THE RUNNING MAN By Dawson Sarcona 11/15/2025 The Running Man, directed by Edgar Wright, is the latest in the boom of Stephen King adaptations from the past few years. That being said, this film immediately differs from its counterparts in one major way: This is not a horror movie. Regardless of how you know King’s writing, whether it's literary classics like Cujo, Salem's Lot, Carrie or big horror icons like IT or The Shining, King is known for creating truly terrifying stories. The Running Man, however, is different. This movie is a dystopian action story through and through. While it does include some intense and high-stress situations, the only “horror” that lies in this film is its disturbing resemblance to our current society. This film follows Ben Richards (played by Glen Powell) as he competes on a deadly gameshow that, if won, will result in him winning 1 billion dollars and securing a better life for his wife and daughter. The world this film builds is one of the more interesting put to screen this year. “The Network” (a literal TV network with a name devoid of creativity) owns the government and dictates the lives of everyone in the nation.Because of the way this world is set up, the message from Kings original novel stays relevant in 2025’s adaptation by Wright. The message is simple: the dangers of a world reliant on media and entertainment. Here is where King’s trademark “scariness” comes in. His depiction (aided massively by Edgar Wright’s film adaptation) of this parallel Earth is chilling because it’s not far off from our own. In a time where everyone is heavily reliant on their screens, the thought of a society where those screens watch back and keep tabs makes for a captivating watch. Moving away from the plot and broad strokes of King’s writing, Edgar Wright once again shows audiences why he's one of the most talented directors working right now. Wright has directed many cult classics (Shaun of the Dead and Scott Pilgrim Vs. the World, to name a few), but his status as a director otherwise seems to be underrated. Since I first saw his passion project film, Baby Driver, I've been a huge fan of Wright, and the talent he demonstrates filming compelling action in that film carries through in The Running Man. This movie is, action-packed by definition, full of fight scenes and stunts that rival some of the genre’s best films across the past year. Wright just knows how to properly direct a scene. Even in the moments with the least action, this movie maintains its momentum. In comparison to movies like Mission Impossible: the Final Reckoning, which left me bored from scene to scene, waiting for the next piece of action, this movie fully immerses its audience into the story. There was not a second during this movie that I felt bored or a scene lingered too long. If anything, there were some moments in the film where the pacing felt a little too fast. While it wasn't enough to take me out of the film, there were some moments I wish they’d spent a tad bit more time in. That said, for the most part, Wright uses his time in King’s world wonderfully and tells a wholly satisfying story. Wright isn't The Running Man’s only strength. Glen Powell delivers one of, if not his most compelling performances yet. There has been talk amongst the film/movie culture of Glen Powell taking up Tom Cruise's mantle as the next big action star. Before this film, I was impartial to this concept. But after seeing The Running Man, I can confidently say that he would be an excellent choice to succeed (and even surpass) Tom Cruise. Powell brings life to the character of Ben Richards and makes him very easy to root for, which is important for a movie like this. He balances the comedic range and physical demands of this role very well, and his on-screen interactions with most are very compelling. All in all, the only minor issue I see with this movie is some rushed pacing in the first act. I would rate this movie a 9 out of 10 , and would heavily recommend it to anyone looking for a fun and exciting theater experience. It’s Glen Powell at his best and further proof that Edgar Wright can direct a thrilling ride of an action movie!

THE ODYSSEY 8/5/2026 - Dawson Sarcona - Ian Thomas Sherry The following is a transcribed and edited conversation between CG reviewers Ian and Dawson about Christopher Nolan's The Odyssey DAWSON: Just starting off, Ian, I know you've read The Odyssey before. Were you a fan of the casting and the performances? Do you think they kind of held up to Homer’s version? IAN: Yeah, well, starting with the story. First of all, you had to tell me the bard was Travis Scott, but I thought that was fantastic, the way that they included that, 'cause that's the way it was told for so long. They hit all the points, obviously. And I thought that the plot moved along pretty well for such a long thing to adapt. You know, I just watched O Brother, Where Art Thou. It's so loose to call it an adaptation of the Odyssey - I mean, I get it's a comedy, but this (Christopher Nolan’s The Odyssey) is right on point and moves along. And yeah, with the casting, I had some favorites for sure, but I'm gonna kick that back to you. Were there any favorite castings or performances for you? DAWSON: I mean, there's a lot of performances getting gassed up from this movie, and I feel like rightfully so. Anne Hathaway did a really good job (as Penelope). And I like the direction Nolan took her character too. But my favorite, and this is the basic answer, 'cause it's the main character, I really like Matt Damon's performance. Really enjoyed just the energy he brought to it. I've seen him in a lot of other action movies like the Jason Bourne films, and they're really boring to me, so this kind of solidified to me like - oh, he actually knows how to do this stuff, because I found his performance very captivating and I like the complexity that he brought to the character. Though Nolan has a bit of… I wouldn't say an issue, but he does this thing with all his characters where he kind of.. makes them extremely noble and tries to make them the most, you know, complex ‘I'm gonna take accountability for everything’ characters. When from what I've heard, in the original Odyssey Odysseus is kind of just like a trickster and is kind of a little bit just like… IAN: -He’s not so apologetic.- DAWSON: Yeah, so I think that that was a good change and I think that Damon portrayed that well. And I also really thought Robert Pattinson shined in his role. I would have liked to see more of his character just being a douchebag because he was good at it. IAN: He is. I went with my sister, and she was raving about how good he was as a villain. And yeah, I totally agree. And like Dawson said, Anne Hathaway was great; she was strong in her performance, you know, that's important in this day and age… So what did you think of Tom Holland’s Telemicus? DAWSON: So, Tom Holland was... Well, he didn't have a bad performance by any means, but I would like to see that they gave him more to do. I am a fan of him as an actor, and I feel like - I say this wearing a Spider-Man hoodie, but I still think No Way Home was one of his best performances, and I would have loved to see him allowed to bring that emotion in this movie. It just wasn't necessary for the character, so like I get it, but it (the performance) was kind of middle of the road for me. IAN: I think part of that is the character, like he's limited; he never even gets to step into the throne room in any aspect, leadership-wise, and his main function in this film was to move the plot along with the cutting back and forth. And I thought that was pretty easy to understand, given I already knew the story, but still it flowed pretty well, so I thought he did well. I enjoyed his performance. DAWSON: We’re there any castings that were distracting for you? IAN: Charlize Theron as Calypso, that was a little strange. Only because I didn't feel like it was well enough introduced, but that situation was eventually explained. It's supposed to be mysterious to an extent, but I also don't know how accurate it is, her living washed up on the beach. That's not how I interpreted reading it. - What about yourself? DAWSON: Yeah, I can agree with that. She just kind of felt like an empty character, just kind of a plot device. And I know that she has more acting chops in her, so maybe it's just more of a writing issue. But yeah, her and Benny Safdie, as Agamemnon, I felt very like he stood out most specifically, probably. With the helmet off, he just kind of gives off, for lack of a better term, dorky energy. IAN: He did. DAWSON: - They spent so many of his shots in the movie, framing him as, like, very imposing and cinematic and a guy that you don't want to mess with. Then like, they have Odysseus speak to him, and he's very soft-spoken and kind of friendly with Odysseus, which I’m not sure if that's how it was in the book, but I would assume that maybe it was not. IAN: I would have expected the character to be, furious, you know, and to have some sort of facial wound from being killed - a crazed warlord that sacrificed so much, and was caught up in his own home, I think, he would probably be more bitter and angry. But we're kind of splitting hairs here, I think, overall, that (oracle scene) was pretty great. DAWSON: This is probably his (Nolan’s) biggest accomplishment. I mean, I think that's fair to say. It's the first movie ever filmed completely on IMAX, which means it was also filmed completely on film, like traditional film, which is not something you see a lot nowadays. And watching it, seeing all the love and care put into it; it's just very clear. Especially when it comes to the practical stuff that they do with the Cersei scene in the pig transformation and in the Cyclops stuff. For perspective, there was a guy in full Cyclops makeup, and then for other scenes they had a full 60-foot Cyclops puppet that they built for the characters to interact with. So it’s stuff like that could have just been blue-screened and CGI-ed, but instead they took the time and really actually made it to the best they could, that is a testament to how much not only Christopher Nolan cares about movies, but how important that stuff still is to making a great movie - and you can really tell when you're in that theater, especially the IMAX theater. IAN: I thought the way that the Cyclops moved was really awesome; it was otherworldly, and it made the whole scene a lot better. That's one of the more famous scenes I was wondering how they were gonna execute it, what it was gonna look like, you know, and it was like a mutant child type-thing, which makes perfect sense because I believe it's a giant and Poseidon’s offspring, so it was pretty wild, and it was the same with Cersei. They could have had her wave a wand and poof them (Odysseus’ men) into pigs, and nobody would have batted an eye, but the idea to kind of go the horror direction, that ended up being one of the more memorable scenes in the whole film to me. DAWSON: I learned the other day that Ithaca, the island that they used for that, is a real island and that's a real castle, and they got permission to film there, but they weren't allowed to build anything, so like they couldn't build a road to get their film supplies up there. So they had to literally airlift and then, by hand, carry like thousands of dollars of equipment up this hill every day to film there. And I think that's just another cool example of the people who worked on this movie really putting in the effort, and I think it shows in volumes when you see it. IAN: This is interesting because it looks really genuine, the castle, and it looks pretty