239 items found for your search. If no results were found please broaden your search.
(10/07/04 2:31pm)
With the billions of dollars being pumped into the music industry every year, it can be tempting for rock bands to alter their style to appeal to the masses. Watching Creed and Evanescence make millions while other bands continue to wait can get to you after awhile. But for The Wrens and The Mendoza Line, two bands who are coming to play the Bluebird this Friday, they've found a way to make pop music without selling out.\nThe music industry has a way of chewing people up and spitting them out. The Wrens found this out first hand, but haven't let their record label troubles stop them from making innovative rock songs.\nHalfway through promoting their classic album Secaucus (1996), their label, Grass Records, called them in to talk contracts. Owner Alan Meltzer demanded The Wrens, then his franchise band, sign an extended contact or all of their promotion for Secaucus would be cut off immediately. The Wrens denied the offer because they didn't want to be strong-armed, and Meltzer vowed to make the next band to walk through his door reach the top of the charts. The next band was Creed. Several platinum albums and millions of dollars later, Grass Records becomes Wind Up Records and signs another pseudo-Christian rock hit in Evanescence.\nWhen Creed broke up this year, needless to say The Wrens weren't disappointed. \n"I have to admit that two thoughts went through my mind," Wrens guitarist Charles Bissell said. "One was, like everyone else, was thank God. The other was the fear that they would come back like that mythological creature (the phoenix) and form new bands, and we'd have like four Creeds out there."\nThe Mendoza Line hasn't been jerked around as much as The Wrens, but it has had its moments where it wishes it didn't have to work so hard for its music.\n"We'd like to be making more money right now, but what are you going to do?" singer/writer Shannon Mary McArdle said.\nBesides playing your average bar gigs, The Mendoza Line has once took its musical stylings to a comic book convention. Most of the fanatics seeking autographs had no clue who they were, but were glad to hear its sounds while browsing rare issues.\n"Yeah, usually those people are pretty odd, but they were really nice and it's always great to reach new audiences," McArdle said.\nThe Mendoza Line has been able to reach new fans overseas as well, playing places like Greece and the UK, with fans telling them, "I like very much your music. But what is wrong with your country?"\n"It takes a long time to build up the fan base you think you deserve, but we're getting there," guitarist Timothy Bracy said. "In the meantime, it's pretty good to be able to make a living and be a songwriter. I mean, we aren't household names, but I do get to spend all of my time traveling with five awesome people. What more can you ask for?"\nBuilding a fan base and dealing with executives aren't the only hurdles that The Wrens and The Mendoza Line have dealth with. They've also worked to define their sound.\nThe Mendoza Line has been compared to a lyrical version of Ernest Hemingway, with its folky old-fashioned tales. Its sound has been described as everything from alt-country like Wilco to folk to straight-up pop rock. One thing that's secure about its sound is that it draws heavily from its influences: Bob Dylan, American Music Club and the Replacements.\n"It's hard to get away from your influences," writer/guitarist Peter Hoffman said. "Those bands become a part of our lexicon. All in all, we're just a rock band who listens to a lot of rock."\nThe Wrens have gone through a world of change since between Secaucus and 2002's The Meadowlands. Some fans were even upset since they waited seven years for a new album only to get something that was very different than what they were used to. Bissell admits that The Meadowlands is different, but contends they have the same goals to him. Back in the lab, The Wrens are out to experiment yet again.\n"If you thought The Meadowlands was different, then you'll think our new stuff is different," he said. "But one way or another, it just won't be another seven years until it happens."\nOne thing that's unique about The Wrens is that from listening to them, one may have a hard time understanding why other similar sounding rock bands have blown up while they have enjoyed mostly critical success. Its recent release made almost every magazines best-of-the-year list including landing the No. 1 spot in Magnet magazine's 2003 list. KEXP morning disc jockey John Richards said about the incredibly catchy song, "Everyone Chooses Sides" from The Meadowlands: "It's been seven years since the last Wrens album, and it'll be seven more before this song gets out of my head."\n"We like catchy music, but we never wanted it use easy formulas or things that are very formulaic," he said. "We're a basic rock band with two guitars, a bass and drums. It's the same old rock 'n' roll job, but we try to put it all together in a different way."\nAnd even if it is a pop song away from making the leap from having its videos played on MTV2 to "TRL Live," The Wrens aren't too worried about it.\n"For all that we've gone through, we're actually not bitter about the whole thing," he said. "A lot of us are married and with kids, and we're at the point in our life where we're not worried about being signed by a big label or making a lot of money. We just want to put out good albums"
(10/07/04 4:00am)
With the billions of dollars being pumped into the music industry every year, it can be tempting for rock bands to alter their style to appeal to the masses. Watching Creed and Evanescence make millions while other bands continue to wait can get to you after awhile. But for The Wrens and The Mendoza Line, two bands who are coming to play the Bluebird this Friday, they've found a way to make pop music without selling out.\nThe music industry has a way of chewing people up and spitting them out. The Wrens found this out first hand, but haven't let their record label troubles stop them from making innovative rock songs.\nHalfway through promoting their classic album Secaucus (1996), their label, Grass Records, called them in to talk contracts. Owner Alan Meltzer demanded The Wrens, then his franchise band, sign an extended contact or all of their promotion for Secaucus would be cut off immediately. The Wrens denied the offer because they didn't want to be strong-armed, and Meltzer vowed to make the next band to walk through his door reach the top of the charts. The next band was Creed. Several platinum albums and millions of dollars later, Grass Records becomes Wind Up Records and signs another pseudo-Christian rock hit in Evanescence.\nWhen Creed broke up this year, needless to say The Wrens weren't disappointed. \n"I have to admit that two thoughts went through my mind," Wrens guitarist Charles Bissell said. "One was, like everyone else, was thank God. The other was the fear that they would come back like that mythological creature (the phoenix) and form new bands, and we'd have like four Creeds out there."\nThe Mendoza Line hasn't been jerked around as much as The Wrens, but it has had its moments where it wishes it didn't have to work so hard for its music.\n"We'd like to be making more money right now, but what are you going to do?" singer/writer Shannon Mary McArdle said.\nBesides playing your average bar gigs, The Mendoza Line has once took its musical stylings to a comic book convention. Most of the fanatics seeking autographs had no clue who they were, but were glad to hear its sounds while browsing rare issues.\n"Yeah, usually those people are pretty odd, but they were really nice and it's always great to reach new audiences," McArdle said.