Massimof

Listen Caz.. FOR ME Springsteen is the Everest of Rock n Roll. For you, it might be the ditch of rock n roll. But I don't care, except to have a nice discussion about it. If you don’t like it, you don’t like it. For example, I don’t like NECRO (I told you I wouldn’t bring it up, but if you keep going, so will I). The Nirvana were a great rock band. But the reviewer pointed a finger at a ton of stinking bullshit (I already got pissed off this morning): he’s on drugs, he died for the business, he sucks, just for MTV... Do you know (more like the reviewer) that Cobain was terrified of fucking with his audience? Because he wrote songs for himself or maybe a little more. And he saw tours, concerts, etc. as a money-making machine to rip off his fans? He considered that circus a dirty and false thing. Drugs. He fell into it like millions of other young people. But even those who smoke, who drink... What kind of moralism is this? Zero for the reviewer and the review. Nothing is saved. Ignorance gave birth to this crap.

C'mon... you don't respond to me because you don't know what to say, and not knowing what to say you invite everyone to read my review of Springsteen, and for this, I thank you. In this review, I repeat and conclude, knowing that you can't refute anyone: there are just a pile of nonsense (this morning I'm being polite).

The most beautiful and romantic part of the USA. The Great Nature, The Adventure. The Conquest.

Damn... What does it mean that he says what he thinks? He thinks bullshit, writes bullshit, and consequently gets thrown out immediately. Your approval is just a clear attempt to go against the tide that went very wrong. As for the rest, I believe that Cobain's suicide (like the deaths of Hendrix, Morrison, Buckley, Elvis...) should not be judged, as long as one has a bit of common sense. Just as the other deaths of artists shouldn't be judged (dying from an overdose is perhaps worse than taking one's own life). Someone takes their own life because they are evidently in a lot of pain. But what do personal issues have to do with the music produced? I believe that Nirvana was a great band. Nothing historic, but certainly a great rock group. And their music will remain iconic, whether people like it or not. Then, regarding their value, it's right for everyone to have their own opinion, but to bring personal matters into it is, I repeat, adolescent.

Caz this time you're literally making me laugh (bitterly). With certain comments, you're bringing me back down to kindergarten. I knew (know) the Melvins very well; I never said that Nirvana invented a genre, read carefully, but they made an epochal album (which may or may not be liked) for various reasons. These adolescent bullshit to stir up controversy and go against common thinking are just approximate nonsense and populism. Do you really respect someone who says the singer killed himself for the band's business? You should redo a post to better explain your thoughts; it would be wise. If you want to argue just to highlight that your opinion "doesn't conform to the masses," choose a more solid topic with more valid arguments.

Yes, good memories... and the album definitely deserves a 4. Great review.

Beautiful album. For the review, I would have preferred it to be slightly more focused on why the album was composed and what meaning Cash and Rubin wanted to give it, and perhaps mention more songs that are, all, precious gems.

Dasaro, I lived through the Nirvana era, and I’ll tell you more: I saw a Nirvana concert. And I can assert that what you wrote is a load of (and I mean a huge load...) nonsense, which I’ll list below: 1) “...that our unjust world rejected because it was too dirty for such a noble and high entity...”: What are you writing? Who told you that? This is one of the biggest things I've ever heard. 2) “Kurt Cobain: Who was he? Basically, a junkie. Someone who lives for MTV and commits suicide for 'the system.'”: If you make such a simplistic analysis of life and its events, you must be between 14 and 17 years old. Cobain as someone who lives for MTV? What nonsense! I’ve never heard this in over 10 years! 3) “The music: What was it like? Not particularly innovative.” Is it? Sure, you can say that 13 years after the release of that album. But you couldn't have said it RIGHT after that album came out, I assure you. 4) “It must always be emphasized: the biggest commercial operation ever carried out by Nirvana was undoubtedly the death of its frontman.” With this statement, which has never been touched by a human mind, you’ve earned the WORLD’S STUPIDITY AWARD FOR MUSIC REVIEWERS. 5) “Kurt is dead, and thank God he is. Otherwise, you wouldn’t be able to stuff your diary any more.” This, on the other hand, is the "De profundis" of the review. In other words, you can't go any further. In summary, you’ve written a steaming pile of crap. I only agree with you on the fact that it’s a commercial operation. But for this, take it up with the record label, not with someone who died over ten years ago. You’ve made yourself look ridiculous.

Hal if you are a Christian Democrat today..... :-)

Indeed anonymous, you are right, you know? In reality, I gave it a 4 because I thought of other all-time classics in comparison to this one. But it definitely deserves more than 4. Maybe a 4.5. Here’s another rating so I can average it out.