supersoul

@psycho as Trapattoni said (if he ever said it) I am FULLY in agreement WITH you HALF: First of all, regarding Aletta's voice, it’s clear that it’s a folk voice; in fact, in the psychedelic tracks (and they are DEFINITELY psychedelic in the Jeffersonian sense) like “She Brings Peace,” “Winchester Town,” and “Traitor,” it’s Hawkins who sings with her providing backing vocals. The album (in my opinion) doesn’t deserve a 2, maybe not even a 4 because my intention was a 3 and a half, and this time I rounded up (while for the Trees I perhaps guiltlessly rounded down). The tracks I just mentioned I listened to again and they are wonderful. It’s clear that it’s a hippie psychedelia and from flower people; if this variation rubs you the wrong way, it’s evident that the judgment on the album could be negatively affected. This is not a "tough" group, but one of peace & love. Don’t you think?

@No purpulan, the Quatermass have nothing to do with it; the Saturnalia are much, much more hippie (if I had to give an example with a band closer to us, I would say a more basic and naïve version of Opal). Here, Rod Roach's guitars dominate acidly and splendidly over much more "journey"-like rhythms ("She brings peace" is stunning) rather than focusing on the hard blues contamination of the other mentioned bands. And even though the musicians moved from one group to another, here it's only Roach who can boast a stint in the legendary Andromeda. Anyway, the key figure in all these bands, which almost always lasted only one album, is the guitarist John Du Caan: involved with Attack, with Five Day Week Straw People (splendid), with Andromeda, with Atomic Rooster, with Hard Stuff (alongside Gustafson who came from Quatermass)...

enbar77, I have the impression that you posted in the wrong section; this "review" should have been placed in the cinema section.

Here, I don't want to be a sour professor at all costs, but I would like to know from enbar77, who just stated "...I've never listened to Exile on Main Street but I will get to it" and who in the review judges Their Satanic "...the highest quality work of the Rolling Stones." I would like to know what mindset the reader should have when approaching his reviews. Because reviews are not poems that live a life of their own but must be compared with "the listened to." Flights of fancy are not enough; there needs to be substance, and in your writings, dear enbar77, it's immediately evident that it's lacking.

@bjorky perfect: let's do the Basinger in the remake of Getaway! @ole: give priority to the Andromeda, exceptional! @sterbus: how's it going with Uncle Frankie? The Samurai? much more prog...

Oh, if that's the case, don't worry, my contribution will never be lacking.

@bjorky, shall we do the Kathleen Turner from "Body Heat" then? Alright?

@artaudette, sorry but I see more excessive gloss in your reviews and comments than in this film.

There’s another American film from 1970 in which the protagonist throws away his documents and gets on a truck to Alaska at the end, a great film with a simple scene around the middle that makes you jump to your feet and applaud. In a motel on the highway, the protagonist tries to order things outside of the rigid combinations allowed by the menu while the waitress insists that the rules don’t permit it. In short, he doesn’t want the chicken, and the waitress acidly yells something like, “And should I keep the chicken for myself?” He then replies, “Yes, you can keep it, but between your thighs!” and tips everything off the table. Thirty minutes of applause from us young viewers, not out of disdain for the waitress but for the rules.

"...the highest quality work of the Rolling Stones." Just this is enough to understand the kind of preferences of the reviewer (for example, 5 for Supertramp, defined true rock, and 4 for The Doors and Janis Joplin...) A mixed-up album; if there is a psychedelic masterpiece here, it’s "2000 Light Years From Home," not even mentioned by the reviewer.