The Shark is Still Working: The Legacy and Impact of Jaws

It's Shark Week, so while many of you are soaking up all the marine action airing on Discovery, I spent this morning watching the latest documentary on the pop culture phenomenon that is Jaws.  The Shark is Still Working: The Legacy and Impact of Jaws is a feature-length documentary that was included on the 2012 Blu-Ray release of my favorite picture.  I hadn't taken the time to view this collection of never-before-seen footage and interviews with the cast and crew, partly because I've seen so many of these things.  Heck, I've even read numerous accounts of the film's production, release, and most importantly, the impact the movie has had on the industry at large and the legions of fans who still adore it.  I found this documentary to be the best of the lot, and I was amazed at just how moving this making-of feature was.

Now, I could go on and on about the movie, and anyone who knows me well has probably heard me do so on multiple occasions.  Yet I'm going to direct my attention to The Shark is Still Working, which was a truly emotional experience for me.  Obviously, anyone who loves the film is going to grow wistful when thinking about the key figures involved who are no longer with us, namely Peter Benchley, Robert Shaw, and Roy Scheider, but there was so much more to this documentary.  I don't know if I can adequately describe how much impact hearing about the ultimate fate of the Orca had on me.  Seeing how Martha's Vineyard has been shaped by the movie and witnessing how the making of the film is still celebrated there was also profoundly touching.  There are many great movies, just as there are many great books, yet the scope of this particular piece of art's legacy transcends both mediums.  It's a global experience, and the legions of devotees who still cherish Jaws give it a revered spot in our society than cannot be understated.

The documentary was riveting, capturing Peter Benchley's efforts to write the story, the studio's efforts to turn the property into a motion picture, the making of the film, and the unbelievable reception that followed.  To this day, many people still harbor potent feelings on both sharks and the ocean based on Jaws.  To this day, our interest in sharks and the popularity of such material still serves to enrich the storied history of one of our most beloved tales.  The Shark is Still Working does a fantastic job of exploring how the story came to be and probes the fascination and wonder Jaws has spawned for several generations of people--not just Americans, but people all over the world.  It was a magical ride, and I can honestly say that few stories have struck such a chord with me.  Surely, I've never been so moved by a documentary about the making of a film, and that's both a credit to everyone involved with this feature and the film and book that launched the phenomenon.

If you are a fan of Jaws, (and seriously, who isn't?) you owe it to yourself to sit down and spend a little time with The Shark is Still Working.  I thought it was positively mesmerizing, and it only served to reinforce my love for a story that is proving to be timeless.

From the Archives: The Best of Times

Yes, I'm still recycling, but there's a method to the madness.  Football is almost upon us, and that means it's time . . . for The Best of Times.  This piece was also originally published in RVA Magazine.  Enjoy!

From the Archives:

The Best of Times

What is it?

The Best of Times is a 1986 comedy starring Robin Williams and Kurt Russell.  In the film, the two reside in the small town of Taft, where lovable loser Jack Dundee (Williams) is still haunted by the pass from local hero Reno Hightower (Russell) that he dropped in the big football game 13 years ago.  Dundee decides to stage the game once again in the hopes of atoning for his biggest mistake, but first he has to sell this ridiculous idea to both the town and his former teammates.  Once he manages to do that, it will be a miracle if he can get his old team in shape, and speaking of miracles, do you think Jack can actually catch the ball this time out?

Why don’t I know about it?

The film didn’t win over many critics or audiences when it debuted, and despite being televised routinely after its release and gaining a meager following, The Best of Times never really evolved into a true sleeper either.

What makes it unique?

Before Ron Shelton (Bull Durham, White Men Can’t Jump, Blue Chips, Cobb, The Great White Hype, Tin Cup, Play it to the Bone) gained notoriety for creating some of the best-received sports films ever made, he wrote this little gem for Kings Road Entertainment.  Shelton got the idea for the film when the high school he attended in Santa Barbara actually re-staged several big games against rival San Marcos in the early 80s as part of a fund-raising effort.  The first such game was a huge success, selling out, and according to Shelton sub-sequent games were also successful until the practice was discontinued due to injuries. 

