So yesterday, the internet was all abuzz with the debut of the “42,” trailer, the new Jackie Robinson biopic featuring the music of Jay-Z. First of all, what trailer doesn’t feature the music of Jay-Z these days. Second, the introduction of this movie’s presence into my little world, sent my movie loving heart into overdrive. Historical biopics are my absolute favorite genre of movie, even though they are almost all terrible. Quentin Tarantino said it best, and I’m paraphrasing, ‘You can’t just shove a famous person’s life into a 2 hour movie and expect it to be a good exercise of film-making.’ He’s right, practically every historical biopic is fatally flawed for this reason. In these movies, the main actor is usually too old looking for the teenager scenes, and too young looking for the elderly scenes. Think “J. Edgar.” Another problem is the level of historical accuracy. Most times, historical fact is stretched for storytelling purposes in order to sensationalize the person or their story. One scene that comes to mind is from “Nowhere Boy” where fictional teenage John Lennon punches fictional teenage Paul McCartney at John’s mother’s funeral.

Needless to say, this never happened. The director of the flick, Sam Taylor-Wood, remarked that they needed a way to show John and Paul physically bonding…you know outside of their incredible musical partnership.

Another problem with historical accuracy is that sometimes its too accurate. This is the main criticism levied at Steven Spielberg’s soon to be released historical extravaganza, “Lincoln.” The film is an early bet to win a slew of Oscars because of the combination of the commercial master Spielberg, and Daniel Day-Lewis, the actor with the world’s greatest method. Lewis is known for throwing himself into roles with extremely methodical techniques and extensive research. Naturally, the excitement level for this flick was off the charts, and when the trailer hit, the general popcorn munching crowd were stunned when they heard the great Lincoln speak at last. Day-Lewis employed a high pitched, slightly whiny, Kentucky accent. By all recorded accounts, this is how Lincoln spoke. The public, used to seeing Lincoln sit majestically in the Lincoln Memorial, or gaze stoically off their pennies and 5 dollar bills, expected this man to speak with the voice of God. There was a palpable disappointment from the trailer debut because of this one minor point. For me, I loved that Daniel decided to give his Lincoln a historically accurate voicing. My problem with the trailer was the presence of too many familiar superstars dotting the canvas. I found it distracting to see Sally Fields, Tommy Lee Jones, and Joseph Gordon-Levitt inserting their famous mugs in the middle of 19th Century America. To me, this should be a movie where Day-Lewis is the most famous face, and all the rest should be brilliant but lesser known character actors like Jared Harris, who plays General US Grant, and Jackie Earle Haley, who plays Confederate Vice President Alexander Stevens. I’m not too upset though. Sometimes a trailer can’t do a great movie justice. Hopefully the film matches its hype and star power. Judge for yourself.

The next movie that I am absolutely seeing is “Hyde Park on Hudson.” The film is directed by Roger Mitchell, and stars Bill Murray as President Franklin D. Roosevelt. Its set during a crucial visit of British Royalty to FDR’s palatial family estate in Hyde Park, New York right before the onset of World War II. For those wondering, yes, its the same King and Queen we all loved from “The King’s Speech,” though obviously played by different actors. A lot of “Lincoln’s” early hype came from the fact that Daniel Day-Lewis was able to physically embody the person of Abraham Lincoln so perfectly. The man transformed magically into that Honest Abe, even if his voice shocked people. When I see Bill Murray as FDR, I just see older Bill Murray with a cigarette holder and a fancy hat. He looks nothing like FDR, and frankly, doesn’t even really sound like him. Now, its actually not really important for an actor to look exactly like the historical figure he is portraying. If the movie and performance are great enough, you end up buying the whole thing no matter what people on the screen look and sound like. Bill gives Roosevelt a halting and mischievous voice, hinting at Bill’s expert comedy skills. There are hints of seriousness from Bill, and I hope there are more in the actual movie, because FDR was one of the country’s greatest and most brilliant Presidents, and it would be interesting to see Bill play a character of such historical gravitas. On the surface, this trailer looks sleight, as one of the biggest plot points seems to be the scandal at serving the King and Queen of England hot dogs and cocktails. Take that you poncy snobs! It also seems to be an awkward love story where we are supposed to be rooting for Franklin as he merrily cheats on his wife with Laura Linney, who plays FDR’s real life mistress. Could be great, could be a train wreck, either way, they have my money.

