Ghemison

As you wanted to prove, you know few things and mostly trivial ones (without taking anything away from their skill, even though you keep putting words in my mouth that I didn’t say: like that the Beatles or Radiohead are crap). This year, I’ve probably listened to five times what you've listened to: I try to stay informed, in addition to the old stuff I miss and find interesting, I also buy and download recent albums (between promos, downloads, purchases, I’ve listened to almost fifty this year) to get a sense of things. So if I want to say that musically, 2008 was terrible, I can say it. You can't. And by the transitive property, you can't even say this is the most original album of 2008.

overrated work (but I'm talking about the anime): boring, repetitive, trivial, and full of mental wanking between the two protagonists and shallow emo philosophy.

Yes, but Donnie, you keep going on about fences and prejudices. If someone doesn't appreciate Fireman or says there's better stuff out there (more original, more beautiful), then they don't love the Beatles. And then you tell me that Jefferson, Grateful, and their psychedelic buddies are niche groups, but what the hell are you talking about? Just because you (and your buddy Primiballi, who always responds the same way, as if everything is provocation and he’s always superior, and dodges direct questions) are fifty years old doesn't mean you have the truth in your pocket. No. Damn it, admit it: we’re old, we don’t want to listen to new stuff, and at most we give our old myths a chance if they release something unreleased (I wouldn’t say "new"). Ah, Donnie, just to show you how full of shit you are: "show me any other band that's been dead for 30 years that puts out an album and goes straight to number one in charts worldwide?" For example, the Floyd (the double compilation from a few years ago), the Stones, the terrible Queen... in other words, all those bands that continue to be recycled (or recycle themselves) to stuff even more money into their pockets, and I really believe that you’re one of those idiots who prefers spending on overplayed stuff rather than opening up a bit to the youth. With that, I bid you farewell because I’m really fed up with you.

Oh my God, Lizzy, you really speak without prejudice. Donnie, far be it from me to offend you, but your comment above seemed more resentful than ironic. In retrospect, one can twist it however they want. As for the rest, I continue to agree with Easy: there are always good (and even original) things out there, you just need to look for them. If one continues to musically associate with artists who have already said everything (and even more, if I think about Dylan and the Beatles) and have been around for forty years, it’s normal to be dazzled by works that may only be mediocre. However, I don't want to delve into the album; mine is merely a discussion about what was stated by PrimiBalli at the beginning of the page, which can be summarized as "but, I repeat, there is nothing left, and one should not give in to personal or generational infatuations...: it’s like that." (Still, I’m the first to admit that old lions can still amaze us or even make us fall in love again... not a day goes by that I don’t listen to Wyatt’s Comicopera.) I wonder, always referring to the author of the review, what (and how much) he listened to throughout 2008 to define this as "the only non-trivial album I've come across recently"? This is not a provocation; I’m genuinely curious.

Well, in my opinion, the whole idea of "one morning I woke up and realized I couldn't draw well anymore, that I wasn't able to draw properly" is awesome. Then, applying it to one's life, narrated in pencil and in a whisper, among memories, fears, and shames, is even more beautiful. Maybe by the end of the reading you might even think, "but in the end, why the hell do I care?" But it's the honesty that is disarming and contagious, the poetry that emerges from the clumsy routine seems unique yet relatable (and how can we not mention the wonderful illustrations of pirates?).

wow wow wow wow!!!!!!!! a review that should be read (and written) more often!! album already reserved where we know, eh ehe eh...

My God Donnie, what a triumph of childishness. Well, I agree... guess who?! Especially Easy, with whom I share at least everything he wrote in his first comment. And then I pose a question to the author of the writing, PrimaBalli: is it more snobbish to completely ignore that the music market has drastically changed in the last thirty years (a matter that has already been raised several times in the comments on your pages and that you probably tend to forget as soon as the aforementioned page closes) and continue to rummage in the same little garden, or is it more snobbish to try to stay informed and visit more shores, thus speaking with a greater understanding of the whole?

It's reasonable to compare them as the contributions of Moore and Miller to the comic book genre are revolutionary like few other things in the same art form. I appreciate Sin City less already; for me, the true Miller is the one from the late '70s to the mid-'80s. In Sin City, he already exaggerates and repeats what he has already said, making everything even more pulp and bloody, without of course detracting from the graphic research of the work. My dear Lopi, we don’t understand each other: graphic novel is just a pseudo-noble term for comic book coined by those who don’t read comics and believe they are for children and therefore take refuge in terminology that, from the very beginning, requires reference to another type of art, literature. I may seem nitpicky, but I swear that Moore himself has expressed the same concept more or less a ton of times.

@Lopi: now explain to me what the hell is the difference between a graphic novel and a comic? Come on, and if I don’t like the answer I’ll call Moore directly to explain it to you.

Well, Hardrock, what you wrote above is not very clear: in my opinion, the comparisons between Miller and Moore don’t make much sense; the only thing they have in common is that they both accidentally wrote comic works that transformed the superhero genre into something more adult. Whether you prefer Moore or Miller is purely a matter of personal taste: it should be noted that thirty years ago they both revolutionized comics made in the USA (then Miller took a bad turn, repeating himself into exhaustion). The review is poor and lacks any understanding: it analyzes a minor work by Miller, without even mentioning Miller's previous masterpieces (of which there are many). Okay, the graphic style is cool, but it has none (at least in my opinion) of the grand, engaging, hybrid, and poetic style of youthful works like Elektra Vive Ancora or Ronin; furthermore, the screenplay is definitely written poorly, giving us a rather impure comic. At a certain point, you say about Punisher, "Rarely have I read a comic as engaging and glorious as this." Well, to me, that statement regarding this comic makes me think that you have actually read few comics or certainly far too few to analyze one in a review (and don’t tell me that yours is just a suggestion, because only a presumptuous person, and I don’t mean to say in bad faith, could suggest spending 25 euros on a work from a genre they do not fully understand). So if you want to read a beautiful, profound, and graphically stunning Miller, pick up the two texts mentioned above (always colored by the excellent Verley); in both cases, you will be more satisfied and spend less too.