Controversial Entertainment Opinions/Discussion Thread - Part III

[GlassesJacketShirt]

I could really get into Joy Division's stuff if they were purely an instrumental band, or had someone else do vocals. Anyone. Okay, maybe not Camilla Cabello.

 

[Shareefruck]

I feel that way about New Order. Sumner's Karaoke voice/lyrics make me cringe alot, but I love the sounds/progressions.

You feel embarrassed about liking The Killers' Hot Fuss? An album that was both a commercial and critical success, and one that's aged very well over the years? Jeez, talk about pretentious

Speaking of Arcade Fire, they peaked with The Suburbs. I think they briefly held the "Biggest Band in the World" tag too.

I'm a Montrealer so it pains me to admit this, because the Arcade Fire have been a big deal around here for more than a decade and I grew up with their music, but their latest work is just garbage.

Embarrassed by content and relative to how I feel about it now, not reputation-- who cares about that? I'm sure there are people that feel embarrassed that they used to like Eminem when they were younger, and he's pretty acclaimed. Doesn't make it pretentious.

 

[x Tame Impala]

Eminem is still widely regarded as a legitimately talented rapper in every hip hop conversation with people who know what they're talking about

 

[aleshemsky83]

I love the killers, but their lyrics are Train-like in how little sense they make

 

[Aladyyn]

I think being embarrassed by liking stuff in the past comes off as pretty insecure. Tastes develop, it's natural.

 

[BonMorrison]

I think being embarrassed by liking stuff in the past comes off as pretty insecure. Tastes develop, it's natural.

This is how I feel as well. I can comfortably talk about what I used to like and not feel embarrassment over it. Everyone's different though.

 

[Spring in Fialta]

I could really get into Joy Division's stuff if they were purely an instrumental band, or had someone else do vocals. Anyone. Okay, maybe not Camilla Cabello.

Whaaaaaat. I love Ian Curtis's voice and lyrics.

 

[Leafsdude7]

Gravity is Our Lady Peace's worst album, but Clumsy is a close second. Healthy In Paranoid Times and Burn Burn are tragically underrated. Spiritual Machines is their best album.

 

[GlassesJacketShirt]

I love the killers, but their lyrics are Train-like in how little sense they make

To be fair, the Killers never accidentally compared their love to garbage.

Whaaaaaat. I love Ian Curtis's voice and lyrics.

Lyrics are one thing, but vocally......I think he is one of the worst I've ever heard, to the point where I can't go on with the songs themselves.

 

[Shareefruck]

Eminem is still widely regarded as a legitimately talented rapper in every hip hop conversation with people who know what they're talking about

That's exactly what I'm saying. Yet you could still have someone feel embarassed about liking it when they were younger without it being due to pretentiousness.

Like you guys say, tastes change, and when you look back at some stuff, even if they're well received by others, they can feel cringe-y to you.

Hell, I slightly cringe when I think back at how emotionally deep and important I felt Funeral by Arcade Fire was when I was younger. It's still considered a classic, and I appreciate it as a gateway album and SOMEWHAT like it, but I feel very differently now.

That isn't pretense.

I think being embarrassed by liking stuff in the past comes off as pretty insecure. Tastes develop, it's natural.

This is how I feel as well. I can comfortably talk about what I used to like and not feel embarrassment over it. Everyone's different though.

I'm definitely and obviously not above showing insecurity, otherwise I wouldn't defend my opinions so relentlessly. Knowing that tastes naturally develop doesn't seem to change that visceral "Ewww" reaction I have to these things, though.

I mean, if you think about it, embarrassment of any kind is insecure by definition, is it not?

 

[Hippasus]

1 I'm not sure how you arrive at that. Wouldn't they both be primarily an indicator that many people really like a thing as a first hand appreciator of the music, and both be similarly susceptible to the possibility of only liking it because others do?

2 I don't totally understand your smoke/fire explanation. Doesn't 'influence' and 'that which is influenced' mean the same thing?

3 I can accept your other points, but I feel differently. I understand the whole getting a kick out of appreciating the genealogy of music history thing, and I do find that neat as well (adds to the mythos), but it seems about as unrelated to the musical value to me as getting a kick out of what ended up being a cultural phenomenon/breaking records and what didn't. I prefer thinking about the former over the latter (especially when it suits the narrative for what I like), so I might feel compelled to use influence as a tie-breaker as well, but I can't square why that would be anymore logical than using popularity as a tiebreaker, personally. They both seem to merely measure recognition rather than value, to me, and recognition is a very flimsy measuring stick (sort of like thinking something is good because it wins a lot of awards).

