nes Banned

Maybe I listened to them very little, but I never managed to understand what was supposed to be pirate-like in their music.

Not bad, but the first one is really too... I don't know, just too much. If you give the first one a 5, you can't give this one more than a 3. If you give this one a 5, then you have to give... I don't know, twenty-one to the first one?

Okay, I told you a nonsense: I like it, but that's not what I've been grinding for years, that's the homonymous one, the one that opens with "no summr4u." Don't you know? Discover it! Vaporwave before vaporwave because: vaporwave is just the witch house for hipsters.
P.S.: After that "discover it!" there should have been a link to the bandcamp page, but it doesn't exist anymore, dear God(!), so I guess you'll have to "settle" for soundcloud.
But since we're talking about witchhouse, I'll rewrite the whole message as the spirits that haunt the house command:
♂k, ti h♀ dett♂ una v▲cc▲t▲: celo, me piace,ma mica è quello che macinø Ða ▲nni, quello è l²♀monimo, quell○ che si apre con "no summr4u". N○n c♀nosci¿ $coprilo! ▼▲porwave prima della v▲porwave perchè: la ▼▲porwave è s♂lo la witch house dei fighe┼ti.
ps: dopo quel "scøprilo!" ci ▲nÐava il link alla p▲gina banÐcamp, m▲ mica esiste più, s▲ntiddio(!), e ▲ll♂ra mi sa che ┼i devi "▲ccøntentare" di s○undcloud.

And then the link:

Here it is. A few years ago, I was really into witch house. I've always divided it into two main categories: really good albums and shitty albums. I've never encountered any halfway measures in this genre. This one is not only really good, but it's also one of those that I played the most (and still play) on the stereo. Oh my, stereo...

let's not joke around.

I know, I remember, I haven't heard from them in almost twenty years. I don't miss them, but they made me have fun. I'm pretty ashamed of it, by the way. But it’s thanks to such shitty music that today I listen to the stuff I do.
For the review, I’ll pass by for the dead when I have more vacation.

Ah, I'm saying this here because it's too funny: earlier someone referred to this movie as something as great as Babadook. It's the same person who saw the same themes in Babadook as in "The Haunting." That's like saying: damn, Scarface is such a beautiful movie, that film about gangsters, kind of like "My Cousin Vinny." And then to come out with, "WOW, Donnie Brasco, that film like Scarface."
Sorry, I'm laughing; partly for my own reasons, partly because that poor kid is now on Wikipedia checking what "My Cousin Vinny" is. In six years he'll come by here recommending it and singing its praises.

@ [G]: this is also the last time that teenagelobotomy insults me. I understand that banning the latest idiot is easy, but when the idiot has paid, it’s a bit trickier. I realize that teenage is always around because he paid, but the fact is you ban hilarious users and keep smelly pustules. That’s not okay. Oh, by the way, the canal was passed to me by Pixies two years ago (try it to believe it). As usual: teen, you’re always spot on!

I was told like this: at the beginning of the film, the protagonist becomes an orphan. From then on, his life will only get worse. I thought about it, about Japan, the perverse sense that the Japanese have for suffering, from Anne of Green Gables to Daddy Long Legs, and I said, "Well, no thanks."
"But it's a serious drama! And it talks about Hiroshima!" They insisted.
"You're playing a losing game," I replied.
And that’s it, I didn't watch it, and I won't ever: NEVER.

You really held back too much.
I’ll start by apologizing: this is one of those films I have a lot to say about but that made me so angry that I can't dedicate a proper review to it. So sorry, Joe, if I’m using this space in a way that lacks respect for your work (which, again, all I have to say to you is: you’re really too lenient).
First preface: this comment will be a giant spoiler that will ruin the experience for anyone who wants to see it. Anyone still has time to stop reading.
Second preface: this film has pleased everyone; I believe it would be wise to watch the film before reading this comment and maybe come back to read it afterward.
What's good about the film? The indie aesthetic. The soundtrack. Stop. (Soundtrack and aesthetics do a lot in a film; It Follows is certainly not crap, it’s just all wrong and ridiculous.)
Then there’s the good initial scene that starts with a girl leaving her house and you're already shitting your pants; it’s not clear why, but holy crap you know you're going to freak out soon, and when the scene reaches its climax, well, I’d be dishonest if I denied thinking, "I don’t know if I’m more disturbed by everything or enthralled by the beauty of this scene." Unfortunately, there are another 90 minutes of film after that.
So, what is NOT good for me? Everything else. First and foremost, the logic of the audience, according to which (it’s a trend of the last 3/4 years) jump scares are crap (I might even agree, but unfortunately, there aren’t many ways to scare the audience. In fact, there’s only the jump scare to do it (tense soundtrack, tension, suspense, and then BOO the soundtrack spikes when the little monster appears!). But there are films that disturb, you might say, that create a ton of tension, you might say, like this one! Yes, and I’ll reveal a top-secret that you probably should have figured out ten years ago, but patience: without audio, no film can create tension. Tension always comes from the soundtrack. (The silent film, sure, in 1920... because if anyone of you gets scared by a silent film today, I swear you should seriously see a psychologist.) So, the mere fact that this film is packed with sound cues from beginning to end (wonderful and doing a damn good job. Oh my god, they’re the only things that succeed in building suspense here...) gets sanctified, and that the jump scare is seen as "kid stuff" makes me chuckle a bit and, all things considered, even annoys me. Trends are fine, but this is going too far.
What else is not good? The subtext, but we’ll get to that calmly. First, the truly embarrassing part.
The "monster" follows you. At sloth speed. No, seriously, at sloth speed; practically, while you’re being chased, you could park, stand in line at McDonald's, and wait for Crohn's disease to kick in. A friend of mine told me: "Damn, we need an entity that slowly stalks us and every now and then makes us get a little exercise. You play too many video games? Look out the window: the monster is coming! Go downstairs, take a slow walk; it catches up with you, and you jump on the metro just as the doors are closing. You’ve had your daily walk, twenty minutes of fresh air, and you’re good until tomorrow. Maybe it’ll come back tomorrow, but until both your arms break, and you’re in a wheelchair, well, no, it will never catch you.
Trying to empathize with the victims in this film is like asking Carl Lewis to feel stressed on the eve of a race with Momo the turtle (the film, not the cartoon, BEASTS!)
And then we get to the reason why I’ve watched this twice; if everyone likes it, there must be some reason beyond DJ Disasterpeace's work, I hope. And yet it seems not, or at least I haven't found it.
So here’s how it works: B sleeps with A and gets the sloth curse. But if they can sleep with C, the curse will move to them, leaving B alone. However, if C is killed by the curse, the evil will come back to B.
Fantastic! I thought about this for a long time and ultim