Still the best: Beck (Jeff, that is)

A review of the music video Jeff Beck performing this week... Live at Ronnie Scott’s

(available now on Blu-Ray and DVD)

UPDATE: Read this NYTimes article ... they must andythemovieman followers...

From our contributor GROOVEKING – The Music Man

I first saw Jeff Beck live in concert in the Tucson (Arizona) Civic Center – it was 1971. He’s been around that long and, apparently, so have I.

In 1965, when the flibbertigibbet Eric Clapton bolted from The Yardbirds, Beck replaced him. In 1966, they released an album entitled Roger The Engineer with guest guitarist Jimmy Page. In one band??? Over the years, I have been torn between these three guys as to who is the best living Rock ‘n Roll guitarist, having seen them all live and listened to most of their work. As I go back ‘n forth, it has remained an open question . . . until I watched this concert.

Recorded in 1080i High Definition Widescreen 16X9 (1.78:1) with a DTS HD Master Audio soundtrack, it looks and sounds as good as it gets. State of the Art. The nightclub setting and stage lighting give the tape a luscious colorful hue and the audio production was perfectly executed (especially due to the superb work of Engineer Alan Branch – not Roger). If you have a home theater system sportin’ big audio, this disc is a must have. Recorded in 2007 over several nights in the famous London Soho nightclub “Ronnie Scott’s” and then edited down to 191 minutes of material, you can hear people clapping behind you when listened to in 7.1 surround. Am I really 30 feet from the stage? The audience is full of London Rock ‘n Roll notables (Oh look, there’s Robert Plant. And two tables over, right there in the center, is that really the Jimmy Page?) It’s a small wonder that it was the hottest ticket in town during the week of these shows.

Beck’s four-piece band is killer, combining experience with youthful exuberance. They tightly navigate their way through Beck’s rock/jazz/blues fusion material. On drums is Vinnie Colaiuta (of Frank Zappa, Herbie Hancock and Sting fame), with Londoner Jason Rebello on keyboards (Sting again) and Australian bass phenom Tal Wilkenfeld. If you are unfamiliar with the 21-year old Wilkenfeld, she is a mesmerizing performer. Beck showers her with adoration all concert long and for good reason. Apart from very accomplished playing, her stage persona creates a camera magnet (frame count second only to His Majesty). See for yourself at talwilkenfeld.com. Guest vocalists Joss Stone (one song) and Imogen Heap (two songs) are exceptional. The best five-piece ensemble of the concert is the encore performance of Rollin’ and Tumblin’ with Heap. But the absolute star of the show is, of course, Jeff Beck.

I played guitar professionally for 10 years and then spent another 10 in production and I DO NOT KNOW HOW HE MAKES THOSE SOUNDS! I do know it’s not with pedals and electronic devices; it’s with his fingers, his Stratocaster, and his Marshall stack. He doesn’t even use a pick, for God’s sake. Fingers pickin’ and strumin’ on strings, pick-ups talkin’ to amp. Camera shots abound of fans in the audience (many pro musicians, for sure) going, “Wah? Huh?” He was using a bottleneck slide way up ahead of the neck on top of the pick-ups (where movements of about 1/32 of an inch equals a full note) without missing a note (literally). The late Les Paul, inventor of the guitar cutaway (that radical indent in the body up top of the neck that allows your hand to get way up there) is smiling somewhere because Jeff Beck’s hand lives in the cutaway. But when that hand comes running down the lower end of the neck, hold on to your seat. Heavy, heavier, heaviest . . . tasty, tastier, tastiest. There is nobody that compares or that I would rather listen to.

In fact, there was an encore guest appearance by Eric Clapton (what a treat for two songs). They traded licks. No contest. Not even close.

Content

Audio

Video

The Taking of Pelham 123

Jun 2009, Tony Scott, 106 mins (out on DVD Nov 3)

It’s hard for this reviewer to believe that anyone associated with the creation of The Taking of Pelham 123 would have been happy with the end result. The film is a thrill-less thriller with a $100 million budget. The first minute or two of Tony Scott’s remake had the quick cuts and shaky camera that is his style (see Man on Fire, Domino) and a small inkling of what an intense movie could feel like. However, over the next 100 minutes there was little to separate the film from a high school production created on a budget of $20.

Travolta does his normal bad guy thing (Face-Off, Broken Arrow) to an underwhelming note. Washington, the one and only “plus” of the film, does his part but his hero character isn’t given the range or scenes to pump any blood into the role. The original, starring Walter Mathau and Robert Shaw, couldn't possibly have been this bland.

Once Travolta’s Ryder character had taken control of the train, I kept waiting to care about the scenarios developing on screen. I wanted to route against him or feel for the captives but everyone was just too level. The film never sold me.

I honestly was dying to see what the twist was going to be. What character had been hiding a deep seeded secret and was going to flip the story on its head in a barrage of gun fire and lies... but nothing. There were hints of such a twist. Side stories and ideas were bounced around but never came to a head. I would have settled for a lame “there’s-no-way-that-really-would-have-worked” type of twist. But nothing. Just as time runs out in blowout basketball games, with the losing team never having a push for a comeback, this film went to the locker room with a slight whimper and its tail between its legs. A bore through and through.

