky, eccentric way that grabs me in any movie shes in, no matter how lackluster. (For instance Blade Trinity and Josie and the Pussycats are two lackluster movies that she really shines in). Nevertheless, I wish this character had been a little less of a rip-off of the Miss Tessmacher character from the 1978 film. It felt less like an homage and more like a direct copy at times. This was one of the more absurd things about Singer's film all around. I loved the fact that he payed so much reverance to the Christopher Reeve films, but at times he overdid it just a bit. He seemed to quote one too many lines from the old films. The most egregious example is when Kitty repeats verbatim an old joke from the first film. When Lex asks her "What did my father always tell me?" Kitty says "Your losing your hair" and then "Get out." OK, I love this joke. I loved it in the first one. But I was really perplexed as to why Singer so blatantly repeated it, almost as if he didnt expect the new audience to be aware of the joke at all. And Kitty is used to this effect a lot. She repeats old lines and old plot points, like coming to feel bad for Superman in the end and deciding to help him out so that Lex doesnt destroy New Jersey. Exact same plot progression in the old film. This is the reason this film is not being called a "sequel" but it is actually being called by many fans a "requel." Its being called a "requel" because its supposedly a cross between a sequel and a remake. And I understand that now, because parts of this film feel simply remade rather than built upon. Curious decision on Singer's part and Im still getting used to it.

THE HENCHMAN: Poorly used. I couldn’t understand why Kal Penn never talked in this movie. Did he not have any lines written for him?!? And yet, they were menacing enough I guess.

MARTHA KENT: Eva Marie Saint is just a classy actress and she is in this movie a lot less than I wanted her to be. Also an underused character, but I kind of understand. This is not a “Smallville” movie and so Martha Kent is not going to play a huge role.

OVERALL THOUGHTS: OK, this is the part I think Im going to have to wait and write more on later after Ive seen the film a second time. Let me just say this. Ive become a big fan of the TV show Smallville over the past couple of years. One of the reasons I like this show is because I get to see some of my favorite iconic characters (Lex Luthor, Clark Kent, etc.) interact with each other on a weekly basis. One of Smallville's greatest strengths is that, although the show has amazing special effects (the best on TV quite possibly) and has at least one great action sequence per episode, the show can only afford to have so much action and so has to rely on good dialogue between the characters. I like the fact that on Smallville, I get to see Lex talk to Clark, Lex talk to his dad, Clark talk to his dad, Clark talk to his mom, Clark talk to Chloe, Chloe talk to Lois, Lois talk to Lana, Lana talk to Lex, etc. etc. I love dialogue. Im kind of a sucker for it actually. It just makes characters come alive for me.

Superman Returns, I am sad to report, comes up surprisingly short on dialogue. Now there is actually a pretty specific reason for this. The true secret influence on Singer in making this new Superman film was not so much the Christopher Reeve films, but perhaps even more so the Max Fleischer cartoons from the 1940's. I love those cartoons. I still think they might rank as the best work of animation ever! And they are also very short on dialogue. Your lucky to hear Clark and Lois say anything in those cartoons. Its mostly just astounding visuals of Superman flying around and saving the day in huge ways. Now Singer's film is unquestionably inspired by the Fleischer cartoons. The way Superman flies, the scope of his super-feats, and the tone of the visuals are all directly borrowed from those cartoons. But unfortunately, in my opinion, Singer also decides to make his film largely silent like the old cartoons. He doesnt infuse his characters with great dialogue. And this hurt the film a lot for me. I want to hear Clark talk to Lois (a lot) and I want to hear Clark talk to Jimmy (they were sitting at a bar together in one scene but they curiously edited out most of their conversation) Clark talk to Perry, Superman talk to Lex, Lois talk to Jimmy, etc. etc. This is by far the greatest weakness of the film. I said last night that the film seems "action top-heavy" and I stand by that. It needed more character development, and instead we got some overly long action sequences, full of amazing spectacle, but lacking character engagement. I am very sad to have to admit that this film, for this reason, was not everything I wanted it to be.

