Adam Gardner, Ryan Miller and Brian Rosenworcel, better known as Guster, met during their freshman orientation at Tufts University in 1991. Known for its unique sound and vocal harmonies, the band built a fanbase with its underground albums “Parachute” and “Goldfly” before going mainstream with “Lost and Gone Forever” in 1999. The band has found continued success with its latest efforts, “Keep It Together” and “Ganging Up on the Sun,” and has taken on a new member in Joe Pisapia.

p. Guster will perform this Saturday as part of the College’s Homecoming festivities. Rosenworcel, Guster’s drummer, sat down with The Flat Hat for a pre-show interview.

p. **Flat Hat: Is there a reason you play a lot of college tours?**

p. **Brian Rosenworcel:** We like to play schools this time of year. … We really like the college crowd, and we have a lot of fans that are that age.

p. **FH: How did the band form?**

p. **BR:** We met when we were at college. We got started by playing in one of our rooms, but when we formed the band we didn’t really have any aspirations of doing this in our mid-30s. But here we are.

p. **FH: Guster is known for its live shows. Why do you think that is?**

p. **BR:** I don’t really know why we’re known for our live shows, because we’re not very good at our instruments as far as having any chops. We write pop songs and we arrange them and we’re good at tracking them, but we’re not great players, except for the new guy Joe. We tend not to take ourselves too seriously on stage, and we play with a lot of energy. We play the songs that we’re really inspired by in our set. We’ve been doing it a long time, and we do whatever it takes to keep it interesting.

p. **FH: You definitely like to have fun on stage. Any reason that you sometimes joke around with the audience?**

p. **BR:** Ryan will every now and then just kind of go off into a land of his own. We did a show with the Barenaked Ladies, and a lot of people thought, well yeah, they’re like the Barenaked Ladies in that sense, but those guys are like improvisational geniuses and comic geniuses, and we don’t go for that. We play our songs, and every now and then we’ll go off on some tangent, but it’s not like the comic element is a real part of our live shows.

p. **FH: How did you develop your unconventional barehand style?**

p. **BR:** I brought my bongos to college with me and met these guys, and we became friends and wrote songs on the instruments we had. It wasn’t until recently that I learned how to play a regular drum kit. It just became part of the show and people liked it, so right now we’re at a stage where our live show is very eclectic. We’re switching up for every song, and I’m jumping back and forth between a percussion kit and a regular drum kit. So these days we feel like there’s a lot of [stuff] going on, and it’s cool, and it makes for a more eclectic show.

p. **FH: Where did you get your nickname “Thundergod”?**

p. **BR:** I took that from Rick “Thundergod” Allen of Def Leppard. I had the opportunity to meet him once, and it was pretty awesome. We probably have a lot in common in that we both play hand drums with a lot of electronic triggers, and we both play with three limbs since my left foot doesn’t really do anything. But yeah, I stole that from Def Leppard.

p. **FH: Have you noticed that your fan base seems to vary a lot age-wise?**

p. **BR:** Our fans really are kind of all over the place. We’ll play a show in New York over the weekend for some high school kids, and then we’ll play a show out on the West Coast and we find that our fans are almost 30. It’s definitely the college demographic that’s always been there; that’s where it started and it hasn’t left us, but we can fit in with a lot of crowds. Like we played with Modest Mouse and the Yeah Yeah Yeahs last week, and then next week we’re playing with Willie Nelson.

p. **FH: Do you guys make a concerted effort to be fan-friendly?**

p. **BR:** I think, yeah, we make an effort to be good to our fans. We always have. We’ve always sold our T-shirts as cheap as we could, we communicate well with fans on our website and otherwise attempt to be accessible. And I think we really try hard to keep the college students at heart. I think people take that as thanks to our fans who helped us to distribute our CDs before we had national distribution. We have a lot of fans who have been with us since the beginning, and we really appreciate that.

p. **FH: What makes for a great show?**

p. **BR:** Well, it depends who you ask. We’ll come backstage after the same show and one of us will think we were amazing and one of us will think we sucked. I think if we play well, to me nothing else really matters, and I tend to feel good. But Ryan is all about if he’s connecting with the crowd. I’m pretty much oblivious to the crowd; I tend to keep my eyes closed. But yeah, there are a lot of factors.

