This Is Bullsh*t

Last night I posted about a new Tragically Hip record coming out. A band I have loyally followed for decades. I read today that Gord Downie, the lead singer and guiding force, has terminal brain cancer. They plan on touring this summer anyway. See 'em while you can. I have vivid memories of a small club show by the Hip I saw circa 1990-91. Not to be missed. Looking forward to the record even more now. Although, don't look for a Bowie-like goodbye on this one. The record was written and recorded prior to his diagnosis. This is actually big news in Canada. The Hip are still a huge band there. His doctor held a press conference to discuss the diagnosis. Apparently the mean lifespan for people after diagnosis with this type of brain cancer is about 2 years. Downie claims that he plans to keep making music. Should interesting stuff.

New Hip

One of the only bands that still gets me excited about a coming release is Canada's own Tragically Hip. They've been putting out great stuff for over 25 years now. Granted, their records are often hit and miss (the only perfect one from start to finish is Road Apples), but when they hit, they can still hit me hard. It is difficult to explain these things, where a certain band has a certain sound or turn of melody or style or chords they use that just hits your emotional sweet spot. I like the new song "In a World Possessed By the Human Mind," from Man Machine Poem, out in mid-June. Here's the video, I like the mood it creates quite a bit. But perhaps that's because I'm listening and watching late tonight while the wife is out of town and the kids are long asleep...it's like getting a phone call from an old friend...thank God for the Hip.

Fun question for those reading: what bands/artists still putting out new material hit that sweet spot for you? Not every song, but consistently enough to where you are still excited when you hear of a new release on the horizon. this is especially an interesting question for those 40 or over, since I think it is harder for anything new to emotionally penetrate us like it used to.

There Aren't Enough of Us

I have held off from discussing the election here at GNABB. Too many musical obituaries to do. But I have been following it very closely. I just haven’t been able to bring myself to write anything, though. Partly because I have so many thoughts and feelings about it, I haven’t had the energy to sit down and sort them out. But here goes…

Trump vs. Hillary. An historical election, in part because we have never had the two major candidates both have such high negative polling. Polls indicate that over 50% of Americans dislike them both, so…???? Anyway, they are our candidates. No amount of wishing them away will change that.

As someone who generally leans middle/right, the Trump phenomenon/fiasco has been especially interesting/infuriating. I was onboard the Never Trump train early on, but at the same time I always held out a little hope that he could convince me otherwise. That he would fulfill his promise that the primary season was just an act, a carnival sideshow, and that he would magically become “presidential” when it mattered.

Trump: “I’ll be so presidential it’ll make your head spin.”

Speaker of the House Paul Ryan just handed Trump an opportunity to be exactly that, presidential. In an unprecedented move, the Speaker of the House refused to endorse the presidential candidate of his own party. Or at least, said he was “not ready” to do so. Trump could have taken up the challenge, said something like “Speaker Ryan is correct, I need to bring this party together and I am determined to do just that. I invite Speaker Ryan and other party leaders to meet with me and we can come together and discuss a host of issues, and then together we can lead this party to victory in November.” But it just isn’t in his DNA to collaborate. Instead, Trump responds in the only way he knows how, confrontationally. He said that he wasn’t ready to support Ryan’s agenda. So there, the trenches on the battlefield are dug.

Trump just doesn’t care. The very idea of a political party has very little use to him unless it is simply an apparatus to get him what he personally wants. Paul Ryan was talking about the great responsibility to live up to the best of the GOP legacy, to live up to the principles and leadership of Lincoln and Reagan. To Trump that hardly registers, and that is one of the many problems here.

What is Ryan doing? Is he giving cover to vulnerable Republicans up for re-election in Congress this year, so they can also distance themselves from a Trump scorched-earth candidacy? Is he trying to preserve true conservativism (which is a religion to Ryan, and a matter of convenience to Trump), where Ryan and others might actually be willing to throw this election in order to preserve the Republican Party for the long run? All are possibilities.

Paul Ryan: Losing the battle on purpose to win the war?

