mista

Dear de-reviewer enthusiast, if you liked this, grab Episode and Visions, so you'll understand those like me who, having known the true Strato (legendary their opening concert for Rage on the Episode tour (1996 damn it!), for me the day when the power metal craze kicked off here in Italy, to the point that there was more excitement for them than for the headliners), consider this album mediocre, or rather the same old reheated soup. And let’s not even talk about their latest work! So good that they themselves, at the supporting date, played only two songs from it, choosing instead to play almost everything from Visions!

if you want blood don’t touch! Bon Scott rules!

Hi Fidia, don't worry, I hold no grudges for your entirely legitimate comments on my first review. Instead, I invite you to learn more about the band, because it has nothing to do with the power epic of Rhapsody or something like that. You won't find pointless tirades at all sixteenths, alpine choirs, or cheesy orchestral parts, but only a very personal heavy metal-hard rock with Teutonic power nuances (especially in the singer's timbre). For fans of the more esteemed German power metal, I recommend the band’s first (I believe) work: "Living in Hysteria." A bit raw but with some nice tracks. I take this opportunity to give the album a rating. It’s a three, which for me already means "cool album" (I'm a bit stingy).

After extensive searches through the comments, I found the law you mentioned. Yes, indeed some phrases from Vic could integrate the illicit act you referred to, provided that it cannot be proven that the right to satire applies (which is tricky in this case). In the end, I must admit that the Debaser staff, from a legal standpoint, did well to censor the review to avoid incurring liability for a lack of oversight on what was published. Although personally, I find any act of censorship abhorrent, if I had been Debaser's legal advisor, I would have still advised them - for professional duty - to act as they did. Unfortunately, guys, like every civil right, the right to expression also has limitations when its exercise infringes upon some other Constitutionally relevant right. The law is like that, a real mess... :-) Hi everyone!

Anyway, I still feel like ROXING :-)

I understand your enthusiasm, but 5 still feels like too much for me; there’s no explanation that holds up, especially if you tell me you consider it inferior to the first one (which I’ve listened to in full once and found rather underwhelming myself). I also get excited when I go to see Maiden live, but if I had to review one of their concerts, I would never give it a 5 nowadays, because that would be a historical distortion. If you used the highest rating to express your excitement, you’re free to do so, but it’s just not a choice I agree with.

OH MY GOD!! The ring of power from Asgard!

Fuck, those Motley are so cheesy... but they fit in, come on! (And it's still a blast today to see their fans dressed like them dancing on Saturdays at Zoe). But still, saying "music understood as analysis of metropolitan reality set in a realistic but not real dimension, such that it can be observed with detachment and carefreeness" seems a bit much to me! Let's not weigh down the carefree rock of the Motleys with these improbable exegeses; I would say more "music understood as an analysis of the drinks, the highs, and the hookups that these four scruffs were having!"

I will look for the law you mentioned in the comments to Vic's review just as soon as this damn translation of acts in English that I'm doing is finished. I certainly didn't mean to say that you threw a bunch of legal nonsense into the mix; I just pointed out that while the verification of facts belongs to the judiciary, it is obviously up to the complainant to present facts that are relevant to the crime. Moreover, it's clear that we are not discussing the fact (it is indeed undisputed that Vic wrote the review and equally undisputed is its content). Therefore, if you take the position of a virtual complainant or denouncer of Vic's writing, for purely speculative and academic purposes, it is up to you to bear the burden, for the sake of the substantive effectiveness of your virtual act, to support the bases upon which your accusations are founded, even though it is obvious that the Public Prosecutor can independently assess their criminal relevance. As far as you tell me, you have already done this in the comments of the other review. As soon as I have time to read them, if you're interested, I'll share my opinion on your positions.

Rating for the album: 5!!!!! Filippo, while acknowledging your decent argumentative skills, I wonder who the hell calibrated your judgment meter, come on! If this album really excites you, then a 4 is more than enough! But five... (sorry for the outburst, but I can't stand the generous tipping that is often adopted on this site)