Britney Returns In All Of Her "Glory"

Even as a fan, I was skeptical at first. Britney Spears was releasing her first album since 2013 -- undoubtedly pushed back thanks to her dazzling, wildly successful Vegas residency show "Piece Of Me" -- and she was calling it... "Glory"? It's certainly an odd choice for a pop album title. (My first thought: is she going gospel?) But after pressing play only once, and again with each subsequent listen, the name is more than fitting. This ambitious collection of songs revels in the many sides of Spears at a creative peak. Not since her 2003 career-best "In The Zone" has her music been this eclectic and experimental.

"Glory" has moments on nearly every track where my jaw practically dropped at the maturity and confidence of the production values, almost forgetting that it was a mainstream Spears effort. The rich, electronic auras of opener "Invitation" and "Just Luv Me" lend an ambient, ethereal flow to a performer better known for high-energy danceability. The silky prowess of lead single "Make Me" shows Spears as an artist who embraces her sensuality as a sensible adult woman, rather than her former days as a teenage marketing gimmick. The brazenly frothy hooks of "Private Show" and the flirty disco variations of "Do You Wanna Come Over?" are familiar territory that quickly become uncharted with clever vocal arrangements and instrumental twists.

Elsewhere, globe-trotting textures abound; reggae vibes ("Slumber Party"), Middle Eastern flair ("Better"), and Latin infusions ("Change Your Mind") are daring yet solid maneuvers that give her sonic palate a much-needed boost in diversity. Even closing track "Coupure Electrique" (roughly translated, "Blackout") is a haunting, Goldfrapp-esque indulgence...sung entirely in French, no less! Yes, this is still the same album. Spears has clearly one-upped and outdone herself. The sky's the limit now for what she could possibly try next. I've been saying for years that she should take a cue from Madonna's 1995 set "Something To Remember" and put out a whole album of ballads. Unlike her earlier work, the slower, more contemplative songs here fall short, as evidenced by the icy paranoia of "Just Like Me" and the desperate longing of "Man On The Moon." However, this brief lapse represents an opportunity for Spears to take back the wheel and steer toward the rest of those strengths in the future.

Meanwhile, runner-up favorite "Clumsy" glides through a full spectrum of tunes in a few short minutes. A deceptively simple, wickedly catchy hand-clap beat suddenly gives way to a hypnotic chanting chorus underscored with syncopated sizzle, all set in motion by a playful exclamation of (what else?) "oops." By far, though, the most impressive song is "What You Need," a brassy, fiery throwback that nods heartily to the burlesque sirens of yesteryear. Spears delivers a gutsy and glamorous big-band ditty that, miraculously, doesn't feel out of place amid the many other varied styles on display.

Just the strategically placed F-bombs alone during two pivotal tracks would have been enough to deepen my appreciation of her legacy in the industry. Nine albums in, Spears has finally joined the club of pop stars (like Pink, Christina Aguilera, Rihanna, and Beyoncé before her) who respect that their fans have grown up right along with them. These artists are comfortable enough to speak (or sing) their minds without fear of reprisal or censorship for their honest language.

Spears is indisputably a pop-culture icon to listeners from my generation, but her relevance to the current crop of millennial consumers is under fire. With "Glory," she has taken time to sincerely craft an album that awakens her potential to reach a new, wider audience. By periodically igniting her own sense of innovation, she can easily defeat the apathy of expectations -- with the power to not only challenge herself but also surprise even her most loyal followers.

Girl Power Rules The Big Screen

Insecure men, beware! Women took charge and wore the pants at the multiplex this summer. Two major comedies featured primarily female casts, and they showed us that there's nothing left to prove when it comes to ladies leading the way.

The reboot of "Ghostbusters," despite what all those immature online haters would have you believe, walks the fine line between nostalgia and reinvention but emerges unscathed. The new movie knows that the 1984 original is by no means broken, so they weren't trying to fix it. Instead, it's a new story with new characters that just happens to incorporate the now-famous ghost-hunting tools without feeling like a lifeless retread. The four leads (Leslie Jones, Melissa McCarthy, Kate McKinnon, and Kristen Wiig) are all perfectly cast, bringing both charisma and depth to these new personalities. This revamped team isn't just female versions of their male counterparts; both the script and the actresses are wise to avoid coasting. By giving them unique qualities and mannerisms, they become well-rounded people and ultimately heroes. In an unexpectedly hilarious supporting turn, Chris Hemsworth threatens to steal the show as the well-meaning but dim-witted receptionist, allowing the movie to make some spirited jabs at onscreen objectification.

Thankfully, the film doesn't ignore its roots, gleefully acknowledging the original entry with plentiful cameos and references to appease those reluctant fans. That said, this is still a different "Ghostbusters" for a different time. A lot has changed in the 30-plus years since the first movie was released, both in filmmaking and in the world at large. This installment's broader humor and reliance on digital effects are clearly compensating for the need to appeal to a much wider audience. I maintain that even having another male-dominated cast would have been met with the same amounts of skepticism, pressure, and expectations. Those involved with the original film couldn't possibly have known right away that it would earn a place in the pop-culture pantheon or become so integral to a whole generation of moviegoers. This time around, the sentimental value places that bar a lot higher, but a genuine reverence for that value is what sets this loving remake apart from the parade of uninspired deja vu that's been plaguing theaters lately.

