supersoul

Just a moment surferkangaroo...the copyright for the monolith joke doesn't belong to Nick but to the judge!

And who bows to Jake, I must have been unlucky... but anyway, I wasn't there for De Vito, the last time after her the Nils Petter MOLVAER/Bill LASWELL group performed, it's during these occasions that you can hear with your ears the difference between the masters and the apprentices...

You picked a terrible beast to review for your virgin ears enbar77, and in my opinion, the result is as useful as a diving suit in the Sahara Desert. At least you can see a five denied to the Doors, Janis Joplin, and Pink Floyd (but previously given to Supertramp).

maybe if you explain to them what Kubrick's black monolith is, it'll spark a light bulb for them...

I remember the story of this guy Alexakis who was carrying a bit of a difficult life on his shoulders (seriously, not just for the mass media). And you're right about the result; maybe I remember them being close to bands like Green Day, even though their territory was more contaminated by California-style power pop, especially in the later albums. In short, the usual story of a major label that redistributes this album already released by an indie two years earlier, hoping to squeeze some money out of it just like with Green Day. And indeed, in the subsequent albums, the majors will make chart-friendly pop suitable for FM radio in the car or on the beach. I remember a great track, "Father of Mine," exceptional for this purpose, with a riff borrowed from the melodic Dinosaur Jr.'s "Green Mind," which who knows in turn from whom they had stolen it.

I understand, jakechambers, unfortunately and evidently, the four times I saw her, because she was "supporting" other groups in various showcases, it was always the same project, with the same outcome and with things that were less enjoyable...

But are they now even publishing repeats of reviews? I remember this one coming out a few months ago, exactly the same...

The review is good but perhaps overly praises a group that I remember (I must still have this and "Bizzarro") as quite monotonous despite the upbeat jingle-jangle of the guitars. Perhaps it's also the fault of the absolutely soporific and monotonous voice of the singer. It's hard (at least for me) to leave the record in the player until the end.

As a Neapolitan, I've had the opportunity to listen to De Vito multiple times, and I must say it has never thrilled me; I find it quite distant from the endeavor of reaching the depths while skipping over ears and brains.

A couple of things in no particular order, first of all, it’s clear to the naked eye that Paolo is not a fresh-faced kid; the Italian comedy of the '70s, continuous references to icons, first soft and then pornographic, like Karin Schubert and the Frajese, of whom today’s "kids" have no idea. Then regarding Pasolini, he said some right things and others off the mark (in my opinion): that Decameron opened the floodgates to trashy films that can even be traced back to current Brass is absolutely true. It is not equally true (again, in my opinion) that Pasolini had nostalgia for the past. His Decameron is in Neapolitan, which is a much livelier language than Tuscan dialect; the past that Paolo interprets as nostalgia should be seen (s.s.m.) as an INDEX of the present's poverty. Pasolini wants to say that in his today, pleasure no longer exists as a bodily need (not questioning the motivations behind things), but rather it is (and here we might connect back to Debord’s purpulan, who culpably minimizes PPP) the pleasure itself experienced as a media-consumerist possession of enjoyment. In other words, today I possess enjoyment and that’s enough for me; afterwards, I might not even enjoy it. And here we can also link to Pasolini's personal story, as he could not find that type of “ancient pleasure” in contemporary society, which is either puritanical or commodified.