Local Beat: Soft Cough LP debuts with positive response

Local band Soft Cough—made up of Geneseo seniors bassist and vocalist Tom Kohn, guitarist and vocalist Dan Pugh, drummer Ben Freiman and guitarist and vocalist Nick Koithan—gathered to discuss the release of their self-titled debut album and their plans for the future.

Their album was met with large acclaim from the Geneseo music scene and the surrounding area, reaching Syracuse, Buffalo and even down to New York City where the band will be performing this semester. The band expressed their happiness with the positive reaction to the first album, noting that this encouraging feedback has only made them more excited to release their second album.

“We just want to do another one,” Pugh said. “I think we’re chasing that high again.”

The typical songwriting process for Soft Cough usually involves band members recording a demo of what they think the song will sound like and then playing it for the other members. Normally, lyrics are inspired by interesting turns of phrase. One example comes on the track “Mouthbreather”—Koithan thinks that “mouthbreather” is a funny insult, leading to the group’s exploration of that idea in the song.

Soft Cough isn’t afraid to borrow from literature either. Pugh was inspired to borrow the line “unspeakable boilings and tearings apart” from Maxine Hong Kingston’s memoir The Woman Warrior: Memoirs of a Girlhood Among Ghosts.

The band is currently writing new songs even though they have a plethora of recorded songs that weren’t released on their first album. Soft Cough fans can expect to hear a version of “Trebuchet” appear on a compilation album from Indiana record label Headdress Records.

The biggest standout from the self-titled album is “Seadogs & Pyrite,” which has inspired several covers online and has been heard in basements all across Geneseo. The song also received a huge reaction at a recent show they played in Syracuse. Pugh—who wrote the song—explained that the band didn’t expect such an overwhelming reaction for the track, but he knew it was a special one.

“I wrote it differently than the other songs,” Pugh said. “[Since] I got the music done very early, [I figured] there’s a bunch of shit that I want to say, so I’m going to take this and however long it takes to say it, that’s when the song’s going to be done. Usually, I just have lyrics that match up coincidentally with songs I’ve written. It was the first song that I felt like I needed to write.”

Another huge hit from the record is “Jackson Pollock,” a song written by Kohn. Kohn admitted that the song came from an embarrassing attempt to impress a girl with his art history knowledge. “I wrote the song to keep myself in check,” he said. “I’m making fun of myself, essentially and that’s the most therapeutic way to do it.”

As for the future, band members agreed to continue making music together after graduation. “We made most of the first album across the state,” Freiman said. “I think we can keep doing that.”

Soft Cough was excited to promote the release of their upcoming tapes on Shammy Tapes. They also mentioned plans to record a live set in Syracuse. Things are looking bright for the local band and their fan base has a lot to look forward to in the near future.

Jam falls flat despite good intentions

The annual Welcome Back Jam, an alcohol and drug-free alternative to the debauchery associated with the first weekend at college, was held on Friday Sept. 4 in front of the MacVittie College Union. It was wholesome, heartfelt and uncomfortable.

At its peak, roughly 35 people were at the Jam. The whole affair felt like an awkward school dance. There was a zip line, a popcorn machine, a bounce house and a live musical act. None of these, however, were able to pull the student wallflowers away from the sidelines. The Jam perfectly captured the uncomfortable innocence associated with high schoolers.

Hip-hop artist Luke Christopher and his fellow band members bravely performed in the face of a less-than-enthused crowd, but it’s difficult to really “get the party started” with a shy audience.

Perhaps one of the most significant moments of Christopher’s performance was when one of the two audience members dancing off to the side was brought on stage. Christopher sung directly to her, giving her a personal performance. The song was about wanting to have casual sex with a girl. This was after the DJ had called a few times for the ladies to get up, dance and come onto the stage. He was unsuccessful.

The overall discomfort of the crowd didn’t seem to be because of Christopher—it was more of a reflection of the Welcome Back Jam itself. Its earnest and sincere attempt to be an alternative to the usual college Friday night made it feel infantile. As a result, it kept crowds away.

The intended age demographic of the event could be questioned on multiple accounts. The presence of a bounce house came off as immature and silly, but Christopher’s music was heavily centered on motifs such as sex, drugs and alcohol. This conflicting dichotomy was unsettling and seemed to push many students away from the event.

