From: owner-loud-fans-digest@smoe.org (loud-fans-digest) To: loud-fans-digest@smoe.org Subject: loud-fans-digest V1 #299 Reply-To: loud-fans@smoe.org Sender: owner-loud-fans-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-loud-fans-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk loud-fans-digest Friday, November 9 2001 Volume 01 : Number 299 Today's Subjects: ----------------- [loud-fans] Steve sweated on me! [Vivebonpop@aol.com] Re: [loud-fans] 24? [dmw ] Re: [loud-fans] 24? [Aaron Mandel ] [loud-fans] two online things (ns) [Dana L Paoli ] Re: [loud-fans] 24? [Chris Prew ] Re: [loud-fans] high-tech Lynching (spoilers) ["Aaron Milenski" ] RE: [loud-fans] high-tech Reeding ["Keegstra, Russell" ] Re: [loud-fans] once more with ProTools [Dan Schmidt ] Re: [loud-fans] once more with ProTools [Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey ] Re: [loud-fans] high-tech Lynching (spoilers) [Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey ] Re: [loud-fans] high-tech Reeding ["Aaron Milenski" ] Re: [loud-fans] high-tech Lynching ["Andrew Hamlin" ] Re: [loud-fans] high-tech Lynching ["Pete O." ] Re: [loud-fans] Scott-Watch! ["Andrew Hamlin" ] Re: [loud-fans] high-tech Lynching ["Andrew Hamlin" ] [loud-fans] vicious... [Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey ] Re: [loud-fans] once more with ProTools [Roger Winston ] Re: [loud-fans] once more with ProTools [Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey ] RE: [loud-fans] vicious... ["R. Kevin Doyle" ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 03:22:55 EST From: Vivebonpop@aol.com Subject: [loud-fans] Steve sweated on me! And to quote Homer Simpson, "I was lost in your Bobby Sherman-like eyes." Actually Malkmus and band did a good set, very tight and enjoyable, so he would be worth an evening out for the average Loudfan in my opinion. He was, to sound cliche, much better live, (I bought the album months back and sold it) but refused to do any Pavement material when audience members screamed out Pavement song titles. It reminded me of seeing Let's Active in '87 when people in the audience yelled "EVERY WORD MEANS NO!!" and Mitch refused frustrated. I liked the opening band, Marble Valley. They had a pleasant, albeit, quasi generic non-threatening indie-pop sound, which I thought may impress me more if I explored their album they had for sale. They had cutesy imagery on their band t-shirts that looked like they were going for the backpack and barettes set (they even had a giant stuffed dog with a sign on it that said "Please buy Marble Valley stuff"...so I did...never been one to refuse pleas from a large stuffed toy). However, I got their disc (which shall remain nameless) and it is, IMO, just awful. I was like, this is the band I just saw two hours ago?? It sounded like drunken frat boys with a fetish for rap playing a joke (on the poor slob who paid 10 bucks for the thing) or something. So, I disliked the Malkmus disc, but liked him live, and liked Marble Valley live but didn't care for their disc. Maybe if MV got Mitch Easter or Steven Street (yeah, right...money's no object) to produce them they might actually put out a good record. Mark np Game Theory "Distortion of Glory" ("T.G.A.R.T.G." makes me want a pair of checkerboard Vans) "2+2= 5-ism: Caving in to a target marketing strategy aimed at oneself after holding out for a long period of time. 'Oh, all right, I'll buy your stupid cola. Now leave me alone.'" (Douglas Coupland, _Generation X: Tales For An Accelerated Culture_, 1991) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 09:07:59 -0500 (EST) From: dmw Subject: Re: [loud-fans] 24? On Fri, 9 Nov 2001, glenn mcdonald wrote: > marketing for this? The idea, in case you missed it, is that the series > is 24 episodes long, each episode covering one hour of the story > approximately in "real" time (including the occasional split-screen when > things are going on in two places at once), so that the whole series did anyone see, I think it was called "The White Balloon?" An Iranian film, near the first blush of Iranian film hotness, it's presented *strictly* in realtime -- it's 90 minutes, with three clock strikes to ground the action. No crosscuts either -- if I remember right the camera moves only in ways that a physical object could move. In most other respects, I suspect it was very unlike 24; I thought it was really charming. Is it because? - -- d. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 09:11:32 -0500 (EST) From: Aaron Mandel Subject: Re: [loud-fans] 24? On Fri, 9 Nov 2001, glenn mcdonald wrote: > Did anybody else succumb to the marketing for this? Yes. The problem is that it was so incredibly predictable. What I've heard is that they aren't following any master plan -- it's being written as it goes along just like most other series. So some of the things that are up in the air after the first episode may be that way because the writers didn't know how they'd work out either. I don't object to this method in general, but it seems like _24_ would call for tight plotting. On the other hand, the split-screen things (both for phone conversations and just for things happening at the same time) are very nice, stylistically different from all the other shows based on the same plot cliches, and for some reason the real-time gimmick made us all giddy. When a character says "that'll wear off in half an hour", you know when in the episode the waking-up scene will be! For some reason, that's neat. I'll be watching a little longer, if only to see whether, miracle of miracles, they have a ticking-bomb scene where the readout on the display is respected. aaron ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 09:25:21 -0500 From: Dana L Paoli Subject: [loud-fans] two online things (ns) We haven't been doing coupon links for a while. I'm not sure if that's because everyone gets them, because nobody buys CDs online, or because the companies have stopped giving them out. I haven't seen one of those great $10 or $20-off CDNOW coupons in a while. Anyway, I just got one today, but it's for a measly 15% off. With the holidays approaching, though, I guess every little bit helps: http://cdw01.cdnow.com/Click?q=3e-F5SnIizbfjf9u5oa7KaPG3if Also, does everyone know about the Epitonic website/newsletter? It's not a godsend, but occasionally it's a nice thing to have. Basically, you can subscribe to their newsletter, and once ever few weeks you get an email with a bunch of indie-type bands on it, with graphics of their albums and a brief bio. Appearing on the current newsletter are Yuji Oniki, The Clean, Bertrand Burgalat, etc. The part that I like is that if you click on the band, you get taken to a page that usually features 2-4 of their songs in their entirety, and even better you can stream the whole page which makes it much easier to deal with at work. Just ignore their blather about how amazingly wide-ranging their taste is: http://www.epitonic.com/ And finally, Voiceprint finally sent me my Claire Hamill "October" CD, after an incredible wait -- they easily have the slowest shipping in the business. That means that I no longer need the (somewhat scratchy) CDR that I'd made from vinyl. So if you want to hear the folk/psych album that two loudfans think is pretty neat, feel free to write me off list. (CC Dorsey, this has your name all over it, I think). - --dana ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2001 08:28:02 -0600 From: Chris Prew Subject: Re: [loud-fans] 24? Aaron Re: 24 > > Yes. The problem is that it was so incredibly predictable. What I've heard > is that they aren't following any master plan -- it's being written as it > goes along just like most other series. I read they actually wrote the episodes backwards....or at least, wrote the major plot points backwards for the entire season. I didn't watch it, though. I did watch the Tick...not impressed. Bring back the cartoon, please. Of course I still think Family Guy is the funniest thing on TV, so what do I know? Chris ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2001 09:40:33 -0500 From: "Aaron Milenski" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] high-tech Lynching (spoilers) Can there really be any spoilers in a film that has no actual beginning and end? >I am more than ever persuaded that Diane is the emotional center of the >movie, and that if that Salon.com article's premise that the first part of >the movie is her dream is a bit oversimplified, it certainly hits upon an >essential truth in the way the film works. I'm curious, because none of the articles I've read answer this question. Does anyone know exactly what was part of the TV pilot and what was added later? The obvious assumption was that everything from the first sex scene on was added, but in a Lynch interview he mentioned that much of the main body of the film was retooled. My reason for asking, other than just plain curiosity, is just that if Diane (or at least the personality of Diane rather than just the name and dead body from earlier in the film) wasn't even created until Lynch realized he had to have a "finished" film rather than an ongoing TV series, it's an odd concept that the whole thing could be her dream or that she could be the emotional core of the film. I have similar questions about whether Lynch knew who the murder was when he first created Twin Peaks or if he just eventually had to choose one (which would mean that the preceding events, as shown in TP:FWWM, were devised after the events of the TV show.) I think Lynch's logic works that way--it's as if he pieces together his own stories by writing them, then looking at them and solving the puzzle he created. >And someone really should mention that when Betty asks Rita if she'd ever >"done this" before, Rita's answer - "I