p. **FH: Is there a particular show that you’ve performed that stands out in your mind?**

p. **BR:** I’d say the Woodstock ’99 Festival, well before we were ready to be playing in front of that many people. That was a scary one. I think that this weekend when we play FarmAid, that will be pretty memorable. Neil Young and Willie Nelson are two of my heroes.

p. **FH: Do you have a favorite Guster song?**

p. **BR:** Favorite Guster song? You know, I tend to enjoy the ones that are freshest, so these days I’m enjoying playing “Hang On” from the new album. I always like to play “Manifest Destiny” and there’re a few old ones that have been with us for a while that I still really like, so that’s exciting.

p. **FH: What about a favorite Guster album?**

p. **BR:** I know for a lot of people “Lost and Gone Forever” is the quintessential Guster album because it was the first time we really captured the acoustic guitar sound. Since then we’ve kind of reinvented ourselves. I think “Ganging Up on the Sun” has been my favorite so far, but we don’t really ever feel satisfied with what we’ve done.

p. **FH: When can we expect a new album?**

p. **BR:** We’re going to do this tour, and after the last show we’re going to take the better part of the year off to record the new album. So this is your last chance to see us live for a while since we’ll be taking a studio hiatus.

This weekend the College will celebrate its first “plucked” homecoming. The absence of the pair of feathers that long accompanied Tribe Pride has lasted half a semester and seven football games. However, a new logo will finally be unveiled as alumni surge by the hundreds for a nostalgic return to campus.

p. While the much-anticipated logo will be revealed, the football sideline will remain lonely without an official mascot. However, the theme of the homecoming parade seeks to raise awareness and ideas to restore the absent mascot. From now until Thursday, clubs can enter a banner exemplifying the theme “Extreme Makeover: Tribe Mascot Edition” to compete for up to $500.

p. Submissions will be presented at Friday’s pep rally at Yates Field where groups are asked to perform a cheer to accompany their banner, which will be judged based on creativity and applause from the audience.

p. Bright green homecoming T-shirts will be sold this week at the University Center tables: $10 for short sleeves and $15 for long sleeves. Cash, check and William and Mary Express will be accepted. The green and gold tees feature Zable Stadium and the slogan “We must protect this house,” which will likely color the student section as Tribe football faces the University of Massachusetts Saturday.

p. Leading up to the homecoming football game, freshman, sophomore, junior and senior girls will first become enemies as they battle against each other in flag football. Thursday from 7 to 9 p.m. the classes will face off in the Sunken Garden for the Powder Puff title. The following night, forgetting their football foes, the classes will reunite for the homecoming pep rally. From 7 to 9 p.m. on Yates Field, the event will feature free food and drinks, a bonfire, foam fingers and live performances.

p. Saturday the 78th homecoming parade will proceed through Colonial Williamsburg toward campus down Duke of Gloucester Street. Starting at 9:30 a.m., student groups will present their ideas to replace former Tribe mascot, Ebirt. “We are thrilled about this theme in particular since it gives the student body an outlet to express their creativity for a new school’s mascot,” Class of 2009 President Kevin Dua said. “We’ll have a member of the official mascot committee sitting on the judging panel taking pictures of the themed floats, ensuring students’ input into the decision-making process.”

p. After a variety of pre- and post-game tailgates sponsored by alumni classes, sororities and fraternities and the UMass football game, the source of noise on campus will transition from cheers emanating from Zable to free tunes from the band Guster, performing at 8 p.m. in the Sunken Garden.

p. While homecoming weekend signals football and school spirit for many, the event is one celebrated by current students and alumni alike. Lauren Katkish ’08, in charge of organizing the Kappa Delta alumni reception, said, “Homecoming is an especially exciting time for sorority members. Recent graduates return to Williamsburg and stay in the chapter houses where bigs, littles, friends and sisters are reunited. New members get the chance to meet the recent graduates who were such a large part of the chapter just a few years ago, and all sisters get to meet graduates from 10, 20 and even 30 to 50 years ago and hear about how William and Mary as well as their sorority has changed.”

p. While many have experienced multiple homecoming celebrations at the College as students and alumni, the Class of 2011 gets set to experience its first. Class of 2001 President Jazmine Piña said, “This is my first homecoming, so I’m really excited for the huge amount of Tribe Pride stuffed into one weekend. I’m also really looking forward to finding out what the new logo is.” Whether the first homecoming celebration or the 45th the current student body and returning alumni have a packed schedule of events to commemorate Tribe Pride. With old students returning, the unveiling of a new logo and hopes for a new mascot, the weekend promises both excitement and anticipation.

p. “Hopefully students will be able to enjoy every single aspect of homecoming,” Dua said. “From buying a shirt, watching Powder Puff and the parade to attending the pep rally, Guster concert and football game — it’s going to be an entertaining week for the entire campus.”