One group of audience members mentioned that they had come to try and make new friends. After sitting around for only a few minutes, however, they shifted uncomfortably around in their seats and decided to watch the sunset instead.

The artificial environment of the event couldn’t compare with the appeal of natural connections. Although the Welcome Back Jam was well orchestrated and was held with nothing but good intentions, it was simply awkward.

Road to the Oscars 2015

Best Picture American Sniper, The Imitation Game, Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance), Selma, Boyhood, The Theory of Everything, The Grand Budapest Hotel and Whiplash. Directed by Clint Eastwood and starring Bradley Cooper, American Sniper tells the story the “deadliest sniper in American history,” former Navy SEAL Chris Kyle. The film centers on his struggle with the realities of war and the difficulties of maintaining a relationship while one’s life is in constant danger. Cooper definitely gives a gripping, intensely layered performance and Eastwood is a very talented director. I believe, however, that in addition to the controversy surrounding the discrepancies between how the actual Chris Kyle said he felt in his memoir and how the film portrays his behavior, the fact that Kyle is the only character depicted as anything more than one-dimensional will prevent this film from taking home the gold.

The Imitation Game tells the heartbreaking tale of Alan Turing, the genius who began the process of inventing the modern computer and who cracked the German Enigma Code during World War II. Benedict Cumberbatch continues his streak of playing a socially awkward genius ––see “Sherlock” and The Fifth Estate––under the direction of Morten Tyldum. Though this biopic is excellent, I didn’t find it as exceptional or interesting as some of the other nominees and would be very surprised to see it win.

Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance) stars Michael Keaton in a role that could very well be an exaggerated version of himself. Keaton plays Riggan, an actor best known for playing the superhero “Birdman” and who attempts to rekindle his career by starring in a Broadway production. The film is filled with surrealistic sequences, some of which may just be Riggan’s daydreams. Alejandro G. Inarritu directs the film brilliantly and all of the actors put in truly impressive performances. The only shortcoming of this film is that it didn’t see a huge release, so audiences may not be as familiar with it as they are with some of the other nominees.

Selma is the third of four nominees based on true stories. Directed by Ava DuVernay, it tells the story of Martin Luther King, Jr.––expertly played by David Oyelowo––as he leads the march from Selma to Montgomery, Alabama. Though it is both powerful and was released during a time where the events of the Civil Rights Movement feel exceedingly relevant, its lack of nominations in any other categories and the modest hype surrounding it probably mean it won’t be a winner.

Boyhood is my pick for this year’s Best Picture. The film tells the story of a young man’s coming of age from 2002 to 2014. This may not seem so impressive at first, but its innovative director Richard Linklater chose to do something truly remarkable in his execution of the story. Instead of using similar-looking actors who were progressively older or some combination of prosthetics and computer graphics to mimic the aging process, he filmed the movie over the 12 years it took place. From 2002 to 2014, stars Ellar Coltrane, Patricia Arquette, Ethan Hawke and the director’s daughter Lorelei Linklater were documented as they naturally aged. The story is a really powerful portrayal of coming of age in the modern world, and is reminiscent of Francois Truffaut’s masterpiece The 400 Blows. I think the pure scope and technical dedication behind this film will result in its win.

The Theory of Everything is the final true story on this year’s list. It portrays the story of famous astrophysicist Stephen Hawking and his marriage to Jane Hawking. The story is a powerful one, as we see Jane and Stephen struggle as his Lou Gehrig’s disease progresses. Stars Felicity Jones and Eddie Redmayne give truly wonderful performances. Still, I just can’t shake the feeling that this film doesn’t demand the same level of attention as some of the other nominees.

The Grand Budapest Hotel is the latest Wes Anderson film to be released and, as is the case with most Wes Anderson films, it is more of an investigation into the worlds of specific characters than it is the telling of one, unified story. It’s a truly exceptional movie—one that left me with a warm and beautiful feeling in my stomach at its conclusion. This is another frontrunner for a possible winner as it has a lot of critical support; many see it as the current jewel in the crown of an already quite impressive career for Anderson. Interestingly, it is his first Best Picture nomination. I’m not certain it will be his first win but I do have a feeling it is likely to take home the trophy in the more technical categories it’s been nominated for.

