Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
say no more..
say no more.
'Them writing a song about a fucking tree? Give me a fucking break! A thousand year old tree? Go fuck yourself! You’d have thought he’d have written a song about a modern tree or one that was planted last week. You know what I mean?'
Liam Gallagher is so thick!
I mean funny! Haha, FUNNY, that would be it. Hahaha.
1) Someone who is talented creates something
2) Look / listen / comsume the something with a dim witted look on your face as if you can't understand why the whole world isnt' exactly like you and your cunt Paul Wellar haircut
3) Say something disrespectful about the artist / art using swearwords such as "Kate fucking Bush writes a fucking song about snow the fucking mental bitch!" in an interview because you're a disrespectful twat who can't understand a thing
4) HILARITY ENSUES
If he can write a massive smash hit like Daft Punk's new tune in "an hour" then why doesn't he, rather than having his music career slowly disappear into a pile of horse shit?
Because he's a thick twat who can't but actually thinks he can.
I know people think he's hillarious when he does stuff like that. I think he's a fucking moronic Neanderthal. I don't understand anyone who sees it the other way.
Just to be clear.
Sorry - Wasn't an attack on you, it was an attack on him.
I just realised that the question was not who, but WHAT his favourite band are.
In that case, are they rock musicians?
Your musical compatibility with daniellucas1986 is Very High
According to his last.fm, he only listened to the Beady Eye album once.
more than once?
it's his job
watch a new cinema release more than once before writing his or her review?
get home from a match and rewatch a recording of the whole thing again before passing judgement on the teams' respective performances?
if he deemed that the film contained no artistic merit
without playing a single one.
how many albums can you think of that you love now that didn't really strike you on first listen?
Yes, but I think you can decide that you hate an album on first listen and it will never grow on you.
I hated Modern Life is Rubbish when I first bought it but persevered because I'd spent a tenner on the cassette. Now it's my favourite Blur album.
But, yeah, I properly hated it to the point that I considered taking it back. A tenner was a lot of money to my 15 year old self.
if nothing's 0/10.
Seeing as 0 suggests there's absolutely nothing there, surely the scale is 1-10?
As pointed out somewhere in one of the threads on BE, taking rounding into account, 0/10 means something that has up to 4.99% artistic merit. It just rounds down to nothing because it's that shit.
it's a drop down menu, so I suppose from a literal perspective it's the guy who designed the website who says the scale's 0-10.
That was a 0.
But "didn't really strike [me]" is very different from a 0/10 first listen. I wouldn't bother to re-listen to a record I thought was 0/10 shit.
but come on, one listen? i can barely register a record on first listen, let alone write a review about it.
that you draw between films and albums where you say, "Very different form of entertainment"
and because we're only using one of the senses, it can be difficult trying to appreciate it on one listen, whereas a movie is more direct, literally more in your face and because of the nature of moving pictures, tends to be more accessible because it's all there. I think alternative music is deliberately a bit more obtuse than your average movie too, which is obviously catered to a far larger audience. I guess music is more like poetry in that the best poems are ones you don't understand on first reading; it takes further digging to really get to the meaning of it. Much more gratifying that way.
TL;DR wank wank wank
the silent films tended to exaggerate everything, sometimes for comedic effect; the facial expressions, over-the-top movements. They were only silent because of the restrictions at the time, and there wasn't the technology or advancements to make the films more clever as far as reaping more depth with repetitive viewings. It's just a different ballpark. They weren't trying to achieve what musicians are trying to achieve with music.
It's like comparing pop music with other music? One's trying to be easily digestible for a different audience and one's trying to challenge their audience with something a bit different? I dunno, I've really gone off track with this one.
after posting, mate.
if someone goes to see a film they're most likely to only watch it that one time, but if someone buys an album they'll generally play it more than once. ergo, movie reviewers filing their review off the back of one screening are at least in tune with their readers
also I like how someone's last.fm stats are, at this point in the game, apparently considered chapter and verse on someone's listening habits in their entirety
ARE YOU BLIND OR ARE YOU STUPID
lets fuck him up