First of all, Radiohead’s “In Rainbows” is excellent; if it’s not on par with the band’s greatest work, then it’s at least as good as “Amnesiac” or “The Bends.” If you’re already a Radiohead fan, you won’t be disappointed, and if you’re new to the band which many consider the greatest on Earth (with good reason), this is a fantastic place to start.

p. There’s a story here that’s bigger than the music, though. An enormous amount of press has been heaped upon “In Rainbows,” mostly due to its ingenious “fuck the record industry” business plan, which was sorely needed in the midst of the Recording Industry Association of America’s plan to flog its consumers with massive lawsuits and fines. Radiohead released the album without a record label, which is a large enough surprise for a group that has sold an estimated 40 to 50 million albums worldwide. Not content solely with going independent, the band allowed fans to download a digital copy of the album for a consumer-determined price. About 1.2 million downloads (at about an average of $8 apiece) later, the experiment has been a resounding success, and will only be reinforced by the album’s physical release in January.

p.But regardless of the economics of it all, few albums were more anticipated in the last two years than this. Listeners and critics alike spent sleepless nights wondering how “In Rainbows” would sound, wary of how the band’s experimental tendencies would manifest themselves. 1997’s “OK Computer” was the culmination of the band’s paranoid, atmospheric arena rock, and is considered by many to be the best album of the decade. Seemingly realizing that they could not push their style any further linearly, 2000’s “Kid A” was an extreme departure into electronic soundscapes that alienated some, but enthralled many more. Since then, “Amnesiac” and “Hail to the Thief” have continued in that vein, with the latter incorporating a little more of Radiohead’s previous sound.

p. The new album is a pure combination of the two different styles. More insular and controlled, Radiohead sounds as confident with itself as it ever has. Each song is tightly wrapped around quickly moving, athletic percussion, allowing the compositions to evolve within themselves and become singular entities, each more independent than those on “Kid A” and more cohesive than those on “Hail to the Thief.” Jonny Greenwood’s guitar, in its most primary role in 10 years, is haunting and perfectly placed wherever it appears.

p. But the centerpiece, as always, is Thom Yorke’s inhuman wail, which has consistently been as strong an instrument as any in music. The effect of 10 years’ worth of electronic experimentation is most evident in his voice; weaving in and out of the songs and slightly altered in places, it sounds both deeply his own and completely otherworldly.

p. Every song on the album is solid, and very few stand above the pack. “Bodysnatchers” and “Jigsaw Falling into Place” are anthems on par with most anything from “OK Computer,” and “All I Need” recalls an early-’90s Massive Attack-style trip-hop mixed with Boards of Canada synthesizers. A haunting, almost R&B three-four beat and ethereal string section make “Nude” fit neatly in the slow-burning, anti-ballad canon of “Exit Music” and “High and Dry.”

p. Maybe the most telling feeling one gets from “In Rainbows” is that of instant familiarity within the Radiohead back catalog, while simultaneously realizing that none of these songs would fit perfectly on any of the group’s other releases. The album is truly a culmination of the band’s previous styles, and in trying not to cover new territory or genres, the band has created a stunningly confident work of art that feels truly like a Radiohead release, regardless of expectations or preconceptions.

p. With such a high-profile band as Radiohead going completely independent, and becoming the first to fully embrace the digital music revolution, we can only hope that change is on the horizon for the deeply flawed record industry. In the meantime, however, we can celebrate “In Rainbows” as the group cementing its place in history and allowing us to witness the band of our generation at the peak of its ability.