don't know" - is priceless, That was hilarious, though I have to admit that it was also obvious and easy to predict: I said it in my own head just before it came out of her mouth. >Finally, I really can't see how Aaron sees the film as lazily edited I don't believe I called the editing lazy; if I did that's not really what I meant. I'm questioning Lynch's "internal editing." "Lazy" is probably the wrong way to describe it. I just continually get the feeling that when he makes a final decision about what to include or not to include somewhere in the back of his mind is a voice saying "I can get away with this even if I don't know why I'm doing it." That's been my feeling about Lynch ever since WILD AT HEART, and while this discussion has softened my view of whether that's ultimately good or bad in terms of the quality of his work (positive: it gives him courage to experiment, negative: it doesn't encourage him to look for a "better" idea), I still am completely convinced that's how he operates. >filmed material that doesn't seem to fit, isn't it less work (i.e., >lazier) to just cut it out rather than try to figure out where to fit it >in? You're probably right, so again "lazy" is wrong. That's not to say that I think trying to fit it in a necessarily the best decision. >I'm also very uncertain about why anyone would feel resentment if they >don't like a film - esp. a film by David Lynch who, as I said, is unlikely >to be reasonably expected to produce a conventional movie. That reaction >confuses me...who's the victim? No one is forcing anyone to go see a movie >- or are you blaming critics for praising the movie? I feel the same way about Lynch that I always do about solo Lou Reed (here's a weird analogy), that because he's flaunted convention the way he has (and in Lou's case, has purposely attacked the concept of rock criticism) that he's become somewhat above criticism, which means he can get away with anything. I'm curious about whether some of those critics who praised WILD AT HEART to the skies have since changed their minds about it the way critics over the years have looked back at Reed albums like STREET HASSLE, THE BLUE MASK, and BERLIN and reassessed them in a less positive light. _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 09:49:33 -0500 From: Dana L Paoli Subject: Re: [loud-fans] high-tech Lynching (spoilers) the way critics over the years have looked back at Reed albums like STREET HASSLE, THE BLUE MASK, and BERLIN and reassessed them in a less positive light. >>>>>>>>>>>> I thought that Berlin initially received poor reviews and was subsequently reassessed in a more positive light. If memory serves, Rolling Stone ran a second review, which was positive, after an initial pan. Was it subsequently re-reassessed in a less positive light? I like Transformer better, but Berlin comes in second. - --dana ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2001 10:05:35 -0500 From: "Aaron Milenski" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] high-tech Reeding >I thought that Berlin initially received poor reviews and was >subsequently reassessed in a more positive light. If memory serves, >Rolling Stone ran a second review, which was positive, after an initial >pan. Was it subsequently re-reassessed in a less positive light? Critical response to BERLIN is almost as bizarre as the album itself. It tends to get reassessed in a positive light, then negative light, then positive, etc... My own reaction, which I've posted to the list before, is equally weird. I hate it every time I hear it but am still compelled to listen to it every once in a while, after which I hate it so much that I usually sell it, only to buy it back again the next time I get the urge. Some recent "100 best albums of all time" lists actually include BERLIN. BLUE MASK and STREET HASSLE tend to the be the Reed albums that were most overrated at the original time of release. I've also noticed that LEGENDARY HEARTS. which is much more subdued than BLUE MASK, has tended to grow in critical admiration, which seems appropriate to me since it's the rare Reed album where he doesn't seem to be trying to put anyone on. Aaron lyric of the day, from the Dictators "Two Tub Man:" "I think Lou Reed is a creep." _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2001 15:21:39 +0000 From: "O Geier" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] 24? Did anybody else succumb to the marketing for this? The worst case of marketing for a bad show was NBC's attempt to market the 'Michael Richards Show' during the World Series. As if I didn't hate Bob Costas enough, I had to listen to him 'sell' the show in the guise of a conversation with Joe Morgan, a childhood hero of mine. Example: 'Hey Joe, sounds pretty good huh? You got Kramer from Seinfeld, and Tim Meadows, the 'Ladies Man', should be a real winner'. AAaaarrrggghhhhh!!!!!!!!! - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 