desade

The review is really well-written, I like it. I haven't listened to Greatesthits, I rate the band based on almost 15 years of career, as you say. They don't seem that bad to me; they are certainly an honest band that makes honest music, nothing revolutionary but enjoyable. PS: strange that from "In Your Honor" they included only one, the album is nice (especially the second one, the acoustic one).

horrible

"Frankenstein" is not among my favorite readings, but, to be fair, I believe it deserves justice. To claim that it is no longer relevant strikes me as a colossal nonsense. The subtitle of the work indeed reads: "The Modern Prometheus." It's 1818, we are in the midst of Romanticism, and literary culture, which has never stopped reading Greek and Latin classics, presents a new way of approaching mythological themes and Greek theater. While previously, especially during the Enlightenment, "Greekness" was considered synonymous with proportion, perfection, and balance, the perspective is now reversed, plunging into the dark side, the "sublime" aspect of Greek works. In the characters of myth, people see their own fears, the fear of divine abandonment, of fatal punishment. Dr. Frankenstein, just like Zeus, creates man with his own hands, believing he can control him, but what happens happens. "Frankenstein" is a hymn to rebellion, it's titanic (Leopardian?), it's the synthesis of an era's thought with a universal message. The review calls it a gothic novel, and I agree if referring to the settings, but more generally, I would call it a black drama. Good point on the concept of "monstrosity," excellent reference to "Frankenstein Jr." in post N 6.

I fully agree with Marcel Proust.

great review

I don't share all this enthusiasm for the series. One could say that in the States, unlike here, television is held in higher regard, more is invested, and therefore there are high-quality productions, just like this one. But honestly, "The O.C." remains, or rather gets bogged down, in the usual adolescent trope, better than "Dawson's Creek" (insignificant in every way), worse than "Melrose Place" and "Gossip Girl" (by the way, the creator is the same). It struck me as a bit provincial, just like the setting, with scripts that are sometimes devoid of meaning. American serials have offered better. The review lacks some mention of the differences between one series and another (I believe the second one is the best), but overall it's nice.

The film is truly a masterpiece. Honestly, the critical definition of "Bergmanian trilogy" can go when it is confined to a purely stylistic discourse, but the way Woody talks about loneliness, incommunicability, the dispersion of the self, generational contrast, the dust that settles in the domestic hearth (all themes dear to the great Bergman) is entirely original, and then the idea of the psychoanalytic session eavesdropped by the protagonist is a trademark. The line about memory at the end is iconic. Beautiful review.

Many people didn’t like the ending, I honestly don’t understand the reason.

Don't blame us... :))

Come on Nes, there’s a bit more to see from Argento, like "Il gatto a nove code" and "Quattro mosche di velluto grigio," which still belong to the early phase. I think the decline of Argento started with "La sindrome di Stendhal," which had good ideas but was ultimately executed in a somewhat flawed way. Among the early films, there are definitely some that aren't worth watching, but they could be considered "missteps." But after "Non ho sonno," "Il cartaio," "La terza madre"... he stumbles too often.