Hetzer

Great film.. Crisp, measured, well acted.. It evokes a new atmosphere for movies of this genre, and it’s also very believable.. There are a couple of really cool scenes (the view from above of the Mayan pyramids is beautiful..) and a conclusion fitting for the context.. A must-see and to be appreciated..

To a laborious structure, rich in stories within the story, with slower passages and backward temporal shifts, as in "The Call Of Cthulhu," corresponds a captivating, elegant style, sometimes aseptic and other times captivated by total fantastic visions. And it is precisely this dense structure, at times laborious and sometimes rigid, that creates this dichotomy typical of Lovecraft's style. It is also what has contributed to his success.

"It’s a heavy read." For you it’s heavy, but the review doesn’t say it is. You find it heavy and that’s your colossal problem, but the review, contrary to what you claim, doesn’t say anything of the sort. I repeat, and I certainly won’t tire of doing so, that you have distorted my words, twisted the meaning of my description, and attributed to me nonsense that I never even thought. Why you did this remains a mystery, and so do your problems. But the reality is that you’ve created a ridiculous circus of insults and pitiful justifications just to avoid admitting you misinterpreted what I wrote. You are pathetic, truly pathetic, as well as very rude.

Let's go in order: "I said that, as the review states, I found the reading heavy; it's the opposite, you idiot!" At your (supposed) age, you should know that changing the order of factors doesn't change the result. God knows the difference between what I wrote and what you wrote.
You're a coprophage because you constantly fill your mouth with your own shit. At least I had the decency not to bring up parents and personal insults. But I understand that you're desperate and do everything to insult me, so go ahead and do your worst.
"(the style is the beautiful one of mine, you can't change a person's style, and it’s called a cycle not by chance, it's not just a matter of reported events)".. It makes me want to laugh; such a sentence is simply the result of ignorance and should be ignored. Zero arguments, insulting arrogance, and random judgments thrown out 100%: this is the style of nes..
"I said that sixty years ago it probably wouldn't have felt heavy, but today, as the review states, it's a tiring read," the review doesn’t say it's a tiring read and, by the way, it talks about the story "The Call Of Cthulhu," while your comment refers to the cycle. In short, we're talking about different things. How can the review refer to the cycle when it clearly mentions the story? Stop playing the game of "after all, the style is all the same," it's such a ridiculous and ignorant argument that it’s just pitiful. You don't even remember what the hell you've read from HPL, and you don't know what you're talking about. You've admitted it yourself, so if you're an adult and honest with yourself, you should stop throwing around judgments about things you don't understand.
"Not answering one question out of 100?" I responded, what are you waiting for? Why do you first come and tell me that the structure corresponds to the style and then tell me that the structure is part of the style? If a concept (that of structure) IS PART of another broader concept (that of style), how can you claim that a tiring structure means a tiring style?
"tiring structure" = "tiring style".. It’s exactly like saying “tiring structure = heavy structure.” You consider them synonyms. Your sentence “if you say the style is tiring, I repeat, you are saying it's a demanding read, therefore heavy”.. But I'm talking about structure, not style. How is it possible for you to change a word at will? Ah yes, it's called mystification.
“uphill road on a bike = sweat”.. What does it have to do with anything? Here the elements are three: uphill road + bike = sweat. And then, does the uphill road belong to the bike? Or does the sweat belong to the uphill road? These are not concepts that fit within each other.. The structure, however, is part (since you don't get it, let me announce that it is part along with other elements, logically different from the structure..) of the style.. as you have reiterated.. Maybe you go uphill with the bike stuck up your ass, and so you sweat with the bike being part of you? I'd say no, at least I hope so.. So what the hell does your example have to do with it?

To you, to this sad clown, to his record and to the review... with affection..

Five balls just for the first paragraph...

Simply a spine-chilling record... Even the review is spine-chilling; in a terrible way though..

Well, Venditti has always seemed like a big idiot to me and, all in all, quite mediocre.. Then the fact that the bleating "Alta Marea" is one of his most famous songs is a bit sad.. Poor Craudid Aus.. Exhaustive review, but cumbersome and limping; the pseudo-nostalgic introduction, however, is quite pleasant in its absurdity, even though you forgot to remind us of the death of Freddy Mercury, the tragedy of the Moby Prince, the discovery of the Similaun, the birth of the PDS and the Internet, and some other minor events..

Hardcore? A sense of revenge/anger towards today's society?? God save me from that! But I have to say, beautiful cover!!