Whiplash is an upsetting film. It stars Miles Teller as Andrew, an ambitious young drummer who is beginning his career at Shaffer, the best music school in the country. He studies under the cruel and brutal Fletcher, played masterfully by J.K. Simmons. The film is all about ambition and vengeance. It is cutthroat and psychologically disturbing. Still, it suffers from the same flaw as Birdman: its release may have been too narrow and there just isn’t that much hype surrounding it.

Best Actor Steve Carrell for Foxcatcher, Michael Keaton for Birdman, Bradley Cooper for American Sniper, Eddie Redmayne for The Theory of Everything and Benedict Cumberbatch for The Imitation Game. Though all of these actors turned in strong performances, Bradley Cooper and Eddie Redmayne probably have the highest odds of bringing home the Oscar. While Cooper dealt with some very real emotional difficulties in playing a traumatized soldier, Redmayne impressed with the powerful physical work he had to go through to perfect his role as Stephen Hawking.

Best Actress Rosamund Pike for Gone Girl, Marion Cotillard for Two Days, One Night, Felicity Jones for The Theory of Everything, Reese Witherspoon for Wild and Julianne Moore for Still Alice. If Pike doesn’t win this award I’ll be shocked. The dichotomy in her performance is both stunning and horrifying in the best possible way.

Best Actress in a Supporting Role Patricia Arquette for Boyhood, Laura Dern for Wild, Keira Knightly for The Imitation Game, Emma Stone for Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance) and Meryl Streep for Into the Woods. Actress in a Supporting Role should go to Patricia Arquette. I wanted to take the time out to commend Arquette for her work in Boyhood. Though she isn’t technically the main character of the film, her struggle is truly one of the most emotionally compelling parts of a film rife with poignant scenes.

Best Director Richard Linklater for Boyhood, Alejandro G. Inarritu for Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance), Bennett Miller for Foxcatcher, Wes Anderson for The Grand Budapest Hotel and Morten Tyldum for The Imitation Game. I’m stuck between Anderson and Linklater for this one. Both are true auteurs who genuinely deserve the award. Anderson deserves it for his ability to create an entire world that feels fully realized and totally plausible in its own quirky ways, while Linklater deserves it for the incredible vision required to make a film over 12 years instead of trying to find tricks around it. The Oscar could honestly go to either of them.

Adapted Screenplay Writing Jason Hall for American Sniper, Graham Moore for The Imitation Game, Paul Thomas Anderson for Inherent Vice, Anthony McCarten for The Theory of Everything and Damien Chazelle for Whiplash. The award should go to Paul Thomas Anderson for his adaptation of Thomas Pynchon’s Inherent Vice. I was honestly stunned that the film wasn’t nominated for very much else, but it’s a funny and weird story of a pot-smoking private investigator who gets pulled into a vast conspiracy theory. It’s not a play on noir so much as it is a total uprooting of the genre from one generation to the next, and it’s a lot of fun.

Original Screenplay Alejandro G Inarritu, Nicolas Giacobone, Alexander Dinelaris, Jr. and Armando Bo for Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance), Richard Linklater for Boyhood, E. Max Frye and Dan Futterman for Foxcatcher, Wes Anderson for The Grand Budapest Hotel, Dan Gilroy for Nightcrawler. Original Screenplay should be given to Nightcrawler. This is another movie I’m surprised wasn’t nominated for more, especially considering the enormous physical transformation lead actor Jake Gyllenhaal underwent for his role. Few films that have come out in the past several years have made me leave the theater feeling as unsettled as Nightcrawler did. This unforgiving analysis of local news’s “If it bleeds, it leads” mentality—as well as of what ambition can do to a person—deserves any gold that it can get.