But I still really loved the film. I also said last night, that even before I saw this film, I was incredibly happy and satisfied with so many of the decisions that the filmmakers made. Im so happy that they treated Superman's whole history so reverentially and that they treated him so iconically. I love the look of the film, the scope of the film, their casting choices, their choice of music, their nods to Donner's old 1978 production designs, their brave and well-written screenplay that takes Superman in amazing new directions. I loved, loved, loved so many aspects of this film and I have a feeling that now that my expectations are a little more realistic, the second viewing will be even better. I cant wait for IMAX, to see this film in 3-D! That should be amazing. Im really pumped for sequels! I think one thing that they have done unqualifiedly well is that they have set up a successful franchise where the sequel possibilities are limitless. I think Bryan Singer could easily make a sequel to this Superman movie that is as fresh and exciting as his X-2. I always believed that X-2 made the first X-Men a better movie. And I think the same thing could happen here. If Singer does a sequel (and he better) I think he will work out his kinks and give us something even better.

This is certainly the best film of the summer, and I dont expect anything to surpass it. And its certainly reached my expectations and stretched them a bit. Its not the perfect, greatest-film-of-all-time that I wanted it to be, but it makes a fantastic addition to the Superman universe.

And thats all for now.

Great Ceasar's Ghost!!!

Superman Returns opens today. There are a total of 21 people arriving at the theater at 9:30 pm tonight to see this movie with me. It should be a grand event of epic proportions. Im wearing my Superman tie.

Update on "Super" Sale: (Buy Your Tickets Here!)

I have bought six initial tickets for Superman Returns on movietickets.com for

TUESDAY
JUNE 27th
10:00 PM

Its literally the first showing of the night. To reserve these tickets to see this show with me, email me at ttwillison@yahoo.com. Im selling them for $7 a piece (a deal).

This is not a general sale. Make sure you know me and that we are friends.

If you are my friend, I want to see this movie with you! So buy my tickets and go with me on Tuesday night. I can always buy more once I sell out of these.

Willison "Super" Sale

Heres the deal. Over the past few weeks, I have been promising certain people that they would indeed be the person to get the honor of seeing Superman Returns with me on the pre-July 4th weekend. I cant even keep track, but Ive certainly promised several people. I guess people just know Im enthusiastic about the movie and so therefore want to see it with me.

Well what I would like to do here over the next couple of weeks is collect a definitive list of names of people who want to go with me. Trust me, I would love to see this movie with a ton of people! I want it to feel like the
"event" movie of the year when I go see it. So if you are interested in seeing this movie with me, let me know and I will write your name down. Then, a few days before the movie opens, I plan to buy the ticket of everyone of who is going with me on Fandango and then, get this, sell it to them for a REDUCED price. Yes I am prepared to take a punch to my wallet for the opportunity of giving my friends a great night at the movies for a little bit less than the rip-off price. It would be my pleasure. And just think of it, not only will you be getting a good deal on the movie, but you will get the added bonus of seeing the look on my face after I have seen the movie, which Im pretty sure will be priceless.

So sign up now for the "Super" Willison sale on Superman Returns tickets. Come one, come all. There is only one requirement. I have to know you and like you, or you have to be known and liked by someone I know and like.

Representing Covenant in the North

I got some very exciting news this afternoon! As some might already understand who read this blog, I am now an Admissions Representative for Covenant College. Well, today I found out the one piece of information that I have been in suspense about ever since I took the job. What region of the United States will I represent Covenant to? This is a pretty big question, because I am presumably to do a lot of travel this year, and so I was naturally wondering "Where will I travel?"

