They weren’t from Detroit. That’s probably the first thing to know. In the tradition of the Five Chinese Brothers, who were neither Chinese nor brothers, we have the Detroit Emeralds. The four brothers who formed the lineup were from Little Rock. Ivory, Abrim, Cleophus, and Raymond Tilmon called themselves the Emeralds at first. When Cleophus and Raymond left the group, a childhood friend named James Mitchell joined and the trio moved to Detroit. There they became the Detroit Emeralds.

In 1968 the group signed with Ric-Tic Records and it was there that they had their first R&B hit “Show Time.” Two years later the Emeralds were recording for another Detroit label, Westbound. They were on tour in Memphis when they recorded some demos at Willie Mitchell’s Hi Recording Studios. With basic tracks recorded by the hit-making Hi Rhythm Section, the Emeralds returned to Detroit where they added vocals, horns, and strings to the tracks. All of the tracks were written by Abrim Tilmon.

The Memphis sessions with the Detroit overdubs resulted in several hits for the Emeralds including “If I Lose Your Love,” “Do Me Right,” “You Want It, You Got It,” and “Baby Let Me Take You (In My Arms).” Each of the singles was a Top 10 R&B hit and “Baby Let Me Take You (In My Arms)” did even better, crossing over to Pop success at #24 on the Billboard Hot 100 in 1972. Even with all of that success, the best was yet to come for the Detroit Emeralds.

“Feel the Need In Me” was not their biggest hit but it is without question the song for which the Detroit Emeralds are most remembered. It reached #22 on the R&B chart in 1973 and it was a Top 5 single in the U.K. Unfortunately, the success brought problems and by the following year, things were not looking good for the Detroit Emeralds.

It’s never a good sign when two groups are touring with the same name, and by 1974 there were Detroit Emeralds led by Abrim Tilmon and another group by the same name that included James Mitchell and Ivory Tilmon. There was a coalescing of the groups in 1977 when Abrim joined Ivory and James Mitchell for a reunion tour. Talks were taking place with an eye toward another reunion tour when Abrim Tilmon died suddenly in 1982 from a heart attack. He was only 37 years-old. Mitchell, Ivory Tilmon, and Marvin Willis continued to tour the club circuit as the Detroit Emeralds for several years.

“Feel the Need In Me” has been covered several times over the years including versions by Graham Central Station and Bryan Ferry. Other Emeralds’ songs have been sampled by artists including Nas, Raekwon, Limp Bizkit, Kendrick Lamar, De La Soul, Method Man, and J Dilla.

This tenth (!) album from Michigan native May Erlewine isn’t (as one might guess) something you would usually find on my playlist, but every now and then, a welcome change is needed and you have to get out of the wheelhouse.  Two years in the making, Ms. Erlewine put a lot of heart, soul and thought into this collection of songs; it is, indeed, different than what I tend to musically ingest but there’s a lot of warmth here to make me enjoy it in a proper, organic fashion.  And I can appreciate the fact that Ms. Erlewine is a member of the Earthwork Music Collective, a group of independent artists who share resources and talents to raise both community and self-awareness, along with facilitating and encouraging original music in the state of Michigan.  It’s a positive thing – to see a musician who acts as part of a greater whole.  And if that isn’t enough, she also fronts a seven-piece band called The Motivations, so it’s a sure bet her energies know no bounds.

Nonetheless, Mother Lion is the focus here; opening with “Wild”, which is a sweet and soft piece.  Ms. Erlewine’s voice is instantly soothing and the melody is rich and haunting; “Hurricane” is a semi-country shuffle with tight, multilayered harmonies and some very tasteful guitar fills.  One immediate production note is that Ms. Erlewine’s vocals are dry; it works with these songs and don’t need any kind of treatment with effects.  “Fine Line” is a simple, direct number with an interesting drum pattern and a powerful message in the lyrics.  “Never One Thing” has the markings of a “single” – while this isn’t lightweight, pop fluff, you can imagine hearing this on radio; the guitar figures on “Paint The Town” are quiet and subdued and along with the vocals, keeps this song from any kind of dramatic build-up; only towards the latter part of the song does there come a piano and bass with some very light percussive flourishes – possibly the album’s standout track.  And the beauty of “Your Heart” is a perfect way to close the album; again, sweetness prevails along with harmonies, melody and precision – all tastefully understated and uplifiting.

For someone who now has ten albums to her credit, it seems May Erlewine still has a drive; a desire to paint her songs with full color.  The passion she has for her songs are clearly conveyed in listening, because this album has a lot of heart and it succeeds in making you feel.

RECOMMENDED

Mother Lion is currently available

http://mayerlewine.com/#/player1?catid=0&trackid=0

Ridley Scott is unusual amongst A-list directors. He has several classics to his name, but is still not mentioned in the same breath as directors like Steven Spielberg or James Cameron. They are household names while Scott still feels like he has to prove himself to his audience.

This may be because for every great film he directed (Alien, Blade Runner, Thelma & Louise, Gladiator) he made a lot of clunkers (1492, Robin Hood, Prometheus, Exodus: Gods and Kings). Scott has also never developed his own style as a filmmaker. His films could pass as any other director’s work. Scott leaps from genre to genre with no trouble. This is certainly a sign of strength with certain filmmakers, but Scott started doing it before audiences understood what sort of films he would make.