Youth in Revolt

Jan 2010, Miguel Arteta, 90 mins

Michael Cera, the Prince of the Hipster Comedy generation, continues to find ways to avoid the pretentiousness that has clouded this genre over the past few years. With the passing of Juno and the stumbling of Nick and Norah and Away We Go, the "I’m-too-cool-to-do-anything" movie mantra had seemed to slip the way of the torture-porn-horror industry. But, young Michael is just too much fun to find fault with. He is not a Shakespearian actor or the re-birth of Sir Lawrence Oliver, but he is a palatable leading guy.

Youth in Revolt is a fun little feature that fights an uphill battle and wins. A rough start, headlined by the all too overdone masturbation scene followed by a whiney teenage introspective voice-over left the viewer with a sprouting headache. However, insert a strong supporting cast led by Jean Smart, Steve Buscemi, and Zack Galifinakis and you have the grounds for a solid comedy; Youth got even better as time passed.

The boyish nerd summer love story, again not the most original, is then turned on its head as the script takes you on a journey that at some points feels like a comedy version of Taxi Driver. In order to be with the girl of his dreams, Nick Twisp (Cera) conjures up an alternate personality, François Dillinger. François, a chain-smoking, mustache sporting man (also played by Cera), is a hilarious counter to Nick’s mild mannered existence.

The biggest surprise was that I was really ready for this movie to suck. I’m very against being told what to laugh about. Watching teenagers go through “coming of age” situations has run its course. It takes near perfect versions of these stories to keep you from banging your head on the seat in front of you. However, Youth in Revolt finds the perfectly balanced ground between a Holden Caulfield-esque character and the hilarity of Superbad.

Lost in the box office woods that is Avatar, Sherlock Holmes, and a certain Squeakuel, it’s unlikely Youth will find much of an audience during its theatrical run. It’s a shame. The film has the makings of a fun, semi-cult classic that today’s 14-20 year olds could play for years to come in co-ed filled dorm rooms.

Avatar

Dec 2009, James Cameron, 162 mins

James Cameron has held many titles in his lengthy film career; Oscar Winner, King of the World, Living Legend. With Avatar, he is the writer and director; one of these titles, he excelled in and the other... not so much.

Avatar is a monumental film. The 3D design and imagery breakthroughs put it on a level not seen in any film, ever. Cameron’s ingenious direction of CGI, live-action, and green screen landscapes make the film stand out as an achievement in art. At the same time, the story fails to develop.

With all the grandeur, and believe me the film is grand, the narrative and side love story sink faster than the Titanic. The first 2 hours begin to drag after the initial shock of the world of Pandora is shown. There is a memorable villain but a villain that pretty much just points at things and drinks coffee. This is as far as my negativity will go.

Avatar is the most visually stunning movie I have ever seen. The world Cameron has created is a thing of pure and un-clichéd beauty. From the majestic living trees, the luminescent habitat, to the flying dinosaur-type beasts, it’s a wonder to watch.

The film’s lead, Sam Worthington (Terminator: Salvation) does a fine job at being a dull marine with a heart that, somehow, isn't so destroyed by war that he has lost hope for humanity. Though, the film does make you wonder about the nature of humanity. When does the human race become the Alien invader that planets are fearful of? What happens if we are the flashing light in the sky or the yellow orb that scares the natives? What if we created the war of the worlds?

The film has the normal screenplay beats to it. The acts follow a standard procedure. Cameron has not reinvented the movie; he has reinvented the viewer. No longer can films get by with blowing up built-to-scale White Houses with cherry bombs and stop motion lenses. Now it needs to literally jump from the screen at you. If you see this movie, see it big and loud and bright. Go to your nearest IMAX 3D cinema and see it right.

The special effects now have a special affect, finally. You can’t watch this masterpiece of visionary creativity without gasping at the incredible visuals. It’s honestly amazing. For two and half hours, your eyes will go “WOW!” It’s too bad that every now and then, your mind will go “wait...what?”

Up in the Air

Dec 2009, Jason Reitman, 109 mins

It must be great to be George Clooney. You’re rich, handsome, and amazingly successful in a medium that will guarantee you immortality. Mr. Lucky’s newest picture, Up in the Air, asks him to play a jet setting single man who’s not sure about commitment... let me know when they are casting my life story, because I’m sure I could play myself pretty well too.

Air has been called “the movie of our time” and is winning various pre-Award show awards for its acting and directing. It’s a decent movie. There are some laughs and some interesting situations, but the film really fails to (pardon this next phrase) “get off the ground”.

Maybe I’ve become to assimilated to comedies, even adult comedies, at least being happy and having a lot of laughs. Sorry, I like those kind of movies. Air, however lacks even the pretentiously hilarious hipness of director Jason Reitman’s sophomore film, Juno.

Now, with all the other hype behind it, it’s going to be up for best picture at the Oscars, heck, they have 10 movies up for best picture now... anything could get nominated. But when the whole movie is weighed out, you have an A-list star, an A-list director, in a solid B- movie.

There is really nothing that stands out from the film as classic or new. Apparently, handsome men have sex with pretty women, have trouble at work, and are really just taller, older boys. I get it George, I understand. Now go and do another movie that requires you to do less facial grimacing (a move that should be called the Clooney) and try to find the next O Brother, Where Art Thou or Burn After Reading… or direct another Good Night and Good Luck or Confessions of a Dangerous Mind. We know you have the talent, we’ve seen it. Even Brad Pitt branches out more than you.

What I don’t need to see is Daniel Ocean trying to be smooth in an espionage thriller, a romantic comedy, or a hospital drama. Give me substance, creativity, a shot in the arm, find the diamond hidden so elusively in the ruff. You know the casting directors want you, now just read the scripts.