09:40:25 -0600 From: "Keegstra, Russell" Subject: RE: [loud-fans] high-tech Reeding Aaron declares: >lyric of the day, from the Dictators "Two Tub Man:" >"I think Lou Reed is a creep." ...or from the Rheostatics: "Don't tune, Dave. It's more avant-garde." "Lou Reed wouldn't tune!" Russ ...speaking of the Rheos, I like "Night of the Shooting Stars". It starts to drag a bit after the middle, but "The Reward" is the reward for sticking it through. So to speak. - ----- "We're holding our own." Last communication from Captain Ernest McSorley of the Edmnd Fitzgerald to Captain Cooper of the Arthur M. Anderson, 7:10pm November 10, 1975. Fifteen minutes later the Anderson lost the Fitzgerald's radar image in a snow squall. ------------------------------ Date: 09 Nov 2001 10:50:43 -0500 From: Dan Schmidt Subject: Re: [loud-fans] once more with ProTools Roger Winston writes: | At Thursday 11/8/2001 06:33 PM -0600, Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey wrote: | | >Rog (I think) said he thought UPN was going to rerun the episode | >(less the extra 6 minutes) this week or next - any word on when? | >(My cable system's onscreen guide doesn't list it.) | | I am interested to find out what they could cut out for the shorter | version. They'd have to get rid of one or two numbers, yet they | were all fairly essential to the plot. Maybe the Xander/Anya | number? It would be a shame if they cut the Tara tune. I heard they're cutting some dialogue, the little song after "I've Got a Theory" where they sing about how they'll deal with it together, and Dawn's dance scene. My verdict: the songs were quite good (I'm especially impressed that Joss apparently wrote them), the lyrics were excellent, the singing was serviceable (although I was disappointed by Spike's song - I think it would have been vastly improved if it had been transposed up a fourth or so), and the direction rocked. - -- http://www.dfan.org ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 10:03:57 -0600 (CST) From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: Re: [loud-fans] high-tech Reeding On Fri, 9 Nov 2001, Aaron Milenski wrote: > BLUE MASK and STREET HASSLE tend to the be the Reed albums that were most > overrated at the original time of release. I've also noticed that > LEGENDARY HEARTS. which is much more subdued than BLUE MASK, has tended to > grow in critical admiration, which seems appropriate to me since it's the > rare Reed album where he doesn't seem to be trying to put anyone on. I still like _Blue Mask_ a lot. I like _Street Hassle_ okay. I've never really gotten into _Legendary Hearts_. I would argue that Lou's post-VU work is generally overrated - or rather, he's one of those whose legend far outweighs the quality of his output. If I had to choose between the post-VU catalogs of Reed and John Cale, Cale's would win easily. - --Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society www.uwm.edu/~jenor/ADS.html ::a squid eating dough in a polyethylene bag is fast and bulbous...got me? __Captain Beefheart__ np: Future Sound of London _Lifeforms_ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 10:07:43 -0600 (CST) From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: [loud-fans] Scott-Watch! The most recent issue of _The Nation_ features a review of Michael Azerrad's book, _Our Band Could Be Your Life: Scenes from the American Indie Underground 1981-1991_. At the very bottom of its first page, the reviewer (Alexander Star) writes, "There is little room in [Azerrad's] pantheon for the bright-eyed ingenuous pop of North Carolina's dB's or the synth-draped and irresistible melodies of San Francisco's Game Theory." Whoo-hoo! I expect demand for Game Theory records to rocket upwards amongst middle-aged Jewish New York leftists. - --Jeff J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society www.uwm.edu/~jenor/ADS.html ::playing around with the decentered self is all fun and games ::until somebody loses an I. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 10:10:14 -0600 (CST) From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: Re: [loud-fans] once more with ProTools On Thu, 8 Nov 2001, Roger Winston wrote: > I am interested to find out what they could cut out for the shorter > version. They'd have to get rid of one or two numbers, yet they were all > fairly essential to the plot. Maybe the Xander/Anya number? It would be a > shame if they cut the Tara tune. Actually, they could eliminate the entire opening sequence as superfluous to the plot - that would get rid of, oh, 3-4 minutes. Probably a bit of dialogue-trimming elsewhere... Actually, I think the show itself ran only 4 minutes extra - the last 4 minutes were commercials and (I hope no one missed this) a singing "Grrrr-Aargghh" accompanying the wonderful Mutant Enemy logo. - --Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society