From: owner-loud-fans-digest@smoe.org (loud-fans-digest) To: loud-fans-digest@smoe.org Subject: loud-fans-digest V2 #167 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 Thursday, May 9 2002 Volume 02 : Number 167 Today's Subjects: ----------------- [loud-fans] Bootlegs phenomenon hits the NYT... [Dave Walker ] [loud-fans] Mumps & Kristian Hoffman & [JRT456@aol.com] Re: [loud-fans] Re: Steve's Mix [triggercut ] [loud-fans] totally off-topic [jenny grover ] Re: [loud-fans] Re: Steve's Mix ["John Sharples" ] Re: [loud-fans] Re: Steve's Mix [Stewart Mason ] [loud-fans] esperanto ["me" ] Re: [loud-fans] totally off-topic ["me" ] [loud-fans] The best reason to own a radio in 30 years... [triggercut ] Re: [loud-fans] Re: Steve's Mix [Dan Sallitt ] RE: [loud-fans] Re: Steve's Mix ["Keegstra, Russell" ] Re: [loud-fans] Re: Steve's Mix [jenny grover ] [loud-fans] Patti Smith haters ["Aaron Milenski" ] Re: [loud-fans] Re: Steve's Mix [Dave Walker ] Re: [loud-fans] Re: Steve's Mix ["Aaron Milenski" ] [loud-fans] banner ads ["me" ] [loud-fans] Obligatory Movie Update ["jer fairall" ] Re: [loud-fans] Re: Steve's Mix [dmw ] Re: [loud-fans] Obligatory Movie Update [Michael Mitton ] Re: [loud-fans] Obligatory Movie Update ["glenn mcdonald" ] Re: [loud-fans] Obligatory Movie Update [Miles Goosens Subject: [loud-fans] Bootlegs phenomenon hits the NYT... It's gone overground: http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/09/arts/09MASH.html Legalities aside, DJ Spec's "The Vexed Episode" is one of the most thrilling DJ Mix CD's I've ever heard, and this is coming from someone who owns a lot of them... -d.w. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 09 May 2002 10:29:34 -0700 From: Steve Holtebeck Subject: [loud-fans] Re: Steve's Mix Andrea wrote: > 2 Tommy Keene Andrea: Again, I have to ask what is in print from him. I never > thought of the name as a song, much less something as great as this. Cool > pop, and no this doesn't describe me:-). "Andrea" is from his REAL UNDERGROUND cd, which came out on ten years ago on Alias, so it's probably out of print, but might be available online at www.tommykeene.com. There's a new album coming out next month on SpinArt, and a live TK album that came out last year on Parasol, which should also be available there. > 6 Windy The Association, Desiree The Left Bank: I only know the hits > from these bands, and while I like TLB song a lot, I give the nod > to Windy as this rocks. Any good comps from either where i could > start with them. The only CD I've ever found by the Left Banke is THERE'S GONNA BE A STORM, which is fairly comprehensive, and really great as well. For the Association, the greatest hits albums is all anyone would ever need. > 7 Elizabeth Einstein Adam Schmitt: Sounds like a good lost Fleetwood > Mac/Lindsey Buckingham song. Anything around from him, I wouldn't mind > hearing more. This is from his first solo album, WORLD SO BRIGHT, which used to be fairly easy to find used. He's also got a recent album on Parasol that I haven't picked up yet. > Gloria Shadows Of Knight, was this band any good byond their hit? Not really.. They had a couple of minor hits after "Gloria", but that song is definitely their one shining moment. I prefer it to the original version by Van Morrison and Them, because it's the one I grew up hearing on the radio. I was going to include Patti Smith's version, but it's just too long! > 13 Lola The Raincoats: at first I was put off by them deliberately > sounding out of tune, but it grew on me. This is from their first album, and I don't think it's out of tune on purpose. they were just following the punk rock cycle: form a band, make a record, then maybe learn how to play a little! > 16 Rachel Duffy: Is this Steven 'Tin-Tin' Duffy? I know he'd put out a > real pop album awhile back. Another find, cool pop. Same Stephen Duffy. He put out a couple of real pop albums a while back under his last name. This is from DUFFY, his 1995 album produced by Mitch Easter which found him in full-on Britpop/powerpop mode. > 18 Sarah Prince: Early Prince, and i like this better than what he's > doing now. What album is this from? It's from THE VAULT, his Warners contractual obligation album from the late 90s. Recorded, but not released, sometime between 1985-1994 but the album doesn't say when. > 24 Yasmine Circus Guy, another one I like, John is this > available anywhere, I'd like to hear more of the band. http://www.circusguy.com/. The first time I heard this song, I thought it was about Jasmine Bleeth, but she doesn't spell her name with a Y. Steve H. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 13:29:11 EDT From: JRT456@aol.com Subject: [loud-fans] Mumps & Kristian Hoffman & Since he was recently discussed, let's note that Kristian Hoffman has a great new album called "&" where he duets with many of this list's favorites: Van Dyke Parks, Russell Mael, Stew, Steve McDonald, Michael Quercio, and more. Also, The Swinging Madisons were a really great (and visionary) Hoffman act from the '80s. Their vinyl seems pretty easy to find. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 09 May 2002 13:06:54 -0500 From: triggercut Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Re: Steve's Mix Steve Holtebeck wrote: > > Gloria Shadows Of Knight, was this band any good byond their hit? > > Not really.. They had a couple of minor hits after "Gloria", but that > song > is definitely their one shining moment. WHAT?!?! Sacrilege beyond sacrilege. The Shadows actually had a pretty decent career for a '60's garage punk band. If nothing else by them grabs you, the song "Shake" is miles and miles and miles better than their version of "Gloria". In fact, "Shake" is so good, if you were to remix it today with phatter beats and electronica flourishes, it'd be all over the dance floors. The best compliment I can pay "Shake" is that it sounds like one nonstop De La Soul or Beck sample. But heck, don't take my word for it, hear it yourself... http://www.popmeter.com/real/garage/shake.ram When they get to the final breakdown with the ascending organ line...well, it's as funky as Chicago white kids have ever gotten. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 09 May 2002 13:52:55 -0400 From: jenny grover Subject: [loud-fans] totally off-topic Any Cowboy Bebop fans on here, and if so, have you seen the movie "Knocking on Heaven's Door", and if so, how is it? Jen ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 14:05:41 -0400 From: "John Sharples" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Re: Steve's Mix SH: >http://www.circusguy.com/. The first time I heard this song, I thought >it was about Jasmine Bleeth, but she doesn't spell her name with a Y. "Yasmine" is actually an old Circle Sky song from 1989 that I pestered Culhane to resurrect when we were forced to briefly "reform" Circle Sky as a live band in 1996 (sans Matt Keating) when Copper threatened to pull our track off the Badfinger trib if we didn't play out! That band morphed into Circus Guy and "Yasmine" stuck. Michael is half Lebanese and he has a really cute cousin on the Arab side of the family named Yasmine (yaz-MEEN). But of course the song isn't about her (though that didn't stop her from getting uptight about it). It's definitely about his ex-girlfriend, Cat Carcia, who was a fairly well-known DJ on New Jersey's big rock station WDHA in the late 80s. After the split, whenever they would talk she'd only ask him about how the band was going, not HIM personally, and that of course pained him deeply and voila there's your song. Definitely my fave CGuy track. Ye Olde Tyme Power-Poppe! Ah, enough reminiscing! Back to evil Secured Transactions! Ack, ptooey! JS ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 09 May 2002 14:01:06 -0400 From: "Aaron Milenski" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Re: Steve's Mix > > > Gloria Shadows Of Knight, was this band any good byond their hit? > > > > Not really.. They had a couple of minor hits after "Gloria", but that > > song > > is definitely their one shining moment. > >WHAT?!?! > >Sacrilege beyond sacrilege. The Shadows actually had a pretty decent >career for a '60's garage punk band Well, the Shadows suffered from the same problem as most 60s garage bands, which is that their albums are chock full of cover versions, most of which are energetic but pointless, making the albums horribly inconsistent. Their two most well-known songs, unfortunately, are covers: "Gloria," and "Oh Yeah," which is a great version and was smartly included instead of "Gloria" on the original NUGGETS. The other legendary non-hit of theirs (on the NUGGETS box set), "Bad Little woman" is a cover as well. But when I think of them (or put them on mixed tapes) I think of two great originals, "Gospel Zone" and "Darkside." Pretty much all of the SoK comps include both songs. And I have a hard time thinking of "Gloria" as their shining moment, since all their version did was push the original off of the charts even though it wasn't especially different (and certainly wasn't better.) I'll use this moment to say this--Patti Smith did the absolute impossible. She took the song that was the most covered, most overly re-recorded, most abused, and ultimatly most tiresome, in all of rock and roll, had it lead off her first album, and actually transformed it into something so great that it made me redfine my viewpoint on cover versions (i.e. maybe there actually is a reason for them.) It's as if someone recorded a version of "Louie Louie" that did the same. Aaron _________________________________________________________________ Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 09 May 2002 14:12:00 -0400 From: Stewart Mason Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Re: Steve's Mix At 02:01 PM 5/9/2002 -0400, Aaron Milenski wrote: >I'll use this moment to say this--Patti Smith did the absolute impossible. >She took the song that was the most covered, most overly re-recorded, most >abused, and ultimatly most tiresome, in all of rock and roll, had it lead >off her first album, and actually transformed it into something so great >that it made me redfine my viewpoint on cover versions (i.e. maybe there >actually is a reason for them.) It's as if someone recorded a version of >"Louie Louie" that did the same. Well...yeah, they did. They were called the Kingsmen. Richard Berry forever, Stewart P.S. I thought Bleeth *did* spell her name Yasmine. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 11:08:56 -0700 From: "me" Subject: [loud-fans] esperanto oh boy - http://www.multiline.com.au/~johnm/shortcutkeys.htm - -- "Drag me, drop me, treat me like an object." - -- ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 11:15:41 -0700 From: "me" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] totally off-topic YES! love the show. no, haven't seen the movie. brianna - -- "Drag me, drop me, treat me like an object." - -- - ----- Original Message ----- From: "jenny grover" To: "loud-fans" Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 10:52 AM Subject: [loud-fans] totally off-topic > Any Cowboy Bebop fans on here, and if so, have you seen the movie > "Knocking on Heaven's Door", and if so, how is it? > > Jen ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 09 May 2002 13:55:22 -0500 From: triggercut Subject: [loud-fans] The best reason to own a radio in 30 years... So a couple of Sundays ago I'm driving home from work. I'd left my cd's at home that day, and the Sox game is rained out. I hate the Cubs, so that was hardly an option. I start running the dial...the Adult Alternative or whatevertheycallit station isn't doing anything worth wasting my ears on...so I keep going up the dial.... ...and suddenly hear a Cotton Mather song! On commercial radio! On a mainstream station! They follow that with one of my favorite underappreciated Beatles songs, "Every Little Thing". The gravelly voiced announcer back announces the rest of the songs from that loop--The Gants, The Chesterfield Kings... ...What the hell is goin' on here? Turns out Little Steven Van Zant (E Street Band, Silvio Dante on the Sopranos) has a new, nationally syndicated fm radio show called The Underground Garage. Only been on the air since April 7th. It completely and totally rocks my li'l world. You can check the playlists (prepare to be impressed) and listen to every single one of the five shows so far online at: http://www.hardrock.com/littlesteven/archive.asp That this is ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 12:57:52 -0600 From: "Roger Winston" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] totally off-topic Ditto! Jen, do you have a chance to see KoHD? It sure hasn't been released theaterically around here. I know that Columbia/TriStar is doing the eventual DVD release - there was a teaser for it on the METROPOLIS DVD. I have high hopes for the DVD, since they did a good job with METROPOLIS. My fish's name is Jet. Before him, I had one named Spike, but he died after a few weeks... Latre. --Rog - ----- Original Message ----- From: me Sent: 5/9/2002 12:15:41 PM To: loud-fans@smoe.org Subject: Re: [loud-fans] totally off-topic > YES! love the show. no, haven't seen the movie. > > brianna > -- > "Drag me, drop me, treat me like an object." > -- > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "jenny grover" > To: "loud-fans" > Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 10:52 AM > Subject: [loud-fans] totally off-topic > > > > Any Cowboy Bebop fans on here, and if so, have you seen the movie > > "Knocking on Heaven's Door", and if so, how is it? > > > > Jen ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 09 May 2002 14:53:03 -0400 From: Dan Sallitt Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Re: Steve's Mix > I'll use this moment to say this--Patti Smith did the absolute impossible. > She took the song that was the most covered, most overly re-recorded, most > abused, and ultimatly most tiresome, in all of rock and roll, had it lead > off her first album, and actually transformed it into something so great > that it made me redfine my viewpoint on cover versions (i.e. maybe there > actually is a reason for them.) Personal confession: I have such a negative reaction to Patti Smith's "Gloria" that I can barely stay in the same room with it. I would think lots of others would feel this way, but I've never met anyone who does, and I don't expect to find one on this list.... - Dan ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 14:07:11 -0500 From: "Keegstra, Russell" Subject: RE: [loud-fans] Re: Steve's Mix Dan: >Personal confession: I have such a negative reaction to >Patti Smith's "Gloria" that I can barely stay in the same >room with it. I would think lots of others would feel >this way, but I've never met anyone who does, and I don't >expect to find one on this list.... - Dan ...you just did, although