JURIX

It's just us—who break our shoulder at the concert—and get back up with a bruised foot. // It's just us—who do the live shows to avoid singing—and pull off some decent stunts. // It's just us—who can no longer distinguish anything—the amplifier from the crowd. // It's just us—the ones who then fall down like a boiled chicken—the ones who realize how foolish they are... NA NA NAAAA NA NA NA NA NA NA NAAAAAAAAAAAA EEEEHHHHH!

Just listened. I've never been a big fan of Pearl Jam, but I used to like some of their songs in the past. I find this album rather flat, with a few good tracks (like "Supersonic," for example) and well played, but lacking much bite and with some scandalous tracks ("Speed Of Sound"). For me, it would be a 2.5.

Okay. You won a concrete teddy bear.

"All of you fell for it and crumbled with your pompous, bland, and equally useless vibe of a web superstar." Explain to me what is "superstar" about my comment, by the way without rating the review since it's a personal analysis and thus subjective; I just pointed out that it is not an analysis of the album in question.

I agree it can be challenging to analyze an important and comprehensive album like this, but you didn't even try. And then, especially in this time of the 20th anniversary of the fall of the wall, at least get the name right: checkpoint Charlie... I'M FINE, I'M NOT FINE, I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO.

Nice photo HELL, but I have to say I thought you looked younger.

God ****! And you can't understand a damn thing! ----------------------------------- ---------- If I find the one who made me angry, I’ll give him a punch that will smash his head – and I will find that idiot sooner or later, right? ----------------------------------- ----------- But who is that moron who bangs the door and ... closes it shouting?

Anyway, being Venetian I'm biased and, while I acknowledge the vulgarity that bothers many, even without sound seeing such a character speak on a news segment, with aviator glasses, coiffed like he’s been sculpted, and with that face of a bar patron at 4 in the morning, makes me burst out laughing. I don’t think that a "review" says anything more to those who like it or those who don’t; I haven’t even listened to this remix, the original at 3:03 is better, as Defender85 says. So.......Who’s making that damn noise there?

Here, as I mentioned in my previous post, we continue to judge marijuana mostly symbolically; this means that the positions taken are entrenched in personal beliefs that do not evaluate the substance itself, but its "political" significance. Drugs have always existed; their role in society and the historical period determines the judgment surrounding them. In addition to the well-known shamans and their rituals, there are Tibetan monks who consume hallucinogenic herbs, and some drugs have been used in the arts (absinthe played a 'role' in French literature). Without mescaline (a substance that is more than dangerous, potentially lethal), Huxley would not have written "The Doors of Perception." DEEP-FRENK: most of those who have smoked a joint have done so in adolescence, with friends, at parties, and not during the real and serious problems of life, where traps, in addition to various types of drugs, can be represented by gambling addiction, usury, and alcoholism. Nevertheless, NES, not everyone who does not use marijuana makes such discussions. The last joint I smoked was more than 15 years ago, but I always try to view the topic without superficial ideologies, being aware that physical dependence on cannabis practically does not exist, while dependence on cigarettes and alcohol does. A few years ago, a friend of mine who lives in the United States told me that at a rally in favor of alcohol prohibition, the French and Italians were labeled as "merchants of death" given our wine production; doesn't it seem out of place that this comes from a country where you can buy firearms at the grocery store around the corner? I repeat, it depends on how a reality perceives a certain substance. While smoking marijuana certainly isn't good for the body, it seems to me that the progressive 'zero tolerance' approach towards it has not yielded great results for the youth population in terms of reducing the use of other, undoubtedly more dangerous drugs.

It doesn't seem nice to put a cover like that, belittling the encyclopedia of the longest Italian river.