ajejebrazorf

“after all, it’s just a cartoon” what does it mean? After all, 2001 is just a movie.

there wasn't just America and Disney in the world of cartoons, I think for example of Tezuka's experimental works from the late '60s, for instance. But in any case, this doesn't diminish The Simpsons (which are great), it's just that a supposed primacy in something means nothing.

Anyway, Galakordi's intervention seems to me to be decidedly clear and agreeable: but what kind of reasoning is it to say that the Simpsons are great because they do satire or because they make references, or because they were the first to turn cartoons into something adult (which is not true)? The Simpsons are great because they are an intelligent cartoon where satire and references also happen, but to build a theory on this...

What made it adult? It's not like there were only childish shows before The Simpsons, you know.

let's make it three stars and not speak of it again.

what a great movie "the warriors of the silent swamp" is, one of the best of the 80s (by the way, for me it's infinitely better than the much-celebrated "the warriors of the night," which I can't stand)! I've always heard good things about it, the review is excellent, but this comparison is a review in itself.

Losco, you might want to try "Don't Look Now" by Roeg, a classic horror film (not horror in the strict sense), which was delightfully translated here as "A Venezia un dicembre rosso shocking." The final scene is absolutely terrifying. Also, you should check out the third episode of "I tre volti della paura" by Mario Bava, "Gocce d'acqua," still deeply unsettling even today. As for "Descent": in my opinion, it's one of the best recent horror films, and it deserves praise for not trying to be anything else. Many people have turned up their noses at it, and it does have its flaws; it’s certainly not an art film, but it does its job exceptionally well. The fact that it doesn't have lofty artistic pretensions doesn’t mean it’s stupid; on the contrary: the setting is original, the pacing is excellent, and the ending isn’t just thrown together like in most films of the genre. Plus, the tension is always high: the jury awarded a score of 9.75 for the reverse somersault with one and a half twists that I executed at the moment of the delightful surprise mentioned by Fidia.

>>>>THE CONCLUSION is that you are homophilic invertebrates, blind from birth, with a fucked-up 3rd eye for centuries... just pick up any little treatise on physiognomy, like "The Criminal Man" by Lombroso, or on the physiology of astral influences, or the same ancestral psychisms that swarm on the face of our, to grasp behind the intellectual shell that of the former perverted priest born<<<< Um, sir, phrenology has been considered quackery for 160 years. Anyway, Rivoli, it really doesn't make any fucking sense what you write, and what you do understand is depressing. "A few ideas but confused." You are incredibly sad.

Lariana and Peter Green? And Duane Allman (but also Billy Gibbons...)? For the more recent ones (even though he's passed away), I highly recommend you get "Dislocation Blues" by Chris Whitley, an exceptional virtuoso and an extraordinary stylist on the guitar (he's not one to show off with boring solos, even though he has the talent; he has an extraordinary sound. Even when the songs aren't memorable, listening to him is a delight. And on the dobro guitar, he's amazing.

because, what does Fini say about Guccini? I'm curious