Audio Books Online

Reviews

This CD had a few songs I already knew, and some that I didn't. I thought it would be nice to hear a new take on some of my old favorites, and learn a few new songs. In many ways, it was what I was looking for. These recordings would certainly qualify as a "new take." This CD delivers less traditional sea shanties and more industrial rock pirates. A few of the songs are nice, but most of them are just iritating. Some are like eating glass. This CD is neither what I expected, nor what I wanted. My very strong recommendation would be to buy something else.

It must have seemed like a good idea at the time. Johnny Depp, fresh from playing Captain Jack Sparrow in the highly popular if extremely uneven "Pirates of the Caribbean" movies decided to get his rock star friends together to make a CD of pirate songs and sea chanties. What could be bad? The answer to the question, "what could be bad?" regarding Rogue's Gallery, the two CD set that resulted, is regrettably - most of it. The entire CD may not be execrable garbage, but the majority of it is. How could so many talented musicians and singers create such noisome noise? I think most of them just never got the memo. Most don't seem to understand what sea chanties or sea songs are all about. When Nick Cave, the punk rocker, takes the slyly obscene, Fire Down Below, adds punk rock instrumentation, an out of tune chorus and shouts "And all you mother f__ckers, if you lead a life of sin," well, shall we say that the charm is lost? Or when Martha Wainwright sings Lowlands, her voice is fine but is so overwhelmed by the orchestration that the song seems beside the point. (Most sailors did not travel with full orchestras.) Likewise, Bono's version of A Dying Sailor To His Shipmates is 4 minutes,48 seconds long, of which about 3 minutes is Bono moaning along with the orchestra. And on and on it goes. To be fair, Richard Thompson, Sting and John C. Riley get it more or less right. Their songs feature limited accompaniment, straight-forward singing and robust choruses. I particularly like John C. Riley's "Fathom the Bowl." Nevertheless, these three stalwart singers can't make up for all the rockstar preening and over orchestration.

There are a couple of really great trad tracks in here, but there is a lot of sheer crap, albeit by recognized performers from a variety of genres. Richard Thompson's Mingulay Boat Song is excellent, the scurrilous Good Ship Venus sung by Loudon Wainwright III is almost as raucous as the version I learned, and delivered in a simple melodic style. SAMPLE the tracks first, or you will be scratching your head, these are all over the sea lanes, with a few hanging out in the trees somewhere inland. I was impressed that Sting was doing some of these, his style is a bit overproduced (the presence of soft choral backup vocals with harmonies in major thirds!) but the main melodic line is generally straightforward, at least; much more authentic job on main line of Blood Red Roses than on Shallow Brown. There are gems on this album, just pick through.

Very few albums that claim to be new great versions of folk songs ever turn out to be good. For the most part, they tend to overproduce or gloss up songs that were originally meant to be raw and bare. Or they try to rock them up or mix other musical influences in there and lose the orginal feel and intent of the song. I can happily say that this album is one of the few that really delivers. I have studied irish and american folk music, particularly sea chanties, for many years now. This album really adds some new dimensions to the songs without losing the integrity of the originals. I highly recommend it to folk lovers and just fans of music in general. This album was born out of a disney pirate movie, so I really did not expect it to be very good, but it is brilliant. Well done.

I like traditional music and thought that this was an interesting concept until I received it. The first song sounds more like an asthma attack then a song. 75% of this cd has good renditions of the titles but the other 25% kills it would not recommend and sorry I bought it. Will be using it as a trade at the local music store

Reviews

"New Faces of 1952" has long been one of my favorite musical reviews. After wearing out my LP edition, I'm delighted to own it again on a CD. Does it get any better than "Boston Beguine"?

I thought I was THE ONLY ONE who grew up with this album and was obsessed to find a CD version, though I own the LP, and it is in delicate shape. Seeing that familiar album cover made my old heart skip a beat. I memorized this by age eight and loved performing Lizzie Borden for anyone who'd listen. I do own the VHS, but all songs are not on it, though it is a rare treasure to see those long- gone people very young with such great careers in front of them. New Faces of 52 was a rare combination of talent. Too bad there are no such showcases for new artists. What a blast from the past!