www.uwm.edu/~jenor/ADS.html ::flag on the moon...how'd it get there?:: ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 9:19:42 -0700 From: Roger Winston Subject: Re: [loud-fans] once more with ProTools Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey on 2001/11/09 Fri AM 09:10:14 MST wrote: > Actually, they could eliminate the entire opening sequence as superfluous > to the plot - that would get rid of, oh, 3-4 minutes. Good point. The overture did sort of set things up for the day, but wasn't essential. > Actually, I think the show itself ran only > 4 minutes extra - the last 4 minutes were commercials I'm not sure, but I think I heard it mentioned that in addition to the whole presentation running over an hour, the first 60 minutes had fewer commercials than normal. So it may not be right to say that the whole thing only ran a couple of minutes longer (sans commercials) than an average episode. For the reshowings, they may have to go back to the "appropriate" amount of commercial time for the hour. Overall, I believe that UPN originally had wanted Whedon to cut 6 minutes for the original presentation. - -- When toads are not enough: http://www.reignoffrogs.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 10:24:09 -0600 (CST) From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: Re: [loud-fans] high-tech Lynching (spoilers) On Fri, 9 Nov 2001, Aaron Milenski wrote: > I'm curious, because none of the articles I've read answer this question. > Does anyone know exactly what was part of the TV pilot and what was added > later? The obvious assumption was that everything from the first sex scene > on was added, but in a Lynch interview he mentioned that much of the main > body of the film was retooled. I don't think he's telling - in an interview linked from that Salon piece (maybe the one you're referring to), he says it's not just a straightforward expansion of the "obvious" parts of the movie. > My reason for asking, other than just plain curiosity, is just that if Diane > (or at least the personality of Diane rather than just the name and dead > body from earlier in the film) wasn't even created until Lynch realized he > had to have a "finished" film rather than an ongoing TV series, it's an odd > concept that the whole thing could be her dream or that she could be the > emotional core of the film. > > I have similar questions about whether Lynch knew who the murder was when he > first created Twin Peaks or if he just eventually had to choose one (which > would mean that the preceding events, as shown in TP:FWWM, were devised > after the events of the TV show.) > > I think Lynch's logic works that way--it's as if he pieces together his own > stories by writing them, then looking at them and solving the puzzle he > created. I think this is how he works - through a process of discovery. At least, when he's said that he knows when a scene is right by its emotional impact, that would imply that he doesn't *know* in advance all the details. Certainly, _Twin Peaks_ wasn't planned: I recall interviews with various writers noting that later in the series, one of the major headaches was trying to ensure a reasonable degree of continuity and coherence - very difficult since everything just sort of evolved. > I don't believe I called the editing lazy; if I did that's not really what I > meant. I'm questioning Lynch's "internal editing." "Lazy" is probably the > wrong way to describe it. I just continually get the feeling that when he > makes a final decision about what to include or not to include somewhere in > the back of his mind is a voice saying "I can get away with this even if I > don't know why I'm doing it." That's been my feeling about Lynch ever since > WILD AT HEART, and while this discussion has softened my view of whether > that's ultimately good or bad in terms of the quality of his work (positive: > it gives him courage to experiment, negative: it doesn't encourage him to > look for a "better" idea), I still am completely convinced that's how he > operates. I suspect you're correct - but I'm not sure why you conceive of it as "getting away with it." I would imagine that the idea is to explore where a story, an idea, a theme, a character, takes one, judging the results by whatever criteria one sees fit (Lynch clearly works primarily in two realms: visual and emotional), and then retrofit to accord. I guess I'm also unclear why this process should discourage anyone from looking for "better" ideas. > >filmed material that doesn't seem to fit, isn't it less work (i.e., > >lazier) to just cut it out rather than try to figure out where to fit it > >in? > > You're probably right, so again "lazy" is wrong. That's not to say that I > think trying to fit it in a necessarily the best decision. Agreed - but then we're talking about aesthetic judgments again, rather than character judgments or