But what could that style have looked like? Scott famously started as a TV commercial director, but his first feature film The Duellists has been largely forgotten. That’s unusual, considering how highly praised The Duellists was when it was initially released.  It premiered at Cannes in 1977, won the Best Debut Award, and still has a 91 percent “freshness” rating on Rotten Tomatoes. But everyone immediately jumps to Alien when discussing Scott’s career. It’s easy to understand why – Alien is a genre defining classic – but it means that people are not getting the full picture of Ridley Scott’s filmography.

So what is The Duellists? It’s a film based on a Joseph Conrad story about two French officers that wage a duel that lasts from 1800 to 1815. Feraud (Harvey Keitel) is a proud man that gets involved in a duel with a mayor’s nephew. When d’Hubert (Keith Carradine), is ordered to arrest Feraud, he is challenged to a duel himself. This duel creates a Valjean/Javert level of rivalry as both men constantly fight over some vague sense of honor.

Ridley Scott has long been an admirer of Stanley Kubrick and borrowed many of Kubrick’s ideas for The Duellists. Most notably, the film was released a mere two years after Barry Lyndon and Scott was obviously impressed by the grand scale Kubrick created. But Scott didn’t copy Kubrick exactly – there’s artificial lighting, quick cutting, and the actors are use the original accents. (Why Keitel thought acting like a Scorsese tough guy in Napoleonic France is an acting decision I’ll never understand.) This makes sense – Barry Lyndon was an arduous shoot that no studio would let a first time director replicate. But considering how much attention Scott calls to Kubrick, these shortcuts stick out more. Barry Lyndon still looks like a documentary shot in the 18th century by a time traveler. The Duellists looks like a late studio epic, e.g., actors running around pretty scenery wearing faces that suggest really itchy costumes.

There are some great moments in the film. My favorite was the scene in which Feraud and d’Hubert end up in Napoleon’s disastrous Russian invasion. Feraud walks around seeing frozen corpses, worrying about his fate. It’s also the one time the two put their duel on hold in order to defeat the Russian soldiers that have found them. But what impressed me was the fact that these Russian scenes were sort of a dry run for the LV-426 scenes in Alien. They have the same effect of create a desolate atmosphere that made me care about the characters. It also added a deeper significance to their duels. These are proud men, yes, but not so proud that they cannot find common enemies that they can defeat. Nor do they necessarily hate each other. It’s more about the chase.

Yet I didn’t care about the characters or their fights, mostly because they seemed indifferent as well. The only time they insult each other is when they question the other’s loyalty to Napoleon. The fights seem mechanical and the characters act like they need to fight them because the script requires them to more than because they want to.

Think about the final duel in Barry Lyndon. The entire film had been building up to that moment and we understood why the characters hated each other. It was a dramatic moment that brought some resolution to Lord Bullingdon and Barry Lyndon.  I was missing that emotional connection as I watched Feraud and d’Hubert duel. I wish at least one of them could acknowledge the fact that their situation is absurd. The final duel plays like an 18^th century John Woo bullet opera, with both characters trying in vain to locate their other in a forest. The “victor” remains ambiguous at the end, and honestly I felt the wrong character was punished for their obsession.

That’s not to say The Duellists is entirely bad. In fact, Scott used this film to showcase what he learned directing TV commercials. One of the duels uses quick cuts, as we jump from two people on horseback to an early duel that focuses on the character’s emotions. It’s a very effective scene that’s not only exciting but adds some character development to the action scenes. This is something Scott demonstrated he was very good at with Blade Runner and Gladiator. The film was also ambitious for a first timer. Scott used the modern Hollywood techniques to invert the Hollywood epic, just as much as Kubrick played it straight to make the same joke. We’re meant to think this is a play but that the themes of obsession and a faux idea of honor still resonated in the modern world, particularly as it was released so close to the collapse of the Nixon administration. I may think the characters are ridiculous, but maybe I’m supposed to take a look at the modern political world and learn the same thing. I don’t know – it would explain the disconnect I have from the characters. Scott is obviously a smart filmmaker and that intelligence was on display in his first film.

The Duellists fits perfectly into Ridley Scott’s filmography. It’s an exploration of a different director’s style and shows what a chameleon Scott is. Filmakers usually start with something that they have been obsessed with since their youth. The reason The Duellists has largely been forgotten is because it doesn’t conform to that trend. Scott wanted to take a fairly recent film and basically remake it just to show that he could. I found myself comparing it to other, better works even as I recognized the skill Scott had out of the gate. Ridley Scott didn’t really get to explore his own obsessions until Alien. Like all not so famous firsts, it’s a wonderful curiosity, but there’s a reason Ridley Scott is better remembered for other films.

Ridley Scott is unusual amongst A-list directors. He has several classics to his name, but is still not mentioned in the same breath as directors like Steven Spielberg or James Cameron. They are household names while Scott still feels like he has to prove himself to his audience.

