cptgaio

Well, having watched it tonight, I can pass on my comments: I'll do a bit of spam and post this comment on all 4 reviews because the reviews I had read when they first appeared on HP all appealed to me because (and this is a rare occurrence) they expressed more or less the same overall judgment on the film but arrived at it through different paths, each according to the different sensitivity of the reviewer, and this shows, besides critical sense, also considerable objectivity on everyone’s part: well done! That said, I have to say that there is one in particular that I liked more from a "style" perspective (and I won't tell you which one it is, not even under torture...) but since it was not easy at all to review this film (due to the legacy of the comic and the expectations), I think you all showed courage and deserve the highest praise: therefore, I don't care if I come across as a sycophant, but I give the highest rating to everyone. [continues]

Moving on to the film, I must first make some fundamental considerations about the director: I see negative comments about Snyder, and I must say I find them quite unfair because, regardless of whether you like "300" or not (for example, I didn’t mind it at all as an aesthetic experience; of course, the story is what it is, but one could blame Miller for that), it must be acknowledged that he has a tremendous merit, which is that it is probably the most faithful cinematic adaptation (along with "Sin City") of a comic book ever. Furthermore, Snyder is far from inadequate when it comes to recreating certain "comic-like" settings on celluloid. If we talk about this particular film, I must say that the final impression is necessarily positive, first of all because, while it’s true that there had to be cuts (on supporting characters, on certain interpretations of metafiction, on the story within the story represented by "I Racconti del Vascello Nero," etc., etc.), these were inevitable to condense something potentially unimaginable into two and a half cinematic hours. That said, the underlying atmospheres, certain characterizations, and the use of flashbacks are done quite faithfully, and even the much-criticized ending, while different, doesn’t fundamentally distort the meaning. If I then consider the film independently from the comic, I must say that from a visual standpoint, I was pleasantly impressed. It would be a 3, but I’m giving it a 4 because there are also some gems that I think will remain in memory for a long time: one of them is the wonderful opening credits. I apologize for the spam and verbosity and greet everyone. Bye.

Well, having watched it tonight, I can pass on my comments: I'll do a bit of spam and post this comment on all 4 reviews because the reviews I had read when they first appeared on HP all appealed to me because (and this is a rare occurrence) they expressed more or less the same overall judgment on the film but arrived at it through different paths, each according to the different sensitivity of the reviewer, and this shows, besides critical sense, also considerable objectivity on everyone’s part: well done! That said, I have to say that there is one in particular that I liked more from a "style" perspective (and I won't tell you which one it is, not even under torture...) but since it was not easy at all to review this film (due to the legacy of the comic and the expectations), I think you all showed courage and deserve the highest praise: therefore, I don't care if I come across as a sycophant, but I give the highest rating to everyone. [continues]

Moving on to the film, I must first make some fundamental considerations about the director: I see negative comments about Snyder, and I must say I find them quite unfair because, regardless of whether you like "300" or not (for example, I didn’t mind it at all as an aesthetic experience; of course, the story is what it is, but one could blame Miller for that), it must be acknowledged that he has a tremendous merit, which is that it is probably the most faithful cinematic adaptation (along with "Sin City") of a comic book ever. Furthermore, Snyder is far from inadequate when it comes to recreating certain "comic-like" settings on celluloid. If we talk about this particular film, I must say that the final impression is necessarily positive, first of all because, while it’s true that there had to be cuts (on supporting characters, on certain interpretations of metafiction, on the story within the story represented by "I Racconti del Vascello Nero," etc., etc.), these were inevitable to condense something potentially unimaginable into two and a half cinematic hours. That said, the underlying atmospheres, certain characterizations, and the use of flashbacks are done quite faithfully, and even the much-criticized ending, while different, doesn’t fundamentally distort the meaning. If I then consider the film independently from the comic, I must say that from a visual standpoint, I was pleasantly impressed. It would be a 3, but I’m giving it a 4 because there are also some gems that I think will remain in memory for a long time: one of them is the wonderful opening credits. I apologize for the spam and verbosity and greet everyone. Bye.