attempts to imagine one's own tastes as universal. That's fine with me. > I feel the same way about Lynch that I always do about solo Lou Reed (here's > a weird analogy), that because he's flaunted convention the way he has (and > in Lou's case, has purposely attacked the concept of rock criticism) that > he's become somewhat above criticism, which means he can get away with > anything. I'm curious about whether some of those critics who praised WILD > AT HEART to the skies have since changed their minds about it the way > critics over the years have looked back at Reed albums like STREET HASSLE, > THE BLUE MASK, and BERLIN and reassessed them in a less positive light. As I said, that seems more of a criticism of his critics (that they're afraid to criticize him) than it does of Lynch (or Reed, for that matter). But I've read any number of negative reviews of Lynch (and Reed) - _Fire Walk with Me_ was almost universally panned upon its release, both by the reviews I can remember and by nearly everyone I know who saw it (including myself, at first - I now think it's a very powerful film marred primarily by being too short, at studio demand. I wonder if a DVD will recitfy that?); the reaction to _Lost Highway_ seemed primarily puzzlement - in fact, I think _Straight Story_ got the most positve reviews...and it's probably the most atypical film Lynch has done (discounting _Dune_ - and I think we all should. Although even there, I should probably re-view it - kind of like Aaron and his revolving-door relationship with _Berlin_.). Maybe it's just me: I kinda think artists *should* be able to "get away with" whatever they want. Our job is to see whether we want to go along for the ride - not imagine that artists are civil servants of the imagination. (And that's certainly not to say that some artists who do get away with what they want aren't boneheaded for doing so, for not taking the advice of people with better ideas - only that I wouldn't want to install such art-by-committee as a best practice.) Too many words, as usual, by: - --Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society www.uwm.edu/~jenor/ADS.html ::pushing the pencil not the envelope:: ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2001 11:40:30 -0500 From: "Aaron Milenski" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] high-tech Reeding > > BLUE MASK and STREET HASSLE tend to the be the Reed albums that were >most > > overrated at the original time of release. I've also noticed that > > LEGENDARY HEARTS. which is much more subdued than BLUE MASK, has tended >to > > grow in critical admiration, which seems appropriate to me since it's >the > > rare Reed album where he doesn't seem to be trying to put anyone on. > >I still like _Blue Mask_ a lot. I like _Street Hassle_ okay. I've never >really gotten into _Legendary Hearts_. > >I would argue that Lou's post-VU work is generally overrated - or rather, >he's one of those whose legend far outweighs the quality of his output. If >I had to choose between the post-VU catalogs of Reed and John Cale, Cale's >would win easily. I'm in the Cale camp also, though a lot of his work is hit and miss too. BLUE MASK is probably the album that I've come to dislike most over time, mostly because the so-called "honesty" of songs like "Women" has proven to be a ruse, one that certainly fooled most of the critics at the time, and it's painful to hear him sing "Syl-yl-yl-yl-vi-i-i-ia," knowing what would happen to that marriage. I do have to say, though, that a few songs no it rock with a conviction I've rarely heard from solo Lou, and the band he assembled for that project is just awesome. _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 11:54:15 -0500 (EST) From: Aaron Mandel Subject: Re: [loud-fans] once more with ProTools On Fri, 9 Nov 2001, Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey wrote: > Actually, they could eliminate the entire opening sequence as > superfluous to the plot - that would get rid of, oh, 3-4 minutes. I don't think that's a good idea; it's a catchy song, and without it "I've Got A Theory" doesn't make sense at all. Also, the dialogue-in-song aspect of the opening makes it clear that the songs are more or less diegetic -- the characters are really saying and doing those things, and so the groundwork is laid for Buffy's revelation about being in heaven. Some of the later songs don't quite work like that. a ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2001 12:02:43 -0500 From: "Aaron Milenski" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] high-tech Lynching ...cutting down the words and hoping to bring this thread to a merciful end >As I said, that seems more of a criticism of his critics (that they're >afraid to criticize him) than it does of Lynch That's probably true. Maybe when I felt angry after seeing WILD AT HEART and MULHOLLAND DRIVE it was because of a