I found out today that my region will be the Northeast (VA, WV, PA, MD, DE, NJ, NY, CT, RI, MA, NH, VT, ME), and a great bit of the upper Mid-West (OH, MI, WI, MN, and IA) Now this is huge I know, but the system is based on numbers. On a map it looks like I am covering three times as much ground as some of the representatives. But in actuality, Covenant gets most of its students from the South, so thats why one person can afford to be so spread out in the North. I will definitely have to be a little choosy about what areas I want to focus on. Right now, I know I will make a trip to Iowa to visit my old Cono students and from there I could take a trip up to Minnesota. And I know I will be going to Michigan a good bit because the school has some major connections there. My mom is from Ohio so who knows what kind of connections I might build there? I am very, very excited about getting to focus on some of the major Northeast cities like New York, Philadelphia, Boston, and DC. I have some good connections in each of those cities and I am already talking very enthusiastically with our diversity representative, Kara, about the kinds of things we want to do up there.

So if you live in any of these areas (come on Boston bloggers!) help me out by connecting with me! For the next couple months I have to work very heavily on building connections and making travel plans. I think Ill try to put a visual map up soon on my blog so you can see just what areas I will be responsible for. I want to connect, connect, connect, so comment away or email me at twillison@covenant.edu if you know of people in the Northeast or upper Mid-West who would be interested in building a relationship with Covenant College.

Thats Me!

Whenever I apply to grad schools and things like that I often get asked for a picture, and I freak out because I really dont take that many pictures of myself. Ive just never been in to taking pictures, and the result is that most of my memories are in my head. I just dont have photo albums.

But I decided it was time to have at least one or two pictures of myself that I could print out and put in applications and what not. This is probably not going to be one of those, but my brother took this tonight on his digital camera, and I figure its a good enough start.

Over the Rhine Review

I feel more inadequate to the task of writing about Over the Rhine because I did not go to their show last night as a seasoned fan. I had been exposed to them, mostly through their last two albums "Ohio" and "A Drunkard's Prayer", and so I knew I was in for a good show. But my expectations were not exuberantly high by any means. I guess Over the Rhine always seemed a bit too much like a "coffee shop" band to me. They were tranquil and soothing and often beautiful but not always necessarily memorable.

Well let me just say that my expectations were exceeded by leaps and bounds. I had no idea that I was in for such an amazing performance when I got back from talking to Hem to sit down for the second half of the show.

First off, for those of you who dont know, Over the Rhine is somewhat similar to another group I like, the Innocence Mission, in that they are primarily a husband and wife duo who specialize in lush, mood-setting songs. The husband and wife in this case are Linford Detweiler and Karen Bergquist. But unlike the Innocence Mission, whose Karen Peris specializes in quirky, childlike vocals, Karen Bergquist of Over the Rhine specializes in confident, jazz-inspired vocals reminiscent to me of the late Eva Cassidy and even the late, great Ella Fitzgerald. Thats what really blew me away about Over the Rhine: I had no idea I was about to be treated to what was probably the greatest singular live vocal performance I have ever personally witnessed. This girl can sing with the best of them! Her range and confidence and subtle ability to manipulate my mood was something I had never experienced up close like that before.

And let me not overshadow the husband, Linford Detweiler, who spent most of the time on the keyboard. First off, this guy was hilarious! He was increcibly funny, and even apart from that, he was an incredibly good storyteller. He was the kind of guy you wish you could have long conversations on somebody's porch with and just hear him tell stories of his life. Apparently he was a minister's son, and he treated us to a particularly memorable story of what his Wednesday night prayer meetings were like in his youth.

But Linford was also a ridiculously talented piano player. The combination of his finesse on the keyboard and Karen's vocals were almost more than I could take at times. It transported me to the highest realms of musical enjoyment. Added to that, they were backed by a great drummer and a guitarist who treated us to a blues solo at the end of the show that brought hints of tears to my eyes.

So in short, the Over the Rhine show was one of the best I have ever heard or seen. They have a rich catalogue of songs, an immensely enjoyable stage presence, and talent that just illuminates the whole room.

The combination of Hem and Over the Rhine was perfect. They are two bands that complement each other very well, but who are unique enough in their styles that you feel like you are getting a major 2 for the price of 1 deal. I couldnt have asked for a nicer way to spend a Saturday night yesterday.

