Music Review : Big Star - Keep An Eye On The Sky

Undoubtedly an influential band, but if they had been able to turn that kudos into cash in the form of record sales when they were in their heyday, how would history be rewritten? Perhaps no need for Tom Petty. Certainly, no room for Teenage Fanclub either. And Cheap Trick might never have got out of Rockford, never mind travelled to the Budokan in Japan.

More crucially, would Chris Bell have risen above his troubles, and been able to avoid his fateful path to an early grave? Would Alex Chilton have been able to remain fully focused and avoided becoming the erratic maverick that he has become?

So many questions, and no answers that can be given with any certainty as we aren't granted the gift of knowing our alternative futures when we turn left instead of veering to the right. What is certain is that this much loved band couldn't sell shit when they were around, although their reputation was still quite high at that time.

I can't even claim myself to be one of the few who were into the band when they were nothing! My first encounter with Big Star was buying a 2-for-1 set which featured their first two albums - that must have been around 1978.

This boxset covers almost everything you might need from Big Star. All of the songs from their three albums from the 1970's are included, alongside other unreleased or hard to find songs from predecessor bands and solo activities. Most notable in the latter category are the tracks from Chris Bell's posthumous album. To cap this all of, the fourth disc features the three piece band in concert which, despite being a guitar down, still captures the verve of the songs perfectly as well as featuring a bunch of interesting covers.

I do say almost everything - whilst all of the songs are present in the case of #1 Record and Radio City some of the versions are alternative mixes or versions to that which appeared on the original album. Needless to say, the original albums have also been reissued so if you're feeling completist then these are needed purchases as well.

The music sounds terrific with the electric material having a bite and attack missing from previous versions, with the acoustic songs having a brightness and depth which makes them sound extremely contemporary.

The third album still has the ability to generate opposing views. In one sense, it's very different from the band that recorded the first two albums but, on the other, it remains a compulsive listen. Certainly, over the years Alex Chilton has struggled to even hint at the quality contained here. Poor Chris Bell didn't have the chance of a tilt at failure.

What's not included are the recent reunion album, In Space, or the previously released live material. This may offend the completist, but I think the golden era of the band is best served by keeping a little distance from material that, however enjoyable, doesn't compare in quality to their 1970's work.

Listening to the albums now, it does seem apparent that there was always an edge to the band which would always just knock the edge off mainstream appeal. That's probably where the longevity in these albums is sourced, and which made it less likely that there was much hope in them scaling the heights when the albums were first issued.

Film Review : The Soloist

There are some things outside of the tale itself that you can take from this film.

Firstly, that three films into his career on the big screen suggests that Joe Wright is a seriously major talent that we can look forward to delivering terrific movies over many years to come.

Secondly, that sobriety suits Robert Downey Jr who continues a fine run of great performances in this movie as journalist Steve Lopez.

And finally, that Jamie Foxx is an astonishing actor who has the gift of inhabiting the characters that he plays. In a role where cliche and stereotype might hover uneasily in the background, he creates a powerful and affecting portrayal of a man of great talents who is also blighted by mental illness.

The story itself revolves around the relationship between journalist Lopez and his chance meeting with Nathaniel Ayers, played by Jamie Foxx. Lopez' attention is grabbed by Ayers playing some repetitive but haunting music on a two string violin, and subsequently includes him in his regular column in the LA Times.

As Lopez finds out more about Ayers past, the story moves into the ambiguity about the growing relationship - with growing interest in his abilities via the reports, where is the line that crosses over into exploitation? And are the efforts to help him going to help Nathaniel, or does he even welcome them?

The positive response to the stories in Lopez column generate additional interest in Ayers, and Lopez seeks to assist him in pursuing his undoubted talent for music - he dropped out of Julliard when his mental illness overtook during his second year of study, retreating from his family and living a life on the streets with his possessions (and his life) contained in a shopping basket.

The developing relationship between the two characters is the fulcrum around which the story relates. It has the potential to be too maudlin or sentimental but it avoids this by avoiding any suggestion that there are easy answers to dealing with Ayers condition, and by making clear the many frustrations faced by Lopez as he attempts to do what he sees as the best thing for his welfare.

This film has not done well in America but it's easy to see why. There are no nice and comfortable happy endings (although the film does resolve itself but in a less overt manner) and it shines an uncomfortable light on the plight of the homeless and disadvantaged in American society, although this is a point that's not overly laboured (and more powerful for that).

This picture is based on a real life and Ayers sister has established the Nathaniel Anthony Ayers Foundation For The Gifted Mentally Ill. As you will see from the site, the story is a relatively recent one but no less powerful for that. I think the book on which the film is based beckons now.

Film Review : Surrogates

Occasionally you see a film where a couple of days contemplation allows you to consider the hidden depths in the ideas expressed, and to perhaps feel that a second viewing might be necessary to understand the complexities of the gripping story line. Surrogates isn't one of those films.

Which is not to say that it's not a perfectly servicable popcorn movie - but it's one that you can safely disengage the more distant parts of your brain when watching.

Bruce Willis plays.........well, he plays Bruce Willis as a police detective in a world where real life has been replaced by a virtual reality played through robots...or surrogates....which allow people to live their lives and do just what they want to do in a society that is almost crime-free.

Needless to say (and you can see this coming, can't you) things are not quite so straight-forward and real humans find themselves being killed via their surrogates, which had not been thought possible. Of course, Bruce is required to solve the mystery in typical Bruce fashion.

As seems to be a contractual obligation, Bruce's marriage is a little shaky and this (along with the protaginists reasons for his actions) form the human element of the story. However, what the film doesn't really attempt to do (and which might have run the risk of making it a bit too cerebral) was to consider the impact on the individual of living your life as what amounts to no more and no less than a fantasy. The human element revolves around two family deaths but which in themselves are no different from the tragedies we need to deal with in our own reality.

Having said that, the film was a perfectly enjoyable hour and a half of my life that I can't feel too bitter at having lost but it simply doesn't wrestle with enough challenging (or even unchallenging) ideas to raise it above that.