vellutogrigio

Congratulations! Can you explain how you managed to get this music in 1976?!? I quote Muitosaudosismo on the cinematic value of the review.

It is advisable to read this review in conjunction with: Raffaele e le anime nere di Verona educazione di un neonazista - cronaca - Repubblica.it

@Punisher, after 96 reviews on Debaser, the fact that what I write cannot be my own work offends me... ; @everyone else: thank you for the feedback, especially thanks LaRock... watch this movie and you won't be disappointed.

Count, I don't know if you are me (I'm confused). However, I'm not Il_Paolo (unless I'm getting mixed up): the attempt by Poletti to discredit me is evident, due to the old grudges related to the value he attributes to Fellini, which I do not.

Pole-tti, not to polemicize, but as you teach me, the data regarding the location from which one writes here are confidential. As for the rest, I don't even want to engage, leaving room for the directly interested parties (who will be balanced enough to let you go).

Fake, non fake, I don’t care.

There is always one thing that is proof against fakes: the writing style, behind which, obviously, lies the spirit of the person behind each nickname. With all due respect to Contemplazione, Il_Paolo's has a different rhythm.

I'm annoyed to defend Il_Paolo, who perhaps relies too heavily on his mission and remains serenely observant. However, I believe I interpret his thinking well if I observe that in Contemplazione and Psyco there is the idea that reviews should focus solely on films of a certain value and merit (Fellini, Welles, etc.). Regarding which, commentators can only agree or disagree, exercising the art of interpretation on works rich in significants. But then one could flip the question and ask: are the works reviewed by Il_Paolo insignificant? I don't believe that at all, as: a) the meaning of the work is conferred by the viewer, not by the work itself, which is merely an object of knowledge; b) those who follow the thesis of Contemplazione and Psycho are essentially in the position of someone who, by overvaluing the object of knowledge, undervalues the subject who knows, consumes, reviews, and comments; c) to prove my point, read Il_Paolo's reviews, but especially the comments they have stimulated, the feelings they have evoked in some readers. There are those who laugh, those who think, those who mock, those who reflect, and those who debate. Starting from Romina & Al Bano, we ended up talking about Borges and Russian writers, precisely because the act of knowledge, individual and subjective, can ignite a thousand relationships, a thousand suggestions. This, in the end, is the beauty of life, and, in a small way, also of this collection of reviews.

Good job!

I don't see these big problems if less than 1% of the reviews on Debaser are dedicated to the themes it deals with - with outcomes that may be debatable but always with respect - Il_Paolo. Every now and then I take the trouble to read the comments below his writings, noticing, with surprise but also with pleasure, that the debates raised by the examination of films and music are not trivial at all. Therefore, if the Vanzina brothers are the pretext to say something intelligent, or even for five minutes of fun, I truly don't understand the issue raised by various Poletti & Co. It remains that both Vanzina and Fellini are expressions of this world.