easycure

oh god... if musical maturity is "kind of magic" or "The miracle", then almost better the transition...

x stormino: I don’t understand the point of your comment; I simply expressed an opinion... people evidently tend to forget that when those same opinions expressed aren't in line with their own... it seems pointless for you to elaborate so much on it. Is there freedom of opinion on this site like anywhere else? Well, I expressed mine. Obviously, the fact that you think I did it "without understanding the reasons" is completely off base. I understand that you felt "offended" by my words (in the sense that I offended your favorites), but my review has its arguments; the understanding of the reasons is very much present, and just because you disagree with those same arguments is another matter entirely. To go more specifically into the topics addressed, the DT shows obviously no hint of reinterpretation of their references. §They haven’t modernized anything; what they've limited themselves to is a pale crossover of elements switched from different genres, which, however, remain such, with no innovation. Therefore, at best, they are mediocre, albeit competent, citationists. In the worst cases, they are plagiarists who, moreover, know how to hide rather poorly.

Certainly! Anyway, I don't think you're the only one who has shown such elasticity around here...

Hey there, Ajeje!

Omeganex, I truly don’t think I’ve ever read or written a sentence like “I didn’t listen to it, it’s so terrible,” and, above all, I’m sorry to disappoint you, but I listened to this album in full, and quite attentively. Why must we automatically assume that if someone criticizes Dream Theater it's a prejudgment? Unfortunately for fans, my opinions are entirely based on experience. If I find them utterly awful, it’s because nothing about them positively touches my aesthetic standards, there’s nothing I can do about it. The review doesn’t seem at all to come from someone who “feels superior”; it’s simply an opinion. Period. Sure, many responses, yes, I acknowledge that.. but I don’t see how else—other than “acting superior”—I could respond to insults or to comments that are objectively stupid and DO NOT address the arguments of the review (but, like some comments above, stubbornly focus on irrelevant details), or repeat mindless clichés like: “how can you criticize Portnoy, one who plays so fast”... do you think I should give credit to such statements? Probably someone who constantly listens to the Backstreet Boys would dare to make a more intelligent critique... without generalizing, of course... ;)

Well, I would say that ajeje has already said everything that needed to be added. The fact that Bangs reviewed Bowie and Stones (and by the way, Bowie and Stones are not Oasis) doesn't mean that he only reviewed Bowie and Stones.

If this seems like a humble review to you, Francis... suit yourself. However, I believe that someone like Lester Bangs wouldn't have wasted so many words on a group like Oasis... He was more aligned with the (fake?) alternatives you speak of, I’d say... and the fact that the subject at hand and the way it's dealt with is, in turn, beyond the "logical, obvious, trivial, taken-for-granted things" is also something I won't comment on further... if you're convinced of it, then good for you...

The "character Francis" hasn't been tailored to you; you've had it stuck to you, and even more, it feels like you WANTED it to be stuck to you with reviews like this, in my opinion... and I haven't spoken about "cold" and "warm" reviews; from this point of view, I can only agree with you; in fact, your review is, as lengthy as it is, also an enjoyable read. But it’s exaggerated, unnecessarily flamboyant, undeniably provocative, overflowing, in a word, presumptuous. It’s as if you chose something knowing that discussing it in a certain way would provoke controversy, and you purposely built a review around that. Do you know what this review suggests? That it is an exaltation of Francis, not the group in question. You idolize yourself, not truly doing justice, beneath the surface, to the group in question. Ultimately, Oasis deserved more when it comes to deserving less, if you know what I mean, and I believe that deep down you understand that. Oasis fans do poorly to exalt it, because it’s not a review of Oasis; it’s a review in glory of Francis, it could have been anyone (obviously as long as they would have sparked controversy) in their place. The only difference is that you genuinely like them, unlike others, but the substance remains unchanged. This is the impression I had. It seems to me that to be Lester Bangs, Francis, you lack a little humility..

But excuse me, why do you care, anonymous? You don't come back, do you? If the email notifications bother you, you can always click the "select" button and then the "delete" button... it doesn't take much, and it's always effective! ;)

Well, I've missed a big part of the controversy. What I can say, Francis, entirely objectively after reading the review, is that, very similarly to what you wrote about Jeff Buckley, it's a presumptuous review. First of all because it smells of being provocative, as if you were already expecting (and then I can't help but say you're even looking for) all the insults that followed the review. Secondly, it's very well written, but content-wise it's delirious: a continuous exaltation, with ridiculous statements even for those who consider themselves great fans of Oasis, like the comparison to John Lennon (mind you, a ridiculous comparison not so much for supposed artistic differences, but for the total absence of any possible comparison between the "eras" in which the two produced), or the definition of "genius" etc. etc... the statements are also justified, but the justifications are completely skewed if one considers the issue at hand. No "apriorism," I liked Oasis too, but someone who makes such statements about them in 2005 can only be: either a poor connoisseur of music, and honestly, I don't believe that, or someone with such a conservative, mediocre, degrading idea of rock that they can't admit that originality, innovation, and "difficulty" ever existed or exist anymore. Frankly useless, however well written.