easycure

I liked it a lot.. it seems to me that instead the rhetoric is constantly avoided by the total lack of real meaning that permeates the actions of many of the various protagonists.. even the "kiss" between the two killers has no value of physical attraction.. it's just an experience of something they've never done.. in fact, that's one of the most atrocious scenes in the film, because despite its modesty, it is one of those that best represents the pure and haunting non-sense of their actions. Beautiful.

If America is all one and completely Masonic, as you say, how come they got rid of it? Moreover, the idea of greed in its purest form is something that makes no sense... Contextualization is still necessary: in the '60s both the USSR and the USA would do anything to maintain their status... but if it hadn't been like that, if the balance had been broken, I would really like to know where we would be now... ah yes, American greed... and the beautiful "ideal socialism" of Stalin and his successors? America with Cuba? And then Czechoslovakia and Hungary? And I’m speaking to you as a convinced leftist... it’s just that certain discussions seem completely uncritical to me... More than a response to the decadence of time, Machiavelli wants to outline a portrait of the ideal timeless politician... and his ideal politician is one who does not shy away from killing a table full of nobles through deceit for the "good of the state"...

I'm sure I don't know what you listen to, but since you've brought up rather weak points, I assumed your perspective wasn't that nuanced. In fact, as you yourself quoted, I wrote "PERHAPS you need to listen to a few thousand records" ;-) ..aside from that: you say they’ve found a style that’s all their own. Well: describe it to me, prove it to me. Do you see we're not on the same page? You throw out that my point of view is ridiculous, while you don't have one at all.. you expect to undermine my opinion just based on your taste, and in fact, you say nothing. In what way have I "insulted" this group? To criticize a group is to insult them? Have I offended them personally? I expressed an opinion about them; if you don’t like it or think it’s off-base, counter it, present some arguments; trying to prove the illegitimacy of an opinion is just ridiculous. Bye.

beautiful review, I liked it a lot.. I always lack the "courage" and the desire to listen to bands like this, personally I think I would get bored but that doesn’t change the fact that albums like this seem very interesting

In fact, it has practically been established that in Cook County during the '60 presidential elections, even the dead voted for Kennedy, probably thanks to the mafia (by the way, I recall a Simpson quote about this) :-D but I think we should still be happier this way... And anyway, no one wants to canonize him, yet come on, he was a politician, not a missionary.. Machiavelli has been trying to explain since the 1500s that a politician MUST NOT prioritize ethical issues.. If you consider this, and only if you consider this, Kennedy becomes an extraordinarily significant figure in his actions.

Well, I’m rather skeptical about directly linking the Bay of Pigs with the missile crisis. Put the way Lariana has, it might seem that way, but in reality: 1) the issue needs to be viewed in broader terms, meaning that despite Eisenhower (a Republican but much more prudent and wise in foreign policy than his Democratic predecessor Truman) having made considerable efforts to "thaw" relations with Khrushchev, the famous spy plane incident not only called everything into question but also brought the relations between the two powers to a level of very limited dialogue and once again clear overt animosity. The escalation had thus already begun beforehand. 2) Cuba certainly must have sought help from the USSR, but it seems naive to believe that they explicitly asked for intervention with nuclear installations. It was certainly the USSR that took the initiative with specific and, in hindsight, obvious political motives, regardless of what Cuba intended to do or not. Probably, the USSR simply seized the opportunity.

Kennedy was indeed a hawk... but every political figure of such magnitude needs to be contextualized. When contextualizing him, I believe he remains one of the greatest politicians of the 20th century, even and especially in ethical terms, in some of his choices. It is obvious that his figure today can only be viewed retrospectively, starting from his death (and the reasons behind it). In any case, it seems to me that even in his ambiguous ability to govern certain situations, he never lost a certain degree of liberal consciousness. Always, I repeat, taking into account the necessary historical and political contextualizations.

I really like how Stone directs. From a purely technical standpoint, he has impeccable style. Even that tacky "Any Given Sunday" entertained me a lot with its frenzied pace... but every now and then he falls into indecorous territory, that's for sure. The best remains "Talk Radio," which is truly a great film with few reservations. This gives the impression, in the end, of being a workmanlike product, too busy focusing on historical reconstruction to truly mean something as an artistic expression, yet it remains captivating, interesting, and masterfully directed.

Well... I've listened to two of their albums, and they didn't tell me anything. They seem like the classic case of a band hyped beyond measure (by critics) more due to a lack of offerings than for their actual quality.

Ah! Thank you, Alessio.. :-) I must admit I've "sweet-talked" my way in, and from his descriptions, I'm very curious about "Circle," which he calls the most imaginative... Anyway, I'll start with this one, so at least in four pieces I can tell if I'll enjoy it... bye, beautiful!