"Absolutely Fabulous" also has a legacy to preserve, with its own inception going back to its first TV episodes in 1992. Across five seasons and several interim specials, the misadventures of Edina (Jennifer Saunders) and Patsy (Joanna Lumley) have become iconic across multiple demographics. We can all agree that while they're hardly role models, it's refreshing to see two individuals of any gender be so unabashedly human, flaws and all. That's what has kept them relatable and relevant for so long, and the big-screen treatment is very kind to their endearing antics. Saunders and Lumley are as game as ever to revisit this world; their physical embodiment of Edina and Patsy's exasperated quirks and tics, right down to how they walk and carry themselves, is still spot-on and true to their characters. Some of the best punchlines in the film, just like the series, are completely nonverbal and delivered with a perfectly pithy look, gesture, or stance.

Even more impressive is how many others they persuaded to play along after all this time. As a testament to its staying power, the entire cast is on board for the latest outing, including a majority of the recurring guest stars and a veritable who's-who of celebrity cameos. The movie is beautifully shot across many exotic locations (it could easily double as a postcard or tourism brochure for southern France), and there are numerous homages to classic farces like "Some Like It Hot." There's even a chance that the outrageous fashions on and around our ersatz heroines could walk the awards season runway with nominations for costume design. Since the film was written and directed by women and features an entire core cast of women, it may be time to come up with a Bechdel-type test that identifies behind-the-scenes participation in addition to the existing criteria for onscreen representation. It's a brave new world for filmmaking... if the industry can swallow its pride and grow up.

Ironically, "Ghostbusters" had to push forward in spite of the fans, while "Absolutely Fabulous" is an obvious love letter that wouldn't exist without its fans. Yet they're both adaptations of previously existing material, which demonstrates the double-edged sword of fandom in show business. Since both films seem to be launch pads for new franchises, their success shouldn't have to be classified as women playing a men's game. These women -- and in turn, these movies -- are rewriting the rules of the game so that anyone can play, and everyone's invited to the fun. No party-poopers allowed!

Still "Looking" For A Proper Ending

Fans of the two-season run of HBO's acclaimed gay dramedy "Looking" were understandably crushed when it was cancelled in March 2015. The series was an all-too-rare, slice-of-life project that was never as melodramatic as "Queer As Folk" but also never snarky and self-aware enough to be labeled a male variation of network companion "Girls." Instead, the show blazed its own refreshingly honest trail through the frustrations of normalcy -- now that it's "okay" to be gay, what does that look like in everyday life? This unprecedented malaise may have hit too close to home for viewers who came of age (and/or came out) with groundbreaking yet campy fantasias like "Will & Grace."

Naturally, when it was announced that a follow-up movie would address some of the lingering questions that were left unresolved in the show's last episode, no one was sure what direction this next chapter would take. Until history was made just a few months later, when the Supreme Court declared gay marriage legal in all 50 states. A series like "Looking" that had resigned itself and its characters to embattled contentment with the status quo would surely have something to say. On that front, the new installment delivers. Aesthetically speaking, the movie follows in the thematic footsteps of Richard Linklater's superlative "Before" trilogy as well as "Looking" director/co-writer Andrew Haigh's own captivating film "Weekend." Over the course of a few days -- a scant but engrossing 84 minutes of screen time -- we are given intimate access to a series of hilarious, heartfelt, and sometimes harrowing conversations about what love, sex, commitment, and the future really mean in modern culture, in a way that men (gay or straight) are rarely shown discussing with such plausible candor and eloquence.

It's hard to weigh this "Looking" finale as a stand-alone film; admittedly, uninitiated viewers can easily pick up on the dynamics and relationships of all the characters. However, so much happened both offscreen and in the original episodes that the movie -- an extension of those events and their aftermath one year later -- may as well be considered a condensed third season. The movie offers a simple plot with minimal obstacles: main character Patrick (Jonathan Groff) returns to San Francisco for the wedding of his friend Agustin (Frankie Alvarez). Along the way, Patrick is also reunited with friends Dom (Murray Bartlett, finally replacing his oddly attractive mustache with a handsome full beard) and Doris (the endearingly acerbic and criminally overlooked Lauren Weedman).

All of the actors carry over the same level of natural charm and appeal, but with the exception of Groff, they're given surprisingly little to do. Instead, the film functions as a character study revolving around Patrick's search for closure about why he really left and what it would take to bring him back. This disproportionate focus neglects the strengths of the ensemble as well as the individual performers, barely advancing their stories from where we left them at the end of the series. Even the people who represent the loose ends of Patrick's past -- his former boss Kevin (Russell Tovey) and his ex Richie (Raul Castillo) -- simply exist to serve his arc of self-discovery. To call this a more fitting finale than what was previously aired is difficult at best, since the movie concludes just as ambiguously as the show did... and with each character at more or less the same crossroads. As enjoyable as it was to return to these personalities, did I miss something? Besides a few provocative talking points about current events, was it really necessary to revisit the series? Or was this just a well-meaning attempt for HBO to reconcile their guilt over the untimely cancellation?

Intriguingly, the opening and closing shots of the film are of San Francisco itself, reinforcing a notion of setting as character. By bookending "Looking" with these complementary images, perhaps Haigh is acknowledging in his own way that the more things change, the more they stay the same. This final episode/closing chapter/last hurrah may not have contributed as much as expected to its own characters or story, but its broader stance on gay life and love -- in the media and in society at large -- is something worth remembering.