untouched and like weathered. I also thought the plucking of the bow- that was a great moment. They planted that seed early on, and it was pretty cinematic when it did it in the end, so I thought that was pretty cool, and I'm not sure I remember that from the book; I think the book is moreso about being able to execute the challenge, just stringing it and shooting, so I think that was pretty cool. DAWSON: Yeah, and I noticed a few things about that on my rewatch too of like how much that is woven into the story, and it's stealthily. There's a lot of stuff, Nolanisms, just a lot of really interesting details that are just sprinkled in there. Like, for example, a few that I can remember are: there's a song on the score called "Sirens," and it's the song that plays when Odysseus hears the sirens' song, and he's strapped to the, you know, pull in the ship and is listening to it. - IAN: - And it's at the same time; it's just the song on the score that we hear while he's listening to them. - DAWSON: - Right, yes, exactly, thank you. But that song is titled that, but it's technically like him and Penelope's theme in the movie because the only other times we hear it are when he and his wife are together. And so when he talks about the siren song being like “a song of like everything you've ever wanted and everything you ever wanted was something you had and lost,” I think that's just a really cool way to musically tie it into, like, when he hears that song, he's hearing something about Penelope and Telemicus. And going back to Telemicus, another thing is, any time they are viewing his flashbacks of his family, Telemicus is not facing the camera. It shows like a kid facing away from the camera, which is something Nolan does in like all of his movies. IAN: Now I'd like to get to my last big question if you don't have anything else. DAWSON: No, I don't think I have anything else. IAN: So The Culture Gyre is based on a concept, the gyre, which is a shape. Imagine two funnels facing into each other so at one end you would have an open circle and then a point in the center which would be the point of the other funnel going the opposite direction; would you consider this movie to be closer to “the point,” the thing that everybody in film is driving at, or would you say it's pushing an edge in the grand scheme of the film? DAWSON: I think it's interesting with Nolan because he is something - he's someone that all filmmakers kind of strive to be like; he is kind of anointed, almost anointed himself as like filmmaker royalty because he is, I believe, the president of the filmmakers' guild. So a lot of people, they kind of view him as like the one above all, and to be honest with you, he still has duds, he still has movies that fall through, so going into this movie I was excited, but I was not 100% certain, kind of like you are saying. I think the concept for this movie is kind of on that outer circle; it's something that you know a lot of people can do, and a lot of people have made adaptations of the Odyssey, right, and it's a general idea a lot of people have, but it's not necessarily always executed properly. There are so many ways that it can be done, and I think what's great about Nolan is he can kind of bring it into that inner focal point, like that thing that everyone's striving towards, because of the way he's able to direct things. And I think a lot of this comes down to the people going to the movies now who are so much more invested in cinema. I think just because of the nature of social media and how it's heightened everybody's opinions on things you're either going to the movie because you love this movie or you hate this movie, right? Like, there's rarely ever an instance now where someone's like ‘I have no thoughts on this’ and that's compounded by social media with people sharing those opinions. So he's kind of being built up and built up, and I think the fact that Nolan keeps pushing forward shows he's not the type of person who's building up this reputation for himself and just kind of going with the flow. He hasn't plateaued yet. He keeps pushing the bar farther for himself, and you don’t know what his next movie is going to be or when it's going to be, but he's been pushing out movies every three years. Which is a crazy production turnaround, especially considering the scale of stuff he's making. So my long-winded answer to your question is, yes, I think that this movie, especially in Nolan's way of approaching film, is pushing for the center of the gyre. I think the future of film has to be like this; it has to be more people who care, people who are doing things practically and who are trying new things with reliable stories, even if just because there's only so many stories that can be told. I would say the same about Obsession this year by Curry Barker, right? The one wish willow. The monkey paw- that is a story that has been told countless times by countless people, but he sat down, and he found a way to make it fresh, and he put a lot of love and practicality into it, and it was probably the second biggest movie of the year so far in terms of box office success. So yeah, I think right now the future of film, the focal point from that poem is this notion of bringing more originality to movies, and we need to do it out of love and care and not for the purpose of making money for a studio. And it's in the details, but careful detail. IAN: I agree. DAWSON: Yeah, and you know, obviously studios care about money, but I think people - I think studios right now are kind of finding that if they prioritize originality, it benefits them more in the long term.

KID CUDI'S ENTERGALACTIC BY: Ian Sherry 10/12/22 Kid Cudi is a generational artist who has shaped the melodic hip-hop scene of today through his work in the trilogy of Man On The Moon albums and other releases over the last ten years. His newest project, Entergalactic, was released on September 30th in tandem with an animated Netflix series under the same name. The series has been received well by critics thus far while the album brings something different to his discography. The buildup for this dual release was immense. Cudi is an artist who has shaped generations of music listeners and musicians as well. He has saved lives with his relatable commentary on mental health struggles. The world’s number one Kid Cudi fan, Nino Dioso, can attest to this. In his words: “That man literally saved my life”, and “I would die for Scott Mescudi [Kid Cudi]”. Any artist with this kind of impact is bound to have heavily anticipated releases and therefore high expectations. I think Cudi delivered. This isn’t to say he delivered a perfect album – far from it. The high points are impressive, though nothing musically groundbreaking. However, there are some issues. The most glaring is the fact that it feels aimless. Cudi is known for his thematically brilliant albums. This album had a slightly different focus. The only real theme was love and its focus on supporting the animated series falls short. In order to be a chronologically strong album the listener has to understand the full narrative from start to finish. For example, Tyler The Creator’s 2019 experimental and genre-bending release Igor tells a complete story through lyrics and even the feel of the production. Entergalactic doesn’t come close to this level of coherency in its storyline. Kid Cudi also falls prey to the occasional boring song on this album. He has a tendency to overuse his trademarked moaning vocals and lock in on one flow for too long, sometimes an entire song. Both of these can be seen on the song “Can’t Shake Her”. It is repetitive and fails to ever hit the second level it needed to be a widely enjoyable song. It stays in a sort of melancholic rut for the duration of the track and wastes one of the two Ty Dolla $ign features which are at a premium. Songs like “Angel”, “My Drug”, and “New Mode”, all fall in the same category. They show bits of potential at times but ultimately fall flat. Kid Cudi never makes offensively bad songs like other artists, just boring ones. Once he hits his stride though, the good outweighs the bad. The good can be found consistently from the fifth to the tenth track with one or two before and after, however, tracks six through nine are perfect. “Travis Scott would not exist without Kid Cudi” -Nino Dioso. This is not an uncommon opinion, and there is no better example than “In Love”. It has the punchy drums, decisive autotune, rolling synths, and soaring choruses that are responsible for so many of Travis Scott’s hits, except Cudi does it better on this song. It is a fantastic example of how to properly use elements of pop music without selling out to a mainstream sound. Though Travis Scott can come close at times, nobody but Kid Cudi can make a song like this. In that same vein, “Willing To Trust” is another massive success. One of the two singles leading up to the release of Entergalactic, this track features the previously mentioned Ty Dolla $ign, who is known to be one of the best feature artists in the entire music industry. He delivers here. His relaxed yet vulnerable vocals blend perfectly with Cudi’s, and a couple well placed refrains pull the track together into a cohesive and complete Kid Cudi classic. As if these two emotional and vocally elite tracks weren’t enough, Cudi directly follows them with “Can’t Believe It”, featuring 2 Chainz. This song is a big change in tempo from the previous two. Though it poses a slight chronological discrepancy, I can’t complain. Its rolling baseline and higher-paced chorus are a nice change of pace and it leads perfectly into the next song. 2 Chainz delivers one of his signature playfully braggadocious verses to round out “Can’t Believe It”, and just like that it's ready to be sent into any era of Cudi’s music. The hot streak continues into “Livin’ My Truth”. This track, like many of the other successes on this album, feels like a newer spin on a classic Cudi formula. It is a perky beat with a catchy hook and poppy ad-libs. As “Livin My Truth” fades out to a spacy guitar riff, Cudi wraps up what I think might be his strongest four-song stretch on any of his albums. Entergalactic is by far Cudi’s best work of this young decade, though it may not stack up with the first two Man On The Moon albums or the 2018 collaborative album Kids See Ghosts. He put up some of his best solo work since 2010, even if the whole album doesn’t soar to those heights. To me, Entergalactic’s level of creativity falls in the same category as his 2013 project Indicud, but it is much more well-rounded and polished, not quite sinking to the level of Indicud’s weakest moments. Instead, Cudi’s worst efforts on this album just come across as conservative, inoffensive. He doesn’t run into any issues that he hasn’t encountered before other than the clumsy storyline. That said, it isn’t nearly as chronologically inept as fan-favorite albums such as Because The Internet by Childish Gambino. So, clearly, it is possible to make a classic album with a shaky storyline. I didn’t know what to expect heading into this album. I was almost afraid Cudi might start to regress after his 2020 project, which seemed to lack creativity and consistency. He proved me wrong and I’m glad. I didn’t provide a rating for my first review of the year. That is because, frankly, DJ Khaled’s God Did, didn’t deserve a rating. Cudi does. He overcame the oversights in his storyline, as well as some boring songs, by including several classic tracks of different types and a solid crop of songs to support them; all the while staying with himself, for better or for worse. Kid Cudi’s Entergalactic is a 6.25/10.

ENOUGH CHEER: ONE BRAVE MAN'S FIGHT AGAINST SEASONAL SONIC SUFFERING 12/25/23 BY: IAN SHERRY I am Scrooge (in the Groot voice). I don’t like Marvel movies, nor do I like Christmas music. One of the most hotly contested seasonal debates, I always take the side of grumpy opposition, and I have reasons. While I plan to lay them out in an organized fashion momentarily, I have one question for fans of this genre: Do you truly believe, in your merry little hearts, that ‘jingle bells’ are both a tolerable instrument and viable lyric? If so, you're wrong, but allow me to further provide reasons to shut off the radio. I’d like to begin with the disclaimer that there are some acceptable occasions. For instance, you can listen to Christmas music to put you in the so-called spirit within 72 hours of the big day , the same way you listen to a sweatily angsty R&B song to get you in a romantic mood or an mind-numbingly bland Mac DeMarco song to go to sleep. However, it is absolutely required that, somewhere in the back of your mind, you are open to the fact that a creatively negative adjective must accompany your cheer-filled opinion of a given song. Unfortunately, many ignore that requirement. Backtracking: Genres have a traceable and consistent formation process. I’d describe them as ⅓ influence, ⅓ innovation, and ⅓ capitalism. It starts with an artist or group of artists that are influenced by the sound around them. This could be what they’re raised on, what they come to love, or what they’ve grown to despise. As a result, they’re inspired to put their own spin on it, innovation. Once these two key ingredients come together and a new sound is born, capitalism takes care of the rest, packaging and selling their art to the public in droves until a new genre is born . It’s a symbiotic process that combines the beauty of creativity with the necessity of money. Christmas music is certainly a genre, however, it’s unique in its formation. Holidays are rooted in tradition. Tradition is a powerful binding factor. It brings together generations, races, nations; whatever the division, if there’s a shared tradition, there’s a bridge. Because it is such an obviously powerful social phenomenon, money-makers worldwide continually seek to take advantage through the most evident and reliable manifestation of our traditions: holidays. America (where I live, if that wasn’t evident) was founded, populated by, and constructed in favor of Christians. Christ-ians are very interested in Christ. So, in this rich Christian-empowered nation, Jesus Christ’s birthday has become more than a religious day or season. It’s the most wonderful time of the year. That goes particularly for those on the production end of our beloved nationwide money-making arrangement. Naturally this means money flowing into the pockets of the producers. That stretches beyond the small businesses, malls, even Amazon. Yes, it stretches to music. Hence Christmas music. Hence this article. Christmas music, as a genre, is ¾ capitalism and ¼ everything that’s important to music. Is it morbidly naive to assume all artists who have produced Christmas music are focused solely on selling records? Yes. But, even those whose focus lies elsewhere, like the religious aspect of the holiday or joy of the season, still feed 100% into the powers that be. When Donny Hathaway slipped “Th is Christmas” into his 1971 self-titled masterpiece that includes “A Song For You,” among other classic tracks, he probably didn't analyze its profit potential. However, 50 years later, it nearly doubled the streams of any other song on the album, by far holding the number on his Spotify page. Is it a good song? Sure, by Christmas standards. It flourishes big horns at the beginning, before settling into a loungey early 70s groove fronted by one of the purest vocalists of his era, and it’s supported by poppy drums and a piano solo. However, sitting at the end of one of the most emotionally raw, underrated, and era-defining albums of all time, the source of its popularity (October-December) is all too evident. I won’t pretend it's a realistic expectation that an artist’s best music would be Christmas songs, and it’s no mystery why those songs are so popular, but what bothers me most about Christmas music is that, the majority at least, is bad. Unlike my previous set of mostly surface level market-based connections, this phenomenon is more complicated. It all starts with identity. Good music, in every single case, is infused with the artist’s identity. The lack of identity deprives the art of something that, although it may be hard to describe, gives the audience something to attach to. A good, and incidentally similar, example is Christian rock or rap. The artist is so focused on passing the religious identity and putting their faith/faith figure in the forefront, it seems they forget to be themselves. The fact is, your art has to come from you, otherwise it isn’t yours, otherwise it’s not art. Jesus didn’t make “God’s Not Dead (Like A Lion)” by the Newsboys (the first Christian Rock song that popped up on Google). He might’ve made What’s Going On , but he didn’t make that . Pardon my digression. Because identity is so essential to art, artists who have it go further, even if that identity is the embodiment of the mainstream (Taylor Swift). However, the American Christmas has a very strong identity as well. It has its own themes, schemes, even classics. For an artist to enter this space, they often feel the weight of this identity, and the pressure to adopt it. A Christmas album by any artist, we can use Taylor Swift, is sure to have multiple if not all covers. The Taylor Swift Holiday Collection (2008) is four Christmas classics with two Swift originals mixed in. Her originals play as average 2000s Taylor Swift songs, basic structure with an emphasis on the vocals and lyrics that cover the different angles of a past relationship, but wait, It’s also Christmas! This is common in original Christmas songs, the artist attempts to bring Christmas into their world, their sound, but it often takes over and the focus of the song settles in no-(wo)man's-land. What interests me more is the covers. There have been a select group of original songs over the years that struck gold. Someone wrote “Jingle Bells”. That select group has been covered relentlessly and will continue to be every December forever. Very recently (January 2, 2023 ), some awfully wise i ndividual wrote that ‘When done well, cover artists pay homage to the original song while offering their own spin or twist.’ I believe the problem with Christmas covers is this: there are absolutely no faces or names to the original songs anymore and absolutely no pressure to do something significantly individualistic with your own version. Cher’s Christmas is doing quite well this year. She brought in Stevie Wonder, Darlene Love, Michael Bublé, Cyndi Lauper, and of course, Tyga. In a recent interview, she claimed that “It's not your mother’s Christmas album”. I listened (yes, I listened), and I can confirm that it is indeed your mother’s Christmas album. Not my mother, she has great taste. It’s a lot like any other Christmas album, lot’s of jingles, choruses, and opportunities for my cynical eyes to roll. The most unique thing about Cher’s album: the volume. She’s pretty loud. Despite mistakenly naming the album ‘Christmas,’ instead of ‘Cher’s Seasonal Exercise In Mediocrity,’ her fun little features and reliance on the classics will serve her mightily and buy her truckloads more of those sparkly jeans (edgy) she’s wearing on the cover. That’s the formula, plenty of covers, a few originals folks can skip, and an angle for sales. Cher knows it, her label does, the radio does, and if you’re honest, you do too. As I’ve alluded to (or maybe I hav en’t, I never read these things back), not all Christmas music is bad, the concept just sets its participants up for failure. Few can overcome it, but as I ease towards a conclusion allow me to be momentarily positive. I would be remisced (hunted down) if I didn’t bring up Mariah Carey. When you look up Carey on google, aka The Queen Of Christmas, snowflakes fall down your screen. No joke. She completely dominates the season, and I can’t lie, I do enjoy this part. Here’s why she’s been so successful. Mariah Carey came up in a unique pop landscape. As hip-hop and pop collided, lots of effort went into blurring the lines. This era birthed trend after trend. Saggy jeans were sported by rappers emphasizing their streetness and r&b divas (Carey included) straddling the lines of sexy and cool. With the trends came pressures to be adaptable. Carey’s adaptability led to hit after hit. R&b, pop, hip-hop features, you name it, she nailed it. However, Mariah Carey didn’t define the era, it defined her. She embodied it, she took its identity on as her own. So, come December every year, she does the same with Christmas, and she does it better than anyone else. Mariah Carey was the 2000s and Mariah Carey is Christmas. Unfortunately for this seasonal genre, nobody can quite do what Mariah Carey does. There are other success stories in which an artist successfully strikes a balance. The Temptations were able to apply enough of their own identity on “Silent Night” and Stevie Wonder’s “Someday At Christmas” is popular because of how it repackages his social justice lens to fit the holidays. But, at the end of the day, they can’t touch “Papa Was A Rollin’ Stone” or “Love’s In Need Of Love Today” . The balance isn’t sustainable. Here’s what I suggest in place of Christmas music: music at Christmas. Someone close to me insists that their favorite song is a Christmas song despite its complete lack of thematic relevance. I whole-heartedly agree. FKJ’s “Die With A Smile” is a perfect exercise in sonic minimalism. It mesmerizes the listener with a lonely guitar, the occasional snare, synths, and an amplified bass drum. The vocalist repeats one line a few times, and creates a warm environment that no audience could resist. It’s my favorite Genius page ever and I use it to tune my speakers, but what I love most about it is the tone and minimalism which allow it to mean whatever you want it to. To this person it means warmth, joy, and memories. It means Christmas. Merry Christmas! -The Culture Gy re CHALLENGE 1: Listen to this posthumous disasterpiece: "Silent Night" by DMX CHALLENGE 2: Listen to the worst song I've ever heard on WDET: "Shopping" by Joseph Washington Jr.

GRAMMYS ON TRIAL 2/4/24 BY: IAN SHERRY On Sunday, February 4, 2023, the 66th annual Grammy Awards will take place at 8 pm. If you like good music, you may not like the Grammys. In fact, I’d tend towards the opinion that you absolutely should not. Anyone who’s ever watched the Grammys has experienced disappointment. They’ve experienced confusion as an artist strolls to the stage to accept the most prestigious award that applies to their mediocre product. That combination of disappointment and confusion leads to anger. Then, all of a sudden, music’s biggest night, the one that’s supposed to bring fans together nationwide, is steeped in division. Twitter lights up in outrage, TVs shut off, and people go to bed thinking next year will be better. People are mistaken, because in fact, the Grammys only get worse. Their archaic thought processes and categorizations grow weaker as music diversifies, and their failure to adjust in any significant way becomes increasingly offensive. Yet, they sit alone at the top of their critical field. If you’re interested, please join me down here as I throw rocks at the throne. One of the greatest criticisms of any institution is to say they’ve lost sight of their original purpose; the Grammy Awards are a perfect example. Elected officials often get lost in the game that is politics and begin to govern with the intention of securing reelection instead of serving the people. The Grammys have fallen into a similar trap. In order to maintain their unparalleled grip on the pinnacle of musical achievement, they feel they need to please an audience. Their word is final, yet if people are displeased their credibility comes into question. So, in order to maintain credibility and reserve the right to assert their opinion, they have to simultaneously appeal to the largest possible demographics while pacifying the frustration of undervalued fanbases. For this year’s attempt at saving face, Harvey Mason Jr., the CEO of The Recording Academy, added three sub-categories: best African music performance, best alternative jazz album, and best pop dance recording. While the surface-level intention here is good, it doesn’t make a dent. The Grammys' genre divisions can’t be fixed by adding niche awards here and there. If there is a category for Christian music why not other religions? If there is a category for Electronic music why does it only apply to the Euro/American EDM and hyperpop movements and not the majority-Black Techno and House movements of Detroit and Chicago? You’ll never get to the root of the problem by going one at a time. The result of their box-checking strategy is an uncomfortable and unbalanced relationship with not only the artists, but their audience as well. How is an audience supposed to accept the word of The Recording Academy as gospel when that word has been so obviously impacted by a variety of monetary influences and inherent biases? Criteria is the key word when it comes to exercises of this nature. An entity that is determining the best or worst of anything must have criteria in order to consistently deliver a decision. Discrepancies sew doubt into the minds of the audience, and I have many doubts running through my mind this year. Morgan Wallen is the newest rage in country music. In 2023 he was all over the charts, even holding the number one slot for 16 weeks with “Last Night” . His music dominated the country audience, but more impressively, he brought in non-country fans as well. I won’t pretend to count myself as one of them, but I do find it incredible that he will receive the same number of golden Grammy trophies as me this year (0). While his songwriters have a shot in the best country song category, Morgan Wallen himself is not nominated once. If the Grammys aren’t about the fans, at least not his, they must put more of an emphasis on critical success, right? Caroline Polachek must be nominated for album of the year. Wrong. Instead we sit in a weird in-between where popularity matters only within fanbases The Recording Academy values, where critical voices are used to defend certain artists’ inclusion but ignored to justify others. For instance, Ice Spice is nominated for Best New Artist, but not Sexyy Red . Both artists had massive presences on the rap charts and TikTok, planted their names amongst the top female rappers, made significant feature appearances, and received strong reviews from critics, yet only one is nominated. Sexyy Red is what we, in the tradition of complaining about the Grammys, call a snub. Yes, gathering around and complaining about the Grammys snubs is a tradition at this point. I’m sure The Recording Academy can feel this culture of negativity amongst their audience, though I’m not sure they care. As long as those angry people still tune in, what's the harm? A lot of work goes into crafting an audience such as this; we’re frustrated but we return without fail. They sell it and we buy it, and when there’s a dip in sales they find a way to pull us back in. In 2021 they charted by far the lowest viewership this century. The next year, they received praise from all corners of the entertainment industry when Jon Batiste won the 2022 album of the year. To follow that up, they put on a 50 years in hip-hop celebration last year, which received awards and resulted in a 30% spike in viewership from the previous year. So, how do they maintain an audience constantly threatening to wane? They lean into other demographics as needed. There is no 51 years in hip-hop celebration this year, in fact there’s no hip-hop nominated for any of the top three categories. Instead they sprinkled nominations in for Grammy darlings Kendrick Lamar and Jon Batiste , despite Lamar having a slow year in terms of production quantity and Batiste’s new album receiving lukewarm reviews across the board. This kind of token placement throughout the nominations is a common Grammy trope, and its used to justify Harry Styles’ Harry’s House winning over Beyonce’s Renaissance or Macklemore’s The Heist winning over Kendrick Lamar’s Good Kid, M.A.A.D. City (notice how they’ve been sure not to repeat this particular mistake). If you create the standard that a certain kind of music’s merit is limited, then its inclusion in any form is appreciated. Have you ever taken a moment to wonder why you never see hip-hop albums win Album of The Year? In fact, only two have ever done it. Is it fair to say that Lauryn Hill’s The Miseducation of Lauryn Hill and Outkast’s Speakerboxxx/The Love Below are the only two rap albums ever to sit at the top of their year, that even the best rap albums can’t, on average, stand up to the best of other genres, that rap is a lesser artform? No, that’s nonsense, yet that’s what the Grammys imply. The Grammys imply that Black music can be pigeonholed into one umbrella category, and somehow, that’s remained acceptable. In 2021 Black artists accounted for 44% of charting songs according to Billboard , yet a CNN article from the same year revealed only 24% of the nominees were Black. The vessel through which the Grammys bottle up Black artists is the Rap & Spoken Word Poetry category. While it's dangerous to assume an artist’s inclusion in a given category is based on anything other than merit, patterns imply intent not coincidence. Case and point: every single artist nominated in the R&B, Rap & Spoken Word Poetry this year is of African descent. Knowing that, it becomes a lot harder to remain under the impression the category has anything to do with music, not to mention the glaring differences in the art being presented within the category. However, the person who highlights this categorical foolishness the best isn’t even Black. Jelly Roll is a rapper and singer from Nashville. He spent more than a decade rapping, inspired by the Southern royalty rap of the 90s and 2000s. However, when he finally received his first Grammy nod it was in the Country & American Roots Music category. Just like there's no room for Lil Yachty in the Rock, Metal & Alternative Music category, there was no room for Jelly Roll in the Grammys definition of rap. After more than a decade, this was abundantly clear to him so he transitioned to a genre that fit his skin tone and accent in the highest critical context. That’s the kind of power these awards wield. They shape the landscape in which artists attempt to create music, and they enforce their racist mindset on the industry at large. That’s why Lil Nas X couldn’t release a pop/country song without backlash, Tyler, The Creator got his music pulled from the radio for practicing the same horrorcore rap that made Eminem famous, and Iggy Azalea climbed the charts by rapping in her best impersonation of a Black woman instead of her natural Australian accent. At the source of every institutional form of discrimination is an institution. In the music industry you can point to a number of villains, but none more public and pathetic than the Grammys. To The Recording Academy: allow me to remind you of your supposed purpose. You are the highest positive critical force in American Music. You have a responsibility to recognize the best of the best, based purely on merit, by creating categories which cover all types of excellent music and rewarding the best artist within that category. The purpose of categories is to ensure those who deserve to be recognized are accommodated, not to appease the fans, insert or cover your inherent bias, or reinforce the configuration of the pop charts. The pop charts, after all, speak for themselves. We don’t need you to base your decisions upon streaming numbers or radio listenership, Billboard exists for that very purpose. No, we turn to you because you are the all-encompassing, musically critical institution which best summarizes the feelings of the most reputable pundits and the people for whom the artists make art. You wield the power of public opinion, not the other way around. That power is unrivaled in the music industry, as streaming is the livelihood of the artists who you’re meant to empower. After all, their art is also a product. Instead, you’ve become the product. You sell yourself to the public every year. Everything you do, from the categories and the artists nominated within them, to the presenters and performers selected to put on your show, is all a part of the institution, the product, the lost cause: the Grammys. Of course, we can't completely abstain from the ceremonies. So, here's a list of the best amongst the nominees, who I think will win, and who should win regardless of the nominations for every category I feel inclined and qualified to pick.

LIL YACHTY'S LET'S START HERE BY: Ian Sherry 2/14/23 My go-to word when asked about Lil Yachty’s music has always been “fine”. That’s exactly what it is. To be fair, he does some things really well. His production is often compelling and he showcases versatility in his delivery when he is at his best. He also has been a part of a few fun pop crossovers. But, those songs are just that: fun. He falls victim to repetitive flows and occasionally leans too hard on autotune, but these problems aren’t unique. That is probably my biggest issue with Yachty: he is very talented in multiple facets of music-making, but he still makes mistakes that every other mediocre mainstream rapper does. So, as much as I like Yachty as a person, prior to this release, I would describe him simply as “fine”. The last few years have been interesting for Yachty. He’s gained a sizable media presence, mostly because he is a genuinely entertaining personality. He also has expanded musically. For example, in 2021, he decided to come to Detroit to make his album Michigan Boy Boat. The album featured some of the biggest artists in the Detroit scene -Tee Grizzley, Sada Baby, Babytron, YN Jay, RMC Mike, and Rio Da Young OG, to name a few- and his deep dive paid off in what felt like an authentic Detroit Rap project. As a Detroiter, I can attest that although for some people Detroit Rap can be an acquired taste, it is unique and hard to duplicate just for a given album. For the most part though, that is exactly what Yachty did, embracing the punchline-focused delivery that makes Michigan artists great. On top of his time in Michigan, over that last year or so, Yachty has reportedly been a part of studio sessions for several rap projects, and he’s written songs for other artists as well. He also released his single “Poland” recently which immediately blew up because of its show-stopping autotune, even though it was admittedly one-dimensional. There was some buzz over his upcoming album, but, even with the knowledge I had, I still wasn’t convinced it would be more than just a slight improvement over the previous Lil Boat albums. Simply put: I was wrong. Let’s Start Here is essentially an alt-rock/hip hop crossover, and it's good. The album could not have started out with a better track. “The BLACK seminole.” starts with heavy base and drum hits, immediately diving into the unique atmosphere of the album. Then, after the first verse, the guitar comes in. Not just a guitar riff or sample, a guitar solo. Not only does this speak to his immediate commitment to this new concept album, it shows his confidence in his musical expertise and versatility. After a somewhat lengthy tension release (something Yachty does well on this record), “the BLACK seminole.” finishes with the moaning vocals of Diana Gordon, who is brilliant throughout her multiple appearances. Once again relieving some tension, Yachty rolls right into the second track “the ride-”. It’s a relaxed, upbeat track that feels like Yachty’s version of what Steve Lacy does often on his 2022 album Gemini Rights. And, guess who is featured! Steve Lacy. Steve’s feature is simple and enjoyable, even though simplicity is not Yachty’s style on this album. Upon closer listen, “the ride-” has plenty of complexity to it. The baseline which roams throughout the song, keeps pace and bolsters the song’s personality. The third song “running out of time” is very easy to listen to, as is the fourth song “pRETTY” which features autotune reminiscent of “Poland” and a solid feature from Foushee. Unfortunately track five raises my first big issue with the album. “:(failure(:” is an interlude that consists of Yachty reflecting about his failures in a roundabout way. Here’s the thing: Yachty has a great personality. The problem is the placement. He led off the album with four great tracks but he then broke up the momentum with an interlude that could have slotted in anywhere. “THE zone” and “WE SAW THE SUN” come next. Both have their strengths. The first features, possibly, his best songwriting on the album, and the second includes more great autotune and a perfectly done mini-interlude. The interlude reminds me of some of Kendrick Lamar’s best. It simultaneously entertains and leads into the next song, as the bass kicks in towards the end for a seamless and satisfying transition. “drive ME crazy” and “IVE OFFICIALLY LOST VISION” mark the last two Diana Gordon features. Her impact on this album is probably greater than it appears on the surface. Her voice is a familiar mix between Alanis Morrisete and Tracy Chapman, and it adds completeness to the album by tying songs together stylistically, in a way miscellaneous features could not have. “sAy sOMETHINg” flirts with Yachty’s habitual repetitiveness but avoids it by pushing the limits of autotune and leaning into it heavily from the bridge throughout the conclusion of the song. “paint THE sky” opens with a muffled sample of the Weeknd’s “Save Your Tears”. Yachty does a mild stylistic Weeknd impersonation for the remainder of the song and executes it tastefully. “sHouLd i B” and “The Alchemist” combine for the weakest pair of songs on the album. Both are fairly repetitive, and though they stay within the niche of the rest of the album, they are missing the palpable creativity on every other song. “The Alchemist” has a nice finish that leads into the album’s final song. But aside from that, I could do without them, especially on such a strong and reasonably lengthy (57 minute) album. “REACH THE SUNSHINE” is the final song on the album. Although it doesn’t reach the heights of the opener, it brings in some of the same elevated vocals. Daniel Caesar has a great feature, adding to the atmosphere of the album’s conclusion with great vocals. Yachty decides to ride out the album on a wave of synths and sound effects, the same synths and sound effects that create the exotic sonic world that is Let’s Start Here. Lil Yachty’s Let’s Start Here is a musically alternative take on mainstream music industry style. It has its flaws, namely: the occasional grating vocal performance, incoherently high decibel combinations of instruments, and Yachty’s repetitive flow. But, it is a triumph nonetheless. Let’s Start Here sits in a strange yet surprisingly common set of circumstances, where the album can easily rub a given listener the wrong way. Yet, it would be a mistake to miss the genius behind it regardless of personal taste. Other albums that share these circumstances, especially within alternative hip-hop, are: Tyler The Creator’s Igor, Danny Brown’s Atrocity Expedition, JPEGMAFIA’s Veteran, even Death Grips’ The Money Store. If you’re familiar with those, I think Let’s Start Here is on its way to their level. Yachty is young, talented, and after this album it seems he’s poised to start making timeless albums. Lil Yachty’s Let’s Start Here is an 8.5/10.

MAYHEM By Ian Sherry 3/31/2025 Lady Gaga released MAYHEM , her first studio album in five years, on March 7, 2025. With a collection of songs that meet the moment, Gaga has reasserted herself atop the charts. Lady Gaga is selling this project as inspired by a variety of 80s and 90s influences, but I’d describe it as a return to form. Her last studio album skewed too far into mall-music for my liking and, with the intrusion of movie soundtracks in her recent discography, it’s been since 2016 that we got a musically ambitious album from Lady Gaga and since 2013 that we’ve seen one of this quality. No song better fulfills this record’s sales pitch than “Zombieboy.” The chant-clap intro briefly sets the stage for the high-energy disco-electronic instrumental that drives the track. She rides the 80s revival wave and energetically fills out the musically encased vocal pockets for a sonically airtight product. The record feels contemporary, original, and unique to her well-established catalog. The MAYHEM sound’s X factor is the acid bass. The strobing electronic bass that flutters on songs throughout the record is reminiscent of Kendrick Lamar and his GNX production team’s “squabble up” . An album this fresh, however, is the result of more than just one new trick. All these years later, Lady Gaga is circularly collecting on her own influence in electronic music, and the results are inspiring. “Abracadabra” was a smash hit before the end of the first verse. It has the unmistakable, vintage feel of a Lady Gaga anthem. The bouncy electronic introduction is excellent. From there, she effortlessly builds energy before dropping an immediately iconic Gaga-talk chorus pumped full of that acid wobble on the low end. She commands the refrain with electrifying swagger, chanting in sync with the punchy dance beat for my personal high point of the album. Listening to Lady Gaga’s fervorous commitment to song concepts is as much fun 17 years in as it’s ever been. If it weren’t for her comfortability in her own sound and a willingness to work with fresher cross-industry influences, this album couldn’t compete in a trend-based genre like pop. “Killah” , for instance, is a ridiculous undertaking of influences that lands closer to corny than cool across the first couple verses, still it’s saved by a crisp chorus and a stellar instrumental feature from Gesaffelstein . Gesaffelstein was also MAYHEM ’s primary producer, which made him responsible for stylistically ushering Lady Gaga into the swing of this decade’s musical landscape. He generally delivered, bridging the gap between her vintage sound and today’s charts with notable chemistry and quality. The best songs featured filled-out instrumentals and ear-catching moments, while the small population of weaker songs suffered from thin backing undeserving of Gaga’s unrelenting vocal effort – the P!nk effect. Gaga sings like a dynamo, preventing any song from flopping - something that major pop releases are so prone to accepting. Her performances are potent, enough to elevate a song like “Blade Of Grass” to a touching ballad, and enough to somewhat salvage instrumentally empty duds like “Don’t Call Tonight” or “The Beast” . She shows veteran songwriting chops, only running long a few times on pop drags while manufacturing danceable songs, one after another, with timely shifts that allow her to choose from her full arsenal of sounds on any given song. Her lyrics are still the unmistakable mix of cheesy and genuine – the parody that results in goofs like “Perfect Celebrity” and number-1-worthy tracks like “Vanish Into You” – and I can’t imagine them any other way. At her best, Lady Gaga has a generationally distinct sound that can churn out 10/10 songs each time the pieces align (3 this year). The attention to detail throughout this record, which is quite contradictory to the title, pays dividends and is especially evident in the synchronicity between Gaga, the punches of the instrumental, and the infrequent but impactful backing vocals. This is music the product of a living icon, and this album may prove to be an essential member of that icon’s discography – a later-model success that further cements Lady Gaga’s legacy as an artist and musical innovator. MAYHEM is a 8.3 .

Coverage Vol. 3 9/9/24 BY: IAN SHERRY On Instagram it's acceptable, trendy even, to take a sound from another video then make a video of your own, with your own message/joke using the same sound in the background. That format falls into the ‘recycled mindless internet crap’ category, but I did indeed see a funny one once. The ‘sound’, which I’m sure has been used to death in a variety of fashions since the original video, is a recording of a guy who mistakenly begins to rap Kendrick Lamar’s “Poetic Justice” over Janet Jackson’s “Any Time, Any Place” . The first samples the later, so it's an easy mistake to make, but he was immediately scolded by a friend who was trying to enjoy his contemporary oldies. In my opinion anyone who leans towards Lamar’s recycled and remixed version of Jackson’s classic has lost their damn mind, but I can identify with the mistake. Just this morning I was listening to my very own oldies playlist, and as it finished and Spotify took over the track selection, I immediately recognized Jaheim’s “Put That Woman First” . One of the best songs by one of the best voices of 2000s r&b, I was initially happy to hear it play, but realized not too far in that this was a different song, likely the original. I was right, but the two versions are so similar at points, both lyrically and in the instrumental hook, that I couldn’t immediately decipher if it was a cover or a very thorough sample-job. It turns out William Bell’s “I Forgot To Be Your Lover” is indeed a completely different song, and while I prefer the revamped version by my favorite golden-toned thug with a heart, there are quite a few strong renditions of the original track. Let’s dive in and crown a champ. Welcome to Coverage 3. Honorable Mentions AL KOOPER, 1976 Al is butt naked on this album cover and he delivers the weakest, most vocally and instrumentally thin rendition to boot. Yikes. THE REVELATION, TRE WILLIAMS 2012 This supporting track for Wu-Tang Clan’s foray into the world of martial arts movies leads the pack in production quality and includes a solid guitar-forward bridge, but the vocal performance leaves something to be desired, often failing to stay within the instrumental framework of the song. TOMMY TATE, 1989 I feel bad that Tommy can’t climb any higher (he looks awfully friendly), but his well-executed straightforward version doesn’t surpass the original in any particular way. WILLIAM BELL, 1968 Bell wrote and performed a beautiful song. It was safe, simple and powerful, but its simplicity lent itself to improvement and that’s the only reason he falls outside the top four. That being said, this version remains the standard. ROBERT CRAY, 2005 Cray is one of my all-time favorites, but just like Blood Sweat & Tears missing out on the last coverage, Cray didn’t do quite enough with his version. However, his always steely guitar has a different warmth to it on this track, making it worth a listen. THE MAD LADS, 1973 The Mad Lads gave the most ingenuitive vocal performances of the bunch. Their foursome added a 60/70s Temptations-esque spin to the track, and if it had actually been The Temptations it would’ve cracked the top spot, but it just wasn’t. NUMBER FOUR THE BLACK KEYS, 2024 Admittedly I was torn between this version and the last. Both reinvented the song vocally, but The Black Keys frontman Dan Auerbach’s twist is more in the cadence than the vocal sequencing. As a result, he better replicates the familiar feel of the time-honored original. There are times he delivers a line, or note, down when I want it up or vice-versa, but those are issues of taste and preference. The key, (get it?) is that he maintains the emotional feel the track is intended to deliver, and he does so as well as nearly anyone else. I am a fan of Auerbach’s solo work, and his stylistic versatility combined with the adaptability of his partner Patrick Carney make this modern rock-tinged edition of Bell’s classic a resounding success. NUMBER THREE GEORGE FAITH, 1978 I wouldn’t have imagined a reggae arrangement of this song, but it turned out to be a stroke of genius. The similarities between reggae and soul lie in their deep lineage and aged variety; as a result, the song makes a pretty smooth adaptation between the Black American ballad and this heartfelt reggae version. George Faith floats with restraint over an energized reggae pace, guiding a song that could’ve lost its original intention in the right direction. By holding back and letting the echoed production swirl around his vocals, a slight discrepancy in pace becomes clear between his words and the music flowing around him, reminding the listener of the melancholy cry the song was designed to simulate. It may not be the most true-to-form version, but it is a creatively gutsy reimagination of a soul song that resulted in an undeniably well-executed reggae song. NUMBER TWO BILLY IDOL- "TO BE A LOVER", 1986 Because of the different title and overall ‘Billy Idolness’ of this song it’s not completely recognizable, but this highest charting version of “I Forgot To Be Your Lover” is indeed a straight cover. Idol, who could not be bothered to bend to the song’s original form (or title), also recognized what he could do with it. He nearly doubles the length, adding air to the structure, high-energy instrumental portions, a confident vocal performance, and an entirely different attitude. The track ramps up quickly with true rock & roll style, the bounciness of the 80s, and the improvisational ability of a great performer, before eventually concluding just after the best guitar performance on any of the versions. It was a true pop/rock blowout of the words that originally sat on the paper, and it was done to near perfection. NUMBER ONE BRUCE SPRINGSTEEN, SAM MOORE, 2022 That’s Sam Moore of Sam & Dave , in 2022, at age 86, singing beautifully beside Bruce Springsteen. This is absolutely the best version of the original imagination William Bell had in 1968. It has every ounce of class and quality the original put on display, but with even more soul. Moore opens their rendition in his aged yet unwavering voice, ranging up and down subtly, filling the speakers for the bigger lines and finessing his way through others. He sings as strong as ever and with enough emotion to match his partner’s fanfare. Springsteen has always had a very genuine tone to his confident, even overbearing vocal persona, and on this track he lets it take the forefront. He backs Moore on the chorus, bolstering and energizing the tune as they approach the handoff. Then with the instrumentation of prime Detroit soul and the audio equipment of a 2022 Springsteen contingent, the energy elevates through The Boss’s verse, and the well-oiled veteran duet finishes off my very favorite version of “I Forgot To Be Your Lover”. Listen to Jaheim's "Put That Woman First" and "Finding My Way Back" for some CG Xtra Credit.

THE RUNNING MAN By Dawson Sarcona 11/15/2025 The Running Man, directed by Edgar Wright, is the latest in the boom of Stephen King adaptations from the past few years. That being said, this film immediately differs from its counterparts in one major way: This is not a horror movie. Regardless of how you know King’s writing, whether it's literary classics like Cujo, Salem's Lot, Carrie or big horror icons like IT or The Shining, King is known for creating truly terrifying stories. The Running Man, however, is different. This movie is a dystopian action story through and through. While it does include some intense and high-stress situations, the only “horror” that lies in this film is its disturbing resemblance to our current society. This film follows Ben Richards (played by Glen Powell) as he competes on a deadly gameshow that, if won, will result in him winning 1 billion dollars and securing a better life for his wife and daughter. The world this film builds is one of the more interesting put to screen this year. “The Network” (a literal TV network with a name devoid of creativity) owns the government and dictates the lives of everyone in the nation.Because of the way this world is set up, the message from Kings original novel stays relevant in 2025’s adaptation by Wright. The message is simple: the dangers of a world reliant on media and entertainment. Here is where King’s trademark “scariness” comes in. His depiction (aided massively by Edgar Wright’s film adaptation) of this parallel Earth is chilling because it’s not far off from our own. In a time where everyone is heavily reliant on their screens, the thought of a society where those screens watch back and keep tabs makes for a captivating watch. Moving away from the plot and broad strokes of King’s writing, Edgar Wright once again shows audiences why he's one of the most talented directors working right now. Wright has directed many cult classics (Shaun of the Dead and Scott Pilgrim Vs. the World, to name a few), but his status as a director otherwise seems to be underrated. Since I first saw his passion project film, Baby Driver, I've been a huge fan of Wright, and the talent he demonstrates filming compelling action in that film carries through in The Running Man. This movie is, action-packed by definition, full of fight scenes and stunts that rival some of the genre’s best films across the past year. Wright just knows how to properly direct a scene. Even in the moments with the least action, this movie maintains its momentum. In comparison to movies like Mission Impossible: the Final Reckoning, which left me bored from scene to scene, waiting for the next piece of action, this movie fully immerses its audience into the story. There was not a second during this movie that I felt bored or a scene lingered too long. If anything, there were some moments in the film where the pacing felt a little too fast. While it wasn't enough to take me out of the film, there were some moments I wish they’d spent a tad bit more time in. That said, for the most part, Wright uses his time in King’s world wonderfully and tells a wholly satisfying story. Wright isn't The Running Man’s only strength. Glen Powell delivers one of, if not his most compelling performances yet. There has been talk amongst the film/movie culture of Glen Powell taking up Tom Cruise's mantle as the next big action star. Before this film, I was impartial to this concept. But after seeing The Running Man, I can confidently say that he would be an excellent choice to succeed (and even surpass) Tom Cruise. Powell brings life to the character of Ben Richards and makes him very easy to root for, which is important for a movie like this. He balances the comedic range and physical demands of this role very well, and his on-screen interactions with most are very compelling. All in all, the only minor issue I see with this movie is some rushed pacing in the first act. I would rate this movie a 9 out of 10 , and would heavily recommend it to anyone looking for a fun and exciting theater experience. It’s Glen Powell at his best and further proof that Edgar Wright can direct a thrilling ride of an action movie!

Stranger Things Season 5, Vol. 1 By Dawson Sarcona 12/5/2025 Stranger Things Season 5 Vol. 1 has officially dropped, and with it, the end of a decades-long franchise has begun. As someone who has been on the Stranger Things train since 2018, this franchise has been a crucial part of my development as a person. This is hands down one of my favorite TV shows of all time, so the fifth season had a lot of anticipatory weight to it. With this in mind, it's only fair to review this first volume (which only consists of four episodes) episode by episode. Season Five, Episode One: The Crawl A season opener is always a tough task. Especially following a one-year time jump, it can be difficult to write a cohesive first episode that lets the audience know what characters have been up to and simultaneously jump-starts the story for the rest of the season. That being said, this episode does a great job of balancing catching us up and building stories for the future. Dustin’s character arc provides some of the best moments of the season. This episode wavers in the quality of writing from the rest of the season - shaking off the rust. There are a few select scenes that probably could have been cut, as the writing stands out against the distinct tone of the series. Rather than setting up interactions and showing how characters are feeling, it felt like a lot more exposition dialogue rooted solely in just saying things that are happening. All in all, this re-entry into the world of Stranger Things takes its time setting up new character dynamics and leaves the audience with one of the best cliffhangers in the history of the show. This episode is an 8.5/10. Season Five, Episode Two: The vanishing of Holly Wheeler This episode follows the cliff hanger with the previous episode with a cold open that show creator calls the craziest they’ve ever done. With such a strong beginning of the episode, the rest pales in comparison. “The vanishing of Holly Wheeler” feels like the most ‘filler’ of the four this volume. It sets up some important mysteries and furthers the development of the new pairings for this season. Finn Wolfhard (Mike), Natalia Dyer (Nancy), and Nell Fisher (Holly) all deliver exceptional performances this episode. For Mike and Nancy, this feels like a return to leading forms we haven’t really seen since the end of season one. The two siblings working together, bouncing off each other, is something I’ve really missed and their strength is one of the best things to come out of these episodes. This season Mike also seems to fall back into his role as the leader of the party (Mike fans rejoice) For a new character, Holly is a great addition and does a great job fitting in with the environment of the show almost immediately. All that being said, this episode feels the most dragged out and at times feels boring. There’s also an increase in some of the iffy dialogue from the previous episode. Overall, episode two is a 7/10. Season Five, Episode Three: The Turnbow Trap Episode three immediately picks up from the slower pace of its successor. This episode introduces the other new breakout character from this season: Derek Turnbow. This kid is an immediate favorite of the internet - why? He is hilarious. Everything he says is delivered perfectly for the comedic relief needed to bring some light to what has so far been the darkest and most mature season. The addition of kids like Derek and Holly in this season is great because it brings the show back to its roots of being about young kids and monsters, while still being able to tell the stories of our original party and they grow up. Additionally, episode three pulls from “Home Alone” in one of the best sequences of the series. Scenes like that provide some of the volume’s best moments, where we get to see the classic Stranger Things teamwork moments - solving problems in unique and creative ways to defeat a monster. This episode is where the pieces of this story begin to fall into place, and the mystery starts to form. It sets up perfectly for episode four and is a great episode in itself. It’s a near-perfect 9/10 , and it fixes the majority previous episodes’ problems. Season Five, Episode Four: The Sorcerer Episode four is not only the culmination of the volume but, in some ways, a culmination of season 1-4. In this episode, we finally get to see Will Byers step into his own as a character. Since season one, we've been able to see nearly every character grow and develop, and it's felt like Will’s character has been left stagnant. All of Will's victimization and what some would call weak characterization build up to this episode, where we finally get the development we've been waiting for. In addition to this, we get some satisfying conclusions to the micro-mysteries set throughout the volume. The way this episode comes together is something marvelous. This episode defines what a great show is all about in showing perfect character growth, that creates a top 3 scene in the show hands down. To create an episode that tells its own story, bridges the gaps on the rest of the volume and sets up a really excellent arc for the rest of the show is not something that's easily accomplished. This episode does it flawlessly, a true 10/10 and the highest rated episode of the show to date. In conclusion, this season so far is a big success. It feels like a near-perfect continuation of the fourth season’s vibe and a proper upscaling for the concluding season of the series. This show is very important to me and has been for a lot of other people my age; we’ve grown up with it. While it's sad to see this show approach its conclusion, I’m very happy with with its swan song thus far. There are still some moments of iffy dialogue, things that just feel off, which is likely the product of the increased number gaps bridged in the writing this season. It seems with season 5 they may have hit their limit with how much one writer's room can handle while maintaining good quality writing. At this rate, season five definitely resides within the top three of the show! I’d give volume one an average rating of 8.5 out of 10. Given the end of the volume it's clear whatever “fifth-season-funk” may have plagued the writers for the first few episodes is gone, and they're ready to deliver more mysteries, scares, and emotional endings for our favorite characters in volume 2 and 3.

Fool's Gold: Apollo's Debut Is Not By Ian Sherry 8/8/2025 On August 8, 2025, Lew Apollo released Fool’s Gold. This debut album is a celebration of individual creation within the blurred lines of this contemporary musical landscape. Lew Apollo was introduced and pitched to me as a “soul” artist. We take soul seriously here in Detroit, making such a label not only striking, but a direct challenge. An endless list of criteria scrolls Star Wars-style through my subconscious as my ears do the judging. In this case, “soul” is a precious label I cannot afford. Apollo’s self-produced pop sound is balanced, fresh, and on-par with industry standards, but it doesn't so much emulate the musical bones of soul music. In an effort to perfectly portray “Lew Apollo the artist,” a noun was used as an adjective: Lew Apollo is not a soul singer, but he is a singer with soul. In 2023, Apollo released JUNGLE . His debut EP had an interesting variety of pop-adjacent tracks, but I find its name to be its most relevant feature. Jungle, to most music fans, is a British band, whose poppy yacht-funk can drift towards modern (Indications-like) soul on any given track. Whether or not he did it intentionally, Apollo benefits from this namely intertwinement. His and Jungle’s likeminded approaches to bridging pop and aspects of disco or soul co-validate one another through quality and creative direction, and that’s evident from track 1. “No Room In Hell” is a prototypical result of this sound, and I’m here for it. The track’s bounce is enough to grab my ear, and the otherwise spacey instrumental is filled-in but secondary to Apollo’s well-engineered vocal editions. The following title track, “Fools Gold,” flexes the ability to easily rework the sound established in track 1. The gradual pace and slappy bass allow Apollo to meander his way into a dreamy vocal performance, floating on the verses no problem, into a catchy chorus with understated background vocal support, before making room as he often does on this record, with a humble but quality instrumental bridge. By this point, it was becoming clear to me that I was dealing with a legit composer. Lew Apollo has a thriving independence about him, from the persona outlined in his promo material, to the aesthetic he’s cultivated on socials and cover art. But, the kicker is that he produced this record himself. Many a genre-fence-sitter have thrived in the technological era of production. Think early Kanye West, Anderson .Paak producing Malibu on his Macbook, or Lew Apollo piecing together a chorus-bolstered, soul-appreciative third track of legitimate sonic scale… “Let The Light In” opens with a murky hook preview and some of Lew’s most striking lyrics thus far. After teasing the chorus, the track begins to pick up steam, bringing in more instrumental and background vocal support on the chorus’ second repetition, and continuing to find new gears through the track’s closing moments. Our tour’s next stop is track 7, “Addicted.” Talk about inspiration. Lew definitely went for a soul tune with modern juice on this reimagination of Bill Withers’ “Just The Two of Us.” Leaning respectfully-but-noticeably on that legendary 6-bar progression, Apollo drops in a heavy r&b track complete with an original spin on the hook’s bones, meaty bass dips, and a delicate bare-bones sonic atmosphere that he places himself at the center of. A win in my book. Now for the closer. Fool’s Gold’s ninth and final track was perfectly placed. Lew Apollo lays it all out there on “Feeling OK,” which stands head and shoulders above an already raw record in terms of vulnerability. Accompanied by only his guitar, Apollo limps his way through a relatable account of the challenges of day-to-day living. While the song doesn’t do a ton musically, his guitar is just enough to properly support him as he captures a feeling experienced by many through different but comparable experiences. He has one line specifically that he wanted us all to hear as his debut record came to a close: “if you can’t pick me up, then put me down.” I’m here to pick him up. Lew Apollo is an ambitious artist. A capable musical visionary. An independent well-rounded artist. And a soulful singer. Fool’s Gold is a 8.2.

Inspecting Sabrina Carpenter By Ian Sherry 9/10/2025 On August 29th, 2025, Sabrina Carpenter released Man’s Best Friend. With her first record since reaching the pinnacle of pop stardom, Carpenter solidified an already-hardening opinion in the mind of this music fan. Sabrina Carpenter is the closest thing American pop music has to a real-life Powerpuff Girl. When most kids are still learning to tie their shoes at the age of 15 (or was that just me?) Carpenter was priming herself for a rise to fame. Her natural mix of sugar, spice, and espresso soon came into contact with the infamous Chemical X (Disney channel), and out burst the perfect pop star, a flawless celebrity figure. As far as I can tell, and Man’s Best Friend only made me more certain, there’s very little that makes Carpenter’s music special, aside from Carpenter herself. What I mean is this: her tendency towards generic pop-of-the-moment places her performative persona at the center of attention – and what a persona it is. Carpenter is reportedly a hard worker, and she’s been on a disciplined grind for some time now. Long before Sabrina gained serious notoriety as a singer, clips of her concerts had been surfacing on social media. All of them (speaking for my own algorithm here) showcased her personality via shenanigans, while featuring very few, if any musical moments. That is the Sabrina Carpenter experience. The product is the person performing the piece, not the piece itself. Let’s see what Sabrina is selling us this time around. First, the producer combination of John Ryan and (who else but) Jack Antonoff ensures a certain style of music. The pop-fitting formula featured by this chart-pounding-paring reliably features drum machine beats that punch up into the midrange, a slew of looped strings which harmonize below the vocals, and a variety of synths that build later in songs to amp up the energy, ornamentation, and sonic abundance (of which there’s never much). Rarely will these albums feature notable session musicians aside from the headlining artist or band members. That’s why it’s a noticeable gimmick when Carpenter welcomes a fleeting fiddle solo on track 1, “Manchild.” The nod to middle America is a fitting on a tune that begins the album-long painting of a particular brand of mama’s boy. Listen to the record all the way through and you’ll know what I mean. Here are some terms to keep in mind: physical and mental unavailability, weaponized incompetence, emotional immaturity, and resignation. Now let me give you a few of Sabrina Carpenter’s own: “You said your phone was broken, just forgot to charge it - Whole outfit you're wearing, God, I hope it's ironic - Did you just say you're finished? Didn't know we started - It's all just so familiar, baby, what do you call it? Stupid - Or is it slow? Maybe it's useless? But there's a cuter word for it, I know - Man-child .” And now the bridge, “Oh, I like my boys playing hard to get - And I like my men all incompetent - And I swear they choose me, I'm not choosing them .” Suffice to say, it was the lead single for a reason, and it’s not such a bad song either. Allow me to usher you along to track 5, “We Almost Broke Up Again Last Night.” A pop ballad straight from Swift and Antonoff’s shared California Closet, Carpenter gives us the next best glimpse at her mind in love. The legendary pop pairing's success over recent years has made Antonoff the top-of-mind landing spot for any pop star in search of a producer. Carpenter fits the Swift-formed mold perfectly, but where the two Pennsylvanian Antonoff collaborators differ is their perceivable attitudes ‘in love’. While Taylor Swift believers are often criticized for living in a feminist fantasy land of their mother’s making, Carpenter airs on the side of comedically exasperated realism. Swift has always brought an uplifting, rebellious, independent attitude to her music, even when the subject matter isn’t pleasant. Carpenter does some of those things, but contrasts with the industry titan in what I call her resignation to the bullshit. “Gave me his whole heart, then I gave him (noggin),” is a telling lyric to me. I doubt I’m the first and unfortunately, I won’t be the last to break this news: the average American male (but not just males) doesn’t digest and regurgitate their emotions in a fashion that is conducive to the relationship’s need for empathetic discourse, and the resulting dumping of pent-up emotion can clutter the Love Train’s tracks. Resignation to that, expecting nothing more from an entire gender of the world’s apex species, is a bit disappointing in my mind. But where are the parents?! That’s what Sabrina Carpenter demands to know on the following track. “Nobody’s Son” is a well-articulated, heartbroken rant that details being dumped by a guy who “discovered self-control this week.” The bridge digs even further into our previous subject matter as she turns the blame (which never seems to quite land on the son in question) onto his mother. “That boy is corrupt – Could you raise him to love me, maybe? He sure fucked me up – And, yes, I’m talkin’ bout your baby.” Maybe it's my sensitivity to the idea of my mom getting blamed for my nonsense, but I couldn’t stop finding issues with this song! I find the poppy orchestral chorus cheap (don’t make me think about Frozen) and the way she jams “emoshnally” into 4 syllables to fit the bar makes my skin crawl (I used a synonym for emotionally a few paragraphs ago - it can be done). The next track found redemption in my eyes, both in sentiment and sound. “Never Getting Laid” is refreshing; its greater bass presence and restraint with the myriad of strings, which are often uncharacteristically blaring on this record by Antonoff standards, allow for her vocals to float instead of cut through. The dreamy vibe is intentional as it pairs perfectly with the passive aggression Carpenter spitfires with lyrics like “Baby, I'm not angry - Love you just the same - I just hope you get agoraphobia someday - And all your days are sunny -From your windowpane - Wish you a lifetime full of happiness - And a forever of never getting laid .” It even has a sweet lil outro. At least anger is one of the stages of grief (blaming the mother isn’t even bargaining). “Never Getting Laid” for the win. “When Did You Get Hot?” is next in line. Carpenter goes for an Ariana Grande thing here, but I don’t need this song from anybody. “Go Go Juice” – not my cup of tea. “Don’t Worry I’ll Make You Worry” – a snooze. Luckily, the home stretch kicks off with “House Tour.” This throbbing pop-funk bop has the magic captured at times by late model Justin Timberlake but most prominently by Bruno Mars. Laced with clever wordplay, Carpenter flaunts her world’s best euphemism game as she prances atop the album’s top energy track. “Goodbye” is the perfect name for a last track! And that’s not the only reason Man’s Best Friend ends on a positive note. This spin on a breakup song features an empowered Carpenter pushing off. She soars atop a triumphant instrumental, nailing the ABBA sound before dipping shamelessly into Sgt. Pepper’s bag of tricks to find her last bridge. It builds, and Carpenter opens up her lungs surrounded by a chorus of herself to put a confident stamp on this final track. How does she sing that well with her tongue in her cheek? Sabrina Carpenter’s 2025 release is the typically mixed bag major pop labels have standardized over the last 20 years (bring back Brittney). I found her songwriting effective, the album’s narrative easy to follow, and the instrumentals largely underwhelming. I believe that Carpenter makes music to be performed live – it shows in her lyrical designs, the number of verses meant for speak-singing. She is a pop star. She is the product. She knows what she’s doing. But does she know what she’s doing? When Sabrina Carpenter showcases sonically bland music before the masses, does she consider that it will be her persona and way of being that is idolized? If Carpenter wanted to sound like ABBA, to pass along one of her beloved influences, she could. She passes along a character. Perfectly acceptable, she’s not the only one, and she’s not near the worst. But what does this character preach? I’ve danced around the edge of enough sensitive subjects; I’m glad to have saved this simple point to close my argument. If it hasn’t already occurred to you, glance at the album cover and think about what that name means. Sabrina Carpenter won’t be stained by a suggestive album cover, and its nothing in the piles of pseudo-smut the music industry has to offer. Years from now it’ll likely be the felicitous cover of the Bonus Track Edition people click most often. But legacy doesn’t fade. Sabrina Carpenter has control of hers, an opportunity so many women have gone without. With her chance, Betty Davis chose to be a “Nasty Gal,” Chaka Khan chose to be Every Woman, Brittney Spears chose to be “Toxic.” I hope Ms. Carpenter’s final choice is not to be- Man’s Best Friend is a 6.3.