Red Mosquito

dimejinky99 wrote:So B writes all the RM blogs?

That explains a lot.

anything that isn't credited to someone else is B. I think he does a great job with the site.

Farmer John wrote:I'm honoured to have gotten a shout out in the main page write-up!

i could have just quoted you and walked away but I wanted to be able to use the word agency somewhere, and that requires some setup to do it right.

stip wrote:

IlluminEddie wrote:Can someone explain to me how the words (religion) and images (war) fit together in today's context (two terms of Obama and not Bush)? I get the point of the song, but the war-related images coming from a guy who's a super-supporter of the guy in office just don't make sense in today's framework. I feel like this song makes sense coming from Ed 8 years ago, not today. I'm really trying to figure this out.


P.S. Are the dollars on a slot machine or is that printing money?

What makes you think that Eddie is at all supportive of Obama's foreign policy? Elections are about choices, and the choices on the table were Obama and Romney in 2008. On a host of other issues Obama is probably in line with the bands policies, and probably on every single measure Romney would be worse. They tried the 'keep our hands clean' approach in 2000 and I suspect they regret that.

I desperately wanted Obama to get reelected less because I support everything he did and more because the alternative was so much worse. And it sucks that those are your choices, but that doesn't change the fact that they are, nor does having to make it preclude you from trying to also take steps to ensure that next time you have a better one.

First, I wasn't talking about Romney. In that one sentence, I was speaking about outward hatred of "everything" Bush and seeming support of "everything" Obama. To me, just seems hypocritical. I was saying we were actively at war 8 years ago. And although we still are, it's often downplayed by everyone (media and Ed alike). So, the question is in this video, is he really actively trying to torch Obama here on foreign policy? Me thinks not. Hence, my point that this made sense 8 years ago. Instead, me thinks he's trying to give Obama the pass and tie war to religion (which the lyrics are about). Yet, Obama's at the helm now - good or bad. I get Bush was terrible president, but I get that so is Obama. So, why the video about war? Maybe I'm wrong, is it really about Obama's policy?

Second, to answer your question I think Eddie is supportive of Obama period because he actively raised millions of dollars for his election last year. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxyRzswxVCE

I am very aware that elections are about choices, but they are also about non-choices and expression of beliefs. So, you're right that the "main" choices were Obama and Romney in "2012" (typo on your part), but they weren't the only choices, as I'm sure you know. You can not vote (you're more likely to die on the way to the polls than influence a national election). You could also write-in or pull the lever for Green or Lib, etc. Moreover, making a voting choice and actively vocalizing support are different. Going to the extent of fundraising millions of dollars for a candidate is very, very different. At that point, I simply think you're pretty much completely supporting all aspects of that candidate unless otherwise spoken. And correct me if I'm wrong - to my knowledge he's never, not once been critical of Obama's policy... anywhere.

As for who's in line with his policies, I'm curious of Ed's thoughts on privacy and how he feels about the NSA, especially after a song like Grievance, that's pretty much being lived out by this admin in full, much, much worse than the previous. Why not just speak up on that issue? It's plain hypocritical. How about the UPS commercial on the front of this page? And his previous hatred of corporations. How about Target? How about Ticketmaster? There's so much hypocrisy it gets one dizzy. On a whole though, I agree he may have favored Obama to a guy who was a borderline Democrat (Romney). I actually don't care, other than to see if this is Ed taking a stand and stopping the cheerleading... admitting that Obama's at fault. My point wasn't about Obama vs. Romney at all. My point was about Ed and this video that doesn't blend with the lyrics. But, if I needed to elaborate further, I'm curious of how Ed would respond to our military actions since Obama's took over. Would he be critical enough to say something at a show like he use to if something's done in Syria or Egypt... how about Libya when it was? Or is it the fact that this guy wears a "D" pin, that gives him the pass? This video doesn't help me because it's purposefully vague. I guess we'll see during the concerts if he brings up politics... I bet he wont.

