cptgaio

A review that's a bit too brief, but a memorable live experience.

Half disappointment, avoidable track by track.

Each genre has its own parameters, and according to those of this trend, the rating follows accordingly.

You could have added a fifth star, be a little braver ;-)

I do not share the reviewer's opinions. A film that, despite its flaws (forgivable in my view), has become the progenitor of an entire genre should be judged on its own merits based on when and how it was made, and consequently on the impact it had, rather than on technical parameters that only make sense on March 24, 2007; perhaps in ten years they will have a completely different meaning.

Review that could say more, a film that is a masterpiece in its genre.

Beautiful album but not a masterpiece, very nice review.

I'm going with dysgraphia, sorry..

Look, you see, no one was trying to make you marry an idea you don't share, and no one was trying to make you like Oasis; everyone was expressing their opinion. (In my opinion, you took too seriously a discussion that was among enthusiasts.) They were simply defending the dignity of a musical era (the '90s, obviously) that maybe wasn't as seminal as others, but in terms of emotions (and you will agree with me that one can never disregard subjectivity in these cases), in my opinion (and that of many others), it really gave a lot. In music, as in much else, everything is an evolution, and the '90s were part of this journey, contributing to its continuation. Moreover, the same protagonists of those years have shown that their path was marked by figures from the '60s and '70s. (My favorite artists, Tori Amos and Tool, both cite Led Zeppelin as their major source of inspiration, but one cannot say that they embarked on the same musical discourse relating to them and their "masters," for example.) And after 10, 15 years, "imitators" of "imitators" (forgive the term) are emerging who will develop different ideas. You shouldn't see musical history (and indirectly general history) as a series of big bangs that generated everything else, but as a continuous evolution. After all, the rock of the '60s and '70s derives from that of the '50s, which in turn comes from the blues, etc., etc. It's hard to say what has been more fundamental (those who try often fall into ridicule). I'll say a cliché, but nothing is created and nothing is destroyed; everything is transformed. It's up to individual tastes to choose their own path; that's all there is to it. Take care!

Great film "Don't Torture a Duckling," there's no arguing about that, and Fulci and Bava are two geniuses. Argento, in my opinion, is the classic example of a student who has surpassed his masters (masters in this case).