Movie Review: Nightcrawler

Nightcrawler tells the disturbing tale of Lou Bloom, an unemployed but ambitious man who discovers the world of crime journalism. Bloom quickly realizes that not only is he great at it, but he also loves it, possibly too much. Bloom’s own criminal tendencies clash and meld with his journalism career, inciting a twisted and thrilling plot. The film stars Jake Gyllenhaal as Bloom. In Nightcrawler, Gyllenhaal delivers one of the best performances of his career, emphasized by the physical transformation he underwent for the role. The actor supposedly lost around 35 pounds by starving and overworking himself. The usually affable and charming actor undergoes a noticeable mental transformation. In the film, Bloom isn’t very good at interacting with others. In interviews, director Dan Gilroy has noted that both he and Gyllenhaal took inspiration for the character of Bloom from wild coyotes. Both Bloom and coyotes are solitary, nocturnal hunters who gain most of their sustenance from scavenging roadkill, yet always manage to look terrifyingly hungry. Gyllenhaal is able to balance a constant hunger and sense of self-preservation with a hidden underbelly of sheer danger and violence in a quite remarkable way. Bloom’s interactions with his “intern” Rick, played by Riz Ahmed, feel like they could turn violent at any moment. What’s more, Bloom’s manipulation of Nina, played wonderfully by the director’s wife Rene Russo, is endlessly frightening and disconcerting. Though almost all of the actors give strong performances, they are overshadowed by the sheer strength of Gyllenhaal’s. Russo plays opposite of Gyllenhaal, with great visual shifts in body language and delivery as the story progresses. As the power dynamics and dependency shifts between Bloom and Nina, so too does Russo’s chemistry with Gyllenhaal. The other relationship that makes it through to the third act is Bloom’s connection to Rick. I was underwhelmed by Ahmed’s performance throughout the film. He rode along with actual stringers in preparation for the role, but as far as I can tell it didn’t do much good. Rick is supposed to act as audience stand-in—disgusted by Bloom’s actions, but dependent on him for his own sake. Unfortunately, it is hard to feel any connection to Rick mostly due to Ahmed’s portrayal. Nightcrawler is ultimately a morality tale, attempting to crucify the 24-hour news circus and the audiences who force it to function the way it does. The film reminds the audience that many of the stories that lead the news are what they are because they are constructed based on popularity ratings. The film is disturbing and unsettling, and left me physically upset after completion. It’s a masterfully well-done film that will almost certainly garner an Oscar nod for Gyllenhaal. If not for the failings of such a key character as Rick, Nightcrawler would be a nearly perfect film.  

Rating: 4/5

T-Swift trades country drawl for bubbly pop

Taylor Swift’s fifth studio album 1989 has officially stripped her of the “country girl” title. It may seem surprising, but is it really a big deal? It’s not as though Swift has had a real country hit in years, and maybe that’s what brought about the official announcement. 1989 is Swift’s follow-up to 2012’s hugely successful Red. It’s a pop album with good, catchy hits––she made the right call with this genre.

1989 opens with the synth-heavy “Welcome to New York.” It’s a fun song, but it’s nothing I haven’t heard before. It does feel very 1980s––which I love––but I can’t get over two specific lines in the song. There’s a line in the beginning where Swift says that she was “searching for a sound we hadn’t heard before,” which seems like a strange declaration to make to start an album that was designed to sound like it’s from 1989.

I also have some trouble with the line “You can want who you want/ boys and boys and girls and girls.” It’s not that I’m against the message. I like that Swift has moved away from the stigmata of country by agreeing that people can love who they love, but the line feels like a shoehorned attempt to make the song anthemic for everyone.

The fourth track “Out of the Woods” is not as likable as “Welcome to New York.” Lyrically, it feels like another one of Swift’s classic break-up songs without the acoustic guitar. Musically, it reminds me of Imagine Dragons’ “On Top of the World.” It’s not a bad song, but where “Welcome to New York” felt redone and unoriginal in an intentional and thematic way, this song is simply boring.

“Shake it Off” was the next track that’s been released at this point. Based on the amount of plays on the radio, it’s likely that most have probably jammed out to this song at some point. It’s a perfect pop song in every way. It draws on tried and true pop clichés, but it still feels fresh and fun. It’s not experimental or new, but that’s fine for this album.

I guess one critical thing that can be said is that it’s more 2014-pop than 1989-esque, but for the biggest single of the album, that’s probably a forgivable blunder.

Ultimately, what I’ve heard of 1989 is fun, poppy and really enjoyable. There’s nothing new here, but it still feels fresh and bound to draw listeners beyond Swift’s loyal audience.