The greatest damage that Trump has done to the Republican cause is demographically. By 2050, many experts believe that the United States will be “majority-minority,” meaning that there will be no ethnic group that is a majority in this country. The fastest growing demographic is Hispanic. During the 1990’s, the Hispanic population passed up the African-American. I have argued for years that in many ways, the Hispanic population and the GOP are a good fit (social issues, economically). It is a matter of messaging and perhaps some movement on a few issues. The Republican establishment, like Paul Ryan, had realized this and were trying to work on this long term issue. Trump has blown that effort out of the water (tweeting a picture of The Donald enjoying a taco bowl on Cinco de Mayo saying “I love Hispanics!,” notwithstanding).

ABOVE: Apparently, all you have to do is eat a taco bowl and proclaim "I love Hispanics!" on Cinco de Mayo, and all will be forgiven

If the Republican Party does not figure out a long term plan to expand its base, it will become a party perpetually in the wilderness. So Trump calls Hispanic immigrants rapists, he calls for a blanket ban on Muslim immigration, and shows an anachronistic, dismissive attitude towards roughly half of our population (women). As a father of two daughters, I would punch someone in the face if they spoke to one of them in the way that Trump has addressed women in public. For that reason alone, it is hard to stomach supporting him and having him be an example to my girls. Trump has managed to alienate most anyone who is not non-Hispanic white from the Republican cause. Perhaps Paul Ryan and others see the long game, and the need to sacrifice this election.

What explains Trump’s popularity (beyond just obvious bigots, because there are a lot more people than that supporting him)? As has been much discussed in the media, it is the same anger fueling Bernie Sanders’ movement on the other side. People fed up with comfortable establishment figures who maintain their power while things seem to be getting more unstable and out of control internationally, and at least stagnating domestically. People want change. But The Bern’s socialism and Trump’s demagoguery and narcissism are not the answers.

Trump has tapped into a fear and frustration that has been there for awhile amongst working class whites. Which is one reason he still could win this thing. Frankly, there are quite a few northern, working class whites who normally vote Democrat who are flocking to Trump (what we called in the 80’s “Reagan Democrats.”) Can they make up for the Never Trump Republicans? Maybe. Add to that Hillary is a very weak and vulnerable candidate who has serious issues of her own.

I can’t support Trump for several reasons. His wall and his plan to round up millions of illegal immigrants and send them back are absurd (but “the good ones” can come right back. How does he know who is “good”? Will he interview them all personally? Can you just see the Gestapo-like images of people being rounded up, separated from family members and shipped back to foreign lands?) So what is his point? Is he just that cynical, stirring up nativist sentiments, knowing he can’t really deliver? Or does he really think he can do these things? Either way, it is ridiculous and dangerous.

Even worse is his foreign policy. He casually talks of dismantling NATO, of promoting nuclear proliferation in Asia…he discusses reversing American foreign policy that has been in place since the end World War II with as much thought as you or I would dedicate to ordering take-out. I swear, it looks like he says these things the moment they pop into his head. His Middle Eastern policy? Which Trump do you believe? We should pull out and let them fight out their own problems? Give the Russians a free hand to do with Syria what they see fit? Go carpet-bomb ISIS into oblivion? It seems to change with each week that passes. Again, whatever pops into his head at the moment. One thing that he said is true. The U.S. would be “unpredictable” under a Trump administration. The problem with that is that for close to a century, global stability has depended on a predictable American foreign policy. Our allies depend on it, and our enemies are kept in check by it. Trump: “I’ll make great deals.” Meaning everything is now negotiable? The majority of conservative foreign policy experts agree that Trump’s foreign policy would be a disaster. Not everyone has such dire feelings about it, though. Vladimir Putin is a noted Trump fan.

