easycure

No, no, I'm talking about music. Overall, I prefer Kid A by Radiohead.

Here, someone above mentioned Amelio: HE knows how to look inside Italy. Moretti, by now, knows more than anything else how to maintain his status.

the votes:

But come on, if there’s one thing that Moretti is NOT, it’s a good director. At least not in the classical sense. He has the visual sense that a commercial director might have, and the way he directs actors almost makes you miss Dario Argento, who at least has a deeply "underground" soul.. I found this film rather banal and irritating. It fundamentally lacks criticality, which given the subject matter, makes it really bad in my opinion, almost a complete failure. It’s not that there aren't hypothetically interesting ideas, but everything is always diluted, everything is always calm, apart from some coarse stereotypes about Berlusconi's Italy. The final sequence, then, is truly embarrassing. At least Moretti could have avoided acting in it (yes, because the fact that Moretti is also a good actor, forgive me, seems to me the worst nonsense that can be said.. okay that you take a middle ground, but it seems to me that you don't actually disdain it and yet it's simply terrible).

Come on, OK Computer is from another planet (and it's not even my favorite Radiohead album).. there at least is a poetics, here there are only clichés.

who knows if the good old Mika '83 will come out eheheh :-D ..the review seems nice (especially in the first part).. but the album isn’t worth a thing

It may be, yet you made a mistake :-) the "typical armamentarium" of criticism is a topic that works just fine with me, since if you had read the review with due attention, you would have noticed that for me Mulholland Drive remains one of the greatest masterpieces to be seen in this decade. If I'm not mistaken, it is at least ten years later than Twin Peaks, and certainly not a linear film. Moreover, you continue to reduce my point of view to the usual "not understanding anything".. so perhaps your interpretation of my critique is stale and trivial? I talk about a lack of communicative power, I talk about artistic presumption, I talk about arrogance.. I talk about the fact that you can make art with much less conscious and perhaps sadistic metaphorical cerebralism or pseudo-such, where there is intelligence and creativity with enormously more humility. I do not accept that this is a masterpiece because I insist on believing that art can still be simple.. because the same reaction you mention, that of spectators leaving the theater disgusted, to me is already a huge deformity. I cannot believe that art necessarily reduces itself to forced elitist intellectualism. Because this, ultimately, and by your own words, is what this film has inevitably produced as a result and interpretation. Maybe not mine and not yours, but of many. And that's enough for me: because I conceive a work that cannot speak as an incomplete work, thus far from being a masterpiece. P.S. The reaction of most viewers at least here was the classic jaw-dropping.. and masterpiece over here and masterpiece over there, the response that at least for me was frankly the most obvious and plausible :-D then it is obvious that not everyone has reacted this way, in fact! as you yourself confirm...

Can you imagine.. and what mark would this "pop rock/indie" have left? Plus you throw in the Blur who were born 15 years before Franz Ferdinand, and therefore have nothing to do with it.. I trust you, I'll never listen to them.

And in any case, in the final analysis, I absolutely agree with Lux. Great Lux, do you remember the good old days of "metropolis"? ;-D

eh eh :-) ..no no well, you're absolutely right about prog; it's not a genre with well-defined borders.. it's just that Dark Side has too many characteristics that don't align.. perhaps the only truly prog piece remains "the great gig in the sky," but if you listen to tracks like the aforementioned "Us and Them," "Time," "Brain Damage," or the same "breathe," you can feel there's a search for atmosphere that is philosophically typical of psychedelia. A true progger would have sought a more cultured approach, perhaps more complex, certainly more intellectual. Where the Floyd have refinement, there's also a morbid neurotic ambiguity that's more typically psychedelic.. that's what I meant.. then it's an album that's hard to define also because it's somewhat watered down compared to what the Floyd had done and in general to much psychedelia as well as many prog works. This is also why it gets "misclassified." bye!