1 That was poorly-phrased on my part, but I think you sort of understood what I meant anyways. Being popular is a given. As in, it either is or it isn't. Then liking something because it's popular is sort of like following the crowd. Liking something because of influence is more the result of one's own exploration, or music-listening journey, at least for me.

2 'Influence' is the active agent. 'That which is influenced' is what the influence created, in terms of it's influence. Basically, influencer versus influencee. The fire would be the active agent. The smoke would be that which is influenced, or the effects of the influence.

3 I'm thinking about what one thinks the nature of the influence phenomena is from one's own vantage point. Like as if one is the researcher oneself. So it's still to a large degree a first-person perspective. Not entirely, but largely.

 

[SJSharksfan39]

There was only one reason I bought The Killers Hot Fuss album. I loved the Guitar Riff on Jenny was a Friend of Mine. The other songs were pretty good too, but that song is probably my favorite on the entire album.

In terms of the whole embarassed thing, isn't that like Guilty Pleasures? I heard it said once and I agree with it. There's no such thing as guilty pleasures because why would you feel guilty about liking something.

 

[Shareefruck]

1 That was poorly-phrased on my part, but I think you sort of understood what I meant anyways. Being popular is a given. As in, it either is or it isn't. Then liking something because it's popular is sort of like following the crowd. Liking something because of influence is more the result of one's own exploration, or music-listening journey, at least for me.

2 'Influence' is the active agent. 'That which is influenced' is what the influence created, in terms of it's influence. Basically, influencer versus influencee. The fire would be the active agent. The smoke would be that which is influenced, or the effects of the influence.

3 I'm thinking about what one thinks the nature of the influence phenomena is from one's own vantage point. Like as if one is the researcher oneself. So it's still to a large degree a first-person perspective. Not entirely, but largely.

I'm pretty lost, to be honest.

There was only one reason I bought The Killers Hot Fuzz album. I loved the Guitar Riff on Jenny was a Friend of Mine. The other songs were pretty good too, but that song is probably my favorite on the entire album.

In terms of the whole embarassed thing, isn't that like Guilty Pleasures? I heard it said once and I agree with it. There's no such thing as guilty pleasures because why would you feel guilty about liking something.

It's a bit different.

With guilty pleasures, I agree, it doesn't make any sense at all, because if you like it, why would you ever feel guilty about it?-- It could only be taken as admitting that you'd rather fit in and go along with the crowd rather than represent yourself honestly.

With feeling embarassed about past preferences, that doesn't really apply. It's not a case where you secretly like a thing and are embarassed to admit it. Instead, you now see your past take as being completely wrong, and the idea that there was a version of you running around who spewed these falsehoods (according to present you) in your name is an embarassing and unsettling thought.

 

[SB164]

Anybody remember the insane hype surrounding The Stokes before their debut album? I can't recall many others like it since. Music critics were basically calling them the new saviours of rock.

 

[Spring in Fialta]

Anybody remember the insane hype surrounding The Stokes before their debut album? I can't recall many others like it since. Music critics were basically calling them the new saviours of rock.

I was too young but I've read about it but you can't blame the critics (although they did get over-hyped). Popular music was at an all-time low and their two first albums still bests what came afterwards even if it doesn't compate to their predecessors. They're in a weird spot where they're far better than their counterparts but can't give weight to what they were influenced by. The Strokes would have done well to follow Julian Casablancas's insinct/whims. His strangeness/ideas gave far better music than the rest could muster. His solo work blows their last 3 albums out. He looks a lot like John Frusciante seperated from RHCP to me.

 

[SB164]

I was too young but I've read about it but you can't blame the critics (although they did get over-hyped). Popular music was at an all-time low and their two first albums still bests what came afterwards even if it doesn't compate to their predecessors. They're in a weird spot where they're far better than their counterparts but can't give weight to what they were influenced by. The Strokes would have done well to follow Julian Casablancas's insinct/whims. His strangeness/ideas gave far better music than the rest could muster. His solo work blows their last 3 albums out. He looks a lot like John Frusciante seperated from RHCP to me.

I was in high school around that time and the best way I could put it was that they looked cool, they played cool music, and they just embodied this nonchalant rock n roll vibe (they just made it look easy). "Is This It?" really was one of the best debut albums I can recall in a long time and they lived up to the hype at least for that one album.

The song "Someboy" always transports me back to when I was a teenager. I've played it as house parties over the years recently and people will instantly have a huge smile on their face when they hear it.

 

[Shareefruck]

Yeah, I read all this stuff about Beatles comparisons when they first came on the scene and it really left me scratching my head.