\nThe Mendoza Line has been able to reach new fans overseas as well, playing places like Greece and the UK, with fans telling them, "I like very much your music. But what is wrong with your country?"\n"It takes a long time to build up the fan base you think you deserve, but we're getting there," guitarist Timothy Bracy said. "In the meantime, it's pretty good to be able to make a living and be a songwriter. I mean, we aren't household names, but I do get to spend all of my time traveling with five awesome people. What more can you ask for?"\nBuilding a fan base and dealing with executives aren't the only hurdles that The Wrens and The Mendoza Line have dealth with. They've also worked to define their sound.\nThe Mendoza Line has been compared to a lyrical version of Ernest Hemingway, with its folky old-fashioned tales. Its sound has been described as everything from alt-country like Wilco to folk to straight-up pop rock. One thing that's secure about its sound is that it draws heavily from its influences: Bob Dylan, American Music Club and the Replacements.\n"It's hard to get away from your influences," writer/guitarist Peter Hoffman said. "Those bands become a part of our lexicon. All in all, we're just a rock band who listens to a lot of rock."\nThe Wrens have gone through a world of change since between Secaucus and 2002's The Meadowlands. Some fans were even upset since they waited seven years for a new album only to get something that was very different than what they were used to. Bissell admits that The Meadowlands is different, but contends they have the same goals to him. Back in the lab, The Wrens are out to experiment yet again.\n"If you thought The Meadowlands was different, then you'll think our new stuff is different," he said. "But one way or another, it just won't be another seven years until it happens."\nOne thing that's unique about The Wrens is that from listening to them, one may have a hard time understanding why other similar sounding rock bands have blown up while they have enjoyed mostly critical success. Its recent release made almost every magazines best-of-the-year list including landing the No. 1 spot in Magnet magazine's 2003 list. KEXP morning disc jockey John Richards said about the incredibly catchy song, "Everyone Chooses Sides" from The Meadowlands: "It's been seven years since the last Wrens album, and it'll be seven more before this song gets out of my head."\n"We like catchy music, but we never wanted it use easy formulas or things that are very formulaic," he said. "We're a basic rock band with two guitars, a bass and drums. It's the same old rock 'n' roll job, but we try to put it all together in a different way."\nAnd even if it is a pop song away from making the leap from having its videos played on MTV2 to "TRL Live," The Wrens aren't too worried about it.\n"For all that we've gone through, we're actually not bitter about the whole thing," he said. "A lot of us are married and with kids, and we're at the point in our life where we're not worried about being signed by a big label or making a lot of money. We just want to put out good albums"
(09/23/04 4:00am)
Soulive is proof that jazz music is alive and ever-changing. This jazz/funk group, comprised of Alan Evans on drums, Neal Evans on organ and Eric Krasno on guitar pays tribute to jazz, funk and R&B of all decades, all of which can be found in their trademark sound. Although they aren't raking in millions yet, the group is making a name for themselves among many different crowds. They've opened for The Rolling Stones, The Roots and Dave Matthews Band. They've recorded with Talib Kweli, Dave Matthews, Blackthought (of The Roots), Jurassic 5, Me'shell Ndegeocello and Amel Larrieux. They've played diverse concert festivals such as Bonnaroo, Sasquatch and The Gathering of the Vibes. Critics hailed 2002's Next and their 2003 live album. For these keepers of the funk, the support just keeps rolling in. Maybe that's why Dave Matthews called Soulive "the greatest band in the world."\nAlan, who released his solo album Let it Ride this week, spoke with Weekend about jazz music, recording sessions and sibling rivalries.
(09/23/04 4:00am)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>I'm about to say something that may seem like blasphemy to all of you movie buffs out there. I don't think all movie remakes are terrible. In fact, I enjoy some more than the originals. Now I know with all of the mobs storming the streets with torches and pitchforks after this summer's remakes, "The Manchurian Candidate" and "The Stepford Wives," it may not be the right time to be talking about remaking more films. But the truth is that Hollywood is going to rehash the same garbage whether we like it or not, so I suggest that they simply adhere to a few guidelines for remaking movies.
First, there needs to be a 20-year buffer between the original/last remake and the latest incarnation. I really don't want to see Seann William Scott star in the remake of "Forrest Gump." I'm sorry ... It's too soon.
Next, the audiences develop emotional attachments to the original actors playing the roles, so it's hard to break them from that. One solution to this problem is to remake kids' movies. Although most parents scream out in disgust over the remake of "The Parent Trap," the kids don't care. They just don't want to watch any actors sporting platform shoes.
One major reason why everyone is so leery of remaking a film is that very few remakes add anything spectacular. But sometimes remakes are better than the original. "The Maltese Falcon," the 1941 Humphrey Bogart classic, was the third film version of the Dashiell Hammett novel. Alfred Hitchcock even remade his own film "The Man Who Knew Too Much," to add Jimmy Stewart and Doris Day.
Best Remake:Ocean's Eleven - If you've ever seen the original Rat Pack film, then you know how much better the 2001 version is. I'll admit that Frank, Dean, Joey and Sammy are the coolest, but they aren't half the actors that Brad Pitt, George Clooney, Matt Damon and Don Cheadle are. This is the perfect example of how you can take a campy flick with potential and add some style to it.
Worst remakes:Psycho -- I still have the utmost respect for director Gus Van Sant, even after the back-to-back pretentious snore-a-thons of "Gerry" and "Elephant," but there was no need for this remake. The creepy shadows in the black and white film is one of the reasons critics praised the original, so colorization wasn't a great addition. Van Sant's vision was to shoot it with the exact same script and the same shot list. Then what was your job as director?! C'mon Gus!
Godzilla -- Why does Ferris do this to himself? The only thing worse than a campy, mindless, low-budget movie is an overblown, mindless, big-budget summer blockbuster.
Upcoming Remakes:
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory -- At first, I was skeptical about this remake. I mean, who could top the genius of Gene Wilder? But when I heard that Tim Burton was directing and Johnny Depp was starring as Wonka, I leapt with joy. I know many of you doubt this because Burton directed the new "Planet of the Apes," but I contend that the script was to blame there. Burton is mostly a visual director, and I expect for him to create a beautiful world in the new chocolate factory. One downside: there won't be any songs in this one, so don't expect Depp to belt one out as he floats on a chocolate river.
Oliver Twist -- This is one of the most overdone films of all time with 15 versions already out according to www.imdb.com. Now Roman Polanski will take a crack at this high school English fave with Ben Kingsley as Fagin. Coming from a director with as much baggage as Polanski, expect this to be the creepiest edition yet. This is a man who had his wife murdered by Charles Manson, fled to Europe amid statutory rape charges and directed "Rosemary's Baby." This film definitely won't be for children.
