Our Take: 4 Stars

Last year, due to COVID-19, movie theatres across the country were forced to close their doors. But, in early 2021, as vaccines rolled out and life began to return to normal, the future of movie theatres still remained uncertain.

Classic adrenaline-fuelled monster movie “Godzilla vs. Kong” changed all that, and may have just saved the theatre industry.

“Godzilla vs. Kong” was released on Mar. 31 to theatres to HBO Max simultaneously. The fourth installment in Legendary’s MonsterVerse, the film is a sequel to 2019’s “Godzilla: King of the Monsters” and 2017’s “Kong: Skull Island.”

Unlike many franchise films today, the MonsterVerse requires no prior knowledge of previous films.

“Godzilla vs. Kong” is a delightful watch even without context; something that was most likely purposeful.

This is the 36th Godzilla film, a Japanese Kaiju monster that dates back to 1954. Originally, Godzilla, a nuclear abomination, was laced with political and social undertones, addressing issues that plagued a post-WWII Japan.

Seventy years later, “Godzilla vs. Kong” is nothing but two very large, very powerful monsters duking it out and destroying cities left and right.

That does not mean it is not enjoyable or a good movie, however. There is a reason the sequel has essentially re-opened movie theatres.

Pitting two well known monsters against each other is a tacky plot, and director Adam Wingard (“V/H/S”) seems to know that. While there is some questionable and confusing exposition about ancient enemies with millena-long rivalries and a whole hollow earth plot that is something straight out of 2008’s “Journey to the Center of the Earth,” Wingard knows that his viewers are here for action — and he provides.

That being said, the movie runs a little too long. Coming in at a watch time of about 2 hours, the movie feels a little plot heavy.

The long, nonsensical and seemingly inconsequential side plot where a teen girl (Millie Bobby Brown, “Stranger Things”), her best friend and a crazy middle-aged conspiracy podcaster (Brian Tyree Henry, “If Beale Street Could Talk”) take an Elon Muskian-like hyperloop from Florida to Hong Kong could have easily been left out.

Since its release two weeks ago, “Godzilla vs. Kong” has already made $358 million world wide, $70 million of that domestically. Compared to another pandemic-era box office release that tried to reopen theatres with arguably more valuable intellectual property, Christopher Nolan’s “Tenet,” “Godzilla” has hit it out of the park. “Tenet” was released only into theatres on Aug. 12, 2020 and only made $50 million domestically over a period of three months.

The success of “Godzilla vs. Kong” has seemed to change the trajectory of movie theatres across the country. The largest chain, AMC, which in January of this year reported that it was going to run out of cash and close down, has seen a resurgence in stock prices. The weekend after “Godzilla vs. Kong” opened AMC’s stock prices soared from round $7 a share to $13. They now rest at about $10.

Whether you stream “Godzilla vs. Kong” or are one of the brave to return to movie theatres, give it a watch, it’s nothing but a good time.

The belated 2021 Awards season comes to a close this month. On Sunday, Apr. 4 the 27th Screen Actors Guild Awards took place.

Like many other awards shows this season, the ceremony was pushed back several months due to the pandemic.

The SAG Awards are voted on by the Screen Actors Guild – American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (SAG-AFTRA), which is an American labor union representing 160,000 film and television actors, journalists and other entertainment industry professionals.

While the SAG awards took place entirely on Zoom, they managed to avoid most of the pitfalls that other pandemic-era awards shows were plagued by. The ceremony was short, only about 45 minutes, and pre-recorded, allowing the production team to avoid any real-time technical difficulties.

On the whole, the film recipients were pretty surprising and yielded some of the best acceptances in recent memory.

One of the more surprising outcomes was Viola Davis winning Outstanding Performance by a Female Actor in a Leading Role for her role in “Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom.” It was expected that Frances McDormand would take the award for “Nomadland,” but Davis’ win was a welcome twist.

When Viola’s name was announced she did a little surprised jump and shimmy on her Zoom screen and gave her husband a sweet peck.

Viola then gave a moving acceptance speech acknowledging her late co-star Chadwick Boseman: “Thank you to George C. Wolfe and Denzel Washington, Todd Black, Jeremy Shamos, John Coyne, Dusan Brown, Taylour Paige, Glynn Turman, and Michael Potts, Colman Domingo, the beautiful Chadwick Boseman. Thank you, August [Wilson], for leaving a legacy to actors of color that we can relish for the rest of our lives.”