Now we’re going to end from where we began, with “42,” the story of Jackie Robinson. Ironically, of the three trailers, this was my favorite, even though I think this will be the worst film of the bunch. On top of being a huge fan of history, I’m even a bigger fan of baseball history. It was stunning to see the long destroyed monument to Brooklyn baseball, Ebbets Field, existing in full HD reality. Also, the vintage uniforms and realistic baseball choreography was like catnip to me. Jay-Z’s ode to Brooklyn, “Brooklyn (We Go Hard),” which bleats menacingly over the gorgeous imagery of late 40s era baseball is a great contrast. Harrison Ford plays Branch Rickey, the real life hero who had the good sense and courage to integrate baseball with the signing of Jackie Robinson in 1947. Having seen Ken Burns’s “Baseball” documentary a hundred times, I can tell you that Ford looks and sounds just like Rickey, and based on the trailer, I’m betting on a masterwork performance. The actor that plays Jackie Robinson, Chadwick Boseman, is a dead ringer for the man, however there is one crucial difference. Boseman gives Jackie a thunderously low and powerful voice, like a cross between Shaft and Howling Wolf, when in reality, Jackie had a high pitched, almost nerdy voice. Think Tony Gywnn. The voice Boseman uses sounds great, and it makes you wonder how much more excited people would have been for “Lincoln” if Daniel Day-Lewis employed a similarly powerful voice. Now, with all that said, why do I think this film will be the worst of the three highlighted? Well, first of all, I hope it isn’t. I have high hopes that the filmmakers will be focused and clever enough to give Jackie the story he is due. The problem is that this is being marketed as a sensationalistic movie. Jackie is being presented as the toughest, most hard loving, passionate, and heroic human beings ever, all in the span of 1:47. Now, obviously, Jackie was all those things, but being a hero in a movie is radically different then being a hero in real life. In movies, heroes tend to swerve from one adrenaline spiked moment to the next, carried on the wings of ceaseless action and drama. What’s left out is the sense of tedium, loneliness, awkwardness, and randomness that makes up the majority of anyone’s life, be they an average Joe or Niel Armstrong. Like I said, hopefully this movie lives up to its great trailer.

Well, lastly, I hope you are looking forward to these movies as much as I am. I plan to be providing extensive reviews of each one once they come out to let you know how well I think they held up to their hype, so stay tuned historical biopic junkies! First up is “Lincoln,” premiering right after election day in early November. “Hyde Park on the Hudson” is coming out December 7th, and we’ll have to wait to April 2013 for “42.”

So, several months ago, I posted a song I made called “Funeral Business,” on this site.  The presentation of the song was wrapped around a simple title card youtube video, nothing fancy.  Well, consider the fanciness level knocked up a notch.  Over the past month, I’ve been slaving away on music video extravaganza for this song, and after 9 versions, its finally ready to the world.  The video features your favorite Ghostbusters, as well as your favorite ancillary Ghostbuster characters, all rocking with spooky verve to “Funeral Business,” a song of thrashingly dynamic rock power.  The song’s origins trace back to my college days, neglected, but never forgotten.  When I dusted it off last Spring, I had my good friend and musical genius Ian Wehrle help me flesh out some lyrics and construct a better bridge.  I then brought in another musical genius, Andrew Lee, to play the jaw dropping guitar solo that appears in the middle of the song.  The second, and less draw dropping guitar solo, was performed by me, so future Andrew Lee fans, don’t judge that solo’s simplicity with that of Mr. Lee’s now legendary, um, future achievements.  The rest of the music was produced and performed by yours truly, Willie Simpson.  The video itself, which went through 9 alterations, was willed into its final version with aid coming in the form of technical advice and moral support from film making genius, George Gross.  George is an up and coming movie man whose work not only helped inspire this video, but has been featured on this very site.  (Just click his name to see.)  The deliciously cool title card sequence was edited and co-conceived by this site’s brilliant banner creator, Sonia Rapaport, an insanely talented visual artist in her own right.  I also want to thank Lilja Nielsen, my  sonically battered roommate, who provided candid insight with each incarnation, as well as enormous patience as “soooulll” echoed endlessly throughout our little apartment.  With that, I proudly present, “Funeral Business,” for you all to enjoy and share with your friends.

