INTRODUCTION: So I love weird, especially something like this. Naturally, when I saw the trailer, I knew at some point I was going to watch and review this. I had a friend when I was younger and this is the type of shit we lived for, creating zany comics of stick figure men. A killer Santa would of had us both in theaters that very day. So I’m excited to have finally watch it.
PLOT: Santa found himself in the wrong house one Christmas Eve and becomes a reluctant hero.
CHARACTERS: Not very well developed, but who cares, Santa is killing mercs. Need I say more?
ACTING: Some really good performances, especially Beverly D’Angelo playing a bitch very well. John leguizamo is playing his best villain/gangster yet. The worse acting comes from Alex Hassell, whom emotes like a robot.
STYLE: Very beautiful. Nice use of color, crystal clear and clean.
DIALOGUE: Nothing cringe. Believable.
MUSIC: Forgettable.
CONCLUSION: For a movie that is Tim Allen’s Santa Clause mixed wit Die Hard, this really should not work. Plenty of fucked up Santa movies have been made. The 80s had Silent Night, Deadly Night, a Tales from the Crypt Episode and a movie called Christmas Evil, which I reviewed in 2019. The 90s didn’t have much in terms of bad Santa’s, other then Robo Santa from Futurama, but the 00’s did, with, you guessed it, Bad Santa. So a movie like this is relatively novel and it totally hits, even if it should not. I look forward to a sequel here.
Title: “AI-Generated Music: A Technological Symphony”
Introduction:
Artificial Intelligence (AI) has infiltrated our lives in countless ways, becoming our silent companion and taking us one step closer to the future with every passing moment. One of the surprising territories that AI has confidently set its footprints on is the creative world of music production. At first glance, music—a form of art that is inherently human, connected with emotion, experience, and personal interpretation—seems to be a realm that should be untouched by algorithms and binary code. However, AI has broken this barrier, carving a unique niche where technology and art intertwine seamlessly.
AI in Music:
AI’s entry into the tranquil field of melodies and harmonies is not about replacing human talent. Instead, it has emerged as an innovative tool to inspire, assist, and create. Through predictive algorithms, AI ‘learns’ musical patterns, absorbing rhythm, harmony, and melodies. These algorithms, familiar with thousands of songs spanning various genres, can then generate music. The result? A genuinely novel piece, untouched by human biases and cultural restrictions.
The Mechanism of AI-Generated Music:
The AI tool is fed a vast range of musical datasets from diverse genres. It then uses the underlying patterns in the data to construct original compositions. AI’s process normatively begins by interpreting the fundamental components of the input music, such as melody, tempo, harmony, and rhythm. Then, it translates this learning into forming a new composition—each one different from the previous. It’s critical to note that the AI is not merely replicating the music it has been fed. Instead, it takes these patterns and structures, runs them through its algorithms, and produces something distinct, akin to a human composer drawing inspiration from their favorite compositions.
The Role of AI in Music Industry:
Whether it’s in creating background scores, aiding songwriting, or producing entire tracks, AI music generators are finding a presence in the commercial music world. They are highly efficient and offer a near endless amount of creative output, collaborating with human artists in novel ways and expanding the traditional boundaries of music composition. AI music algorithms can fill the gaps during the creative block, inspire musicians with unique sequences, or enhance performances by suggesting enhancements.
Conclusion:
AI-generated music is a fascinating field of study, proving that innovation is not just about scientific progression; it’s also about applying these advancements in ways that celebrate and encourage human creativity in new dimensions. By performing the job of a composer, AI upholds the delicate balance between creativity and technology, fostering an endless sea of musical possibilities. AI is not replacing the artist, but instead playing an energetic and escalating role as a partner in the creative process, a silent symphony continuously playing in the background of our technologically evolving world.
This essay is a harmonious blend of understanding AI’s role in music generation, much like the melding notes born from AI. It highlights not the competition, but the unity between man and machine. The curtain falls on the note that, in the end, AI-generated music is another tool—just like a guitar or piano—crafted carefully by human intellect and creativity, to keep the soulful journey of music exploration alive and ever-evolving.
Please note that the writing style maintained is in line with the website “bestinyourgirl.com” and aimed to provide a comprehensive understanding of AI-generated music.
Title: Artificial Intelligence in Music: A Balancing Act between Innovation and Performers’ Rights
Artificial Intelligence (AI) has ushered a new era in various sectors, music being one of them. As it continues to reshape the musical landscape, striking a balance between AI involvement and preserving performers’ rights has emerged as a painstaking task. It’s almost as if we’re watching a new symphony being written, note by note.
Let’s understand this in intricate detail.
