Purpulan

Revisionist New York, it wasn't enough with Interpol; now they’ve also placed their shoegaze revival with "A Place To Bury Strangers," more in the style of J&MC because they’re just a bunch of sheep, lacking the "finesse" of Shields. As for MBV, I’d say the journey should be viewed in perspective from "This is your bloody Valentine," moving through "Isn't anything," which makes "Loveless" more approachable (still remaining a rather rich album in melodic insights).

Blessed will be the pussy of an Ursuline nun (but not so much)... for me, at most, my dick will break from being called "blessed" ;)

Oh, beautiful there, so let's see... who in the world of rock is better not to mess with? I quote Piero Acciaio, the one who likes the blood of "Tipo 0 Negativo"!

Never heard of it...is it serious?!

I step outside the choir: "( )" aside from "E-Bow" (6) and "Popplagið" (8) it's a bit boring.

No, I was simply referring to the fact that, directionally/stylistically, even though some themes may seem somewhat comparable at times, three profoundly different directors have been contrasted here.

Categorization is a bit of a mess, I admit, but both "Dreampop" and "Shoegaze" were coined a bit before "Loveless"... for "Dreampop," we actually go back to the early '80s (let's say "Treasure" by the Cocteau Twins...).

Cimino, however, is much more attentive to the canonical film structure (American) that pivots on the concept of verisimilitude of the narrated act. The co-participation and identification of the viewer with the characters and events narrated is a primary necessity of his filmmaking. Altman is anything but a discreet director; even in his less verbose works, he fills scenes that could very well have much more linear developments (since the content does not require excessive emotional excitement) with superstructures. Jarmusch, on the other hand, is a master of estrangement, thanks to an expressive minimalism that manages to strip the narrative act of every accessory component. However, even when he "slams in your face" a key point of the plot, he does so in such a style that it never breaks the seemingly low (apparently monodic) rhythm of his narratives (and it is no small feat to make the moods of a work felt in their entirety without the observer ever feeling jolted from their seat).

I didn't want to "dismiss" them; it was your subsequent statement about "pop preponderance" that I was referring to. The Pixies had the rare ability to make even the most obscure and unconventional things catchy and immediate. In this regard, I don't entirely agree with the comparison of Hypnosphere to the Velvet Underground in the realm of "classic rock" (ummm, I believe he was referring to the Velvet... Underground and not just the Velvet... because otherwise things change even more...).

When I read it yesterday, I didn't grasp its hidden meaning, and I liked it; it had a bit of that "Frigidaire," Tamburini-style vibe... but, no offense, Supersoul, if it's about a reaction to the "mental gymnastics" that can accompany discussions on so-called "avant-gardes," and specifically, the rehashing of the reviews of Battles... the pretext becomes a bit demeaning to me... it's like saying Duchamp had already understood and stigmatized everything... it's pointless to give any credit to that jerk Cattelan (to pull out the usual annoying parallel with "Art" par excellence, i.e.: figurative).