particular set of expectations I'd been given beforehand. To be honest, I'm completely puzzled that LOST HIGHWAY was so panned and MULHOLLAND DRIVE was so praised. When I really should be angry is when critics praise stuff like JERRY MAGUIRE, just to pick one that annoyed me a million times more than any Lynch film. >(or Reed, for that matter). Well, this is different, because I think Reed actualy does try "to get away with" a lot. I know he found it amusing that his absolute dumbest lyric ever ("Suzanne") gave him a hit single. And Lou often is lazy. Half the time he can't even be bothered to attempt to actually sing. >Maybe it's just me: I kinda think artists *should* be able to "get away >with" whatever they want. Well, I agree with that. I'm perpetually saddened when I think of what great films and records have been squashed or compromised by studios/recording companies that were unwilling to take a risk. I'm certainly not arguing against Lynch continuing to make films like MD, and I'll keep watching what he does. _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 10:03:07 -0700 From: Roger Winston Subject: Re: [loud-fans] once more with ProTools Aaron Mandel on 2001/11/09 Fri AM 09:54:15 MST wrote: > I don't think that's a good idea; it's a catchy song, and without it "I've > Got A Theory" doesn't make sense at all. Also, the dialogue-in-song aspect > of the opening makes it clear that the songs are more or less diegetic -- > the characters are really saying and doing those things, and so the > groundwork is laid for Buffy's revelation about being in heaven. Some of > the later songs don't quite work like that. I think you're confused - Jeff was refering to the opening "wake up/start the day" montage/overture which just had music and no dialog, not to Buffy's first song in the graveyard. Later. --Rog - -- When toads are not enough: http://www.reignoffrogs.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 10:22:35 -0800 From: "Andrew Hamlin" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] high-tech Lynching Just in case anyone missed it, here's a Freudian angle on the whole mess: http://www.salon.com/ent/movies/feature/2001/11/07/mulholland_dream/index.ht ml Freud isn't the only way to look at Lynch of course...but I found it interesting. Was that Trent Reznor behind the dumpster? Andy Q: Are there any anecdotes about the bad that you wish to share... A: Well, we all drink a lot and that's a problem in itself. And recently our toilet hasn't been working right, so our bass play has been shitting on newspapers in our backyard. Q: Have the neighbors complained yet? A: Not yet. - --Curtis Brown, singer of Bad Wizard, from an interview with Rick Kutner in the current issue of Backfire. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 11:23:12 -0800 (PST) From: "Pete O." Subject: Re: [loud-fans] high-tech Lynching - --- Andrew Hamlin wrote: > Q: Are there any anecdotes about the bad that you wish to share... > > A: Well, we all drink a lot and that's a problem in itself. And recently > our toilet hasn't been working right, so our bass play has been shitting on > newspapers in our backyard. > > Q: Have the neighbors complained yet? > > A: Not yet. > > --Curtis Brown, singer of Bad Wizard, from an interview with Rick Kutner in > the current issue of Backfire. So... has anybody checked on the drummer lately? - - Find a job, post your resume. http://careers.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 11:32:09 -0800 From: "Andrew Hamlin" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Scott-Watch! >The most recent issue of _The Nation_ features a review of Michael >Azerrad's book, _Our Band Could Be Your Life: Scenes from the American >Indie Underground 1981-1991_. At the very bottom of its first page, the >reviewer (Alexander Star) writes, "There is little room in [Azerrad's] >pantheon for the bright-eyed ingenuous pop of North Carolina's dB's or the >synth-draped and irresistible melodies of San Francisco's Game Theory." Just wanted to say that I read, and enjoyed, OUR BAND COULD BE YOUR LIFE. Informative, historical, thought-provoking. Azerrad doesn't seem to have many theories of his own, but he's happy to, and successful at, documenting the theories of others. Not to mention stories. Ah, stories. Tour stories. Butthole Surfers tour stories... A good year for rock books, says I. Caroline Sullivan's BYE BYE BABY: MY TRAGIC LOVE AFFAIR WITH THE BAY CITY ROLLERS made for unadulterated reading pleasure. Three other books I devoured in quick succession and did not regret (though I had to resist several urges per book to toss the whole construction in question against the nearest wall): David Bowman's THIS MUST BE THE PLACE: THE ADVENTURES OF TALKING HEADS IN THE TWENTIETH CENTURY, Chuck Klosterman's FARGO ROCK CITY: A HEAVY METAL ODYSSEY IN RURAL NORTH DAKOTA, and John Strausbaugh's ROCK 'TIL YOU DROP: THE