This will be an "All I Want for Christmas" folderol. Certaiinly, this is not a little-known song -- but the reality is that there are two songs by the same name, and both are very popular, though one (as popular as it is in country music circles) is more under-the wire. And we have lesser-known, fun performances of them -- with a bonus. The best-known of course, is the version sung and co-written by Mariah Caray. James Corden had a "Carpool Karaoke" performance of it with the singer recently...but after a lively start, it took a quick right-turn and became totally different and a joy. If you didn't see it, I shall say no more. The other version was released in 1989 by an offbeat group, Vince Vance and the Valiants, and it's a rousing, song with a powerful vocal. After it was discovered, it's become a Top Ten holiday recording on country radio for 20 years. The thing is, when the group finally made a video they used a model who lip-synced the song, and that lead singer on the number, Lisa Layne, as a hidden voice. I thought it only right and proper to give Lisa Layne her due. So, here she is -- still performing on her own, here in Branson, Missouri -- with the song. It's not as gritty and driven as the original recording, but she still does a terrific performance of the very good song. And finaly, as a bonus, we go back to the first song, the Mariah Caray version, but this time "performed" (in a manner of speaking...) by -- President Barack Obama. Not really, but a group named Baracksdubs, which does this sort of thing, has strung together words from the President's speech over the year and -- with a bit of help, I assume, from autotuning -- created a very amusing, entertaining version of the song.
0 Comments
On PBS tonight (Friday) from 9-11pm Los Angeles time (and probably in the East), they have a Great Performances special. On the 400th anniversary of Shakespeare’s death, the Royal Shakespeare Company has a “star-studded” gala with Benedict Cumberbatch, Judi Dench, Joseph Fiennes, John Lithgow, Ian McKellen, Helen Mirren, David Suchet, David Tennant, and more. Crank up the DVR.
I wrote about this a year ago, and it remains one of my favorites. Back in my initial posting here about Kukla, Fran and Ollie, I wrote about how puppeteer Burr Tillstrom won an additional Emmy Award that was not involved with KF&O, but for his work on his own. It was for one of the "hand ballets" that he performed on occasion for the satirical news series, That Was the Week That Was. That Was the Week That Was was a smart, pointed, very sharp British sketch-comedy show which was brought over to the U.S. in the early 1960s. Among other things, it introduced to American audiences one of the original British cast members, David Frost. It's also the show that introduced Tom Lehrer to most Americans. He wrote periodic songs for the series, and then recorded them for his now-classic hit album, That Was the Year That Was. And it also brought Burr Tillstrom into the national spotlight in a way people hadn't seen or expected. His hand ballets were little vignettes that didn't use any puppets at all, but merely Tillstrom's bare hands, using them alone to evoke some story in the news he wanted to get across. It was done with great artistry, often movingly. And one of them so artistic and moving that it won him an Emmy Award. In 1963, two years after the Berlin Wall had been erected, a very brief concession was made. The Wall would open for the Christmas holiday and allow those in the West to travel into East Berlin and visit family and loved ones, needing to return a few days later. This is what Burr Tillstrom did a hand ballet about shortly after. And -- -- I found the video of it. It is one of the favorite videos I've been able to find. I'm thrilled The quality of the video is a little rough, especially at the beginning, but it's fine. And ultimately, as you watch -- one brilliant artist using only his hands -- the quality of the video won't matter one whit. And if anyone ever wonders where the humanity of Kukla, Fran and Ollie came from, to bring such life into puppets, now you'll know. Here it is. The other day, Kellyanne Conway was named counselor to the President of the United States. I can see making her the press spokesman, that's her background, after all, but why should the Trump administration be contstrained by little things like that. But counsleor to the president?? And just a day or so after being named we got a perfect example of why this was such an a lousy idea.