Back to School -- Rodney Dangerfield's collegiate classic will be redone starring Cedric the Entertainer. Cedric's funny, but has enough time really passed? This might be decent, but it won't be nearly as great as the original.
Look Who's Coming to Dinner -- This time the tables are turned as Bernie Mac is upset when his daughter brings home a white boy -- Ashton Kutcher. I don't know about the race thing, but I'd be pissed that Punk'd douche bag was boning my flesh and blood.
King Kong -- "Lord of the Rings" slob Peter Jackson will add some much needed effects to this old-school classic. I always thought the original needed some Jack Black, and now my prayers have been answered.
Other ones not to watch -- Jude Law will step into the shoes of Michael Caine in "Alfie," Adam Sandler, Chris Rock and infamous wifebeater Steve Austin will star in the new "The Longest Yard" and Lindsay Lohan will continue her remake streak with "The Love Bug." These will all disappoint.
(09/23/04 2:53am)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>I'm about to say something that may seem like blasphemy to all of you movie buffs out there. I don't think all movie remakes are terrible. In fact, I enjoy some more than the originals. Now I know with all of the mobs storming the streets with torches and pitchforks after this summer's remakes, "The Manchurian Candidate" and "The Stepford Wives," it may not be the right time to be talking about remaking more films. But the truth is that Hollywood is going to rehash the same garbage whether we like it or not, so I suggest that they simply adhere to a few guidelines for remaking movies.
First, there needs to be a 20-year buffer between the original/last remake and the latest incarnation. I really don't want to see Seann William Scott star in the remake of "Forrest Gump." I'm sorry ... It's too soon.
Next, the audiences develop emotional attachments to the original actors playing the roles, so it's hard to break them from that. One solution to this problem is to remake kids' movies. Although most parents scream out in disgust over the remake of "The Parent Trap," the kids don't care. They just don't want to watch any actors sporting platform shoes.
One major reason why everyone is so leery of remaking a film is that very few remakes add anything spectacular. But sometimes remakes are better than the original. "The Maltese Falcon," the 1941 Humphrey Bogart classic, was the third film version of the Dashiell Hammett novel. Alfred Hitchcock even remade his own film "The Man Who Knew Too Much," to add Jimmy Stewart and Doris Day.
Best Remake:Ocean's Eleven - If you've ever seen the original Rat Pack film, then you know how much better the 2001 version is. I'll admit that Frank, Dean, Joey and Sammy are the coolest, but they aren't half the actors that Brad Pitt, George Clooney, Matt Damon and Don Cheadle are. This is the perfect example of how you can take a campy flick with potential and add some style to it.
Worst remakes:Psycho -- I still have the utmost respect for director Gus Van Sant, even after the back-to-back pretentious snore-a-thons of "Gerry" and "Elephant," but there was no need for this remake. The creepy shadows in the black and white film is one of the reasons critics praised the original, so colorization wasn't a great addition. Van Sant's vision was to shoot it with the exact same script and the same shot list. Then what was your job as director?! C'mon Gus!
Godzilla -- Why does Ferris do this to himself? The only thing worse than a campy, mindless, low-budget movie is an overblown, mindless, big-budget summer blockbuster.
Upcoming Remakes:
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory -- At first, I was skeptical about this remake. I mean, who could top the genius of Gene Wilder? But when I heard that Tim Burton was directing and Johnny Depp was starring as Wonka, I leapt with joy. I know many of you doubt this because Burton directed the new "Planet of the Apes," but I contend that the script was to blame there. Burton is mostly a visual director, and I expect for him to create a beautiful world in the new chocolate factory. One downside: there won't be any songs in this one, so don't expect Depp to belt one out as he floats on a chocolate river.
Oliver Twist -- This is one of the most overdone films of all time with 15 versions already out according to www.imdb.com. Now Roman Polanski will take a crack at this high school English fave with Ben Kingsley as Fagin. Coming from a director with as much baggage as Polanski, expect this to be the creepiest edition yet. This is a man who had his wife murdered by Charles Manson, fled to Europe amid statutory rape charges and directed "Rosemary's Baby." This film definitely won't be for children.
Back to School -- Rodney Dangerfield's collegiate classic will be redone starring Cedric the Entertainer. Cedric's funny, but has enough time really passed? This might be decent, but it won't be nearly as great as the original.
Look Who's Coming to Dinner -- This time the tables are turned as Bernie Mac is upset when his daughter brings home a white boy -- Ashton Kutcher. I don't know about the race thing, but I'd be pissed that Punk'd douche bag was boning my flesh and blood.
King Kong -- "Lord of the Rings" slob Peter Jackson will add some much needed effects to this old-school classic. I always thought the original needed some Jack Black, and now my prayers have been answered.
Other ones not to watch -- Jude Law will step into the shoes of Michael Caine in "Alfie," Adam Sandler, Chris Rock and infamous wifebeater Steve Austin will star in the new "The Longest Yard" and Lindsay Lohan will continue her remake streak with "The Love Bug." These will all disappoint.
(09/23/04 2:14am)
Soulive is proof that jazz music is alive and ever-changing. This jazz/funk group, comprised of Alan Evans on drums, Neal Evans on organ and Eric Krasno on guitar pays tribute to jazz, funk and R&B of all decades, all of which can be found in their trademark sound. Although they aren't raking in millions yet, the group is making a name for themselves among many different crowds. They've opened for The Rolling Stones, The Roots and Dave Matthews Band. They've recorded with Talib Kweli, Dave Matthews, Blackthought (of The Roots), Jurassic 5, Me'shell Ndegeocello and Amel Larrieux. They've played diverse concert festivals such as Bonnaroo, Sasquatch and The Gathering of the Vibes. Critics hailed 2002's Next and their 2003 live album. For these keepers of the funk, the support just keeps rolling in. Maybe that's why Dave Matthews called Soulive "the greatest band in the world."\nAlan, who released his solo album Let it Ride this week, spoke with Weekend about jazz music, recording sessions and sibling rivalries.