Another wonderfully surprised recipient was Yuh-Jung Youn, a heavily awarded actress in Korea, who won Outstanding Performance by a Female Actor in a Supporting Role for her performance in “Minari.” In a stacked category, where Youn was competing against the likes of Glenn Close (“Hillbilly Elegy”) and Olivia Coleman (“The Father”), her win was well deserved.

Despite this, Youn’s face was that of shock and she was rendered speechless for a few seconds before saying, “I don’t know how to describe my feelings, I’m being recognized by Westerners.”

However, the biggest accolade of the night, Outstanding Performance by a Cast in a Motion Picture, was not surprising at all. The award went to Aaron Sorkin’s “Trial of the Chicago 7,” a mediocre film with a star-studded cast. Headlining actors included the likes of Sacha Baron Cohen (“Borat”), Yahya Abdul-Mateen II (“Watchmen”), Joseph Gordon-Levitt (“Inception”) and Michael Keaton (“Birdman”).

Another unsurprising win was Outstanding Performance by a Male Actor in a Leading Role, which rightfully went to the late Chadwick Boseman for his final performance in “Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom.” Simone Ledward Boseman, Chadwick’s wife, tearfully gave his acceptance speech, thanking the actor himself.

Of the television awards, “Schitt’s Creek” and “The Crown” were the biggest winners.

With its final season running last year, “Schitt’s Creek” went out on a high note, receiving the SAG for Outstanding Performance by an Ensemble in a Comedy Series. Catherine O’Hara, who plays the quirky and __ Schitt matriarch, took home Outstanding Performance by a Female in a Comedy Series. This win was expected (and deserved); O’Hara has won all five major acting awards for this role in the 2021 awards season.

The most recent season of “The Crown” stirred quite the controversy, as it finally portrayed the royal family’s so-called “Diana years.” For its controversial season, the Netflix series’ cast took home Outstanding Performance by an Ensemble in a Drama Series. In the Outstanding Performance by a Female in a Drama Series category, “The Crown” had three nominees: Emma Corrin for Princess Diania, Olivia Coleman for her portrayal of Queen Elizabeth and Gillian Anderson for Margaret Thatcher. Gillian Anderson ended up receiving the award.

Netflix productions were recognized in several other categories, too. Anya Taylor-Joy received Outstanding Performance by a Female Actor in a Television Movie or Limited Series for another Netflix production, the hit limited series “The Queen’s Gambit.” Jason Bateman received Outstanding Performance by a Male Actor in a Drama Series for the streaming service’s “Ozark.”

As for the other television categories, Jason Sudeikis won Outstanding Performance by a Male Actor in a Comedy for “Ted Lasso” and Mark Ruffalo won Outstanding Performance by a Male Actor in a Television Movie or Limited Series for his role in the gut-wrenching HBO limited series “I Know This Much is True.”

Often a solid predictor of the Academy Awards results, which were also postponed and will take place on Apr. 25th, the SAG Awards are less likely to be as analogous to the Oscars in this unprecedented year.

The SAG Awards only nominate five films for their Outstanding Performance by a Cast in a Motion Picture category — compared to the Academy’s eight nominations for the 2021 Best Picture category. The current Oscar front runner for this award, Chloé Zhao’s “Nomadland,” was not nominated for a SAG award. The possible underdog winner for Best Picture, Emerald Fennell’s “Promising Young Woman” was not nominated at the SAGs either.

Whether or not the buzz that comes with its SAG win will propel “Trial of the Chicago 7” to the front of the Best Picture race and push out “Nomadland” and “Promising Young Woman” is yet to be seen.

As for the acting awards, Chadwick Boseman is a lock for the Academy Award for Actor in a Leading Role. Actress in a Leading Role is more up in the air, nominees include Viola Davis, Andra Day (“The United States vs. Billie Holiday”), Vanessa Kirby (“Pieces of a Woman”), Frances McDormand (“Nomadland”) and Carey Mulligan (“Promising Young Woman”). Davis’ SAG win may give her an edge in the category, but McDormand is currently the favorite.

The Academy has until Apr. 20 to cast their ballots; as the penultimate awards show for the 2021 Awards Season, the surprising results of the SAG Awards may shakeup longtime favorites.

Tech was never my first choice. I knew as a high school senior that I would be studying engineering and so I — as your overachieving, overly involved high school senior — applied to all the highest ranking engineering schools in the country. At the time Tech ranked 4th for undergraduate computer engineering programs.