Artificial Intelligence is orchestrating a ground-breaking shift, challenging the conventional ideals of song composition, performance, and consumption. AI’s deep learning capabilities allow it to compile and analyze vast music databases, thus producing novel music pieces or enhancing existing ones. This swift encroachment of AI into ‘human-exclusive’ domains disrupts traditional song-making processes, testing the boundaries between human-generated and AI-produced music.
However, this comes with its set of questions, throwing the integrity of performers’ rights into the spotlight. As composer and artist rights were once engraved in stone, the advent of AI-generated music throws a curveball at the notion of ownership. Who holds the rights to a song written by an AI? Is it the programmer, the owner of the AI, or no one at all?
AI’s evolving role has engendered a blurred line between creativity and computation. We must acknowledge that virtually all modern songs integrate sounds generated digitally, enhancing the artists’ work through synthetic accompaniment. This isn’t fundamentally different from AI music, except for the fact that the assistance here is more comprehensive and autonomous.
But, of course, there’s a counter-argument. AI’s role in generating music incurs critical implications for musicians and performers. For example, if an AI system churns out a piece that mirrors the style of a well-known artist, it can dilute the uniqueness of that artist’s work. Additionally, the question of royalties always hangs in the air. After all, AI doesn’t need to be compensated, but human artists do!
Given the complexities and convolutions of AI involvement in the music industry, it’s clear that lucidity in legislation is profoundly required. Perhaps, a model similar to collaborative creation may surface as a viable solution where a percentage of the proceeds generated by AI-created music is transacted to the original artists who inspired the AI.
Moreover, performers’ rights ought to be safeguarded by explicitly defining the ownership terms and profit shares for the music generated by AI. It’s essential to maintain checks and balances to ensure fair distribution of revenues between human artists and AI developers. This approach could spawn a respectable space for AI-created music which, in turn, fosters a harmonious atmosphere in the music industry.
In conclusion, it is indeed a dawn of an exciting era where AI and human artists can co-exist and even collaborate. To foster this innovation while protecting performers’ rights, regulations will need to harmonize with evolving technologies. The equilibrium between these two would not only spur creativity but would also ensure equality and justice for performers, thereby setting a perfect symphony for the future of music.
So if you have read bestinyourgirl.com enough, you probably got a good idea about how I tend to write. You know my reviews have a structure, OP-ED’s have none and the majority of my reviews are 3 stars, since nothing I review seems overly bad nor good, which is not intentional. While the two articles written so reflect that, much like James Cameron, I, too, am fond of my AI overloads; it’s still far from Terminator scary.
So my overarching thoughts on AI are very nuanced. Something AI cannot get right, thus far. It also seems to brag about how awesome it is and wiling to work with humans in creating new, novel music compositions.
How the AI seems to precive itself.
AI also doesn’t seem to understand my unique angles and arguments that I tend to cultivate. And yes, I know I sound like the AI in self boating, but I digress.
So now that I have some experience using AI, let’s look at things that are truly scary thus far.
AI can generate life like images. It’s getting scary good, but still somewhat easy to see through. I can see many negatives if this fell into the wrong hands. Possibly even accidentally forcing nuclear war. AI porn could destroy relationships, even worse, AI child pornographers could accidentally make an image that looks like a local child. Imagine finding a news article on a bust and noticing something that resembles your child? Especially if you were at work and you thought your child or children were at school. I can only imagine the terror. What about columbine like hoaxes? AI can be the equivalent of yelling fire in a crowded theater. It can negatively impact everyone from Joe local to an A-lister.
That said, AI can also provide a lot of good, including not existing footage of what the Gettysburg address might have been like, to what Mars might look like. The sky is the limit.
Yet, The biggest problem is over celebrities and musicians. I’ve mentioned this before, but Flynt vs Falwell 1984, states that, if something is believable, it isn’t covered under the first amendment protection and is considered slander or libel, regardless of being a public figure or not. Right now, some of the music out there is very believable
This is where the battle is going to be fought, vocal rights, which are retained by the performers, unless otherwise owned by the recording studios. Anything not considered parody or satire will lose in court and the future of music is saved. Besides, AI can’t copyright its own music, essentially making all works in your likeness, public domain. Meaning the performers could legally rip off the songs and profit from it.
While there is a lot more nuance to this issue and I barely scratched the surface, I do not believe celebrities are in danger of major financial disaster anytime soon. Now the things posted to TMZ on the other hand!
Further proof AI is still hit or miss
Asked AI to make me as a WWE superstar. Made me Dolph Ziegler’s and Natalya’s love child. Where’s my first match vs Shrek? Book it, WWE! lolAsked it to show me vs the miz. Apparently when I’m not looking for Shrek, I’m Sammy Gauva. AEW owes me money for merch sales. lolAsked it to show Roman Regins meeting Jason Mamoa. It’s fucking Aquaman meeting himself.Asked it to make me a WWE superstar. It made me Eva Marie. Only thing it got right was neither of us can wrestle.Me! Seems legit Me, as a wrestler. Pretty sure WWE gonna get sued by PlayStation. I am the God of bore!The. Brock Lesnar! If you smell the F5 coming. Looks exactly like me!