(09/22/04 5:15am)
With everybody from the AFL-CIO to the Indiana Smallmouth Bass Club picking sides in this year's gubernatorial election, political endorsements could make an impact on November's election.\nThe groups that are supporting each candidate reflect the type of image the candidates are presenting in their campaigns. \nRepublican gubernatorial candidate Mitch Daniels is backed by conservative groups, such as Indiana Right to Life, agricultural groups, such as Indiana Farm Bureau, and small business organizations, such as the National Federation of Independent Business. \nDemocratic Gov. Joe Kernan seems to be the favorite of labor, since he has endorsements from several Indiana unions including the AFL-CIO, the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers and United Auto Workers.\nWhether or not all of the members will follow their group's endorsement come Nov. 2 is yet to be seen, but the support does have its benefits in the campaigns.\nMark Lotter, Daniels' press secretary, said his campaign is thrilled whenever Daniels receives endorsements because it shows his support is growing. The Indiana National Federation of Independent Business' endorsement has meant added help finding business settings for news conferences. Indiana Farm Bureau has also lent a helping hand by finding land for Daniels' campaign signs.\nLotter said the support helps reinforce the themes Daniels has emphasized on the trail.\n"The big thing about Daniels' campaign is reaching out to all counties of Indiana," he said. "He's been traveling in his RV, and he's been talking to local businessmen. And so we're glad that these small businessmen have accepted our support and decided to support us as well."\nTina Noel, Kernan's press secretary, said they are pleased with their endorsements because they continue the relationships Kernan has tried to build as governor.\n"Teachers, policemen, everyday workers: these are the people we want to reach out to," Noel said.\nThe endorsements that really gain media attention are the ones that surprise. Lotter admitted that Indiana Right to Life generally supports Republican candidates but pointed to some unexpected support for Daniels. Prominent Democrat Bill Mays, president of Mays Chemical and owner of the Indianapolis Recorder, the largest African-American newspaper in Indiana, decided to endorse Daniels.\nLotter also noted that several local sections of unions decided to break from their statewide counterparts and endorse a different candidate. Local unions of the AFSCME, International Union of Operating Engineers and Indiana Fraternal Order of Police all broke from their statewide unions to endorse Daniels over Kernan.\nThere are different processes that groups take when deciding to endorse a particular candidate. Sometimes the decision is made at the top, but most of the time representatives vote on who to support.\nKen Zeller, the president of AFL-CIO, Indiana's largest labor union, said that all of his chapters submitted their votes and the general consensus was to back Kernan.\n"We stand behind governor Kernan because of his stance on family and labor issues," he said. "He's been a good friend to Indiana."\nIndiana Farm Bureau uses their political action group to help with the governor's campaign. Farm Bureau leaders from each county sent their vote to the PAG, and Daniels garnered overwhelming support.\n"I think there were several issues that appealed to our members, such as Daniels' stance on property taxes," said Pete Hanebutt, political educator for Farm Bureau. "He's just who our group thought was the best candidate."\nBut for those outside of the two-party system, gaining endorsements can be tough. Although no group has officially endorsed Libertarian candidate Ken Gividen in the governor's race, an anti-Indiana 69 group called COUNT US! has lent him its support. \nGividen's campaign manager Aaron Milewski said the lack of endorsements isn't going to hurt the race since he thinks their base is strong. However, he did say that it's frustrating that most groups won't go out on a limb with a third-party candidate.\n"I think most groups want to back a clear winner in the election, even if it doesn't truly fit their ideals," Milewski said. "They want to have a friend in the governor's office."\n-- Contact Weekend editor Adam Aasen at aaasen@indiana.edu.
(09/16/04 6:10am)
The IU Board of Trustees is looking at purchasing a 278-room University Place Hotel at IU-Purdue University-Indianapolis for $17.5 million and then renovating the facility for an additional $12 million.\nThe hotel was built in 1987 by a private company and the conference center, a part of the hotel, was built by IU. The facilities of the hotel have not been renovated in eight years, and the occupancy rates have dropped to below 55 percent. IUPUI Vice Chancellor for administration and finance Robert Martin said it is the right time to acquire the hotel especially because IU already owns the conference center and the current owners want to sell.\nMartin said IU's joint efforts during the years have been to attract conferences that are University-related, corporate clients, clinical programs offered by the Clarian hospitals related to cancer care and research, family visitors to the campus and athletic events hosted by both Indianapolis and the IUPUI campus.\nThe conferences held at the IUPUI campus serve as a source of income and as a way to help bring academic prestige to the campus.\nIU trustee Sue Talbot said the conferences are a great way to bring some of the best scholars, businessmen and elected officials to the campus, which allows for the faculty and administration to have a greater dialogue with these powerful people. \nPast conferences at IUPUI have focused on many business and health issues, since the IUPUI campus boasts both the IU School of Medicine and part of the Kelley School of Business.\nBut to be able to attract such high-profile conferences, Talbot admits the facilities need to be high-tech and professional.\n"In order to maintain a first class facility, it is important to have professional conference personnel who can understand the needs of an organization and equip the conference and attendees with the appropriate needs," Talbot said. "Many organizations want to be on campus so that they can take advantage of the resources provided by our outstanding faculty and other facilities."\nThe renovated hotel will be also beneficial because it will be used to house cancer patients while they receive treatments from the experts at IU's medical facilities.\n"Perhaps that alone is reason enough to want the hotel to be first class and to provide more than adequate housing," Talbot said.\nMartin added the hotel makes for a prime spot for these patients because it is in the middle of the campus. The hotel will also continue to serve visiting students, guests of the University and regular patrons, such as students' parents.\nIU will initially use money loaned from the IU renovation to finance this project, IU trustee Patrick Shoulders said. He said the trustees are close to closing the deal, which means IU could have ownership within the next 30 days.\nShoulders went on to say the University is looking to sell bonds for the hotel to pay back the funds from the IU Foundation. Investors who purchase these bonds will be able to receive their money back with interest after a certain amount of time. The only problem is that IU needs to receive approval from the Indiana State Legislature before they can sell these bonds and the General Assembly won't reconvene until January. In the meantime, the renovation will proceed, one part of the hotel at a time.\nAlthough the University may have to borrow money to fund such an endeavor, Shoulders said he thinks the investment will pay off for IU in the long run.\n"The hotel has really been mismanaged and the owners really want to sell, so we think the hotel would be a lot more profitable if we ran it," he said. "It's really just a smart move economically and it should benefit IUPUI tremendously."\n-- Contact Weekend editor Adam Aasen at aaasen@indiana.edu .