Shelton has some issues with the piece, most notably his displeasure in regards to an epilogue left unfilmed.  He also doesn’t like some of director Roger Spottiswoode’s choices, though he claims that the studio gave the director a tough time.  Shelton wasn’t pleased with the publicity the film received either, and as far as business relationships are concerned, he writes the whole thing off as a very bad experience.

Kurt Russell was already a budding star when this picture was made, but Williams was just a zany comic with some success in television and a few mediocre films under his belt who would hit the big time with Good Morning, Vietnam a year later in 1987.  They have great chemistry here, and the film works best when it is centered squarely on their shoulders, yet they have never shared the screen again. 

When I was composing this piece I couldn’t find any commentary from the stars themselves.  That leads me to believe that this film probably doesn’t rank among their personal favorites, though it is entirely possible that they have made comments to the contrary that aren’t currently available.

For the most part, this is a truly a forgotten film within the industry.  Despite the star power and the creativity at work behind-the-scenes, there isn’t a lot of fanfare for this one to be found.  In fact, while I was putting this piece together, I didn’t find any retrospectives or features devoted to The Best of Times, though I should not that there are a wealth of forums and reviews where fans express their strong feelings for the film.

Is it any good?

I have loved this picture for a long time.  I have loved this movie for at least as long as I have loved football, and that’s a very long time indeed.  It is a bit clumsy in places and I know the stars of this piece have certainly offered up better performances, but this will always be a personal favorite of mine for a variety of reasons. 

First off, Kurt was at a point here where he could no wrong, and his Reno Hightower is a joy to watch.  Kurt doesn’t miss a beat throughout this irreverent and ultimately heart-warming little oddity.  Williams is often a bit much for yours truly, but here he is subdued enough (and trust me, a subdued Robin Williams is still a lot like you or I on crack) to amuse me without annoying me.  His Jack Dundee is a wounded man, but seldom has another man’s misery been so incredibly funny to behold.  The scene where he goes to a massage parlor and pays someone to listen to his agonizing self-dissection, all of which is based upon dropping the football in the big game, is one of his funniest bits ever, and he is consistently amusing throughout. 

While clearly the stars of the piece, Russell and Williams receive a lot of help from a great cast.  M. Emmet Walsh, R.G. Armstrong, Pamela Reed, Holly Palance, and Donald Moffat are all game for this quirky comedy, and everyone brings some humor to the mix.  Everyone fares well unless they happen to be involved in a poorly-staged song and dance routine that is positively embarrassing to behold and nearly drags the whole affair into oblivion.  Yet the film survives and offers up several far more entertaining and memorable setpieces along the way.   

Williams and Russell are both at the top of their game throughout, and their reliable performances are a model of consistency.  This is my favorite film featuring Robin Williams, and in truth I like Russell’s Reno Hightower almost as much as I like Snake Plissken, Jack Burton, and R.J. MacReady.  That’s high praise indeed coming from yours truly, and if you don’t believe that you need to take another look at my Top 5 John Carpenter Films.   

Additionally, the home stretch is definitely a crowd-pleaser.  The film that stumbles occasionally in the first and second acts really nails the big game in the third act.  Russell is truly magnificent, and the fire and determination he shows in this muddy battle makes you want to go out and block for him.  The film becomes surprisingly dramatic as the contest unfolds, and it’s hard not to cheer when fate is kind enough to offer Jack a shot at redemption in the closing seconds. 

The verdict:

The Best of Times isn’t a great picture, yet it still works.  Don’t be surprised if there are a few scenes in the mix that are so bad you can’t comprehend why they weren’t cut altogether, and yet don’t be surprised if you do find yourself incredibly moved by the silly happenings of this fun little film.  It’s whimsical, it’s absurd, it’s a little sloppy here and there, and it is anchored by two terrific performers in great roles who make us care about this imperfect movie that slipped through the cracks.  In the end, The Best of Times succeeds because it is fueled by warmth and a premise we can all identify with—after all, who wouldn’t like a shot to make up for at least one grievous error from the past—and even if it is a bit rough around the edges, it remains a lovable winner with a lot of heart.   

