nix

See? Your story is not only amusing, but also educational. Because I must admit I was not familiar with the story of Milli Vanilli. So, intrigued by the reference in your tale, I went to look it up. I listened to the account recalled by Carlo Lucarelli on Radio DeeJay. Thus, as someone who loves stories, I discovered a beautiful narrative—the tale of a massive rock fraud. Right up my alley. Thank you, Lector.

Stylistically, it's a song released in 1992 but frighteningly 80s. Everything, from the harmonic progression to the way it's sung, absolutely everything about that song harks back to that decade, which was brimming with things like that. From this perspective, I could say it's a piece very much from the "rear-guard," meaning it was already old and decrepit as soon as it was born. But so many years have passed... what difference does it make anymore?

Well. I confess I didn’t mind that little tune. The declaration of disdain is amusing this time. However, rock has always had a pacifist and benevolent streak, starting from the Concert for Bangladesh promoted by George Harrison way back in 1971 (or 72 or 73, I can’t remember well), up to Live Aid, and then many other occasions. Musically, there’s a ton of stuff that’s not all contemptible, including the little song in question.

On a conceptual level, your critique could lead us far. For example, it could take us to distance ourselves from the concept of "charity" and the "suspicious" spirit of those who engage in it. Personally, I avoid making "a priori" general stances. I prefer to evaluate things on a case-by-case basis. Sometimes there is hypocrisy and aims of cleansing a guilty conscience, sometimes there’s sincerity, and sometimes a bit of both. I would rather look people in the eye before taking a stance.

In this case, I would say you are overestimating nothing more than a little song, giving it a "historical centrality" that I don’t think this little song has ever had. I happily whistle it in the shower, and it seems like a catchy little tune to me. The words are simple and superficial just like millions of rock songs.

what a fantastic album. The other one too. It's hard to say which is the best, two jewels. Well done Luludia.

...and then, all in all, you've said the essential things, and you've done so nicely as well.

I've been waiting for something about this album for ages.
It doesn't seem like a proper review to me. I would call it a note with a fleeting and ironic word for each component of this double vinyl's story.
Better this way. You can't "review" the Mona Lisa, the frescoes of the Sistine Chapel, or Dante's "Inferno." Some things just need a mention, that's all. Then, let those who want to understand, understand.
Because this, in my humble opinion, is the greatest rock album of all time. No contest.
What I've always found incredible about the entire saga of this album is that this work, characterized by a level of inspiration that's simply stratospheric, further enhanced by the technical and instrumental prowess of Jagger and the gang that you won't find in the following years—this work, I said, was created amidst rivers of heroin. The recording sessions and the "behind the scenes" were extensively captured by cameras and operators. Well, they were always wasted, but seriously wasted, the kind of stuff that could end you. And instead of everything falling apart, as almost always happens when you get to that state, these musicians recorded the greatest rock album in history.
Then those who don't love them will say whatever they want, but I don't care; de gustibus non disputandum est. I bought my first record in the mid-'70s, and to this day I haven't heard anything surpassing those two vinyls. MississippiFra, it's fine like this. On an album like this, you either write four nice words like you did, or a four-hundred-page monograph.
Let's go for the four words.

the reprimand to the "social" youth that allows itself to be culturally impoverished, Calvino, the commitment of those formidable "years," Morgan and Zanardi, the Regeni case and ISIS, and much more.
It seems to me that there is a lot at stake and that the effort to say something significant about the current era is evident. If I loved this singer-songwriter, I would definitely get the album.
But for me, the problem is precisely this: I have always found Vecchioni an unbearable, false, and hypocritical character, and I have never been enchanted by that thin veil of false humility that cloaks a character who is actually frighteningly arrogant.
He is perhaps the only one among the "historical" singer-songwriters that I cheerfully dislike.
I regret seeing my dear old Guccini involved in this affair, who I have always adored and to whom I would have liked to say, "come away Francesco, let’s go have a glass wherever you want, but come away, because you are the one from Eskimo, remember? You’re the one that when you started ‘Questa domenica in settembre…’ people immediately got emotional for so many intimate reasons and applauded you with enthusiasm, come away you deserve better than singing this ridiculous little song with this buffoon."

Several years ago, I found myself in Viareggio attending a cover band from Tuscany that played the Doors. They were literally identical, even in their choice of original instruments, including Manzarek's keyboard. The only problem was that the singer was almost bald. What can I say, De...Marga..., you make music such a personal affair that any criticism risks being disrespectful, which I wouldn’t want for the world. I consider the Pink Floyd post The Wall to be a band devoid of any interest, and I view the phenomenon of cover bands as something more akin to masturbation than to music. But all this aside, I have great respect and admiration for DeRecensore. However, this time I find myself on your daughter's side. I’m sure you will forgive me. Best wishes from Turin.

POLO, when I see one of your reviews come in, I rush over: guaranteed fun!

beautiful review, concise yet complete, of a splendid album.