bjork68

from mymovies.com on Greenaway’s The Last Storm: "In a redundant outpouring of Renaissance art that, through the Baroque, arrives at a delirious Rococo, he has executed a total art operation where the technical means ....."" total art, you simply translated it as total art, (I misspoke earlier, I said total style). Now you come to tell me that it's your own idea??

I too was a musician back then; in elementary school, I played the mandolin, took singing lessons, music theory, and solfège, and I sang in a few groups during my youth, like millions of kids around the world. If that's what makes me a musician, then... :-D. My questions are the kind that an ignorant commentator asks the reviewer who should enlighten him, not provocations. Don’t react as usual all worked up or singing your own praises.

Another thing, are the Ginderman and the Patti Smith Group similar? In what way?

The individual instruments play without differentiation between one track and another... do you mean they sound the same in all the songs? It doesn't seem to me that "helpless" is played the same way as "gimme shelter," for example.

"If you listen to the tracks one after the other, THERE'S no kind of research, no study on the solos, nor a hint of invention; even the individual instruments sound without differentiation between one track and the other." I don't understand... what research and study of the solos? And then what does it mean that the song structure has been heard before? They are covers, of course we've already heard them... perhaps you mean already heard done this way, well, by whom?

Alright, I repeated the thing about the Green Day and Who reviews twice, so you understand better :-)

Ah, I don't care about the style of your intrusive fakes; I don't even consider it a problem. I only know that when you used to critique with a funny little story, like the Who or Green Day, we could forgive your total lack of musical and lyrical aspects. Look at Punisher—this review might be forgivable from a kid, but you’re a man over 40, and we expect a review with reasoning behind what you claim, not a series of swear words thrown around as if discussing a Max Pezzali record at the bar! Your critiques are usually like that. It was better when you made up stories, like the reviews of Who and Green Day; at least they were entertaining, even if vulgar as usual, but they at least made us forget that you don't talk about music. There are four of your reviews on the homepage; sometimes there are even more. Why not write fewer reviews but make them more detailed and in-depth? And then, a piece of advice, okay? For cinema reviews like Greenaway, don’t take cues from MyMovies; many of us read that too. And you know, when I read about baroque, rococo, and the triumph of Total Style, it sounds like stuff I've heard before.
Four of your reviews and zero from Poetarainer, Odradek, Grasshopper, and others—thanks to insignificant guys with names like Cocchiola, Facchioschifo, Aljansen, Pungitore... I’d like to see less Punisher and more substance on the homepage, but this is a democratic site, and we make do with what's available.

I'm still waiting for an answer to two simple questions. I'll remind you in case you've forgotten: 1) What are the arrangements like? 2) Why is this album poorly played? As I anticipated in a previous post, your response was disappointing and evasive as usual. Is it that difficult for you to talk about music and not nonsense? Okay, I surrender; talking to you is like trying to draw blood from a turnip.

moments of great rock. Down By The River is superb!

Anyway, his was a traumatic defection, at least judging by the high level of anger he had. He had also told me what had happened, but I didn't understand much of it, and then hearing only one side and not the other...