Watch The Throne is Kanye's weakest for me so far and rather overrated (although some songs are great). But 4 is an excellent, gorgeous album. I'd pick it very easily.
Oh, I definitely think Solange's career has inspired this new direction. On "***Flawless", she sings "My sister taught me I should speak my mind". Those Knowles girls, so talented, so much sisterly love!
So this is what it's like waking up and suddenly finding out a new spectacular and utterly beautiful and lively album is out. I'm not even that much of a Beyonce fan (even though she really grew on me after 4), but this is just incredible. It's like she is not even trying o compete with other popstars. But not out of laziness, but because she can just make her own tier and not even try to pretend she wants to play the game all of these desperate artists are. This is, at the very least, a top 4 album of the year, and might go higher with further listening. This is truly surprising me with how evolved and mature Beyonce and the music here are. This is a fucking class act career best.
Beyonce > 4 > B' Day > Dangerous In Love > I Am... Sasha Fierce
The Grammy actually are not very fond of repeat winners there. The last repeat winner was U2, and it took nearly 20 years for them to allow that to happen. The last artist to win AOTY so close to a pat win was Stevie Fucking Wonder in the 70's. I know Taylor is popular and all, but she is not Stevie Wonder, even in terms of fame. Plus, she only has 4 noms, which hardly means lots of support.
This is a Daft Punk vs. Macklemore battle. Remember Macklemore has the LGBT rights ballad with a nice lady voice hook, and that they are all "LOOK AT US BEING SO POLITE UNLIKE EVERYTHING ELSE IN HIP-HOP! WE'RE SO LIKE TOTALLY GENUINE AND EARNEST!". And Daft Punk has just gone through a major crossover year, so expect one of the two to take this.
I'll be surprised if a rap album wins. Two rap albums will likely split the vote, and the two singer-songwritter cute girls have huge disadvantages (Taylor has already won AOTY quite recently and Sara is not really popular enough for them). I can't believe I'm saying this, but I think Daft Punk will win the Album Of The Year Grammy.
But Macklemore would be the one most likely to if Daft Punk doesn't. I love Kendrick, but he'll most likely get all his wins on the rap field and go empty-handed from the main categories.
I'd argue hip-hop was never just lyrics. And emphasis on which aspect has always depended on the artist. Loving the lyrical proficiency of Kendrick doesn't mean I have to see Kanye as a lesser artists and vice versa.
"I’d also love those of you who are whining about Ye’s rapping to sit down with me and parse the lyrics of Haim, The Knife, and Chvrhces." Oh god yes. And I love The Knife! But none of those artists have great lyrics. hell, I'd say they phone it in more than Kanye ever has. But indie rock/pop always gets away with stuff artists like Kanye are constantly called out on.
Janelle is way too low. Like, unbelievably low. I still don't get Stereogum's gripes with this album. Julia Holter should be higher as well.
Excited to see Cassie though. That mixtape was awesome. Also glad to see NIN with their incredible comeback album in the list (although below Churches? Pffft). Run The Jewels should've been top 10, and while like Sky and Haim fine, they are way too high for the albums behind them.
Anyway, I don't agree with most placements, but good list. I also see the Yeezus as album of the year prophecy has been fulfilled. I'm okay with that. It's on my personal top 3.
Even if you don't like them (which, whatever, okay), calling them"irrelevant"? That's about the most incredulous label to use for criticizing them, when music history and cultural impact clearly says otherwise. relevance doesn't depend on taste or measure of innovation. Relevance is based on legacy and impact, which they clearly have to this day.
I don't get denying Sgt. Peppers as a top 5 Beatles album. Say what you will about the idolizing aspect music critics have given it, and I get taking classics down a bit (reputation should never make an album unquestionable, no matter which album or which artist). But if people are fans of the Beatles, saying Sgt. Peppers is not a top 5 album is something I find odd. It's their most crafted album in everyway, even if not necessarily the best. For me, Abbey Road is the masterpiece and their absolute best album (and one of the best albums of all time), but I would take Sgt. Peppers stunning production and fantastic songwriting to Revolver (now that's an album I always thought it was just a tad overrated) even though everyone is acting like Revolver is so freaking unquestionably better. Sgt. Peppers is weirder, more beautiful, technically more impressive, and more mature. I can see why Revolver is so popular. It's a major sound shift, but less conceptual, which can make it feel like it flows better and is less unpenetrable for a lot of people. It also can feel more personal. But I still think Sgt. Peppers is more layered in musicianship and production and more ambitious in themes, and has some of their absolute best songs (like, top 10 good), like "She's Leaving Home" and "Day In the Life". It's a fantastic album.
