odradek

From bad to worse: be good, guys, leave cinema alone, have some mercy. What unhealthy need pushed you to make your opinions about a movie known that, most likely, you didn't even comprehend halfway? I won't get into it because it seems like a mistake to do so. Talk to us about the soundtrack next time, and maybe throw in some other banal pseudo-ethical/moral consideration if that's what you care about. It's complicated to write about cinema, be nice, think about it. Have a good day.

I'm going to their concert. I've been told that the singer will be De Leo. I hope so, because he has a great voice. I heard them live a few years ago, and they seemed to be among the few who had something personal to say and the skills to do it. I hope they've continued down that path...

All this unanimity about Queen always leaves me puzzled. But even if they had the weight you seem to want to attribute to them, the review is absolutely counterproductive. Yes, "perhaps the best rock band that ever existed, undoubtedly the greatest live" is laughable. A bit of good humor, sometimes, doesn’t hurt.

A strange drift, hard to articulate. A sense of rigidity from which he would probably have freed himself over time. It would have been interesting to observe which path, and with what unpredictable deviation, Battisti might have taken... However, some pearls, scattered here and there, are never lacking.

And you said nothing! Alright... Regarding the songs, your correction wavers: they have changed even though they were already there, obviously. In fact, what is not there does not change, doesn’t it? But they have indeed changed. It's not my decision. It’s a fact.
Some of them might even be a bit ugly. So what? I skip the grooves, the track. I'm not getting paid to defend them. The songs take care of themselves. They last as long as someone remembers them, sings them, listens to them. And I have no intention of accusing you of throwing anything on anyone. It was an attempt, fruitless, to put the issue in other terms. Bye.

But Bogusman, why didn't these merchants do it with another thousand groups? But Bogusman, that's not the sign of VALUE; that's a consequence, if anything. And you can't extrapolate like that either, otherwise it doesn't count. That's not how the game is played.
The globe reference was related to the song format. In fact, the context stated: "But can anyone say that the Beatles' songs haven't marked the song format from then on?" I mean, what you say afterward: "..or the fact that they influenced the songwriting of countless artists."
Do me a favor, read it again. The conversation requires attention. Although it's not mandatory, of course. I'm going back to work, damn DeBaser notifications...

I just passed by here and I agree with some of the others above: Crocodiles is their album I like the most. That one gets a 4, this a 3/4. But I like how you talk about it (I also saw the perfect review of Chrome a little while ago...with compliments).

Yes, I know, I know about Scaruffi. I've read it, alas. But exactly, who cares. Here (and there) they say that they don’t count for shit musically. I listened to other things for years too, and I was surprised each time by the different possibilities available to those willing to explore. Even in their years. But it's not like when I encountered the Velvet, long before My Bloody Syndicate and perhaps Scaruffi, I declared that the rest was crap. I'm not a diehard fan, am I? Look, really, I've got a lot of work to do. See you around.

And to think, damn it, that I've never been a fan of the Beatles! I would have never imagined getting caught up in something like this. Damn DeBaser...

Hal, I see that you keep trying with thorough and clear arguments. So I apologize for interrupting: but it's precisely on the level of construction, of song form, that one cannot fail to understand the importance of their work. Should we be ashamed to state it, perhaps? To follow side issues or to attribute the title of immaculate innovators to some, while ignoring other groups that are also very interesting? It’s on that level that they have succeeded. But who cares about socio-cultural impact? That’s indisputable, and it’s only a matter of time before someone tries to deny that too, and then the reversal will force us to rethink even the law of gravity, which Scaruffi or whoever else may have discovered to be a sly invention of Beatles-loving conservatives. But can anyone truly say that the Beatles' songs haven’t shaped the song form from then on? That it’s about the songs that people, humans, sing around the globe. Not about the cultural revolution, not about the fate of Art, that’s a poor excuse as well. Songs: 3/4 minutes. Music and words. From that point on, everything changed. Bye