Bryan Scary and the Shredding Tears: Flight of the Knife

L.A. Bryan

It's slick. It's stolen. It's scary.

Bryan Scary and the Shredding Tears

Flight of the Knife

Label: Black & Greene
US Release Date: 2008-04-01
UK Release Date: 2008-04-07

Brooklynite Bryan Scary's latest album is too too. Too what? Too everything. Leaving off not far from the style of his solo debut album, The Shredding Tears, an album which showed flashes of Scary brilliance, I can only assume Bryan Scary decided he needed more of everything. So this time around, his touring band, the Shredding Tears, has recorded the album with him. And musically, he's injected every sort of imaginable sound into any lulls lasting for more than two seconds. The end result is as mind-scrambling and ridiculous as his musical moniker.

The heavily marketed "Imitation of the Sky" has a lot of potential. In fact, before the needless backing vocals kick in, it's almost a good song. Things just get worse from that point, however, and the end of the song coalesces into a chaotic mess of cloying voices. It's not just bad, it's grating.

Unfortunately, the rest of the album follows the same formula:

basic pop song +

prog & glam rock accouterments +

layers of effects and backing vocals =

The Flight of the Knife.

This might not be so bad if any part of the formula were not a complete rip off of another musician, but this simply isn't the case.

Scary loves his influences and is never at a loss for someone to imitate. The Beatles, David Bowie, Queen, Elton John, Of Montreal, Rush -- yes, Rush -- are each raped mercilessly throughout the album. Mindless imitation is never a good thing, but the results are worse still when the charlatan in question can't even decide whom he should rip off. There is no smelting of styles here, just musical schizophrenia recorded over a dozen tracks.

"Purple Rocket" alone channels the Beach Boys, the Beatles, Rush, the Beach Boys again, Rush again, and, finally, Of Montreal. Whew! I'm tired just thinking of it. But one thing Scary does possess is oodles of energy. Never underestimate the potent combination of manic energy and a compulsive tendency for imitation; just when you think there can't possibly be room for any more affected vocals, or yet another change of style, there they are: both of them, at the same time. On top of each other.

Of course, these layers upon layers of effects can't cover up the lack of quality pop songs beneath them. In fact, they make it worse. Stripped down, the songs would simply be mediocre snoozes, but with the added layers they become incorrigibly irritating. It's like dumping the entire jar of Smuckers on a burnt piece of toast. Your best bet is to just chuck it and get a brand new piece of bread.

Only one song escapes these superfluous aural dressings. "The Curious Disappearance of the Sky-Ship Thunder-Man" is, while not exactly great, still redeemable. Scary has great skill in arranging and playing music. But again, this track sounds like Yes opening a Beatles ballad with dubbed snippets of Of Montreal placed strategically at its end. Even so, the song is a wee redemptive oasis in the midst of a writhing musical catastrophe.

Scary is obviously a technically-talented musician, but his own ideas and influence are too hollow and fleeting to combat the copycat sounds of his music. Likewise, he possesses an exquisite voice -- which he uses only to sound like other people (generally Paul McCartney). These two things highlight the overriding problem with The Flight of the Knife: Scary never manages to channel himself. Not once has he contributed anything new, nor anything authentically Scary. You could argue that Scary exists only to arrange the talents of others into slick but depthless collages. You might be right. And in that case, Bryan Scary will indeed have accomplished the fantastic, for he has then made himself irrelevant.


So far J. J. Abrams and Rian Johnson resemble children at play, remaking the films they fell in love with. As an audience, however, we desire a fuller experience.

As recently as the lackluster episodes I-III of the Star Wars saga, the embossed gold logo followed by scrolling prologue text was cause for excitement. In the approach to the release of any of the then new prequel installments, the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare, followed by the Lucas Film logo, teased one's impulsive excitement at a glimpse into the next installment's narrative. Then sat in the movie theatre on the anticipated day of release, the sight and sound of the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare signalled the end of fevered anticipation. Whatever happened to those times? For some of us, is it a product of youth in which age now denies us the ability to lose ourselves within such adolescent pleasure? There's no answer to this question -- only the realisation that this sensation is missing and it has been since the summer of 2005. Star Wars is now a movie to tick off your to-watch list, no longer a spark in the dreary reality of the everyday. The magic has disappeared… Star Wars is spiritually dead.

Keep reading... Show less

This has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it.

It hardly needs to be said that the last 12 months haven't been everyone's favorite, but it does deserve to be noted that 2017 has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it. Other longtime dreamers either reappeared or kept up their recent hot streaks, and a number of relative newcomers established their place in what has become one of the more robust rock subgenre subcultures out there.

Keep reading... Show less

​'The Ferryman': Ephemeral Ideas, Eternal Tragedies

The current cast of The Ferryman in London's West End. Photo by Johan Persson. (Courtesy of The Corner Shop)

Staggeringly multi-layered, dangerously fast-paced and rich in characterizations, dialogue and context, Jez Butterworth's new hit about a family during the time of Ireland's the Troubles leaves the audience breathless, sweaty and tearful, in a nightmarish, dry-heaving haze.

"Vanishing. It's a powerful word, that"

Northern Ireland, Rural Derry, 1981, nighttime. The local ringleader of the Irish Republican Army gun-toting comrades ambushes a priest and tells him that the body of one Seamus Carney has been recovered. It is said that the man had spent a full ten years rotting in a bog. The IRA gunslinger, Muldoon, orders the priest to arrange for the Carney family not to utter a word of what had happened to the wretched man.

Keep reading... Show less

Aaron Sorkin's real-life twister about Molly Bloom, an Olympic skier turned high-stakes poker wrangler, is scorchingly fun but never takes its heroine as seriously as the men.

Chances are, we will never see a heartwarming Aaron Sorkin movie about somebody with a learning disability or severe handicap they had to overcome. This is for the best. The most caffeinated major American screenwriter, Sorkin only seems to find his voice when inhabiting a frantically energetic persona whose thoughts outrun their ability to verbalize and emote them. The start of his latest movie, Molly's Game, is so resolutely Sorkin-esque that it's almost a self-parody. Only this time, like most of his better work, it's based on a true story.

Keep reading... Show less

There's something characteristically English about the Royal Society, whereby strangers gather under the aegis of some shared interest to read, study, and form friendships and in which they are implicitly agreed to exist insulated and apart from political differences.

There is an amusing detail in The Curious World of Samuel Pepys and John Evelyn that is emblematic of the kind of intellectual passions that animated the educated elite of late 17th-century England. We learn that Henry Oldenburg, the first secretary of the Royal Society, had for many years carried on a bitter dispute with Robert Hooke, one of the great polymaths of the era whose name still appears to students of physics and biology. Was the root of their quarrel a personality clash, was it over money or property, over love, ego, values? Something simple and recognizable? The precise source of their conflict was none of the above exactly but is nevertheless revealing of a specific early modern English context: They were in dispute, Margaret Willes writes, "over the development of the balance-spring regulator watch mechanism."

Keep reading... Show less
Pop Ten
Mixed Media
PM Picks

© 1999-2017 All rights reserved.
Popmatters is wholly independently owned and operated.