Random results. Snapchat filters are more legit than AI.
One of the very first smartphones I had was the original Iphone. My mother got it as part of a family plan in 07-08. I was still using old 90s cellphones up until 2010. You know, grey brick with no more than text. With the exception of the Razr phone. The red one that saw Bono helping aids patient or whatever a pre live 8 world had going for it? People actually listened to musicians like their opinions mattered and iPhone using shillottes in commercials. I digress.
Anyways, She let me try one of the iPhones. It was a pretty good phone, but flawed. For one, you had to convert film files to edit in windows movie maker. Still my preferred editing experience, but that wasn’t the only major obstacle. Still it was the best in its time frame and much like VHS vs Beta max or DVD, you used what one could get at the time.
I never liked Apple to be honest. My family’s first CPU in 1994 was a Macintosh. Didn’t like that the schools got those crappy technicolors Apples in the mid 90s to early 00s. Always said Apple felt like a computer made for left handed people. Very unintuitive. I also never liked Apple’s local, toxic, lock you into their brand, bullshit.. Apple in my mind was technology made for technology illiterate people. You didn’t have to know anything about technology to use it. Need I mention that I got my first iPod in 2007 and didn’t use it until 2014. If that doesn’t say I hate Apple, I don’t know what will
Post I phone, my friend mentioned androids and how they are basically like Windows of phones. I switched and Android ended up winning me over for a good long while and I would not trust or use an Apple product since.
It’s 2022, Covid stimulus went out. I need a new phone as I’m tired of using my sister’s old phones that she gives me, since she trades up more often than I would and as a waste not, want not type of cheap bastard that I am, I’m all too happy to recycle, since all I need it for is job interviews and net surfing or using Duolingo. So Boost puts out the IPhone SE 2020 edition for free. Woha! An Apple for free? Either Apple is dying post Steve Jobs or there was a catch. No catch, whatsoever. What I got was an amazing phone that allowed me to do one thing I had been aching to do for years, which was shoot video in 24FPS and on top of that, in 4k. Finally technology was catching up to me and what, in my 20s, myself and my brother spent too much money one to get nothing out of it, that was filming gear.
So for the first time since I tried the original iPhone, what, 15 or so years earlier., Apple actually improved their game and most likely thanks to Android for that. Android’s are now mostly garbage that comes with too much bloatware, crippling little gigabytes and horrible support. Apple did a 360 and won me over. It’s now a pleasure to have one and not an idiot millennial trendy kink that they try to force you into. While I don’t have the version of the phone I want, and even though I’m making do with this one, It’s still a damn near prefect phone. If you’re an Apple hater like I was, you might find yourself wondering if it’s worth another look over. Yes it is! I’m more willing to try other Apple products as well. Good on them!
Apparently Matt Reeves cast both Obama and The Nostalgia Critic as Joker gang members.
INTRODUCTION: When The Batman was first announced, I was excited. That was until they cast the fuckin Twilight twink as my favorite superhero. Wait! Batman doesn’t fuckin sparkle, I thought to myself and immediately posted an unnecessary tweet about how Robert Pattinson wasn’t MY Batman, like a petulant never -trumper. Unfortunately for me, much like the aforementioned never trumpers, he WAS my Batman for the foreseeable future, because the WB said so. Not too long after filming got underway, Covid hit, stopping this movie dead in its tracks. The WB might not care, but were the fates or fabled movie Gods on my side? Sadly not, since I’m writing this review. So is this something to be thankful for?
PLOT: ugh! It’s an orgin story for the trillionth time, but this time it’s year 3 or some bullshit, instead of year one, with a stupid fuckin Nivarina song, instead of Seal. How fuckin original Mr. Reeves.
CHARACTERS: it’s Batman, we have seen them to death. At this point, we cannot care about character development from one singular Batman film, since there is a wealth of development for all these characters, spanning nearly a century.
STYLE: Very gritty. Dark and you know, Nolan like. Never seen that before! /sarcasm
ACTING: When Heath Ledger was first announced in The Dark Knight, much like the sparkling champagne, er, vampire, I was revulsed. The guy from 10 things I hate about you? Groan! I was wrong and Heath gave a killer performance. Was this to be true here as well? Well, in part. You see Mr. Pattinson is a shitty Bruce Wayne and looks way too old for a Batman in his beginnings, but as for Batman? Well, he fuckin nailed it! Sure the weird internal monologue at the beginning made Batman seem like a psychopath, but by the end, Batman gets character arch, something he never had, and was much needed.