I should say that I have a negative reaction to Patti Smith in general. Russ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 09 May 2002 15:12:42 -0400 From: jenny grover Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Re: Steve's Mix Dan Sallitt wrote: > > Personal confession: I have such a negative reaction to Patti Smith's > "Gloria" that I can barely stay in the same room with it. I would think > lots of others would feel this way, but I've never met anyone who does, > and I don't expect to find one on this list.... - Dan Ah... interesting. I can see how some elements of it would put a lot of people off, for various reasons. For me, the shock element, and the brazenness of it, make that version a sort of dark, guilty pleasure for me. But it would not surprise me at all if there were people who just couldn't tolerate it. Jen ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 09 May 2002 15:16:51 -0400 From: "Aaron Milenski" Subject: [loud-fans] Patti Smith haters Wow! I knew Patti Smith haters existed, though I'd never met one nor expected to find so many so quickly here. Dang...next thing you know someone on this list will say they hate the Ramones! Aaron, wondering what I dislike that would shock the list _________________________________________________________________ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 15:23:22 -0400 (EDT) From: Dave Walker Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Re: Steve's Mix Ever notice how amenable some musicians songs seem to be to cover versions? I'm thinking of a few in particular -- Neil Young, for example. I can think of several phenomenal covers of his songs right now without straining (Pixies - "Winterlong", Wire Train - "Mr. Soul", Saint Etienne - "Only Love Can Break Your Heart") -d.w. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 09 May 2002 15:30:54 -0400 From: "Aaron Milenski" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Re: Steve's Mix >Ever notice how amenable some musicians songs seem >to be to cover versions? > >I'm thinking of a few in particular -- Neil Young, >for example. I can think of several phenomenal >covers of his songs right now without straining >(Pixies - "Winterlong", Wire Train - "Mr. Soul", >Saint Etienne - "Only Love Can Break Your Heart") I would think the artists most amenable to cover versions are those who aren't great singers, which explains Neil Young (well, in some people's opinion, anyway) and, of course, Bob Dylan. Aaron, using this logic and awaiting a cover version of Dory Previn's "Starlet Starlet On The Screen Who Will Follow Norma Jean" _________________________________________________________________ Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 12:34:56 -0700 From: "me" Subject: [loud-fans] banner ads finally - one worth sharing: http://cache.burstnet.com/gifs/adcouncil_adc_acs_lineup_468_032902.gif and it links to here: http://63.150.180.215/coloncancer/information.html where you can get a desktop polyp. rockin'. - -- "Drag me, drop me, treat me like an object." - -- ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 15:43:23 -0400 From: "jer fairall" Subject: [loud-fans] Obligatory Movie Update Thumbs up to both SPIDER-MAN and HOLLYWOOD ENDING, both of which have already been endorsed here, plus if you missed WAKING LIFE in theaters you can now rent it, which I highly recommend doing. Jer np: Elvis Costello, WHEN I WAS CRUEL http://www.care2.com - Get your Free e-mail account that helps save Wildlife! ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 09 May 2002 14:54:45 -0500 From: Miles Goosens Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Patti Smith haters At 03:16 PM 5/9/2002 -0400, Aaron Milenski wrote: >Wow! I knew Patti Smith haters existed, though I'd never met one nor >expected to find so many so quickly here. You can add another -- not me, but off-list friend (he's on the Roxy Music list) who hates Patti Smith with a passion. For me, she's been one of those people that I never liked as much as the critical establishment -- I mean, I see what she's trying to do, I even like some of it some of the time, and *man* she can turn on the charisma and power and just electrify a room -- but for me, the idea of her has always been better than the actuality of her. I'd put Joni Mitchell in the same category. I don't dislike either one, but they don't click with me either. >Dang...next thing you know >someone on this list will say they hate the Ramones! No luck with this lister. :-) >Aaron, wondering what I dislike that would shock the list I guess mine are well-known: Guided by Voices Stereolab (like the Velvetsy sounds, hate the loungy) Pavement High Llamas (except for "Cropduster") The Connells Elliott Smith SWAG (much more icky in snarky live mode) If everyone here starts liking Character -- a Nashville band with some ties to Lambchop and Lifeboy, mostly instrumental music from the Tortoise school (though some Stereolab and GbV flourishes