Watch it...

NOW.

For those who think music is dead...

Let me assure you, it's not! Paul and I saw Mute Math and The Working Title last night at the 40 Watt in Athens. It's my favorite kind of place to see bands like this that are relatively new, but still put on a great show. You can get right up front and rock out in the crowd.

The Working Title opened and really blew me away. I had been told previously that they were really good and sounded a lot like one of my favorite bands, Lovedrug. I have to say...I almost think The Working Title does Lovedrug better than Lovedrug does! The singers have that same kind of raspy, "dirty" voice that sounds high and low all at the same time. They both regularly flip into their falsetto without sounding wimpy, and both play guitar and keyboard. The Working Title just seemed to have a little more polish to their sound. I was extremely impressed.

Then came Mute Math. I had been hearing their name for over a year now, but hadn't really had any exposure to them personally. All I can say is I have been missing out! It's hard to describe their sound. They themselves say they "blame it on the last 40 years of music." It's true. There's a lot of 80's influence (particularly from Sting) and a good bit of electronica. Yet it's still unique. The album is consistent and beautiful, but doesn't compare to the live show. Mute Math is one of the most energetic bands I've ever seen (Blindside being the most energetic!) and yet the drummer was so tight, he sounded like a drum machine.

I realize I'm gushing at this point, so I'll wrap it up soon. Just trust me, if you're looking for some great new music, you need to hear these bands! You can listen to both on MySpace. Enjoy!!

Fashion Blog...

I've recently discovered a new fashion blog. It's from a girl (presumably) who calls herself the Style Savant. She has really great tips and thoughts on what's new in the top Spring lines. There are also some really great links to other fashion sites. Check it out!

So, it's been a while...

I've been busy with school lately, so it's been a while since I posted anything of real substance. Well, maybe I shouldn't say it that way, but I trust you know what I mean. It's been mostly fluff for a while now. Well, if you're tired of that, you're in for a treat today!

I have a class this semester called Media Culture and Diversity. We are focusing on representations of race and gender in the media. The first half of the class dealt with race and we're now in the process of moving into gender. I could talk a lot about the race stuff (how there's not much biologically that separates the races and the whole concept of race is socially constructed), but the gender stuff has really gotten to me, so I'll focus on that for now.

The first day after Spring Break, we talked in general about gender. We talked about how there are, obviously, some significant biological differences between males and females. However, the concept of gender (i.e. masculine and feminine) is socially constructed. In other words, there is nothing essentially masculine or feminine about a baby when it is born. Based on whether the baby is born male or female, however, the parents and friends of that child immediately start to teach him or her what it means to be masculine if he's a boy or feminine if she's a girl (they paint his room blue, they give her a doll to play with, they give him sports equipment and her an easy bake oven, etc). These ideas of what masculine and feminine are have been constructed by society and our culture. It's a complete nurture over nature argument.

This has been a really challenging thing for me to think about. I think I've decided it's both. There are some things that are essential, that are innate, to being masculine or feminine. And then, of course, there are those socially constructed roles (or even stereotypes) that are forced upon all of us based on our being male or female.

I've been trying to think about what the Bible says about masculinity and femininity. I have yet to do a real study on it (so suggestions are welcome!), but I think even there we see representations that both essential things and socially constructed things play into it. Some of the roles laid out in the Bible were cultural things for that location and time period. For example, women were not educated, so it made sense they would not be allowed to speak in church services. However, there are some things that I believe God laid out because of those innate masculine and feminine traits. That the man is to be the spiritual head of the household, that the woman should be the nurturer of the family, etc. I think God, as our Creator, knows that there are some things men are made for and some things women are made for. Knowing that, He outlined roles for us that complement those things.

And maybe that's what we see in society as well. It's not that a woman can't be a construction worker if she wants. Or that a man can't be a daycare worker. It's that, in general (and I know that's a scary word to use), there are things that men are better at than women and vice versa. I think that comes from the things inside us that make us masculine or feminine.

All of this makes me wonder how I will (or should) be with my children someday. If I have a boy, should I buy "boy things" for him, trucks and transformers and dinosaurs, oh my! If I have a little girl, should I put her in princess dresses and give her baby dolls to play with? I don't know. I've heard that children show their masculine and feminine tendencies pretty early in life, so I guess I'll have to play it by ear. I don't want to force a role onto my child that they'll feel they have to break out of later.