The Man with the Iron Fists

I'm a kung-fu guy.  Like, I love the movies, and I studied it.  Well, kind of.  There wasn't a kung-fu class anywhere around, so I spent a good portion of my life studying everything that I had access to.  I love the old movies, particularly The 5 Deadly Venoms and any other Chang Cheh features.  If it comes c/o The Shaw Brothers, I'm probably down, and then there's that Bruce Lee guy.  We can file all of that under stuff that I love.

So, I was thrilled with the throwback approach RZA took with The Man with the Iron Fists, and for the most part, I enjoyed the picture.  It's ludicrous, and anyone who doesn't like a vintage kung-fu outing shouldn't expect to enjoy this one any more, but I'm cool with that.  I loved the score, the choreography was on point, and all of the characters were badass.  Well, all of them except for RZA in the title role.

Now, I'm not really busting his chops for giving himself the lead role, though it should be noted that while he managed to pull his fight scenes off, he was definitely the least impressive presence in the film when it came time to throw down.  Yet that wasn't really the problem.  The problem was in a picture bursting with interesting characters, the main character was dull.  Seriously dull.  I'm not even sure that it was because it was a tired approach that we've seen a hundred times over, for that could be said of many of the roles, and most of them managed to impress.  There were like ten primary characters, and everyone but the main character was a delight to watch in this festive romp.

Russell Crowe owned the movie, but he had some serious competition.  The gore was fantastic.  All things considered, I had a good time with it, so I'm going to recommend it, but it's a shame that the main protagonist wasn't more charismatic.

Which Jaws has the bigger bite?

While I'm resurrecting old bits, here's the first piece I published in RVA Magazine.  It's a comparison of Steven Spielberg's film and Peter Benchley's book.  It's brief, but since that there are few (if any) tales that I enjoy more, it's something I had a lot of fun with.  Enjoy!

Which Jaws has the bigger bite?

It’s a true anomaly: a stellar book is optioned by Hollywood and brought to the screen in epic fashion, surpassing the source text in the eyes of many.  For once, fans of either format can sit and ponder the merits of these beloved blockbusters, engaged in a difficult debate.  Which version has the sharpest teeth? 

            When Peter Benchley wrote his signature novel, he ignited the literary world with a gripping “Man vs. Nature” opus that plunges the reader into a marine nightmare on the first page and never looks back.  Benchley based his work on an actual series of attacks on the East Coast attributed to a single shark and this gives his plot a potent dose of realism.  The characters are well drawn, the setting is perfect, and the prose is both rhythmic and knowledgeable, a delicate balancing act performed to perfection here.

            Steven Spielberg took Benchley’s book to tinseltown and frightened audiences across the country out of the water with his amped-up approach and an explosively different climax (literally) that won the author over despite some initial conflict.  Young Spielberg was willing to take more chances and it shows, this stark and scary picture is a far cry from the family fare the director is also known for.  Here, his ambition and ability join forces with an exceptional cast to land an instant classic.  Give an assist to John Williams, the famed film composer who supplied one of cinema’s grandest scores.

            Since there can be no doubt that both versions of this tale have touched countless lives, a prominent question arises: which is the better fishing trip to go on?  Unfortunately, this is a query that simply cannot be answered.  The two visions vary enough that it simply will not work if one attempts to compare and contrast them.  Prominent characters and subplots within the novel didn’t make it before the cameras, most notably an extramarital sexual encounter between Matt Hooper and Ellen Brody that charges the third act of the book with blistering tension as three men take to the sea in pursuit of one of nature’s most violent killers.  Alas, who can forget Robert Shaw’s incredible monologue regarding his service on the Indianapolis, a plot device Spielberg originated and a setpiece the actor ran wild with.  There is also the conclusion to consider, as well as the fact that a primary character who survives on celluloid perishes in print.

            This is all a blessing, as those who know and love the story have two separate experiences to enjoy, both of which are frequently cited as favorites by bookworms and film buffs alike. 

Popping the Clutch: an Interview with Neil Fallon (from 2007)

This is my interview with Neil Fallon that I referred to yesterday.  Once again, this interview was featured in RVA Magazine, and this chat took place way back in 2007.  I loved the format RVA Magazine was using back in those days, and this is one of the best pieces I provided them with during that timeframe.

Popping the Clutch:  An Interview with Neil Fallon conducted by James Wayland

                                                      

Clutch has been one of the most unique bands to grace the heavy scene since their inception nearly twenty years ago.  They have continued to evolve as their output has baffled critics and studio execs looking to label their original sound.  During that time, they've given us an assortment of terrific albums and songs, including the treasure chest that is Elephant Riders, the iconic stoner jam “Spacegrass,” and their most recent offering, From Beale St to Oblivion.  This newest recording has received rave reviews, and some publications, such as Metal Hammer, have gone so far as to call it "the best album the group has ever produced."

On March 21, Clutch will bring their rollicking brand of sonic aggression to The National.  Those of you who have seen the band live will undoubtedly be on hand if at all possible, but if you haven't seen this unruly juggernaut at work, you should make sure you score a ticket.  This show promises to be a vibrant celebration of beloved hits and personal favorites that everyone will be talking about afterward.  Recently, I sat down with lead singer Neil Fallon to talk about how the band prepares for such a gig, and we also discussed the band's body of work, their creative process, their relationship with the guys from Jackass, and their future plans.

Read on for a peek inside the inner workings of one of modern rock's most powerful acts, courtesy of one of metal's most versatile vocalists.

JW:      First off, Neil, on the behalf of RVA magazine, I’d like to thank you for taking time out of your schedule to talk to me today.  Obviously, we’ll be talking a lot about Clutch and the music you make, but before we get into that, let’s step outside the box for a moment.  Maybe you’d like to talk about what you’re doing when you’re not making music.

NF:       Well, that’s pretty rare.  You know, usually, I kind of sit around at home.  Like right now, I’m at home for a few weeks, I got a few weeks left.  I’m always working on music in one form or another.  Other than that, I kind of enjoy just being a homebody, just kind of studying the domestic sciences as it were.

JW:      So I assume it would be fair to say that the work is the play for Neil Fallon.

NF:       Yeah, I guess I’m in a lucky place.  I mean, I don’t mind--actually it’s not that I don’t mind, it’s just that even when I’m not on tour, I look forward to going down to the basement and writing music.  Even if it ends up in the garbage the next day—it’s not like it’s digging ditches, you know?

JW:      Right.  Aside from the music you’re making, what are you listening to these days?

NF:       Well, let’s see.  I’ve been listening to some John Fahey.  A friend of mine turned me on to a band called The Elves Shelves Fair--they’re kind of associated with the Deltones and Sugarman Three, kind of instrumental R&B.  I’ve been listening to a hip-hop artist called Mr. Lift, but then there’s all the standards, the blues stuff I’ve always been listening to that I always return to as a fail-safe.

JW:      Cool.  Are you a fan of the cinema?  Are there any movies you’ve seen lately that you would recommend to someone else?

NF:       Well, I went to see No Country for Old Men, which I thought was awesome because it didn’t have a very happy ending, and I always appreciate that in a movie.  Just for shits and giggles, I would recommend Planet Terror, which, when I saw the previews for it, I thought it looked terribly stupid, but I wish I had gone to see it in theatres because it’s an amazing bit of film.

JW:      I would completely agree.  I think Death Proof may have been a better movie, but Planet Terror was far more entertaining.

NF:       Yeah, Planet Terror was entertaining on a lot of different levels.

JW:      Well, as far as Clutch is concerned, I think the band is 17 years old now, if I’m correct.

NF:       Uh, something like that, yeah.

JW:      And I believe you’ve produced eight full-length studio albums. 

NF:       Yep, I think so.  I don’t have the stats on hand, but that sounds about right.

JW:      Well, it’s definitely difficult to classify your sound—while doing some research online, I came across the following descriptions on various sites:  we’ve got “stoner rock, blues rock, hardcore punk, funk metal, post grunge, alternative general,” which I guess is somehow different from standard alternative, and “rock fusion,” among others.  What do you make of these attempts to label your work?

NF:       I like to hear that.  It makes me feel like we’re doing our job.  Everything’s subjective, of course, and I would rather it be that way than to say: “They are this and nothing else.”  I think that’s why we’ve been able to do it as long as we have, because I don’t think we ever really had a preconceived notion of what this band is or what this band is not.  It’s just four guys who like to make music with each other, and whatever that music happens to be or evoke, that’s what it is.  We just kind of follow our instincts.

JW:      Talk to us a little about the inner workings of the band:  Are there roles and schedules that have become routine, or is it still a learning process after all this time?

NF:       Oh, it’s always a learning process.  I think the minute you stop learning, that’s basically when you’re getting ready to die.  I mean there’s obvious things like learning to play your instrument better, but you’re always still learning about new music out there that will influence you.  There’s always room for improvement.  We tour a lot, and touring can become monotonous, but if you look hard enough, there’s always something to learn out there. 

JW:      Do you guys have to place an emphasis on creating new music or is that just something that comes naturally? 

NF:       I think there are two modes that we work in.  There’s the mode when we’re supporting a record and we are writing new music, but that’s maybe not as intense as when we’re focusing on a new record.  When that happens--and that will happen for us probably within the next six months--by that time, we will have accumulated a dozen or so rough ideas.  Maybe only two or three of those ideas are worth a damn, but then we get into the studio--well not the studio, but Jean-Paul’s basement, which is a studio of sorts.  I kind of like the deadline, I like the intensity of it, because if you have all the time in the world, sometimes you suffer from a lack of proper motivation.

JW:      The last few albums have seen a notable addition--here I’m speaking of Mick Schauer on the organ—and I think I’ve noticed a palpable shift toward the blues.  Talk about how this has changed the band and the progress it has allowed you to achieve so far as the music you make is concerned.

NF:       Well, I think that as far as the blues element is concerned, that just sort of happened incidentally.  Eric Oblander was playing harmonica on the record, which, of course, is kind of bluesy, and there’s a couple of songs that were written more in that style.  The Hammond B3 is always associated with soul, R&B, and the blues.  Once again, we didn’t really think about it, it’s just what happened.  I don’t think any of us either then or now said “Okay, we’re moving in a blues direction.”  It’s just a foray into a different vibe, I guess, and where we’ll go after that remains to be seen.

JW:      You mentioned Eric, and I really thought he added a lot to “Electric Worry,” and when I took in a show at the 9:30 club in D.C., he was terrific on stage as well.  Do you think he may find his way into the mix again?

NF:       I believe so, but it’s hard to say.  This next tour that we’re doing, for various reasons, it’s just going to be the four of us, meaning Jean-Paul, myself, Tim and Dan.  At times it was getting to be a little more than we could handle, and I think we wanted to focus on the nuts and bolts.  We wanted to strip it down and then start adding things again, just to give the whole thing an overhaul.

JW:      A lot fans—and I’m not necessarily in agreement here--but a lot of fans felt that with some of those additions, the sound had become a little softer.  Do you think stripping those things away indicates a return to a harder sound?

NF:       Nah.  I mean, maybe it does, maybe it doesn’t.  It’s not an effort to—I always thought it was hokey when a band said they were going to return to their roots.  To me, that’s like saying “We’re just going to go down the beaten path, because the one we’re on isn’t very lucrative.”  For us, it’s just a matter of gaining a point of reference.  I guess maybe the best analogy I can make is that sometimes if you add too many ingredients to the pot, you can’t really taste what the hell is going on.  That’s not to say those things won’t ever happen again, I certainly hope they do, but sometimes there are certain points in time where you just have to stop and check yourself.           

JW:      I think you make a great point.  So much happens to a band when they achieve success that I think it’s fair to say that when a band says they’re “going back to their roots,” that would probably require a time machine.

NF:       Yeah, I mean everybody’s different.  Everybody ages.  Musicians are no different.  I think the whole “going back to your roots” thing is an admission of grave defeat in some regards.  I think if you want to be a healthy artist, you have to keep moving forward and be willing to accept failure as part of moving forward, and out of that failure you can learn.  I mean, it can’t always be roses.  I think it’s more important and more honorable to take a risk and fail than to just kind of rehash something you’ve done in the past that worked.  The minute you start saying “The fans want this, we should do that,” well then you cease to be a rock band.  You’re just a commodity.  You’re a market force.

JW:      You mentioned earlier that art is subjective, which is certainly the case, although sometimes artists don’t want to acknowledge that.  Since that means the artist creates the music and the audience responds to it in their own unique way, what type of a reaction are you striving for? 

NF:       I think the biggest compliment that anyone can offer is to say that your music or show influenced their music, because in that, you get a sort of creative immortality.  You sort of add your creative influence to the pot.  As far as shows go, you know, it’s been a long time since anyone in the band was really interested in seeing a crowd beat the crap out of each other.  That’s just old and tired.  I think for us, I’d rather people just be satisfied in knowing that they had witnessed something unique that didn’t occur in the past and won’t occur in the future.

JW:      Neil, would you rather have those fans be instantly gratified with something smooth and palatable, or do you prefer to challenge them, forcing them to take a step back and digest what they’ve heard?

NF:       Both.  I think, if I’m going to see a band, I don’t want the band to be self-indulgent and just play new material because they feel they have to.  I mean, I want to hear music that I’m familiar with myself.  That’s part of the entertainment value.  At the same time, I don’t want the band to just go through the motions.  So I think you have to strike a balance between those two elements.

JW:      Clutch has a great relationship with their fans—incidentally, so far as I can tell, you guys sometimes do more than a hundred shows in a year’s time.  How much of an impact does your relentless schedule have on your ability to maintain that connection with the audience?

NF:       I think that is the connection, really.  I mean, the internet, you know, MySpace and websites, that’s all well and good, but it’s really fake.  I think it’s a good way to spread information, to get information out there, but to actually have some kind of relationship, it’s a false forum.  The most honest thing is to be in person, face to face, sincerely playing, and the crowd is sincerely enjoying themselves—hopefully.  That’s really the kind of the marriage between the musician and the audience.  I mean, that’s as old as the hills, that goes way beyond videos and records and albums.  Live performance is the heart and soul of it all.

JW:      On your latest album, From Beale St. to Oblivion, you worked with producer Joe Barresi, who has also worked with two of my personal favorites, The Melvins and Tool.  What was that like, and do you think he may be on board for the next album?

NF:       I certainly hope he is.  He just bought his own studio out in California.  I think he did an awesome job capturing a kind of real honest rendition of what the band sounds like live.  Plus, half the battle with working with a producer for a prolonged period of time is personality, and we got on great with Joe.  He’s really easygoing and it was actually fun to be in the studio for once.  In the past, it’s been a drag, we don’t really enjoy it, I don’t think, but that time around we did.

JW:      I’m glad you pointed it out, because I was going to reference how amazed I was at how live the album sounded.  I think maybe going back to The Stooges and Funhouse, that’s the only other album I can think of that really captured the live sound like From Beale St. to Oblivion.

NF:       Thanks, that’s good to hear.  I think a lot of that had to do with the fact that we really wrote the record front to back before we even got to the studio, and we played the album for two weeks on the road.  We started on the east coast and toured, basically playing the album every night.  The fans weren’t really happy about that, but sometimes that’s what you have to do.  Then, by the time we rolled into California two weeks later, we were really well-rehearsed and we didn’t have to worry about remembering the parts.  We were able to concentrate solely on the quality of the performance.

JW:      Neil, in the early 90s when Transnational Speedway League and the self-titled album launched, the lyrics, to me, seemed exaggerated and maybe even cartoonish at times.  Recently, however, there seem to be more references to real world issues pertaining to government, maybe even religion popping up in your songs.  Were you veiling these references early on or is this commentary on pop culture a new development?

NF:       I don’t know.  I mean, I’m probably the last person you want to ask about my lyrics.  It usually takes me a couple of years to figure out exactly what it is that I was saying truthfully.  I mean, I always know what my intentions are, but I always approach it as having free license to lie, to write fiction.  Basically, I approach it in the same manner that someone would write a fictional short story, so I don’t ever want to have people misconstrue it for setting off opinions too much about religion or politics.  It’s just that religion and politics play such a large role culturally that I see them as fodder to be characters or subjects for lyrical purposes.  If that makes any sense.

JW:      It does, and even though you just said you’re the last person I should ask about lyrics, I’m going to ask another question in a similar vein.  I picked up The Devil & Me tee-shirt at the show I went to because that’s probably my favorite track since Wishbone.  I like the song a lot, because to me it sort of has a Jim Croce “folk story” feel to it, but I’m really curious as to whose perspective it’s written from. 

NF:       The way I envisioned it, because sometimes I kind of have this movie playing in my mind when I’m trying to write lyrics, it’s the devil and God incarnated as two old men on two sides of the street, sitting on stoops just kind of yelling at each other like they’ve been doing for years, like sometimes you see old guys do.  Some of the verses are from God’s viewpoint, I think the first verse is, and the second verse is from the devil’s viewpoint, so it goes back and forth between the two.

JW:      Excellent.  I had a feeling and I was hoping you might confirm that for me.  Now, obviously, Clutch is a labor of love for you, but the word “labor” is there for a reason.  How hard is it to keep the ball rolling, and how much of a toll does all the effort you put in take on you?

NF:       In a spectrum of hard work, this is probably at the bottom as far as jobs go.  It’s like any other self-employed job, there’s feast and famine.  You have to exercise some sort of self-discipline.  No one’s sending you checks in the mail, you’ve got to go out and work for it.  The older you get, the deeper your roots go, and it’s harder to leave home and go out for weeks sometimes and come back.  At the same time, there are a lot of other jobs where you have to leave for months at a time or weeks at a time.  Creatively speaking, it’s easier to write and work when you’re always doing that.  If you take a sabbatical and then you go back to work, it’s not like a faucet that you just turn back on.

JW:      Different bands carry different reputations, and while there are several noteworthy things that could be said of Clutch, I think the superlative I hear associated with your band most frequently is “Terrific Live Act.”  How do you feel about the reputation you’ve garnered for delivering a great show?

NF:       I’d rather have that than anything else.  Speaking for myself, as a young guy, what really got me interested in rock n’ roll was seeing bands play live and blow me away.  Records are great, but the live show is so much more important.  I’d rather have it that way than have people say “Oh, they sounded so much better on the record.”  I mean, what a drag that would be.

JW:      Absolutely.  I don’t think there’s anything that can diminish a band’s appeal more than a lousy performance after you’ve listened to a great album.  Now, on stage, you guys seem really relaxed.  There’s a definite lack of “stage personas,” as I guess they’re called.  Has that always been the case?  If you would, talk about why that’s the approach Clutch has elected to take.

NF:       I guess just being in rock n’ roll, I’ve seen both sides, you know, of the stage.  It seems like a lot of work, and it seems like a real hassle to be somebody that you’re not.  Guys and girls who do that tend to take themselves way too seriously.  I think it should be fun and if we had done that, this band would have exhausted and killed itself years and years and years ago.  If you’re just yourself, then there’s really no effort, it just happens naturally.

JW:      We’re talking about live shows, and considering the body of work you’ve got to choose from, how difficult is it to narrow that down and come up with a setlist?

NF:       The way we deal with that is we go through alphabetical order. The first night of the tour Dan will write a setlist, then the second night Jean-Paul will write a setlist, the third night I’ll write the setlist, and the fourth night Tim will write a setlist.  Then it goes back to Dan, so we don’t have to sit there and talk about it.  We know there are certain songs that it goes without saying that we’re not going to play, because we haven’t played them in years.  We know that there are certain songs that we probably will play, because they were on the last album or what have you.

JW:      You’ve got a big tour kicking off on February 21 with Murder by Death, Maylene and the Sons of Disaster, and Hex Machine.  What type of show should fans looking to buy a ticket expect?

NF:       You’ve got four bands, get there early.  It’s just going to be a night of rock n’ roll; we’ll do our thing, they’ll do their thing, the crowd will do their thing, and when all is said and done, everyone will have had a good time.

JW:      We’ll definitely see you in Richmond when you hit The National—I believe that will be March 21^st.

NF:       Yep.

JW:      I noticed as I was doing some research that Bam Margera directed the video for “The Mob Goes Wild,” featuring Ryan Dunn taking yet another on-screen beatdown—How did that come about? 

