azzo

I thank everyone who stopped by, including dissenters like Dj Mushroom and Jackas. Everyone has their opinions. I must say I mostly agree with 47. The last album seems quite easily digestible, to the point that it becomes tiring quickly (I, by the way, have listened to it loads of times). It’s true that Radiohead are a very cerebral group (forgive the horrible pun), everything is probably reconsidered thousands of times, which is why the last album contains many tracks that Radiohead had been holding on to for years. It seems to me, though I could be wrong, that a tremendous amount of work was done in terms of refining, and this, as I also mentioned in the review, is also for the sake of a simple live reproducibility of the pieces. They still move me, though. I do believe they're still a pop band (I had already stated this in the posts about In Rainbows, when there was someone talking about psychedelia?!!), a pop completely different from the early albums, but that’s also thanks to God. The last one seems to be their seventh studio album, if they were still at the sounds of The Bends it would have been a deadly bore. Anyway, after the break of Kid A and Amnesiac, I repeat, it seems to me they have returned very pop (besides Drake, there are pieces that, for example, remind me of the Beatles). No wonder they suck at Neu.:-)

Well, you know, despite some people here saying they are snobbish, arrogant, etc., the greatness of Radiohead seems to me to lie precisely in humility. As I also mention in the review, it’s about feeling important while knowing that others are nonetheless necessary. Otherwise, Yorke would have left a long time ago (ironically, I don’t know if it was him or someone else who said that he, within the group, is like the U.S.A. within the U.N.). And Greenwood, who is a really interesting guitarist, often takes on tasks that are sometimes merely supportive (I could be there too). What I’ve always thought a band needs to function: try to limit the ego; what matters is the result.

First of all, thank you Super for opening the debate :-). Of course, I raise questions, not axioms. In fact, worse still, just feelings. For me, that David Byrne is already the end of Talking Heads, because beyond Remain in Light, there's nowhere else to go. The resonances are there, but you, I see, are not a Radioheadologist, between good Thom and good David. In other words, what is the meaning of Radiohead after Yorke's solo album? If they still have a meaning, it’s that the last Radiohead album is very similar to Yorke's album, but better. And indeed, Byrne alone has never produced an album better than the Heads. So I close the loop by saying that, it seems to me, in the end, we agree.

A review that is nothing short of sumptuous. But the film didn’t blow me away. Let’s say (I sound like D'Alema), just a bit pointless? I’ll give it a 3, but it’s really a 2.5.

@Isi, I really didn't spend the night on the computer... I simply connected to radiohead.tv at one o'clock instead of continuing to listen to CDs (it was midnight in England). Today, however, between rewatching it, writing the review, and sending you my best wishes, I actually spent the afternoon on the computer. :)). @Ole: always too kind, your page the other day was better. I reiterate, to raise the bar a bit, keep writing reviews. Even of bands that probably suck to me. :-).

Hello everyone. Editors are hard at work on the first of the year like yours truly: they published it in about an hour...:-). Just to let you know that if you want to see it, it's still online at www.current.com. I caught it live, in bits and pieces, between drinks, last night on radiohead.tv, then a couple of times during the day on the site I mentioned.

I join Odra, welcome back Kyrie and thank you for this year-end gift. It must be said, you know it, but many do not, and in fact Battiato plays, avoiding the citation of sources, on the common ignorance that "The encounter between an umbrella and a sewing machine on an operating table" is Lautréamont, referenced by Brèton. Just to give credit where it’s due. And because in the world there are true artists, intellectuals, etc. and fake artists, intellectuals, etc. of which our Sicilian is one of the foremost Italian representatives. In this, I fully agree with Rivoli. If he could also refrain from imitating the Stones and De André, we would be grateful. A true postmodern result (in the sense of trash).

Just to say that, in fact, as a collection, Big Hits etc. is much better, and that therefore a newcomer should first get that.

Masterpiece. I’m sorry Fidia, but I didn’t like the review at all. I don’t see why one shouldn’t make the effort to try to understand the film. The more you understand it, the more you love it. Also, because it’s much more comprehensible than a lot of Lynch's cinema.

Thank you for the compliments. The reason is very simple. A friend of mine, a real metalhead, in the sense that she generally listens to stuff much heavier than what I listen to, had talked about it positively. Then I read good things about it in the newspapers. So, curious, I got my hands on it. Then I come to DeB to read the review and make a comment and discover that, months later, no one had reviewed it. Since, like it or not, it's an album that has been talked about a lot, it seemed right to fill the gap in our DeDatabase. In short: a service for the community :-). The review isn't all that great, considering the album doesn't say much to me either (it's easier to talk about things you love or things that suck). In any case, even though I review little pop, I listen to a lot of it. And if I have to rank genres, I prefer it to metal in all its forms (except hard rock) and to prog. Thanks again for the attention.