Stephen Colbert has garnered a good deal of press ever since he announced on his show that he is running for president of the United States (though only in South Carolina). He was purportedly “testing the waters” with his recent book, “I Am America (And So Can You!),” the progeny of 2004’s “America (The Book),” by Jon Stewart ’84 and his “Daily Show” staff. Sadly, ‘I Am America’ does not quite live up to the quality and humor of its predecessor — just like Colbert and his show, “The Colbert Report.”

p. Colbert was the best correspondent on “The Daily Show,” hands down. His segment “This Week in God” seemed to be created for him to bop the God Rod, and it quickly fell flat when he left in 2005 for his own show, a parody of political pundits such as Bill O’Reilly and Rush Limbaugh. The problem with “The Colbert Report” is its focus on one character — Stephen Colbert. Conversely, “The Daily Show,” though anchored by and around Stewart, also relies on a variety of humor styles and personalities, including Larry Wilmore (the show’s senior black correspondent) and John Hodgman (a “resident expert” on topics ranging from Iran to art authentication to immigration to mixed martial arts).

p. Colbert, meanwhile, is forced to say mostly the same things over and over. His on-air persona is merely an amalgamation of outlandishly right-wing claims and ideas with a generous mix of reactionary political ideology and a dash of powerful name-dropping. I’ve never been a fan of “The Word,” the daily segment that combines a Colbert dialogue with sidekick text consisting mostly of puns, and his interviews never have the same quality of those on “The Daily Show.” But the ‘Report’ isn’t without its charms; I particularly enjoy his “On Notice” (Jane Fonda and grizzly bears) and “Dead To Me” (New York intellectuals and bowtie pasta) boards.

p. Unfortunately, ‘I Am America’ is more of the same — a mere extension of the show. The worst part is that it lacks the most important aspect of “The Colbert Report”: Colbert, himself. Sure, his picture is sprinkled throughout the book, but without his awesome trademark personality to deliver the jokes, the whole concept becomes decidedly pedestrian.

p. ‘I Am America’ is peppered with juvenile humor. The 10 Commandments were “Moses’s greatest achievement, though that beard was a close second.” On evolution: “[Charles Darwin] was on the Galapagos Islands for spring break, got smashed, woke up in bed next to a monkey and then had to come up with a theory that made it all okay.” Books are scary because “you can’t spell ‘book’ without ‘boo!’”

p. Ha. Ha. Ha.

p. And “The Word,” like a bad infection, just won’t go away. The margins are full of cutesy comments on the main text. At least on the ‘Report’ you can listen to Colbert and read the puns simultaneously; in the book, you have to read the main text and then read the margin comments, breaking up the book’s flow.

p. ‘I Am America’ is broken into chapters with subjects such as the media, sports, old people and immigrants. The chapter with the best jokes focuses on higher education. Although he compares professors to Unabomber Ted Kaczynski, a gem of a joke follows this parallel by showing how to pad a resume: “Let’s say one day you’re bored in class, so to pass the time, you make out with the Danish exchange student across the aisle. Now, on your college application, you can say that you carried out an Independent Study in Foreign Tongues.” Colbert also handily summarizes entire courses into a few sentences for quick learning.

p. Introduction to Formal Models in Computer Science: “Some people just don’t lose their virginity ever.”

p. Comparative Religion: “Jesus wins.”

p. Introduction to Philosophy: “If a tree falls in a forest and no one hears it, I hope it falls on a philosophy professor.”
Interracial Dynamics between Women of Color: “It’s not what you think.”

p. “I Am America (And So Can You!)” will, despite its flaws, rise to the top of the sale charts. Why? Because Stephen Colbert gives Oprah a run for her money when it comes to controlling the purchasing parity of his viewers, except Colbert controls young politically minded liberals instead of cheesecake-eating housewives. ‘I Am America’ could have been better, much better, but it will have to do until Colbert finds his niche in the political humor market.