DECLINE FROM REBELLION TO NOSTALGIA. While not a rock book, Nick Tosches' WHERE DEAD VOICES GATHER fascinated me with its history, its hints at analysis, and above all the pathos of the author's mania, which, in this case at least, alleviates much of the tiresome hypermasculinity to which he's prone. Looking forward to the Captain Beefheart biography (and Jean-Michel Mension's THE TRIBE), Andy "After the briefing, he slapped a Valvoline sticker on his forehead, ran headfirst into a wall and burst into flames." - --suspect reportage from http://www.fuckedworld.com/ on a briefing last Wednesday from Homeland Security Director Tom Ridge. Ridge did, at said briefing, say regarding NASCAR, "We think there will be ways that we could learn from them, and they may learn a thing or two from us." See http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/11/20011107-1.html#NASCAR ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 11:33:00 -0800 From: "Andrew Hamlin" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] high-tech Lynching >So... has anybody checked on the drummer lately? I think he's okay. But I'll let you know when I get the record. Andy ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 14:31:28 -0600 (CST) From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: [loud-fans] vicious... http://www.yahoo.com/s/2672 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 13:31:29 -0700 From: Roger Winston Subject: Re: [loud-fans] once more with ProTools Thanks to Sue, I've got a Joss Whedon quote about the Buffy cuts (looks like I was right about the Xander/Anya number): > The short version will air I think a week from fri -- it was hell to do, > but we pulled out "If Were together" entirely, plus a verse from spike > and a verse from "Walk through the fire". Plus a messload of dialogue, > the overture and Dawn's Ballet. All gone. So tonight -- and the > inevitable if very far off DVD are the real versions of the show. The > rerun is kind of like highlights. Hopefully it still plays as a > dramatic piece though, not a hodgepodge. Later. -Rog - -- When toads are not enough: http://www.reignoffrogs.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 14:33:59 -0600 (CST) From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: Re: [loud-fans] once more with ProTools On Fri, 9 Nov 2001, Aaron Mandel wrote: > On Fri, 9 Nov 2001, Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey wrote: > > > Actually, they could eliminate the entire opening sequence as > > superfluous to the plot - that would get rid of, oh, 3-4 minutes. > > I don't think that's a good idea; it's a catchy song, and without it "I've > Got A Theory" doesn't make sense at all. Also, the dialogue-in-song aspect > of the opening makes it clear that the songs are more or less diegetic -- > the characters are really saying and doing those things, and so the > groundwork is laid for Buffy's revelation about being in heaven. Some of > the later songs don't quite work like that. I should probably make clear that I wasn't able to tape the episode and saw it, therefore, only the one time, three days ago. I lack the laser-like precision memory for detail many of you apparently possess (either that, or a videotape). - -j ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 14:37:08 -0600 (CST) From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: Re: [loud-fans] high-tech Lynching On Fri, 9 Nov 2001, Pete O. wrote: > > A: Well, we all drink a lot and that's a problem in itself. And recently > > our toilet hasn't been working right, so our bass play has been shitting on > > newspapers in our backyard. > > So... has anybody checked on the drummer lately? You know all that junk drummers stuff into the bass drum to mute its sound? That's all I'm saying. - --Jeff J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society www.uwm.edu/~jenor/ADS.html ::Any noise that is unrelenting eventually becomes music:: __Paula Carino__ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 14:40:20 -0600 (CST) From: Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey Subject: [loud-fans] inevitably... So what would happen if David Lynch directed an episode of _Buffy_? - --Jeffrey with 2 Fs Jeffrey J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society www.uwm.edu/~jenor/ADS.html ::Watson! Something's afoot...and it's on the end of my leg:: __Hemlock Stones__ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 11:04:01 -1000 From: "R. Kevin Doyle" Subject: RE: [loud-fans] vicious... RE: http://www.yahoo.com/s/2672 The girls main mistake was taking a floral approach. Flowers are generally ineffective against all but the most inbred, asthmatic members of the royal family. As Charles can attest, the best way to eliminate a royal involves staging an automobile "accident." ------------------------------ End of loud-fans-digest V1 #299 *******************************