So no, I can’t vote for the Donald. Country over party. And actually, not voting for Donald, in the long run, is probably best for the party too. Perhaps the Republicans will need to go into the wilderness for awhile and reinvent themselves. Like after The New Deal, and it required a Barry Goldwater to plant the seeds that only came to fruition 15 years later with Reagan (or as I describe him to my students,

“Goldwater with a personality”). It might take more years of horrendous policies like Obama’s to finally convince Americans that another way is necessary. But it is not Trump’s way.

There are just not enough of us out there right now. Reasonable, thoughtful, Libertarian-leaning conservatives who are concerned about the deficit and debt and fiscal future of this country. Who recognize that the American character and work ethic is worth preserving, at least the best aspects of it. Who understand that America has a leadership role to play in the world that needs to be predictable and steadfast for our allies (which Trump doesn’t seem to understand), and that also must project strength and be able to strike a certain fear in the hearts of those who would oppose us or try to do the world harm (Obama doesn’t seem to understand, or at least agree with, this part). Reasonable conservatives who understand that we need to cut government spending, reform entitlements (including the difficult ones like Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid), but also that not all taxes are automatically bad. Republican icon Ronald Reagan understood this. He once said that if you get 80% of what you want, then that is a success. He understood that you had to work with the opposition, that it did no good to demonize your domestic political opponents.

We have ourselves (on the Right) to blame for Trump. It started with talk radio, I think. I listen to a lot of conservative talk radio on my drives to and from work. And I agree with much of what they say. Many critics of the genre haven’t actually listened to much of it, and it provided an outlet for a point of view that had been blocked out of the mainstream media. But they hold on to and expand their listenership through demonizing the Left, there is no doubt. Most every issue that comes up is proof that Obama and others are out to destroy America. Not that they have different opinions on solutions, but that they just hate America. Ratings equal stirring up anger and resentment. Some are more reasonable than others (I loved Bill Bennett when he was on, I enjoy and respect Dennis Prager and Michael Medved quite a bit, not coincidently two who have come out and said that Trump is wrong for this country), but then you also have the Michael Savage’s of the airwaves. It is an industry built on resentment and intransience, on the belief that if you compromise with the Left then you are a traitor. Reagan, in this environment, would have been excoriated. Talk radio created the Tea Party. Tea Party resentment paved the way for Trump.

ABOVE: With these people becoming a vocal part of Republican politics, was Trump far behind?

The funny thing is, Trump is not even a conservative. And he will actually run to the left of Hillary on some issues. But this pitchfork and torches contingent of the Right is so angry and emboldened now, they don’t even notice that Trump is a carnival barker opportunist who will bend and change with the populist tides and his own whim on any given day. Add to that the Reagan Democrats that he has courted. Trump has no core ideology at all.

So, what to do? Hillary is not a good candidate, nor an honest leader. I think at heart Hillary is pretty moderate. Bernie has pushed her left. Can she tack back center once the children (Bernie supporters) are put to bed and the adults in the Democrat household take control again? I don’t know. But she is not dangerous like Trump is. At least not in the same way he is. I could see Trump doing damage that will be much harder to repair than Hillary. I either vote for her or I don’t vote, I guess. Or cast a 3rd party protest vote if the Never Trump crowd can get something together.

Ryan/Rubio ’20.

RIP Prince, 1958-2016

I'm sure a lot of you have seen this, but this has to be the greatest performance at a Rock and Roll Hall of Fame induction ceremony. Prince and George Harrison (as a solo artist) were inducted in the same year, and this is one of those All Star jams during the ceremony. Harrison was already dead by his induction, so this is a tribute performance of "While My Guitar Gently Weeps." Many of the usual suspects are there, like Tom Petty, Steve Winwood, Jeff Lynne, etc. It is a nice but unremarkable performance until about 3:30, when Prince tears into his guitar solo. On a totally different plane of existence from these other guys. And you can tell he knows it. He isn't usually associated with classic rock, but it is like he is saying, "if I feel like it, I can do this better than any of you." He is having so much fun. Notice the look of surprise and awe on Dhani Harrison's face at about 4:48 (Dhani is George's son, can't you tell?) The best part may be the end. He tosses the guitar to the heavens (where the hell does it go??) and struts off the stage while the other guys are still on the last chord. Like "yeah, bitches!" I read an interview with Dhani Harrison that was great, talking about this performance. Harrison said that he wasn't too excited about Prince performing on the song, he just wasn't that familiar with his music beyond hits like "Kiss," and didn't think he would fit in musically. These other guys had been friends of his Dad's, Dhani had grown up knowing them, etc. Also, at rehearsal Prince didn't show his cards, he played a rather routine solo. Harrison said that he ran around frantically backstage looking for Prince after the performance, shouting wildly "where's Prince! Where's Prince!" Apparently when Prince strutted off the stage, he never stopped and just walked out of the building into the night without saying a word to anyone.