(09/10/04 6:49am)
With interjections, personal attacks and standing ovations, the tension of the national election was evident as the IU College Democrats and IU College Republicans squared off in a debate held by the Alpha Phi Alpha fraternity Thursday night at the Neal-Marshall Black Culture Center.\nThe event started off with host Rashawn Ray, a grad student and adviser to the Alphas, introducing each side. For the republicans, IUCR Chairman Angel Rivera, a senior, and IUCR Vice President Chase Downham, a junior, took the right side of the stage to uphold their conservative ideals. For the democrats, IUCD President Mandy Carmichael and IUCD Vice President Peter Cheun, both seniors, took the left side of the stage to support their liberal views.\nForeign policy seemed to dominate the debate, as Iraq, Afghanistan and 9-11 were brought up by both sides.\nThe democrats emphasized candidate John Kerry's platform for internationalism and building a world alliance to deal with the conflict in Iraq. Cheun said one thing that everyone needs to understand is the difference between the war on terrorism and the war in Iraq.\nRivera countered that the theory is that free people are inherently peaceful and that Democratic nations don't go to war with each other.\n"Whether or not this theory is true, we are finding out every day, just like your side is," Rivera said. "But I don't think that there is any doubt that the world is a safer place since that S.O.B. Saddam isn't around."\nThe College Democrats also said they believe there were no weapons of mass destruction and the war was started under false pretenses. Downham said he believes the WMDs will be found, and even if they aren't, he says the war was still justified.\n"You don't think that given the opportunity Saddam would do anything to harm us?" he said. "It doesn't matter if they haven't found any weapons of mass destruction. Saddam was a weapon of mass destruction himself."\nCheun said he thinks the war in Iraq has distracted the U.S. from other more serious issues, such as finding Osama bin Laden.\n"At the Republican National Convention, Bin Laden's name was only mentioned once," he said. "I mean, Richard M. Nixon got his name said more times."\nCheun said one of the biggest problems with the war on terrorism is that Bush has separated the issue into good versus evil when he believes that not everything can be that simple. Rivera reaffirmed his belief that "these people are evil," saying, "Kerry wants us to be more sensitive to these people when they are trying to kill us."\nRace and the economy were some of the other hot topics. In his opening statement, Cheun said he can sum up his party in one word: "Inclusive. Unlike the Republican Party, it's not just rich people who have a say."\nRivera countered that statement by saying President Bush has had one of the most inclusive administrations in history, especially in terms of diversity.\n"Not only do we have the most diverse cabinet in history, but all of the members didn't get picked just because they were black, Hispanic or a woman. They were picked because they're damn good at their jobs," Rivera said.\nCheun said the division in America has extended beyond race, as he claims the Bush administration has favored the upper 1 and 2 percent of Americans while ignoring the working class. He said the Democratic Party is more interested in creating opportunities for all Americans and fighting for the underdog.\nRivera refuted this claim saying, "I don't know how you can be the party of the little man when you have two multi-millionaires running on a ticket together."\nThe debate started to heat up as Carmichael interrupted Rivera, saying, "George W. Bush isn't that strapped for cash either."\nRivera shot back, "At least he didn't marry into it," referring to Kerry's wealthy wife, Teresa Heinz Kerry.\nThe audience began shouting comments at the stage, with some members backing up Rivera's statements while others shouted, "Bush was born into his wealth," "He failed at every business he started," and "Bush spent his money on crack."\nAs the audience calmed down, the discussion moved on to healthcare and education.\nRivera touted Bush's education policy as "amazing," and took particular note to his No Child Left Behind Act. He said Kerry has "flip-flopped" on this issue by initially voting for the act, but recently coming out against it.\nCarmichael shot back, saying the NCLB Act has been under-funded by $27 billion and would work if funded properly.\nRivera said the administration needs to make some priorities with their budget and that the nation's security was a more immediate need. Downham added that more funding isn't the answer.\n"A lot of democrats in D.C. think that if a program isn't working, it isn't funded enough," he said.\nWith the crowd cheering for both sides at different times, it was hard to determine who won the debate, but several audience members had their own opinions.\nAlpha Phi Alpha members and grad students James Taborn and Marshawn Wolley said they thought the Republicans won the debate since they had more facts to back up their arguments. On the other side, senior Jared Fallick said he thought the Democrats clearly won, judging by the audience's reaction to their comments.\nBut junior Jacob Bower-Bir said it really didn't matter who won the debate.\n"I don't think anyone in the crowd changed their mind," he said. "Everybody pretty much came here with their own ideas and they heard what they wanted to hear."\n-- Contact weekend editor Adam Aasen at aaasen@indiana.edu .
(09/09/04 4:00am)
On most nights of the week, especially on weekends, addicts meet at clubs and bars in Bloomington for their "fix." At all hours of the night, these junkies wait in lines, red-eyed and anxious, to fork over their cash for what they crave.\nThese addicts' hits aren't measured in liters, grams or ounces, but by millimeters -- usually 35. These addicts live for stale popcorn and DVD bonus features. These are film fiends, and like any addict, not just any movie will do. It seems that these cinephiles need more and more obscure selections to feed their appetite.\nFortunately, these "filmoholics" have plenty of options in Bloomington. Although it may not have the abundance of art house theaters that New York or Chicago can claim, this small town in Indiana boasts quite a few hot spots for those looking for good independent films.
(09/09/04 4:00am)
With the explosion of TV series sold on DVD, overlooked gems like Fox's shrewd cartoon "Futurama" have found a new fan base. With its fourth and last season now on DVD, this animated wonder keeps showing us why it should have never been canceled by Fox (the same geniuses who dumped "Family Guy").\nFor those that don't know, "Futurama" is the brainchild of "The Simpsons" creator Matt Groening and is about a pizza delivery boy frozen and awakened in the year 3000. Similar to "The Simpsons" or "South Park," this show really seems to hit its stride in the fourth season, partly because the characters are well-developed by this point. Most of the obvious story lines have been used up in the first three seasons, so this season features episodes which are a little more out there and reveal more about the characters. New revelations include the discovery of Leela's parents and the real reason Fry came to the future. Some of the series' best episodes are on this DVD, including Bender, the robot, getting a sex-change operation, Fry making a deal with the Robot Devil and Bender's love affair with a spaceship.\nThe bonus features are above average for an animated series, especially one on its fourth volume. The deleted scenes, commentary and behind-the-scenes moments are great for fans of the show.\nThe price may be a little steep at nearly $50 (you can find it for $35 online), but for nine hours of entertainment, it is well worth it. Plus, if you own the other three seasons, I see no reason to not plop down the cash to make your collection complete. This is a definite must for fans of the show and a highly recommended choice for everyone else.