This may be because for every great film he directed (Alien, Blade Runner, Thelma & Louise, Gladiator) he made a lot of clunkers (1492, Robin Hood, Prometheus, Exodus: Gods and Kings). Scott has also never developed his own style as a filmmaker. His films could pass as any other director’s work. Scott leaps from genre to genre with no trouble. This is certainly a sign of strength with certain filmmakers, but Scott started doing it before audiences understood what sort of films he would make.

But what could that style have looked like? Scott famously started as a TV commercial director, but his first feature film The Duelists has been largely forgotten. That’s unusual, considering how highly praised The Duelists was when it was initially released.  It premiered at Cannes in 1977, won the Best Debut Award, and still has a 91 percent “freshness” rating on Rotten Tomatoes. But everyone immediately jumps to Alien when discussing Scott’s career. It’s easy to understand why – Alien is a genre defining classic – but it means that people are not getting the full picture of Ridley Scott’s filmography.

So what is The Duelists? It’s a film based on a Joseph Conrad story about two French officers that wage a duel that lasts from 1800 to 1815. Feraud (Harvey Keitel) is a proud man that gets involved in a duel with a mayor’s nephew. When d’Hubert (Keith Carradine), is ordered to arrest Feraud, he is challenged to a duel himself. This duel creates a Valjean/Javert level of rivalry as both men constantly fight over some vague sense of honor.

Ridley Scott has long been an admirer of Stanley Kubrick and borrowed many of Kubrick’s ideas for The Duelists. Most notably, the film was released a mere two years after Barry Lyndon and Scott was obviously impressed by the grand scale Kubrick created. But Scott didn’t copy Kubrick exactly – there’s artificial lighting, quick cutting, and the actors are use the original accents. (Why Keitel thought acting like a Scorsese tough guy in Napoleonic France is an acting decision I’ll never understand.) This makes sense – Barry Lyndon was an arduous shoot that no studio would let a first time director replicate. But considering how much attention Scott calls to Kubrick, these shortcuts stick out more. Barry Lyndon still looks like a documentary shot in the 18^th century by a time traveler. The Duelists looks like a late studio epic – ie. Actors running around pretty scenery wearing faces that suggest really itchy costumes.

There are some great moments in the film. My favorite was the scene in which Feraud and d’Hubert end up in Napoleon’s disastrous Russian invasion. Feraud walks around seeing frozen corpses, worrying about his fate. It’s also the one time the two put their duel on hold in order to defeat the Russian soldiers that have found them. But what impressed me was the fact that these Russian scenes were sort of a dry run for the LV-426 scenes in Alien. They have the same effect of create a desolate atmosphere that made me care about the characters. It also added a deeper significance to their duels. These are proud men, yes, but not so proud that they cannot find common enemies that they can defeat. Nor do they necessarily hate each other. It’s more about the chase.

Yet I didn’t care about the characters or their fights, mostly because they seemed indifferent as well. The only time they insult each other is when they question the other’s loyalty to Napoleon. The fights seem mechanical and the characters act like they need to fight them because the script requires them to more than because they want to.

Think about the final duel in Barry Lyndon. The entire film had been building up to that moment and we understood why the characters hated each other. It was a dramatic moment that brought some resolution to Lord Bullingdon and Barry Lyndon.  I was missing that emotional connection as I watched Feraud and d’Hubert duel. I wish at least one of them could acknowledge the fact that their situation is absurd. The final duel plays like an 18^th century John Woo bullet opera, with both characters trying in vain to locate their other in a forest. The “victor” remains ambiguous at the end, and honestly I felt the wrong character was punished for their obsession.

That’s not to say The Duelists is entirely bad. In fact, Scott used this film to showcase what he learned directing TV commercials. One of the duels uses quick cuts, as we jump from two people on horseback to an early duel that focuses on the character’s emotions. It’s a very effective scene that’s not only exciting but adds some character development to the action scenes. This is something Scott demonstrated he was very good at with Blade Runner and Gladiator. The film was also ambitious for a first timer. Scott used the modern Hollywood techniques to invert the Hollywood epic, just as much as Kubrick played it straight to make the same joke. We’re meant to think this is a play but that the themes of obsession and a faux idea of honor still resonated in the modern world, particularly as it was released so close to the collapse of the Nixon administration. I may think the characters are ridiculous, but maybe I’m supposed to take a look at the modern political world and learn the same thing. I don’t know – it would explain the disconnect I have from the characters. Scott is obviously a smart filmmaker and that intelligence was on display in his first film.

The Duelists fits perfectly into Ridley Scott’s filmography. It’s an exploration of a different director’s style and shows what a chameleon Scott is. Filmakers usually start with something that they have been obsessed with since their youth. The reason The Duelists has largely been forgotten is because it doesn’t conform to that trend. Scott wanted to take a fairly recent film and basically remake it just to show that he could. I found myself comparing it to other, better works even as I recognized the skill Scott had out of the gate. Ridley Scott didn’t really get to explore his own obsessions until Alien. Like all not so famous firsts, it’s a wonderful curiosity, but there’s a reason Ridley Scott is better remembered for other films.