RIP Scalia, 1936-2016

Couldn't you have hung on until next January? That would have been much better. None of us get to choose the time of our departure, I guess. My wife and I were at a yoga class (the second one I have ever attended - the things we do to please our spouse for Valentine's Day), and just before we started I glanced at my phone and saw that Antonin Scalia had died. I have to admit I was rocked pretty hard by this one.

For one, Scalia made law school bearable. Whether you agreed with him or not (and I often did), his decisions were a joy to read. You don't hear that much when referring to the writing in Supreme Court decisions. But Scalia possessed both a razor mind and a razor pen. And he was by far the most powerful Justice on the Supreme Court for decades, because Scalia got two votes whereas the other Justices just got one vote. (I am, of course, referring to Clarence Thomas, who almost always voted with Scalia and would often just sign on to Scalia's decisions vs. writing his own).

ABOVE: What is Clarence "yeah, what he said" Thomas going to do now that Scalia is gone? Think for himself?

On a more serious note, I'm not sure what to think of the Republican Senate standoff with Obama on appointing Scalia's replacement. This rhetoric of "let the people decide" (as in, wait until after the election so the people can weigh in on the direction of the replacement) is crap. That is not in the Constitution, as Scalia himself would probably point out. And the people did weigh in. Obama was re-elected.

I think what should happen is that Obama fulfills his Constitutional duty and nominates someone, and the Republicans in the Senate give him or her their due hearing and then most likely vote them down. Drag it out until the election, and then let the next president pick someone. That seems better than refusing to even hold a hearing without even having a nominee yet. At least go through the motions. This holdout could be worse for the Republicans in an election year than just having some contentious hearings and then voting "no."

Do I think the Democrats would do the same thing if it were reversed? Of course. In fact, both Chuck Schumer and Harry Reid have statements exactly to that effect from back in the waning days of George W. Bush's presidency. I wouldn't agree with them doing it either (and you know if this were the democrats doing this, talk radio-world would be raising a sh*tstorm about the dems circumventing the Constitution, etc.)

Our Founders certainly intended for the president to nominate someone and then for the Senate to advise the president on that nominee and then consent or not. I don't think they meant "advise and consent" to mean "No. It doesn't matter who you nominate. We'll just leave the seat vacant for a year."

Anyway, Scalia was quite simply one of the greatest minds we have ever had on the Court. A giant. I leave you with the ever quotable Antonin Scalia...

“Never compromise your principles, unless of course your principles are Adolf Hitler’s, in which case you would be well advised to compromise them as much as you can.”

“More important than your obligation to follow your conscience, or at least prior to it, is your obligation to form your conscience correctly.”

“A Constitution is not meant to facilitate change. It is meant to impede change, to make it difficult to change.”

“This Court, however, concludes that this limitation would prevent the rest of the Act from working as well as hoped. So it rewrites the law to make tax credits available everywhere. We should start calling this law SCOTUScare.”

“A man who has made no enemies is probably not a very good man.”

"A Bill of Rights that means what the majority wants it to mean is worthless."

"That’s the argument of flexibility and it goes something like this: The Constitution is over 200 years old and societies change. It has to change with society, like a living organism, or it will become brittle and break. But you would have to be an idiot to believe that. The Constitution is not a living organism, it is a legal document. It says something and doesn’t say other things."

"You’re looking at me as though I’m weird. My God! Are you so out of touch with most of America, most of which believes in the devil? I mean, Jesus Christ believed in the devil! It’s in the Gospels! You travel in circles that are so, so removed from mainstream America that you are appalled that anybody would believe in the devil! Most of mankind has believed in the devil, for all of history. Many more intelligent people than you or me have believed in the devil."

"To pursue the concept of racial entitlement–even for the most admirable and benign of purposes–is to reinforce and preserve for future mischief the way of thinking that produced race slavery, race privilege and race hatred. In the eyes of government, we are just one race here. It is American."

"Undoubtedly some think that the Second Amendment is outmoded in a society where our standing army is the pride of our Nation, where well-trained police forces provide personal security, and where gun violence is a serious problem. That is perhaps debatable, but what is not debatable is that it is not the role of this Court to pronounce the Second Amendment extinct."

"Bear in mind that brains and learning, like muscle and physical skill, are articles of commerce. They are bought and sold. You can hire them by the year or by the hour. The only thing in the world not for sale is character."

"God assumed from the beginning that the wise of the world would view Christians as fools…and He has not been disappointed. Devout Christians are destined to be regarded as fools in modern society. We are fools for Christ’s sake. We must pray for courage to endure the scorn of the sophisticated world. If I have brought any message today, it is this: Have the courage to have your wisdom regarded as stupidity. Be fools for Christ. And have the courage to suffer the contempt of the sophisticated world."

"If, even as the price to be paid for a fifth vote, I ever joined an opinion for the Court that began: ‘The Constitution promises liberty to all within its reach, a liberty that includes certain specific rights that allow persons, within a lawful realm, to define and express their identity,’ I would hide my head in a bag. The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie."

RIP David Bowie, 1947-2016 and a Review of 'Blackstar,' 2016

David Bowie managed to turn even his death into an artistic act. He last toured in 2003, when he had to cut the Reality tour short due to health issues. He subsequently disappeared from the music scene until 2012’s surprise release of a new record. That record (The Next Day) was good, but not great. Critics and fans were just happy that he was making music again. January 8th of this year he released what we now know was his final record, the daring Blackstar. Bowie then died two days later. He had kept his 18 month struggle with liver cancer a secret from the public (and even many of his close associaties, apparently), so the excitement of a new Bowie record was followed by shock, as most fans like myself were looking forward to yet another career renaissance. He knew that this would be his last record, so a close listen to the lyrics and themes take on new importance with Blackstar. It seems rare (I can’t think of any parallels) that a musical artist gets to make a record knowing that this is his last chance to say what he wants to say. It is probably even rarer that it is done so successfully and so gracefully.

I probably don’t need to write the standard obituary for David Bowie here, as most of you know the important touchstones. If I had a dollar for every time he was called a “chameleon” in a review or article, I would have no need to buy any Powerball tickets. But, the name fits. Bowie was on the vanguard of many different musical trends in his almost five decades in music (I think the mid-80’s through the 90’s was probably the only period where he was more a follower of trends than leader, although even then he still made some worthwhile music). For many artists, Bowie was more influential on them than The Beatles. Duran Duran said that was the case for them.

Bowie is one of the few artists where you can become obsessed with various periods of his career. Most artists would be lucky to have an entire career worthy of fan obsession, but you can dive into Bowie’s glam period, or his Berlin Trilogy, or his pop excursions, or his work in electronic music…and be rewarded just focusing on one of those periods.

Something else rare was that through the vast majority of his career (maybe except for the late 80’s), Bowie was always cool. You never had to apologize for being a Bowie fan. Even when he was in his 50’s, he was making music that younger generations of musicians and fans were following. He knew how to manage his image masterfully. He even knew when (and how) to disappear.

I got onboard with 1983’s Let’s Dance. Blame my age, it was when I was becoming aware of pop music. I still love that record, although by many it is seen as one of his more uncool, least experimental efforts. The five core songs on it (title track, “Modern Love,” “China Girl,” “Cat People,” and “Criminal World”) still stand up as fantastic, varied pop/rock songs in my book. (Also fun that a very out of place Stevie Ray Vaughan plays on them). It was Bowie's commercial peak, which may explain the lack of critical fawning for the album. But the same guy who made Let’s Dance made 1977’s krautrock-loving experimental masterpiece Low? Or the glam touchstone The Rise and Fall of Ziggy Stardust and the Spiders from Mars? Or quirky folk of Hunky Dory? Or the plastic soul of Young Americans? Or the electronic-drenched Earthling? Yep. Same guy. Or how about releasing Low and ‘Heroes,’ two unquestionable masterpieces, in the same freaking year?!

And with Bowie it was never clear how much of it was sincere or how much of it was a put-on. “It” being whatever genre he happened to be creating or revolutionizing or diving into at the time. To some that has been a turn-off. But I think a certain distance Bowie kept from whatever world he was exploring also allowed him to quickly move on to other exciting musical planets without lingering for too long in one place.

My favorite period? Probably the Berlin Trilogy (especially if you can extend it to the one record previous and the one right after to make it five records: Station to Station, Low, ‘Heroes,’ Lodger, and Scary Monsters).

Anyway, I could go on about remembering Bowie, but I want to talk about his final record, Blackstar. I loved it when I heard it on the day it was released. But his death makes it more significant than just the next Bowie record. It is the last Bowie record. (Although I have no doubt the vaults will be raided for some posthumous releases).

He put together a new band for this last record. Mostly they were young jazz players, and Donny McCaslin’s exciting saxophone playing is all over it. It is a return to his more experimental tendencies, doggedly uncommercial (the title track was released as the first single, and it is ten minutes long, a complex labyrinth of sounds that still holds together, but obviously much too complex and lengthy for radio). Longtime Bowie producer Tony Visconti stated that the band were unaware of Bowie’s declining health as they were recording, but that Bowie always intended this record to be his swansong, his “parting gift” to his fans. What a rich gift it is. Knowing it to be his last, he had no reason to compromise at all for commercial considerations. No tour to plan. No follow-up to set up or work on. This was it. Some might fold under that type of pressure (how do you cap off a career spanning four decades? While knowing you are dying while doing it?) But it is also liberating, I imagine.

ABOVE: Check out Bowie's fascinating video for the title track to his new record, "Blackstar"

These lyrics, while typically not exactly straightfoward, contemplate his mortality, saying goodbye and his legacy. The gorgeous Cure-like dirge “Lazarus”: “Look up here, I’m in heaven / Got scars that can’t be seen / I’ve got drama, can’t be stolen / Everybody knows me now” and “just like that bluebird / oh, I’ll be free / Ain’t that just like me.” Or from “Dollar Days”: “If I never see the English evergreens I’m running to / It’s nothing to me” and “Don’t believe for just one second I’m forgetting you / I’m trying to, I’m dying to” (or is it “too”?) What a lovely goodbye the final two tracks are, where “Dollar Days” and “I Can’t Give Everything Away” segue together. Both are lush, flowing ballads, and the repeated refrain of the last song – “I can’t give everything / I can’t give everything / Away” – could stand as the epitaph for his entire career. Bowie produced thrilling, daring, yet still accessible music, but there was always a bit of mystery, a bit of the opaque. As much as he gave to his music and fans, he still held something back. That for some reason made it even more intriguing. By the way, that is not to say that it is all moody. "Sue (or a Season of Crime)" and "'Tis a Pity She Was a Whore" rock out a bit.

As a final gift, a final artistic statement where he incorporated his own death into the work (and it must be added that the final two videos for "Blackstar" and "Lazarus" are essential for the entire package as well)…I can’t think of a more enigmatic yet satisfying, from an artistic perspective, way to bow out. I read a great article recently on Bowie’s passing where the author said, only slightly tongue in cheek and I’m paraphrasing, “I can say that the human race was fortunate to share the planet at the same time that Bowie was here.” RIP David Bowie.

Blackstar: **** out of *****

Dez Reviews 'Star Wars: The Adventures of Han and Chewie,' er, I mean, 'Star Wars: The Force Awakens'

Well, here it is. So how good is it? Does it occupy the same rarified air that the original Trilogy does (or, let's face it, really just 'A New Hope' and "Empire Strikes Back')? Does it bring back the wonder once again? Does it start to heal the, in the words of a recent review I read, PTSD inflicted by George Lucas upon Star Wars fans with his infernal Prequels?

Yes. To all of the above. One thing that I quickly was reminded of as I watched this new chapter in the Star Wars saga, was just how bad the Prequels were. My God, how we wanted to love them. How we yearned to love them. But they are, quite simply, cold and unloveable. As cold as the overstuffed digital effects that George Lucas has made his religion. Side note: get a copy of the great documentary 'The People vs. George Lucas,' which chronicles the love/hate relationship Star Wars fanatics have with The Creator (Lucas). But the Prequels did provide a service, in a sense. They brought expectations back down to earth, they freed director J.J. Abrams and future directors of impossible standards to meet. Because whatever they do, even if it is just filming Han Solo sitting on the toilet reading a magazine for an hour, it would still be better than 'Phantom Menace.'

I will keep this review spoiler free until the end, at which point I will warn you, dear reader, with a SPOILER ALERT so you can stop reading there if you are one of the 5 people left in this country who have not seen this movie.

First the negatives. As many reviews have already pointed out, Abrams' reverence for the original Trilogy is a little too prevalent. He recreates, in a way, many of the key elements of 1977's 'A New Hope,' with his own cantina scene, a new Death Star, another trench run, a new Darth Vader-like character with his own new Tarkin-like foil, a new heroic trio of two boys and a girl. Then he stretches things with another Oedipal plot. Domnhall Gleeson's General Hux is not nearly as menacing or cool as Grand Moff Tarkin was (who he was clearly designed to model). Peter Cushing, who played Tarkin in 1977, was a unique and interesting actor, and Gleeson, at least here, is not. I do like how Hux and new generation Vader obsessive Kylo Ren are competing for power within the new First Order. That provides for some more interesting dynamic than the Tarkin/Vader-on-a-leash dynamic of 1977 did.

BELOW: Unfortunately, General Hux...

...is no Grand Moff Tarkin.

My only other criticism is something that has been present in every Star Wars film. For a movie that spans galaxies, it's a small universe after all. Many things in this film (as with the others) happen due to very fortuitous circumstances. The new Death Star is literally embedded in and is the size of an entire planet. Yet the characters seem to run into each other at the right times. Han Solo and Chewbacca have been searching for their Millenium Falcon for presumably years, and they happen to come across Rey and Finn in the Falcon when they need it. It seems pretty lucky that Rey happens to be in Maz Kanata's cantina, and Kanata just happens to have Luke Skywalker's lightsaber in her basement storage. But you know, go through any of the Star Wars films and they often depend on these coincidental meetings. You just sort of accept this and enjoy the film.

But the positives are huge. Let's just say that I did not really want to rush out and see any of the Prequels a second time after I saw them. When this was over, I was already thinking about watching it again. Abrams has brought back a light touch, humor, interesting characters, and good dialogue...all of which was missing from the Prequels. This movie, above anything else, was FUN. Gen. Hux aside, his new stable of characters are all interesting. I am looking forward to continuing the adventure with Poe Dameron, Rey, Finn, Kylo Ren, etc. in the films to come. Abrams masterfully brought in the old characters and integrated these new ones. And it was natural. The new and the old never felt out of place in each others' company. That was a feat.

It would have been so easy to make Kylo Ren a Darth Vader clone (he certainly does physically). But while Kylo Ren may be obsessed with Vader, he is not Vader. The key scene for me, the one where I decided "oh, this guy is interesting in his own right," was when some underling delivered the usual "they got away" news to Ren. Vader would have Force-choked the poor bastard and then promoted someone else. Ren takes his lightsaber and throws a tantrum, destroying the console before him, then takes a breath and steadies himself, turns to the messenger and asks "anything else?" He is not in control of his emotions or powers, he is a live wire and unpredictable. That makes him more dangerous in some ways. It would have been so easy and lazy to make him some generic baddie that you see in so many superhero movies. Abrams doesn't do that.

ABOVE: Kylo Ren has an unhealthy Darth Vader obsession

Abrams is the ultimate Star Wars fanboy. That can be a negative, as is discussed above in that Abrams doesn't take more risks with the franchise than he could have. But, he also knows what every Star Wars fan wants. And that is more Han f*ckin' Solo and more Chew-f*ckin-bacca. And he delivers. Han and Chewie are major characters in this film. And anyone of my generation who doesn't get a lump in their throat, or at least get some goosebumps, when Han and Chewie step aboard the Millenium Falcon once again...I don't want to know you. You are not of my species. Harrison Ford is more grizzled, but his Han Solo is still the rogue he always was, albeit a bit more wise and weary. How Solo and Chewie work with the new Rey and especially Finn is just fantastic. About as smooth of a passing of the torch as I have ever seen on film. As a subset of this point, Abrams also makes more use of Chewie as his own character, not just as a sidekick of Han Solo. That was welcome as well.

ABOVE: HELL YEAH

The real favor Abrams has done for us is creating a new set of heroes to take us into the future. Daisy Ridley with her portrayal of the resourceful scavenger/orphan Rey who is strong with The Force makes her an instant star, and deservedly so. Oscar Isaac's cocky X-Wing fighter pilot Poe Dameron is great as well, and someone who I wish got more screen time. I am sure he will in future films. But the real secret weapon here is John Boyega's soulful stormtrooper with a conscience, Finn. It is through Finn where much of the humor comes. As he breaks Poe out of the First Order's prison ship...Finn: "just stay calm." Poe: "I am calm." Finn: "I'm talking to myself." These three characters are more than capable of taking this franchise into the next trilogy and beyond. And, as has often been commented upon, a more diverse future. The three major characters for the future: a white female strong with The Force, and a black man and a hispanic man.

ABOVE: John Boyega as Finn (seen here having a heart to heart with Han Solo) has more heart, spirit and character than all of the characters George Lucas created in the Prequel Trilogy combined.

Bottom line: while not a perfect film, it is as much as we could expect and hope for. A fun, rollicking ride that is reverential of Star Wars history but is also taking it into the future. A future that I can't wait to see.

**** out of *****

Just for funsies, where does 'The Force Awakens' fall within the franchise as far as greatness? I'd put them in this order:

The Empire Strikes Back *****
A New Hope *****
The Force Awakens ****
Return of the Jedi ***1/2
Revenge of the Sith ***
Attack of the Clones **
Phantom Menace *

SPOILER ALERT...read no further if you have not seen the film and wish to be surprised...SPOILER ALERT

I am giving you more space so you don't see the next sentence inadvertently.

OK? Are you ready?

Ready?

On the death of Han Solo. It was appropriate and gives the film necessary gravitas. The scene could have been done a little better, and the whole son of Solo/Solo dynamic mirrors too neatly Vader/Luke, but it completes the handing of the franchise over to a new generation. Interesting to note that Ford wanted Solo killed in 'Return of the Jedi,' but Lucas refused to do it. He gets his wish here. I love that Chewie, though, survives and joins the new characters seemingly permanently. It will be cool to see Chewie in future films. Hard to believe that Han had never shot Chewie's crossbow laser, though. All those years?

And I love what Abrams has done with Luke Skywalker. The MIA Luke in all the previews and promos...genius. Perfect marketing and build-up. And like Spielberg and holding back the shark in 'Jaws,' the fact that we don't even see Luke until the last minute of the film is great set-up for the next one. Yet like the shark, Luke is at the center of the plot and a presence throughout the film. And Abrams has built up enough questions about Luke that we really want to see what happens two years from now.