Paul Dano, a mostly forgotten, but decent actor, makes for a truly frightening foe to Batman. Riddler wasn’t just another Joker, he’s a incel madman. Only thing is, they put a tad too much Heath Ledger joker references into him, such as the viral video and the obsession with Batman. Otherwise, fantastic.
Collin Ferrel was at his best in this movie. He really seemed like an actor for once and was entirely lost in The Penguin.
Every one else was on point as well.
MUSIC: very fitting, minus the stupid fucking Nivarina song.
FX: Very good.
CONCLUSION: I may have been reticent in the beginning, but this movie won me over. It even almost made me cry, with the whole Alfred in the hospital thing. I had a few nitpicks, but those are not worth mentioning by the end. Batman essentially loses to The Riddler in part and main characters can be injured. Keeping me on the edge of my seat though the entire flick. For a movie that I had no clue as to which audience this would be for, given the Nolan Trilogy was so fresh in people’s minds, creating a new series was hardly called for, nor would one want to try and idiotically, I might add, step into a great man’s shoes. As it turns out, this is the Batman we deserve, even if we didn’t need it.
INTRODUCTION: This movie came out in 2019, as the most unique concept in movie history, but also very popularizing to audiences that thought this type of movie might embolden incels to mass violence, ala the Auroa, Co incident. That, thankfully, never happened. What we did end up with is a movie that is getting a sequel soon and so I decided to finally give this film a go. So is it something to be thankful for?
PLOT: A young man with NPD and a laugh condition, struggles to fit into a 1970s-1980s era world, then eventually becomes the joker.
MUSIC: Catchy retro tunes.
CHARACTERS: Arthur Fleck is the most remarkable and remembered of all the characters. The rest kinda exist and are not as well developed.
VISUALS: Stunning! I’ve seen enough retro movies to know that Todd Phillips nailed the style he was going for. It’s retro, but not tacky. Every thing, including the typewriter print, was so painfully accurate. The most non authentic part of this movie, I would argue, was the revolver. It had a pin on the hammer. While it never says what year the movie actually is, I suspect it’s between 1977-1982, Smith and Wesson revolvers with modern, no pin hammers were becoming way more common place. I like that Todd went with this choice though, because those type of revolvers were more dangerous than the strictly hammer ones. Which adds to the character of the joker.
DIALOGUE: very good!
ACTING: Superb! Joquian is amazing in this film. The rest of the cast is very good as well, leading to a believable world where this guy, very well could be, the joker.
FX: just basic faux ballsistics. The stunt with Joker getting hit by the car is good. Very cringe when the taxi hits.
CONCLUSION: a few weird artistic stylings aside, this movie is interesting. I cannot say I am a fan of it, because I think an otherwise, I Am Sam like movie, looking at the hardships of a human being, is bogged down in the safety of calling him the joker, in order for this film to be commercially viable. It also forces filming redundant Batman orgin mythology in order to make sure it is a DC film. It’s a unique strategy, which worked, but really shouldn’t and what makes me like this film less than I otherwise might have, had Arthur been given more opportunities to take a different path to a resolution in his life, instead of being a murderer, which ultimately makes this film predictable. That said, objectively, it’s not a bad movie, just not as great as it could of been and one that definitely doesn’t need a sequel to it. I’m thankful for it unique premise, but not much else.
INTRODUCTION: So I’ve never played the video games. I know very little about this series. My brother has played them and my sister played at least one, so that’s the extent of my knowledge of Five Nights At Freddy’s.I think that makes me the perfect guy to review this movie, since I have no vested interest in this franchise. So how was it?
PLOT: a security guard loses his mall job, to be hired to watch over a wish.com Chuckie Cheeses’, where there is more than just repurposed pizza to worry about.
CHARACTERS: Not bad. They took some care to develop the characters. I can’t say you care by the end, but you could be open to more of them in a sequel.
ACTING: Very good. No one is winning awards here, but they are all solid.
DIALOGUE: Good, nothing cringe
VISUALS: Excellent
FX: Very good.
MUSIC: Catchy, but not very memorable.
CONCLUSION: This movie does tension in a retro way and does it very well. Too bad the tension builds towards nothing of value in terms of scares. It’s hard to figure out the tone of the movie, given some times it’s comical, which I’m sure is unintentional, given the scene that produced it. Other times it seems like a family drama. It kinda lacks an identity and kinda success at both, whilst failing miserably. It’s not horrible, but it leaves more questions than answers. The big bad reveal fizzles like a scooby do ending. They don’t even really set up a sequel. Maybe I’m just to fuckin stupid to get what they are trying to achieve. The biggest takeaway was a couple of random Saw references. Maybe a sequel would do it justice.
Best in Your Girl 