My rankings are...
Masterpieces:
1. Abbey Road
2. Sgt. Peppers
3. White Album
Great albums:
4. Magical Mystery Bus
5. Hard Day's Night
6. Rubber Soul
7. Help!
8. Revolver
Excellent albums:
9. With The Beatles
10. Let It Be
Imperfect but entertaining albums:
11. Please Please Me
12. Yellow Submarine
13. Beatles For Sale
Rubber Soul gets too much credit for what I feel is a stunning but still mainly transitional album. Give me every album they have made afterwards before Rubber Soul.
The College Dropout is so much more significant in terms of Kanye quality than Please Please Me is in terms of Beatles quality. Also, you're ignoring some Beatles albums.
Album: The Electric Lady by Janelle Monaé
Song: Get Lucky by Daft Punk
Music Video: Lost Is Lost (Hello Steve Reich Mix by James Murphy for the DFA)
Best New Act: Disclosure
Best TV Show: Breaking Bad
Best Movie: The Act Of Killing
" It’s weird still for some people, so what?" - so what is that instead of reaffirming this, people should try to move on from this. Cultural baggage and society shape who we are, but it's not something you can't change and work on. And it's certainly not something people who are doing great in that aspect and learned and appreciated to love with a long time ago like to see randomly pointed out as if it was matter of fact.
"This is why I make no illusions for myself that some people who champion gay rights aren’t thrown off when two men kiss, society has kinda set it up our entire lives that men are supposed to be dominant, aggressive alphas and suddenly when two sets of lips meet it flips the entire notion on its head." - While it's true most, if not all, gay men take time to get used to the simple concept of homosexuality being acceptable, once you actually start living with it, embrace it, and starts advocating for it at the point you start to engage in LGBT causes, it's highly unlikely at this late stage you would still carry that baggage. If only because to get that far you go through a lot of transformations that make that kid that had problems with two guys kissing seem more like a distant memory. I'm not saying it's impossible, but I don't think it portrayals an accurate, realistic portrayal of gay men to say that the guys who go to the point of taking an active role in the causes and standing up for gay rights would still have that, or at least not at the intensity that would make a silly video become uncomfortable.
"I thought this was both hilarious and hard to watch, and I kiss my boyfriend, like, all the time. I wasn’t uncomfortable in the sense of “ick two dudes” or even “ick fat” because I actually think Seth Rogen is attractive, but what makes it uncomfortable is the bending of preconceived gender roles." - I don't know your personal history and baggage, so I won't judge you. But if you are an out gay man who has lived as an openly homosexual guy for a while and has met a large number of other gay men and gay couples, you usually pretty much get used to seeing guys kiss all the time. Again, I don't know anything about your life, so maybe you don't get to see it much, or maybe it's just your thing. But I still think it's worth saying that gay men usually don't find gay guys kissing hard to watch. Quite the contrary, actually. And even if you don't find it disgusting, but uncomfortable, again, it might just be case of how you interact with the rest of the gay world and people that means you aren't as used to very affectionate displays. It might also not be that, and I'm talking out of my ass, but most of the time, it is. Because once you have settled with having homosexuality be a normal part of your life, men kissing is about as common as waking up or taking a shower. So I don't think it's okay to hold on to that and sorta let it slide because society allowed us to. It's sort of allowed, even after all the gay rights advances, for straight people (and in some cases, gay men like you) to still say that two men kissing is "hard to watch". It's honest, yes, but stating it as matter of fact makes stronger rather than weaker. Because people allow themselves brush it off as an aside too frequently, like they can just compensate for that by accepting gay rights and gay culture in other aspects, and that truly learning to live with gay displays of affection isn't important, when it's actually a pretty huge deal.