(09/09/04 3:22am)
With the explosion of TV series sold on DVD, overlooked gems like Fox's shrewd cartoon "Futurama" have found a new fan base. With its fourth and last season now on DVD, this animated wonder keeps showing us why it should have never been canceled by Fox (the same geniuses who dumped "Family Guy").\nFor those that don't know, "Futurama" is the brainchild of "The Simpsons" creator Matt Groening and is about a pizza delivery boy frozen and awakened in the year 3000. Similar to "The Simpsons" or "South Park," this show really seems to hit its stride in the fourth season, partly because the characters are well-developed by this point. Most of the obvious story lines have been used up in the first three seasons, so this season features episodes which are a little more out there and reveal more about the characters. New revelations include the discovery of Leela's parents and the real reason Fry came to the future. Some of the series' best episodes are on this DVD, including Bender, the robot, getting a sex-change operation, Fry making a deal with the Robot Devil and Bender's love affair with a spaceship.\nThe bonus features are above average for an animated series, especially one on its fourth volume. The deleted scenes, commentary and behind-the-scenes moments are great for fans of the show.\nThe price may be a little steep at nearly $50 (you can find it for $35 online), but for nine hours of entertainment, it is well worth it. Plus, if you own the other three seasons, I see no reason to not plop down the cash to make your collection complete. This is a definite must for fans of the show and a highly recommended choice for everyone else.
(09/09/04 2:50am)
On most nights of the week, especially on weekends, addicts meet at clubs and bars in Bloomington for their "fix." At all hours of the night, these junkies wait in lines, red-eyed and anxious, to fork over their cash for what they crave.\nThese addicts' hits aren't measured in liters, grams or ounces, but by millimeters -- usually 35. These addicts live for stale popcorn and DVD bonus features. These are film fiends, and like any addict, not just any movie will do. It seems that these cinephiles need more and more obscure selections to feed their appetite.\nFortunately, these "filmoholics" have plenty of options in Bloomington. Although it may not have the abundance of art house theaters that New York or Chicago can claim, this small town in Indiana boasts quite a few hot spots for those looking for good independent films.
(09/06/04 5:08am)
Israel announces plans for more housing in West Bank settlements," or "Sharon rips up 'road-map' with plan for 1,001 new settler homes."\nSame story, different headlines.\nWhen it comes to reporting about Israel and Palestine there is no way you can find an objective story.\nLook at what seems to be a benign story about elections in Palestine. The Palestine Daily Web site printed, "Arafat promises general elections," while, The Israel Daily Web site reported, "Palestine announces possible elections."\nSome would say, "Well, all journalism is biased, so that's no big deal." I would contend that no other issue in journalism is so polarized and subjective. There is no middle ground in the Gaza Strip conflict.\nAccording to the organization Honest Reporting, Reuters has favored Palestine. Their studies claim that headlines on violent acts by Palestinians use "active voice" 33 percent of the time, compared to stories about violent acts of Israelis, which use it 100 percent of the time.\nMeanwhile, FAIR (Fairness and Accuracy In Reporting) claims that The New York Times is consistently pro-Israel, saying the paper "suggested that the deaths of 23 Israelis ... are more important than the deaths of 100 Palestinians."\nThe reason why you can't find an unbiased report on the matter is that everyone who cares at all about the conflict has some sort of vested interest in it. You can't find someone who is both detached from the conflict and well-versed in this issue.\nThis lack of objective information doesn't stop the debate from raging. Usually, I'd say debate is a great way to learn the ideas of your opposition, but with Israel and Palestine, I'd say the policy is to shut up. From articulate scholars to earnest college students, nobody has ever had a constructive debate about the issue -- and I understand why. When your people are being killed every day, it's sort of hard to separate your passion from the facts. \nEven if you have no passion for one side, the facts you use to debate the issue are biased. You can cite as many articles or studies that you want, but you are trusting the word of someone who most likely has taken a side themselves. The only way to get an accurate view would be to move to the Gaza strip and observe what's happening. Even then, your perceptions would be skewed by who you'd live by and the people you'd meet. \nEven on our own campus, students are at war because of the actions of those thousands of miles away. I've spoken with Muslim students at IU who want nothing to do with any Jewish students and I've met Jewish students who can't stand Muslim students. Neither group will sit with the other at the Wright Food Court. They won't hang out with them at Bluebird. They won't even borrow notes from them for their Finite midterm. This sort of segregation has become ridiculous on our campus. \nI understand it's hard to separate the religion from the politics, but if we can't hope for people of different faiths to get along here in Bloomington, then there is no hope for the Middle East.\nSo, my advice is to forget trying to have an intelligent conversation with those who oppose your views about this issue. Nobody is going to win that argument. Instead, shut up about Israel and Palestine and discuss something that you can be objective about. You can debate who's going to win the next Colts game, who's going to win the presidential election. But nobody is going to win in the Gaza strip debate, so you're just wasting your breath.
(09/02/04 4:00am)
Within the first few minutes of "Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism," most of the film's credibility is shot. This new documentary takes aim at the Fox News Network and does so with a lack of professionalism. With overly-dramatic music playing, director Robert Greenwald makes an odd decision to hold on a shot of a poorly-made graphic for nearly 10 seconds. Seriously, all of the graphics and scene transitions look like they are made in Microsoft PowerPoint. I was just waiting for the star-wipe to come on in. \nAlthough the the graphics aren't a major part of the movie, they're indicative of a larger problem with this film -- technical sloppiness. You can tell all of the archive footage was taped on someone's VCR and then ripped to the movie because some of the screens shake and the sound is off sometimes. The editing is horrible, which is the most important thing when it comes to making a good documentary. Editing together shots of the phrase "Fair and Balanced" to Don Henley's "Dirty Laundry" just isn't effective after the two minute mark. The bonus features on this DVD are lame. A behind-the-scenes feature and a movie trailer hardly add any additional entertainment.\nThe real strength in this film comes down to quality of the interviews. Walter Cronkite and Al Franken make brief appearances while former Fox News employees vent about the right-wing slant pushed by management. Some good arguments are made, mostly by the people at FAIR (Fairness and Accuracy In Reporting), but many of these observations could be made about CNN, MSNBC or other news sources. Plus, it seems mostly journalism majors or news junkies would be really interested in most of this content. \nThe film also brings up the same old arguments about why Fox News is biased, such as selection of guests, constant editorializing, an overwhelming use of pundits and Rupert Murdoch's own political leanings. All of these arguments have been made by many people before and are nothing new to anyone who would want to watch this documentary. It seems all of the astute points could make up 10 to 15 minutes, and the directors had a hard time stretching the movie to 78 minutes, so they filled the movie with meaningless montages. \nOverall, this film is a nice effort, but it seems like it was made by high school or college students. If it wasn't for their legal battles with Murdoch, I doubt we'd hear about this film.