Last night.she was a guest on Rachel Maddow's show, and they were was discussing Trump's horrific Tweet about expanding our nuclear program. As part of the conversation. Maddow was setting up a point and off-handedly asked what country has the third most nukes after the U.S. and Russia. Conway's remarkable answer was -- "I don't know." "I don't know." She is going to be the counselor to the President of the United States...and she doesn't know the third top nuclear power in the world. (It's France, by the way.) One would really hope that knowing something like that would be extremely high on the list of things to know. After all, it probably helps in informing the advice you're counseling on. Being skilled though in misdirection and sleight of hand, she continued on, quickly saying "But I'm sure Donald Trump knows." Since Rachel Maddow was making a different, larger point she let it slide to address her issue. But it's not a slideable response. First of all, no, I'm NOT sure Donald Trump does know who has the third-biggest nuclear arsenal. I don't know if he has a clue, nor do I have a reason to think he has a clue, most especially since he showed his profound irresponsiblity with his nuke-based Tweet.. But the thing is, that's beside the point, even if he does know. Because the point is -- as *counselor to the President* SHE SHOULD KNOW. It was a horrible answer. Truly horrible. But then that's the case with so many of the Trump nominees to the new cabinet or administration, people named who either have no business beiing in a position beyond their expertise, like Ben Carson and Rex Tillerson, or those who are publicly opposed to the agencies they've been put in charge of, like Rick Perry. Not to mention Steve Bannon who has no business being chief adviser to the president, though he certainly earned his place to be part of the administration, as Ms. Conway has. But they should be in positions for which they are qualified. (In Bannon's case, that's more of a challenge, though Second Assistant Personal Valet might work, since he is fit to shine Trump's shoes.) If Conway gets more criticism that's because she's not only been around much longer than all these other except for Bannon, who came in at the same time, but she's also the public face. It's been her job to defend the reprehensible. And now she's been put in a position to not just defend, but explain what she has no understanding of. And that lack of undestanding was shown by her answer to that question and her further inability to explain the Trump nuclear triad policy which were truly horrible. But then, most of what I heard in the interview was truly horrible. I say "most of what I heard" because I find her unlistenable. I find her responses to be a combination of lies, avoidance, misdirection and ignorance, all wrapped in a sweet little bow of a smile that appears valid on the surface, when there's an iceberg underneath ready for the country to crash into and sink it. Even Rachel Maddow, after asking a range of hard questions, shook hands with Conway at the end for having a "civil discourse" -- missing the point that a seemingly civil discourse is the brand of shiv that she uses. When asked about Trump's lie on the stump about the unnamed Martha Radatz of ABC News supposedly crying on Election Night (something she didn't do) -- which, yes, Maddow referred to specifically as a "lie" -- Conway avoiding answering the question about apologizing publicaly and kept talking about it being dealt with behind the scenes "in a way you'd like." Not only do I question that, since I question most everything on the surface by this team, so anything hidden away is even more suspect, but the larger point -- as Maddow kept saying -- is that the lie was made publicly, so the apology or addressing it should be public, as well. Then there was the question about what Trump meant by his "expanding" our nukes Tweet, and she was sliding so far over the place that I'm not sure even she know where she ended up, talking about what he was trying to get across, when the question was about what he specifically meant. Or the separate questions about Trump appointees Mike Flynn and Monica Crowley each making wildly irresponsible comments that ranged into the lunatic, one from Flynn pushing whacked-out conspiracies with Hillary Clinton running a crime ring with children from a pizza restaurant -- really! -- the other being Crowley's claims that Barack Obama isn't actually black (honest!!), which raised the question about their judgement, and all we got was a resume of the fine experiences they have. As Maddow pointed out, you may be a noble person but if you run over someone with your car, none of your past credentials matter. Or Maddow's question about the soon-to-be First Lady suing a journalist for what she claims to be a lie (which may be a lie, for all I know), and wondering if this will be the First Family's policy once they're in the White House. And the answer was...well, who knows?. Her reply just had to do with how people shouldn't lie, which has nothing to do with the question about whether they'll be suing everyone who lies about them in print. To which Maddow made the point that every president going back to the beginning believes they're always being lied about, whether they are or not. As I said, though, I could only take her answers so far, and most of the time my TV was on mute. But I have determined that this is a great way to watch Kellyanne Conway. On mute and fast-forward through her answers. When you see the reporter start to talk, stop the fast-forward at that point and listen to either the new question or follow-up, and then wait for the first few sentences from Ms. Conway until they start to go off into another direction or spin in on itself and she starts to implode. And then she and Maddow shook hands. Because she was "civil." That's become our standard. I believe in civility. I also believe in honesty, decency, competence, helping others and more. It's horrible. Truly horrible. Today we have another somewhat little-known Christmas song -- "somewhat" because it's had a fairly high profile, but then oddly disappeared. In 1996, CBS made a lavish and pretty entertaining TV musical with high-pedigree, Mrs. Santa Claus, that starred Angela Lansbury and Charles Durning, with a score by Jerry Herman (who, of course, wrote the Broadway musical, Mame that Lansbury won a Tony Award for.) And aired it in Lansbury's old Murder: She Wrote timeslot. The show did well-enough to get repeated -- but since then, for whatever reason, it's largely fallen off the map. It not only stopped being shown annually, but even doesn't seem to be aired on smaller cable channels. And I believe the cast album CD is now out-of-print. The film isn't great, but well-done, thoughtful and fun. And it has a pretty good score, including a wonderful showstopper production number, "Avenue A," along with several nice holiday songs. (This film aside, Herman does have a Christmas hit from Mame, the song "We Need a Little Christmas.") Here's one of the more notable Christmas numbers from Mrs. Santa Claus, "The Best Christmas of All." The clip starts with the film's opening credits which is then edited on to the number that ends the show. Oh, what the heck, 'tis the season, so here's a bonus song from the film. This is the slight, but charming title song from "Mrs. Santa Claus" sung by Lansbury -- with an appearance by an elf played by another Tony-winner, Michael Jeter. Like I said, the show has impressive pedigree. (Also in the cast as the antongist toy maker is Terrence Mann, who created the role of 'Inspector Javert' in the original Broadway production of Les Miserables.) As above, this clip begins with part of the opening credits, and ends the some credits tacked on. Oh, it's a festive season, so let's toss in one more. You're on the Nice list, after all. This isn't a Christmas song, but I mentioned it above and it's in a little-known Christmas movie, so it counts. Sort of. This is my favorite song in the film, an elaborate production number called "Avenue A." Mrs. Santa Claus has had to abruptly land her sleigh in turn-of-the-centruy New York City. A young fellow named Marco (peformed by David Narona) sees this lost stranger wandering around and takes her on a tour, singing about the joys of the mixed-culture neighborhood. Seemingly a bit inspired by the song, "Consider Yourself" from Oliver! One note -- at the 3:10 mark, you'll see a honky tonk piano player pounding the ivories in his apartment. In a brief cameo, that's the composer, Jerry Herman. And for it all, I remain bewildered why this TV film has largely disappeared for pretty much any airplay for the past 20 years during the holiday season... There's a video making the rounds of an extremely moving and lovely rendition of Leonard Cohen's bittersweet classic "Hallelujah" performed for an autistic 10-year-old Irish girl. Her singing is wonderful, and all the more so because (according to the story) she wouldn't even read out loud before the special school gave her confidence and a voice to sing, and there she is standing out front. I say this all so as to make clear I'm not a curmudgeon on this. But -- I greatly dislike the video. That's because, despite how articles wrongly describe it, it is NOT Leonard Cohen's "Hallelujah," but rather the lyrics were completely changed by a Christian rock band, and it's a totally different song, with a completely religious meaning now. Perfectly fine for song, but reprehensible to steal someone's copyrighted song and not only change its meaning, but change it 180-degrees. It's one thing to write parody lyrics, which is allowed by law, but this isn't a parody. They just wrote different lyrics and (I assume) recorded it. I don't know if Leonard Cohen was aware of this altered-lyric and, if so, what he thought about it, or even tried to get it stopped. Perhaps he liked it, though I'd put a lot of money on guessing not, given that it subverts his song. Consider, for instance, that one of the original passages he wrote goes -- You say I took the name in vain I don't even know the name But if I did, well really, what's it to you?" Or the verse that comes near the end of the song -- Maybe there's a God above But all I've ever learned from love Was how to shoot somebody who outdrew you This is hardly an intent to write a moving paean to the glory of religion Given that Lenoard Cohen passed away only last month, he clearly can't react at this point to this video. I really wish they'd had this endearingly admirable girl sing the actual song. It would have been glorious. As it is, SHE'S glorious -- the song is unfortunate. And hypocritical, praising its religion yet stealing someone's work. All of which is why I'm not providing a link to it. If one is interested, it no doubt would be easy to find. To be clear -- since I wrote about this elsewhere, and got a few critical comments -- this is not about a wonderfully talented, noble child singing wonderfully, nor about inspiration nor about religion. It's about a professional band taking someone else's song, cutting the words, adding their own and, on top of that, completely changing the intent. That's not only irresponsible, but copyright infringement. Making the real song itself easy to find, though, here's Leonard Cohen himself singing his classic, as the words are intended. |
AuthorRobert J. Elisberg is a political commentator, screenwriter, novelist, tech writer and also some other things that I just tend to keep forgetting. Feedspot Badge of Honor
Categories
All
|
© Copyright Robert J. Elisberg 2024
|