Dr.Adder

So... the review is satisfactory, rating 3.8 (without decimals), even if (in my opinion) the unyielding Anatas could definitely do better, especially in terms of sympathy where he is almost unbeatable. Asia are a more than decent band (the same can be said for Toto) and they've produced far more than just a few 'decent' songs. For instance, I really liked Arena a lot, and in that album, there's also a great Elliott Randall (if I'm not mistaken, he also played with Steely Dan). Let's not forget the always stunning covers (even though they're not my favorites). @MAH!, I had already seen Howe some time ago; he has aged a lot, but at least he hasn't 'let himself go' like others. Asian greetings.

The review of the paloz, which I have decided to nickname 'paloz the nitpicker,' is decidedly exquisite.
In this situation, however, I have chosen not to give a rating (it could be 4.5 or even 5.5) partly because, in certain cases, the score, especially in a 'place' like this, doesn’t seem that important or decisive for evaluating a written thought. Maybe it's also because (in my opinion) there are aspects of the review on which one should reflect. Anyway, congratulations on the effort and care you put into it.
Unmissable regards.

Hooray for Asia, this review was needed, and I'll come back (periodically) to read it.
Greetings in suspension (not cryogenic).

You can also leave this site for good, but your passion for cinema will never go away; it will accompany you forever until the end.
After all, aside from the more or less 'acceptable' comments, the 'jokes,' the 'fakes,' the 'outbursts,' and even some 'offenses' that might be more or less out of place, what truly matters in this place (in my opinion) is the purpose of it all, which is: to review what you consider important or maybe not important, that's it, and perhaps create a small 'virtual' connection with someone who shares your passion.
That’s it! Now I'm off too, but to refresh myself in the cellar.
Refreshing regards.

Mumble...I think the review is well done, even though it's slightly verbose.
Rating 4.49 (periodic).
The cover is definitely 'energetic', the Sun is life and without it we couldn't exist.
Unfortunately, in a very distant future, even the Sun will be destined to 'turn off'.
Some time ago, I happened to see a kind of 'visual simulation' of the catastrophic effects of the Sun's end on Earth, an impressive 'show'.
For the album, I trust your opinion as a 'master' of Kraut-Rock and, within the limits of the possible, I'll try to get it.
Ps: "po'".
Sunny greetings.

I quote Anatas, the review is well done and quite 'professional.'
Review rating 4.6 (without periodical).
However, even though the cover is well made, it’s still the usual cover... the days of the great F. Frazetta and also of 'Friend' B. Venosa are long gone (an artistic energy almost in contrast with the great Giger).
Earthly greetings.

@Poletti, I must preface that I do not possess and I believe I will never possess your cinematic culture (and on this subject, hats off to you), but I must honestly say that I see (and read) all of this (your reviews and Paolo's) in a broader context. Think about it, on one hand, there are the serious and committed film reviews by Poletti and on the other hand, the more light-hearted and entertaining ones by Paolo; personally, I don't mind all of this because it offers a wider choice. Just like with music, sometimes I listen to the Crimson, other times I listen to Toto (oh dear... the Toto!), and with reading too, sometimes I delve into books like Triton (Delany) and other times J. Carter (Burroughs, not the one from Naked Lunch). As for films, I enjoy watching Stalker (sometimes) or… Vacanze in America (muhahaha!). I also like to 'break' the 'free time' when it’s available. Ban Paolo? No way. Now I'm off to the cellar to cool off a bit since I'm melting like snow in the sun. Warm regards. Sometimes certain cinematic masterpieces are held in such high regard while they may not deserve it, and on the other hand, some films are unjustly belittled (yes, I know this isn’t the case here). Of course, there’s also the risk of 'leveling' all artistic works, but I also think that, as the saying goes: History will decide what is 'bëlo and brüto' because sometimes (not so infrequently) it 'buries' great works and instead 'elevates' mediocre ones.

Bau(7)te! Hi Jake(Jazz)Chambers (you didn't see this coming, huh!).
As usual, I want to compliment you on the nice review (if it’s not a 4, it’s a 5 or maybe even a 6).
I don’t know about the album (maybe) it’s not really my thing, but you can never tell.
The cover is also very interesting.
PS: "especially". (You know I care about you 'virtually', right!).
Warm regards.

Personally, I still don't understand (regardless of the reviewed work) why Paolo's writings (or reviews) should be 'criticized' especially so repeatedly (and also trivially).
Paolo's reviews are always well done, there are no spelling mistakes (but that's not the point) and you can see (read) the effort he has put into them.
If there is also a certain irony underlying his 'mission', as Paolo calls it, that's another story.
I must admit that despite the 'works' covered, the reviews are able to 'explore' topics and viewpoints that are quite unknown to many other reviewers (including myself).
On the other hand, if someone comes along and 'presents' the most unlikely album (or film) from the most obscure group (or artist) who produced half an album (with the most horrific cover in history) of twenty minutes, with three tracks where a guitarist with the longest fingers in the world 'plays' in a way that reaches who knows where and then disappears into absolute nothingness, then everything suddenly becomes rosy...
Paolo's tenacity, however, is remarkable (I would have already thrown in the towel) and if one wants to criticize him (in my opinion) it should be done constructively based on the thoughts he has expressed, not just because the film is a 'galactic flop' (an opinion that could be dismantled if absurdly the second theorem of Gödel were applied).
Therefore, my sympathy and (virtual) respect for Paolo (whoever he is, fake or not, and regardless of his age) remains (and it's not 'political correctness').
If his reviews turn out to be a bit too sugary, I can also agree, but the comment should be 'related' to the writing and not just to the reviewed work.
Warm regards.

Thank you, Editors, for the correction, especially for "l'Amico" RoberT.