(09/02/04 2:59am)
Within the first few minutes of "Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism," most of the film's credibility is shot. This new documentary takes aim at the Fox News Network and does so with a lack of professionalism. With overly-dramatic music playing, director Robert Greenwald makes an odd decision to hold on a shot of a poorly-made graphic for nearly 10 seconds. Seriously, all of the graphics and scene transitions look like they are made in Microsoft PowerPoint. I was just waiting for the star-wipe to come on in. \nAlthough the the graphics aren't a major part of the movie, they're indicative of a larger problem with this film -- technical sloppiness. You can tell all of the archive footage was taped on someone's VCR and then ripped to the movie because some of the screens shake and the sound is off sometimes. The editing is horrible, which is the most important thing when it comes to making a good documentary. Editing together shots of the phrase "Fair and Balanced" to Don Henley's "Dirty Laundry" just isn't effective after the two minute mark. The bonus features on this DVD are lame. A behind-the-scenes feature and a movie trailer hardly add any additional entertainment.\nThe real strength in this film comes down to quality of the interviews. Walter Cronkite and Al Franken make brief appearances while former Fox News employees vent about the right-wing slant pushed by management. Some good arguments are made, mostly by the people at FAIR (Fairness and Accuracy In Reporting), but many of these observations could be made about CNN, MSNBC or other news sources. Plus, it seems mostly journalism majors or news junkies would be really interested in most of this content. \nThe film also brings up the same old arguments about why Fox News is biased, such as selection of guests, constant editorializing, an overwhelming use of pundits and Rupert Murdoch's own political leanings. All of these arguments have been made by many people before and are nothing new to anyone who would want to watch this documentary. It seems all of the astute points could make up 10 to 15 minutes, and the directors had a hard time stretching the movie to 78 minutes, so they filled the movie with meaningless montages. \nOverall, this film is a nice effort, but it seems like it was made by high school or college students. If it wasn't for their legal battles with Murdoch, I doubt we'd hear about this film.
(08/27/04 5:21am)
As the race for the Statehouse heats up, one candidate is more concerned with raising issues than winning his election.\nLibertarian gubernatorial candidate Ken Gividen plans to make an impact on the polls with his party's strategy to cut down the state's bureaucracy.\nGividen said although he may not win the race, he hopes this election will add prominence to the party.\nBrad Klopfenstein, executive director of the Indiana Libertarian Party, said this election holds a lot of expectations for his party as new members join every day.\n"A lot of people get disillusioned with the partisan politics and want a change," he said. "We draw pretty equally from both parties. A lot of liberals like us because of our social policies while a lot of conservatives are drawn to our fiscal policies."\nKlopfenstein said two years ago the party received 4 percent of the vote and hopes to eventually reach 10 percent of voters.\nThe basic idea behind the Libertarian Party is to follow a strict interpretation of the Constitution, which means a smaller government and more freedom for everyone, according to the party's Web site. Some general party issues include eliminating departments of the government, decriminalizing marijuana and prostitution, and abolishing gun laws.\nKlopfenstein said the party has gotten excited about several races across the state, including county commissioner races and of course, the race for governor.\nGividen, alongside candidate for lieutenant governor Elaine Badnarik, said he plans to separate himself from Republican Mitch Daniels and Gov. Joe Kernan with issues that should resonate with voters.\n"If you really look at it, Daniels and Kernan are pretty much the same," Gividen said. "They both don't want to get rid of property taxes. They both are for the I-69 plan."\nGividen said he differs from the other candidates because he feels property taxes should be eliminated.\n"I know people that are paying $1,000 a month for property taxes. You shouldn't have to pay rent on a home you own," he said.\nGividen said one way to get rid of property taxes would be to turn every school in Indiana into charter schools. Without the added bureaucracy of school boards and educational departments, private schools are able to educate students for $4,500 a year compared to $8,500 a year for public schools. Gividen said all of the school leaders could be elected locally and all of the students in each district would be given vouchers from the state government.\nAnother plan to cut down taxes would be to eliminate unnecessary departments of government, Gividen said.\n"We have way too many government buildings downtown," he said. "I mean, everybody loves a good building, but we don't need all of these departments."\nGividen also said he thinks that the I-69 extension is a good idea, but an unnecessary waste of funds. He said the construction could be paid for with an express lane on the highway where drivers could go 80 mph if they pay a toll. \nHe said the toll would provide added funds and the speedy drive could make Indiana an attractive route for nationwide business.\nGividen will be attending a anti-I-69 rally Sept. 4 in Bloomington. \nGividen said Daniels and Kernan are also very similar in their personal lives. \nHe noted a recent scandal where it was reported that Daniels was busted for possession of marijuana while at Yale and Kernan admitted to smoking pot a couple times in the 1960s. \n"The Democrats tried to bring up Daniels' arrest to make a difference between the candidates and they're still the same," he said.\nThat's another issue where Gividen differs from the other two -- he's never tried marijuana, cigarettes or even alcohol.\n"Not that it matters, but a lot of people think it's ironic that the Libertarian candidate is the only one who hasn't smoked pot," he said.\nEven though he believes people should be free to use any of these items, he has stuck to his Baptist beliefs.\nBadnarik said the similarities between these candidates will turn off a lot of voters, but they choose to pick between the lesser of two evils.\n"Most people I talk to don't even know there is a third party," she said. "It seems that we have a one-party system, especially in Indiana."\nShe said because of the way district lines are drawn most races aren't competitive.\n"The people of Indiana need to know they have choices," she said. "And I think if more people knew about the Libertarian Party they'd find out that they agree with us. We just need more voices because that's how democracy works the best."\n-- Contact Weekend editor Adam Aasen at aaasen@indiana.edu.
