Welcome to the critically acclaimed HBO drama series The Wire; hailed as "the best show on television; period" by the San Francisco Chronicle. The New York Times calls it "a vital part of the television landscape...unvarnished realism." Time declares that The Wire; "like its underfunded; workaday cops; just plugged away until it outshone everything else on TV."The Wire stands not only as riveting drama but also as a sociopolitical treatise with ambitions beyond any television serial. The failure of the drug war; the betrayal of the working class; the bureaucratization of the culture and the cost to individual dignity -- such are the themes of the dramas first two seasons. And with every new episode of season three and beyond; another layer of modern urban life will be revealed. Gritty; densely layered; and realistic; The Wire is series television at its very best; told from the point of view of the Baltimore police; their targets; and many of those caught in the middle.Rafael Alvarez -- a reporter; essayist; and staff writer for the show -- brings the reader inside; detailing many of the real-life incidents and personalities that have inspired the shows storylines and characters; providing the reader with insights into the city of Baltimore -- itself an undeniable character in the series. Packed with photographs and featuring an introduction by series creator and executive producer David Simon; as well as essays by acclaimed authors George Pelecanos; Laura Lippman; and Anthony Walton; here is an invaluable resource for both fans of the show and viewers who have yet to discover The Wire.Hollywood has long used the cop drama to excite and entertain; and Hollywood has always dictated the terms. But The Wire is filmed entirely in Baltimore; conceived by Baltimoreans; and written by rust-belt journalists and novelists intimately familiar with the urban landscape. Its as close as television has yet come to allowing an American city to tell its own tale.
#802104 in eBooks 2009-11-11 2009-11-11File Name: B002WJM5J6
Review
5 of 5 people found the following review helpful. Mostly very good; a few awful blundersBy Jeff HoltThe Bloody Reign of Slayer" by Joel McIver is. to my knowledge. the only full English bio of Slayer. so for those of us die hards who have been waiting decades for such a book. this would be a must even if it were terrible. For the most part. this is not a terrible book. In fact. the first few chapters. in which the author deals with pre 1983. and Show No Mercy through Hell Awaits. were great (I wish that someone would write a bio just dealing with those years!). I also loved all of the photos from that period. especially the three or four of them playing the "high school tours!" Fantastic! I was hoping the author would include the photo from that period where Jeff Hanneman has unbelievably short hair. Kerry King is wearing the silly striped shirt. and they are all wearing white Nike high tops--I always think of that as their Nike high top commercial shot. Alas. that was not to be.Furthermore. let me just say. before I get into my criticism of the book. that I very much enjoyed most of the authors commentary on the songs. For the most part. for Slayers original songs. they were similar to mine. esp. in terms of albums. as he picked out what I have always thought were two of Slayers weakest albums. "South of Heaven" and "Diabolus in Musica." I thought it was pretty courageous to point that out about "South of Heaven" because so many traditional metalheads. i.e. major Megadeth and similar technical thrash fans. look at "South of Heaven" as Slayers "first great album." although they will usually also listen to "Reign in Blood." though they tend to think of the album as inferior.To this 40 year old fan. thats crazy. I first heard "Show No Mercy" as a 13 year old. and it was the fastest. scariest. most incredible thing I had ever heard. It made Iron Maiden suddenly seem like "down time" music. It put Metallica. whom Id heard first. to shame. And Slayer just got better. "Haunting the Chapel" had a lower. more evil sound. with longer. more epic songs. and "Haunting the Chapel." the song itself. meant everything to me because I had been raised in an oppressive Christian home with "the holy cross. symobl of lies" intimidating me. When "Hell Awaits" came out. I bought a copy the first day. and the guy at Sound Warehouse put it on for me and my other 8th grade friends and we headbanged by the speakers. It was bliss! Finally. "Reign in Blood" was simply the other extreme: short blasts of songs. for the most part. and the sound was incredible. For me. Slayer was perfect until 1987 when I went and bought "South of Heaven" and all of the heavy metal cliches--even a clean tone guitar intro!