supersoul

Good job, blackdog, see? You can get there too if you put your mind to it! Now take from this record "No Pussy Blues" and then go listen to "Rocket USA" from the first self-titled album by Suicide. Do you hear the prominent bass riff of the song? Have you realized that they are the SAME? The difference is that the Suicide track is 30 years younger (not trivial) and Alan Vega has a voice that sends chills down your spine.

The reviewer will allow me to disagree with him entirely. 1) We are certainly not returning to the Coens of Blood Simple, which, despite its dramatic tone, was a great grotesque and ironic film—something entirely lacking in this icy movie, especially since I was left watching the credits to see if it was truly directed by the Coens. 2) The phrase "it's a ruthless and philosophical analysis of how far a man can be pushed to seek his own dark half" is absolutely (in my opinion) out of place. Llewelyn is not searching for any dark half; there’s nothing psychological or paranoid about it—he finds some money and tries to keep it for himself. That's just how he is; his wife knows it too. 3) The Coens made a film that remains entirely faithful to McCarthy's great novel, which is even colder in its progression than the film. The brothers give less space to the figure of Sheriff Bell, who is the true "antihero" protagonist, realizing that this is a country that no longer suits him, as is clear from the old uncle's speech that he visits at the end of the film. This is what disorients those who know nothing about the novel; in the first half hour of the film, they are convinced they are facing a nice western-gangster-thriller, and gradually they realize that there will be no confrontation, except with their own conscience.

radio...exhaustively...commendably.

Sorry mien, but there's also a good piece on FM radio here that you didn't mention, Santa Monica, which is a solid pop song like we've heard in droves throughout our (in my case, long) life. What needed to be said about this unfortunate one has already been thoroughly and commendably expressed in the previous review. Repetita juvant?

put a screen in the barn, those Gotthard guys have often hung around the MTV truzza with their AOR truzzo, maybe the truzze cows have more fun...

....holy words Ringo.

Good job, hold back for a while because many times here it risks becoming mere chatter. I determine my favorites based on my own ears and not on genres. Personally, I've reviewed progressive bands, including Audience, Janus, and the Italian band Stantarde, which are great prog groups and I'm glad to have bought their albums that I still listen to with pleasure today. I couldn’t care less if a genre is praised and then buried because my tastes transcend genres. You talk about Van Halen or ‘80s hard rock when in fact what should be rediscovered are all the hard blues rock bands from the seventies; and only when I listen to, for example, Humble Pie do I realize that perhaps AC/DC might not have needed to exist at all; with Steve Marriott and the crew, I wouldn’t have missed them, let alone Van Halen.

What strikes me is that on this site, most fans of progressive rock are limited to Yes, Genesis, Jethro, and maybe VDGG, while in the three-year period from '69 to '72 there were so many bands that I hardly see any attention when someone writes a review about them. Moreover, those same fans are ready to defend even the last rotten fart of Wakeman and get offended if someone personally differs from defining progressive as the most noble genre of music in the history of rock. I like Electric Eels as well as bands like Janus, Catapilla, Gygafo, Astr, Indian Summer, Twenty Sixty Six and Ten, who create wonderful progressive music. If I pointed a finger at Yes and Genesis, as you may have read in the review, it’s to say that progressive should be enclosed in that golden era. Today, Electric Eels still sound modern, while Yes's "Tales ..." reeks of mold. That was the point; if I was unclear, I’ll sprinkle ash on my head.

Thank you for appreciating the review; I hope everyone, including the always welcome input from Zaireeka, understood that there was no intention of being academic and that I have great respect for the progressive music of the golden years, let’s say up to 1973. As for @@@beenes, it's a special case since he clearly didn't get a thing, as he "accuses" me of creating musical canons by even bringing up Neu!’s "Super" (and why not then my favorites Can from Tago Mago, where you can find Wire, the Fall, PIL, Jesus and Mary Chain?). The fact is that I don't recall Neu! ever getting into fights on stage, nor did they ever attack the police who intervened to stop the concert, resulting in arm fractures, to the point that John Morton was nicknamed "Broken Hand" because he played with a plastered hand. In short, beyond the music, it was also the attitude on stage and in the lives of these three fools that is comparable to the idea we have of punk "iconography" as I personally experienced it in those days and as presumably it was passed down to you, dear beenees.

Boh! Damn, how limited you guys are... I can't understand why a film with a theme like this genre should necessarily be faithful to the disgusting reality of war. Then we should say that at least half of the war movies are crap, randomly mentioning "Stalag 17" by Wilder or the really enjoyable "The Warriors" by Hutton or "Gunny" by Eastwood himself. This isn't about being so foolish as to be fooled by Salvatores, who can sweeten the story as much as he wants; he’s not Piero Angela. And besides the tape of "La Grande Guerra," I also have "Tutti a Casa," and I would never trade it for "Mediterraneo," and now that I remember, I even have this one too.