So I saw it tonight and I can go ahead and comment: I will do a bit of spam and post this comment on all 4 reviews because the reviews, which I had read when they first appeared in HP, I liked all of them because (and it's a rare thing) they expressed more or less the same fundamental judgment about the film, but they approached it in different ways, each depending on the different sensitivity of the reviewer, and this shows, besides critical sense, also a remarkable objectivity from everyone: well done! That said, I must say there is one in particular that I liked more from a "formal" point of view (and I won't tell you which it is even under torture...) but since it was by no means easy to review this film (due to the legacy of the comic and the expectations), I think you all showed courage and deserve the highest praise: so I don't care if I might come across as a sycophant, but I'm giving the maximum to everyone. [continues]

@Gnagnera: you are right, but you make a fundamental mistake ;-): you reason with your own head as a deep connoisseur of Italian indie (or at least non-mainstream) music; this compilation tries to reach another type of target, namely people who not only know the great bands you mention but probably don’t even know that Morgan played in a band called Bluvertigo and only know him as a television personality and/or as the ex-partner of Argento, just to provoke a bit. So I believe that, for now, the attempt to stir the waters (which will probably fail) is worth appreciating, and who knows, maybe one day we can also give space to other names, like the ones you mention. Then regarding the magazines, we need to specify which ones you mean because it depends on the target; for example, there’s a slight difference between Xl and Tv Sorrisi e Canzoni, and I doubt many of the names in the compilation have appeared in the latter. If we go to more “specialized” print, they certainly appear, but I have also seen the ones you mention. As for radio, I completely agree: the names that keep circulating (but only in pop and rock music, as in other artistic fields and/or information, and I’m not only talking about music, there are really valid programs) are always the same, but I think it's more about incompetence and a lack of commitment rather than bad faith. As for the music supermarkets, since I don't frequent them, I trust your words :-D. I greet Sid and Gustavo and I won't intrude into their debate because they are talking about groups that I don't exactly adore, and therefore I would be a bit "unobjective" ;-)

I thank you all for the warm welcome and the nice comments. Regarding the issues raised, trying to be brief for once... Sid, no te preocupe, I understood that you were being ironic and I don’t think you’re a fool ;-): @4urelio: degustibus, indeed! @Pixies: the point you bring up is interesting: it’s true that Rock as a genre sells little in Italy, but honestly, it doesn’t seem to me that there’s all this buzz to bring out the Italian (indie) scene: I remember a few compilations in the '90s from Mescal but nothing more, this seems to be the first initiative that’s emerged after a long time. That’s also why I appreciate it. @Gustavo: well, Baustelle can be comfortably defined as mainstream, in the literal and not offensive sense, from my perspective. @Bisius: welcome back! I don’t know that MP song, I’ll look it up and let you know my opinion. @HB: oh my, Borromeo singing Prozac…poor Prozac ;-) @Virtual: You know, I had to listen to it three or four times to understand them all; for example, I didn’t like the Zen Circus song at first, but now it’s one of my favorites, and the one from Zu initially left me perplexed, but now I love it. Maybe in a while my opinion will change again, but yes, I recommend you spend a little more time on it :-D @Gnagnera: as mentioned, the Artistic Director is Agnelli, and from what I understand, justifiably since I believe he also contributed to the expenses, the choices were made by him: I understand what you’re saying, and you mention names that are indeed quite ghettoized, but I also believe that many names appearing here have their first real opportunity to be visible. Regarding the "friends of friends" discourse, I prefer to be optimistic and hope that the good Agnelli, for the good I wish him, isn’t like that, but it does seem more than plausible that he also has his preferences (as he certainly did back in the Tora Tora days) but I trust it’s only "preferences" and nothing more! Thank you again, everyone!

Deny you? Not even for a moment! ;-)

"Think that I'm now getting a bad reputation as the pig user of the site." Bad? ;-)

But I take that for granted: "putting oneself on display" can be done for money, but also to convey a message. However, the point is that if you can't support yourself with your art, sooner or later you will be forced to either sell it cheap or dedicate yourself to something else. There are those who manage to make a living while remaining absolutely aloof from any commercial logic, and that's true, but they are (rare) exceptions and should be considered as such: beautiful, romantic (in the poetic sense of the term), etc., etc., but exceptions that are often determined by luck and the circumstances of life. The long-term discussion remains the same: the limit of how "ethically" correct it is to push boundaries with commercial logic changes from person to person, from user to user, and from audience member to audience member (obviously there are distinctions here too: Britney Spears is an outlier, for example). It varies according to personal experiences, tastes, and, why not, even a certain disillusionment perhaps (provoked by age: if not chronological, then "cerebral"?). Thus, from my point of view, the parameters I use to evaluate the boundaries are generally, aside from the "civic" ones (it's obvious that a song glorifying racial hatred will be hated by me regardless of the music), primarily musical. To the question "Do you think the groups featured in this compilation, at least those you already knew, have changed something in their sound to be more 'accessible'?" the answer is no. After considering all these thoughts, my conclusion is that this is a commercial operation (because all possible means are used to make it known), but overall it carries a high artistic dignity and a fairly noble purpose, so I can somewhat turn a blind eye to Sanremo, XL, and various amusements. I hope I've been clear enough in expressing my idea ;-)