Third, on lyrics, my bet is he was scared to make this too religious. So, he and/or the director avoided it. Instead, they figured ahh... let's just talk about war, bombs, etc.... that'll be good enough.

Also, I don't really care who you voted for, no offense. I think all the candidates sucked. I just don't like seeing Obama get a pass for things others would not have. It's unfair and quite ignorant.

Did I read this right? Is the guy who did the animation saying he used to knock Pearl Jam in the press every chance he got? Typical, knock em until they ask you to join them then you are a fan.

http://missoulanews.bigskypress.com/Gre ... jeff-ament


We caught up with Smetanka by email as he was traveling through Finland and got the scoop.

How did you end up making a music video for Pearl Jam?
Andy Smetanka: Jeff Ament made a generous donation to my Kickstarter campaign (for And We Were Young). I sent him a message to ask him how he wanted to take delivery on his custom light box, and he wrote back asking if I was interested in "creating some images" for Pearl Jam. Hell yes, I replied. It went from this not-very-specific request to actually starting work on green-screen animation for a music video in less than a week.


Did you approach it as a silhouette animation in the way you have with And We Were Young?
AS: I approached it pretty much the same way as any other silhouette project, with the difference that I shot it digitally and not on Super 8, using a Canon DSLR camera and a program called (I think) Dragonframe. I had to do it this way because of time constraints, but it was also very liberating, very encouraging to get a peek into my post-film future if I intend to keep making silhouette movies.

What was the hardest part of the project?
AS: Getting to grips with this new technology wasn't very difficult. The hardest thing about the project was the disruptive effect of the long working days on family life at a time when we were also getting centered down to go on a major overseas adventure. But I'd set the whole month of July aside to not work on And We Were Young, and the PJ project fit perfectly. Another great thing about the digital process was that it created, as a sort of happy by-product of the animation, literally thousands of huge JPG files for the band to incorporate into both the Electronic Press Kit and the album artwork for the upcoming release! Double bonus!

Did you get full creative reign or did Jeff Ament and Eddie Vedder have their own ideas?
AS: I think Jeff takes a direct hand in designing the artwork for PJ projects, kind of the de facto Art Director, so I was mostly working with him and their frequent collaborator, Danny Clinch, who was directing the video and filming the live performances behind which the animation will be inserted via green screen. Everyone had great ideas, they usually gave me the go-ahead on mine, and I took great care to film some interpretation of theirs, from Danny and everyone else in the band filtered through him and Jeff.

How long did it take you?
AS: The whole thing happened lightning-fast. Starting from scratch (with a few ready-to-go silhouette trees and things from my silhouette archive), it took two solid weeks of 10-14 hour days to come up with around 8 minutes of animation. The song itself is around 2:39 in length, so there was plenty of coverage.

How do you feel about getting to do this?
AS: All in all, an exhilarating experience, and probably the most compact, efficient and blindingly fast film project I've ever had a hand in, speaking only for my part in it. Also a great weight off my shoulders.

Are you a Pearl Jam fan or, if not, have you been converted in any way?
AS: I don't own any Pearl Jam recordings apart from a CD burn of just this one song, but I definitely consider myself a fan of the band, more for what they stand for than for the music itself (although the song is a corker!). As many who know me will surely point out, this has not always been the case. Along with certain other Indy writers, I used to be infamous for knocking them in print every chance I got back in the mid-to-late '90s. But the truth is that I've never had any substantive beef with them, and in my experience it's hard to find anyone who does. We were young, snotty punks and we wanted enemies. Now, of course, the idea of little punks like we were then casting aspersions on what is and is not worthwhile music and "selling out" is just comical to me.

Interesting.


"Another great thing about the digital process was that it created, as a sort of happy by-product of the animation, literally thousands of huge JPG files for the band to incorporate into both the Electronic Press Kit and the album artwork for the upcoming release"

stupidmop wrote:

IlluminEddie wrote:Can someone explain to me how the words (religion) and images (war) fit together in today's context (two terms of Obama and not Bush)? I get the point of the song, but the war-related images coming from a guy who's a super-supporter of the guy in office just don't make sense in today's framework. I feel like this song makes sense coming from Ed 8 years ago, not today. I'm really trying to figure this out.


P.S. Are the dollars on a slot machine or is that printing money?

He can support Obama in a wider sense but still oppose war.

He could also not really support him but realise he's the lesser of two evils.

He could be a hypocritical asshole.

He could be cozying up to Obama just to tear him down later. Hint: its an inside job today

He could actually be two people one of whom is liberal and anti war and the other a politician shmoozing dickbag.

He could be an Eddie Vedder clone built by Obama and used as a pawn to gain more votes and sway the 'alternative' crowd.

He could be doing it just cause he hates us.

Agree with everything you say here. But, I just think he should say "something". Right now, about 6 years into Obama's Presidency, I've never heard him disagree with one element of his politics vocally. Not once... and this is from, perhaps the most vocal lead singer regarding politics in modern history. I mean he blasted Clinton and ...Bush to pieces. To me, that means he's probably #3. But, I'd be happy to be proven otherwise.

VinylGuy wrote:Interesting.


"Another great thing about the digital process was that it created, as a sort of happy by-product of the animation, literally thousands of huge JPG files for the band to incorporate into both the Electronic Press Kit and the album artwork for the upcoming release"

Yeah, interested to see how this comes about. I bet that image of Ed jumping in front of the flag is something we'll see a lot of

IlluminEddie wrote:perhaps the most vocal lead singer regarding politics in modern history.

This is just flat out wrong.

The EPK from both avocado and BS were pretty awesome.

IlluminEddie wrote: First, I wasn't talking about Romney. In that one sentence, I was speaking about outward hatred of "everything" Bush and seeming support of "everything" Obama.

again, what has Eddie done to make you think he supports everything obama does?

IlluminEddie wrote: So, the question is in this video, is he really actively trying to torch Obama here on foreign policy? Me thinks not. Hence, my point that this made sense 8 years ago. Instead, me thinks he's trying to give Obama the pass and tie war to religion (which the lyrics are about).

MYM is more general social/political commentary in the vein of DTE or Grievance rather than the specific stuff targeting Bush that you'd find on Riot Act and S/T. It's condemning the United States for sure (which would imply a shot at Obama, since he is president), but not Obama by name. Maybe it's because he doesn't want to harm obama (lets see what's said on tour this year, if anything), but Obama has been challenging to the psychology of the mainstream left. It was easy to assume that everything the left hated during the Bush years was because of Bush, and so blaming Bush makes sense. Get rid of bush, fix the problem. But if the same problems survive across two presidencies headed by two seemingly very different people than they become far more structural in nature, and so railing about a president kind of misses the point. What Obama taught a lot of people is that while who is president certainly matters, the issue runs into the core of how America functions.


Also, I don't think MYM is about religion, not in the way that you say here.

IlluminEddie wrote: Yet, Obama's at the helm now - good or bad. I get Bush was terrible president, but I get that so is Obama. So, why the video about war? Maybe I'm wrong, is it really about Obama's policy?

like I said, it's not about Obama. I also don't think Obama is a terrible president (although he's bad on some issues). Obama's presidency speaks in a lot of ways to the limits of the presidency.

It's also not just a video about war. It's a video about collapse, and not doing anything about it.

IlluminEddie wrote: Second, to answer your question I think Eddie is supportive of Obama period because he actively raised millions of dollars for his election last year. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxyRzswxVCE

Oh sure, and he definitely wanted Obama to win. But you are implying that he is therefore someone who loves everything he does, and one does not follow from the other.

IlluminEddie wrote: I am very aware that elections are about choices, but they are also about non-choices and expression of beliefs. So, you're right that the "main" choices were Obama and Romney in "2012" (typo on your part), but they weren't the only choices, as I'm sure you know. You can not vote (you're more likely to die on the way to the polls than influence a national election). You could also write-in or pull the lever for Green or Lib, etc. Moreover, making a voting choice and actively vocalizing support are different. Going to the extent of fundraising millions of dollars for a candidate is very, very different. At that point, I simply think you're pretty much completely supporting all aspects of that candidate unless otherwise spoken. And correct me if I'm wrong - to my knowledge he's never, not once been critical of Obama's policy... anywhere.

This goes far beyond this thread, but a vote for a green (in Obama's case) IS the same thing as a vote for Romney. That's a problem, obviously, but no less true. As a nader voter in 2000 I can speak from experience.

IlluminEddie wrote: As for who's in line with his policies, I'm curious of Ed's thoughts on privacy and how he feels about the NSA, especially after a song like Grievance, that's pretty much being lived out by this admin in full, much, much worse than the previous. Why not just speak up on that issue?

I suspect he probably hates the NSA stuff. I wouldn't be surprised to hear him rail about it on the tour.

IlluminEddie wrote: How about the UPS commercial on the front of this page?

what about it?

IlluminEddie wrote: And his previous hatred of corporations. How about Target?
How about Ticketmaster?

I've talked about this ad infinitum on this board and the old one, but someone has to release your records, and when your boycott fails and one venue controls access to the places you want to play it is not hypocrisy to understand that you have to deal, and instead try and make deals on your own terms.

IlluminEddie wrote: On a whole though, I agree he may have favored Obama to a guy who was a borderline Democrat (Romney)

excuse me?

IlluminEddie wrote: Third, on lyrics, my bet is he was scared to make this too religious. So, he and/or the director avoided it. Instead, they figured ahh... let's just talk about war, bombs, etc.... that'll be good enough.

yes, clearly taking shots at organized religion is something they've never done before, and would alienate the demographics this song is clearly otherwise trying to reach.

IlluminEddie wrote: Also, I don't really care who you voted for, no offense

I'll try hard to not be offended.

IlluminEddie wrote: . I think all the candidates sucked. I just don't like seeing Obama get a pass for things others would not have. It's unfair and quite ignorant.

there are lots of democrats who are unfortunately silent on this stuff (although that is changing) just like there were far too many conservative libertarian types who kept their mouth shut during Bush. It's tough because criticizing your guy also empowers the enemy.

What makes you so sure Eddie is a Democrat. I voted for obama (I know you don't care) and I'm not a registered democrat. I often vote against democrats in local elections if there is a viable candidate further to the left.

And something to keep in mind is that democrats do not necessarily equal the left. There is plenty of left wing criticism of the national security state out there. it just doesn't come from establishment democrats.

Lament wrote:

IlluminEddie wrote:perhaps the most vocal lead singer regarding politics in modern history.

This is just flat out wrong.

Not sure we'd agree, but how about "a very vocal lead singer regarding politics in modern history?" You can't debate that. That should solve your problem. Now, back to the point of the post rather than one sentence.

IlluminEddie wrote:

stupidmop wrote:

IlluminEddie wrote:Can someone explain to me how the words (religion) and images (war) fit together in today's context (two terms of Obama and not Bush)? I get the point of the song, but the war-related images coming from a guy who's a super-supporter of the guy in office just don't make sense in today's framework. I feel like this song makes sense coming from Ed 8 years ago, not today. I'm really trying to figure this out.


P.S. Are the dollars on a slot machine or is that printing money?

He can support Obama in a wider sense but still oppose war.

He could also not really support him but realise he's the lesser of two evils.

He could be a hypocritical asshole.

He could be cozying up to Obama just to tear him down later. Hint: its an inside job today

He could actually be two people one of whom is liberal and anti war and the other a politician shmoozing dickbag.

He could be an Eddie Vedder clone built by Obama and used as a pawn to gain more votes and sway the 'alternative' crowd.

He could be doing it just cause he hates us.

Agree with everything you say here. But, I just think he should say "something". Right now, about 6 years into Obama's Presidency, I've never heard him disagree with one element of his politics vocally. Not once... and this is from, perhaps the most vocal lead singer regarding politics in modern history. I mean he blasted Clinton and ...Bush to piec es. To me, that means he's probably #3. But, I'd be happy to be proven otherwise.

If I'm honest I'm probably with you on wishing he'd say something, but I put him being less vocal down to him being older and more easy going. Not in his views necessarily but I think he's less likely to start lecturing or antagonizing the crowd, he got a lot for doing it from the fans and I don't even think the entire band likes/ agrees when he does it. But maybe we'll hear something now, with the looks of the album it would be odd if he kept quite. I wonder how he feels about all this privacy related big brother shit.

VinylGuy wrote:The EPK from both avocado and BS were pretty awesome.

Say what you want about this band, but they make one helluva EPK.

Are you a Pearl Jam fan or, if not, have you been converted in any way?
AS: I don't own any Pearl Jam recordings apart from a CD burn of just this one song, but I definitely consider myself a fan of the band, more for what they stand for than for the music itself (although the song is a corker!). As many who know me will surely point out, this has not always been the case. Along with certain other Indy writers, I used to be infamous for knocking them in print every chance I got back in the mid-to-late '90s. But the truth is that I've never had any substantive beef with them, and in my experience it's hard to find anyone who does. We were young, snotty punks and we wanted enemies. Now, of course, the idea of little punks like we were then casting aspersions on what is and is not worthwhile music and "selling out" is just comical to me.

good answer

bodysnatcher wrote:

VinylGuy wrote:Interesting.


"Another great thing about the digital process was that it created, as a sort of happy by-product of the animation, literally thousands of huge JPG files for the band to incorporate into both the Electronic Press Kit and the album artwork for the upcoming release"

Yeah, interested to see how this comes about. I bet that image of Ed jumping in front of the flag is something we'll see a lot of

If the album art is just screenshots from the video imma be a tad annoyed.

stip wrote:

Are you a Pearl Jam fan or, if not, have you been converted in any way?
AS: I don't own any Pearl Jam recordings apart from a CD burn of just this one song, but I definitely consider myself a fan of the band, more for what they stand for than for the music itself (although the song is a corker!). As many who know me will surely point out, this has not always been the case. Along with certain other Indy writers, I used to be infamous for knocking them in print every chance I got back in the mid-to-late '90s. But the truth is that I've never had any substantive beef with them, and in my experience it's hard to find anyone who does. We were young, snotty punks and we wanted enemies. Now, of course, the idea of little punks like we were then casting aspersions on what is and is not worthwhile music and "selling out" is just comical to me.

good answer

I wish he would have been honest and just said "not at all but hmm money"

Heathen wrote:

stip wrote:

Are you a Pearl Jam fan or, if not, have you been converted in any way?
AS: I don't own any Pearl Jam recordings apart from a CD burn of just this one song, but I definitely consider myself a fan of the band, more for what they stand for than for the music itself (although the song is a corker!). As many who know me will surely point out, this has not always been the case. Along with certain other Indy writers, I used to be infamous for knocking them in print every chance I got back in the mid-to-late '90s. But the truth is that I've never had any substantive beef with them, and in my experience it's hard to find anyone who does. We were young, snotty punks and we wanted enemies. Now, of course, the idea of little punks like we were then casting aspersions on what is and is not worthwhile music and "selling out" is just comical to me.

good answer

I wish he would have been honest and just said "not at all but hmm money"

i was mostly keying in on the last sentence. I'm sure yours is the correct answer though

This video is a perfect representation of "Mind Your Manners", and how you feel about it will probably be in line with how you feel about the song. To some, that means they think the video is fresh, exciting and fun. To others, it's hokey, clumsy and dumb. To most everybody, this is a completely useless post.

dimejinky99 wrote:So B writes all the RM blogs?

That explains a lot.

My name appears on everything I post.