It is currently Sat Feb 24, 2018 12:39 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2017 10:09 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Nov 19, 2017
Posts: 42
on visual art
on music
on television/cinema

etc

controversial opinion: imo the beatles are entry-level music even their supposed "experimental" music is one-dimensional and flat. i respect their widespread influence but it was a "right moment in time" situation

controversial opinion: in terms of metal music, folk metal (stuff that uses flutes, accordians, harps, orchestrals) is dumb; folk-influenced metal on the other hand, can be artistically monumental when done right


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 28, 2017 1:23 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 25, 2013
Posts: 10333
Location: Kamloops, BC
Identity: Male
I don't really get the reasoning behind deriding something as "entry-level". I don't even think I could effectively argue the point- I don't have a firm grasp on the philosophy.

I have pretty divided opinions on rap. For me to even warrant a second listen, a rap has to be on point, poignant and maintain momentum the whole way through. I think that's why lots of songs have a single verse of rap- if you can't keep up the quality the song fails immediately.
Bit of a tangent here- but I think that's why so many horror movies suck and so many make better comedies- it's easy to fail hard.
I was going to savage Eminem's Lose Yourself, but I looked it up and the version I'm listening to now is amazing. Is it the movie version that kills it and the album version that drops the ball after the first verse or vice versa?

I hate most country music. Half of it's so preachy that I want to throttle the singer. The other half is alright, but most of that's just rock music trying to cash in on a cultural trend without its own unique musical style.

_________________
Cato wrote:
CotW is a method for ranking cards in increasing order of printability.

*"To YMTC it up" means to design cards that have value mostly from a design perspective. i.e. you would put them in a case under glass in your living room and visitors could remark upon the wonderful design principles, with nobody ever worring if the cards are annoying/pointless/confusing in actual play

TPrizesW
TPortfolioW


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 28, 2017 3:00 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 23, 2013
Posts: 1505
It may be that the Beatles suffer a bit from being so foundational for later musicians. It might also be a metal fan thing.

For myself...

I cannot stand Jim Carrey, Will Farrell, and Steve Carell. Slapstick and awkward humor are painful to watch, and comedies that lean heavily on them are bad, lacking complexity and creativity.

_________________
_______________________________
It's only a tatter of mime


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 28, 2017 3:18 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Nov 19, 2017
Posts: 42
TPmanW wrote:
I don't really get the reasoning behind deriding something as "entry-level". I don't even think I could effectively argue the point- I don't have a firm grasp on the philosophy.

most (not all) entry-level stuff is just one-dimensional and utilizes only surface-value qualities of whatever genre it either is from or precedes.

Black Sabbath is entry-level metal, but it still exemplifies all the good aspects of metal music in a nuanced, and multidimensional way.

i cant say the same for the Beatles.

Quote:
I hate most country music. Half of it's so preachy that I want to throttle the singer. The other half is alright, but most of that's just rock music trying to cash in on a cultural trend without its own unique musical style.

modern country is pop music with twangy guitars. It follows typical pop chord progressions and ABABCB song construction that has been done to death.

try country from 1980 and earlier, also bluegrass. its pretty manly


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 28, 2017 5:45 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 25, 2013
Posts: 10333
Location: Kamloops, BC
Identity: Male
YingLung wrote:
It may be that the Beatles suffer a bit from being so foundational for later musicians...

The Beatles have the same problem as Seinfeld- a modern viewer might find it horribly cliched, but they were the ones who established those cliches. Breaths of fresh air that've gone stale.

Butthead wrote:
TPmanW wrote:
I don't really get the reasoning behind deriding something as "entry-level". I don't even think I could effectively argue the point- I don't have a firm grasp on the philosophy.

most (not all) entry-level stuff is just one-dimensional and utilizes only surface-value qualities of whatever genre it either is from or precedes.

Black Sabbath is entry-level metal, but it still exemplifies all the good aspects of metal music in a nuanced, and multidimensional way.

i cant say the same for the Beatles.

Quote:
I hate most country music. Half of it's so preachy that I want to throttle the singer. The other half is alright, but most of that's just rock music trying to cash in on a cultural trend without its own unique musical style.

modern country is pop music with twangy guitars. It follows typical pop chord progressions and ABABCB song construction that has been done to death.

try country from 1980 and earlier, also bluegrass. its pretty manly

I get the gist of what you're saying, but I'm not sure exactly what you're saying the Beatles lacked. Subtlety? Were their chord progressions too simple? Did they just never delve deep enough into all the things they touched on?