As Dec. 2016 turned into Jan. 2017, early application college decision letters began arriving.

As each new letter arrived I found myself imagining a different future for myself at the school in question.

If I ended up in Cambridge I’d be just an hour from home and keep the snowy winters, if I went to the Bay Area I could be in the center of tech, in southern California I could escape snowy winters.

But then, the stark reality of my actual future came into play. As a first generation college student with no college savings and parents who couldn’t afford to help with tuition, the most important factor of my college decision was whether or not I’d actually be able to afford it.

After totalling up estimated attendance costs, scholarship awards and financial aid letters my decision was made. I would be attending the Georgia Institute of Technology.

Before stepping into Tech Square for FASET I’d never been on campus, never even been in the state, nor in the South at all. The culture shock of my Northeast upbringing and the Georgia Tech culture in general was a rude awakening.

I’d really like to say that Tech ended up surprising me, that I fell in love with this school and this state, but that’s not quite true. The past four years have been rough — as they are for all Tech students, I know I’m not special.

The rude awakening of freshman year is something all first years must reckon with: going from a 4.0 high school student who’s never heard of studying to an overworked and overtired college freshman barely scraping by with Cs isn’t an easy transition.

What I didn’t expect to struggle with as much as I did was being so far from home.

I’m from the small rural and quaint state of New Hampshire, over 1,000 miles from Georgia. My family — my parents and siblings, aunts and uncles, grandparents and cousins — are a close knit bunch.

Being the only one far away was rough — and not being able to go home for a weekend after a rough week like all of my in-state friends took a toll.

Well into my second year, and unfortunately way too late and way too many credits in to do anything about it, I decided I hated my major.

Computer Engineering just wasn’t for me.

I hated all my major courses; I didn’t care about system architecture or how exactly bits are flipped and I felt vastly outnumbered and inferior to all the boys in my classes.

When choosing a STEM major, I was of course aware that I, as a girl, would be in the minority throughout my entire career, but it was not something I had truly considered.

I knew then that I should have been a computer science major but it was too late to change it and so I had to stick it out for two more years.

Then there’s the last year and a half of college — which was unforeseeably altered by COVID-19 resulting in some of my most stressful semesters ever at Tech.

My time at Tech has been rough, and I wish I had some advice for other students who might be having the same experience or a rough time, but I don’t.

Unfortunately, four years of college may have taught me a lot about semiconductors and oscilloscopes but they have not made me any wiser.

While my time at Tech was not what I expected college to be, I don’t want to just complain about how hard it was — I am glad to have had the change to attend Georgia Tech.

I got to live in a part of the country I would have never foreseen myself moving to. I got to explore all the neighborhoods of Atlanta. I joined the Technique, something I would have never imagined myself doing as a code-monkey high schooler.

I got to study abroad at Tech’s campus in Metz, France and travel the entire continent of Europe, something I never expected to have the opportunity to do as an engineering student.

And of course, I met some incredible people and forever friends.

After getting out in May I’ll start a full time job in consulting I’m incredibly excited for and move to Seattle, a city I’ve always wanted to live in.

College being the best four years of your life is a popular narrative in movies and TV that I grew up with.

My experience not aligning with these (and my own) expectations of higher education was something that took me a little bit of time to reckon with.

This wasn’t the future that a high school senior me may have imagined for myself, but it’s one I’m really looking forward to.

Our Take: 4 Stars

Since her self-titled 2010 studio debut, Lana Del Rey has produced seven studio albums, all which explore kitsch Americana. Her latest, released on Mar. 19, “Chemtrails Over the Country Club,” does not depart from these themes but explores them from a new point of view.

Lana Del Rey has been in the media for her questionable mask choices and even more questionable political statements more often than for her music recently. While it is hard to separate these actions from music that is so entrenched in an American — and more specifically, a very white American — perspective, this album is without a doubt
packed with hits.

On the Apr. 3 Billboard Charts “Chemtrails” debuted at No. 1, making it Del Rey’s third chart topper. Despite this success, it fails to live up to Del Rey’s 2019 effort “Norman Fucking Rockwell!,” which received critical acclaim; as a glowing review from Pitchfork rightly stated: “On her elegant and complex fifth album, Lana Del Rey sings exquisitely of freedom and transformation and the wreckage of being alive. It establishes her as one of America’s greatest living songwriters.”