"And even though I’m gay having a man be visually “passive” still looks weird as hell me in the context of a male female relationship. Seeing a man laying in the crook of a woman’s arm or to have a woman with her arm around a man’s shoulders comforting him still boggles my brain. Not offensive or uncomfortable to the point of disgust, mind you, but weirdness that could register as discomfort." - Again, I get how much society and culture play a big part on genre expectations. I have been there. But this is the kind of hang-up that straight-dominant society has made accepted but it's not healthy. I don't think simply admitting is a good thing. It's just one step. So I don't think it's okay to hold on to that and sorta let it slide because society allowed us to.
But like the gay men kissing thing, just accepting that, or thinking that being honest about it is enough let's it reinforce as habit even while you're aware of the problems with that. And it's by confronting that, in dialogue like this, that we can maybe have some kind of minor progress or a casual step that might lead to advances about perspective on what you call "passive" role. So while it's someone's right to say what you're saying and while I can understand how the reaction came to be, it should also be understandable that I or someone else would respond rather than just leave it be. Because it isn't about attacking as much as it's opening dialogue, and I truly believe this is one thing that must be addressed. But it's the details of how we engage in gender roles that define how much we get better at this. The more we change the little things about us with lingering minor problems about gender roles, the better and more mature our whole attitude about sexuality usually becomes.
I'm not sure if people around here figured this out yet, but my points are not really that it's offensive (it isn't) and I'm not attacking the video, even I disagree about how the point works and in which level it does.
You see, I love that we live in a time where straight people support gay rights. And i understood what you meant. I didn't attack you or condemn you. And i understand that's a result of cultural baggage. But I still think that 1) people should try to avoid the trappings of the cultural baggage that made them associate aspects of gay life as bad or ugly in effort to truly accept gay people in its entirety 2) that you don't get to change these things and progress those perceptions if reinforce them even if mildly and with no intention to offend (like saying guys making out is hard to watch).
I'm not antagonizing either you or Tom. I know it's hard to get rid of impressions made by media and culture institutionalized by the world around you. Hell, gay people, if anything, understand very well. But instead of just letting it as an aside, we have to actively work to get rid of those last threads we just ignore in order to truly evolve the acceptance. And yes, it is a one step at a time thing, but gay people are still allowed to recognize those aspects still linger and insist we must walk away from the bad connotations and uncomfortable reaction gay demonstrations of affection get. It isn't villanizing straight people or victimizing ourselves to do that, merely denoting a place where people have to progress as well.
"How often do you see two guys kissing each other?" - everyday of my life. I think it's not good at all that people still are not used to seeing it though and still have trouble with it, when gay people have to watch straight people make out all the time all over the place, in the streets, in movies, in TV, and seeing their straight relatives and friends in parties, and are still able to not find it hard to watch (and in the right context, even find appropriate and nice).
I was bothered by Tom's comment (and I suspect other gay readers from Stereogum probably were too) because it's unnecessary to imply with a straight guy mentality that it's not nice to look at two men making-out, when many would argue it's normal. I'm not suggesting censoring that, I don't think it should be, but it was really, really unnecessary and it really bothered me. Like how I can't even read about a video in Stereogum without being reminded that natural homossexual physical expressions of affection without being reminded that a lot of people unfortunately still have this sad perception of gay sexuality being ugly and uncomfortable to look at.
Why did you find it hard to watch? Because it's two guys making out? Because I think it was so normal. And that's my point. Two guys making out, simply making out (which is what they mostly do in this video) shouldn't be funny or hard to watch in itself even if it's still unusual for some or done by comedians. But I should stop repeating myself now, so sorry if I don't reply back.
Didn't see your following statement. It's okay, it's a conversation, and people should expose their ideas. And thank you for saying I'm not being insincere. I'm really not. I usually like Rogen and even Franco (when he is not all pretentious). Not only do I think it's not funny, I do think the joke really does rely on the "gayness" of the two of them together. If I didn't really think it was important for this shot by shot, I wouldn't call it out. I honestly care about comedy using homosexuality in smarter ways, as both a gay man and a big fan of comedians and funny films. And it freaking sucks that being familiar with both my opinion suddenly gets written off because people watch this, instantly liked it and decided every form of criticism to it is invalid.