The William and Mary Theatre department recently put on “It’s A Bird! It’s a Plane! It’s Superman!” Though the cast did a fine job, it’s clear why this show never made it to Broadway — Superman wasn’t really the best idea for a musical. In short, an evil scientist and a competitive columnist team up to destroy Superman, while a group of Chinese acrobats kidnap his love interest, Lois Lane.

p. Tommy Gillespie ’09 shone as Superman, evoking laughter just by walking onstage with his sappy yet loveable grin. Every movement he made, from whipping off his glasses to tossing his cape over his shoulder was entertaining. Gillespie was perfectly complimented by Maura Roche ’08 as Lois Lane. Her voice was flawless as she sang of her frustration with the man in red. She personified the tough but loveable Daily Planet reporter. It’s a shame this show didn’t feature a duet with such strong vocal leads.

p. Peter Andre ’08 as evil professor Dr. Sedgwick, did a wonderful job. His random spasms of maniacal laughter, along with his excellent use of physical comedy and exaggerated facial expressions, made his character delightfully amusing. One of the most humorous numbers in the musical was a song featuring him and Nick Giedris ‘08. Giedris had impeccable comedic timing and was ideal for his role as cocky double-crossing reporter Max.

p. “You’ve Got Possibilities,” the most famous tune from this production, was sung beautifully by his counterpart Bethany Bagley ’08 and proved to be a melody you couldn’t help but hum while walking home. Our beloved Vice President for Student Affairs Sam Sadler even made a cameo in the performance, rousing a cheer for “Tribe Pride!”

p. The ensemble did a marvelous job in large numbers such as “It’s Super Nice.” The choreography, featuring hints at famous ’60s dances, added to the corny humor of the show. All music was produced by a pit orchestra of talented students of the College.
The settings in this production were also quite impressive. A huge backdrop of comic book panels acted as a creative transitional piece and a guide for the storyline. One scene even featured a huge three-dimensional comic book set, placing the actors in individual frames. One of the few problems, however, was that none of the actors seemed to wear microphones. This resulted in several dropped lines and inaudible lyrics.

p. If you aren’t a huge Superman buff, or comic fan for that matter, the plot wouldn’t seem too interesting. Lois has too many love interests besides Superman, and some scenes drag a bit. In addition, the lyrics seem very random at times. During a fight sequence Superman declares, “Gosh I’m hungry / I’d sure like a T-bone steak / I haven’t felt this good since Krypton knows when.” Even if you knew the context, it still wouldn’t make sense. There are some classic one-liners, though, that save this farce from being too odd — Lois asks, “Tell me please, when will he learn it’s not some silly fly-by-night affair?”

p. Though the story of “Superman” was a little weak, the cast did its best and gave a fine performance. This production made full use of the cheesy themes of good versus evil and “always obeying the law.” If taken for what it was — a tongue-in-cheek musical — it was very entertaining and featured some real talent from our College community.

Jocelyn, Sylvia, Prudie, Bernadette, Allegra and Grigg make up the six eclectic members of “The Jane Austen Book Club,” a film that revels in the beauty of Jane Austen’s six classic novels. Based on the best-selling book by Karen Joy Fowler, the film recounts a six-month period, providing one month for each of the Austen books. While each character is undeniably flawed, creating a series of painfully awkward and off-beat moments throughout the story, it is the acceptance of their flaws that makes each member of the club endearing.

p. With “All Jane Austen. All the time.” as the theme of the book club and the film, the audience knows exactly what to expect when it walks into the theater. A chick flick to the core, the film thrives on its diverse cast, witty dialogue and, of course, the classic romantic tales of Austen herself. If you have yet to read any of the Austen novels, this film is just the place to start. It’s like Sparknotes in movie form, providing a simple guide to the key plot lines of each of the stories and cleverly portraying how Austen’s novels are meant to be read. If you are already an Austen fan, this film provides a wonderful modern contrast to the ancient texts.

p. Director and screenwriter Robin Swicord does her job as well as could be expected, weaving in and out of the six storylines as well as the novels themselves, avoiding confusion and forced plot lines.
As a film strong in characters but weak otherwise, its success was dependent on great casting. After reading the book this summer, I could not have cast the film any better myself. Each character is played to absolute perfection, from Hugh Dancy (“Evening”) as Grigg, the only male member of the club as well as the only member who has never read an Austen novel, to Kathy Baker (“13 Going on 30”) as the free-spirited Bernadette, the oldest member of the club and lover of all things Austen. The film also includes excellent performances from Amy Brenneman (“Private Practice”), Maria Bello (“World Trade Center”), Emily Blunt (“The Devil Wears Prada”) and Maggie Grace (“Lost”).

p. The greatest of the film’s strengths is its deep worship of the novels themselves. With each book, the audience sees the parallels in the lives of the members, as well as the unique ways with which each character analyzes the stories based on his or her own experiences. From the timeless romance between Elizabeth Bennet and Mr. Darcy in “Pride and Prejudice” to the trying relationship between the Dashwood sisters in “Sense and Sensibility,” nothing is forgotten. Austen’s stories spill out into the lives of their readers, creating a profound impact on their views and decisions on love and life. If nothing else, the film succeeds in highlighting why Austen’s books are still popular almost 200 years later.

p. “The Jane Austen Book Club” is not oscar-worthy, but it’s far from awful. It meets every expectation one might have for a chick flick. Each plot works out almost too perfectly, walking that fine line between clever and far-fetched. Every once in a while, isn’t that exactly what we need from the movies? To see life work out exactly how it should, but never actually does? At some point, don’t we all wish that Jane Austen could write us a happy ending for our own lives? “The Jane Austen Book Club” is cute and funny. If you are a true lover of Jane Austen or light romantic comedies, run to the theaters. If you are expecting a film that’s going to change your world forever, it may only be worth a rental.

“The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford” makes it very clear right off the bat that it is not a Western. No shootouts, no horse-chases and only one robbery, an unglamorous and uneventful affair at the very beginning. That being accomplished, the movie spends most of the remaining two-and-a-half-hour run time deciding what it is. Hero tale? Nope.

p. Betrayal story? Slightly. Nervous breakdown movie? Maybe.
Documentary? A little bit. Vaudeville? Well believe it or not, there’s even some of that in there, too. It’s a confusing mish-mash of stylistic choices, and could have used a bit more editing.

p. It starts off promisingly enough; Jesse James (Brad Pitt, “Fight Club”), classic American icon of the Old West, is murdered by a man he thought he could trust — a man who worshipped Jesse as a child, yet grew up to be his killer. There are so many tantalizing sides to the story, but instead of picking and choosing which to use, the movie tries to do it all, and consequently feels out of synch.

p. The problem with Jesse James is that, in the century and a quarter since his death, he has become so venerated, so revered, so mythologized in American history that there are too many different accounts of the actual man floating around. Dozens of films and countless books have been devoted to expounding upon just one facet of this very complicated man. Writer-director Andrew Dominik (“Chopper”) can’t focus on just one aspect, so he uses them all, and it seems like it’s all Pitt can do in the title role to keep up.

p. The writing and direction have him changing faces so often that it feels akin to watching a cowboy trying to stay on a bull. And yet, despite it all, he does a damn good job. He runs an exhausting gauntlet through the whole range of his prodigious acting catalogue, from cool collected “Ocean’s Eleven” Brad Pitt to brink-of-neurosis “Fight Club” Brad Pitt, and still manages to contain it all within the bounds of James’s metered accent and steely mannerisms. Dominick’s script jumps the character from zen sensai to crazy person and back in the expanse of just a scene or two. This makes the film feel thoroughly disjointed.

p. That said, after the actual assassination, the film improves remarkably. With the disorder caused by Pitt’s character removed from the picture, a logical calm settles over the remainder of the story, giving Casey Affleck (“Ocean’s Eleven”) a chance to shine as the second title character. The real life Robert Ford was everything Jesse James was not — unsure of himself, uncharismatic and, as the film’s title suggests, cowardly. Likewise, Affleck’s character undergoes a logical course of growth and development and enjoys a solidity and consistency that Pitt’s character sadly lacks. Affleck, like Pitt, has the mannerisms and the accent down pat but, unlike Pitt, gets the opportunity to craft a memorable performance because he’s playing a human being and not a quasi-godlike myth.

p. Every move Affleck makes is thought out. Every shift of the eyes, every lick of his lips and every crack in his voice seems meticulously planned and placed with the utmost care. It’s his thoughtful and solid portrayal that ultimately glues the film together against the thoroughly gorgeous backdrop given by cinematographer Roger Deakins (“O Brother, Where Art Thou?”).
Still, by the point Affleck takes over the film, it’s almost too little too late. It’s more than a little bit of a let-down because movie characters don’t come any better than Jesse James, and the knowledge that his role could have been handled so much better only colors the admittedly all-around good elements in the film with the uneasy feeling of disappointment.