 

[Hippasus]

I'm pretty lost, to be honest.

One is authentic and subjective (tracing influences, etc.), to me. While liking popular music is following the crowd, to me.

 

[Shareefruck]

One is authentic and subjective (tracing influences, etc.), to me. While liking popular music is following the crowd, to me.

Can't either of them.... be either one of those things, though?

Like, you could trace which bands were competing with which other bands, which ones managed to appeal to the masses, generated the most buzz in the atmosphere just from the sheer excitement they created for the fans, and become an event at a historically impressive scale, then trace why interest in them died out and which bands came in and took their spotlight, etc. Following that story/progression could be an involved and authentic exploration that helps you appreciate the scale that music can carry, and it could be a personal/nostalgic thing to recall if you experienced that popularity first hand.

You could also learn about how influential a band is second-hand, take people's word for it as a fact, fan the flames, and blindly follow the crowd as well.

I get that we've seen more of the more shallow side of popularity than we have with influence, but both ideas seem susceptible to the similar boons and pitfalls to me. And neither seem like qualities of the music itself, but instead a description of the reaction.

On that note, that's partly why I still don't get the influencer/influencee distinction. If the influencees are merely a byproduct that doesn't matter as much as the influencer, isn't that essentially the same thing as saying the music and its qualities (which have the potential to influence) are what matter, regardless of whether or not it actually ends up influencing anyone?

 

[Hippasus]

Can't either of them.... be either one of those things, though?

Like, you could trace which bands were competing with which other bands, which ones managed to appeal to the masses, generated the most buzz in the atmosphere just from the sheer excitement they created for the fans, and become an event at a historically impressive scale, then trace why interest in them died out and which bands came in and took their spotlight, etc. Following that story/progression could be an involved and authentic exploration that helps you appreciate the scale that music can carry, and it could be a personal/nostalgic thing to recall if you experienced that popularity first hand.

You could also learn about how influential a band is second-hand, take people's word for it as a fact, fan the flames, and blindly follow the crowd as well.

I get that we've seen more of the more shallow side of popularity than we have with influence, but both ideas seem susceptible to the similar boons and pitfalls to me. And neither seem like qualities of the music itself, but instead a description of the reaction.

On that note, that's partly why I still don't get the influencer/influencee distinction. If the influencees are merely a byproduct that doesn't matter as much as the influencer, isn't that essentially the same thing as saying the music and its qualities (which have the potential to influence) are what matter, regardless of whether or not it actually ends up influencing anyone?

Sure there could be overlap between the two, but that's not the norm is it? I was just arguing on my own behalf. I find that there is no inconsistency there. Someone could consistently even be all about influences in terms of what they see as constituting goodness in their view whilst disregarding popularity. In that case the situation might be closer to a researcher in mathematics or philosophy that was attempting to identify the source of some idea or trend in history in their field so she could value that trend more highly. There is, or at least should, obviously be an objective aspect to the influence criterion, but it can have a subjective and authentic component too. Perhaps by focusing on genres by which one feels most moved.

 

[tacogeoff]

this will be a fun one.

Mad Max Fury Road is one of the greatest action movies in the last decade.

Going to watch my Black and Chrome version now that just arrived from amazon

http://www.denofgeek.com/uk/movies/...black-chrome-exploring-its-spectacular-detail

 

[ProstheticConscience]

this will be a fun one.

Mad Max Fury Road is one of the greatest action movies in the last decade.

Going to watch my Black and Chrome version now that just arrived from amazon

http://www.denofgeek.com/uk/movies/...black-chrome-exploring-its-spectacular-detail

That's not controversial at all. That's just a bald statement of fact.

 

[ProstheticConscience]

Also, Captain Beefheart and his Magic Band was self-indulgent, hippy-dippy crap and the only reason anyone liked it was there was too much bad acid and mushrooms going around at the time.

 

[tacogeoff]

That's not controversial at all. That's just a bald statement of fact.

you could be right. I just remember the discussion being really back and forth as to whether it deserved the praise it received on hfboards.

 

[Spring in Fialta]

Also, Captain Beefheart and his Magic Band was self-indulgent, hippy-dippy crap and the only reason anyone liked it was there was too much bad acid and mushrooms going around at the time.

That's total crap. I'm in my mid-twenties and while I don't like everything he's done, when Beefheart hits, he hits at all-time great levels for me. I've also never taken mushrooms or had to take any drugs to enjoy his music. The first time I listened to him I was sober and ended up playing the song Peon in a loop all day.

Also, there's nothing wrong with self-indulgence in art, especially if the work justifies it.