Make sure you catch this show if you still have a chance. Here is the full list of dates still up ahead!

Mon Jun 05: Charlotte NC, Visulite Theatre ALL AGES
Over the Rhine opens; Hem closes

Tue Jun 06: Asheville NC, Grey Eagle ALL AGES
Hem opens; Over the Rhine closes

Wed Jun 07: Chapel Hill NC, Local 506 ALL AGES
Over the Rhine opens; Hem closes

Thu Jun 08: Alexandria VA, Birchmere ALL AGES
Hem opens; Over the Rhine closes

Sat Jun 10: Lancaster PA, Chameleon Club
(No Hem on this show) Special guest: Abigail Washburn

Mon Jun 12: Boston MA, Paradise
Over the Rhine opens; Hem closes

Tue Jun 13: Philadelphia PA, Theatre of Living Arts ALL AGES
Hem opens; Over the Rhine closes

Wed Jun 14: New York NY, The Concert Hall ALL AGES
Over the Rhine opens; Hem closes

Thu Jun 15: Northampton MA, Iron Horse Music Hall ALL AGES
Over the Rhine opens; Hem closes

HEM REVIEW

I went to the Hem/Over the Rhine show last night, and the show was so great, I cant review it in just one post. So let me talk about Hem first, just because they went first.

I've been following Hem for a few years now, and last night was my second time seeing them live. I saw them in Atlanta on both occassions. I saw them for the first time at the Red Lantern cafe, a really small little joint where I saw the whole show from about five feet away. Last night I saw them at the Variety Playhouse, a larger place (but not too large) which proved to provide much better sound quality and lighting.

For those of you who dont know anything about the band, let me give a brief breakdown. The band was initially a group of three particulary talented musicians (some of whom are from Brooklyn, NY; maybe all): Dan Messe who was the primary songwriter, Gary Maurer who was the producer/engineer, and Steve Curtis who was enlisted as a co-musician and songwriter. The guys put an ad in the Village Voice for a singer, and to make a long story short, they received a demo tape from a woman named Sally Ellyson singing old-fashioned lullabyes, and they quickly brought her on. It has now become a tradition to begin their albums and their live shows with Sally singing one of these lullabyes.

I can probably pick out three main things that make Hem stand out as an exceptional group:

1) The songwriting: Hands down, Dan Messe and Steve Curtis are two of the most intelligent, purposeful songwriters working today. Each individual Hem song is a testament to what is possible when songwriters pour passionate, detailed effort into their craft. Their songs are exquisite and incredibly well-defined.

2) The singer: Sally Ellyson has a sweet voice. Her voice is a perfect match for these songs. I dont know if she has kids, but her kids are bound to be lucky to be sung to sleep by this woman.

3) The musicianship: I love going to shows where the technical quality of the instruments really shines. The last time I remember hearing a show where this stood out so much was Gillian Welch and David Rawlings about 3 years ago. The guys in Hem (which now includes Bob Hoffnar, a pedal steel player, and no longer seems to include Gary Maurer) are obviously masters of their instruments. More than that, they are masters of how to blend their instruments together. This is really the best part about Hem. Their sound has such a rich and pure texture, unlike anything Ive ever really heard before, because the musicians really just know how to play together. Its quite outstanding.

Im going to continue to follow this band through each step of their career. I dont imagine I will ever lose interest. I have had the pleasure of meeting the band both times I have seen them. Last night I was able to talk to them and to tell them I really wanted them to play a show in Chattanooga sometime. They said that they have gotten that a lot for some reason. They said that for the past five years, they have gotten a lot of requests to come to Chattanooga, and that it really appears that they have a fanbase there. So hopefully they will come down on their next tour! They have a new album coming out on September 5, "Funnel Cloud", so I wouldnt be surprised to see them down south again before the year is over.

