Thank God, it had been like a whole month or something since we've heard anything from Lana Del Rey, I was starting to worry the media onslaught had ended.
I actually thought we had tied, must have past you at the last minute. I did think yours was more clever, I had position on you though. Did you photoshop that yourself or did you find it?
I'll thank the Westboro Baptist Church for being a bunch of crazy nutters, and all of my fellow Stereogum commentators for failing to get as many up thumbs as me. Have a great weekend, losers.
But seriously, This is cool. I really dig AV undercover, they're always are good for some righteous covers (except when Cymbals Eat Guitars did Superchunk, that shit was awful).
I appreciate the support, but yeah, that fight is a loser. I really have no choice but retreat back under my bridge and lick my wounds, at least until the movie comes out and we hear what the reviewers think. You hear me Hunger Games!? This war is not over!
D-lines. (Nice long name by the way), what I'm saying is that a title is not the same as the content. You are placing all these rules on art without any context. You're essentially saying in your first paragraph that anything created artistically with words needs to compact in order to have worth? A Title is not a song. this argument is so beyond self-serving it is stupid.
You don't even what? Don't get all pissy with me, Bob. You're the one who started placing prerequisites for being able to disagree with you.
Regardless of whether you like the title or not, the idea that principles of writing a story, long or short, also applies to the naming of a collection of songs is absurd.
I'm a writer, and I think we can all tell by my picture I'm also a very skilled songwriter. So, given that I satisfy your requirements to have a valid opinion on this topic allow my share mine: You're wrong.
It isn't nearly as bad as it was, from about '03-09 it was virtually unwatchable. Still, it is a shell of what it was in its hey day and given just how bad it was earlier in the decade I am amazed how much good will the show manages to maintain with viewers.
I get it. If you say something negative about anything that's popular its gonna get downvoted, it doesn't matter how sound your reasoning is.
What I don't get is why SNL is still popular.
JaggerT, I'm confused. Do you think that the film industry as a machine is a myth? I think its pretty well documented that Hunger Games (as a film) has been designed to appeal to the very same people who like Twilight and such things, for very much the same reasons. Casting, direction choices, and script are all effected by this.
As far as praise for the series. Most of this is attached to hype by readers and marketing. It reminds me of the praise the Millennium series got the last two years, which after I read, found was greatly undeserved. Yeah it's fun and addicting, like Hunger Games, but its not particularly original or resonating in anyway.
Hey you're entitled to like it, I just get annoyed with people trying to make it more than it is. I don't really expect it to be as bad Twilight, I'm not even sure if that's possible. But I'm not looking forward to it, all the same.
If you don't think the film industry wants Hunger Games to be the "next twilight" you should google "Hunger Game Twilight". You will be amazed, I have a feeling.
Sure it is not quite so devoid of intelligence as Twilight, but its still a young adult book series getting an absurd praise for a very unoriginal story. People talk about it like its the next LOTR or something. Its not even on the same level of Harry Potter.
Comments