flood

In my opinion, Gabriel, just like Bowie, has stopped (for now) experimenting with the language of the music video because he understands how things are now—TVs only show those filled with hot girls and pimps, with young singers... and the nice music videos, the ones with a concept behind them, the "artistic" ones, whether by Gondry, Romanek, or Jonze, are almost always relegated to late-night slots.
So here he is, preferring to focus on the multimedia aspect of his live shows; Mariaelena is right, the DVD of the last tour is truly spectacular... unfortunately, I saw the more "basic" and simple leg of that tour, but he is always sensational live.
P.S.: I understand that one might prefer Gabriel with Genesis, but I have always been convinced that what he did afterward was the right and natural artistic progression; otherwise, he would have ended up like all his peers (both from Genesis and not), that is, an artist anchored only to the past and its celebration, with no future ahead.

Magmatic and fascinating album... in my opinion stronger in the first part than in the second, but still really of the highest level. I'm starting to be impatient for the sequel...

The comparison with the Blue might be a bit excessive; despite a few rather slick/faux trendy singles, Simply Red (or Hucknall) have more or less remained the same musically, obviously having "slowed down" with age—they no longer sound fresh and suitable for a young audience, having become a kind of elegant routine.
Their voice, however, remains exceptional, one of the best examples of plastic soul to come from England. This album is very nice (although I think the third, A New Flame, is better); the only flaw is indeed some typically '80s solutions (especially towards the end of the album) that make it feel a bit dated today. The cover of Heaven is beautiful (but I must say that Simply Red have always been good at transforming and giving a "soul" twist to other people's tracks).

I already know that I'll have to give it up, too bad I would have loved to see it live! By the way, do you know if he will also be performing songs by Pulp?

Ale, if you were born in '87, in '92 you were 5 years old and you might not remember well. Let’s be clear, Erotica did sell (but much less compared to its predecessors) because it was a Madonna album, who until that point was at the top. Therefore, there were expectations and anticipation from millions of fans who would buy her new album regardless. However, those expectations were disappointed both because the album was somewhat (very) panned and because many (the "casual" buyers) did not like the new Madonna at all, neither in terms of sound (the single was not received like the previous ones) nor especially in terms of image (with less flashy, "adult," unappealing videos for the MTV target). Those 5 or 4 (I think) million records Madonna would have sold anyway on "trust" thanks to the fans, with or without the scandalous book and the associated thriller/erotic film. However, the point is that the book did not bring in any new fans or curious onlookers... the numbers are clear: from 20 million of the previous greatest hits to 4 of Erotica, I’d say that’s quite a drop, a resounding flop! From that moment on, Madonna's career was always considered to be on borrowed time, at least until Ray Of Light... so yes, I’d say that in this case the publicity stunt served perhaps her as a character, to be talked about in the newspapers, but definitely not for her album, which was the only thing worth "saving" from that period.

Wow, is it really possible that among the mail I only find notifications for new comments on this review!? It seems that the others I've written really suck ahahahah.
Anyway, I wouldn’t talk about “luck” for this album, quite the opposite... the Sex book caused quite a stir and a lot of noise, but that time Madonna miscalculated badly because the publicity turned out to be very negative and especially in America (but not only) the album was a resounding flop. However, I still maintain that it's one of her best and most interesting works, even compared to the almost overrated Ray Of Light.

But in my opinion, the quality has diminished considerably not only in terms of composition but also in terms of arrangements, which are increasingly banal, polished, almost cheap... once they were much more exotic, rich in percussion, tribal rhythms. His latest march pieces (all the same) marked by the plucking of strings are unbearable.

Correction: "you can tell that it’s designed as a soundtrack rather than a standalone album."

I've never been able to appreciate this album; it feels long-winded, boring, "dusty"... to be fair, that might be the intention (and you can definitely tell it's meant as a soundtrack and a standalone album), but I just can't get into it yet. Moreover, here I find his voice particularly raw and lacking in emotion; Watermark is truly on another planet (and so is Shepherd Moons). Still, great review.

Yes, it's true, I've noticed the attention given to the lyrics too...unfortunately, it's something I do later (for obvious reasons...armed with a dictionary). In fact, yes, it must be quite different to catch all the aspects of an album (both musical and meaningful) at once, and it's probably what makes the difference in this case. I've just seen that the recent reviews from Pitchfork and Uncut are hovering around the pass mark...well, you might not believe it, but now this album (stripped of its supposed untouchability) is starting to grow on me a bit more!