NF:       Well, even before Bam had his TV show, he and his brother Jess were coming to see us play outside of Philly.  Then, when his career took off, he was able to make demands of MTV and put bands that he liked on his show.  When we had that song, Bam offered to direct it on the cheap, because we don’t have a budget for that kind of thing, and it was close and easy for us, so we just did it.  That’s how it happened.

JW:      Are you a fan of Jackass?

NF:       I haven’t seen the last one.  It has its moments.  Sometimes it’s a bitter pill to swallow, but I know a lot of those dudes and it’s nothing I could do, I’ll tell you that much.

JW:      If you would, Neil, tell us a little about your side project, The Company Band.

NF:       Jess, who I was just talking about, called me up last year and said he wanted to put a band together just for shits and giggles.  He had me in mind, Jason Diamond from Puny Human on bass, and Jim Rota from Fireball Ministry, and Dave Bone, who I didn’t know at the time, but he’s friends with Jim.  These were all guys that CKY had toured with, so we just sent tracks back and forth to each other on the internet.  Then we got together almost a year ago next week to practice some songs, and then last summer we recorded some, pooled our money together, and put out this little EP.  It was just kinda something to do.

JW:      If your fans want to listen to The Company Band, how do they go about doing that?     

NF:       At the moment, it’s only available on iTunes.  It’s The Company Band, the EP is called “Sign Here, Here and Here.”  The physical cds will be ready in a couple of weeks and we’ll be selling them on merchdirect.net.

JW:      Neil, earlier you said Clutch would probably be back in the studio in the next six months, I believe—any teasers for fans as far as what they should expect?

NF:       I couldn’t tell you.  That’s half the fun.  Right now, we’re just kind of setting our sights on new material, going over some of the stuff we’ve written over the past year.  We don’t know where it’s going, but that’s what makes it fun.

JW:      All right, last question is a hypothetical.  One venue, three bands--What would your dream show be?  If you like, you can play alongside two of your favorites, or you can be a fan for the night and soak up the show.  Who’s taking the stage and where are we?

NF:       Well, I’ve got to say I’m pretty spoiled.  I would have to say the 9:30 Club because it’s one of the country’s best venues, if not the best, and it’s only 7 miles from my house, so I can take a cab back.  I guess—are these bands that are realistic or just fantasy?

JW:      It’s hypothetical, so you can choose any band at all.

NF:       The MC5, Bad Brains, and (long pause while Neil ponders carefully) Black Flag.

JW:      That sounds like a terrific show, Neil.

NF:       Yeah, it should be a good time.

JW:      Well, again, I would like to thank you for taking the time to speak with me today, and I wish you the best of luck in all your future endeavors.

NF:       Thanks for the opportunity.

Interviews w/ Buzz Osborne and Duane Denison

I've been very fortunate when it comes to interviewing musicians.  My first such interview was Neil Fallon, lead singer of Clutch.  A few months ago, I had the opportunity to chat with Duane Denison from Tomahawk and The Jesus Lizard, and just this week I got to interview King Buzzo from the Melvins.  These guys are all musicians that I'm extremely fond of, and I'm really pleased with how the interviews turned out.  The Fallon piece isn't available online, so I'm going to have to dig it up and share it with you in another blog.  Here are links for the other two:

Buzz Osborne Interview

Duane Denison Interview

Note: The interviews included or mentioned in this blog were originally featured in RVA Magazine.

The Watch/Top 5 Silly Comedies

Warning: This blog comes from a guy who may just be Vince Vaughn's biggest fan.  I also dig Ben Stiller, and as much as my wife hates silly comedies, they just so happen to be my favorite type.

I watched The Watch last night and I laughed my ass off.  I haven't heard anyone say anything remotely positive about this movie, but I thought it was hilarious.  Stiller played the straight man, so he was a little subdued, but Vaughn got to work his magic to terrific effect.  Jonah Hill was also on point, and in truth, I thought everyone involved did a nice job.  The effects were pretty nifty, the use of music was stellar, and I'm going to recommend this to anyone who likes a good silly comedy.

Speaking of which, here are my Top 5 Silly Comedies:

1) Monty Python and the Holy Grail

2) Black Dynamite

3) Airplane!

4) Zoolander

5) Dodgeball

What are some of your favorite silly comedies?