are present), and they're starting to get *massive* buzz -- I'll have to add them to the list. later, Miles ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 09 May 2002 14:56:06 -0500 From: Miles Goosens Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Re: Steve's Mix At 03:23 PM 5/9/2002 -0400, Dave Walker wrote: >Ever notice how amenable some musicians songs seem >to be to cover versions? > >I'm thinking of a few in particular -- Neil Young, >for example. I can think of several phenomenal >covers of his songs right now without straining >(Pixies - "Winterlong", Wire Train - "Mr. Soul", >Saint Etienne - "Only Love Can Break Your Heart") I'll quickly add: The V-Roys - "Motion Pictures" (on their live album) Sonic Youth - "Computer Age" (from THE BRIDGE) later, Miles ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 09 May 2002 16:02:50 -0400 From: "Aaron Milenski" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Patti Smith haters Miles says: >For me, she's been one of those people that I never liked as much as the >critical establishment -- I mean, I see what she's trying to do, I even >like some of it some of the time, and *man* she can turn on the charisma >and power and just electrify a room -- but for me, the idea >of her has >always been better than the actuality of her. I'd put Joni >Mitchell in >the same category. I don't dislike either one, but they >don't click with >me either. I think HORSES is one of the greatest albums ever, hands down, but I also think that she's the epitome of an artist with one great album followed by a dissapointing, mediocre career. Her other albums all have a song or two that are really good, and at least "Because The Night" and "Dancing Barefoot" are as good as what's on the first album, but basically she never came near that level again (and if HORSES didn't exist she'd be barely a footnote or one-hit wonder.) Hmmm...Joni Mitchell. She just may be the one artist whose critical admiration most baffles me. It's not just that her music doesn't appeal to me; I just plain don't understand it (musically, that is. I understand her lyrics and see why people like them, though I don't always relate.) I do like Fairport Convention's version of "Chelsea Morning" though. Aaron _________________________________________________________________ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 15:16:44 -0500 (CDT) From: Jon Tveite Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Patti Smith haters On Thu, 9 May 2002, Aaron Milenski wrote: > I think HORSES is one of the greatest albums ever, hands down, but I > also think that she's the epitome of an artist with one great album > followed by a dissapointing, mediocre career. Every time I listen to HORSES I think, "Damn, this is a good album. I can see why everybody likes it so much." Then I put it away for another 3-4 years before I spin it again. Jon ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 16:38:06 -0400 (EDT) From: dmw Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Re: Steve's Mix On Thu, 9 May 2002, Dave Walker wrote: > Ever notice how amenable some musicians songs seem > to be to cover versions? > > I'm thinking of a few in particular -- Neil Young, > for example. I can think of several phenomenal > covers of his songs right now without straining > (Pixies - "Winterlong", Wire Train - "Mr. Soul", > Saint Etienne - "Only Love Can Break Your Heart") i'd chalk this up to young (and the other suspects who are about to be mentioned) being a really strong *songwriter* as opposed to just a great performer. we can save the argument about whether dylan is or isn't a good singer for another day, but i really think there's an argument to be had/made. - -- d. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 16:37:28 -0400 (EDT) From: Michael Mitton Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Obligatory Movie Update On Thu, 9 May 2002, jer fairall wrote: > Thumbs up to both SPIDER-MAN and HOLLYWOOD ENDING, both of which have already Ooh, I'm going to see HE this weekend, but a big thumb down to Spider-Man from here. I wanted to like the movie, because I quite like both Maguire and Dunst, but I was bored from beginning to end. (Of course, it didn't help that the Russian family behind me had a one year old that kep crying and a two year old that kept hitting me on the head until I walked Benigni style several rows forward.) - --Michael NP Gomez IN OUR GUN (half the songs are great, the other half seem useless) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 16:51:21 -0400 (EDT) From: Dave Walker Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Re: Steve's Mix Miles Goosens wrote: > Stereolab (like the Velvetsy sounds, hate the loungy) Miles, have you heard Broadcast? They basically spring from a subset of Stereolab's influences (Velvets, Faust United States of America) with a pinch of pre-DSOTM Pink Floyd. They employ drones, ancient keyboards, and a dreamy female vocalist, but the lounge aspect is missing entriely. -d.w. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 17:08:13 -0400 From: "glenn mcdonald" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Obligatory Movie Update > a big thumb down to Spider-Man from here. I was beginning to think I was alone in the world on this. I thought _Spider-Man_ had some scattered good moments (MTV can stop taking other nominations for the year's Best Kiss), but overall this movie seemed Bad to me, in just about all the banal ways bad big-budget movies are usually bad. Poor writing, unmotivated romance, clunky pacing, unconvincing CGI, rampant implausibility exacerbated by attempts to portray it in detail, idiotic costuming, villains with no depth, stock conflict-resolutions, manipulative soundtrack, creepy violence (I can't be the only one who found the shots of the as-yet-unidentified flying object banking around to dive towards Manhattan chilling in a totally unentertaining way), paper thin characterization of everybody except the cardboard-thin protagonist, one completely gratuitous wet-blouse scene and a "poignant" ending with no actual logic behind it. I thought _Unbreakable_ and _X-Men_ were both vastly superior as movies about people discovering their own powers. glenn ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 09 May 2002 16:18:53 -0500 From: Miles Goosens Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Re: Steve's Mix At 04:51 PM 5/9/2002 -0400, Dave Walker wrote: >Miles Goosens wrote: > >> Stereolab (like the Velvetsy sounds, hate the loungy) > >Miles, have you heard Broadcast? They basically spring >from a subset of Stereolab's influences (Velvets, Faust >United States of America) with a pinch of pre-DSOTM >Pink Floyd. They employ drones, ancient keyboards, and a >dreamy female vocalist, but the lounge aspect >is missing entriely. Nope, Dave, I haven't heard them, but all those influences are right up my alley, so I'll be on the lookout for them! Thanks for the recommendation! later, Miles ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 09 May 2002 21:13:47 +0000 From: "Brendan Curry" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] banner ads From the guys at hi-res!, anti-banner ads: http://www.soulbath.com/clickhere.html Brendan >From: "me" >Reply-To: "me" >To: >Subject: [loud-fans] banner ads >Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 12:34:56 -0700 > >finally - one worth sharing: > >http://cache.burstnet.com/gifs/adcouncil_adc_acs_lineup_468_032902.gif > >and it links to here: > >http://63.150.180.215/coloncancer/information.html > >where you can get a desktop polyp. > >rockin'. >-- >"Drag me, drop me, treat me like an object." >-- _________________________________________________________________ Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 09 May 2002 16:42:01 -0500 From: Miles Goosens Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Obligatory Movie Update At 05:08 PM 5/9/2002 -0400, glenn mcdonald wrote: >> a big thumb down to Spider-Man from here. > >I was beginning to think I was alone in the world on this. I haven't seen SPIDER-MAN (or HOLLYWOOD ENDING) yet, but THE NASHVILLE SCENE took the unusual (for them) step of having both Jim Ridley and Noel Murray review it, and both gave it raves. http://www.nashvillescene.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?story=This_Week:Arts:Film (at this URL through next Wednesday, then it'll move to an archive page) I trust Jim Ridley more than any other film critic, though I think he's slipped a bit over the past four or five years. And he's responsible for me wasting a matinee ticket to see CHARLIE'S ANGELS. However, Jim's capsule reviews remain tart-tongued and insightful, and are finally available online. To avoid the tedious Movie Clock -> select film - -> click on "view capsule review" runaround, use this workaround -- start with a URL in the following form: http://www.nashvillescene.com/cgi-bin/movieclock.cgi?review=A+Beautiful+Mind And when you want to see the capsule review of a different film, substitute its name with "+" between each word (for example, instead of "A+Beautiful+Mind," type in "The+Last+Waltz"), and you should go directly to the capsule. Happy reading! later, Miles ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 23:03:39 +0100 From: "John Bartlett" Subject: [loud-fans] Re: The Orgone BoxJohn > ------------------------------ > > Date: Tue, 07 May 2002 11:38:15 -0400 > From: Stewart Mason > Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Steve's mix > > >11 Judy Over The Rainbow The Orgone Box, who are these guys, and what do > they > >have out. This is a real find. Very retro in all the right ways, mid 60s > >Beatles style, including a singer who sounds *a lot* like John lennon. > Trippy > >as anything. > > They only have one album, THE ORGONE BOX, on the UK label Minus Zero, but > it's terrific. You can probably find it at Parasol or Not Lame. > Or indeed , minus zero themselves at www.minuszerorecords.com , probably the best bet for those in the UK Cheers, John ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 18:51:07 EDT From: Cardinal007@aol.com Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Re: Steve's Mix In a message dated 5/9/02 14:04:52, jsharple@bls.brooklaw.edu writes: >Ah, enough reminiscing! Back to evil Secured Transactions! I got yer Article Nine right here, tough guy! "Yasmine" is also my fave CGuy track; I urge others to seek it out. Your funny valentine, C7 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 19:31:59 -0400 From: "John Sharples" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Obligatory Movie Update (spoiler space at the end) Just to provide balance, I thought SPIDER-MAN was terrific, and even though I agree with a couple of glenn's crits, they didn't mar my enjoyment of the film at all. glenn: >_Spider-Man_ had some scattered good moments (MTV can stop taking other >nominations for the year's Best Kiss) got that right...but why then get all uptight about Kirsten's nips coming to the fore in the same scene, since repressed adolescent sexuality bursting through to the surface is so obviously a dominant theme? >Poor writing, in places, definitely. But if you take it in as a comic book on screen, as I did and I think Raimi intended, this isn't a big deal. > unmotivated romance, Huh!? I was absolutely convinced. What more primal object than the troubled, gorgeous redheaded girl next door? I say Maguire and Dunst had a crackling, old-Hollywood chemistry like I haven't seen in a mainstream picture in ages. I wanted to take them home. Their romance was so entirely grounded in their characters I thought it was the film's shining achievement. Their scenes in the hospital room, and in their backyards, were especially moving and well-executed. Color me utterly convinced. >clunky pacing yes, but it's been said (and I agree) this is because Raimi was tending to the characters more than audience need-for-speed, so I say he had honorable motivation and made the right decision - because it was after all, a choice > unconvincing CGI, This prompts a current Sharples rant: I'm not sure I've ever seen convincing CGI, so I'm happy if instead of fretting over a vain attempt at 'realism' the CGI has energy, grace, and fluid movement of its own, and I'm glad they freely went in that direction here. I think film as a medium generally gets incorrectly held to a higher expectation of "convincingness" because of its proximately 'real' look and feel, but I think that's fallacy. Are we unconvinced by comic book panels? Of course not, we accept that they are impressionistic. I think we need to re-calibrate our experience of film more that way. I know it's not real. rampant >implausibility exacerbated by attempts to portray it in detail I don't know what this means. I mean, it's a comic book; what 'plausibility' do we demand? But since you mention it, I liked the decision to make the web stuff come out of his body (it's actually implausible a teenager could come up with that wrist-contraption in the book) as it's a terrific teenage boy sexuality gag, and I loved the 'attempt to portray it in detail' - you mean the practice shots off the rooftop? Great scene. Or how his first attempts at 'canyon-swinging' were wildly out of control? If these are the examples you mean, what would you have had them do instead? Parker has a lot of awkwardness adapting to his powers, and Raimi gets mileage out of it. , idiotic >costuming, His first Spidey outfit at the wrestling match was brilliant and got a huge laugh at my screening. People have criticized the static Goblin mask but I liked it, and Raimi made the critical tie in with all those other Kabuki-type masks Osborne owned. Thought it was a nice connection to ancient-culture theater tradition, a Campbellian touch. > villains with no depth, The depth of the Goblin's rage comes from our country's deep anxiety and anger over how our economy treats its human workforce as utterly disposable. Dafoe's scene in the mirror was a startling instance of low-tech acting chops smack in the middle of a special effects blockbuster. How about Osborn's barely repressed rage of sexual jealousy of his son? (Didja catch the Dunst-alike portrait of his absent wife?) Dafoe added unexpected depth with little moments like when he playfully smacked Spidey upside the head, and leaned back...the newspaper guy is a quasi-villain and THAT guy stole every scene he was in. But for me the joy of this movie came from powerful way Raimi handled the highly complex and charged quadrangle relationship between Parker, MJ, and Osborn dad and son. The messy, unresolved, complicated truth of it really resounded with me. My last point: (SPOILER SPACE) > a "poignant" ending with no actual logic behind it. Are you talking about the same thing Ebert complained of - why does Parker refuse MJ at the end? He said he didn't want to put his loved ones in danger anymore. The whole movie pounds that character motivation home. Do you mean something else? Oh and you said something about pat conflict resolution - nah, things were left highly unresolved and ominous with both MJ and the Osborn kid... JS ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 16:35:54 -0700 From: "me" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Obligatory Movie Update (spoiler space at the end) - ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Sharples" To: "Sharing...caring..." > I say Maguire and Dunst > had a crackling, old-Hollywood chemistry like I haven't seen in a mainstream > picture in ages. I wanted to take them home. sicko. *snicker* sorry - couldn't help it. but... your review has me sold. i'd been kind of ignoring the movie, but i guess i'll have to go catch it this weekend. - -- "Drag me, drop me, treat me like an object." - -- ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 19:49:09 -0400 From: "John Sharples" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Obligatory Movie Update (spoiler space at the end) Me: >>I wanted to take them [Maguire and Dunst] home. Mini-me: >sicko. No, no, you misinterpret how I meant that! The way I meant it is this: I wanted to take them home, stopping on the way for a bottle of champagne and a disposable camera. Then Kirsten and I would drink the champagne and get naked. I'd slap her on the ass and pretend I was launching a ship. Maguire would take the pictures. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 19:48:33 -0400 (EDT) From: dmw Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Obligatory Movie Update (spoiler space at the end) On Thu, 9 May 2002, John Sharples wrote: > Just to provide balance, I thought SPIDER-MAN was terrific, and even though > I agree with a couple of glenn's crits, they didn't mar my enjoyment of the > film at all. > > glenn: > > >Poor writing, > > in places, definitely. But if you take it in as a comic book on screen, as > I did and I think Raimi intended, this isn't a big deal. urr. no offense, but i *hate* this argument. i'm not gonna play comic book apologist -- sturgeon's law and all that -- and some of the early, genre-defining comic work was pretty amazingly clunky from a literary standpoint. but i think you'd be hard put to find a successful comic book written any time after the late 70s that is badly written as most of the films that are made from them. and it's not as if it really has to be that way. i had a friend who tried to convert me to fandom of the batman animated series; he failed, but good golly, those 1/2 hour kidvid units were better written than those of the feature films i saw: much tighter plotting; sharper, wittier dialog; and for god's sake, more substantive subtext. i'm still kinda hoping blade ii is a miracle exception to the rule, mind you. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 20:13:24 -0400 From: "John Sharples" Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Obligatory Movie Update (spoiler space at the end) dmw: >> in places, definitely. But if you take it in as a comic book on screen, as >> I did and I think Raimi intended, this isn't a big deal. > >urr. no offense, but i *hate* this argument. i'm not gonna play comic >book apologist -- sturgeon's law and all that -- and some of the early, >genre-defining comic work was pretty amazingly clunky from a literary >standpoint. but i think you'd be hard put to find a successful comic book >written any time after the late 70s that is badly written as most of the >films that are made from them. Not what I meant. I thought most of the writing was fine. The hospital scene, as Peter slowly discloses his deep adoration for MJ, was written beautifully. Most of the complaints I've heard about the writing was dialog btw Spidey and Goblin: "You've spun your last web!", etc. I see these goofy lines as having a big dialog bubbles around them, intentionally suggesting comic book schtick. I really loved how the Donner SUPERMAN did this. Then there were some places the writing simply could have been better, and all I'm saying is it didn't bother me, not apologizing for it. JS ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 20:42:46 EDT From: Cardinal007@aol.com Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Obligatory Movie Update (spoiler space at the end) In a message dated 5/9/02 19:48:04, jsharple@bls.brooklaw.edu writes: >The way I meant it is this: I wanted to take them home, stopping on the >way > >for a bottle of champagne and a disposable camera. Then Kirsten and I >would > >drink the champagne and get naked. I'd slap her on the ass and pretend >I > >was launching a ship. Maguire would take the pictures. and JRTaylor -- YOU, sir, can have a picture of the Sharples drinking champagne and launching Kirsten Dunst. I kid..... Cohen?? Larry Cohen?/ what; are you a jew? Shot in the dark ....... ------------------------------ End of loud-fans-digest V2 #167 *******************************