A great, but obscure, movie is on Channel 5 tonight at 11.05 - 1.05. It stars Kenneth Branagh (he also directed) and Emma Thompson. Branagh is a private detective who takes on a case of a woman suffering from amnesia. Somehow it all becomes about reincarnation and a murder that took place in a previous life. Has an interesting twist at the end.

It's a funny movie and mildly dramatic. Robin Williams also pops up for a few scenes and Derek Jacobi is funny as a antique dealer with a sideline in past-life regression therapy (that he abuses when on the look out for family heirlooms).

Well worth watching. At least take a minute to set a tape up for it as I think it's worth seeing.

Also, fans of Dream Theatre should watch it as it's the film they ripped-off/homaged for the plot of their 1999 "Metropolis Part 2: Scenes From A Memory" concept album.

A review: http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/19910823/REVIE...

Phil Collins was sitting on the sofa nodding his head while Tony Banks (the keyboard player) did all the talking. Mike Rutherford, the guitarist, wasn't there.

Tony was asking me to play bass for them. I explained that I was a musical incompetent. Not only I did not know how to play the bass, but that I have no musical ability whatsoever. The day I string two notes together will be long after Armageddon has come and gone.

He wasn't bothered and insisted that I join them. I read somewhere that the reason supergroups suck is because all bands need a Ringo to keep things simple and grounded. Maybe they wanted me to be their Ringo?

He wore me down and I agreed to tour with them, but I refused to join as a full band member. I've read enough about bad record contracts to know that I could end up owing money to the record company, so I insisted on being paid a large weekly salary while still having equal rights as the rest of the band.

At the concert I cut the set list of some of the longer songs so the audience was going to get a shorter show than planned. I then announced to the crowd that they're going to get excellent value for money. Then I realised that they probably paid over £100 for this show, so I quickly added, "At least I think so," but I didn't even convince myself.

I was in a HMV store and was surprised to find that the A - Z CD racks have been moved from the ground floor to the back of the 1st floor. Instead the computer games have taken over on the ground.

The A - Z DVDs have been displaced by the CDs, which have been given only about two thirds of the space the DVDs enjoyed.

At the entrance on the ground floor there are still two long racks of CDs. One is the new releases, which I assume are still very profitable. And the other rack is for the 2 for £10 sale CDs ie. Radiohead, Girls Aloud, Muse, Kasabian etc.

Gives me the impression that they haven't been selling many CDs lately. Does it mean anything, or have they just done a reshuffle to keep the place looking fresh and exciting for the KiDZ?

People complain that I'm a bitter, jazz hating piece of misanthropic scum. And that I should write about what I like and not what I don't like. So I'm writing about a misanthropic piece of scum that I do like.

These are a series of weekly computer game reviews. Nothing to do with music, but he did review Guitar Hero III.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation/17-Guitar-H...

Enjoy. New cartoons are posted every Wednesday.

I've just had an interesting discussion about jazz with someone.

The gist of it is that I had listened to "Kind Of Blue" by Miles Davis for the first time. This is the ultimate, number one jazz album by all accounts. I thought it was boring and pointless.

I had also watched a documentary on Miles Davis and I came to the realisation that jazz was a con, perpetuated ever since the 60's by pretentious people. I can understand how pre-rock and roll it might be worth listening to, but once rock became popular it seems a bit pointless.

Miles was signed to a new label in the 50's and was told by the owner to make an album of the usual tracks, but he had to do one original song, and it had to be called "Miles Ahead" so that he could call the album by that title.

These jazz artists must have farted out four or five albums a year. And they must be of debatable quality.

This seems to be how most albums were recorded:

1. The band turns up to the studio.

2. The band leader plays a chord sequence to them.

3. They record a ten minute live improvisation around that chord.

4. The band leader plays another chord sequence.

5. They record a five minute live improvisation around that chord.

6. Repeat for the rest of the day until they have 20 minutes for side one.

7. Reconvene a month later and record the second side in one day.

If people talk about how great jazz is, are they deluding themselves? I can't escape the feeling that it's all a load of pointless noodling. Can non-written, improvised music with no lyrics really have anything to say? Raw aggressive guitars at least articulate anger. What does a jazz trumpet articulate?