I’m not tuned in to every detail of the Wes Anderson universe, but I loved being surprised by them.  I was surprised by how much I loved “Fantastic Mr. Fox” when I saw it, despite thinking for over a year it was probably some horrible 3D childrens movie, (its nothing of the sort, and you should see it if you haven’t.)  I was surprised by how much I loved “The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou,” a film which I assumed sucked because that’s what everyone was saying at the time of its release.  I waited over 3 years before seeing it, and I thought it was wonderful.  I was surprised at how much I loved “Darjeeling Limited,” a movie I reluctantly watched on my computer one summer day with no intention of sitting through the whole thing, but I did, and I watched it again, the next day.  I was never a Wes Anderson fan, but I guess I’ve been surprised to discover that I love practically everything he’s done; all said love coming with a great degree of anti-hipster reluctance I suppose.  This pattern has now lead me to “Hotel Chevalier,” a 13 minute short film Anderson made with Jason Schwartzman and Natalie Portman.  The film serves as “Darjeeling Limited’s” prologue, and is essential watching for fans of the latter mentioned full motion picture.  What makes it essential?  Well, nothing of any substance in terms of plot or characterization, but like any good comic book, its good to just continuously inhabit the world of a universe you really love.  “Hotel Chevalier” allows that privilege.  The funny thing about the “Darjeeling Limited” universe, and the one explored further in “Hotel Chevalier,” is that they exist in the grander Wes Anderson universe.  It’s an imaginary and dreamy sort of world, stuffed with the precious sort of nostalgia that is both impossible not to adore, and desire with great jealously.  For those wondering, the song that appears both in the short and in the full picture is “Where Do You Go To (My Lovely),” by Peter Sarstedt.  It’s easy to see why Anderson would be attracted to that song, as it makes reference to a beautiful girl’s Rolling Stones record collection.  Anyway, I was just as surprised that this short film existed, and having become tired of being surprised by Anderson’s genius, I watched it right away upon hearing about it.  You can too if you’ve never seen it, or rewatch it.  Either way, enjoy.

On February 1st, 1982 David Letterman launched the Late Night Show on NBC.  As you can tell by its overly dramatic and irony fueled science fiction opening, Dave was far ahead of his time.  Understanding David Letterman’s genius is partly based on knowing what a clear cut revolutionary comic visionary he was.  Not only was he fully secure in his own comic voice, always bleeding confidence over every comedy beat, he was a broadcasting natural, just a seemingly perfect physical fit for the television medium.  When Dave is on TV, he is just in his natural environment.  It’s really harder to imagine the man in real life, and according to those who work with him and know him, the real Dave is a neurotic and socially awkward mess of a man.  TV Dave is the complete opposite, a titanic colossus of confidence and  razor edged awareness.  His first show on NBC is just a remarkable time capsule of his talent and impact, and I got all 7 parts for you to devour below.  You’ll get Dave at his most classic, giving you a bizarre monolog poking fun at himself and NBC.  You’ll get a hilarious tour of the NBC studios, and you’ll get Bill Murray being young and brilliant.  Oh yea, you get Mr. Wizard too.  This is awesome, so check it out and brighten up your late night.