This is the original broadway cast album. It contains songs which went on to become hits for their performers, such as Lizzie Borden, Lucky Pierre, Love is a simple thing, Guess who I saw today, Bal petit bal and Monotomous. Now re-released on Jasmine label, it was originally released by RCA Victor so the quality is excellent, but from the mono era.

Loved having this on the CD form. I wore out the 33 1/3 record. Thank you for carrying this CD!

I bought a recording of this show in the middle '70s when RCA was re-isuing a lot of their rare soundtracks. The record made a big deal about isuing a lost track called "Time For Tea" from this show sung by June Carroll and Alice Ghostley. This track is not included on this CD. Luckily I still had the record, and was able to make a version of the CD and add the second last track just before Lizzy Borden. Buyer beware however, this CD is not complete!

Reviews

This movie is awesome. So cool, funny and entertaining and serious and yet hilarious. In the opening scene where it shows all the kids in the movie who have graduated from college talking into the camera I have to admit that at first it started me because those kids looked actually like the kids in my U.S. history class of 2009! They looked like the exact same kids I went to class with excality. Those kids could have been the kids in my class and probably were. It's like Hollywood should have come to my school and picked those people for this movie because that's exactly what my fellow classmates looked like-to a T. It's so special that way because I feel like the movie is very close to my life and that's really funny and cool too. The people in their twenties in this movie are funny and they remind me so much of my friends from that class! Isn't that something or what? It's amazing and incredious. I loved that scene at the begining, I laughed out loud when the opening credits came up to that music where Winona is giving her speech as her school's validvactiron. What a cool movie. Winona plays a young woman in Houston who is trying to find a job after college and never seems sucessful at finding just the right one-she goes on countless interviews and tries to find a job sense she has to pay rent and earns very little per week-only so much as to pay for things she really needs. She is a assiant on a weekly TV show but gets fired and miss unempolyed finally gets a job from her dad, pumping gas at a gas station. Well, at least that pays money and she can pay her friends back for all the phone bills she runs up, depressed and unhappy on the phone with her psychic. Winona's character dates a guy who is nerdy and uptight and well a boss and they enjoy moonlight evenings drinking Big Gulp. They also fall in love-for a short time until she falls truly, for real in love with her friend, a cute guy who struggles for her feeligs for her. They finally come to terms with it at the end and kiss and fall madly into each other's arms. THis movie is very well-written, well-acted and funny and real and emotional and hilarious and good. THis movie is really good and is worth seeing. I thought this is one of Winona's best roles, she fits the character perfectly and is a good serious actress. She plays her character well and it's like she can relate to what the girl's going through, like she lived through finacial problems herself and also dealt with growing up into a mature adult with an job. The other actors are funny and well-rehearsed and the cute guy in the movie is adorable, a hunk. My only regret is that the cute guy didn't punch out Ben Stiller, that would have been hilarious. I loved this movie, I laughed and I could relate to it myself a lot. Winona's awesome here, check her out. This movie reminds me also of the kids in my U.S. history class who were funny and like these kids in the movie. Scary how art inmates life!

My wifes favorite movie can now be watched for weeks without renting it over and over. Thanks for saving me money in the lond run.

For those of us who lived and breathed the 90s... This movie rocks! It totally captures our generation, what seems to be the long gone era of grunge... before boy bands, Britney, Paris and Bush came along to destroy humanity. Grab a popcorn and get nostalgic.

The Bottom Line: A depressingly formulaic and unappealing movie in which the main character must decide romantically between a suit-wearing bigshot and a soulful poet-writing ne'er do well (guess which one she chooses), Reality Bites should be of interest only to those who want to steep themselves in mid-90's nostalgia.

This movie is a bit of history now for Gen Xer's that have moved on in life.

Reviews

What happened when an American company tried to bring electricity to a country formerly part of the USSR is what this doc is all about. The Georgians aren't accustomed to paying for power, but AES is determined to get the money out of them. Though US, most of the company's employees seem to be Brits. Well done.

Excellent documentary on the trials and tribulations companies face investing in the former USSR and what the smaller republics face in trying to build a market economy in the former Soviet Union. I felt for the elderly who could not pay their bills. I greatly admire AES for trying to tackle the problems they faced in Georgia. They finally sold AES Telasi to the Russians in 2003 and from what I have read the situation is worse now because of the economic situation in the country.

First off, I'm a "documentary junkie", especially when the director edits the film so that it forms a storyline and doesn't use the film for "propaganda" purposes. When that happens, I don't need to know the subject in advance to seek it out and watch it. "Power Trip" meets those conditions on all levels. It's recent enough to be current (it takes place between 1998 and 2003). And filmmaker Paul Delvin follows the timeline from when the American Owned energy AES bought the government power company in Soviet state of Georgia until ...... well, I can't tell you or it would spoil the narrative. Like a good filmmaker, Devlin seemed to have his camera at the right place and at the right time and he is able to capture some incidents that were not expected at the time he started his film. Again, it's those surprises that make this film interesting. "Even handed" and "Well Balanced" are two phrases that come to my mind immediately in describing this film. There are no "good guys" and "bad guys" here. Well, yes there are. The politicians. (the corrupt ones anyway, who are the "bad guys".). But in the fight between the residents of Georgia who find themselves without power (no lights, no TV!) and the employees and President of AES (who are working for a company that can't collect payments for the power that THEY have to purchase), Devlin doesn't point any fingers or take sides. And the personalities of the employees of AES who are working in foreign counties is fascinating too. You'll remember AAES Manager Piers Lewis long after you've watched this film. The supplemental material is interesting as well, though not essential to the enjoyment of the film. I'm not reviewing this from a political point of view; just as an example of excellent documentary filmmaking. Steve Ramm "Anything Phonographic"

Devlin's gripping film unblinkingly exposes a Western audience to the fundamental upheavals accompanying major transformations in form of government. Shots of major blocks of the city going dark (as A.E.S cracks down on non-paying customers), and furious, uncomprehending people protesting the need to pay for electricity, bring into close proximity a far-away problem too few comfortable Americans even know about. An unnerving and cautionary tale, since energy could one day be a luxury for us all.

This film is funny, gripping and informative. It's hard to believe that a documentary about the privatization of the power grid in the Republic of Georgia could make such a fascinating tale. This film is excellent for use in classrooms trying to explain the political economy of post-socialist countries, or the problems facing foreign businesses in alien environments.

Reviews

When the US's present "war" began, I was working out at a gym. On the gym's television, Wolfe Blitzkrieg sang the Bush administration's tune eagerly, he was such a cheerleader I expected him to slip on a short skirt. On another network, some "correspondent" claimed that the troops had found some chemical weapons, and implied that the UN inspectors had been looking for years and hadn't found them while the diligent and competent US troops found them in days. When it turned out later that they were going through a fertilizer factory, the "correspondent," who should have been locked up, never came out and said, "What I said was false, and stupid." So his bosses should be locked up too. This "war" has now been going on for substantially longer than WWII, its support has dwindled to maybe 25 percent of the voters, yet we're still there. Americans and Iraqis are still being killed. Why is this true? Danny Schecter really comes through with a well-produced indictment: the the US media aren't worth the paper or the air they use to spread their words. I began taking notes on this DVD, but it was getting too depressing. I mean, the Pentagon has done a clever job of setting up the US media representatives. I think one of the critics called it the "Stockholm syndrome," i.e., the Pentagon put unarmed "journalists" with the armed troops. So the former began to identify with the latter. It's a classic propaganda technique that another American critic called "straight out of Stalin." Yep, the media are the commissar culture! Danny divided the film up into sections, one of which was the "Fox News Effect." I've been following that to a degree. Fox is a right wing cheerleader with (at least formerly) decent ratings, so the other networks followed suit. One can't seem to be in line with the US unless he tows the Pentagon line. We've seen it all. "You don't support the troops? What are you, part of Al Qaeda??" Indeed, toward the beginning of the film, a peace activist was being threatened by people near "Ground Zero" in NYC, for suggesting that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. Heaven forbid, she might have a divergent opinion. I've read on the travesty that is "embedded" journalism since I read "Second Front" a long time ago. So that's nothing new. (It is, however, something that should have real journalists, not embedded cheerleaders furious!) But still much of the American public is in the dark. One portion of the film stated that even CNN has different stories for the US than for the rest of the world. There was, of course, a rationalization for that; the concept of "cognitive dissonance" comes to mind any time Danny talked with media representatives. Then there's the Bush rationalizations: There were no WMDs, so the regime changed the subject. There was no media pressure to get the regime to face reality, so the war continues. Then there's Schecter's suggestion--offered with some evidence--that the non-"embedded" journalists particularly were actually targetted by the military. Some were killed in "friendly fire" and some other "accidents" were just discounted as that, when they didn't happen arbitrarily, i.e., were probably not accidents. That needs to be investigated further! I guess one of the bottom lines is that the US media are owned by a few very large corporations. NBC was claiming they had been reasonable journalists, while critics challenged that--with more-than adequate evidence--that NBC was just towing the line. But NBC is owned by General Electric which was given upwards of $600 billion in contracts to rebuild Iraq. Isn't that what they call a "conflict of interest?" ABC is owned by Disney, which would rather entertain than inform. That, in fact, was another section of the film, on entertainment--I think someone refered to it as militainment--and journalism. And all the mega-media want the federal FCC on their side, so they refrain from confronting federal government policy. And that's a disaster. There's so much that could be said, but it gets pretty depressing. What I hope is that teachers and professors show this to their classes so that young people realize how they're being hoodwinked. We Yanks seem to think we're miles beyond the rest of the world. And many in the rest of the world, the ones who don't hate us anyway, think we're a bunch of ignorant buffoons. Spread the word on this DVD and others like it. Wake up!

In the Weapons of Mass Deception, the producers show how this administration was determined to win media support and thus the country's support for their adventure into Iraq. Mass media, now owned by large and conservative conglomerates avoided the anti-war stories, to the point of refusing to run commercials for people who were opposed to the war. Anti-war demonstrations received marginal coverage, at best. When Phil Donahue had opposed the war, and said so publicly on his show, the network cancelled his top-rated show. His replacement? Michael Savage who lasted less than four months with ratings in the cellar. Clearly, this "liberally-biased" media did not want to rock the conservative boat. The administration's genius turned out to be first orienting and outfitting reporters with kevlar helmets and vests, and showing them how to use gas masks for chemical attacks that would never come. This gave the media the feeling that Iraq was an enemy. The embedding process was sheer administration genius. By placing reporters with our soldiers and marines, they identified with them to the point that their stories had lost all objectivity, and they had been reduced to a micro view of the war. While some may complain that this production is biased, that is what the producer's slant is. It is also what he is already describing. The bias was in the media being duped by the administration and losing their objectivity in reporting the war. Any criticism this DVD may receive, the facts are irrefutable. All these things happened. Schecter simply compiles these facts and presents them in a logical and presentable fashion. This is recommended viewing.

This professionally written and produced documentary is essential viewing for any American concerned about their free press. In this exposé, of the sort which would have been on 20/20 or 60 Minutes when I was kid, media veteran and critic Danny Schechter amasses evidence which shows how complicit the American media were in the run-up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Statistics are damning---of the roughly 800 experts on American TV in the build-up to war, only 4 provided anti-war perspectives. Most of the time anti-war and other positions critical of the government line were simply ignored; when they were shown, it was simply a quick shot of "those people protesting" or a soundbite about soldiers protecting protestors rights to free speech, instead of any serious analysis of the arguments made against the war. And so a large percentage of the American people's voices were lost from the so-called debate, because of a priori prejudices and agendas shared by the media producers, military leaders, and politicians. This film provides evidence in support of Noam Chomsky's propaganda model of the American news media. The viewer sees how career advancement, product marketing, market share, etc. trump good old truth telling and challenging power in the modern American mass media.

I gave this DVD five stars because of the credentials of Danny Schechter and the way he delivered his argument. He is a well respected media critic well known throughout media circles for asking the toughest questions at media conferences and has appeared on just about every mainstream media outlet. He was a war correspondent in Vietnam and Cambodia, he was a producer for 20/20, worked for CNN and ABC, and has authored a couple of books. He successfully dissects the media with regards to the run-up to the war in Iraq, the embedded reporters, and the aftermath of the invasion. You will see in this video clips and interviews with several well known media personalities along with Generals in the military, a retired Colonel who taught propaganda in the military War Colleges, authors, and some of the embeds themselves. You will see how the media was seduced by the government after 9-11 by means of access and cash. Journalism is most certainly dead with regards to mainstream media! You will even hear Kristiana Amanpour criticize her own network for crawling into the sack with the government. The argument that was also well made was how the Neo-Con's believe that Vietnam was lost solely due to the media and not because of bad policy and how they are determined this time to `get it right'. You will also see how they `got it right' by the ingenious Pentagon embedded reporters program, they must have known of the effects of the Stockholm Syndrome, makes a lot of sense when you look at the big picture I think. This documentary will show you how the death of responsible journalism has turned into `coverage' and the propaganda techniques that are used. Most interesting example I thought was the sports metaphor technique with the "dum-dum-dumm" football kick-off type music that the networks would use preceding a segment leading up to the war and all the `CNN Generals' that were used to draw lines on computerized maps of the battlefield, just like a football coach does on the field, and how they would promote, not report the war through all the flashy techniques describing new weaponry and the like and how they were told to "sex up the graphics". The fact that ALL of the networks hire psychologists to maximize the use of these graphics and music tells me that their intentions are not to inform us in the first place. You will see how the war was turned into a bloodless game through the use of video game like footage from `smart' bombs and the use of playing cards to show who was captured and was still out there. It's not supposed to be like Hollywood action oriented production but the government paid a million dollars to a Hollywood producer to set up the media center at CENTCOM! You will be presented with the facts behind the Jessica Lynch propaganda scheme, the same with the toppling of the Saddam statue, the real reason why Peter Arnett was fired from CNN, how Ruppert Murdoch paid Saddam almost half a billion dollars just so that his reporters would be given access to enter Iraq during the time leading up to the war, and several other instances that will show you that what you are seeing is in fact NOT journalism, but "militainment". Schechter definitely makes the argument that the more you watch TV, the less you know. If you want to be well informed you must not be a `consumer' of news but a critical thinker. I highly recommend this film as it is entertaining and very informative. WARNING: You should be ready for a big dose of reality as well as some people may be offended, especially Fox `news' viewers. Broaden your horizons and watch this film.

This is an interesting and informative DVD to gain a broader view of how the media operates, especially during the runup to the Iraq war. However, it is so jam-packed with information that it occasionally seems to gloss over important points or scenarios. There are some segments that I would have liked Schechter to have elaborated on and a few which could have been presented more clearly. As a member of a younger generation this DVD is great because it provides an informed picture of just how much the media is in bed with government. For me, it tied a lot of loose ends together in my head and gave me a broader view of how mass media functions. I disagree with another reviewer that Schechter was in the movie too much. He was narrating his own point of view and he stayed out of the way when it was appropriate.

Reviews

I bought this book for my husband who watches the O'Reilly Report everyday. He really likes the book.

This was the first book I have read by Bill O'Reilly, but it will not be the last. He is a very funny writer. I love his shows and his words are honest and truthful. There are some parts of this book that sent me rolling on the floor they were so funny. A MUST READ !!!!!!!!

A Bold Fresh Piece of Humanity is a must read for all! I couldn't put it down. It's filled with antidotes, great lessons about life with a little political prose thrown in for a good measure.

Skillfully written so different generations are able to appreciate Bill's path. This is a great gift idea for any occasion.

I had high expectations for this book based on all of the comments Mr. O'Reilly reads during his nightly show. It got off to a real slow start and got a little more interesting towards the end. I thought it was going to be better that it was.

Reviews

I found the book interesting. If you are a progressive and to an extend a liberal you will not like this book. But on the other hand, if the shoe fits?? Though a conservative view of various people, media and the like, it does open your mind to people behind the scene who are progressive and liberal in ideas and their methods that forget human nature.If progressive and liberals express their ideals and have failed miserably in past decades. I cannot see how they can say that traditions and conservated methods/government does not work. Our founding father had it right. Having traditions and being conservative will work with our constitution. Marxism,socialism and communism will bring out the worse in our fellow Americans including leaders. The government does what WE the people want. Read this book, I grew up in the sixty's, in California and my family were at the lower end of the middle class near poverty level. But one thing I learned from my parents was hard work will give the things you want. I do not want any hand out from state or US government because their is tendency that it breeds laziness and thinking that somebody or society owes you some value. This is what this book has shown me no one owes you something.

As a German, I had never hreared of Mr. O'Reilly until I read this book. It is basically the credo of a conservative, but not bigot American. The book is probably well researched, although I cannot judge this. Many of his point make sense, even to a European, some don't, for example: How one can defend the right to possess and sell arms, but not the right to do the same thing with drugs. Also his constant "Judeo - Christian angle" was difficult to digest for me (America was founded on ideas of Enlightenment, not on anything else...) My main objection is to the style, this book is written in! I am sure, that Mr. O'Reilly is MUCH more intelligent, than his writing suggests. This is my reason for only giving two stars.

"Culture Warrior," by Bill O'Reilly, published in 2006, was 5th on the best-seller list in the category "hardcover nonfiction" in 2006. O'Reilly is a syndicated columnist, has written eight books, and is the host of his own show, "The O'Reilly Factor," which airs every weekday on the Fox News Channel. "At times you have to fight" (1) is O'Reilly's powerful first sentence of the book. O'Reilly notes that the American public, traditionalists (mostly Christians) in particular, are being attacked by socialists, coined "secular-progressives" (S-P for short) by O'Reilly. O'Reilly notes many of the key leaders in the S-P movement, putting The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) at the top of the list. Others include George Lakoff, George Soros, and Peter Lewis. O'Reilly is basically saying that these organizations or individuals are mostly in line with the S-P movement and should be regarded with much caution. So, what does this all mean for Christians? The S-P movement is attacking some of our core beliefs. Some of the ways that the S-P movement wages war are as follows: the war on Christmas, opposing the War on Terror, failing to bring justice for children, fighting for the teaching of evolution in schools, and polluting media and newscasts with their liberal agendas. O'Reilly discusses the deteriorating morality of American culture and how we should fight to save it. At times, however, O'Reilly is too judgmental of others and makes offensive, personal jabs at others. While it is important to be critical of the actions of others on the basis that we should be careful what we allow to influence us, we also have to be careful what we say about them in order to use to not alienate them from ourselves. Colossians 4:6 says "Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone." Even if we do confront others, we need to "speak the truth in love," as Ephesians 4:15 tells us. All in all, Bill O'Reilly's "Culture Warrior" is a pretty convincing book which effectively points out the urgency with which we should fight the S-P movement. We need to do what we can in the fight against the negative influences in our culture today. We have to stand up for our beliefs. As 1 Corinthians 16:13 says, "Be on your guard; stand firm in the faith; be men of courage; be strong." Sometimes, we do have to fight for what's right.

I'd like his book a little better if he didn't spend so much time patting himself on the back

Glad to read there is still a bastion of common sense left in America, hopefully the voting majority will agree with these principals next election.

Reviews

Easy read, makes you understand more of how O'Reilly makes his mind up. Good beach read.