The person I was talking to confessed that he never just listens to jazz to pay attention to it. It's always used as background music for when he's reading. Should music just be an ambient background mood enhancer? Surely if it's not interesting enough to pay attention to then it's not got much going for it. I've never heard a Brian Eno album but I know he invented the ambient genre. Is it a good genre, or does it just work when people bolt some ambient ideas onto their rock/pop music ie. Air, Zero 7 etc

To give some context to my comments I'll list the four jazz albums I like and I have listened to many times:

1. The Don Ellis Orchestra - Electric Bath (funny, tongue in cheek 60's 21 piece band)

2. Mahavishnu Orchestra - Birds Of Fire (heavy rock masquerading as jazz)

3. Herbie Hancock - Head Hunters (mildly funky)

4. Miles Davis - Bitches Brew (music keeps changing every minute so always something new to pay attention to (I assume it would be terrible background music))

Is jazz pointless? Am I missing something by just being bored when a band plays a ten minute variation on the one groove? Do you need technical knowledge of how music works to "get it"? Am I just a twat?

I was going through the "First Record You Bought" article and saw that someone had also listed the last CD they had bought. So that got me thinking.

I have the following on order:

Siouxsie and the Banshees - Ju Ju (Digitally Remastered)
Siouxsie and the Banshees - The Rapture
Siouxsie and the Banshees - The Scream (Remastered)
Leonard Cohen - Various Positions

All are £3 each on Play.com. Still haven't arrived.

As I've never bought a single I have nothing to report on that front.

Apparently Guy Hands of EMI has said that they plan to use the back catalogues of their artists to help generate extra profits.

While everyone else is appalled by this abuse of the music, I'm delighted. If we don't want it then we don't buy it. The possibilities of new Best Ofs, B-side collections, special editions of albums, reissues of long deleted music etc can only be a good thing surely. We're only exploited if we allow ourselves to be. It's not like a government that we all have to live with. It's a bunch of CDs we can just leave on the shop shelves.

What would you most like to see released?

I'd love the two Jane's Addiction albums to get an expanded remastered release. And this Pink Floyd Best Of http://www.wordmagazine.co.uk/content/pink-floyd-best-1968-1972. And a Radiohead B-sides compilation.

We all know never to buy pop albums because you only get two knock out great singles and ten bits of filler. Out of curiosity does anyone know of a pop album that is all killer, no filler?

The Beatles? Maybe, but is Dr Robert a good song, or is it just enjoyable because we've listened to the album so much that we've learned to love the duds?

The best I can come up with is Garbage, but as pop as they are, they're just as much a rock band.

Has anyone suffered through a Kylie/Girls Aloud/Christina Aguleria (sic) album? Are the album tracks any good?

Or they are according to Radiohead fans. They're unhappy as the evil EMI are going to release a thoughtful compiled and sequenced Best Of that is perfect for the casual music listener, who wouldn't touch an album with a barge pole.

How can they work up so much bile for something they themselves can just simply not buy as it's redundant to them. They seem to forget that not everyone has the albums. And not everyone wants more than one disc. Too many people forget that casual music listeners exist and that not every Best Of is an evil cash in designed to fleece the fans.

And in this age of MP3 playlists it seems strange to bleat on about breaking up the albums into individual songs. Personally I like to hear familiar songs juxtaposed against different tracks to what they're usually sequenced beside. Reading their comments on Amazon you would think they've never used the random button on their CD players.

Are Best Ofs evil? If you've already got the albums then simply don't buy them. If you don't have the albums? They're a cheap goldmine of great songs. And they're usually the only CDs casual listeners buy unless it's a brand new album with endless radio airplay.

This Radiohead Best Of will introduce a LOT of new people to the band. Casual listeners who don't know how to steal music on the internet will see the TV adverts and like the snatch they hear of "Karma Police". A new, unique idea will pop into their heads. "Hey, you know what, I could buy that." EMI are right to release a Best Of. And if they spend the money advertising it, then it might be a big hit.

Having said all this, I won't be buying it as I've already made it as a playlist on my iPod. And it's better than the previous Best Of I made myself.

Nine Inch Nails are a great industrial heavy metal band that recently left their major label. They have released their new studio album for free.

http://dl.nin.com/theslip/signup

I think David Bowie has some great Best Of compilations but the albums are pretty poor. These albums are considered to be classics while I think they're loaded down with dated filler.

Is it because I bought them three or four at a time and listened to them all within a few days? Those who love the albums probably paid full retail price and were unable to buy another album for a few weeks/months. So the album got endless spins until you learned to love the duff tracks. While I bought three or four albums (for £5) at the one time and listened to them all within a few days. I always had better, or newer albums to listen to so I never felt a need to play each album more than a few times.

Did the scarcity of new music directly influence the bands you grew to love? Were the records companies doing us a favour by charging £16.99 for an album?

As a separate question can someone give me an idea as to how much CDs cost during the early nineties as I struggle to imagine people paying £16.99 for a Bruce Springsteen CD, or £30.99 for a double album. Surely my memory of these prices are wrong? What's the most you've paid for a standard, easy to find CD? The most I ever paid was £12.99 for the single disc U2 nineties Best Of (and even then I overpaid by mistake as I thought it was £10.99).

Does anyone have an opinion on film dialogue, found sounds or live on stage banter in between songs on an album?

Interesting on the first listen. Okay for the second time. Then you come round to the third listen and boy, does it get right up my nose. The skip button or a strategically edited MP3 version become indispensable to get rid of Axel Rose jabbering away on the Guns N' Roses live album etc.

Short sound snippets are okay like The Pixies "F**king die" moment on one of their albums. It's when they go on and on that they annoy me. There are advantages to dialogue on a soundtrack CD, as it gives context to the music so it doesn't just become a random collection of tracks. And on stage banter can be funny, or just plain interesting. Unfortunately it rarely ever stands up to repeat listening. In the end I'm here for the music, not the witty comments.

Anyone else have a comment on talking breaking up the flow of music on an album? Or would like to list any good or bad examples?

The worst for me was the two Johnny Cash prison albums. The current CD versions have the WHOLE concert; minutes of chatter and lots of false starts. Fascinating on the first listen etc. I had to edit every track on my MP3 version so now I can just listen to the music without the distractions.

I haven't heard the Tarantino soundtracks in a long time, but I assume they're quite annoying as they have lots of dialogue on them.

I'm fascinated by the idea of taking an album and improving it by changing the track order, removing dud tracks and adding other songs (B sides, bonus out takes or songs from totally different albums if they fit).

Stylus Magazine have a whole set of articles about this called Playing God (http://www.stylusmagazine.com/archive.php?type=7&year=2005). Nine Inch Nails' "The Fragile" and Smashing Pumpkins' "Mellon Collie" get trimmed from two CDs to one. Radiohead's "Pablo Honey" and REM's "Up" get overhauled etc.

Does anyone here have any rearranged albums that they would like to share?

Someone else here called Lucas Hare posted this reworking of Bob Dylan's "Blood On The Tracks":

1. Tangled Up In Blue - from The Bootleg Series 1-3
2. Simple Twist Of Fate - from Blood On The Tracks
3. You're A Big Girl Now - from Biograph
4. Idiot Wind - from The Bootleg Series 1-3
5. You're Gonna Make Me Lonesome When You Go - from Blood On The Tracks
6. Meet Me In The Morning - from Blood On The Tracks
7. Lily, Rosemary And The Jack Of Hearts - version above [he's referring to a video that went along with his original post]; the only one not commercially available
8. If You See Her, Say Hello - from The Bootleg Series 1-3
9. Shelter From The Storm - from Blood On The Tracks
10. Buckets Of Rain - from Blood On The Tracks

I personally have not rearranged any albums in a particularly noteworthy way.

If failing that then do you have any single artist Best Ofs that your particularly happy with?

I've got a good Bruce Springsteen and Nick Cave Best Of that I'm very happy with:

Springsteen Best Of, all but two songs taken from "The Essential Bruce Springsteen":

Born To Run
Badlands
Darkness On The Edge Of Town
The Promised Land
Stolen Car (not "The River" version, but instead the version from the "Tracks" 4CD box set)
Hungry Heart
Nebraska
Atlantic City
Born In The U.S.A
Glory Days
Dancing In The Dark
Tunnel Of Love
Janey Don't You Lose Heart (from the "Tracks" 4CD box set)
Lucky Town
The Rising
American Skin (41 Shots) (Live)

My Nick Cave Best Of has no slow ballads, instead I've made it into a HEAVY ROCK album:

Do You Love Me? (from The Best Of 1998)
Abattoir Blues (from Abattoir Blues)
Deanna (from The Best Of 1998)
Red Right Hand (from The Best Of 1998)
There She Goes, My Beautiful World (from Abattoir Blues)
Scum (from B-Sides & Rarities)
Mercy Seat (from The Best Of 1998)
Get Ready For Love (from Abattoir Blues)
Supernaturally (from The Lyre of Orpheus)
Hiding All the Way (from Abattoir Blues)
Tupelo (from The Best Of 1998)
O'Malley's Bar Part 1 (from B-Sides & Rarities)
O'Malley's Bar Part 2 (from B-Sides & Rarities)
O'Malley's Bar Part 3 (from B-Sides & Rarities)
Jack the Ripper (Acoustic) (from B-Sides & Rarities)
O'Malley's Bar Reprise (from B-Sides & Rarities)

I have also created a Pink Floyd Best Of that covers the pointless noodling stage of their career between 1968-1972, which can be seen at http://www.wordmagazine.co.uk/content/pink-floyd-best-1968-1972.

I was listening to the studio disc of Ummagumma for the first time and I thought to myself that there's only two real SONGS on this album. What they should do to satisfy the mildly curious is release a Best Of that only covers the post Barrett, pre Dark Side era.

So I made this list and would like to hear feedback on it. I don't know the singles they released like "Point Me At The Sky" so I haven't included them. And "Jugband Blues" is not eligible for inclusion.

It is intended to last the length of a single CD.

1. "Set the Controls for the Heart of the Sun" (Roger Waters) - 5:28
2. "Cirrus Minor" (Roger Waters) - 5:18
3. "The Nile Song" (Waters) - 3:26
4. "Careful with That Axe, Eugene" (David Gilmour/Roger Waters/Rick Wright/Nick Mason) - 5:45
5. "Grantchester Meadows" (Waters) - 7:26
6. "Fat Old Sun" (David Gilmour) - 5:24
7. "If" (Roger Waters) - 4:31
8. "One of These Days" (David Gilmour, Nick Mason, Roger Waters, Rick Wright) - 5:57
9. "Echoes" (David Gilmour, Nick Mason, Roger Waters, Rick Wright) - 23:29
10. "Wot's... Uh the Deal" (David Gilmour/Roger Waters) - 5:08
11. "Free Four" (Roger Waters) - 4:15

If I go ahead and create this as a MP3 playlist for myself then I would delete "One of These Days" as it's already covered by the Echoes Best Of and instead I would replace it with "San Tropez" (Roger Waters) - 3:43 which is a track I am very fond of.

Also personally I would prefer to delete "Set the Controls for the Heart of the Sun" and replace it with "The Gold It's in the..." (David Gilmour/Roger Waters) - 3:07. I never liked "Set the Controls" but I am aware it's a fan favourite.

Also any suggestions for a title for the Best Of? And is a mixed up non-chronological order better? Would the shorter 16 minute 2001 version of "Echoes" be better so you could fit another song onto the CD?

NOTE: To create your own list I recommend pasting the song titles from Wikipedia so you get the lengths as well.