I should also note that besides the fact that Hem is built upon such great songwriting, they are also an amazing cover band! They are the kind of band I would fear being covered by, because they tend to outdo their original source. Some examples of covers that just blow me away would be Bruce Springsteen's "Valentines Day," REM's "South Central Rain," and Fountain of Wayne's "Radiation Vibe."

Definitely check these guys out! And definitely see them live! Its the only way to go.

BORED

OK, some thoughts, because Im bored on a Friday night.

1) Perhaps the most emotionally satisfying film I have seen this year was a documentary about the late singer-songwriter Townes van Zandt entitled "Be Here to Love Me." The film itself wasnt a work of genius, but to just learn Van Zandt's story and to see actual footage of his life is incredibly moving. He was the truest definition of a tortured genius.

2) I think it should be a federal requirement for all engaged couples to watch Ingmar Bergman's "Scenes From a Marriage" (the entire five-hour TV version) before being allowed to sign their marriage papers. This is not my own idea, but a shared idea between me and another friend who watched the film with me.

3) I think my favorite novels tend to deal with the themes of envy, murder, and guilt. Perhaps I'm feeling a bit Cain-ish lately.

4) Ive been pretty happy lately. But Ive also been kind of restlessly bored. I think I tend to feel that way when I allow myself to become superficially happy, and I forget to think about eternal things. When I think about eternal things, I tend to feel kind of tortured, but Im not bored.

5) I would say about a year ago I felt that I was coming dangerously close to being an alcoholic. It was just strange to drink so regularly, and so much, and to enjoy it as much as I did. I began to fear that I would allow another bad habit to develop that I would have to add to my list of habits that I had a hard time kicking. Thankfully, things appear to have changed a lot in that department. Theres a lot of benefit to staying busy and having a daytime schedule.

6) I just found out today that I have a friend who has hung out with the Prince of Serbia at his palace and was able to see his private theatre.

7) I think its kind of encouraging that the most embarassing, most idiotic things I have done in life cease to bother me all that much after enough time has gone by. Time really does heal all wounds I think. Embarassment is essentially a temporal thing I think.

8) All through my life I have continually learned to like new things, things that I might have been initially opposed to. I have learned to like new kinds of food, new kinds of music, new kinds of people. etc. Does that ever end? I wonder if in the second half of your life, you dont so much learn to like new things as much as you learn to re-like the things you used to like and forgot about.

Keith is Dangerous

I have this friend Keith, and hanging out with him can be a dangerous affair. I was at his house last night, and I tried to lean back in his chair, not in any kind of extroardinary way, but just in the way I always lean back in chairs. The chair collapsed completely. I tried to break my fall with my arm and I did something to my arm as a result. Its been killing me all day.

On top of that, I got a brand new book yesterday, one I was excited about (the Peter Enns book I already posted on). Keith had his paws on it for less than an hour before the book ended up swimming in puddle of rainwater.

Keith is a great friend, but I think he should come with some kind of liability insurance.

Taylor U. Mistaken Identity Incident

Im not sure how many of you have read this story, but I am just dumb struck. To sum up here, the one girl who survived the fatal Taylor University van accident five weeks ago was presumed for the past five weeks to be the wrong girl! The girl who was presumed alive was actually one of the girls who had been presumed dead, thus meaning one family mistakenly thought they buried their daughter, while one family mistakenly thought they were visiting their comatose daughter in the hospital.

A Super Soundtrack

OK, Im bloggin a lot I know. But I had to point out that soundtrack.net has posted their first listen of the Superman Returns soundtrack with a review. John Ottman is the new composer (taking over reigns from John Williams-see pic above) as well as the editor, so he is pulling double time! But just from the thirty second clips I was able to hear, and from the review I was able to read, I think I have every right to be stoked that this will be the best soundtrack of the year!

Hem/Over the Rhine

I am going to see this show on Saturday night at the Variety Playhouse in Atlanta. Im going mostly to see Hem, who I saw in Atlanta once before. If anyone reading this blog has not checked out their music, you should! Anyway, should be a great show: