Entertainment
'Pavements' review: A slanted, enchanting documentary-biopic-prank
Every band has its biggest fans. The ’90s slacker/alt rock group Pavement is probably the greatest, most vital musical group in existence to someone, but right from its opening frames, Alex Ross Perry’s Pavements deflates the grandeur of this idea, sarcastically overstating the band’s stature in its opening text. In an age of musical biopic plenty, this semi-ironic, postmodern take — which runs through Perry’s part drama, part documentary, and part mockumentary — may be just what the doctor ordered.
To those with only passing knowledge of the Stockton, California, rockers — Stephen Malkmus, Bob Nastanovich, Scott Kannberg, Steve West, and Mark Ibold — this approach to the band’s concert footage may seem counterproductive, but it also perfectly embodies their lackadaisical, experimental facade. The unique form of Perry’s film has its strengths and drawbacks. However, like Pavement itself, what sets the film apart is its outright refusal to adhere to tradition. It is, for better or worse, unique.
What is Pavements about?
Through split screens that contrast the group’s late-’90s breakup with its 2022 reunion, Pavements establishes a sense of visual and narrative duality early on. While the film eventually chronicles the lives of its members (and the band’s life as a whole) in slightly more linear fashion, this contrast establishes what appear to be the film’s dramatic parameters: an early success story later granted a new lease on life. However, the strange nature of the band’s revival soon begins fading into view, revealing just how idiosyncratic this movie truly is.
Much of the movie unfolds in side-by-side split screen, which has become a common technique in musical docs, from Todd Haynes’ Rothko-inspired The Velvet Underground to the self-generating, new-each-time Eno. However, Pavements uses this visual cue for tongue-in-cheek purpose early on. On one side, the band’s frontman Stephen Malkmus espouses his youthful, perhaps naive philosophies in a decades-old video. On the other, actor Joe Keery (Steve Harrington on Stranger Things) begins reciting the very same words, with remarkably similar intonations. This reveals — amusingly, and acerbically — that the movie’s real subjects exist alongside fictitious versions of them, a group of young actors (including the likes of Nat Wolff and Griffin Newman) who have been cast in a film called Range Life, a prestige biopic practically designed to win awards.
The doc veers between presenting the making of this satirical project and presenting it as a movie within a movie, whose footage is sprinkled sporadically throughout Pavements (rife with its own “For Your Consideration” watermark, as though it were a screener for award voting). Perry really did direct and exhibit this feature-length, Bohemian Rhapsody–style satire in New York last year — starring seasoned performers like Jason Schwartzman and Tim Heidecker in biopic stock roles, like the band’s manager and a record executive — with the intention of including this premiere footage in the documentary.
Soon, Pavements begins documenting not just the band themselves, but the development of three parallel art projects that go hand in hand with the band’s recent reunion: the aforementioned movie, a museum installation dedicated to the group, and Slanted! Enchanted!, a Broadway-style jukebox musical starring Michael Esper and Zoe Lister-Jones that pulls from the band’s discography.
Pavements takes a multifaceted approach to its subjects.
The film cuts between its four aforementioned trajectories — the band and its performance, the biopic and its making, the museum, and the show, each with its own dedicated, roughly equal screen time — with reckless abandon. However, these subjects can be paired up along two interesting axes. On one hand, old footage of the band, when contrasted with their museum commemoration, serves to contrast the past and present, and eventually creates a chronology, albeit non-chronologically. On the other hand, the biopic project is tongue-in-cheek, as though it were more about the biopic genre than about Pavement themselves, and thus, it embodies the group’s ironic musings. But this could not feel more different from the musical theater project, which draws from the group’s lyrics and melodies to create a sincere story (this show also really did premiere, in 2022).
While Pavements might seem like it meanders for the first of its two hours, cutting rapidly between these four trajectories helps weave together a complete fabric — about the band’s story then and now, and about the conflict between their approach and the meaning behind their work. While watching the movie, you may not feel like you’re learning anything about the group or its members, but all that really means is you aren’t learning things according to the linear, straightforward language that most music docs and biopics have established.
However, the film’s most entertaining segments are undoubtedly those featuring Keery, which chronicle his fictitious preparation process in meticulous detail. More than anything or anyone in Pavements, the actor seems to embody the group’s spirit through his Borat-like pranks, in which he sits down with accent coaches to prepare for his role as Malkmus and meets up with various people he thinks might be able to help him stay in character. Fittingly, the only music film Pavements resembles in any fashion is Popstar: Never Stop Never Stopping.
What does Pavements actually have to say about the band Pavement?
The film, amidst its head-spinning montage approach, goes to ludicrous lengths with its movie-in-a-movie, all but presenting it in full during its runtime. However, this extended lark isn’t really about the band, per se, the way the other segments are — none of which are individually sufficient to make any viewer a Pavement expert. Beyond a few dates and events, you’re unlikely to come away from Pavements knowing much more about its members and their college disc jockey days than when you went in, which understandably elicits the question: “What’s the point?”
The point, it would seem, lies in the making of the film itself, as an anti-biopic that runs counter to everything a standard Hollywood biopic is — or rather, what it represents. If Pavement was an anti-institution band, then Pavements is its anti-institution movie made with their participation. In presenting a hilariously schmaltzy vision of what a straightforward biopic might have looked like, Perry helps them avoid an overly serious canonization.
In a way, he helps keep them young. Bands, when they reach a certain age or threshold, become nostalgic cover acts for themselves, and Pavements is determined to prevent this from happening at all costs, even if it means crafting a movie on the verge of avant-garde that might alienate half its audience.
Still, even when the various narrative threads in Pavements start to meander, the movie remains an entrancing sensory experience, given just how much screen time is dedicated to performance footage, both real and re-created. At the end of the day, despite the tricks and pranks Perry pulls, he knows full well that the reason people show up to musical biopics in the first place — and the reason they’re made to begin with — is music that connects with people’s sensibilities. This, he delivers in spades, all while maintaining a reverence for Pavement by being, well, irreverent.
Pavements does not currently have a theatrical or digital release date.
UPDATE: Sep. 25, 2024, 4:51 p.m. EDT Pavements was reviewed on Sept. 7, 2024, out of its World Premiere at the Venice International Film Festival. This post has been updated to toast its New York Film Festival premiere.
Entertainment
macOS 27 Beta has a secret Siri AI interface. How to try it.
You’ve waited long enough for Apple’s relaunch of Siri as an AI assistant, and now you can finally try out the Siri AI beta for iOS. But, psst, don’t tell anyone, but there’s even more Siri AI for you to try out with a secret Siri AI interface on Mac.
A Reddit user on the r/MacOSBeta subreddit has discovered a “hidden lightweight UI” for Siri AI in the macOS 27 Golden Gate beta. This feature basically provides users with an array of AI tools, presented in a pop-up menu whenever text is highlighted.
The Siri AI pop-up interface includes AI tools such as Rewrite, Proofread, “How does this sound?,” and “Edit with Siri.” There are also menu options for summarization and providing bullet points from the selected text.
Siri AI can also provide a selection of specific tools dependent on the context of what’s selected. For example, highlighting a phone number provides a pop-up to “Add to contacts” or when selecting an address the pop-up offers an “Open in Maps” option. There are tools for creating calendar events, composing messages and emails, and tracking flights and packages as well.
Why is the feature hidden? Well, as MacRumors points out, the Siri AI interface in macOS 27 developer beta 3 and public beta 1 is simply an unfinished product. Certain features don’t yet work how they’re supposed to. Some options don’t work at all. Clearly, Apple has yet to make it available because it’s simply not ready.
Mashable Light Speed
However, Reddit users say there is a way to turn the interface on in the macOS Golden Gate Beta. According to Redditor pdfu, if users running the macOS 27 beta simply need to open up the Terminal and input a few lines of code.
Please note: We do not recommend running terminal instructions or changing important OS files unless you fully understand what you’re doing. We have not tested these terminal instructions, so proceed at your own risk.
sudo mkdir -p /Library/Preferences/FeatureFlags/Domain && sudo defaults write /Library/Preferences/FeatureFlags/Domain/WritingTools LightweightUI_macOS -dict Enabled -bool true
After that, the Reddit threat instructs users to restart their computer and the Siri AI interface will be enabled.
If you’ve had enough of the unfinished interface, you can turn it back off by once again opening Terminal and the following input:
sudo defaults write /Library/Preferences/FeatureFlags/Domain/WritingTools LightweightUI_macOS -dict Enabled -bool false
It’s unclear if the Siri AI interface will launch with the official version of the new macOS. However, it’s certainly interesting to see Apple further brand its Siri AI relaunch as an all-in-one AI tool across the company’s products.
Entertainment
X-Men ‘97 Just Secretly Connected Itself To The Raunchiest Marvel Movies
By Chris Snellgrove
| Updated
As a longtime Marvel fan, one of my favorite things about X-Men ‘97 is how many fun Easter eggs are stuffed into every single episode. Sometimes, these are winking references to earlier episodes. More often than not, they are connections to the comics and to the larger Marvel universe. Of course, these references are often of the blink-and-you’ll-miss-them variety. Because of this, you sometimes need to be as fast as Quicksilver on the remote control if you want to catch every wacky bit of trivia that pops up onscreen.
That was certainly the case with the recent episode “Weapon X, Lies, and DVDs.” This episode follows up on an earlier Animated Series episode (“Weapon X, Lies, and Video Tape”) and has Wolverine and a team of oddballs discovering major secrets about Weapon X. It’s an episode filled with some jaw-droppingly weird X-Men lore, including an appearance from everyone’s favorite xenomorph knock-offs, the Brood. However, that’s not the weirdest thing about this terrifying tale. The episode provides a list of characters attached to the Weapon X program, and if you pause at the right moment, you’ll see names from the raunchiest, bloodiest Marvel movies ever made: Deadpool and Logan!
The Ultimate In ’90s Media Technology
In Marvel Comics, it’s revealed that Weapon X wasn’t actually the name of the program. Instead, it was the Weapon Plus program, and Wolverine was referred to as “Weapon X” because he was the tenth experiment created by the program (X is the Roman numeral for 10). Incidentally, Weapon I was Captain America, who was turned into the world’s greatest soldier through an experimental super-serum. Later, the project switched to experimenting on mutants, with the goal of creating weaponized warriors who would be easy to control. There have been many characters experimented on or otherwise connected to the program, which is why so many names appear in “Weapon X, Lies, and DVD.”
The episode doesn’t get into the full tangled history of the program, which is consistently referred to as Weapon X. However, the characters do find test subject data on DVDs, all of which are helpfully labeled with the name of the person who was experimented on. One set of DVDs is very easy to view, and the other appears for only a brief moment. With the help of the pause button, though, you can identify some major names. This includes Bucky Barnes, better known to MCU fans as the Winter Soldier. It also includes characters who have only appeared in the comics, including the creepy villain, John Sublime.
The X-Men Get Raunchy
Unsurprisingly, Wolverine and his crew from this episode (including Maverick, Garrison Kane, Sabertooth, and Lady Deathstrike) all appear on the DVDs, as do other characters from Wolverine’s past, including Silver Fox. But for fans of the live-action movies, the most notable names that appear in the episode are Ajax and Deadpool (the villain and hero, respectively, of the first Deadpool movie) and X-23, who appeared in both Logan and Deadpool & Wolverine. Amusingly enough, this effectively connects the (mostly) family-friendly X-Men ‘97 with some of the raunchiest and most vulgar Marvel movies ever made!
Deadpool effectively paved the way for modern, R-rated superhero movies with a film that combined over-the-top ultraviolence and hilariously crass dialogue. It was also unapologetically raunchy, with a naughty Morena Baccarin sex scene that likely made the pre-cancerous Wade Wilson wish that his booty had a healing factor. Logan, meanwhile, was more serious but no less brutal, connecting X-23 (who was created for the kids’ show X-Men: Evolution) to a violent and heartbreaking film where we bid farewell to both Logan and Professor X. Now, that same character (who made a fan-favorite return in the wonderfully offensive Deadpool & Wolverine) is permanently tied to X-Men ‘97.
Does that mean we’re likely to see X-23 onscreen? Not really: even if X-Men ‘97 runs for several more seasons, there are so many ‘80s, ‘90s, and early ‘00s stories to adapt before the writers would ever get to her story. Deadpool might be likelier to appear: after all, he appeared in X-Men: The Animated Series via things like flashbacks and Morph transformations, and Morph continues to take on this appearance in X-Men ‘97. Is all of this leading up to a proper appearance from the Merc With a Mouth? Maybe. Somehow, though, I think Jean Grey will be too busy fighting Apocalypse to help Deadpool properly celebrate International Women’s Day!
Entertainment
Raunchy Stargate SG-1 Episode Is So Bad Even The Show Made Fun Of It
By Jonathan Klotz
| Updated
Once any show has been on the air for five years, it will start to wobble under its own internal logic, lore, and mythology. Stargate SG-1 was on the air for a decade, which means those early Season 1-3 episodes sometimes contradict what becomes canon later. In the case of Season 1’s “Hathor,” it’s unclear why a Goa’uld Queen needs male DNA to produce more larvae. Later episodes show that it’s not needed, and they can reproduce asexually, but that’s the least of the issues with “Hathor.”
Stargate Goes Full Species
“Hathor” centers around the unearthing of the Egyptian Goddess of Love, Hathor (Suanne Braun), who emerges from a sarcophagus after 3000 years, speaking English. Drawn to the Stargate, she shows up at Cheyenne Mountain and quickly starts bringing the men within the base into her thrall. Starting with Daniel (Michael Shanks), then General Hammond (Don S. Davis), O’Neill (Richard Dean Anderson) is the next to succumb, though Teal’c’s (Christopher Judge) Goa’uld renders him resistant to her power.
That sets up a showdown between the men and the women (all five of them), led by Captain Carter (Amanda Tapping) and Dr. Frasier (Teryl Rothery) in the locker room where Hathor is preparing to use a hot tub to birth a new generation of Goa’uld larvae using Daniel Jackson’s juices. That’s how the show refers to it. It’s as awkward as it sounds.
The Writers Chose To Ignore The Episode
Stargate SG-1 would eventually mock “Hathor” in the Season 8 episode “Citizen Joe,” a clip show that highlighted the ridiculousness of those early season episodes. “Hathor” was the first episode in the series where the team didn’t travel through the Stargate, and the only one written by David Bennett Carren and J. Larry Carroll. Hathor herself would come back two more times, as a much more formidable (and better written) villain, particularly in Season 2’s “Out of Mind.”
Ever since Homer introduced the concept of Sirens in The Odyssey, the “beautiful woman mind controls all men” trope is widely used in sci-fi and fantasy shows. Stargate SG-1 had no problem recycling classic tropes and often doing them incredibly well, from time loops (“Windows of Opportunity”) to “that old man can kick everyone’s ass” (Bra’tac), but “Hathor” was a misfire.
Teryl Rothery wasn’t even able to deliver the line “there’s five women in here, and we’re very lonely” while keeping a straight face. The more series re-watches you do, “Hathor” sticks out more and more like one of the worst episodes of the series. Unlike “Emancipation,” which was so bad it caused the writers to rework Carter’s character, “Hathor” has no silver lining, other than the self-styled goddess having more character, personality, and better lines in her later appearances. Her debut episode could be erased from the timeline, and you’d still know everything about her within minutes of her second appearance.
They can’t all be winners, and with a decade of episodes to get through, Stargate SG-1 was going to have some episodes you don’t have to bother watching.
Fresh off bitter loss, Cards take aim at MLB-worst Angels
Michigan ending AD Warde Manuel's embattled tenure