(08/26/04 4:23am)
It's been a long time since Snoop Dogg, Nate Dogg and Warren G hooked up to break us off a piece. In between drug arrests, side projects and feature films, these West Coast hall-of-famers have hyped up their dream of putting out a 213 album. They say the game don't wait, but apparently it does, because the collaboration of these three has taken nearly a decade to finally drop. And now that it has, it just can't live up to the anticipation.\nLooking at their similar styles, past collaborations and multi-platinum pedigrees, you'd think these legendary rappers would add up to the hip-hop equivalent of the '92 Dream Team. But 213 has fallen into the same trap as the current U.S. Olympic men's basketball team. You can assemble great talent, but if there isn't a strong effort, it doesn't matter.\nOne of the main reasons why this trio has seemed to fizzle fo' shizzle is because they have just changed the game too much since the days of "Regulators" and "Ain't no Fun." Nate has kept it gangsta, but it seems like Snoop and Warren have traded roles. Over the years, Snoop has traded in the aggressive flow seen during his Death Row days for his current laid-back image. Warren on the other hand is no longer the smooth playa of the night. He has seemed to be embittered by the industry, probably because his last album was a flop. As a result, you end up with a Warren G who talks more about guns and violence than "chords, strings, melodies… G Funk." On the song "Run on Up," Snoop boasts, "I'm a low-key OG" while Warren vents, "I'm mad as fuck I let the industry use me."\nThe chemistry on the album just isn't there, which is baffling since they've been on each others' songs for years. Snoop seems to dominate the entire album, with Warren G being used sparingly. Nate Dogg isn't given much of a presence either, being relegated to pretty much chorus duty. Still, when he gets the chance to croon a verse, he nails it as usual. Indeed his riffing, such as his singing on "Mary Jane," is the best part of the album.\nAnother glaring problem with the album is the production. Although DJ Hi-Tek and Kanye West provide solid backgrounds, they are from Cincinnati and Chicago, respectively, and just aren't Cali flavor. I don't understand why they didn't recruit Dr. Dre or even Battlecat to lay down some beats that are truly West Coast. The beats throughout the album boom with bass and are pretty indicative of what to expect from Snoop nowadays, but it seems like the album has too many mellow tracks. You'd think you were listening to the Isley Brothers, not a rap album. There also doesn't seem to be a classic song on this CD, let alone a real radio single.\nThis isn't to say that it is a horrible album. It's far from it. Even without their A-game, these three smash most rappers out there. If your collection consists of primarily West Coast rap, I don't see why you wouldn't add this to your rotation, but don't expect a classic.\nAll-in-all, this album reminds me a lot of Snoop's first Eastsidaz album, but with the likes of Warren and Nate, the expectations were a lot higher. With Eastsidaz, you were surprised by these newcomers. With 213, you're disappointed with these veterans.
(08/26/04 4:22am)
John Madden has reached a point in his career where he is almost better known for licensing his surname to a successful series of video games than he is for announcing or coaching. And why shouldn't he be? The video games emblazoned with his name are quicker, more reliable and less annoying. The newest edition gives another reason why he should be proud to endorse such a product.\nOver the last 15 years, the Madden series has evolved from the primordial ooze of the 16-bit classic to the strategy-based version present today. Gone are the days when button-smashing would be all you need to dominate on the field. In the 2005 version, you can control almost every aspect of the game -- with defense being the biggest improvement. No longer is the pig-skin play one-sided in favor of offense. Placement of every defender is easily controllable.\nThe game-play and the basic modes aren't much different from the 2004 version. The biggest thing that serious Madden followers will care about is added details to the features in the game. Franchise mode allows players to make off-season trades, draft players, play a season and receive feedback. Tony Bruno hosts a weekly talk show in which he criticizes your decisions, and e-mails from players show how their morale can also be affected. Whiny players like Terrell Owens cause problems -- just like the real NFL soap opera! \nOther fun additions include classic squads from each team and training camp mode. Some of the features are pointless, such as the create-a-fan mode which allows players to design their own supporter to be shown at cut-away scenes between plays. If you really are into having a bizarre looking cheese-head with Legion of Doom shoulder pads at your game, then it's cool, but if I wanted electronic paper-dolls, I wouldn't buy a football game.\nIf you are a nostalgic gamer like me, I suggest you cough up the extra 5 bucks and spring for the Collector's Edition. This version features a 16-bit version and two 32-bit versions from different years of the systems' lifespan.\nOverall, Madden 2005 is exactly what consumers want in sports games nowadays -- complex game-play with tons of features.
(08/26/04 4:00am)
In Nick Hornby's wonderful book "High Fidelity," the "moral" of the tale is summed up with the oft-quoted line: "It's what you like, not what you are like."\nThis line has seemed to give music snobs literary justification to judge people not by their character, but by their Windows Media playlist.\nWe all know music snobs. They may vary on the sliding scale of pretentiousness, but the characteristics are the same for all of them. Music snobs have a constant need to talk about what album they just bought. Music snobs love to name-drop bands, especially if the names are really absurd sounding. (Example: "Man, have you heard the new Sleepytime Gorilla Museum album?") Music snobs love to try to stump their friends by naming the most obscure bands ever. Music snobs love to cruelly ridicule others' music tastes, especially widely popular bands such as Dave Matthews Band or Phish. Probably the funniest thing you can hear is a music snob trying to explain a band's sound. You'll hear the weirdest crossbreeding of genres and artists to put their sound in words. "Man, it's like Bright Eyes, but with Wilco's lyrics, Nelly's personality and Radiohead's ingenuity."\nEven more satisfying than outsmarting a music snob with an artist unknown to them is to discover they listen to a really lame band and hearing their excuse. I guess only they can see the real genius in Jefferson Starship.\nIn high school, everyone knew that a person's taste in movies, music and books has an impact on social standing. If you knew about lots of unknown indie bands or underground hip-hop it easily made you appear a lot cooler than the kid who jammed out to his Broadway original cast version of "Into the Woods." Admit it, nobody wanted to be the overweight kid in flannel who was mocked for his affection for Christina Aguilera.\nBut at some point, I expected the importance of such trivial traits to fade out in favor of preferences that are more indicative of your personality, such as your choice of major, political beliefs and career aspirations.\nUnfortunately, I realized recently that music snobs will exist at all ages -- and will not relent in their pretentiousness.\nWhile hanging out with my old high school friends, I was not mocked for my musical taste, but rather for the fact that I still listen to the same bands/artists I did back then. I was viewed as old-fashioned, stagnant, the musical equivalent of still water.\nBut, ironically, I feel my state is common for most people my age. After a while, most people find they discover far fewer new bands year after year. With the favorites assembled during your maturing years, it's harder for a new band to find time in the rotation.\nMany of my friends throw money away on four or five albums a week when there is no way they could possibly listen to the albums enough with 10,000 songs stored on their iPod. Seriously, I know several people that traded in their 20GB iPod for the 40GB version. Does anyone really need to listen to music for a month straight without hearing the same song twice? "Damn it, I heard this song in January, why is it on again?" Not to mention the financial burden of purchasing $60 worth of music a week, plus concerts. (And kids are still starving in the world, why?)\nThe bottom line is that some people are still trying to define their personality by their tastes. Instead of being pioneers in business, sports or even making their own music, they'd rather find bands that nobody else knows about.\nI am here to say that interests really don't matter much. Yeah, I'm going to look at you weird if you say you're a big fan of Tom Arnold's comedy, but if you're a nice person, things such as that are easy to get by. Everybody has a friend who listens to horrible music or likes every stupid movie that comes out, but the worst that ever happens to that person is mild teasing -- not ostracism.\nSo, I'd like to tell Nick Hornby that I agree, mutual interests are important in any relationship, but how you share these interests is more important. You can like all the same music as someone, but if they act like a jerk, none of it will matter.