47

good review, I have never listened to traffic. since we’re talking about ondarock, I would say it’s an excellent site for reviews and monographs, with peaks of excellence like the one for lou reed. the fact that metal is somewhat neglected (but not too much) is compensated by the numerous pages dedicated to those absolutely seminal artists, even if they are far from the charts. as a music information site, I find it excellent, and the ratings are what they are, and everyone can form their own opinion on albums that might be slaughtered. as for the megadeth, I would say that ondarock can be considered on par with the Gospel. few of the things written are, in my opinion, disagreeable..

Yeah, it seems that it's precisely the nerds who didn't like it..

@grant: but weren't they Blur and Radiohead?

The review is really excellent, and out of curiosity, I will probably also lend an ear to this album, something I don't think I would have ever done ;) In any case, I always have the impression that when we talk about "innovations" in these cases, it only refers to a very narrow universe (if not even the coldplay-universe) and that in reality, everything boils down to some slightly more refined sound. As for talent in this group, from what I've heard, I haven't seen any, and like blackdog, I find them decidedly too "bourgeois." Anyway, best regards.

wolf85: oh yes, so you think that here we are judged by preconceived notions? I watched the film with no expectations whatsoever, but it's the film's foundational structure that falls apart, with a plot that starts from interesting intentions, which however are poorly developed and too often aim to reach "the right compromise," resulting in a film that, in terms of expressive style, is as uniform as possible with contemporary releases; always and in any case reassuring the bourgeois viewer, forgetting that it's possible to make people laugh or excite with intelligence as well. (but I would direct this "critique of the target" more at Lucas than others) The problem is also that often sequels fall into that category of films "in high demand," desired by the market before the authors. When there's not a story of Indiana Jones, but a story is pulled out of the hat FOR Indiana Jones(R), which becomes just another appealing character. Luckily, I still have 007...

very beautiful

I think exactly like Fujiki about Harrison Ford, an innocent "bystander" to the mess they’ve created around him.. but the lines, especially in the second half, are bland and insignificant..

Certo! Inviami il testo e procederò con la traduzione.

I won’t cling to the classic argument that quoting is a sign of a lack of ideas. The references in the film are not hard to grasp; they’re thrown in the viewer's face throughout the entire duration of the movie. Sometimes the trick works (and nostalgically, a tear falls), but often you turn away embarrassed, hoping to forget the little "episode" and appreciate what remains of the film. The movie, which for the first half is quite enjoyable, creates an atmosphere from the "post-myth" situation that is exactly what I wanted from the directing duo. The thing is, inspiration here is in short supply, and the rest is reduced to expressionless montages of useless and uninspiring scenes, lacking even the continuity that was present before, merely coldly resurrecting the current Hollywood relic. (I couldn't care less if the jungle chase scene directly references Episode 6 of Star Wars; it remains boring and out of context.) In short, what you don’t understand is truly significant, especially if you consider yourself a proponent of film culture in this depage (something I absolutely don’t claim to be, but it takes just a smidge of critical sense). Ultimately, they’ve simply put up an old tent, but the colors are now faded, the fabric is torn and worn out, and they think they can resort to some tricks that should be “romantically” rejected. (the ufos)

it's surprising that Percy hasn't shown up yet...