Rating: 4/5

Netflix gives users blast from the past with new additions

The beloved television series “Gilmore Girls” recently made the move to Netflix, with “Friends” set to follow in Jan. 2015. This can only mean one thing: Netflix wants me to fail out of college. Well, maybe not. What it truly does mean is that Netflix has been paying attention to its demographics––the company knows exactly how to pull new users in while keeping the rest of us suckered on.

Anyone who is currently in college has probably watched “Friends” and “Gilmore Girls” after school or before dinner with their parents. As independent as most people like to say they are, who doesn’t want a little reminder of home or childhood from time to time?

A frequent complaint for many Netflix users has always been that the selection of new releases is relatively limited. Although that is still true, Netflix has consistently been able to bolster its catalog enough to appease its critical and new-content-hungry audience.

With competitors like Hulu and Amazon rolling out near-immediate, next-day streaming, Netflix is fighting back with a little nostalgia in the form of classic TV that is no longer or rarely aired.

Early in Netflix’s history, there was much less pressure on Netflix to be better or stand out from the competition of other streaming platforms. The online streaming site now has to vie for popular programs and films in addition to creating high-quality originals if it hopes to stand a chance against its competitors. The acquisitions of “Friends” and “Gilmore Girls” are just two of the latest attempts to win this competition and improve Netflix ratings.

As long as Amazon, Hulu and Netflix keep this competition up, the users will keep winning. High-quality originals like Amazon’s groundbreaking sitcom “Transparent,” Hulu’s documentary series “Behind the Mask” and Netflix’s prison drama “Orange Is the New Black” will keep coming out. More and more of viewers’ favorite series, old and new alike, will become available.

The coming of “Gilmore Girls” and “Friends” to Netflix doesn’t just usher in the arrival of tingly feelings of nostalgia and new levels of procrastination. It also represents the fruits of an intense business competition—fruits which we can almost hold in our greasy, Cheeto-covered fingers.

Book Review: Not that Kind of Girl

Lena Dunham’s new memoir Not That Kind of Girl: A Young Woman Tells You What She’s “Learned,” is personal, graphic and shocking—but that’s not unexpected at all. Anyone who has seen an episode of Dunham’s hit HBO show “Girls” knows that she is an open book, always ready and willing to tell her audience the most honest stories about herself even if it casts her in a negative light.

In what is probably the best––or at least the most talked about––two chapters of the book, however, Dunham tells us a story in which she is certainly not the bad guy.

In the chapters “Girls & Jerks” and “Barry,” Dunham tells two versions of the same story. In “Girls & Jerks,” she tells a story of carelessly––regrettably––hooking up with a sleazy Republican in college. In “Barry,” the perspective changes drastically as we come to learn that Dunham didn’t consensually hook up with Barry— she realized that he raped her.

What Lena does here with the juxtaposition of perspective is perhaps one of the most empowering moves she could have made as a writer. By utilizing both a story in which she doesn’t comes to terms with her rape and a grittier, more poignant version of the same story, Dunham is able to capture the confusion and struggle of sexual assault survivor.

Dunham admits that she first blamed herself for her rape, talking about how confused and unsure she felt. Her narrative structure perfectly illustrates these feelings; creating a work that survivors can relate to.

Dunham has masterful control of whichever form she uses. “Girls” works by telling stories episodically, gradually characterizing its cast. Her 2010 film Tiny Furniture captures her quirkiness in a shorter timespan. Now, Not That Kind of Girl shows her mastery of yet another successful medium for the writer and actress: print and e-books.

With Dunham’s memoir, readers get something more than what they see on television or in film. They can see that even a woman as powerful and well known as Dunham––someone with talent, purpose and intellect––can be a survivor of sexual assault or rape.

It’s uplifting to see that someone can go through such a painful experience and still be arguably one of the most powerful women in Hollywood. She is able to reveal herself at her most vulnerable and still gain strength from her experiences. Like a reverse Achilles, Dunham has the courage to show all of her weakest points and grows from this exploration.

Not That Kind of Girl is a must-read for anyone who needs to find empowerment or solace. Dunham’s book is truly a testament to the power of courage and resilience.