There's definitely popy country out there, but I had assumed anything that got to pop was no longer considered country. I have no idea where the genre boundaries lie honestly. (And if we're getting into that "pop" is pretty vague too. It's the "popular" stuff, and it's usually really light?)
I know little of older country music, except that cowboys yodelled and it that was painful. That may be going back too far though.

_________________
Cato wrote:
CotW is a method for ranking cards in increasing order of printability.

*"To YMTC it up" means to design cards that have value mostly from a design perspective. i.e. you would put them in a case under glass in your living room and visitors could remark upon the wonderful design principles, with nobody ever worring if the cards are annoying/pointless/confusing in actual play

TPrizesW
TPortfolioW


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 29, 2017 2:49 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 28, 2016
Posts: 1922
Preferred Pronoun Set: he/him/his/his/himself
My understanding of modern musical genres is a mess. I still don't know what precisely "rock" means. You can pick 3 random rock songs from diffrent groups and subgenres, and they'll have (or so I feel) almost nothing in common. Actually, you can pick 3 songs of Beatles, give them to a person who have never heard of them, and (I feel) successfully persuade them that those were diffrend bands playing in diffrent genres. (Cosider this a counterargument to "beatles are flat and one-dimensional.")

Rather than picking bands/artists to be a fan of, I usually choose individual songs/melodies I like, and ignore most of other stuff by same authors.
Lately, for example, I listened to
Yes - Roundabout
Woodkid - Stabat Mater
Rob Hubbard - Monty on the Run
Styx - Mr Roboto
Fall Out Boy - Centuries

I don't like most contemporary (00s, 10s) music that is in fashion in my country now. I especially dislike rap, because it mostly sounds awful. I can listen to some few songs though, mostly because of good lyrics or occasional epic charisma (read "epic charisma" as "snoop dogg is a walking meme").

I actually really like one of the folk bands, but it's from my country, so you don't know it. Its called Melnitsa (The Mill), they often have originally-sounding (to me) tunes, deep texts (once I've read an analysis of one, and the density of meanings, symbolism, and refrences is Homestuck-level), and I wouldn't call them "rock band without it's own style so they borrowed folk" either. The most impressive (for me) thing they pulled off once was a... how do I explain it... landscape-art in song form, which I never seen anywhere else.

As for other media...

I loooove absurd comedies. Hot Shots, Monty Python and the Holy Grail, A Haunted House, Rocky Horror Picture Show, etc. They don't feel dumb to me.

I completely adore Homestuck.

I find anime openings one of the worst things ever.

I often don't mind poor style in literature, as long as the plot is interesting.

_________________
nice quotes from this forum


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 02, 2018 4:45 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Nov 19, 2017
Posts: 42
Actually, you can pick 3 songs of Beatles, give them to a person who have never heard of them, and (I feel) successfully persuade them that those were diffrend bands playing in diffrent genres. (Cosider this a counterargument to "beatles are flat and one-dimensional.")

I dont buy this argument. The fact that Beatles do songs that could be classed as different genres doesnt change that imo they do each of them in a flat, superficial manner.

as a visual artist, i could fire off paintings in many different styles (abstract, impressionist, etc) but it wouldnt change the fact that if handled poorly, it wouldnt exhibit my skill as an artist


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 03, 2018 12:07 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 25, 2013
Posts: 10333
Location: Kamloops, BC
Identity: Male
Depth vs breadth.

_________________
Cato wrote:
CotW is a method for ranking cards in increasing order of printability.

*"To YMTC it up" means to design cards that have value mostly from a design perspective. i.e. you would put them in a case under glass in your living room and visitors could remark upon the wonderful design principles, with nobody ever worring if the cards are annoying/pointless/confusing in actual play

TPrizesW
TPortfolioW


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 17, 2018 10:01 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 23, 2013
Posts: 6937
Identity: Spambot
Preferred Pronoun Set: 0, 1
Unpopular opinion: bringing it all back home > Highway 61 revisited.

_________________
Any resemblance to actual persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental.


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 1:24 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Nov 19, 2017
Posts: 42
Controversial opinion, SEMI SPOILERS:

the visual effects team of Star Trek: Discovery need to stop pretending "It's not 1966 anymore" is a valid excuse, or anything more than a lazy copout to shoehorn flashy new designs (beautiful or not) into canon. "visual rebooting" and retconning are atrocious

star trek is the one franchise where visual continuity should be treated as sacrosanct

and this is coming from someone who, writing-wise, adores Discovery


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group