Still, “Chemtrails Over the Country Club’’ carves a new place in Lana’s narrative. It chooses to explore her tenet themes of femininity, fame and the American dream (or lack thereof) with a much more somber tone than the glorified grandiosity of previous albums.

This album marks Lana’s departure from the coastal locations of previous albums as she ventures into America’s heartland — new geographical and emotional territory for the singer.

“Tulsa Jesus Freak” is one of the catchiest tracks on the album, and draws heavily from middle-American culture. In the lyrics, religious imagery is rampant and speaks of a man of God who strays. Del Rey highlights this moral juxtaposition that is evident in many American religious communities.

The title track, “Chemtrails Over the Country Club,” was the record’s first and only single and is a perfect encapsulation of the feel of the entire album.

An absolutely classic Lana Del Rey song, with production mirroring that of “Norman Fucking Rockwell!,” this track’s lyrics are inherently visual. American aesthetics like turquoise jewelry, late night TV and red sports cars paint a picture of the album in the listener’s mind.

“Dance Till We Die” was not a single but certainly should have been.

Nearly three minutes into the song the tone changes from a signature Lana sound into something far more interesting, far more 70s sounding and catchy. This sound undoubtedly pays tribute to staple singer-songwriter Joni Mitchell and Fleetwood Mac’s Stevie Nicks’ 70s folk rock records — who Del Rey mentions in the lyrics “I’m coverin’ Joni and I’m dancin’ with Joan / Stevie is callin’ on the telephone.”

Lana later covers Mitchell’s 1970 song “For Free” on the last track of “Chemtrails.” Indie-folk singer-songwriters Zella Day and Weyes Blood join in providing resonant depth to Del Rey’s whispery vocals. This rendition of “For Free” may not rival Mitchell’s original, but the track thematically rounds out “Chemtrails” perfectly.

While nearly all the tracks hit home, opening song “White Dress” should have been left off the album or reworked. The chorus — which is delivered at an almost painfully high register — is off putting and features the awkwardly enunciated words “Business Conference” far too many times.

Amidst Lana Del Rey’s personal controversy and accusations of problematic actions she remains as stalwart as ever in her views.

Despite her seeming inflexibility, it is clear that Lana is reckoning with a new America and a new self.

She is truly a great American artist, one who is able to consistently reflect not only a particular zeitgeist of this country, but also a deeply personal portrait.

Our Take: 3 Stars

Netflix seems to release a new original series every other day — some hits, many misses. Their latest hit, however, came as quite a surprise. Thriller limited series “Behind Her Eyes” premiered on the streaming service on Feb. 17, and has since claimed a spot on Netflix’s Top Ten list.

Creator Steve Lightfoot is no stranger to dark, twisted thrillers — he was an executive producer and writer on NBC’s critically and commercially acclaimed TV series “Hannibal.” Lightfoot adapted “Behind Her Eyes” from the 2017 thriller novel of the same name by Sara Pinborough.

At the series open, “Behind Her Eyes” seems like a standard British thriller.
A lonely, young single mother, Louise (Simona Brown, “Man Up”), finds herself entangled in the marriage of gorgeous, wealthy, mysterious Fergusons.

Standard genre tropes play out as Louise begins an affair with her new boss, David Ferguson (Tom Bateman, “Murder on the Orient Express”), only to accidentally befriend his wife, Adele (Eve Hewson, “The Knick”). Adele and David’s relationship should be perfect — they have a massive house in a posh neighborhood; he has a successful career in psychiatry; she is the epitome of upper-class grace — but Louise soon discovers all is not what it seems.

Soon Louise learns that Adele has a traumatic past, spent time in a mental institution and is now under the psychiatric care of her husband.

David, while sweet and friendly to Louise, begins to seem like a dangerous, traitorous husband with some control issues.

Readers of Pinborough’s book will, of course, not be surprised by the twists and turns (and twists and turns) of “Behind Her Eyes” but uninitiated viewers will be shocked by the welcome change in the story after the first few formulaic episodes.

Key to “Behind Her Eyes” is the stellar acting that allows such contrived plot points to be engrossing.

Brown’s performance is fun and likable, and she is the perfect conduit for the viewer.

Hewson is also a standout as Adele oscillates seamlessly from perfect housewife to unhinged maniac. Of the three stars, Bateman’s performance falls flat.