No, what's in fashion is acting as if anyone is over-sensitive if they show they care about something and attacking "politically correctness" every time someone calls a problematic reading on something you like or most consider cool. The whole problem about people not wanting to be politically correct or seen as over-sensitive is that suddenly almost everything is forgiven if done in irony or played for laughs even if it's not smart or intelligent or elaborate about the using something like homosexuality for jokes. I like gay jokes if they have something interesting about them besides just making fun of gay people or acting if gayness is funny, which I feel is not the case here.
And again, I don't find the tone of the parody offensive. But it clearly depends on the two men making out to make it a joke. Otherwise, it wouldn't even be called a parody, just a remake.
Yes, because I don't like a silly parody and think it relies on stupid humor I clearly don't care about Uganda' policies on homosexuality, because as the internet always says, you can't care about more than one thing at once and at different levels of intensity but momentarily focusing on the topic at hand even if it's not by any means as important as catastrophic scenarios like Uganda. That's clearly what's happening, yes sir.
I'm not saying people are homophobic frat boys for liking this (I never said that, is that why people are so defensive around here for this? Because they think it implies that?). But again, I do think it's humor that you see all the time in comedy that gay is funny. Anyone familiar with american comedy and its lowest common denominators know it still happens a lot. And you really think that Rogen making out with Franco isn't supposed a joke? You really believe that that the two making out wasn't intended to be funny? Then you didn't watch the same video as I did. Because Rogen is clearly doing that "parody of sexy faces thing" and the whole way they behave implies that this make-out session should be seen as funny.
I said the HUMOR was lazy, not the shot by shot execution.
And yeah, that's exactly it. I'm looking for something to be mad about. Uh-huh. It isn't that a big part of the joke consists that a woman was replaced by a guy. I get the recreation itself is also part of it, but like I said, the original is so ridiculous that simply remaking it shot by shot doesn't make it funnier and doesn't turn into smart parody. Replacing Kim with Rogen also doesn't make it funnier than it already. So in the end, yes, it is a rather lame joke.
And by the way, if it was two hot women, even if funny women, I doubt the reaction would've been the same. It would be positive, but you'd get a lot more drooling in sites like this, and you also wouldn't get people saying it's "hard to watch". I don't think either way would offer any insight and bring a new reading to the already ridiculous and stupid Kanye video. Sometimes the original is the best form of parody of itself, and I think this is one of these cases.
And if the gender doesn't matter, then why Rogen? Why not a girl? Again, let's not act if it doesn't matter, like it's just random. It isn't. I even said it isn't offensive, just a lazy form of humor that any scene when given a gay reading becomes funny. It happens all the time in american comedy. Let's not act that it's a coincidence.
I'm also waiting for know why is it hard to watch? I rewatched it to confirm , and there isn't anything really about it that seems hard to watch, really.
Really? So if it was two women making out in a motorcycle straight guys would find it just as funny? Or if it was just another straight other couple? I don't think so. I agree that the video is ridiculous by itself. Which is why I think it will almost be inevitable that any parody of it won't feel lazy, because Kanye basically already did all the work for comedians in the original itself and there's nothing more to add. So the only real change here is that it's two guys making out. And again, like I said, I don't think it makes the video funnier and ridiculous just because of that even if it's goofy guys like Rogen and Franco.
Downvote away. But it doesn't change the fact the only joke in this that two guys are making out just like Kim and Kanye on their video. And since I don't find the idea of two men making out like a straight couple would, I don't see what's funny about it. I'm not even offended, because I think it's too harmless to be offensive, they obviously try to keep it goofy. But it is lazy and depends on a rather bro-ish type of humor that thinks that anything turned gay becomes funny.
Why should be it hard to watch? And why do people think replacing a straight couple with two men is necessarily funny? I would agree if the execution was really more than just "LOL, two men making out like Kim and Kanye", but it isn't. I didn't think it was funny. And no, I'm not being over-sensistive. I think there's probably some form in which Franco and Rogen making out on a motorcycle could be funny. But it wasn't this. I thought it was kind of a lazy parody.
Comments