You can probably tell I'm still processing all of this stuff, but I was ready to throw it out there. What do you think?

Why I do what I do...

Last night after Chapel, I went to Wendy's with a few EC students. We talked about a variety of things, but ended up discussing the "crazy Christian lady" that was on ABC's WifeSwap a few weeks ago. I shared how we had watched the clip of her after she came back home. She was going nuts! Slamming things down, screaming at her family and the crew (I believe the direct quote was: "Get the hell out of my house, in Jesus' name!!"), and generally throwing a complete fit. My class, surprisingly enough, wasn't talking about the religious side of it (which could be interesting in itself), but the gender side of it. What if a man had been acting in the same way? Would the producers have still shown it, knowing he would be perceived as violent, aggressive, hateful? With a woman, she was just written off as "that crazy woman".

So, I'm talking about this with the students and I see a light go off above their heads. They've honestly never considered gender roles on television and how things like that could change the audience's viewing experience.

I'm sharing, they're learning! They're thinking critically! This is why I do what I do...it's why I wanted to be an RD (to pass on some of this supposed wisdom and life experience to those who'll come after me) and why I'm pursuing a Master's in Mass Media Studies (to be an advocate for Media Literacy and critical thinking). It made my day!

Et tu, TiVo?

So, I started watching the Oscars on delay last night (as I watch almost everything!), and was really enjoying fast forwarding through all of the commercials and the speeches that didn't interest me. It was great right up until the Best Actress category was about to be announced. Jamie Foxx was reading through the list of nominees and the show cut back to the TiVo menu...meaning it was at the end of what it had recorded. For those of you who may not yet understand what I'm trying to say, I'll spell it out for you...after being geared up for this ceremony for weeks now, I didn't even get to see the following categories announced: Best Actress, Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Original Screenplay, Best Director, and Best Picture...you know, the big ones! :) I was pretty disappointed, but hopped online to find out the rest of the winners. So, having said that, here's what I think about the rest of the show...

Jon Stewart - He did such an awesome job hosting! He was still very much himself and had some great material. My favorite lines were...

* During the welcome: "Ladies, gentlemen...Felicity" (referring to her Transamerica role)
* "Good Night and Good Luck is not only the name of his film, it's also the way Mr. Clooney ends his dates."
* Coming back from break to the audience: "And that's why I think Scientology is right, not only for this town, but for all of America!!!...Oh, we're back!"
* "For those keeping score at home, that's Martin Scorsese, zero Oscars, 3-6 Mafia, one."

The Show - I know Oscar has been trying for a few years now to relate to a younger audience and pull in more viewers. I don't know what the ratings were, but I enjoyed the production as a whole more last night than I have in a while. The stage looked gorgeous, the graphics were awesome, the nominee intros were creative, and the montages were entertaining. The only thing I didn't like was that the orchestra played music for the entire length of each Thank You speech. It was so distracting! I know they're trying to keep these speeches short, but geez...that was excruciating!

The Winners - First, here's a list...
*Best Actor - Philip Seymour Hoffman, Capote
*Best Actress - Reese Witherspoon, Walk the Line
*Best Supporting Actor - George Clooney, Syriana
*Best Supporting Actress - Rachel Weisz, The Constant Gardener
*Best Director - Ang Lee, Brokeback Mountain
*Best Picture - Crash

So, I was 4 for 6 on my predictions. Not too bad, I guess. I don't know what the statistic is on this, but this is the first time in a long time (if not ever) that every one of the Big Six winners were from different movies. In a way, that's frustrating because it makes it harder to predict winners, but ultimately I think it's a really good thing. It means the Academy didn't just pick a favorite picture and vote for it for everything, they actually gave awards to the most deserving people/films.

Congratulations to all the winners (because I know so many of them read this blog!) and thanks for a great year of movies.

Oscar Fashion..

For reasons beyond my control, I sped through the pre-Oscar stuff, so I don't have nearly as much here as I had for the Golden Globes. However, here's what I think about the fashion I did see...