Another strong suit of the show is its pacing. Each time Louise seems to be close to discovering what is really going on with the Fergusons, a new piece of their past is revealed that turns the entire show on its head. While this type of story can become exhausting and boring if played for two long, “Behind Her Eyes’’ has the advantage of being a six-episode limited series. The short runtime of just under five hours is the perfect amount of time for Louise to stumble upon the truth while keeping the viewer interested.

The final ten minutes of “Behind Her Eyes” turn everything Louise thought she knew on its head, leaving her and her viewers reeling.

The last-minute plot twist makes the show engaging, and ensures that many viewers will be inspired to rewatch the series to look for clues.

That being said “Behind Her Eyes” is not a resounding success. Over the short runtime, Louise, David and Adele remain stagnant characters, none of them developing to react to the turmoil of their world. This leaves the viewer disconnected from the welfare of any of them, unattached to any character and caring little for the series’ outcome.

While “Behind Her Eyes” is certainly nothing groundbreaking, it is a riveting watch that is plenty entertaining.

Anyone who is a fan of thrillers, tragic backstories, posh British accents and supernatural twists should check it out.

On Feb. 6 the High Museum of Art in Atlanta premiered the “David Driskell: Icons of Nature and History” exhibit to celebrate the artist’s work. A Georgia native, Driskell was a prominent American artist who is credited with establishing African-American Art as its own distinct field in addition to being one of the most admired artists of his generation.

The High’s exhibit is certainly not the first to feature Driskell’s work, but is the first to unite both his paintings and works on paper; it is also the first posthumous curation of his work following Driskell’s death in 2020.

“Beyond David’s prolific career as an international artist and scholar, he was a dear friend of the Museum, in fact a life trustee. Without question, his work, as well as his generosity of spirit and intellect, have been transformational for the field,” said Rand Suffolk, the High’s Nancy and Holcombe T. Green, Jr., director. “We are honored to celebrate his incredible legacy through this exhibition.”

“David Driskell: Icons of Nature” is a collaboration between the High and the Portland Museum of Art, Maine. It brings together 60 of the artist’s works spanning from 1950 to the 2000s. The art is sourced from other museums, the High’s collection, personal collections and Driskell’s estate.

Driskell grew up steeped in art — his father, a minister, painted and drew religious works and his grandfather was a sculptor. In the middle of his undergraduate studies Driskell received a scholarship to attend the Skowhegan School of Painting and Sculpture in Maine in 1953. He graduated from Howard University in 1955 and in 1962 received a Master of Fine Arts from the Catholic University of America.

Driskell then went on to teach, holding faculty positions at historically Black schools such as Talladega College, Howard University and Fisk University until 1976. In 1977, Driskell moved to the University of Maryland, College Park where he received the title Distinguished University Professor of Art, Emeritus.

While Driskell is perhaps most well known for his work as an educator, curator and scholar “David Driskell: Icons of Nature” hopes to highlight his importance as an artist as well.

“This exhibition is a unique opportunity to gain a deeper understanding and appreciation of David’s widespread influence,” said Mark Bessire, the Judy and Leonard Lauder director of the Portland Museum of Art, “The contemporary significance of subjects that David explored throughout his career are more salient than ever, and we are looking forward to highlighting this remarkable American artist.”

As an artist, Driskell was primarily a painter, though he has experimented with several mediums and even developed one of his own.

Driskell’s “collage-painting” mixes traditional painting with a mixture of other materials and mediums, bringing a distinct texture to his art.

“What remains steadfast in Driskell’s work is a commitment to his ‘icons,’ which elevate the mind and the spirit above that which exists in the physical world,” said guest curator Julie McGee, associate professor of Africana studies and art history at the University of Delaware.

“Among the many gifts Driskell bequeaths to us is the delight of seeing the world through his eyes, and it is a journey of immeasurable beauty and grace.”

The icons McGee and the exhibit’s title refer to are several recurring motifs that litter Driskell’s art.

Some of these icons come from nature as can be seen in Driskell’s still lifes, which feature pine trees and other aspects of the natural world. Others come from Driskell’s personal and cultural history, such as African masks, symbols of the Black experience in America and imagery drawn from his Southern Christian upbringing.

The pieces in the exhibition highlight the broad range of Driskell’s work; visitors can follow the artist through his own artistic evolution. The darker and more realistic early works include Driskell’s 1953 “Self-portrait” from the artist’s estate and 1956’s depiction of the crucifixion, “Behold Thy Son.”

The later works on display show a more colorful and abstract side of Driskell; “Shaker Chair and Quilt” from 1988 shows a similar bright and noisy style, something that becomes signature for Driskell. 2005’s collage “Night Vision: (for Jacob Lawrence)” is a beautiful explosion of blues.

Michael Rooks, the High’s Wieland Family curator of modern and contemporary art, said “Driskell’s command of vibrant color and line, and his attentiveness to what he called ‘the symbolic presence of form,’ endowed his subjects with a kind of frisson like that of an electrical charge, which made his work esthetically vigorous, bold and spirited.”

Rook says it perfectly; Driskell has been such an influential educator. It is now time to honor him as the incredible painter he was.

Make sure to visit the High Museum before March 9 to view “David Driskell: Icons of Nature and History.”

In honor of Black History Month, the Georgia Tech African American Student Union (AASU) has curated a collection of art made by Black members of the Tech community. The showcase is on display in the third floor of the Clough Undergraduate Learning Center.

The AASU’s Black History Month Art Showcase features seven works of art, including paintings, multimedia pieces, photography and poetry. The art featured was selected by the AASU BHM Committee from a pool of applicants from the Tech community.

Angelique Carson contributed not just one, but three paintings to the installation. All of her paintings feature Black women in different lights. The first, “Reflections” resembles a playing card — two young girls are painted facing opposite directions, both with the same challenging expression but in different clothing and hair, each with a small 3 above
their shoulder.

Carson’s other two paintings have heavy Biblical themes. “False Prophet” depicts a woman up to her eyes in water, with hair flowing around her and a crown upon her head. The golden crown is the first thing the viewer sees against the otherwise blue painting, giving the impression of Basquiat. Carson’s use of bright colors and bold lines create powerful and striking visuals.

Carson’s third painting “Ephesians 6:12 / War in the Mind” is an emotional painting of a woman spewing red from her mouth and lightning from her eyes in anguish or in anger. The texture in this painting adds a contrast to the cartoonist depiction of the woman.

The verse that the painting is named after — “For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places” — has devastating resonance in the light of racial injustices that BHM highlights.

Another piece of art featured in the exhibition is a poem — something not often included in art installations. Khamansha Raphael’s “On the dead homies” is a gut wrenching and intimate look at the Black experience in America.

With lines like “Gold medalist or perceived menace / it makes no difference in a society white washed by a christened / fear complex,” Raphael’s words rightly indict the world we live in. The poem ends with the deafening lines “Nah, I’m just trying to stay alive / Million man marching with all the homies / that might never make it home.”

The most striking painting in the showcase is Nigel Davis’ “They Found Me.” Painted on a three foot tall piece of wood, this piece is dominated by a smiling multicolored face, surrounded by smaller grey and purple faces with swirling eyes.

“This painting expresses the acknowledgement of entities in this world that are working with you, not against you,” said Davis, “Consider these ‘entities’ as Angels divinely guided to help manifest the life you want for yourself.”

Make sure to check out the African American Student Union’s Black History Month Art Showcase on the third floor of the Clough Undergraduate Learning Commons before the end of February.

Our Take: 2 Stars

Indie artists Chelsea Cutler and Jeremy Zucker have teamed up yet again to release another intimate EP, “brent ii.” Nearly two years ago the artists and label-mates released the record’s predecessor “brent.” Catchy and personal, “brent ii” is a fun, atmospheric listen but is honestly nothing special.

After the success of the first EP, which received 1.2 million streams in its first 24 hours, it is no shock the duo is back with a follow up. As Zucker tweeted “THE SECOND CHELSEA AND I PUT OUT BRENT 1 WE KNEW WE WERE GONNA DO IT AGAIN I JUST DIDNT THINK IT WOULD BE SO SOON.”

“brent ii” is made up of only five songs, and has a total listening time of just 17 minutes. The brief length is one of the EPs strengths — instead of bombarding the listener with a barrage of tracks, Cutler and Zucker have carefully crafted each song.

Cutler and Zucker had total creative control over the EP — serving as singers, writers and producers — and it shows. The record’s strength comes from the intimacy only this level of involvement allows.

The bare, no-frills production allows Cutler and Zucker’s vocals and writing to shine through, an effect that can sometimes be enchanting, but here spotlights inadequacies. Cutler’s high whispery hoarse voice certainly creates a vibe and is unique and fun to listen to, but can quickly turn flat. She often sing-talks, giving some of the EP the feel of spoken-word poetry with atmospheric backings; something that is not inherently bad but gets old quickly. Additionally, the lyrics have a certain tumblr-aesthetic quality that comes off as a little cringey.

Opening track “this is how you fall in love” has all the makings of a corny indie love song. The bridge is what makes this song stand out. Made up of a single line, “Oh, my love, side to side,” repeated with Cutler and Zucker’s vocals backed by a chorus, this part of the song feels almost cinematic.

Next is “parent song,” the longest song on the EP and a thematic break from the other love songs on “brent ii.” Instead, “parent song” shines a light on the familial relationships in the artists’ lives.

Lyrically, this is the best track on the record and plays like Cutler and Zucker are making phone calls to their parents, reminiscing and missing them. Unique thematically and lyrically, “parent song” is the record’s high point.

“emily” is a bittersweet song that confronts a failing relationship. Here, Cutler and Zucker’s vocals mesh the best and the track is melancholic and raw.

Unfortunately, the chorus of the song is awkwardly paced and sounds like there are too many syllables in the allotted space — especially when Zucker croons the cringey lines “Then I’ll fight with your friends and I’ll trash your apartment / I’ll lie to you, screaming, I’d die for you.”

The first three songs are collaborative, but the album finishes with solo efforts by Zucker and Cutler, respectively.

Zucker’s track “brooklyn boy” is a confessional song that builds to a crescendo.

A slow march until the two-minute mark, the song begins with a simple piano and ends with a much more produced, almost electronic sound.

Zucker’s solo is a welcome departure from the album’s flat sound.

Ending the album is Cutler’s “stars.” The song is a slow and acoustic ballad with a lot of potential, but Cutler does not have the voice to pull it off. Lyrically, the song is really sweet and has a catchy melody but these strengths are not enough to make it a successful song.

“brent ii” has traces of a modernized version of Bon Iver’s indie classic “For Emma, Forever Ago.” Similarly written in a remote northern cabin, the album is laced with emotional intimacy and atmospheric music — unfortunately it hardly compares. But while “brent ii” might not have such a lasting cultural impact, it is still an easy listen full of vibey tracks.

Last Thursday on Jan. 28 Apple CEO Tim Cook caused a bit of a stir in Big Tech. While streaming live his keynote speech for the Computers, Privacy & Data Protection conference in Brussels, Cook sought to differentiate Apple from other Big Tech companies, and without naming names, primarily Facebook.

Early on in the address Cook said: “The fact is that an interconnected ecosystem of companies and data brokers, of purveyors of fake news and peddlers of division, of trackers and hucksters just looking to make a quick buck, is more present in our lives than it has ever been.

And it has never been so clear how it degrades our fundamental right to privacy first, and our social fabric by consequence.”

The purpose of this address was to highlight Apple’s newest technology being released in the next beta iOS update, App Tracking Transparency.

ATT will force iPhone users to explicitly allow or deny third party apps the ability to track them for advertising purposes.

Apple’s hope is that ATT will allow users to block apps like Facebook, Snapchat and Google Maps from creating user profiles and tying collected data back to individuals.

All of this is mostly used to create targeted ads — something that Cook believes to be abhorrent.

Cook dramatically defended his point of view in the keynote: “As I’ve said before, if we accept as normal and unavoidable that everything in our lives can be aggregated and sold, then we lose so much more than data. We lose the freedom to be human.”

With the advent of ATT and Cook’s keynote, Apple is clearly attempting to distance itself from Facebook, a company that is infamous for ‘stealing’ data.

Facebook, who makes 98.5% of its revenue, about $69.7 billion, has become a convenient public and political scapegoat for Big Tech.

The thing is, Facebook, or any app for that matter, isn’t stealing data from any one. It’s creating data. Something that it has the right to do.

Without their service, their technology, their decisions on what user metrics matter enough to be collected, the data wouldn’t exist at all.

You, as a human, as a user aren’t creating anything. You are using a service and in exchange, in order for that service to continue, it tracks your usage and metrics, creating a means of revenue for itself.

It’s not your data. Big Tech doesn’t care about you personally, and “your” data has no meaning on its own.

They’re not looking into exactly what Maya Flores is doing on a Tuesday afternoon, it means nothing to them.

When companies are collecting data, they’re looking to create groups and clusters, grouping thousands of users together based on interests and traits. Data is only valuable in aggregate.

An analogous real world example is shopping at the grocery store.

Publix keeps track of each of your purchases.

By doing this, it can better keep its shelves stocked, make sure to only offer products that have demand.

They are also able to then ensure that less food is wasted and that they make money by selling the things people actually want.

Yeah it is data you helped to create, but it really has nothing to do with you and is only valuable when they take into account all customers.

That being said, I’m not arguing that apps should have free reign of your devices.

Currently, apps can track activity across apps and websites owned by other companies. This has actual security ramifications. Those concerns are far beyond just the issue of Instagram showing you tailor made ads.

But not to fear: ATT does provide protection against this too.

As Apple founder and Cook’s predecessor Steve Jobs took a much more democratic stance on data privacy.

In 2010 Jobs said, “I believe people are smart and some people want to share more data than other people do. Ask them.”

Apple’s new ATT technology allows users to do exactly that, determine how much they want to share with the apps they use.

When this update rolls out I implore you to take a second and think about what exactly you’re doing when you block apps from tracking all data on you.

I, for one, love the ability to scroll through an Instagram explore page.

I get to see perfectly tailored to my interests and allow Amazon to pull up the exact bag of beans I was looking for. And they did this all just based on my recent coffee machine purchase.

Our Take: 5 Stars

Arlo Parks is the voice of a generation. The 20-year-old singer-songwriter-poet got her start two years ago when a BBC Radio 1 DJ noticed her demos. Since then she has released a few EPs and on Jan. 29 dropped her debut album, “Collapsed In Sunbeams.” The R&B and bedroom-pop record is refreshing and raw in a way only an artist who grew up on social media can be.

The album’s opening track “Collapsed In Sunbeams” is not really a song but a 55 second long poem read by Parks herself; her lyrical and slightly hoarse West-London accented voice is almost uncomfortably intimate. The effect of the track is hypnotic and its sadness-laced words sound like the intro to an A24 coming of age film.

The spoken-word poem sets the intimate tone of the album perfectly, ending with the lines “We’re all learning to trust our bodies, making peace with our own distortions / You shouldn’t be afraid to cry in front of me. I promise.”

Next up, “Hurt” is an upbeat and triumphant song that is highly danceable despite the downhearted tone of the lyrics. The simple but catchy music allows Parks’ voice to really shine here, showcasing its vulnerable, bare quality. One of her wordiest songs, “Hurt” finds its groove in repetition, with only a few distinct lines. Before the last chorus there is a spoken-word verse that once again highlights Parks’ poetic prowess and adds gravity to an effortless track.

Parks said her intentions with “Collapsed In Sunbeams” was “to create an avalanche of imagery.” And boy did she succeed — nearly every song invokes a specific visual aesthetic or brings up old memories.

The best example of this is “Green Eyes.” The perfect love child of Tyler the Creator and Frank Ocean, this track is funky but grounded in its bass. Lyrics like “Paintin’ Kaia’s / bedroom, think she wanted green / But the weather puts you on my mind / Dragonfruit and peaches in the wine / Kissin’ circles underneath your eyes,” create a moodboard in the listener’s mind. “Green Eyes” ruminates on Parks’ high school experience and her coming to terms with her bisexuality.

Modern breakup song “Just Go” is a mentally healthy alternative to the hundreds of revenge-ridden heartbroken songs of the 2000s.

Once again, a catchy and repetitive tune with simple musical backing, “Just Go” has a simple lyrical message about releasing toxic people and energy — a much needed change of pace from most pop songs.

While some may criticize Parks’ album as being rote coffee-shop singer-songwriter cliches, it’s the lyrics that mark “Collapsed In Sunbeams” as an album for the TikTok generation. The track that illustrates this most clearly is “Eugene,” one of the singles. The bedroom-pop song’s melody is unremarkable but the high-school nostalgia it inspires it is inescapable. Lyrics like “We’ve been best buds since thirteen /I hold your head back when you’re too lean / I hold the Taco Bell and you cried over Eugene” are not inherently specific but somehow evoke feelings of familiarity and deja vu.

A trendy TikTok dance routine to this song can not be that far over the horizon, but Parks’ work is not just for sentimental Gen-Zers; Michelle Obama added “Eugene” to her public “Black Girl Magic” playlist.

Especially for a debut album, “Collapsed In Sunbeams” is sublime — make sure to give it a listen. Arlo Parks has introduced herself as a major defining voice of the 2020s.