puntiniCAZpuntini

DeRank : 14,42 • DeAge™ : 7882 days

  • Contact
  • Here since 21 october 2003
Voto:
They are still samples taken and rehashed on a computer. This is house, French Touch House but still House there’s the four-on-the-floor, there’s THAT bass, THAT hi-hat, THAT snare. The riff probably came from who knows where, but it's a house piece. Then "French Touch" because it features the compressed sounds they use, because he’s from Ed Banger and he’s from Paris (like Grunge=sub pop = Seattle). This is tech House there’s THAT hi-hat in four-on-the-floor but the bass is techno and faster. At most, I could accept this, but it’s the only case I know anyway they keep THAT tempo, with THAT bass, with THAT hi-hat. They also use "standard" instruments, but it’s still house, what do you care about what they use? Besides, even Guetta samples little guitars, violins, and everything sweet and good in the world, so he wouldn't be “electro” either. I’ve only seen Electro-House on Wikipedia, and on the sites where people copy from Wikipedia. The whole music portal of Wikipedia should explode. Mastodon are: 1)"Alterbative Metal" (another useless definition, there are 9 million subgenres, what the hell is alternative) and as a second genre... Sludge. Would you trust someone who says Mastodon are Sludge? Would you let someone like that baptize your daughter? I wouldn’t even let him pet my dog.
Voto:
In my opinion, it’s one of the - many - giant bullshit things that are written on Wikipedia. Since electronics, in English "electro," is by definition all music made with electronic instruments (as opposed to "electric"), House falls under that category as well. It’s a nonsensical name; rather than being a name, it’s a useless specification, since there are no “non-electronic” House tracks. There are various definitions of "electro," which differ over tiny details, so "electro" alone means nothing, unless you want to differentiate Autechre from the Vienna Philharmonic. The House that was made in Chicago at the "Warehouse" isn’t really that different from what Guetta “produces” (big word), technically. There are the singers, like the stuff from Knuckles. The beat is in 4/4 with bass & hat like all House (if you change the beat and the bpm, it's no longer House), there are arpeggiated melodies, not too many overlays aside from two snare hits to close the 4/4, and never excessively harsh sounds. Guetta makes House, plain and simple, with some pretty Gay sounds, but it’s still House. He’s always played House, since before you young folks were even on this earth. I don’t understand the new trend of renaming something that’s been around for over thirty years. I understand Tech-house; it has the beat of techno but slower (still faster than House) and some slightly harsher sounds. I get hard House, even if it’s just sped-up House. I understand House-Garage, since Knuckles says so. I even understand French Touch, although you could just say "ed banger records" and be done with it. But just because there are Soulwax (and just them, I believe) who also use "real" bass and drums, it doesn't mean we have to differentiate, especially since even Soulwax add a lot of electronic elements on top. If Guetta doesn’t do House, no one does; he’s played records (not his own) at all the biggest events of the genre, from Chicago to Brazil, and in Europe, he’s managed all the most “House” places of the old continent from Ibiza to Paris to Saint-Tropez, and of course, he’s played everywhere from Marbella to Moscow, in House venues. I’ve seen him in Ibiza, Amsterdam, London, and Marbella. I’ll tell you that the only awful tracks (compared to what the people wanted) that he played were his own. Actually, in London, he didn’t even play one of his tracks; he spent over half an hour mixing a cappella bits from old records with French instrumental pieces; one of the best DJs I've seen. Anyway, you tell me; I trust you, define "electro" for me and explain where it "hybrids" in the music that Guetta “produces”; maybe I just haven’t understood.
Voto:
Cathy Guetta, aka mouth-fica-fifty-thousand. Ingrandisci questa immagine
Voto:
<< From his debut album >> He’s been a DJ since the '80s, in the trendiest clubs in Paris. Before making his first record, he had already become a manager (with his wife, who looks like a drag queen) for other DJs (for example, he’s also the manager of Solveig) and of the aforementioned clubs (the "IN" ones). I don't understand what electro-house means; is there also Rock, Metal, and Jazz? If house is necessarily electronic, what's the need? << but does anyone really buy these albums??? >> The DJs, to play them in clubs without getting fined by SIAE (or their foreign equivalents). There are so many DJs, therefore so many records sold. He looks just like Guti, the one from Real Madrid. Javier Pastore looks like Nicole Minetti. Lampard looks like the one from Muse.
Voto:
Look at him, also because we're talking about one of the smartest Bosses, or at least the smartest of those known. Along with Felice Maniero, who is now (well, in a little while it will be a year since they released him) free and a billionaire, despite murders, extortion, robberies, tax evasion, overdose deaths, and much more. They'll never make a decent movie about him because obviously, there's no fucking clue about him. You can also check out those by Fernando Di Leo, especially the trilogy of something, I don't remember the name, but anyway, it’s about the mafia (really?).
Voto:
Oh, the one with Di Caprio and the other one, Bourne Identity, set in Boston run by Nicholson... my gosh. It's nice to watch, but all we need is for Nicholson to step into a phone booth, come out, and take off.
Voto:
To other films in the genre, Americans. The Italian ones are much more on point than any American film about the Italian mafia. It's a bit like if Petri had decided to tell the story of the Clockers from Queensbridge; he would have made a mess. While Spike Lee's take, as far as I know (nothing) and what I've heard (a lot), seems really realistic in the true sense of the word. But to make another example, the movie about Jimmy Hoffa struck me as an interstellar bunch of nonsense, complete with an orbiting station around.
Voto:
Oh, I almost forgot American Gangster. I don't know if it's realistic (after all, it's a confession, and one confesses what’s convenient for them) and by the way, it's written or screenplayed or whatever the hell by Pileggi, the author of the book from which Goodfellas is adapted (he's also involved in Casino).
Voto:
The story has been told differently by Hill; more or less, we're facing a "Criminal Novel" where instead of De Cataldo, there’s Scorsese. The figure of the Irishman doesn’t hold up, doing whatever the hell he wants while the mafia does nothing. Being an American film, it's normal to have an Irish hero, but it's not realistic. Lucky Luciano is realistic because he doesn’t say a damn thing. In fact, in reality, we don’t know a damn thing. "Blow" would also be realistic if it weren't for the fact that it only exposes dead characters or those already arrested, and one should also believe that Jung was bringing tons of cocaine into the USA and giving it all to one person. What’s more, a gay, former hairdresser, sweet as a Sachertorte. And then there was the groundhog making the chocolate. Then, well, he’s all good and tender with everyone, and it’s all the wife’s fault. How. "Banditi a Milano" is instead very, very realistic, given that it talks about a gang of idiots (the Banda Cavallero); there's enough known not to invent anything. "Todo Modo," on the other hand, was not only realistic but also prophetic; Sciascia and Petri together certainly couldn't make a mess. Anyway, I've seen "Goodfellas" 30 times, just to be clear.
Voto:
Well, Scarface is a cartoon, beautiful but a cartoon. Although, stranger than fiction, the real Scarface from Miami was a former Colombian hooker, lesbian, fat, and psychopathic.