--were on the album!All right. so. maybe that history will explain why I agree with much of what McIver says. However. here is what I disagree with. strongly. (note: this is re: the first edition. If he changed the chapter on "Undisputed Attitude" in the second edition. or what I mention in the next paragraph. GOOD. I still think hed be better off deleting the entire chapter on "UA." though). In Chapter 18. he essentially riffs on the entire CD "Undisputed Attitude." revealing the entire time that he knows NOTHING about hardcore punk. or how it sounds. Regarding what hardcore sounds like. it is a short. violent. catchy burst of power chords. like a series of punches in the face. It is very rare for it to have solos or complex song structures. And yet. this is exactly what the author criticizes the songs for. Furthermore. he doesnt even know the names of some of the most important bands! For example. he refers to "two" songs by D.R.I.. getting D.I.. who wrote "Richard Hung Himself." confused with D.R.I.. who wrote "Violent Pacification." Finally. his comments on the "Slayer" songs "Cant Stand You/Ddamm" are representative: he states. because of "Slayeresque solos all over." and "a series of distorted bass breakdowns" these songs "at least lift the quality of the album a little bit." The thing is. if the author knew underground punk from the 80s. or even just did his RESEARCH on it. he would know that both of these songs are by Papsmear. Hannemans hardcore side project from 85-86. and werent written for Slayeresque solos. Oh well.One other criticism. and Im done: there are at least 2 songs by Slayer that McIver despises the most. and repeats this throughout the book: "Die by the Sword" and "Dead Skin Mask." Now. Im not saying that he "shouldnt" hate those songs--everybody has a right to their own taste. He provides reasons for despising them. saying that "Die by the Sword" has too much of a Judas Priest/Iron Maiden riff and that "Dead Skin Mask" has an annoying "sing song" chorus. Personally. my reply to McIver is that if you want to attack any of the songs on "Show No Mercy" for an Iron Maiden or Priest riff--which I wouldnt. b/c I think they are all fantastic !--I would go after "Crionics." Furthermore. I would ask "Whats wrong with a Maiden/Priest influenced riff? Besides Venoms "Black Metal" LP and hardcore. those were their main influences!" As for "Dead Skin Mask." I think the sing-songy chorus is extremely creepy. not at all "sing-songy" in a pop sort of way. But my feelings aside. what makes his repeated statements of dislike about these songs a blunder is that he never even tries to account for the fact that these are two of the fans favorite songs and always have been. ever since their release! Fans have been demanding them at virtually every show. nearly 30 years after "DBTS" appeared on vinyl and more than 20 years after "DSM" did the same. Why does he never even mention this? To me that is an issue that is going to. rightfully. piss fans off. My advice to McIver is. if I were revising this book. I would try to take this into account.Overall. though. as I said at the outset. Im very happy to have this book. I hope its the first in a line of books about Slayer!1 of 1 people found the following review helpful. A biased accountBy AkronJimIve enjoyed reading the history of an intriguing and controversial band. I would warn potential readers. however. that this book is not at all an unbiased historical record. The writer makes no bones about his affection for Slayer. and as such the book is evenly divided between historical record. and fan rave. The writer breaks down each album track by track noting as he does so which songs are great. and which ones "dont cut it". In a perfect world. the author would offer objective analyses of the music and leave the opining to the readers and or listeners. In this instance. unfortunately. if you were to edit out all of the writers opinions. the book would dwindle from a healthy 200+ pages to barely one hundred. Be cautioned. but if youre interested in the story of the band. dont be dissuaded.0 of 0 people found the following review helpful. Very good book. A must for any thrash metal or especially Slayer fan!By Ronald D. Bruner Jr.This book goes into great detail on the band Slayer from the early 1980s until 2010 when the book was published. It is thorough and offers a rare look into one of the founding fathers of metal. This is a book I cannot wait for the revised version in a few years if they decide to make one! Awesome book!