Rachel Weisz - In a simple, billowing, black gown, she looked comfortable, but a little drab. I can't imagine having to walk a Red Carpet while seven months pregnant, but that's no excuse to be boring! Remember Catherine Zeta-Jones when she won for Chicago?

Amy Adams - This relative unknown who was nominated for her role in Junebug (and also portrayed Jim's ex-girlfriend on The Office!) looked stunning. Her hair and makeup was perfect, and the chocolate hue of her dress accented her coloring. The dress itself was a bit on the ornate side, but Adams carried it off well.

Naomi Watts - The cut and color of this dress were very pretty (asymetrical flesh colored), but the detail on the front made her look like she was molting! Come on, Naomi, you can do better than that!

Keira Knightley - Absolutely one of the best of the night! Knightley is quickly becoming a Red Carpet favorite and for good reason. This deep burgundy, hour glass shaped dress was gorgeous on its own, but Knightley really pulled the look together. She does a wonderful job of choosing really sophisticated gowns, but keeping them youthful (thus the funky jewelry and sweet ponytail).

Michelle Williams - I feel like Michelle Williams doesn't really have a look of her own, and thus relies on other people to dress her. This awards season, she has really been pulling out the old-glamour stuff, which is nice, but sometimes feels too old on her (she should talk to Keira Knightley about fixing that!). The dress she wore last night had a nice cut and the neckline was gorgeous, but the color (a deep mustard yellow) was unflattering and sort of caught me off guard.

Will Smith and Jada Pinkett Smith - Always well dressed and coordinated, the Smiths did not disappoint! Will was in a dark navy pinstripe that provided a centered foundation for the electric blue dress Jada was wearing. They looked so classy and gorgeous individually and as a couple.

Jessica Alba - My favorite look of the night! As they said on one of the pre-shows, she actually looked like an Oscar! A perfect tan, gorgeous gold Versace gown with sparkly elegant details, and great hair. She really looked absolutely perfect for the occasion, for her age, and for her personal style.

Sandra Bullock - Not one of my favorites. I think she looked nice, but her hair was a little too messy for my taste, and I felt like the design of her dress made it look like her body shaper was peeking over the top. Everyone went on and on about the pockets, but Sarah Jessica Parker did this a while back and I think she pulled it off a little better.

Nicole Kidman - My second favorite look of the night! She was absolutely glowing with long, straight hair to match her long, straight dress. Her coloring, style...everything was perfect!

Felicity Huffman - I didn't love this one. The hair was too matronly and the dress would have looked better if it were full length rather than shorter in front.

Reese Witherspoon - I ultimately liked her dress better as the night went on, but I didn't love it in the beginning. It was a little too princess-on-the-top-of-the-cake for me. The cut was pretty and flattering, but the silver details just didn't do it for me.

Jennifer Aniston - Between Jen's look and Nicole Kidman's, it was Eat Your Heart Out Exes! night at the Oscars! Jen looked beautiful and elegant as always.

Charlize Theron - Loved the color of the dress, but the dress itself was really over the top. Her 60's era hair was beautiful, but the dress was just too much!

Meryl Streep - Usually one of the worst dressed, Meryl looked great in a form-fitting burgundy gown. It was very flattering and perfectly age-appropriate.

All in all, the fashion was really good. I love that celebrities are still embracing the glamour and sophistication of Old Hollywood. It's the Academy Awards, for Heaven's sake! Take this time to look gorgeous, you know? There were some mis-steps, of course, but for the most part everyone looked great!

Oscar Predictions...

Here's what I think will, won't, and might happen Sunday night (at 8 pm on ABC!!)...

BEST ACTOR
Will win: Philip Seymour Hoffman, Capote
Won't win: Joaquin Phoenix, Walk the Line
Might win: Heath Ledger, Brokeback Mountain

I think PSH has this one locked up, but I wouldn't necessarily take Heath out of the running yet. If Walk the Line had come out last year (the year of the biography!), Joaquin may have had a shot. This year, no chance.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR
Will win: Paul Giamatti, Cinderella Man
Won't win: Jake Gyllenhaal, Brokeback Mountain
Might win: The Clooney, Syriana

I think Best Supporting Actor is the category to watch this year. It really is the most wide-open of all. Everyone nominated genuinely deserves to be there. I think Paul Giamatti will take it for his body of work, but The Clooney may just get it instead. He is, after all, Hollywood royalty and has done a total about-face (Facts of Life, anyone?).

BEST ACTRESS
Will win: Reese Witherspoon, Walk the Line
Won't win: Keira Knightley, Pride and Prejudice
Might win: Felicity Huffman, Transamerica

From the time I saw Walk the Line, I felt like this was Reese's year. This really was the role of a lifetime for her, and I think the Academy may respect her having such an amazing career at such a young age. Keira should be happy to be nominated and choose a gorgeous dress to show off on the Red Carpet (yes, I capitalized it...you gotta problem with that?). Felicity has been slowly gathering steam for her role as a man going through the process of becoming a woman, but I don't think she can edge out Reese.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS
Will win: Rachel Weisz, The Constant Gardener
Won't win: Michelle Williams, Brokeback Mountain
Might win: Catherine Keener, Capote

As Rachel has pretty much swept the awards in this category up to now, I think she'll take home the Oscar as well. This nomination should be a key turning point in Michelle Williams' career. She has overcome her Dawson days with grace and maturity. I think the Academy will continue to look favorably on her work. Catherine Keener is a respected actress and Capote has been getting a lot more press lately because of Philip Seymour Hoffman's recognition.

BEST DIRECTOR
Will win: Ang Lee, Brokeback Mountain
Won't win: Steven Spielberg
Might win: The Clooney, Good Night and Good Luck

Brokeback Mountain has lost some of its momentum in the last few weeks, but everyone is still talking about what a beautiful movie it was and how great Ang Lee is (especially after that Big Green debacle). Steven, we're really, really, really, really ready for that new Indiana Jones movie, okay? Stop with these other projects and make that top priority...before Harrison Ford pierces his other ear. The Clooney is the dark horse on this one. He attacked several deep political issues this year and may just be rewarded for one. I think he ultimately has a better shot at Best Supporting Actor, though.

BEST PICTURE
Will win: Brokeback Mountain
Won't win: Munich
Might win: Crash

Everyone has said Brokeback Mountain is a lock in this category, and I think it will ultimately be rewarded as a whole film (rather than on an individual actor basis). However, since Crash won the SAG for best cast, its odds are also pretty good. Munich? No. Indy, Steven, we want our Indy!!

I'll be back next week for an update on winners and losers and the most important...FASHION!

Freedomland...

A few nights ago, I went to see Freedomland with Samuel L. Jackson and Julianne Moore. I had read in the reviews that the script was a bit weak at times, but that the performances were pretty good, so I was looking forward to seeing it.

Samuel L. Jackson is one of my favorite actors and he does a fabulous job in this film. However, I'm getting the feeling that Sam is being typecast a little too much lately. (I was justified in this opinion when I saw Frangela's Black History Month Awards on Best Week Ever last week...they wondered, as I had, why white women can't seem to hold onto their children and why Sam has to step in and help them all the time!) That doesn't change the fact that he plays his role very well, though. His relationship with his son is particularly poignant and, at the end, briefly offers a glimpse into the depths of his character.

I always feel like I love Julianne Moore as an actress, but as I was watching this movie, I honestly couldn't remember a single other role I had actually seen her in (since then, I've IMDB'd her and realize I've seen her in The Shipping News, Magnolia, Evolution, and several others). She is generally well received as an actress and I always like her in interviews, but I don't know why I couldn't place her in that moment. Perhaps some would say her portrayal of the character was so riveting and believable that I couldn't separate her from it. Maybe that's partly true. Unfortunately, though, I think it was more that her performance was so distracting that I couldn't imagine liking her as an actress in any other movie. I know that sounds harsh, but it's true! In the first half of the film, she was the very definition of an over-actress. Towards the end, her performance got better (or maybe I was just used to it by then) and I ended the movie liking her character and her interaction with Samuel L. Jackson's character.

The star of this movie was Edie Falco. She has only a supporting role, but in a moment of complete silence, she communicates more than either of the two leads do in the entire film. She is brilliantly sympathetic, yet willing to do whatever it takes to find the missing child.

Overall, the movie was good. It's a very heavy movie that takes a little while to process, but it was definitely worth watching.